Developing A Network Of Stakeholders

1466 Words6 Pages
In today’s markets and global interactions, organizational leaders must consider the complexities of engaging with multiple stakeholder interdependently as well as simultaneously. Accountable leaders are aware that mutual interactions benefit both communicators during a positive woven relationship. Moreover, the ability to create a network of stakeholders also promotes organizational energy for all involved. Promoting valuable and lasting relationships also includes promoting agendas that helps the needy as well as the world. These helping relationships networks apply from volunteering to raise money for HIV and Aids too promoting human rights agendas. These stakeholder frameworks provide for key interconnections that promote the…show more content…
Discussion Given the opportunity to evaluate and identify the interaction between Western National Insurance (Western) organization and their stakeholders, identify each stakeholder and their mutual benefits. Determining Western’s historical stakeholder interaction, from past to the present, research must be accomplished. A review of the Pesch, Eide, and Moorthy (2012) document covering the Western National Insurance company that includes an itemized listing of internal and external stakeholders, the organizational leadership used, and the benefits of sustainable interactions (Pesch, Eide, & Moorthy, 2012). It all begins with a historical review of the organization.
Western, Past to Present
The Mutual Creamery and Cheese factory company opened its doors in Minnesota approximately one hundred years ago. This newly opened organization’s owners financed their beginning by providing specialty insurance handling for creameries. These interactions were made with hand to hand and direct coverage to their customers and by their employees. As the organization expanded their options to include liability automobile and property insurance in 1955, their organization met their goals and remained almost unchanged in methods until 1997. From 1997 till somewhere within the 1990s, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chairman of the Board realized their organizational ratio was substandard (Pesch et al., 2012). Moreover, their immediate future
Get Access