人力资源管理案例库

案例二十一、朗讯的薪酬管理
朗讯的薪酬结构由两大部分构成，一块是保障性薪酬，跟员工的业绩关系不大，只跟其岗位有关。另一块薪酬跟业绩紧密挂钩。朗讯的销售人员的待遇中有一部分专门属于销售业绩的奖金，业务部门根据个人的销售业绩，每一季度发放一次。在同行业中，朗讯薪酬中浮动部分比较大，朗讯这样做是为了将公司每个员工的薪酬与公司的业绩挂勾。
业绩比学历更重要
朗讯在招聘人才时比较重视学历，贝尔实验室1999年招了200人，大部分是研究生以上学历，"对于从大学刚刚毕业的学生，学历是我们的基本要求。"对其他的市场销售工作，基本的学历是要的，但是经验就更重要了。学位到了公司之后在比较短的时间就淡化了，无论做市场还是做研发，待遇、晋升和学历的关系慢慢消失。在薪酬方面，朗讯是根据工作表现决定薪酬。进了朗讯以后薪酬和职业发展跟学历工龄的关系越来越淡化，基本上跟员工的职位和业绩挂勾。
薪酬政策的考虑因素
朗讯公司在执行薪酬制度时，不仅仅看公司内部的情况，而是将薪酬放到一个系统中考虑。朗讯的薪酬政策有两个考虑，一个方面是保持自己的薪酬在市场上有很大的竞争力。为此，朗讯每年委托一个专业的薪酬调查公司进行市场调查，以此来了解人才市场的宏观情形。这是大公司在制定薪酬标准时的通常做法。另一个考虑是人力成本因素。综合这些考虑之后，人力资源部会根据市场情况给公司提出一个薪酬的原则性建议，指导所有的劳资工作。人力资源部将各种调查汇总后会告诉业务部门总体的市场情况，在这个情况下每个部门有一个预算，主管在预算允许的情况下对员工的待遇做出调整决定。
加薪策略
朗讯在加薪时做到对员工尽可能的透明，让每个人知道他加薪的原因。加薪时员工的主管会找员工谈，根据你今年的业绩，你可以加多少薪酬。每年的12月1日是加薪日，公司加薪的总体方案出台后，人力总监会和各地做薪酬管理的经理进行交流，告诉员工当年薪酬的总体情况，市场调查的结果是什么？今年的变化是什么？加薪的时间进度是什么？公司每年加薪的最主要目的是保证朗讯在人才市场增加一些竞争力。
一方面我们都知道高薪酬能够留住人才，所以每年的加薪必然也能够留住人才。另一方面是，薪酬不能任意上涨，必须和人才市场的情况挂钩，如果有人因为薪酬问题提出辞职，很多情况下是让他走或者用别的办法留人。
薪酬与发展空间
薪酬在任何公司都是一个非常基础的东西。一个企业需要一定竞争能力的薪酬吸引人才来，还需要有一定保证力的薪酬来留住人才。如果和外界的差异过大，员工肯定会到其它地方找机会。薪酬会在中短期时间内调动员工的注意力，但是薪酬不是万能的，工作环境、管理风格、经理和下属的关系都对员工的去留有影响。员工一般会注重长期的打算，公司会以不同的方式告诉员工发展方向，让员工看到自己的发展前景。朗讯公司的员工平均年龄29岁，更多是看到自己的发展。

思考题：
     朗讯的薪酬管理给了你哪些方面的启示？

案例二十二、天价违约金能否震慑跳槽者？
2005年11月22日，东方航空公司10名机长集体辞职事件被媒体曝光。消息一出，舆论哗然。
“公司把他们从东南大学和南京航空航天大学招进来，有好几个人还是贫困生，我们花了很多资金送他们去培训，他们应该知恩图报。如果他们执意要辞职，放不放人，我们也要看情况。”东航江苏公司飞行部负责人如是说。
其中一位机长的代理律师崔武公开对媒体表示：《劳动法》是保护人才流动的。如果劳动者有过错而提前解除劳动合同，赔偿用人单位的损失就是。但任何单位都无权“冻结”劳动者的辞职权。
无独有偶。2005年5月20日，四川谭氏官府菜餐饮公司成都店的厨师长吴华，收到了法院的一审判决书。这个在不到三年时间就从学徒跃升为厨师长的年轻人，必须为自己的提前离职埋单，而且金额巨大：他的年薪30万还不够支付违约金的零头。
这起违约金额达250万元的官司，被称为“中国餐饮界第一赔偿案”。拿到判决书，吴华的心里很不平静，自己升任厨师长时间才一年的时间，如何赔得了这么多钱？
一项“工作多久跳一次槽？”的网络调查中，接受调查的5463人中，有过跳槽经历的53.66%， 跳过两次槽的约为12.57%，跳过三次槽的约为10.02%。跳槽3次以上的人也在12.18%左右。
作为职业人，跳槽自然是要往高处走。但是在跳槽的过程中，很多人尤其是高级管理人才会遇到的一个问题，就是违约金远远超出了自己的承受能力，跟公司签几年约，就相当于签几年“卖身契”。
而公司比较头疼的，则是自己在人才培训上花了巨额资金，最后却投奔竞争对手。为避免落得个“鸡飞蛋打”，公司要么是制定天价的赔偿金，要么是扣住档案不放人。

思考题：
     员工到底有没有离职权？高违约金合法吗？它能留住人才吗？公司花费的高额培训费如何得到补偿？

案例二十三、Employee orientation at Influence
In the volatile world of E-business, speedy and effective orientation of new employees is crucial. Influence, a technology solutions provider, recently started FUSION, an intensive two-day orientation workshop for new employees at the company’s St. Louis headquarters. Not only does this orientation program give new employees-called associates-basic information on such things as phones and the E-mail system, it also is intended to orient them quickly to the company’s culture, including its informally written handbook. In each FUSION workshop, an average of 10 new associates start by meeting the company’s leaders, including Craig Kaminer, the president and CEO. The next two days are filed with presentations on the history and values of the company, teamwork challenges, personally evaluations, and opportunities to meet new colleagues. New hires are also matched up with buddies for their first few weeks on the job. Although Influence had to make a major financial commitment to FUSION, the company feels that the program has saved time and effort in the long run. Carol Sacks, vice president of leadership and development, says:’ whether someone is employee number 50 or number 100, we want them to feel the same sense of culture and excitement about the company. We also want to enable our associates to be productive right away. If you don’t orient people, they’re not going to produce breakthrough work.’  

Discussion:
     do you think orienting people is important in the organizations? Why?

案例二十四、Hire me, hire my husband
Peter Gettings, director of human resources for XYZ Company’s research and development laboratories, was relating a success from his State University recruiting trip to Derek Hills, XYZ’s manager of computer operations.
“Derek,” Gettings said excitedly, “you know how you’ve had me looking for engineers who could add technical strength to your operation? Well, I’ve found one—a senior at State University and a straight-A student, with lots of ambition, interested in computers for what they can do in applications, and anxious to work in industry. I’m bringing her in for an interview—I’m sure you’ll want to hire her, and I’m positive we can.”
“But,” Getting continued, “that’s the good news. The back news is that she’s married and she and her husband want to work for the same company. Her husband is a marketing major and a jock. He played four years of basketball for State but is not nearly good enough to consider a pro career. I met him; he’s got lots of personality and a C-grade average. I don’t see any particular talent in him, and I think our marketing people will turn him down flat. But if we want her, we’ve got to find him a job!”
Sally Finch and her husband, Mike, were brought in for interviews with exactly the results Pete Gettings had predicted. Everybody was impressed with Sally, for she had prepared well for the interview and was able to point out some unexploited applications of computers at XYZ. Her suggestions about product performance simulation were particularly thought provoking and impressive.
Her husband, on the other hand, did very poorly in his interview. Mike could discuss his basketball prowess, but little else. His earring and ponytail hairstyle did not fit the conservative atmosphere of XYZ either.
The interviews resulted in a very attractive offer to Sally and a rejection for Mike. Sally’s response was a blunt retort that she and Mike would continue to look for opportunities to work for the same company. XYZ wanted to employ Sally so badly that it made a diligent search of local employment possibilities for her husband, thinking this might be a good alternative to employing both of them at XYZ. A small telemarketing firm finally exhibited some interest in employing Mike, and because of the excellent offer that XYZ had made to Sally, the pair decided to accept both offers.
Sally subsequently proved to be a valuable asset to XYZ’s R&D computer operations, and her work resulted in some excellent product development progress for the company. Derek was pleased and continued to pay for her additional training.
Sally received two promotions during her first two years at XYZ. Occasionally Derek asked about her husband, and Sally’s only response was that he was doing OK and they were considering buying a home. This was good news because XYZ felt that Sally was definitely an employee they wanted to keep.
As time went on, Derek saw Mike several times at departmental social functions and noted that he had matured and become a very self-assured individual. In conversations with him, Derek observed that Mike seemed to have all the characteristics of a successful young businessman. Derek, in fact, wondered to himself if XYZ had made a mistake in not hiring him
Derek was surprised and ill prepared one morning when Sally walked into his office and told him she was resigning.
“What’s the problem?” Derek asked.
“My husband has done very well in the telemarketing business and has been offered a promotion and transfer to the West Coast. His company has asked him to open and manage a new branch operation there. I’m certain I’ll be able to find employment in our new location, and we think this is the chance of a lifetime for Mike. I’m sorry to leave XYZ, but really see no other choice. I’m willing to stay a month or so to help train a replacement if you can find one quickly. Of course, if XYZ could come up with a job for Mike equivalent to the one he’s been offered on the Coast, we could stay here.”

Discussion:
     what do you think the dual-worker phenomenon would influence the organizations in the perspective of staff career management?

这是个好东西，谢谢师哥

不客气，美女！

非常感谢楼主分享啊

太棒了！

感谢分享