Based on Jeffrey Pfeffer, it is evident that an association between individuals and profits, whereby companies acquire exactly what they deserve. Majority of the companies treat their employees’ right and this result to high rates of productivity and decreased amount of turnover. The companies, which treat their executives defectively, this result to complain based on the decrease of loyalty and talent in the organization. These are the regions referred as toxic workplaces.
This indicates that many companies have the perception that a cheap competitive advantage develops through the purchase of items on open market. The solution to such issues is the separation from the competitors with knowledge, skills, commitment, and abilities of individuals one associates with in their business. The main idea portrayed in this argument is that companies that manage their executives effectively will outdo the companies that assume these factors by an estimate of 40%. This strategy is usually compelling and applies to IPO markets, these IPO markets focus on their clients and the results are higher than a five-year survival rate compared to other organizations. For example, an experiment carried on the industries demonstrates huge productivity benefits that develop after the implementation of high-performance and high-involvement management practices.
Toxic companies have the tendency of procrastinating events and this result to the decline of the organizations. The toxic workplaces treat their executives as if they are the features of production. Managers have authority on majority of the economic aspects tends to reel off. A company cannot progress when they view individuals as Marxist orientation in which they extract economic surplus.
Work Cited
Danger: Toxic Company by Jeffrey Pfeffer (Issue 19 November 1998)
