Multinational Success The author of this report has been asked to speak to a hypothetical company that is ramping up global production of a selected product. For the purposes of this report, the author will focus on consumer electronics. The different facets and issues within the business that will be answered to will include a list of best practices, the key benefits of creating such policies, the major ramifications that could be faced if those policies are not created and followed, the significant ways in which the long-term sustainability of the company will be served by the policies and whether or not the practices will create a competitive advantage for the company. When it comes to the last of that list, an example company will be given to prove the point. While some companies do fine without a list of best practices and similar policies, having everything in writing, communicated to the entire employee base and enforced at all times is the one and only right way to make sure standards are met and upheld at all times.

Analysis

When it comes to sanitation, the concern with consumer electronics is not about germs and the like but more about dirt and impurities. It has to be ensured that everyone working with the equipment, not to mention the equipment itself (as many consumer products are made by robots and other automation), are very clean at all times. This would include workers washing their hands before shifts and after breaks, the use of gloves and hair coverings, and the wiping down of equipment between rotations. When it comes to eating and drinking, this will not be done on the manufacturing floor at all except for the drinking of water. Of course, workers should be able to get a drink if they need one but non-water drinks such as juice or soda and any food are absolutely forbidden on the factory floor. Non-water drinks and food should only be consumed in the break/lunch room or outside of the facility (Duhigg, 2012).

As for conflict resolution, it has to be made exceedingly clear to people in the factory or in the associated administrative offices that they should seek out their manager at a convenient time rather than letting things fester or allowing things to boil over during a shift. For example, if something comes up during a shift, an employee should let their manager know that an issue exists. When there is a time convenient for everyone involved, the affected and involved people can be corralled one at a time to see what is going on. There can also be meetings of everyone involved if the situation calls for it. Whether and how the meetings occur will be decided by management as there might be some delicacy required. For example, a concern about business procedure would not be handled the same way as possible sexual harassment. Regardless, there should be an open-door policy where people are encouraged and perhaps even expected to say something is there is a problem that needs addressing. The reporting manager for a person should always be the person that is notified unless that reporting manager is part of the problem, as determined by the complainant. Regardless of the problem, the employer needs to promise that there will be a complete and expedient resolution to any problem. However, that solution will be based on what is legally, ethically and of the highest quality when it comes to the employer's results and the safety of the employees. A solution that works for everyone will be the goal but some things cannot be proven even if alleged and there will sometimes not be a solution that placates everyone. For example, if there is a sexual harassment complaint but it comes down to a "he said, she said," then separating the employees may be the only real solution even if one party wants the other fired, or vice versa. What is key, however, is that the employer makes a good faith effort to prove what happened and that they try their best to solve the problem in the best way possible for everyone. An employer failing to do that can face legal liability, as they should. If an impasse is met, then there can be arrangements for binding arbitration that the employer does not control. That way, a third party can be the decider and perhaps provide enough assurances that the employer is not favoring...

Indeed, if there are workers in the Philippines toiling away but there is no one in the United States headquarters on standby in case something arises, then that would be a problem. It is absolute crucial that management and executives make sure that decision-makers and people in power have people at the ready any time of the day when people are working for the firm. Even if it is two in the morning where those people happen to be, there must be at least a skeleton crew or an answering service at the ready so that the proper people can be gotten out of bed in case some goes awry. The same would be true in reverse if the foreign workers are expected to meet the schedule of the people at headquarters. For example, if people in India are helping meet needs for a service-based company in the United States, the people in India will have to work (at least in part) on the schedule of the people in the United States. This will mean odd shifts for people in India but this is necessary so that everyone is working at the same time irrespective of time zones. This sort of things happens in single countries by themselves. The United States, for example, is rather wide in terms of geography. People in California are literally three hours behind people in New York City when it comes to time. While this is not a real issue for a bulk of the day, people in New York signing off at 5 pm EDT is not going to work well unless there are people to cover those in California, where it is only 2 pm EDT (Henricks, 2006).
As for security and evacuation procedures, those two sort of go hand-in-hand. When it comes to consumer electronics, it has to be ensure that there is no theft by any of the employees or managers. At the same time, it has to be ensured that exits are clear and unobstructed so that people can flee problems if they exist. For example, if there is an active shooter situation or a fire, employees need to get out of the building as soon as possible. If there is a weather event or an earthquake, there are different procedures that must be followed. Essentially, people entering or exiting the building must be made to understand that they are subject to search and review. Anyone having an issue with that can work for someone else. The key is that no one can be cherry-picked or singled out. Everyone has to be subject to the searches and questions so that there are no accusations of things like racism, sexism and so forth. Also, there needs to be an established and trained procedure for what happens in the case of fire, earthquake or whatever happens to be somewhat or very likely in a given area (Workplace Fairness, 2016).

The key benefit to having these procedures written down and drilled into the heads of people on staff is that there should be no doubt about what to do, when to do it and why. What cannot be allowed to happen is that these procedures and policies are not in place and people are unsure what to do and when. Even worse is if there is a slipshod way of handlings things. For example, a conflict resolution situation should be handled the same way every single time ... without fail. Handling similar situations differently, by itself, creates chaos and can actually lead to lawsuits in some countries. There is also the safety aspect of things. For example, anything involving an evacuation should lead to the same procedure for everyone. People should generally be going to the closest exit and each department should know which exit applies to them and what meeting place outside the building is in place so as to count people and make sure everyone is alright (UMN, 2016).

Some of the major ramifications of not having proper and complete policies in place were mentioned above. However, those should be reiterated and expanded. Indeed, not having procedures in place leads to chaos, unequal treatment and bad management of the company's affairs overall. There is some credence to the idea that "common sense" should prevail. However, it is not wise to assume that the "common sense" or ordinary thing to do in one country would be the same in…