“The best-performing companies worry less about performance and
more about their organizational capabilities” (Bititci, 2015).
When I first looked at the discussion post, I was not sure one way or
another if I truly agreed with the above statement but after more
thought I do agree with the statement. There are so many different
types of intangible factors that come into play in the success or
failure of any given organization, it would be foolish to say they
shouldn’t be heavily considered. My own company in 2022 so far has
seen an increased focus on culture building and an assortment of
different training and development positions have been created
throughout the organization so that the company can better focus
and invest in the development and growth of the employees of the
company. From a “performance” standpoint these are added
positions that will cost money and do not directly interact with
clients so in a traditional sense are not “making money” for the
organization, but it was a investment that was made due to the
understanding that better trained and developed staff will be able to
outperform undertrained staff and empowered staff stick tend to
have a lower turnover rate.
I believe that organizational culture has a significant effect on the
performance of an organization. If employees are dreading to come
into work due to a toxic culture and are only showing up every day
for the paycheck, they are going to be performing at the bare
minimum to get through their day. Compare this to employees that
are excited about coming into work and feel empowered by their
organization are more likely to go above and beyond.
Looking at the cultures for both Company A and Company B, I would
go as far to say that neither company has an especially strong culture
going on currently. For example, Company A is working on borrowed
time essentially until all of these old systems they have in place fail,
but because they have strong finances currently, they are not
worried about it, even though with an investment now in these
trouble areas they have the ability to fix the issues, have less strong
financials for a few years, and then truly live up to the premium
service that they state they offer.
Company B has always been a underdog in the airline industry and
there are members of the organization who are complacent and
comfortable with where they fit in to the big picture, which is in total
opposition to the President and IT manger who are attempting to
revitalize and reinvent the company (even if some ideas are wild and
could lead to disaster) a much healthier culture would be if the two
extremes of ideologies met somewhere in the middle. From a
acquisition standpoint if TransGlobal is able to acquire both
companies the leadership and resources present in the parent
company might allow both Company A and Company B to turn into
very lucrative assets down the road.
