COMMUNICATIONS
Below is a case study describing the Davis Instrument Company’s efforts to deal with a change in its manufacturing operations. A new computerized manufacturing system is being installed in the near future to automate and control the work of highly skilled workers. As you will see when you read the case, this change involves training workers and requires the support of the three local supervisors. They have to select which workers are to be trained first. As in all previous decisions involving them, the three supervisors agree with the overall change but do not agree on how to implement it. You’ve been brought in as a consultant to analyze the situation and make some recommendations to Pam Martin, the manager of manufacturing, on how to move forward. Please read the case.
________________________________________
THE DAVIS INSTRUMENT COMPANY’S MANUFACTURING CRISIS
Pam Martin was not surprised that the three supervisors in her section were disagreeing about how to train on the new MCF system. Joan, Henry, and Frank rarely agreed on how to solve section problems. Even though Pam had been their manager for over two years and knew each of them to be highly competent, the three seemed to view their work at Davis very differently. The problem for today’s staff meeting was no exception. The new MCF system was being installed throughout all of Davis Instrument Company’s manufacturing areas to computer-automate and control the assembly work previously done by highly skilled workers. The system would not replace any existing employees but would require training on new machines and computer controls. Over time, productivity would be expected to increase, and those employees who had early training on the system would be in positions for rapid advancement. All three of Pam’s subordinates had supported acquiring the new system and thought that it was in the best long-term interests of Davis, but Joan, Henry, and Frank did not agree on how to select employees for training on the MCF and how to restructure work teams to implement the new process.
Joan argued that Pam and the supervisors should just decide. After all, early training on the system should fit the best workers with the highest aptitudes for computers to the new jobs. Yes, of course that means that other good workers would not have as much chance for advancement, but tough decisions are what management gets paid to make. Joan contended that the supervisors were in the best position to judge how to restructure the work teams. She proposed that the supervisors draw up a list of new job assignments, announce them to the group, and develop a timetable for system implementation.
Henry strongly disagreed. He voiced concern that his work team was worried about the new assignments. Henry believed that the affected workers should have some say in the assignment decisions. He supported letting each work team give their supervisors a plan for reassignment that the supervisors would then use for final decisions. He contended that individuals were more likely to be motivated and accept the changes willingly if they had a say in determining how the changes were to be implemented.
Frank thought that both Joan and Henry represented extreme positions that really did not serve the best interests of Davis. He proposed that the three supervisors draw up overall criteria for the new positions and the job assignments needed for each work team. They should then present the reorganization plan to their work teams and have individual meetings with each worker to determine interest and skill fit for each of the new positions. Frank agreed with Joan that some tough decisions about particular individuals would have to be made. He also agreed with Henry that better motivation would result if each individual had some input about the future assignment.
Pam knew all three wanted the project to succeed. The question was how to get Joan, Henry, and Frank to agree on an approach.
________________________________________
Your assignment:
1. Analyze the three supervisors’ different approaches to involving employees in this change process. Use concepts from Schockley-Zalabak’s Chapter 3, 6 and 7 to clarify the differences in (a) their general viewpoints as managers, (b) their understanding of the leadership aspect of their supervisory roles and (c) their views of their role of work groups/teams in local decision-making.
2. Then using the concepts from Kehoe (pp. 93-6, and reading 1 (pp. 6-9) and Schockley-Zalabak Chapter, 9 (pp. 339 – 345) outline a process for finding agreement between the three supervisors. Make certain that your recommendations reflect your analysis.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂