• 3029 Steve Hunt Road
  • Miami, FL 33179
0

Award Winning

0

Expert Lawyers

0

Satisfied Clients

0+

case
Winning

DIVERSITY: IBM VERSUS MONITOR COMPANY- A CASE STUDY

The success of diversity in the make-up of a company depends highly on its acceptance by top management. All companies that practice diversity have modes of implementation and this goes hand in hand with the company’s philosophy.

Let’s meet our case studies:

IBM is globally known for manufacturing of PC Computers, software as well as for business consultancy.  Monitor Company is a group of companies that offer business consultancy and IT solutions. The IBM stance is that diversity is an investment in the future of its clients and the future of business, business development and business diversification. IBM’s approach to diversity was to sell the idea to top management and with the top managers accepting diversity it began to show in the way they worked and acted. IBM took a huge philosophical leap in business approach as it associated itself with the success of its clients and noticing that its clients were of diverse needs, tastes, sex ethnicities it sought to cater for each of its client’s unique needs, in a way ‘putting the client first’ in their decision making process.

This shift in doing business rubbed off on the junior managers and eventually the entire staff of IBM as they were able to see that diversity was not only good for business but also for operations as the leadership structure changed and employees were looked upon as partners and diversity was linked to business goals. The top-down mode of implementing diversity was considered the reason for success of the new found philosophy and increased productivity from the work force. Monitor Company on the other hand took the issue of diversity as a trend and not so seriously. Implementation was from the bottom up and as such faced serious resistance by top management.

The top-down mode of implementing diversity was considered the reason for success of the new found philosophy and increased productivity from the work force.


Monitor Company on the other hand took the issue of diversity as a trend and not so seriously. Implementation was from the bottom up and as such faced serious resistance by top management.

It was really at a sit-down of top managers to discuss diversity that management saw how serious it needed to diversify as staff productivity was dwindling.

This caused a shift in implementation of diversity and had Fuller; its founding director, accept the role of diversity as a tool to improve performance at Monitor.

 

In the end Monitor adopted the top-down mode of implementation of diversity. Management at IBM recognised the value of diversity as part of culture and that their customer base was diverse and in reflecting such diversity in expanding into new areas of business made IBM very successful at reinventing itself tin the global market.


Monitor on the other hand while not diversifying business interests did diversify its work force thus increasing staff productivity but only after adopting the top-down method.

Monitor on the other hand didn’t really embraced diversification and actual showed fear for it and only embraced it after top managers made it an open issue.

Our Expert Developers