1

INTRODUCTION
The Goodman Company is a manufacturing company that specialises in producing small rubber automotive parts such as boots for floor-mounted automobiles and truck transmissions, boots for brakes and clutch and accelerator pedals. The president of the Goodman Company is Mr. Robert Goodman and directly under him is Mr. Joe Smith who is the production manager. The organisation consists of three shifts, each of which is headed by a different supervisor. The three shifts referred to in this case are shift one, supervised by Mr. Cleverson Anthony, shift two, Mr. Norm Leonard and shift three, Mr. Bob Jackson. The president had recently hired a production analyst by the name of Ms. Ann Bennet in hopes to obtain recommendations that would facilitate greater output throughout the organisation. Her main intentions were to replace the existing process, which had entailed each employee to complete each step within the process individually to job specialisation, where each employee would be responsible for a specific function within the process. Although this seemed like a good recommendation it proved not to be totally effective since output decreased on the first and second shifts whilst the third shift was able to maintain their level of output. But was hiring Ms. Bennet the initial problem? This led us to identify what we thought to be a concise and applicable problem statement which states that The core problem of the entire implementation process was the ineffective structure employed by the management of the Goodman Company on the basis of their poor leadership styles/skills which then resulted in a breakdown in communication, a lack of motivation amongst employees that caused them not to be satisfied with their jobs therefore influencing how they behave.

THE CORE PROBLEM AND ITS CAUSE

The Core Problem After thorough analysis of the Goodman case, we had identified many variables that would suggest that the company was neither driven by positive and conducive work behaviour nor guided by tactful and well constructed policies. Moreover, the business practices presented within the case concluded that the management of the Goodman Company had failed to design an effective organisational structure that would have enabled them to properly deal with the change in the production process. With this being said, it was fair to declare that this was the core problem of the Company and as a result the business was unable to operate at its full potential. For change to be fostered and the new techniques successfully implemented, a modification of the organisational structure would have been required. According to Laurie J. Mullins (2005, p. 596) structure is the pattern of relationships among positions in the organization and among members of the organization. Structure makes it possible the application of the process of management and creates a framework of order and command through which the activities of the organization can be planned, organised, directed and controlled. From this definition, we gathered that structure is one of the core components of any organisation as it facilitates the execution of all other functions (planning, controlling, leading, organising). Nonetheless, before analysis it was conceptualised that the organisational structure of the Goodman Company could not be classified as a recognised genre of structure, outlined by early OB/management theorists, such as Max Webers theory of Bureaucracy. However, after thorough analysis we closely identified this structure with that of a simple structure. It became

further apparent that this structure lacked some of the key elements needed when designing an effective structure. Those elements include span of control, work specialisation, chain of command, centralisation and decentralisation, and formalisation. There was span of control evident throughout the company as seen from the first shift to the third shift but despite each supervisor having a small number of subordinates to direct, it was not done efficiently and effectively. Moreover, the chain of command line was continuously broken as seen in both the first and second shifts. This was illustrated on first shift when John (Fireball) Malone would, on a daily basis, run up to Joe Smith, the Production Manager and Robert Goodman, the President, giving them his suggestions on improving operations. When defined, the chain of command states that authority extends from the top of the organisation to the lowest rank and clarifies who reports to whom. Therefore, Fireball had broken the chain and should have reported any suggestions to his supervisor, Cleverson (Clev) Anthony who would then have the authority to report these matters to Joe Smith. The staff of the second shift had intentionally broken the chain of command line because it was clear that Norm was the appointed supervisor of this shift but his subordinates refused to report to him when they encountered a problem. Rather, they reported to Jim Flask, who had no formal authority over the shift. Overall, the structure of the Goodman Company was neither well formalised nor standardised since it lacked the necessary policies and procedures needed to guide both employees and management in their daily operations. Instead of the organisation having a written policy to guide supervisors actions and behaviours when implementing a change, each supervisor was left responsible for implementation which resulted in each shift adopting a different work

practice. Consequently, the different methodologies of each supervisor constituted for how the employees accepted the change of their work roles. What Mr. Goodman failed to understand was that structure should follow strategy. Therefore, those elements of structure that would have been used before the introduction of the new production process may not be applicable after its implementation since the employees roles, responsibilities and authority were subject to change within that new environment.

Cause of the Core Problem Upon understanding what was said to be the core problem, we identified the cause as being that of the poor leadership style and/or skills possessed by Mr. Goodman, President of the Goodman Company. We define a good leader not necessarily as someone in a managerial position but an individual who is capable of getting others to do things willingly through motivation and empowerment whilst creating a vision that others can identify with. Imperatively, what Mr. Goodman failed to realise was that not all leaders are managers and not all managers are leaders. Although holding such a vital position, Mr. Goodman does not possess the characteristics of a good leader which include being able to communicate effectively with employees, make effective decisions and design policies and procedures that would lead to job satisfaction collectively empowering and motivating employees. It was the job of management to ensure that they had communicated the guidelines and procedures associated with the implementation of the new production process, to not only the supervisors but to all employees so as to ensure that the process is standardised throughout the entire organisation. Furthermore, it is good to note that if a manager lacked leadership qualities, his subordinates will still do their jobs, but they may do so

ineffectually (inefficiently). For example, shift one employees are not happy with the changes but continue to complete their tasks with products not being properly readied for the next step in the process. Can we deduce that Mr. Goodman only assessed the implementation of the production process at the organisational level and not at the group or individual levels? Mr. Goodmans main purpose was to maximise productivity so as to meet the increasing demands of his customers and he assumingly disregarded the individual differences, personalities, attitudes of his employees and more so, what motivated them to be more productive workers. In general, Mr. Goodman did not realise that his style of leadership affected the individual, as they were not satisfied, the groups since there was no group commitment and the organisation since goals were not accomplished. By taking into consideration, the personalities of your employees, managers have the ability to design a structure which promotes employee involvement and commitment and employees are more likely to accept the structure or the restructuring of the organisation. This is justified even further because of the behaviours presented by his employees. If he had assessed the implementation at an individual level then it would have been easy to predict the upcoming behaviours of his employees and plans would have been put in place to give immediate corrective actions. In a nut shell, the President of the organisation lacked proper leadership skills which lead to an ineffective change in structure that resulted in each shift not being well formalised.

SATELLITE PROBLEMS
Mr. Goodman was seeking ways to increase efficiency of his products so as to expand productions to meet the increasing demands of customers. Mr. Goodman, like any business owner, anticipated great profits but he undermined the important role that the groups within his organisation played in accomplishing those set goals. Managements inability to adopt an effective organisational structure as well as Mr Goodmans poor leadership style both contributed to the business having some satellite problems during the implementation of the new production process. The case presented those problems which included communication, motivation, job satisfaction, and group behaviour which were all connected and more so influenced by each other. We had first of all, identified communication which had broken down throughout the business. As we know, communication is the transferring and understanding of meaning and within organisations it serves four main functions which include emotional expression, information, control and motivation. Therefore, it was managements job to ensure that they communicated the guidelines of how the new process should be implemented, not only to the supervisors but to employees as well since the change would impact on them mostly. This would further ensure the effectiveness of the implementation process as well as it being standardised throughout the entire organisation. Frankly, Mr. Goodman did not communicate effectively with his employees; he had a clear vision of what he wanted but he failed to inform his employees what the change was, when it was to occur, what was expected of them and how it would impact on their line of work. However, apart from shifts one and two, Bob Jackson, shift threes supervisor, made sure that he notified his shift about the change by giving them a clear

understanding of the new objectives which provided them with direction which increased their efforts towards those set objectives. Lack of communication lead to employees being less committed and therefore one of the functions of communication, motivation, was not or could not be easily fostered. First of all, in order for workers to be motivated they must be driven towards something. Something in this case would be the goals communicated to them but as we know, this was not the case. When defined, motivation is the set of internal and external forces that initiate work-related behaviour, and determines its form, direction and intensity. It should be acknowledged that motivation can either be extrinsic or intrinsic and to ensure that the one chosen for a particular situation or worker is the best one, individual factors should be taken into consideration. In this instance, the organisation had failed to put measures in place that would facilitate both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. However, in shift one intrinsic rewards are the ones that if implemented would have most likely motivated employees since they include the opportunity to use ones ability, receive appreciation either from supervisors or top management and there is a sense of a challenge and achievement. Analysis showed that these employees did not feel appreciated; they did not believe that they were fairly compensated and as a result they were not motivated to embrace the change. Clearly, if upward communication had existed management would have gotten feedback from employees about their feelings before and after the new process. More importantly, if management did not limit downward communication intrinsic motivation would have been facilitated and job satisfaction positively affected. We thought that it was fair to assume that Norm Leonard, the shift supervisor, was not entirely satisfied with his required job but he was motivated to carry on because his pension was not sufficient to live on and he needed the extra money to ease his transition from full

employment to full retirement. Note, that we believe a person who is desperate for a job may not be satisfied with it, but only goes along with the flow because they are motivated by the benefits involved. However, as time goes by it is likely that the person becomes satisfied. Employees on shift one clearly were not motivated before the new process but were satisfied with their jobs and after its implementation they still were not motivated and their job satisfaction declined simply because there was no longer mentally challenging work. According to one of the four factors conducive to high levels of employee job satisfaction, people prefer jobs that give them opportunities to use their skills and abilities and offer a variety of tasks, freedom and feedback on how well they are doing (communication). Obviously, those aged employees in that shift had strongly valued what they did and for Clev it was even more difficult to become satisfied since the case cited that he looks and thinks just the same as he did when he was first hired by Goodman back in 1955. This proved that he was clearly not innovative and change would always lead him to be not satisfied. Furthermore, the change made them believe that the company did not think much of their abilities or else the job would not have been simplified. Mr. Goodman had not designed the necessary policies that would lead to job satisfaction; those such as equitable rewards. Imperatively, since equitable rewards were non-existent these employees could have never been satisfied let alone motivated. Those shift one employees believed that they made the Company what it was and it would have only been fair that they receive a share of the profits; they perceived this as being just and in line with their expectations. These rewards can act as a means of communication since it can signal that the employee had done a good job (acknowledges the employee) and in turn the employee becomes satisfied with

their job and motivation is likely to increase because they get what they believe to be better in this case. Because shift three was well informed about the new process it was easier for them to become more committed to their jobs. Not only that but the fact that they had supportive colleagues added to their level of job satisfaction. Mr. Jackson was friendly and encouraged ideas which made those employees develop a sense of belongingness therefore fostering motivation. Employees who are involved in the decision making feel more appreciated especially if their supervisor or management has considered their input for usage. If that be the case the job would become more enjoyable therefore motivating the employee to carry on. Evidently, the new production process was poorly implemented within the first and the second shifts and employees, especially those on shift one, were resistant to the change because there was little to no motivation and they were not satisfied with their jobs. As a result, each group accepted and reacted to the change differently and those especially of the first shift, had difficulties working in groups because that was not the norm and they did not understand what it meant to have a shared purpose and the ability to act in a unitary manner. When defined groups are any number of people who interact with one another; are psychologically aware of one another; and perceive themselves to be a group (Laurie J. Mullins 2005). It is further stated that a group is a collection of people who share the following characteristics: definable membership; group consciousness; a sense of shared purpose;

interdependence; interaction; and the ability to act in a unitary manner. Throughout the Goodman Company, it was evident that after the implementation of the new production process that group work became a necessity and was the definite route to success since each employee no longer had to perform the entire process.

10

The activities of any group are associated with the process of leadership and the style adopted by their supervisor i.e. the way in which the group reacted or accepted the new process mainly depended on how they were supervised. Moreover, if the supervisor is uneasy with change it becomes difficult to guide his/her fellow group members to the accomplishment of organisational goals because the supervisor now becomes less committed to the task and sometimes this tends to trickle down to members in the group. That is, there is a possibility that the group would also not want to accept the new process and with reference to the case we noted this when Clev, the supervisor, was unhappy, then his subordinate Joe Bob formed a union which was accepted by the other shift employees. In the second shift, Norm as the supervisor had no real interaction with his fellow subordinates and as a group leader it is necessary to interact continuously with group members as this is one important characteristic of a group. When Norm was appointed supervisor the group did not readily accept him and he did not socialise but rather believed that they should do their work. What he failed to realise is that by not interacting with the group they adopted behaviour where they were reluctant to speak to him on any problems that they encountered.

11

RECOMMENDATIONS
Overall it could be said that goals are the foundation of any organisation. Goals provide direction and guides employees behaviour so that effectiveness can be maximised. The Goodman Company failed drastically to effectively communicate goals to employees and the structure employed clearly did not foster employee commitment, motivated employees and the enhancement of job performance. We realised that Mr. Goodman only wanted a recommendation that would have made his company prosper but management is about getting things done through people; therefore we have made the following recommendations that would be based not on making profits but involving employees. We recommend:

Employee Recognition Programs as the name suggests are concerned with managers showing appreciation towards their employees i.e. employee of the month, promotions. Those employees in shift one would enjoy such programs since they are more likely to be motivated intrinsically and such programs would make them feel more important to the business.

Management by Objectives (MBO) which involves the setting of objectives and targets that each employee should meet and a continuous review and appraisal of results. More over, MBO takes away from the boss setting all the goals and allows employees to participate in choosing the goals and how they would be measured. Feedback becomes continuous with MBO and employees would want to know how they are progressing.

12

Kurt Lewins change theory which deals with unfreezing or dismantling the existing behaviour of the employees towards the change, moving them to a new state of mind lastly, refreezing, where the change is implemented and a new mind set is stabilised.

Create an employee selection criterion that would ensure person-job fit. That is, a fit between an individuals personality characteristics and his or her occupational environment. This can be used as a good tool to ensure that there is a certain degree of diversity among employees so that more heterogeneous groups could be formed.

Although each of the above recommendations is applicable, Mr. Goodman needs to implement the one which is most effective. Therefore, after thorough analysis of each, we concluded that our second recommendation which was that of Management by Objectives (MBO) would be capable of providing corrective action since there would be participative management, goal setting and objective feedback all of which were lacking in the Goodman Company. Employees would become motivated and satisfied with their jobs which would be beneficial to the business because productivity would increase. MBO also puts the organisation in a state of equilibrium where there is fairness throughout. Furthermore, if individuals are motivated and satisfied this would affect the way how they would work in groups positively and so too affect the organisation positively since goals would be accomplished.

13

IMPLEMENTATION
For MBO to work effectively, it should be considered as top priority by management and should therefore be a continuous process that works from the top down as well as the bottom up since objectives are to be linked at one level to those at the next level. Most importantly goals should be S.M.A.R.T i.e. specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented and time bound. Goals should be specific so that those involved understand what is expected; measurable, in terms of assessing results; attainable since it makes no sense setting goals that are beyond the capabilities of your employees; results-oriented ( ) and time bound since they should be a set date to

accomplish goals, if not, employees would become laid back because there was no deadline. In general, we had identified what we considered that the best way to implement MBO was by following our own seven step process.
Step 1. Organisational goals should be clearly clarified and communicated to all members

of the organisation. This way everyone involved would have a clear understanding of the new goals, in terms of what the organisation wants to achieve, what is expected of them and the importance of their involvement to accomplish them. There should be more commitment and an increase in efforts towards the accomplishment of those set goals.

Step 2. The organisational structure must now be reviewed and designed so that it is

flexible and promotes effective communication, quick decision making and prompt feedback. Frankly, the structure that the Goodman Company had employed before the new process clearly could not work after the process was implemented since the structure could not facilitate group work. Mr. Goodman would have to structure the groups in

14

terms of specifying roles, norms, status, size and the degree to which members are attracted to each other and are motivated to stay in the group. Moreover, Mr. Goodman can also move around his employees so that groups become more heterogeneous since there is a possibility that the personalities of those from shift three can influence those on shift one to become more open-minded about change. The old men were so all alike that none could turn to the other and say lets give it a chance. In addition, management can restructure the entire organisation by breaking the companys long time tradition of lifetime employment and fire those senior supervisors, such as Clev, so as to make room for younger and more aggressive leaders who are diverse and easily accept change. The younger generation are more accustomed to change and keep in touch with this fast paced world.

Step 3. There should be a consensus between managements and subordinates objectives

and targets. This would be a vehicle towards motivation since workers are driven to achieve goals that they have collaboratively set. Clearly, if there is no consensus, employees would obviously not be satisfied with their jobs since management did not value their input and this could place the company back at square one, where there was a neglect in production and other forces of resistance. Agreement is key at this stage.

Step 4. Management should now closely monitor how employees are performing, in

terms of increasing productivity and quality of the product all at the same time. This way management would be ensuring that employees have been following guidelines so as to achieve their objectives. Also, monitoring can sometimes show management that there objectives were set to high or too low depending on the level of output being observed.

15 Step 5. In such an instance, management and employees would have a chance to put in

place performance improvement plans that would correct any variances in the previously set objective so as to keep performance level.

Step 6.

Those objectives and targets that were previously set should be reviewed so as to

determine whether or not goals were met.

Step 7. Take a look at the overall performance of the organisation since the objectives

and targets were based upon the interests of the organisation. If performance was good then management can conclude that they have reached their main goal - To maximise productivity so as to meet the increasing demands of customers.

(Appendix B shows this graphically)