Throughout its existence, and more recently in current years, analysts from the fields of management, administration, human resources, and organizational behavior have all given their highest respect to GE (Fisher, 2006). A large part of this respect comes from the way GE handles its organizational aspects of Power and Control which becomes a part of how GE differentiates between employees for the purposes of branding.
Examples of such branding have been given by those who have been a part of GE as well as those who have observed it from afar. Theoretically speaking, the company appears to be working with the Functionalist Paradigm in mind which suggests in brief that human beings can largely be expected to act in ways that are rational. Under this paradigm, organizational behavior can be understood through experimental observation and hypothesis evaluations (Burrell, 1979). It seems that this paradigm is certainly useful because GE acts in a manner that is very rational for the most part and the methods used for branding employees, establishing power and keeping GE running as well as profitable are founded in rational thought.
For GE, the overall purpose of employee branding is to set the performance bar for not only the employees but also the company’s objectives and actual accomplishments. It is interesting to note that even a successful conglomerate such as General Electric (GE) with more than 300,000 employees engaged in 11 technology, services and financial businesses across 160 countries has been focusing and improving on the basic management functions of controlling the efficiency and productivity for all of their employees for more 130 years and continues till date (GE, 2006). However, it is their success and their employee management systems as well as the leadership which has brought them the success and appreciation which is seen today (Colvin, 2006). It can be shown without a doubt that this success is in no small part due to the employee.