Case study 2

“The Shiftless Worker”

Week 5 - Case Study #2

This is a sample partial analysis of the Case which should give you some idea about the depth of understanding I am looking for in your evaluations. I am also adding notes about the first two pages regarding grammatical errors, typos, formatting and so on that would affect your grade, as well. Although this is an exaggerated example of errors I typically see, and I do not dwell on them to nearly this extent, I wanted you to see what is included in your grading. Yes, any one of the errors is relatively minor, but a third-level undergraduate student should do better.

By the way, I consider this a 90 (?) paper. While I recognize that the overall intent and knowledge is developed and communicated, the grade would have been higher by 4-5 points had there been considerably fewer errors.

Synopsis: Charlie McManus, mid-level manager of Department B at Lost River Processing, Inc., has recently been receiving reports of potential problems developing in Area 7 of the plant. As manager of department B, and responsible for the operation of Area 7, Charlie has been receiving reports of his operators failing to complete necessary checks and work assignments during their shifts, and starting to hear minor complaints among the employees. These actions seem to be escalating in frequency and are causing Charlie concern regarding productivity and possible actions that he might need to take Lost River Processing, Inc. is a forty-year-old company, located in Ashley Springs, Wyoming, which processes mined ore twenty-four hours a day. The plant’s mineral business is highly competitive with strong competition and there is a current industry condition of overcapacity of production facilities. It is critical that the plant produce an end product of high-quality standards in order to secure sole-supplier relationships with its customers and to remain competitive . About one year ago, four new shift supervisors were transferred to Lost River Processing and three of them were assigned to Charlie’s department B where John Williams, one of these supervisors, was assigned to Area 7. These supervisors came from a much different organizational culture at their former South Carolina plant, and have brought their acquired management techniques to Lost River Processing. In South Carolina, they managed a work force entirely different that that of Lost River Processing. One developing situation, in particular, involves the performance of Mark Olson, a three-year veteran of the company who has always received high performance ratings and is considered a good and promising employee. Recently, Mark has exhibited unsatisfactory behavior regarding his performance during his shifts . Through some conversations within the plant, Charlie has learned that this promising employee has become unhappy and discontent. Based on the reports that he is receiving, Charlie is concerned that the performance issues within Area 7 might be directly related to his new supervisor, John Williams , and is considering what action that he should take, if any, at this point to intervene and correct the situation.

Finding of Fact #1: Lost River Processing, Inc. is a forty-year-old production facility in Ashley Springs, WY. As an ‘institution’ in the area and an integral part of the local labor market, Lost River Processing is in the process of restructuring it’s work force and shifting to new management practices in order to maintain and gain a competitive advantage. This restructure has been in process for the past two to three years and management needs to complete the reorganization process and establish the ‘new’ culture going forward. Employees need to become a part of their new organization, build effective teamwork and promote empowerment .

Recommendation #1: Lost River Processing, Inc. has developed its own culture during the past forty years. The company is in a unique position with its employees in that they have established themselves as loyal to the company and many have worked there for several years. As the company is required to transition to a new culture in order to remain competitive, new management practices must be established and implemented. Lost River Processing has a talented pool of employees who are well-trained, responsible and hard working individuals. Overall they are self-motivated, largely due to their roots as farming families from rural parts of the community. For Charlie McManus, one of the strategic directions that he must follow is to implement the new company initiatives, educate the employees and operate in the new environment. To do this, one of his first considerations might be to eliminate some of the layers of supervision. By ‘flattening’ his organization, Charlie would capitalize on the company initiative of implementing self-managed groups and allow more decision-making capability at the employee level of his organization. To implement this type of organization, Charlie has a well-trained, loyal and responsible group of employees who seem generally satisfied with their employment , and receive annual wage and salary increases. They represent a stable workforce who will appreciate and embrace empowerment, and with Charlie’s leadership and positive reinforcement, the restructuring will prove to be beneficial to the productivity of his organization and the plant. One possible obstacle that Charlie might face is resistance to change, due to the age of the plant and the fact that these types of factories tend to develop their own ‘personality.’ McManus must work within the corporate philosophy in order to foster the restructuring changes within his department. To do this, he must place employees in functional situations where they can succeed at their tasks, and give them the ability to improve on those tasks as a means of growth. He should have weekly and monthly meetings with his team members to set goals and expectations, provide leadership and direction, listen and set the tone of expectancy for his department. This will enable his employees to understand their specific roles and responsibilities within the new organizational culture and give Charlie the opportunity to properly direct them and receive more timely feedback by valuing their input. On a higher level, the plant manager is seen as easy going, unassuming, down to earth and has the respect of the employees. This type of management style, while totally acceptable, can also yield a slower company transition than if he were more assertive and forward thinking. In my opinion, he is probably ‘one of the boys,’ whom everyone respects, but is slow to effect change. A prime example of this is the two to three years that the restructuring has taken so far, plus the ‘enlightened’ human resources practices that have taken place to ensure employee cooperation and satisfaction. Overall, the restructuring should proceed to completion in a quicker manner in order to give the employees the ability to make decisions on a daily basis that will ensure Lost River Processing, Inc. the capability of being competitive in the current market environment.

Finding of Fact #2: Lost River Processing, Inc. has a history of dedicated and loyal employees who are hard working, independent and self-motivated to do their jobs. Due to the closing of the parent company’s South Carolina plant, four new supervisors were transferred to fill shift supervisory positions. The resulting mix of two separate organizational cultures is now causing problems to develop between John Williams, the supervisor, and Mark Olsen an operator in Area 7. By examining this supervisor-employee situation, McManus can better understand some of the reasons for his concerns.

Recommendation #2: By reviewing some of the most important facts of this case, it is important to understand the organizational culture that exists at Lost River Processing, Inc. versus the culture that existed at the South Carolina plant. At Lost River Processing, most employees have long-term tenure and are from the surrounding area. Ashley Springs is a small town of just 4500 people, and many of the senior workers have eight-plus years of experience with the company. The employees come from a legacy of hard work, independence, and are very reliable people. By treating them fairly and ensuring wage increases and benefits, Lost River Processing has kept the plant non-union and kept the employees generally satisfied. The South Carolina plant, which closed about a year ago, employed a very contrasting group of employees. Their workforce was relatively uneducated, predominately rural people and had a high-turnover rate. The workers were not highly trained and their supervisors spent much time ensuring that the employees performed their task to expectation. Several assumptions can be made about these employees such as their job training once employed at the plant, the expectancy that was placed on them, the leadership that guided them, and their motivation to succeed. All of these factors might have enabled these employees to perform better, such as those at Ashley Springs. As a result, the South Carolina plant supervisors developed management skills that were more reactive to the employees’ performance, or lack of. They subtly trained themselves to become micromanagers and to maintain a constant vigil over the workers production. Once the South Carolina plant was closed, the four supervisors that were transferred to Ashley Springs brought their ‘acquired’ management and leadership skills to their new position. Charlie McManus received three of the new supervisors, one of which was John Williams in Area 7. The real issue here is the mix of the two cultures and the resulting consequences. One question is what type of orientation did John Williams receive upon arriving at Ashley Springs? Did he understand the restructuring process and its purpose of empowering the employees? Perhaps so, but according to Mark Olsen, John manages much like he did in South Carolina and does not regularly allow employee participation in the decision making process. It is possible that he did not understand the new company direction, and McManus has the obligation to talk to John to ensure he is part of the restructuring process. Either way, John Williams will need to have some behavioral modification in order blend into the new environment and support the restructuring process. Charlie needs to implement better communication channels with the employees as a measure of team building. Training for John is important as well as all employees to give them the tools needed to empower the teams so they can function as a team and solve problems. Another option that McManus has is to eliminate the shift supervisors altogether and rely on his functional teams to get the job done. He should implement the five-stage theory of group development to lead the team through the transition of their work environment. By holding brainstorming sessions, the teams’ creativity will develop new ideas that contribute to process improvements. Communication, setting goals and working as a team will reduce conflict, which contributes to production inefficiencies. McManus needs to modify his leadership style to accommodate the restructured organization and provide transformational leadership on his behalf. Should his position be retained, John Williams must come to understand that the Ashley Springs culture and employee capability is much different than that of South Carolina. He must adapt and manage accordingly with the mentoring of Charlie McManus.

Finding of Fact #3: My third finding of fact involves the relationship between John Williams and Mark Olsen. So far, we have examined the history and restructuring change that has been taking place at Lost River Processing, plus the effect of bringing in outside employees in supervisory positions that have a different management skill set. As a three-year employee of Lost River Processing, Mark Olsen views the situation from a different perspective and is acting accordingly, based on his perception.

Recommendation #3: Mark has taken it upon himself to intentionally perform poorly with the hopes of transferring to another department within the plant. This action has gained the attention of his supervisor, John Williams, and has been elevated to McManus. From Mark’s perspective, he is not accepting the management style of the new supervisors either because it is more direct than the old managers at the plant, or that John’s management style doesn’t conform to the new initiatives at Lost River Processing. Mark is accustomed to working independently and making decisions where needed, and this type of mentality coincides with many of the new initiatives. As a method of retaliation, Mark has decided to intentionally do random jobs poorly in hopes of expediting a transfer. He sees this as a way to rebel; however, it is not acceptable in any manner. Regardless of his supervisory practices, John Williams is still Mark’s boss and he should respect that. By performing jobs in an inferior manner, Mark is affecting plant productivity. Now that he is aware of a potential problem developing, McManus should spend some time with the employees of Area 7, get in ‘their world’ and better understand their concerns. He should also spend time with John Williams and the two other supervisors from South Carolina to ensure they understand the restructuring initiatives and provide a set of guidelines to help them conform to their new environment. McManus should develop an expectancy model for his organization that reflects the expected outcome of the restructuring and a set of goals for employees to achieve. Management by Objectives (MBOs) would provide a useful tool to manage both the supervisors and employees to help improve their performance. Mark is bored, perhaps due to his intelligence and repetition of the job. Rather than make general assumptions, McManus should talk directly with Mark and determine the cause of his recent lack of attention to detail. Mark must also understand and be requested to stop his negative actions immediately, or suffer the consequences of the actions on his job performance. Rather than being deliberately non-cooperative, he should request better dialog with his superior in an effort to develop a mutually beneficial relationship. Should he neglect to respect John Williams as his superior, and perform his duties in an acceptable manner, then his performance and behavior must be reprimanded. Together, Mark and John must develop a cohesive behavior that allows them to work together as a team and this can be accomplished by leadership from McManus, employing interpersonal communications and general respect.

You already know questions I have about the outcomes. Now, some other ideas that could have come from this analysis:

1. Do you believe stress plays a role in the scenario? How would you recommend those issues be addressed?

2. Do you think McManus needs to investigate Area 7?

3. What about production? Do you think it suffers as a result of the conflict at the plant? It was mentioned in the synopsis but got lost in the FOF/RECs.

4. I am also interested in your ideas about the different management styles being exhibited and the cultural issues prevalent at the plant.

5. Do you think that indoctrination of the new managers to the culture at this plant could have dramatically reduced the adverse impact?

6. Do you think Mark’s is a typical response to the situation? What steps would you take to help Mark cope with his dissatisfaction and return to his previous level of productivity? Should Charlie consider a disciplinary process?

�Two spaces between sentences.

�Proper noun; capitalize.

�“…has started”. Keep tenses the same.

�The Synopsis captures the problems that Charlie is observing. This idea needs to be carried forward as a Finding of Fact (FOF) and then the Recommendations (REC) to resolve the issues� need to be discussed in detail.

�New paragraph.

�Delete unnecessary comma.

�Redundant statement.

�Wordy; be succinct. “…a high-quality end product….”

�Why is this important? What are you telling me?

�New paragraph.

�Proper noun; capitalize.

�The word intended here was “than”. Spell check is not a replacement for good proofing. However, the correct term is “different from”.

�Although the content is good, this is fuzzy writing.

�From an OB perspective, what difficulties does this present?

�Is he the problem?

�Double quotations marks are correct here, not single.

�“…restructuring it is work force….”?

�Double quotation marks.

�FOF is a bit long. Focus on one key idea and run with it.

�Save this idea for a “Fact” then discuss why it is an important part of the Case. This information should have been disclosed in the Synopsis.

�From your experiences, how much effort and “monitoring” does it take to manage this type of folks?

�You already told me about the employees. Don’t repeat yourself. Get right to the Recommendations. How should Charlie address the problems he identified?

�Good tie back to the Synopsis.

9