AECOM is the Fortune 500 company I have chosen for the topic of this research paper. Fortune 500 company number #156
SWOT Analysis Requirements
The SWOT Analysis will be completed for a 2019 Fortune 500 Company. You will research and provide the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, for your chosen company. This information will be paraphrased and placed in your own words. No quotations. One company per person. This must be YOUR original work. You cannot use previously submitted assignments by you or anyone. Do not recycle previously submitted documents completed in other courses, other semesters, or from other schools.
To get started, follow the instructions below in the order given:
1. View the 2019 Fortune 500 List, URL is https://fortune.com/fortune500/
2. Choose two companies for which to complete your SWOT analysis
3. Go to the BrightSpace/D2L Discussions forum and read through the companies previous
submitted/posted to avoid duplication.
4. Create your own message and place the company name in the SUBJECT field of your
post/thread by the deadline date in the Fortune 500 Company Choice Discussion Folder. Remember, the person that post the company first gets preference. You chose two companies so if the first company you chose was already selected use the other. If the 2nd choice is there, go back to the drawing board.
5. You may change companies as long as no one else has selected it. You must post your change BEFORE the deadline. Open and edit your original message if you decide to choose another company.
Now that you have selected the company of your choice, get started conducting the research.
References
mpliance and punish non compliance from the group, the leader has reward and coercive power (French and Raven, 1959). To obtain complete power over the group the leader must gain the trust and belief of the group that they are capable of success, by ensuring the group are both satisfied and meeting performance goals.
The importance of establishing a hierarchy became evident during the planning stage of the outdoor management course for the red team, the coordinators within the team assumed leadership roles but were unable to gain positional power due to the team being a peer group (Pettinger, 2007). The leaders selected had little authority and influence over the group as everyone was perceived to have the same rank, status and occupation, hence the leaders had none of French and Ravens five bases of power (Pettinger, 2007). The result was leaders with no positional power over the group, so could not direct the group with the method of leadership required for the situation. The task had significant constraints, particularly a short time frame and a large group size, for this situation Chelladurai recommends an autocratic leadership style would be most favourable (Chelladurai and Madella, 2006). The leaders attempted an autocratic leadership style, setting individual tasks for the group, however due to the poor leader member relations and lack of positional power the leadership structure quickly became a democracy. The product was an extremely unproductive workforce initially because of the time spent discussing how was best to approach the task. Because of how the leaders were perceived by the group there was little mutual trust, respect or confidence that the leaders were making the correct decisions, and as a result any management style they tried to implement would have been unsuccessful (Pettinger, 2007). Ultimately, if the leaders had analysed their position and the group they would have realised this and chosen a more democratic approach initially the group would have gained trust for the leaders, making future policy implementation easier.