MC Donald Restaurant

Question: Write an analysis of the case study: McDonald's Restaurants built on motivation ? Answer: The current case on McDonald restaurants presents an excellent understanding of the motivation processes for staff groups in general as well as the specific company in discussion. It explicitly develops wider variety of different schemes designed towards motivating group of staff in vary contexts. These motivation schemes in turn are successful in motivating the employees in a way that they develop a personalized interest for their units success through teamwork and collaboration, as the restaurants of the company operate in separated profit units. Mainly two specific bonus schemes the company has developed to implement the motivation among its staff, such as monthly bonus for employees and quarterly bonus for managers of top 10 percent chosen restaurants. This selection of staff for incentives (bonus) comes from a specific procedure based on growth of sales, score from mystery shopper and profitability. These indicators seem quite logical as they cover not only the companys prospect ive but also customers aspects. This motivation scheme has in turn helped putting the concept of team work for the whole staff when the benefits and rewards are considered as referred by Neal, the manager for compensation in charge. This also presents a challenge before the staff to prove them before the mystery customer which makes it fully customer centric. The portfolio pf motivation scheme of this company remained similar across its operations including UK. Similar such program in UK and Barcelona were arranged by a common meeting of awardees and their discussion with peers after return to work really developed an impact of this motivation scheme inside the company (employees). Given this scheme of motivation has acquired universal acceptance, these programs is being linked with Olympic and para Olympic Games and awardees are given chance in these games facilities to enjoy and take part in hospitality. Even some awardees are given paid trip to big cities for travel and enjoyment. While this scheme has got better acceptance by staff, at the same time critics provide a lot of caution in implementing this without of course doubting on its good effect. Neal provide a series of recipes for motivation components such as recognizing right behavior of employees, frequency of awards, understanding values and need of employees in awarding as important in designing motivation schemes. While in this case study selection of staff for incentives (bonus) are discussed to come from specific procedures taking important aspects like growth of sales, score from mystery shopper and profitability. These indicators seem quite logical as they cover not only the companys prospective but also customers aspects. Only thing that can be recommended for addition is some way the need and expectation from employees may be scanned and incorporated into the motivation schemes. In addition however Neals recipes for components for incorporating into motivation schemes in terms of recognizing right behavior of employees, understanding their values and frequency of awards should be taken into consideration as a guide in awarding as important in designing motivation schemes. References: De Cooman, R., Stynen, D., Van den Broeck, A., Sels, L. and De Witte, H. (2013), How job characteristics relate to need satisfaction and autonomous motivation: implications for work effort. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43:13421352. Wang, Zheni and Gagn, Marylne (2012). ChineseCanadian Cross-Cultural Investigation of Transformational Leadership, Autonomous Motivation, and Collectivistic Value, Journal of Leadership Organizational Studies Nov. Lovewell, D. (2013). McDonald's restaurants built on motivation. Employee Benefits, 11. Huang, Yueng-Hsiang ; Verma, Santosh K.; Chang, Wen-Ruey; Courtney, Theodore K.; Lombardi, David A.; Brennan, Melanye J. and Perry, Melissa J. (2012). Supervisor vs. employee safety perceptions and association with future injury in US limited-service restaurant workers, Accident Analysis Prevention, 47 (July): 4551