Solution
Table of Contents
1.2 A range of analysis tools and methods analysis. 3
Evaluation of survey methodology. 4
1.3 The principles of critical thinking and the applications. 5
Reviewing the ideas of others. 5
1.4 Decision Making processes. 6
1.5 Different Ethical Perspectives. 8
3.1 Financial and non-financial performance. 9
Non-financial: Customer Satisfaction. 10
3.2 People practices add value in an organisation. 10
2.2 Key Findings Presentations. 18
Executive Summary
The analysis evaluates evidence-based practices, analysis tools, critical thinking principles, decision-making processes, and ethical perspectives in organisational contexts. It also examines financial and non-financial performance measures and methods to demonstrate the value of people practices. Additionally, it presents and interprets departmental performance data and employee survey results.
Introduction
The analysis provides a comprehensive evaluation of various aspects related to organisational practices and decision-making. It begins by discussing the concept of evidence-based practice (EBP) and its pros and cons in people’s practices. The analysis then delves into a range of analysis tools and methods, such as PESTLE analysis and survey methodology, highlighting their advantages and limitations.
Section One
1.1 Evaluation
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an approach to decision-making that explicitly uses the best available research evidence, along with practitioner expertise and the values of those impacted, to determine the best course of action(CIPD, 2023).
There are several pros to applying EBP in people’s practices. Firstly, it helps optimise outcomes by ensuring practices are supported by empirical research rather than traditions or anecdotes. This increases the likelihood that practices will achieve their intended results. It also promotes accountability by requiring the effects of practices to be measurable. Practitioners must be able to demonstrate evidence that a practice is effective.
However, EBP also has some potential cons. Not all factors in people’s practices can be easily quantified or studied through traditional research methods. Important considerations like organisational culture or employee well-being may take more work to measure objectively. This could result in an over-emphasis on quantitative factors at the expense of qualitative measures. Additionally, applying research can be challenging if the evidence needs to be clarified or contradictory. Practitioners must use judgment to determine how to apply sometimes inconclusive research findings in their unique contexts.
Two key EBP approaches useful for people practices are critical thinking and comparing evidence from multiple sources.
Critical thinking involves carefully evaluating the quality, reliability and applicability of different sources of evidence rather than passive acceptance. It encourages consideration of factors like research methods, sample sizes, potential biases and generalizability.
Comparing evidence from various sources, such as randomised studies, qualitative data, case studies, and practitioner expertise, can provide a better-rounded picture than relying on any single source(Metzger et al.,2020).
For example, these two approaches could be applied to addressing high absence levels at an organisation. A practitioner could systematically search different databases to identify rigorous research on root causes and interventions for absenteeism. They would critically appraise the methods, results and limitations of each study found. Practitioner knowledge and employee feedback would also be considered to understand context-specific factors. The various sources of evidence could then be triangulated to determine a multi-pronged strategy, drawing on the consistently supported practices but adapted to the organisation’s unique needs. Regular re-evaluation of outcomes would ensure the approach remained effective.
1.2 A range of analysis tools and methods analysis
PESTLE Analysis
PESTLE analysis allows for a comprehensive examination of the macro-environment factors that affect an organisation (CIPD, 2024). When diagnosing legislative issues challenging organisational growth, conducting a PESTLE analysis prompts consideration of relevant Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental influences. For example, forthcoming emission reduction laws could necessitate a shift in production processes or a change in the available labor pool due to new immigration policies. By gaining a deeper understanding of broader contextual trends and their implications, strategic planning can create appropriate responses to maximise opportunities arising from changes to the business environment.
Pros:
- Provides a broad overview of opportunities and threats from various external sources.
- Raises awareness of dynamic contextual factors too distant for leaders’ day-to-day focus.
- Structure ensures important domains aren’t overlooked in strategic thinking.
Cons:
- Considers variables at a high level, lacking depth on specific issues.
- No guidance on prioritising influences or their materiality for business.
- Still requires insightful analysis to translate macro insights to the organisation’s micro-context.
Evaluation of survey methodology
As evidenced by Fischer et al. (2021), surveys are a useful tool for diagnosing organisational growth opportunities at scale. When assessing customer satisfaction, surveys can identify underserved needs across a representative sample. Standardised questions allow comparisons between groups, while open-ended queries provide qualitative context. Distributing surveys to prospective customers as well as existing clients can reveal demands in entirely new market segments. Proactively diagnosing demands beyond the current customer base points to avenues for expansion. However, carefully targeting sampling frames is important. While surveys afford broad reach, follow up interviews help ground quantitative findings by validating insights in applied discussion. With awareness of limitations and thorough preparation, surveys effectively uncover growth opportunities when diagnosing underserved needs or undiscovered prospects at an organisational level
Pros:
- Enable input from large, diverse groups impractical to interview.
- Standardised data facilitates comparative and statistical analyses.
- Anonymity may elicit honest, unguarded feedback.
Cons:
- Response rates can be low without strong participation incentive.
- Risk of social-desirability bias or misunderstanding questions.
- Depths of perspectives are lost compared to qualitative methods.
1.3 The principles of critical thinking and the applications
Critical thinking is objective, reasoned analysis of facts and ideas to form well-supported judgments and conclusions (Adhikari, 2023). It requires considering multiple perspectives in a neutral, evidence-based manner by questioning assumptions, distinguishing facts from opinions, and thoroughly scrutinising the reliability of information sources and quality of data used before accepting or dismissing any perspective withoutBias and logical inference. The goal is to move beyond surface conclusions to deeper understanding through comprehensive, impartial assessment.
Reviewing One’s own ideas.
Please click the following icon to access this assessment in full
