Patagonia builds both human and social capital in numerous ways, which is what gives it so much success. Human capital is the productive potential of one’s knowledge and actions where as social capital is the productive potential of strong, trusting, and cooperative relationships (Kreitner and Kinicki,2010, pg.14). Patagonia combines both social and human capital for the greater good. An example of human capital is in which there is a program that allows employees to take off up to two months at full pay and work for environmental groups. Another example is where the company pays 50% of an employee’s college expenses. Both of these examples show that the company, Patagonia, is passionate about their employee’s knowledge and future and in doing these activities, they hopefully will get incentives back by the individual, which in case, gives one more human capital. As to the social capital in Patagonia, it is basically all in the founder and chairan Yvon Chouinard. His personality and enlightment lifts the rest of the team’s morale and makes them want to work harder and better than before. If a company has a strict and overbearing boss, the employee’s will have no faith, admiration and dislike working. Since Patagonia’s founder is very easy to get along with and can actually enjoy being next to, makes this company a step over others.
-
How does this case bring the profile of the 21st-century manager to life?Explain.
Working for a company in the 21st-century is completely different than that of previous times. Managers of today have a whole new sense of managing a company. Instead of be the order giver or controller, they are the advocate or coach. Some others differences are with resisting change to facilitating change. In the A Passion for the Planet, the manager shows these new features such as always thinking for the employee, treating everyone as an equal, and using human capital instead of the employee being a potential problem. I am relly glad that I was brought up in the 21st-century workforce because I feel it is better for the manager, employee, the employee’s spouse and children and everyone that comes in contact with the employee. The evolution of the 21st-century manager was necessary for the new group of workers coming into the workforce. It really seems impossible for workers to have high self-esteem when their manager had a competitive interpersonal relationship. Yvon Chouinard is a like the ‘typical’ 21st-century manager comparable to Bill Gates and the late Steve Jobs. Patagonia is one of the many companies to see continous growth and improvement in their company due to not only the buying market but also the internal affairs such as the employer-employee relationship.
- Which of the seven moral principles in Table 1-5 appear to be in force at Patagonia? Explain.
The manager of Patagonia has definetely made steps closer to ethical decisions by applying some of the seven general moral principles. First, I feel the common good in the company’s goal which is ‘to produce the highest-quality products while doing the least possible harm to the environment’(Kreitner and Kinicki,2010, pg.30). According to the textbook, managers acheive the common good by benefiting the majority but protecting the individual, which absolutely describes Patagonia’s goal. Humaneness, concern for the well-being of others, is shown throughout the passage like ‘that’s after it donates 1% of revenues to environmental groups.....and ‘One popular perk is a program that allows employees to take off up to two months at full pay and work for environmental groups.’ Patagonia ‘offers an on-site day-care center at its headquarters and full medical benefits to all employees’ which is an example of the dignity of human life. The company respects that the employees have lives outside of work. Finailly, I found an model of both honesty and loyalty in the company’s resume when it described its mission statement and how the company is driven by its values. Also I found that the statistics of the company’s revenue pushed loyalty to the public as some don’t want others to know what the numbers say, but Patagonia wasn’t and remained loyal.
- What appeals to you (or does not appeal to you) about working at Patagonia? Explain.
Having a 21st-century manager is a big appeal to me because I like to have a good relationship with my boss. I feel that being afraid or look as not equal ruins the company’s productivity. Another thins that I really like about Patagonia is that it is a small company with a big company’s attitude; the employees feel that this company is the best and that their whole effort is put into this place. ‘Few Patagonians are it for the money’ really stuck to me and shows that making money is just the extra bonus but to actually work and engineer this company is what the employees strive for. So, would I work for Patagonia? Yes and No. I would definetely work for this company due to all the great attributes listed above and talked about in the previous questions but the only reason why I wouldn’t is because its not my area of study. Overall, I would definetely recommend applying for a job at this company due to its great niche in helping its employees.
References:
Kreitner, R & Kinicki, A. (2010).Organizational Behavior. w York, NY. McGraw-Hill Irwin
Historical Background of Organizational Behavior, Edward G. Wertheim, College of Business Administration, Northeastern University
