[Excerpt] There seems to always be the issue of business size versus business agility. Time and time again businesses have fallen behind due to their sheer size, along with their inflated bureaucracies and their inability to further innovate. However, that does not necessarily have to be the case. Through strong human resource management, the corporation can grow and remain capable of advancing and innovating. Stronger worker coordination, creating entertaining competitions, and forming measures of inclusion for those who are added to the workforce allow an organization to be agile while growing

Getzoff, Marc

English

DigitalCommons@ILR

Cornell University ILR School 
DigitalCommons@ILR 
Cornell HR Review 
9-4-2015 
The Theoretical Implications of HR on a Growing Corporation 
Marc Getzoff 
Cornell University, mdg255@cornell.edu 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/chrr 
 Part of the Human Resources Management Commons, and the Labor Relations Commons 
Thank you for downloading an article from DigitalCommons@ILR. 
Support this valuable resource today! 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion 
in Cornell HR Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please contact 
catherwood-dig@cornell.edu. 
If you have a disability and are having trouble accessing information on this website or need materials in an 
alternate format, contact web-accessibility@cornell.edu for assistance. 
The Theoretical Implications of HR on a Growing Corporation 
Abstract 
[Excerpt] There seems to always be the issue of business size versus business agility. Time and time 
again businesses have fallen behind due to their sheer size, along with their inflated bureaucracies and 
their inability to further innovate. However, that does not necessarily have to be the case. Through strong 
human resource management, the corporation can grow and remain capable of advancing and 
innovating. Stronger worker coordination, creating entertaining competitions, and forming measures of 
inclusion for those who are added to the workforce allow an organization to be agile while growing. 
Keywords 
HR Review, human resources, organization, culture, inclusion 
Disciplines 
Human Resources Management | Labor Relations 
Comments 
Suggested Citation 
Getzoff, M. (2015, September 4). The theoretical implications of HR on a growing corporation [Electronic 
version]. Cornell HR Review. Retrieved [insert date] from Cornell University, ILR School site: 
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/chrr/83 
Required Publisher Statement 
© Cornell HR Review. This article is reproduced here by special permission from the publisher. To view the 
original version of this article, and to see current articles, visit cornellhrreview.org. 
This article is available at DigitalCommons@ILR: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/chrr/83 
  
cornell HR review 
 
 
The Theoretical Implications of HR on a Growing Corporation 
 
Marc Getzoff 
 
There seems to always be the issue of business size versus business agility. Time and 
time again businesses have fallen behind due to their sheer size, along with their inflated 
bureaucracies and their inability to further innovate. However, that does not necessarily 
have to be the case. Through strong human resource management, the corporation can 
grow and remain capable of advancing and innovating. Stronger worker coordination, 
creating entertaining competitions, and forming measures of inclusion for those who are 
added to the workforce allow an organization to be agile while growing. 
 
The increased size of companies can stifle innovation through the formation of 
organizational culture and social norms that do not permit new ideas. This can be caused 
by increased routines which often separate an individual’s work experience from their 
personal interest. It can also be caused by excessive supervision, stubborn managers, and 
the creation of strong organizational cultures which may work to prevent dissent. The 
organization culture and social norms at White Cap prevented the company from being 
able to face the competition (White Cap). The production of plastic bottles had threatened 
their line of glass products but the company was unable to move towards the new market 
because of the ideology that pervaded the business and prevented new ideas. It took 
significant changes to alter the organizational culture and allow for innovation within 
R&D (White Cap). 
 
Organizational structure and increased bureaucratization can reduce the agility of any 
corporation. Middle management and levels of specialized bureaucracy are necessary in 
order to provide oversight and direction. However, excessive levels can hinder progress 
by making the organization too slow to respond. Corning Glass Works encountered 
similar problems before it was restructured in the 1970’s. Departmental routines had 
become entrenched and there was very little coordination due to the increased time it took 
to get simple tasks done (Corning Glass Works A). Despite this, the organizational 
structure remained the same and failed to respond. The path towards success was the 
formation of a new coordinated team and the removal of many positions to allow for 
innovative ideas and faster progress up the production ladder (Corning Glass Works C). 
The threat of overburdening management and bureaucracy affects every growing 
corporation. 
 
One key solution to maintaining organizational efficiency and innovation is to increase 
worker coordination on new ideas. When people work independently of others, they often 
become isolated from their co-workers and fail to recognize the benefit their input can 
have. Such was the case at Corning when members of the manufacturing department 
became hostile towards the marketing department and failed to recognize any merit of 
© 2015 Cornell HR Review  
 
 2 
their ideas (Corning Glass Works B). With isolation, workers are more prone to 
confirmation bias and never noticing the flaws of their own ideas. The lack of 
coordination can harm worker morale and prevent collaboration to bring about new 
methods and ideas. 
 
Increasing worker coordination can be done effectively to increase the efficiency of a 
corporation. However, the coordination must be structured in a way to promote diversity 
of opinion and avoid group-think. Successful tactics include getting people to make 
suggestions independently first and then discussing them with a group of co-workers. If 
employees are asked to submit suggestions on how to improve company performance or 
how to better reduce wasted time, they will likely be able to come up with new insights 
which did not occur to management before. But it takes the various input and discussion 
amongst the co-workers to determine if the idea would help performance, if it is feasible, 
and if it creates any new problems. This system of checks and balances can often be 
impeded by groupthink which can occur when dominant personalities support a certain 
idea and convince others. Appointing a devil’s advocate or having anonymous voting can 
prevent groupthink. This will help to ensure that the workers can freely express their 
opinions but must argue their positions against reasonable criticism. 
 
Competition is necessary for any organization. Competition, to a certain extent, can serve 
as a great motivator and does not need to harm worker coordination. In order for 
competition to be effective, there must be a successful motivation for winning and there 
must be relative equality of opportunity in order to ensure that the competition is fair. 
However, competition can create malevolent outcomes if it is not closely monitored and 
regulated to adhere to its goal. If a large bonus goes to the worker who comes up with the 
best suggestion for promoting efficiency in the work process, this may lead to people 
becoming isolated and refusing to trust each other. Workers may not take the competition 
seriously or may assume that a specific person will always win. Whether it is disinterest 
or disengagement from their co-workers, competition can prevent effective work 
behavior. 
 
Competition should be based on an entertaining measure. The start-up community has 
been applauded for its use of start-up battles or technology competitions in which teams 
will make demonstrations to see which is better. Despite the competitive nature, the 
teams engage in friendly conversation, there is widespread socializing, and there are 
constructive team efforts. The same type of environment could be transferred into a 
corporation where teams form to make suggestions on how to improve efficiency, lower 
costs, improve revenue, or better the company in any sense. It would not only lead to 
better coordination with team members but would create an entertaining atmosphere that 
is conducive to innovative thinking. Along these lines, the prize for the competition 
should not simply be monetary. Rather, it should be something that is enjoyable yet not 
directly translatable into money. Examples include vacations and gift cards. These often 
help to reduce any feelings of resentment or jealousy while still retaining the motivating 
benefits. 
 
© 2015 Cornell HR Review  
 
 3 
Inclusion is necessary for any organization attempting to be innovative and agile. As the 
company grows, so will its number of employees and its range of functions. Similarly, it 
will have to transmit its corporate culture to the new entrants as well as form a new 
culture that is more inclusive. For example, as Ben & Jerry’s grew from a small company 
into a large corporation, it required more employees and more executive managers (Ben 
& Jerry’s). In order to maintain the organizational efficiency, the company worked hard 
to transmit its message of local buying and responsible production methods to its new 
entrants while changing its compensation system to attract enough management (Ben & 
Jerry’s). The result was continuous innovation and the development of many new ice 
cream flavors which not only increased profits but made the brand a house-hold name. 
 
Inclusion must be done so as to promote stability and efficiency while preserving the 
uniqueness of the individual. This is a very difficult balance to achieve as turning new 
entrants into committed employees takes time and resources. It requires establishing trust 
before the worker enters into the corporation. It requires a successful encounter with the 
organization, a process of change into becoming a member of the organization, and a 
positive outcome with regards to productivity and commitment. In short, it is best if the 
worker goes through the process and merges with the organization by using “we” instead 
of “them.” 
 
The main reason inclusion is so necessary is that it prevents progress from being stalled. 
If a new entrant is not aware of the organizational culture or work process, they will often 
make errors and stifle the work of others. Similarly, they may become frustrated and quit 
which entails more time and resources spent on replacing them. Inclusion into the 
company should be a steady process which involves sitting in group meetings, 
participating in discussion with employees without management present, and working 
alongside others in coordinated efforts. The inclusion process would eventually bring 
workers into the productive mindset and help assimilate them into the corporate culture. 
 
As corporations grow, it becomes difficult to manage the workers and how to maintain a 
rapid pace of development and innovation. Problems arise with organizational culture 
that prevents innovation and organizational structure that makes the organization too 
slow. Yet, several tactics including improving worker coordination and creating 
entertaining competition help to drive innovation while inclusion can be used to maintain 
efficiency. There are ways to grow as a corporation and to compete with smaller 
competitors, but it requires focusing attention on how new ideas are crafted and pursued 
and how new workers adjust to the corporation. ℵ 
 
Marc Getzoff will graduate in May 2016 from Cornell's School of Industrial Labor 
Relations with a minor in Economics. He has been a human resource and marketing 
consultant to multiple startups. 
 
 
1. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade Ice Cream Inc.: Keeping the Mission(s) Alive Rep. 
N.p.: Harvard Business School, n.d. Hbr.org. Web. 10 April. 2015. 
 
© 2015 Cornell HR Review  
 
 4 
2. Corning Glass Works (The Electronic Products Division) A. Rep. N.p.: Harvard 
Business School, n.d. Hbr.org. Web. 10 April. 2015. 
 
3. Corning Glass Works (The Electronic Products Division) B. Rep. N.p.: Harvard 
Business School, n.d. Hbr.org. Web. 10 April. 2015. 
 
4. Corning Glass Works (The Electronic Products Division) C. Rep. N.p.: Harvard 
Business School, n.d. Hbr.org. Web. 10 April. 2015. 
 
5. Peter Browning and Continental White Cap (A) Rep. N.p.: Harvard Business 
School, n.d. Hbr.org. Web. 10 April. 2015. 
 


The Theoretical Implications of HR on a Growing Corporation

[Excerpt] There seems to always be the issue of business size versus business agility. Time and time again businesses have fallen behind due to their sheer size, along with their inflated bureaucracies and their inability to further innovate. However, that does not necessarily have to be the case. Through strong human resource management, the corporation can grow and remain capable of advancing and innovating. Stronger worker coordination, creating entertaining competitions, and forming measures of inclusion for those who are added to the workforce allow an organization to be agile while growing.Getzoff_CHRR_2015_HR_in_a_Growing_Corporation.pdf: 110 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

eCommons (Cornell Univ.)

https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1080&amp;context=chrr

The Theoretical Implications of HR on a Growing Corporation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@ILR

eCommons (Cornell Univ.)