Evaluation Of Alternatives, Findings, And Analysis
Evaluation of Alternatives, Findings and Analysis, and References
In Part 2 of the assignment, we explore the evaluation of proposed alternatives, analyze the findings, and present relevant references that support the research and conclusions drawn regarding cafeteria improvements at Sana Company. The focus is on assessing specific solutions based on criteria such as cost, safety, variety, and feasibility, supported by scholarly and industry sources.
Evaluation of Alternatives
The alternatives under consideration for improving Sana Company’s cafeteria include: (1) changing employee lunch times, (2) diversifying the food menu, and (3) enforcing safety and hygiene protocols. These solutions were evaluated using five criteria: cost, safety and health, timing, popularity, and achievability. Through extensive research, each alternative's potential impacts, advantages, and limitations were analyzed, leading to an informed comparison of their effectiveness in addressing employee needs and organizational goals.
Alternative 1: Change Lunch Time
Research indicates that flexible lunch schedules can enhance productivity and reduce employee stress. According to a study by Wanson & colleagues (2010), flexible break times allow employees to better manage personal and professional commitments, resulting in improved work efficiency. However, implementing staggered lunch hours requires logistical adjustments, which may incur minor costs but generally offer high achievability due to minimal infrastructure changes. This solution directly addresses timing criteria by providing employees with increased flexibility, aligning with findings that suggest flexible break schedules boost morale and performance (Smith, 2007).
Alternative 2: Diversify Food Menu
Research suggests that offering a diverse food menu can significantly improve employee satisfaction and dietary health. Wanjek (2005) emphasizes that culturally diverse menus contribute to a more inclusive and engaging workplace environment. The primary advantage of this alternative is enhanced popularity, as employees with varied cultural backgrounds find their dietary preferences acknowledged. Nonetheless, expanding the menu entails higher costs related to procurement, preparation, and possible waste management. Despite the increased expenditure, studies by Johnson (2012) indicate that investing in diverse meal options positively affects employee health and productivity, making this a viable long-term strategy.
Alternative 3: Enforce Safety and Hygiene Rules
Enforcing strict safety and hygiene standards in the cafeteria aligns with occupational health best practices. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2020), rigorous hygiene practices reduce the risk of foodborne illnesses and create a safe eating environment. The practicality of this alternative hinges on staff training and regular inspections, which are feasible within existing organizational structures. Research by Lee & colleagues (2018) underscores that consistent safety enforcement not only prevents health hazards but also fosters employee trust and morale. However, the initial costs of staff training and continuous monitoring should be accounted for in the planning process.
Findings and Analysis
The evaluation reveals that each alternative has distinct strengths and limitations when measured against the criteria. For instance, changing lunch times is highly feasible and cost-effective, providing immediate benefits in flexibility and productivity. Conversely, expanding the menu offers substantial gains in employee satisfaction but with higher associated costs. Enforcing safety and hygiene protocols presents a moderate investment with significant health benefits, making it a critical foundational improvement.
Table 1 summarizes the analysis, illustrating how each alternative scores across the criteria:
| Criteria | Lunch Time Change | Menu Diversification | Safety & Hygiene Enforcement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost | Low | High | Moderate |
| Safety & Health | Moderate | High | High |
| Timing Flexibility | High | Low | |
| Popularity | Moderate | High | |
| Achievability | High | Moderate | High |
Overall, the analysis demonstrates that a combination of alternatives may be the most effective approach, leveraging the strengths of each to optimize cafeteria services comprehensively. Prioritizing modifications that offer high feasibility and significant impact aligns with organizational constraints and employee well-being goals.
These findings suggest that implementing flexible lunch hours alongside enhanced safety protocols provides immediate improvements at manageable costs, while expanding the menu can be phased in gradually as resources permit.