The Achievements of Siemens Company - Case Study Example

RADAR Methodology Name Institution Date Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 RADAR Methodology 3 Strengths of the Company 3 Areas of Improvement for the Company 5 Site visit matters and score card 6 Conclusion 8 Bibliography 9 Introduction The European Framework Quality Management (EFQM) is one of the most coveted awards in Europe. It is usually awarded to organizations that have displayed an outstanding performance in terms of quality management (EFQM, 2010). The requirements for a company to be nominated for the award are quite demanding due to the high number of organizations competing for the award. Siemens Congleton is a branch of Siemens Company based in the United Kingdom and it deals with manufacture of electronics. This company has won the award twice due to its exceptional performance in the industry. The paper critically discusses the achievements of the company and how it won the award. The RADAR methodology is also used in the analysis of the company in relation to the award winning. RADAR Methodology Strengths of the Company The company is an integrated technological entity that heavily invests on the new technology. This has enabled the organization to create a department that deals with new innovations on a regular basis. The innovations are for the purpose of ensuring that the company is a head of the competitors. Qualified personnel have been employed by the organization for the purpose of ensuring that the innovations are done on a regular basis (Siemens Congleton, 2012). The quality of the products is usually strictly monitored before being released to the market. The company always ensures that the new products are tested before being sold in the market. This is one of the main reasons that enabled the company to win the coveted EFQM award in 2005 and 2007. The levels of customer satisfaction with the products and services of the company are also high as compared to other competitors. The level of customer satisfaction is usually used as an significant tool for determining the acceptability of the products of the company in the market. The employee and management culture is also one of the strengths of the company that enabled it to win the much coveted award. The management culture is quite friendly to the employees and the customers. Any issue raised by the customer is usually dealt with immediately and hence the high level of customer satisfaction (Conti, 2003). According to Olaru, (2010), conservation of the environment and reducing the green house gases is increasingly becoming popular. Siemens is one of the companies that have implemented various green initiatives that have reduced the emission of carbon dioxide. The use of technological means to reduce the emission of green house gases is vital strength to the organization. The EFQM award won by the company was also a result of the green initiatives of the company. The company is therefore concerned about the environment and it has invested heavily in the conservation efforts. On the other hand, the company is financially stable and it has the potential of taking risks for the purpose of making new inventions as well as promoting the quality of its products and services. It is also important to note that the company is among the top ranking companies in Europe and hence its popularity. Good relationship that the company enjoys with its customers is also a significant strength of the company and it is also a factor that contributed to the winning of the award twice. In the current global economy, most organizations are not just out there for the purpose of making profits but to also satisfy the customers and make a brand name for themselves (Dinu, 2010). Areas of Improvement for the Company Although the company still maintains high standards in terms of the quality of its products and services, it has not been able to win the award since 2007. This may partly be attributed to the high competition for the award by other organizations and also some measures that the company needs to improve. The criterion for selection of organization also changed and more emphasis was placed on the RADAR methodology (Luetkenhorst, 2004). This defined the methods to be used when awarding marks for each organization. The company thus requires various improvements so as to meet the basic requirements of selection. The corporate social responsibility is one of the areas that the organization needs to improve. Although Siemens Congleton has been involved in many community projects, more needs to be done. This will ensure that the company scores highly in the sector and hence the nomination. The company has been doing well financially but due to the global recession, the company has had some difficulties. The financial performance is also an area of consideration by EFQM and should therefore be enhanced by the organization. This requires the company to come up with strategies that will boost growth and hence the generation of more revenue. The financial performance should however be a direct result of the investment o the company as well as the quality of the products and services (Conti, T, 2003). The leadership of an organization accounts for 10% during the selection process. It is therefore essential for the company to develop a strong leadership skills and competence. This area can be improved by the company by ensuring that it recruits the best CEO and managers so as to increase its chances of nomination. According to Lozano et al. (2007), leadership is regarded as one of the enablers of the success of the organization. The strategies depend on the leadership of the organization and this also accounts for 10%. Although some of the strategies of the company are among the best, other strategies have not been successful for the company. It is thus important for the company to develop much better strategies. Since the company has adequate resources, it should strive to increase the number of partners as it is one of the enablers. The partnership is important for the success of the company as well as diversifying its resources. It is also important for the company to ensure that the enablers and the results match. This is important during the selection process. If the improvements are made, the chances of success for the company are high as it has won the award two times before. The new criteria used should thus be adopted by the organization in order to beat the other competitors in the industry (Foote, 2010). Site visit matters and score card The main purpose of the site visit is to determine whether the information given is correct. According to Kiyindou, (2008), the assessors may also find some of the areas not clear and hence the need for the site visits in order to clarify the points. The site visit is also important for the purpose of assessing the prevailing conditions at the workplace so as to determine the conditions under which the organization is operating. The teams carrying out the assessment is also the same that undertakes the site visit. The team has the power of changing the scorecard before it is finally forwarded to the judges for the final outcome. The site visit for Siemens Company is important during the process. This may takes a few days due to the size of the company. However, the management is always cooperative and works well with the team. All the necessary information required by the team is usually availed for the purpose of clarifications. Since the company has been involved in the process severally, the management is aware of the procedures. The assessors are also familiar with the company. However, the site visits must be carried out for any applicant regardless of the knowledge of the assessors about the company (Gradinaru, 2010). The score card for the company depends on the new criterion that was developed by EFQM in 2010. The areas of strengths and areas of improvement are important during the awarding of marks. Siemens Congleton may score highly in the areas of customer satisfaction as well a the processes products and services. This is an indication that the organization is performing well as customer satisfaction has high marks. However in other areas of improvement, the company may not be able to score high marks. This is due to the amount of efforts required in this areas. However it is important to note that the innovations of the company together with the sustainability projects may benefit the company. This is therefore important for the organization and has contributed to the wining of the award in the past. The enablers of the company are also directly proportional to the results. This is an indication that the company is performing well and the score card will definitely be above average. Wining the award is within the reach of the organization due to the measures it has put in place. This achievement ensures that the organization is recognized by the competitors as well as being acknowledged by the customers (Hopkins, 2006). Conclusion In conclusion, it is important for the company to put in place measures that increases its chances of wining the award. Siemens has been successful and it has won the award two times therefore policies and strategy should be put in place to ensure that the company regains its glory. Coveted awards require dedication and exemplary performances. Though the requirements can be extremely demanding, the resultant outcome is always worth efforts. The areas of improvements also contribute to the score card of the organization. Bibliography Conti, T, 2003, Quality into 21st Century, Perspectives on Quality and Competitiveness for Sustained Performance, Milwaukee: ASQ (American Society for Quality), Quality Press. Dinu, V, 2010, Commercial Activity and the Sustainable Development, Amfiteatru Economic, XII (27), pp. 5-7. European Foundation for Quality Management, EFQM, 2010, Introducing the EFQM Excellence Model 2010, Retrieved on 16 November 2012 from, Foote, J, et al, 2010, corporate social responsibility: Implications for performance excellence, Total Quality Management, 21(8), pp. 799-812. Gradinaru, C, 2010, Environmental Quality, Stimulating Factor Consumption in the XXI Century, Amfiteatru Economic, XII (28), pp. 444-453. Hopkins, M, 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility and International development: Is Business the Solution? London: Earthscan13. .Lozano, J, et al., 2007, Governments and corporate social responsibility. Public policies beyond regulation and voluntary compliance, Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Luetkenhorst, W, 2004, Corporate Social Responsibility and the Development Agenda. The Case for Actively Involving Small and Medium Enterprises, Intereconomics, May/ June Issue, pp. 157-166. Kiyindou, A, 2008, Company social responsibility in the multicultural context, Case study: ACCOR Group. Amfiteatru Economic, X (2), pp. 213-219. Olaru, M, et al., 2010, Responsible Commercial Activity of SMEs and Specific Values of Sustainable Development in Terms of The European Excellence Model, Amfiteatru Economic, XII(27), pp. 10-26 Siemens Congleton, 2012, The organization profile, Retrieved on 16 November, 2012 from, . . Read More