Case analysis ‘GSL and detention centres’
Ward de Weijer,
added answers and suggestions will be marked red
We would use the strategic constituencies approach, since this approach is useful when
constituencies have a powerful influence on the organisation and the organisation must respond
to the demands of these organisations. If we use this method to rate the effectiveness of the
company, we would say it’s not very effective. GSL fails to satisfy their main constituency: the
government. The government wants GSL to take care of the detainees, because they contracted
them to that job, so if GSL fails to take care of the detainees, It’ll make the government looks
bad. We think GSL fails to satisfy the government because they don’t take care of the detainees
well but were only looking for efficiency.
GSL's critical constituencies are the shareholders of GSL, the owners of the company. The
government, the detainees and the employees of GSL. It’s not possible to satisfy all the
constituencies because the detainees want to have a luxury life with nice food, good beds to
sleep in, but that costs lots of money. The owners of GSL and the shareholders want to keep
their costs as low as possible so they can offer the government a cheap offer. We think the
government is the most important to satisfy because if they don’t satisfy them, the government
will not extent their contract and GSL could potentially go bankrupt because they don’t have
work for their employees anymore.
Media and public are stakeholders, too.
GSL has to follow the policies of the Department of Immigration. So the effectiveness, their
ability to attain short- and longterm goals, will become different if the Department of
Immigration changes it policy. Maybe one of their goals is to...