Assignment 1
Assignment 1
CAP500: Career Planning
Jose Marcio Guilherme Rodrigues Barbosa
Professor: David Collens
Tuesday, January 21th, 2020
Assignment 1
September 24
Exercise 2, p. 92
This chapter contained two examples of auto companies- Toyota
(Compensation Today 3.1) and CAMI (Compensation Today 3.2)- that
apparently wanted to adopt a high-involvement managerial strategy.
Adopting high involvement was not successful at CAMI but was very
successful at Toyota.
Are there any concepts from this chapter or previous chapters that could
help explain this result?
From Toyota's success to CAMI's failure, both companies tried to succeed by
implementing reward systems and management strategies by using different
approaches to achieve their employees' desired outcomes.
Toyota used a reward system to support its management strategy, focusing on
employee loyalty and commitment, teamwork and high performance to active its
employees and desired behaviours. They analyzed three principal attitudes of
employees (high job satisfaction, employee motivation, organizational
identification) and their consequences, such as membership behaviour, work
motivation and citizenship behaviour of the organization. Showing an equal
treatment, and a sense of fairness in the treatment of everyone, avoiding with
that dissatisfaction reward. CAMI shows a different perspective, trying to
achieve the desired behaviour by making agreements and not fulfilling the
agreements made with the employees. The company made only symbolic
changes and allowed employees to perceive inequality and no longer trust in
the relationship with the employer. Thus breaking the psychological contract
between the parties, causing serious damage to the company's image,
becoming no longer a differentiated company, but just another automobile
Assignment 1
company.
The main factor shown in both cases is that the reward system for generating
commodity results must focus on high job satisfaction and employee motivation.
Assuming that management at CAMI really wanted to move away from the
classical school, what should have been done differently?
From my point of view, the main factor behind CAMI's failure was that they
could not properly deal with the employer-employee relationship. In fact, they
agreed to pay a lower salary, but they did not comply with the agreement, and
did not treat employees with respect and dignity, thus violating the
psychological contract by allowing them to realize the inequality of the contract.
To avoid all these rewarding issues, CAMI should have started by fulfilling its
psychological contract and reinforce its commitment to employee well-being.
Include compensation components and provide generous benefits to build a
trusted relationship with the employee by focusing on the job satisfaction, work
motivation and identification of the organization.