Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 21


Killing ‘em Softly: Terminating Projects in a Video Game Studio

Montaro Case Study

Professor Dubois
November 17th, 2017

Hannah Atkins- 500622398

Alice Frayne - 500619566
Camila Rocha - 500651123
Mieka Shade - 500616078


Montaro is a successful gaming company with a global presence. As demonstrated in this

case however, there are still significant issues that the company must address in order to continue

to be an industry leader and retain top talent, especially regarding project terminated.

The key issues we have identified in this case are communication, leadership, employee

performance and retention. The communication issue centres around the lack of successful

communication between managers and employees, as well as managers and project teams,

resulting in unclear expectations. The leadership issue revolves around the lack of processes that

exist to properly terminate projects. This is due to poorly executed leadership roles at all

management levels. Employee performance issues then arise as expectations are unclear, and

rewards are based primarily on whether or not the game ships. This creates a problematic

environment where knowledge and innovation is lost due to the rigid nature of success versus

failure. Currently, when a game fails all the work and innovations created are lost. Finally, due to

the environment and lack of processes at Montaro there is a retention issue. Alternative

companies are more attractive when the employee’s future at Montaro is uncertain. We address

all these issues in greater depth in the following report.

To solve the problems identified above we have provided two recommendations; the

implementation of a standardized manual of company procedures and a monthly newsletter. Our

main focus and concern was to ensure both of our recommendations were practical within

Montaro’s already established work culture and organizational structure. To ensure smooth

implementation and understanding, the manual serves as an all-encompassing reference book

that educates both management and employees about formal processes within the company in an

accessible manner. In addition, the newsletter will serve as a means for greater internal

communication between Montaro’s HR department and employees.

Montaro is a young company compared to competitors and does not have all the best

practices in place yet. This report will further examine both the problems mentioned above as

well as our recommended solutions to provide Montaro with sustainable solutions moving

forward as a maturing company.

Problem Identification

Problem 1: Communication

The primary issue at Montaro is a lack of internal communication. First, executives at the

company did not raise concerns about the increasing scope of the project in a manner that was

understood by Luke, leading Luke to assume the project was proceeding as initially expected

(Dubois and Fonseca 5). It is important when giving feedback about a project’s status that the

feedback is clearly communicated in a way that employees understand and in a manner that

expresses the severity of the issue being discussed. Luke admitted that although executives had

raised concerns regarding the increasing scope of the project he had just believed it “Was part of

their job to do so” (Dubois and Fonseca 5). The status of the project, as well as concerns and

threats to its success, should be made clear to all involved so that expectations can be managed

and issues can be addressed in accordance to their severity. It should be ensured that all parties,

the project lead and the executives, understand how the project is progressing and how it is

positioned under the broader Montaro umbrella. Luke stated that he “Was under the assumption

that HQ shared his enthusiasm in the breakthrough he had promised” (Dubois and Fonseca 5).

When discussing the state of the project, communication was not transparent, leaving Luke to be

overly optimistic about his project. Performance appraisals, including informal discussion,

should be honest and open to ensure that employees and employers agree about problems and

performance. Employees tend to be overly optimistic about their performance and therefore it is

important for executives to be clear in discussions about performance (Dessler, Chhinzer and

Cole 274).

Additionally, the company failed to communicate a fair representation of the project’s

status. Headquarters (HQ) would have been aware of similar projects occurring within the

company, which would have an impact on the termination of Luke’s project. Unfortunately, they

did not warn Luke and his team of the existence of a similar project, which ultimately ended

Conquistadores. Although employees are warned when starting a new project that work can be

abandoned when similar IP is being developed in other locations, they were not prepared for this

outcome as it seemed to be a general warning, not specific to their project (Dubois and Fonseca

4). Employees were completely blindsided by this lack of communication. This can easily

progress to a lack of trust in management, feeling as though management is concealing facts

from them. This is important as job security is a significant factor in employee retention

(Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 263).

Finally, communication failed when Daniele kept assigning employees to the project with

no explanation. In an attempt to retain employees, the project grew significantly beyond the

scope Luke and management was expecting (Dubois and Fonseca 5). This created a project

which was using an unsustainable amount of resources, and also signaled to Luke that the project

was going well. Since his project was being given more resources, he assumed that meant the

company was pleased with how the project was progressing. However, it was not communicated

to Luke that these employees were not being assigned to the project due to its merit but rather as

an attempt to retain workers (Dubois and Fonseca 5). Luke saw the increase of labour on his

project as a sign the project was going well and created a false sense of confidence in the project.

In addition to the communication issues with Luke, the company failed on its internal

communications, leading it to improperly predict employee demand and supply. It is crucial to

the success of a company that they forecast their labour supply, and determine when they will

have a labour surplus so they may adequately prepare. This requires clear communication

between project managers and human resource professionals (Dessler and Chhinzer 120). This

means having an understanding of the employees within the company, which Montaro has

demonstrated through their extensive skills inventory, and understanding the future demand and

needs within the company, an area they lack (Dubois and Fonseca 2). Communication

throughout this case was crucial but lacking, often being unclear or ambiguous.

Problem 2: Leadership

Building on the communication issues as previously discusses, management from HQ

failed to formal processes into practice when terminating Conquistadores. Stan, the Vice

President of Human Resources and Communication, passes the responsibility to Luke rather than

taking on the task of ending the project. He informed Luke of the termination of Conquistadores

and delegates the task of announcing the bad news to the team to Luke (Dubois and Fonseca 6).

This act of assigning Luke, as the messenger for HQ, is a significant burden on his shoulders as

Stan relies on Luke to help implement an effective strategy, without proper training and

preparation. A formal process is not reflected in the actions of Stan as he engaged only one

member of the entire team (Luke) to devise and implement a solution rather than already having

a process in place to handle project termination issues such as this one. Further, Stan discusses,

“As their producer, we know they look to you for guidance” (Dubois and Fonseca 6), which

functions as his only reasoning for why Luke should take a lead role in determining how to

inform the other employees. In chapter 15 of the textbook it is explained:

The role of HRM is often overlooked in managing employee engagement

and communication during a time of employee separations. Who leaves,

how they are treated during the exit, what the cause or nature of the exit is,

and how remaining employees perceive this all impacts the long-term

sustainability of the organization. (Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 416)

Ineffective human resources and leadership strategies has left Montaro in risk of losing its top

employees. This is a significant management issue as Stan outlines, “Reassigning employees is

no easy task, but there is still a somewhat formal process to go about it” (Dubois and Fonseca 7),

stating a ‘somewhat formal’ process that, through HRM, should instead be a standard procedure

within the organization.

Another issue with leadership within Montaro in this scenario is with how Luke failed to

raise any concerns to his team throughout the process. Luke was aware of the risk yet he kept

moving the project forward despite warning signs from HQ. Concerns were raised about the

increased scope and size of the project, yet Luke assumed, due to unclear communications, that it

was merely a standard part of the job for employees at HQ and that these concerns were not a

major concern (Dubois and Fonseca 5). As the head of Conquistadores, Luke did not thoroughly

communicate with upper management to ensure that HQ continued to share his enthusiasm for

the project. This may lead to survivor syndrome, which is the term for emotions of guilt, anxiety

and detachment that can manifest if some employees continue with an organization while others

do not (Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 137). Luke, Ryan or Trevor may experience survivor

syndrome if were to remain employed by Montaro while the other employees of Conquistadores

would be forced to seek alternative employment, which could negatively impact their future job

performance. Since Luke played such a significant role in the game’s inception, it appears he

was blinded by his drive to continue the project as he was continually reminded of the risks of

termination yet did not raise these concerns to the team. If Luke were to stay on at Montaro he

may experience the guilt of survivor syndrome which could impact his job performance.

Overall, the termination of this project did not follow any standard retention process set

in place by Human Resources to manage the reassignment of current employees. This issue

predominantly affects Luke and his team on Conquistadores as HQ is terminating the project

despite any previous warning signs and there is no formalized procedure to help maintain talent,

technology or IP of Conquistadores. The issue of poor leadership on several levels of

management can potentially also affect HQ stakeholders, as there is a high possibility of losing

top talent and IP from under the Montaro umbrella due to the sudden termination of the project.

From HQ through to Luke and his employees, there was a lack of communication and formal

processes to ensure that all groups were fully informed about the future of their project and their

employment status with Montaro, demonstrating poor leadership skills within the organization.

Problem 3: Employee Performance

Through Montaro’s organizational structure and work culture, it is evident that its

employees thrive off of collaboration and team victories. Montaro’s core teams are essential to

its success and ability to gauge employee performance. However, Montaro fails to provide a

reliable way of tracking its employee’s successes, retaining knowledge, recording innovations

and rewarding unconventional (yet efficient) production methods.


Conquistadores demonstrated a team dynamic that was not replicated anywhere else in

the company, with a high team morale and the project quickly gaining traction (Dubois and

Fonseca 7). Luke supported his team and addressed problems pre-emptively for the game but

lacked transparency about the risks brought up by Montaro HQ as examined. However, the only

fixed method Montaro uses to understanding its employees’ needs, skills and performance

patterns is through a personal profile built by HR that is supposed to be “used to match the needs

of the studio to the needs of the individuals” (Dubois and Fonseca 2). Despite that, the

organization has not implemented a thorough enough way to keep track of employee

performance or a means of retaining knowledge within the company when an employee moves

projects or leaves the company entirely.

Performance appraisals are solely related to the amount of games shipped. Shipping is

used to determine an employee's value and skill set, which influences an employee’s reputation

within the company. Although shipping a game shows that their capabilities and mindset are

aligned with the company’s, it does not reveal where a team struggled during the process of

making the game. In addition, it fails to point out where improvements could be made and what

knowledge, methods or technology could be passed forward. As mentioned in the case, new and

successful IP is celebrated, systematically analyzed internally and showcased at industry

conferences (Dubois and Fonseca 2). Although IP breakthroughs are important and considered a

good move for resumes, they fail in truly representing an employee's performance and Luke has

faced an extreme setback in the process of developing under Montaro. Montaro is a large-scale

company, which relies on bureaucratic ways of organization. It needs to explore new ways of

rewarding, recording innovation and fostering sustainable feedback processes to allow for the IP

of games that are not shipped to benefit future projects.


Problem 4: Retention

The current employee performance infrastructure does not effectively encourage

employee loyalty, motivation, growth, or include training that supports the success of the

workforce as a whole. The result is Montaro less appealing as a workplace relative to their

competition and they risk losing their talent (Dubois and Fonseca 8). Moreover, they risk not

attracting new talent due to their hindered reputation, or not creating the most creative and

valuable content. These are all factors that have contributed to the challenge they are currently

faced with Ryan and Trevor considering other competitors, that could have been prevented with

effective human resources management (Dubois and Fonseca 8).

The first challenge with regards to human resource management is their lack of rewards

system. As noted in the textbook, “The purposes of rewards are to attract, retain, motivate, and

engage employees” (Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 296), which is a feature that Montaro is lacking

to attract employees in the long term and why they were faced with the challenge of employees

feeling tempted to work for competitors.

Additionally, a difficulty Montaro is faced with is their method of paying their staff does

not encourage them continuing to learn and grow in their positions as much as it could (Dubois

and Fonseca 7). Montaro does not encourage systems such as competency pay rates which would

incentivize such growth (Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 294). Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole have

illustrated that “Base pay was the number one factor in attracting employees to an organization,

having excellent career opportunities was the most important factor in retaining employees”

(297). In other words, pay is highly valuable to employees and is a strategic tactic to continue to

attract staff such as Ryan or Trevor. Thus, to continue to be attractive to diverse and talented

staff Montaro must implement similar tactics.


Finally, Montaro currently highly values the growth and wellbeing of their senior staff

but neglects to look at the big picture (Dubois and Fonseca 7). As stated in the case, they value

“interpersonal relationships and the wellbeing of their employees” (Dubois and Fonseca 2),

however, they implement this in a manner that doesn’t value the wellbeing of all staff equally

The result is a hierarchy in which the junior staff has less incentive to remain at the company.

This is a risk that jeopardizes the well-being of their business as they are heavily reliant on their

most experience staff such as Trevor and Ryan for the prosperity of Montaro and its future

innovations (Dubois and Fonseca 7). This challenged can be attributed to the lack of known

retention programs to keep employees upon project completion. Other business have

demonstrated the value of this consistent training. For example, "Bank of Montreal provides

seven days of training per year for all employees at a cost of $1800 per employee-more than

double the national average” (Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 216), as they recognize that it

contributes to loyalty to their firm. Ultimately, Montaro lacks perspective that would benefit

their long-term success which can be resolved through employee retention incentives.


Based on the problems we have identified above, we have developed two

recommendations to Montaro; the implementation of a standardized manual of company

procedures, which clearly outlines formal processes within the organization and the

implementation of a monthly newsletter, which outlines changing processes and highlights key

projects occurring around the organization.


Recommendation 1: Montaro Employee Manual

Our first recommendation to Montaro is to create a standardized manual of company

procedures that clearly outlines all formal processes in the company. This will require Montaro

to develop coherent formal processes, and outline them in a manner that all employees will

understand. This manual will allow upper management to set clear expectations and avoid major

communication issues in the future and will also help create clear expectations for new

employees. We believe this is crucial to solving and improving all the issues we outlined above.

With clear procedures, there will be less room for misinterpretation of feedback, employee

performance will be easier to track and manage, and retention should be made easier as a clear

plan will be made and ready to implement before the cancellation of a project. Management will

have clear procedures to follow, to ensure there is little discrepancy and it will be there

responsibility of management to work with the HR department to ensure that these procedures

are constantly updated and improved as necessary. Further, this manual would include a clear

breakdown of how employee performance will be measured as well as the rewards (monetary or


Below we have outlined what we believe should be included in their manual as well as

practices they should be implementing in each scenario.

Section 1: Training and Onboarding

A solution for long term success would be focusing on developing a strong, skilled

workforce force, by implementing more in depth training processes for both beginners and

advanced staff. This section of the manual would focus on consistent training on all levels which

is vital as, "few things can better illustrate a firm's commitment to its employees than continuing

developmental opportunities to improve themselves, and such commitment is usually

reciprocated” (Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 216). A standardized training and onboarding process

will help new employees with “completing benefits decisions, payroll forms, new-hire data,

introduction of policies and procedures, and preliminary socialization using videos and graphics”

Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 210). If employees across the company participate in a standard

training it will ensure that they are all starting with the same understanding of company policies

and the corporate culture.

Section 2: Feedback

Failure should be seen as an opportunity and not a loss of time, reputation and resources.

Employees and employers should actively seek ways to mitigate risk and failure, but also

embrace it especially if the outcome is inevitable. Instead of attaching shame and blame,

Montaro should seek to transform and pivot from it. A smart company seeks to work with failure

as part of their organization. It is important for employees and management alike to work

together as “It’s all about finding problems, fixing them quickly, and learning — as a team —

from the mistakes” (Newman). Acknowledging failure is essential, if done appropriately it would

allow Montaro to build a stronger work culture and as a result, improve team morale and


This section of the manual would outline a constant positive feedback loop, which would

be implemented into Montaro’s structure to avoid miscommunication and encourage sustainable

innovation. In order to refine the feedback process, the installation of a feedback software would

be the most beneficial option for Montaro. Since employees spend a significant amount of time

on their computers, a software would be a good fit for the video game company. Officevibe is a

software that provides employees the option to give feedback anonymously and connects them

with managers directly. Officevibe explains that one of their biggest challenges is “ensuring that

managers act on the data that they have” (Shriar). This software would be linked in the company

culture manual; employees will also find instructions and tips on how to use the software to best

of its ability. Officevibe consists of short surveys, a cloud platform, analytics and reports to track

employee engagement and satisfaction within the company and with the actual software

(Officevibe). Section two of the manual in tandem with Officevibe would be used to help

Montaro HQ to engage with their employees more thoroughly and improve performance and

productivity with feedback data.

Section 3: Project Termination

As outlined in Human Resource Management in Canada, is important for organizations

to develop termination processes in order to minimize the negative impacts on the labour force

(Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 416). The termination of individual projects within Montaro would

function similarly to the restructuring of the organization as talent and resources must be

redistributed throughout the company. The nature of this scenario also involves employees who

choose to leave the organization if the job is no longer attractive. To avoid unnecessary turnover,

it is imperative to present clear expectations to inform employees as to what is considered

acceptable behaviour in the workplace and what is not (Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 421).

Termination and restructuring can be a significant cost to the company, so outlining a firm’s

expectations from the beginning will benefit the company in the long run (Dessler, Chhinzer and

Cole 417). This education process relates back to what would be included in the onboarding

section of this manual to aid the employee's orientation and to inform them of company policies

and culture.

This section would reduce uncertainty of what manage expects from its employees but

will also help to eliminate lack of a formal processes for management to follow when

termination projects. Not only will this manual educate employees about the expectations and

processes of the organization, including how games may not be shipped if there is competing IP

within the company, but also will set clear practices for management to follow in the case of

project termination. Having processes clearly outlined and implemented by management from

the beginning will build trust between employees, management and HQ and will limit the shock

when a project is terminated.

Section 4: Retention

To focus on building a strong and loyal workforce, Montaro can continue to strive to

create a work culture that rivals competitors. Additionally, incorporating pay rates that value

learning, hard work, and skill will benefit them (Dessler, Chhinzer and Cole 300). According to

De Vos and Meganck, the most important factors for retention are “career development

opportunities, social atmosphere, job content, financial rewards and work-life balance” (12).

Consequently, implementing these practices will save Montaro costs on turnover and contribute

to feelings of fulfillment within their staff. In addition, the previously mentioned training

recommendations will positively contribute to retention (De Vos & Meganck 12). Within the

next few years, it is realistic for Montaro to adapt their pay and begin to evaluate their culture.

Upon implementation of these strategies, Montaro will be viewed as an attractive employer to

skilled workers and incentivize improvement and long term prosperity (Dessler, Chhinzer and

Cole 300). As retaining highly skilled staff such as Ryan and Trevor is valuable to Montaro,

retention incentives are vital to this goal (Dubois and Fonseca 7). With regards to pay rates, to

maintain both internal and external equity, Montaro must fairly evaluate these rates by

examining each role’s worth and comparing their rates to industry standards (Dessler, Chhinzer

and Cole 301). Furthermore, they should be transparent about their compensation by making all

of their rationale available to their staff to create an inclusive and honest culture.


To implement this manual into Montaro’s corporate setting, we recommend that it be

created digitally and stored on an online database to allow it to be easily accessed by employees.

Having it stored digitally also allows it to be revised and updated as the company grows and

progresses. This manual should be interactive featuring writing, videos as well as numerous

visual aids, and some interactive media, such as mini games as examples of past projects that

company has worked on. We suggest that it should take less than one hour for an employee to go

through the entire manual to ensure that it is accessible and easy to understand.

The employee manual would be compiled by the HR team in collaboration with various

departments, with feedback collected and considered from individuals at all levels regarding

current company practices and processes before the creation of the manual. Appendix A outlines

the timeline for the implementation of the manual. Since the work will be spread over two years

and involves the input of the HR team, HQ management and executives as well as other Montaro

staff members, we feel it will be a viable and effective option for the organization.

Recommendation 2: Monthly Newsletter

We recommend the implementation of a monthly newsletter that would be released to all

employees via email. This one page newsletter would be assembled by an individual in HR, such

as Daniele, who has a clear understanding of what is going on around the company, as well as

what projects are underway. The newsletter would feature a different process each month,

presented as a fun fact, offering a short reminder to remind employees about a different policy

outlined in the company manual (the first recommendation), which they may have forgotten

about. We also suggest that this newsletter feature noteworthy projects occurring within the

company, including new IP starting in LabX as well as projects being worked on internationally

(their “AAA” games). This will help inspire employees in the organization, by showcasing other

work and demonstrating successful initiatives (including small innovations within failed

projects) that have occurred internationally. It can show different opportunities that employees

may not have considered and be a great springboard for future ideas. This is also to increase

communication and transparency about what is occurring in the organization.

Finally, we suggest that this newsletter feature policy changes that are being

implemented. Since we believe that the manual suggested above should be a living entity,

changing and evolving as the organization grows, it is wise for management to be clear about

what changes are occurring. It also gives management a chance to showcase that they are

listening to employee feedback and responding appropriately to problems in the organization.


Due to the digital nature of the organization this project should be a fairly simple to

implement with little cost. This project can be delegated to an HR professional, like Daniele,

who would be asked to commit three hours a month to the creation of this document. It will be

released on the first Wednesday of every month directly to all employee emails. Since Daniele is

already very knowledgeable about all the projects occurring in the organization, as well as all the

HR policies, it should not require excessive research, and should draw on her previously

acquired knowledge base. She would be required to consult with an upper management

representative to complete the section on changing policies, but this should not be overly time

consuming as the newsletter is meant to be very brief and simply act as an overview to improve

ongoing communication and transparency.


We feel that a digital, interactive employee manual that is able to be updated with the

latest policies, procedures and performance feedback tactics is the most effective step forward

for Montaro. In tandem with a monthly newsletter, employees across the organization will be

informed about standard practices as well as updates to the IP and games (shipped and not

shipped) through all branches of Montaro. The manual will provide the formal processes for

training, onboarding, feedback, termination and retention so when these circumstances arise,

there is no questioning the correct strategy as there is one already set in place. Communication

issues will be improved as the newsletter updates all members of the organization as policies

change and evolve. Leadership issues can be resolved by the new procedures put in place to

ensure termination and redistribution of resources goes as smoothly as possible. Performance

feedback problems are also addressed by the newsletter and the manual as the Officevibe

software provides a thorough feedback platform so an employee can gauge personal successes

and areas to improve to maximize their contributions to Montaro. Retention will be managed by

these recommendations as the high level of transparency will help decrease the amount of

surprises allowing employees to be more informed about the future of their employment.

Overall, an employee manual and a monthly newsletter is a realistic option for Montaro that they

would be able to implement quickly into their workflow, with the potential for significant


Summary of Roles

To complete this project, we had initially created a variety of deadlines and roles for each

team member. As the semester progressed we found that our timelines shifted and it become

necessary to change our overall approach to the project. We followed our group contract in

dividing up the problem identification. As we had planned in our contract, we did have an initial

meeting to brainstorm our problems so that they were created collaboratively. Although we had

initially planned to meet in person, due to scheduling issues we decided to have the meeting

online. Once these problems were identified we divided them up so that each member of the

group would write on one problem, becoming the expert on the issue. This was identical to what

we had initially planned in our group

Page contract.

We started to significantly deviate from our contract once we reached the

recommendation section. We had initially planned to collaboratively identify our solutions then

divide the work to write individually. Ultimately though, we decided that it was much more

effective to write the recommendations together. This was because our recommendations were

much more broad, and encompassed all the issues. We did not have a structure of one

recommendation for each problem; our two solution addressed all the problems. We had a

meeting where we all worked together in one room, taking on small sections of the

recommendations to write, while allowing us to talk and consult each other ensuring that we had

a cohesive solution. We chose a similar strategy for our conclusion, talking as a group while one

designated group member typed, to ensure that our conclusion hit all the necessary points and did

not forget or misinterpret any significant points. We returned to our contract’s plan for the

remaining elements, dividing up the summary of roles and introduction between group members.

We then assembled our sections into one document and each reviewed the document for

grammar and phrasing, as we had initially planned.

Below is a brief chart breaking down each individual's contribution;

Name Contribution

Alice - Problem 4 - Editing

- Intro - Recommendations
- Conclusion - Timeline

Camila - Problem 3 - Intro

- Recommendations Page Omitted - Conclusion
- Editing

Hannah - Problem 2 - Recommendations

- Conclusion - Citation review & confirmation
- Editing - Formatting
Page Omitted
Mieka - Problem 1 - Recommendations
- Summary of Roles - Conclusion
- Formatting final project - Editing

Appendix A

Works Cited

Cole, Nina D., Chhinzer, Nita, and Dessler, Gary. Human Resources Management in Canada.

12th ed., Pearson, 2014.

De Vos, Ans and Meganck, Annelies. What HR Managers do Versus what Employees Value:

Exploring Both Parties Views on Retention Management from a Psychological Contract

Perspective, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2009.

Dubois, Louis-Etienne and Fonseca, Nicole. Killing ‘em Softly : Terminating Projects in a Video

Game Studio. Ryerson University, 2017.

Newman, Daniel. “Secret To Digital Transformation Success: Fail Fast To Innovate Faster.”

Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 16 May 2017, www.forbes.com/sites/danielnewman/2017/



Officevibe. “The Perfect Process To Improve Engagement.” Officevibe, 2017,


Shriar, Jacob. “The Importance Of The Feedback Loop.” Digitalist Magazine, Digitalist

Magazine, 24 Feb. 2016, www.digitalistmag.com/future-of-work/2016/02/25/importance-