Week 2 Markov Analysis and Forcasting PDF

Preview

Summary

Week 2 assignment paper ...

Description

Ma r k o vAn a l y s i sa n dFo r e c a s t Me l i s s aPa r a d i s o CSUGl o b a l Pr o f e s s orSh e i l aLa n d f a i r Mu e l l e r Ma y2 ,y

Ma r k o vAn a l y s i s 2 1.) According to Adams and Henderson (2012), traditional job stability is a thing of the past, employees stay in a role for and average of 4.4 years (www.forbes.com). The internal job market for Doortodoor Sports Equipment Company fits within this average 4.4 year stability span. The highest stability rate is for assistant sales managers in level 2, on average only 2.5 employees out of 50 leave per year. The exit rates for the other two levels is also low which means that more employees are promoted into new roles versus leave the company.

2.) Level

Cur r ent Wor kf or ce

SF

SP

ASM

RSM

1

500

250

50

25

0

1

150

7. 5

90

15

0

2

50

2. 5

0

40

5

3

30

0

0

0

9

According to the data provided, the highest turnover rates are in level 1, so it is highly acceptable that the highest number of available workforce is in level 1. As you can see from the table above, the highest number of available workforce for 2008 is full time sales people in level 1 followed by part time sales people in level one, then assistant managers in levels 1 and 2, then regional sales managers in level 3, then full time sales people in level 1, regional sales managers in level 2 and finally full time sales people in level 2.

3.) According to Heneman and Judge (2012), there are four limitations of the Markov Analysis, they are: sample size, multiple moves by employee, job category/level combinations, and gross average employee movement (p. 106-107). According to Heneman and Judge (2012) “it is

Le a d e r s h i p 3 desirable to have 20 or more employees in each job category/level” (p. 106). This means that the Doortodoor Sports Equipment Company has an acceptable sample size for all three levels. This analysis does not account for interim moves, only the beginning and end of the year, this means that some positions may not truly be filled. There may be movement between job categories within the same level that are not reflected. This analysis also does not account for causes of movements and vacancies, knowing the causes would help HR plan more appropriately.

References

Ma r k o vAn a l y s i s 4

Henderson, J. (2012, December 22). Job Stability Vs. Job Satisfaction? Millennials May Have To Settle For Neither. Forbes. Retrieved January 29, 2014, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jmaureenhenderson/2012/12/22/job-stability-vs-jobsatisfaction-millennials-may-have-to-settle-for-neither/ Heneman, H. G., & Judge, T. (2012). Staffing organizations (7th ed.). Middleton, WI: Mendota House....