CASE ANALYSIS

NUCLEAR TUBE ASSEMBLY ROOM(A) & PROCESS ENGINEERING PROPOSAL

GROUP 4 SECTION A
ARJUN CHAUDHURI ARJUN KHOSLA RIA VERMA SAURABH SINGH SNEHA MANAN SUHASH TANDLUM

Part 1 - The Nuclear Tube Assembly Room: Analysis covering the following issues

a) Leadership - Style, Supervisory Practices

With respect to leadership style, the case focuses primarily on Ralph Langley. Having analysed the details of the case, we understand that Langley was an employeeoriented leader who had a situationalstyle of leadership. Various instances in the case show how he followed a delegative, charismatic and authoritative style of leadership at various points. For example, he recounts how he told the assembly room employees that his job was to help them, not tell them what to do, and that they were strictly on their own as far as getting out production, scheduling their work, pacing themselves, watching their own waste etc was concerned. If they ever faced any trouble, he was always ready to provide any help. Alice Honart also mentions that since they were closer to the work, Langley could not be expected to do everything related to their jobs. Though results were important to Langley(for example, he mentions how meeting the production schedule was sacred), he was concerned about his subordinates wellbeing and was actually interested in addressing any issues, personal or work related, which they might happen to face. Ralph did not impose a strict schedule on the workers as long as the work gets done(Alice Homart says that they were free to decide length of their coffee breaks). Langley believed in treating the workers the way they wanted to be treated in order to feel that they were a part of the organization. He inspired them to to do their best and suggested them not to focus purely on standards, but learn how to do their jobs better.

Langley used to go through the monthly production schedule alongwith Sally Ivers. He made it a point to not blindly follow what the production planning department asked Tube Assembly Department to produce. Instead, he kept an eye on how sales were happening in order to gauge how much should the actual production of various tubes be. Langley was highly involved in the affairs of the department, sans extensive personal appearance. He usually remained at his desk and all workers were free to approach him with any problem/question. Langley was always fair and was careful to ensure that he gave equal attention and importance to all workers. If things were not going right, he avoided getting into any distressing or threatening discussion. He maintained transparency about the operations with the workers and expected them to be equally honest with him in return. Langley allowed workers the independence to decide which kind of work they wished to do. This is evident in the way he says how Tom Montag was free to choose what work he would like to do.

Further, Langley did not administer the departments budget; instead he made the employees responsible for controlling their expenses basis the allocated budget. If he sensed any trouble with the budget, he asked Bill Yoost about it, but after getting his assurance that everything was alright, Langley used to let go of the issue once again. However, there were certain things which he was absolutely rigid about the production schedule, employee evaluation sheets, inter-personal relationship among his workers. He never compromised on the schedule and was also was also firm enough to fire a worker who was causing a lot of trouble for the entire team. Langley had not appointed any supervisor for the department. Sally Ivers was the group leader who acted as follows: Sally Ivers: Sally gave the working instructions to all women before the days work started. She moved from person to person, checking preparations, answering questions, and discussing the days work schedule. She tried to ensure that her instructions had been understood properly before proceeding further and discussed with workers in case any detailed instructions were required to be given. Workers were free to alter their work-plans without necessarily discussing with Sally. This conveys that a delegative leadership style was practised by Sally. An instance of Sallys supervisory practice comes forth when Martha Stewart erroneously makes tubes out of platinum instead of stainless steel. Instead of rebuking her, she suggests Martha to just go ahead with the production. Another situation which can be cited here is when Betty breaks the tube, Sally does not react unfavourably, but continues with her work. This conveys to us that Sally trusted her fellow workers to have the ability to deal with their problems themselves.

b) Group Dynamics Social Structure/Formal and Informal Groups, Interpersonal Relations:

Initially, the workers in the department were referred to as agitators, hotheads and persistent trouble-makers. They had no motivation. However, they had started performing very efficiently together, and had an active interest in seeing not just their group but also the company progress. The workers were organised as a formal group within the organisation structure. However, within their group, they were very friendly with each other. Their activities were not affected by their supervisors. Workers organised themselves in two groups during breaks according to their interest one group walked and the other played cards. During breaks they discussed everything under the sun with an exception that if a person was offended by a particular subject they wouldnt discuss it. They cared about each others feelings and didnt want to hurt anyone. This was even for the case of any work related issues also.

The group is very informal and relaxed. This leads to a healthy working environment and good group dynamics. The workers feel they are crazy oddballs but when it comes to work they are the best in the company. They are proud of their group. If the production scheduled for the month had not been met then everyone was willing to cooperate in order to meet the production schedule. So when the group was under pressure to attain their tasks everyone used to chip in and do their part. The Pool and Poor Box were two other activities in which most of the workers participated. The pool was a high stakes game in which each member of the group used to contribute 50 cents. The poor box was used to finance special events such as going away presents, wedding gifts etc. These two activities also lead to better group behaviour.

c) Employee Motivation:
Prior to Langleys assuming office, the department had a reputation of being a problem department. It is mentioned in the Exhibit that employees displayed high degree of frustration and worry in the days when the department was running on losses. However, things improved after Langley joined and the departments operations were now among the best in the company. Employees were provided opportunities to perform multiple tasks. For instance, Martha Holtz does coating, ceramic lining, fire polishing and also testing, which reflects Job Rotation. Sylvia Johns was motivated as she had the opportunity to do the kind of work she liked. Similarly, Langley believed that intrinsic factors worked best in motivating workers. He felt that people perform best when they do what they want to do. For instance, in case of Bill Yoost and Tom Montag, he had given them the freedom to choose their line of work. In the case of Nellie MacDonald, Langley knew how to make her feel valued even though she herself thought she was not so bright and she thought she learned something in every interaction they had. Langley thought it was not the standards which should guide workers but the way they feltabout their work, their energy, drive, interest.
Langley always gave due credit where it was due. He ensured that his workers felt important and appreciated, that they derived greatest satisfaction from their jobs. According to him, employees were as important as the company/management. Employees would feel motivated to give more than their usual productivity.

Part 2 The Process Engineering Proposal

a)

Appraise the likely consequences of the proposed changes on the department's social system, productivity, and satisfaction

The process engineering department has called for changes in the manufacturing process of Nuclear Tube Assembly Room alongwith introduction of a new line of radiation tubes. The likely consequences of the proposed changes can be as follows:

Departments Social System:

At present, the workers in the room are mostly middle-age women who do not have advanced educational qualification. The proposal includes hiring four new relatively young employees with degree or special training in electronics. We think that there would be quite a difference in the attitude of the existing and the new bunch of employees. They may find it difficult to gel together. It is possible that the department could get split in two groups. The fact that the new employees would be paid higher wages might also add to the differences between the two groups. It is proposed that the nuclear room should be split into 3 rooms. This could lead to reduced interaction among the workers of the nuclear room. We have seen how freely they are able to interact at present, but this might not be sustained after the proposed changes are implemented. We get the impression that Harold Singer might be getting involved with this department going forward, which might not be well received by the workers as well as Langley. There might be conflict in such a situation.

Productivity:

It is proposed that process specifications should be decided in writing and the whole operations should be brought under close engineering surveillance. At present, everything is run without any fixed procedures on a hit-or-miss basis. Introduction of fixed guidelines should improve the productivity of employees, as they would now have standardized guidelines to follow while they work instead of thinking what needs to be done and formulating new practices. Due to task specialization and fixed station assignments will lead to increased workers skill in specific type of operation, thereby increasing the productivity. However, we can add that if the existing workers do not like the changes, they may feel demotivated which would lead to declining productivity.
Satisfaction:

As new employees would be hired at a higher wage rate, its possible that existing workers may not appreciate it and feel dissatisfied about it. Presently, workers are given the free-hand to decide changes in procedures. However, after the procedures are laid down by the process engineering department, workers will no longer have the flexibility to do this; they might feel as if they have lost some control over their work, which could lead to dissatisfaction.

b)

Determine which of the changes are essential, which will have negative effects, and how to implement those changes which are desirable.

ESSENTIAL CHANGES: 1) Laying down fixed procedures to standardize production 2) Separation of Testing Functions from Assembly Operations. NEGATIVE CHANGES: 1) Splitting the room into 3 would be negative as it would reduce the workers interaction. 2) As per the proposal, any changes in tube assembly methodology can be made only after Harold Singers approval. This will lead to dual boss which might pose problems in the form of conflict of authority. 3) Hiring of new employees at higher wage rate might be seen as unjustified by present workers, as they might feel that their years of service in the organisation has not been recognised. It is better if the company has standard operating procedures as suggested by Process engineering department. However, since till date the workers themselves had the liberty of changing work procedures, they might feel their freedom is being taken away. Thus before implementing such procedures, it is essential to take them into confidence by discussing the reasons behind such change. They should be told that it is in their and the companys best interest to follow certain guidelines as it will improve results. While segregating the Testing operations from assembly operations, it is necessary this is being done not out of distrust of their intentions but to improve the quality. Also, since it is practised in all the companies even American Radiotronics has to follow it.

c)

Diagnose and draw up a plan for intervening in the conflict between the two key actors.

The key actors in this situation are: Harold Singer and Ralph Langley. The way things stand between them they are likely to have a heated argument as their views are diametrically opposite to each other. Ralph is opposing these changes as he feels that the work put in by him for the past two years will be destroyed. Also the proposed changes might lead to a reduction in the workers morale. He is of the opinion that with the introduction of new members into the team will be a determinant to the teams progress. Also he felt that since the leadership of the new production room would be shared between Harold and Ralph, it might lead to problems in handling of the people working over there. Harold wanted to introduce these changes as these changes were long overdue. Also American Radiotronics had inked a contract with a large customer who wanted LDTCs. In order to manufacture them the processes at American Radiotronics had to change its processes. Ralph was not against change since he himself was a change agent when he joined American Radiotronics two years ago. His only concern was that change shouldnt destroy the work

that he had put in for the past two years. Ralph can be made a change agent. His leadership will come into handy when proposed changes are brought into effect. To go about it Ralph has to be made aware of the fact that the current technology that they have is outdated. Also he has to be made aware of the fact about the new contract that American Radiotronics bagged and it involved producing LDTCs which under current conditions cannot be produced. Ralph should be made aware of the fact that laying down SOPs and not deviating from it will actually benefit from it. The introduction of four new people who have an advanced degree will actually help them, as they will carry out the maintenance activities which were being performed by the workers currently. Even before introducing new changes Ralph should be consulted and his concerns should be addressed. After addressing the concerns, change should be introduced in a phased manner. Also there should be no confusion as to who will be the leader of the new room. When the changes are actually introduced we have to take into account the people affected by the changes. Here we have to take the Tube Rooms leader Sally Ivers into consideration when introducing 4 new people into the team.