Putnam [email protected] Case

Cost and Benefit Analysis of emailprotected One of the primal advantages of the emailprotected design is that it creates a cost advantage. Having employees lam at home as contend to in-facility is significantly less costly. According to Table A in the case, annual recurring cost for each individual defecateing in-facility is near $10,650. That is over in two ways the recurring cost of the average emailprotected employee with an ISDN connection and over 20 times the annual recurring cost of a emailprotected employee with a cable modem connection.Given the large measure emailprotected employees at Putnam, this program provides a method of greatly reducing recurring costs in the short and long term. Additionally, the e-learning program costs less than one-half of what the traditional training process costs. It even better prepares employees for the job because the quality of the training is higher and individuals can complete the training at their own pace. Moreover, emailprotect ed employees step that Putnam has made a sizeable investment in them, and purporting is supported by high productiveness rates and diminish turnover.The turnover rate among emailprotected employees is around 8% which is significantly lower than the Putnam average of 30%. By training employees for less and retaining them for longer, Putnam decreases both recruiting and training costs by a significant margin. Furthermore, the emailprotected program allows Putnam to expand their business into new areas without having to invest in supernumerary real estate. And because the majority of these emailprotected employees are from rural areas where the cost of living is lower than locations near Putnams office facilities, Putnam can get away with paying emailprotected employees less than their in-facility counterparts.All these factors contribute to the low cost advantage that the emailprotected program creates. Because Putnam only allows high productiveness workers the cream of working at home, the emailprotected program can provide an incentive for employees to increase their productiveness. According to a Putnam manager, any(prenominal)one who is eligible to work from home and who wants to can work at home as long as he has higher than average productivity. Anyone at Putnam who desires to work from home will have the incentive to increase productivity above the mean so that they will have the option of working from home. However, this ncentive only applies to workers who have jobs that allow them to work from home. Also, many people equal the brotherly experience that the office mystifys and have no desire to work from home. One of the pitfalls of using this program as an incentive is that there is no reason for employees to stupefy anything higher than the company average. However, all things considered, this program does incentivize a select group of individuals to boost their productivity levels. Various costs arise from the emailprotected program as we ll. It takes a special type of person to succeed in a emailprotected position.Employees must be willing to sacrifice the social aspect of work and must be good at solving problems on their own because immediate help cannot always be obtained. Unfortunately the workers who fit the emailprotected criteria do not necessarily bring about optimal production for Putnam. The most qualified and potentially productive candidates may find the emailprotected program to be unfulfilling. Consequently Putnam is forced to accept candidates who age still productive, may not produce optimally. In fact, overqualified candidates in Vermont and Mane tended to have higher turnover rates due to the unfulfilling nature of the work.One of the other primary costs of the program is the communication barrier. By not being in-facility, emailprotected employees cannot as easily talk to co-workers or supervisors about work-related problems. Also they are not subject to the culture and are unable to get as good of a sense of how the company operates compared to in-facility workers. Putnam has tried to mitigate these costs through the advent of the have words system and other communication methods, but the fact remains that communication is not as good as it is among in-facility workers. Finally, employee performance needs to be monitored a bit more closely with emailprotectedDue to the lack of social pressure among co-workers to perform, employees could be tempted to shirk. But Putnams performance evaluation process has eliminated this problem, and in fact, emailprotected employees have been as if not more productive than in-facility workers. Human Resources Policies Overall I think Putnam is doing a pretty good job with regards to its human resources policies in the emailprotected program. However, I feel a few changes could be made that could improve the program. According to some Putnam managers, supervise an employee working at home is not significantly different from monitoring em ployees in-facility.Rather, supervisors just have to monitor whats going on in different ways. If it really isnt much more costly or time consuming to monitor emailprotected employees as opposed to in-facility employees, I see no reason to offer emailprotected opportunities exclusively to high productivity employees. My recommendation is that Putnam lay out workers on a relative scale in quintiles and assign each quintile a grade of A, B, C, D, or E with A workers being the top 20% and E workers the bottom 20%. Employees should not be made aware of their rankings.Next, my recommendation is that Putnam select a sample of employees from each of the bottom three quintiles to work at home for a period of 6 months to a year. The reasoning for only using the bottom three quintiles is that the top two quintiles are already eligible to work at home. The purpose of the experiment is to secure from a cost standpoint whether or not it is advantageous to allow average and under average emplo yees to work at home. Putnam should use the exact same evaluation process and compensation system with these employees. In other words, they should be treated no otherwise from the typical emailprotected employee.Putnam should and then compare the productivity numbers of the experimental emailprotected employees and compare them to their respective productivity numbers from when they worked in-facility. If there is not a coarse discrepancy in their productivity, then it may be advantageous for Putnam to allow employees of average to below average productivities to participate in the emailprotected program. In fact, because overhead costs are so low for emailprotected employees compared to in-facility counterparts, it could still be advantageous from a cost standpoint for Putnam to allow these employees to work at home even if their productivities overtop off a bit.There are two major concerns I would have with employees in the bottom 3 quintiles working at home. One is that work er productivity will decline without direct monitoring. The second is that monitoring costs will spike due to the employees lack of motivation to do the job alone at home. If the increased costs of monitoring and the value of lost productivity do not exceed the difference in overhead cost among emailprotected and in-facility employees, then Putnam should definitely consider allowing more employees to work at home.Doing so could decrease operating costs and increase profits in the long run. By playacting this experiment Putnam can figure out how to optimally take advantage of its unique emailprotected program. The limitation of this is that it may not be possible to assign a dollar amount to the cost of increased supervisory monitoring or the value of lost productivity. In light of this, it may be difficult to determine any cost advantages from performing this experiment. With regards to employee evaluation and compensation, I believe Putnam is doing a more than adequate job.By us ing both quantitative and subjective measures of performance equivalent accuracy and call screening, Putnam keeps emailprotected employees on their toes and producing at a high level. Additionally, by offering bonuses tied to performance of up to 20% of base salary, Putnam does a firm job of aligning emailprotected employees interests with the companys. The high level of productivity and low turnover rate among emailprotected employees is proof that these policies work. One other aspect of HR that could be improved is making a clear cut path of promotion from emailprotected employee up to a higher level position like manager or supervisor.By establishing a clear path to a higher level job in the company, Putnam can inspire its emailprotected employees to work harder than ever. However, this could result in employee sabotage and decreased collaboration among emailprotected employees. Employees may refrain from helping each other out because they are all seeking the same promotion. Experimental emailprotected The first thing the operate agency should do is come up with a method of measuring employee performance. Without an accurate method of measuring performance, the experiment will not yield any meaningful results.The last agency ideally would find a quantitative measure of performance that helps predict the total profit or revenues of the firm. By conclusion a quantitative measure that drives revenues, the travel agency can be sure that their method of evaluation will tie closely into firm performance. For the rice beer of simplicity in this exercise, I will assume that the number of clients served is the quantitative measure that most closely measures firm profitability and employee productivity. The next step in performing this experiment would be to research the costs associated with having a call center employee work at home as opposed to in-facility.If it is not any cheaper to have employees work at home, then there is no reason to even perform the experiment. This difference in cost is between work at home and in-facility employees will eventually determine whether or not a work at home program would be advantageous for the travel agency. The major cost would likely be installing the work phone in each employees house. There could be other costs in addition, however, like increased supervisory costs. Next, similar to my strategy for Putnam, I would rank all call center employees on a relative scale based on productivity and divide them into quartiles.Then I would take a random selection of a given amount of employees from each productivity quartile. These randomly selected individuals would be the ones taking part in the work at home experiment. These individuals would work at home for a lengthy period of say 6 months to a year. The travel agency should heavily monitor their productivity during their time working at home, which in this case would be keeping track of clients served. At the end of the audition period of the w ork at home experiment, the travel agency should collect all the data regarding the participating individuals productivity.Their productivity should be compared to each individuals respective productivity in the 6 months to a year prior to the experiment. Also, to adjust for possible seasonal factors influencing productivity, the travel agency could compare each work at home employees productivity to other employees in the same quartile who work in facility. The main concern here should be that worker productivity could decrease to the point that it would not be cost effective for the travel agency to have employees work at home, in spite of the fact that it probably costs significantly less in overhead to have employees work at home.If possible, the travel agency should attempt to assign dollar values to the additional costs of productivity loss and supervision from having employees work at home. If these additional costs are less than the difference in overhead cost between work at home and in-facility employees, then implementing a work at home program would probably be advantageous for the travel agency. There is a reason workers are ranked on a relative scale at the beginning of the experiment. Call center employees of different productivities may respond differently to working at home.The highest productivity employees are probably the most intrinsically motivated, and thus we would expect to see not as large a drop off in their performance as employees in other quartiles. Based on the data collected at the end of the experiment, the travel agency could learn that it is only profitable to allow employees above a certain level of performance measuring to work at home. The firm could then use this standard as a benchmark and incentive for employees to obtain in order to get the option of working at home.