Organizational Development Intervention for a Cloth Manufacturing Company - Essay Example

Task: Organizational Development Intervention The essay evaluates OD intervention for a cloth manufacturing company. The company has been running for 50 years. It deals in apparel for all ages. Its driving force is to make clothes affordable without comprising on quality. It has 800 employees, all on a permanent basis. In recent times, as numerous other clothing companies have come up, sales have significantly reduced from $600 million in 2008 to $400 million in 2011. This has lead to the need for a reevaluation of strategy. Group level diagnosis The inputs in group level diagnosis include organizational blueprint aspects that are inherent in the entire organization within which the group functions (Cummings and Worley 61). The following characteristics within the organization were identified as affecting group functioning. Technology The company has been in recent times initiated an upgrading program to increase the efficiency of the communication system. This includes the purchases of computer, networking and elevating internet bandwidth including an upgrade to HP Integrity BL860c i2 OpenVMS and CAD. The project has cost the company $250, 000. Other technological improvements include the purchases of new sewing machines and increasing the length of the processing line. Nevertheless, mid level employees are especially dissatisfied since the communication system changes do not meet their suggested quality. They opine that the internet connection is quite slow and is affecting them. The latest machines in the processing line are difficult to operate since no prior training was availed. This was emphasized by the 73% of factory employees who were dissatisfied by the situation. Structure The company has five major divisions dealing with HR, procurement, designing, manufacturing, and marketing. All the heads of the divisions answer to the president. However, within each division, there are groups with varied tasks. These groups give feedback to any of the four heads of divisions. For example, a group in designing children ware may be required to respond to the head of promotion directly without the involvement of the head of design. Sometimes, such a group is required to present its findings to different heads at different times. The interests of the heads at times conflict, since each, seeks to enhance the performance of their divisions without coordination with the other divisions. Evaluation systems The performance of the group is not formally evaluated; hence there are no form reward systems. A group appreciation or reward is dependent on the disposition of the division head under which they operate. A normal source of reward, for example, for the designing groups is when products perform well in the market. This is mostly indicated by the acclaim of the product in the market. In such a case, the group that designed the product may be recognized by being awarded a bonus in the following month. Nevertheless, such occurrences are rare, especially since the start of the company’s sales decline. Only 38 % indicated that they have been rewarded in their job. Other instances of rewards include the company’s annual meeting where individuals are recognized for various feats. However, lower level employees opine that the recognitions are reserved for higher level employees only, only 16% expecting to be rewarded before retirement. Promotions are random, which leaves some employees feeling they were bypassed with no substantiation. Other personnel complain that they have been in the same positions for long; this was expressed by 59% of all interviewed employees. The hiring of employees is based on merit. Job openings are posted on the media and appropriate procedures are followed. However, the salaries offered by the company are below industry average salary and are 76% of the industry average. This makes the company fail to attract highly motivated and qualified individuals. Most of the applicants in the job openings are young graduates who soon move away after some time. This has resulted in high turnover rate (36%), and a decreased familiarity between members of the same group. New members join the groups, while others leave now and then, reducing the coherence of group activities. This has affected the firm’s culture since strong interactions between individuals are hard to find. There is an atmosphere of strangeness within most of the groups and divisions. Especially among the lower level employees, there is always the notion that the new supervisor or accountant will soon go; 67% factory workers expected their supervisor to go within the next three months. Consequently, they view the formation of bonds as a waste of time. Nevertheless, long serving employees are always recognized. Goal clarity There are numerous groups within each of the divisions. The formation of the groups is based on the different roles and task within each of the divisions. For example, in the design division, there is the need to design men and women’s ware. This constitutes the basis of the main division within the teams. Further the groups are divided into smaller groups on the basis of ages. For example, within the female ware group, there are smaller subdivisions for infants, children between 6-12, teenagers, youth, and adults. These ensures that the responsibilities of the groups are clearly defined. 96% indicated that they understood their roles. The same occurs for the marketing divisions. There are groups tasked with marketing varied designs based on age. Within these groups, members design varied ways of popularizing designs within their designated age group. Within the manufacturing division, workers work in groups according to tasks. Personnel performing a similar task are pooled together. The tasks are well defined within the group settings. Task structure Task structure within the groups varies. This variance is more amplified between groups in different divisions. For example, within groups in the design division, coordination of members’ efforts is imperative. Most times they work on improving a single design. Nevertheless, before a single design is selected for improvement, different individuals work on individual designs. After the completion of individual designs, the products are voted to identify a few worth development for manufacturing. Therefore, during the initial stages, tasks are differentiated and the group leader is involved in regulating task behaviors. In later stages of development, the leader is involved in coordinating individual efforts towards the same tasks. In other divisions, for example, marketing, members work jointly at all times. Those in advertising work on possible commercials, scenes and graphics as a group. Individual tasks are limited; consequently, the work of the leader is to coordinating individual efforts towards the same task. In such cases the ability of the leader to carry out his/her duties in coordinating the efforts f individual members determines, to a large extent, the output of the group. In the manufacturing division, coordination of tasks is imperative. Different individuals work on the same garment, improving it in dissimilar ways. These include, seaming, adding buttons, ironing and packing. The coordination between these tasks determines the quality and volume of goods produced by a group. However, in all divisions, irrespective of independence or interdependence of tasks, there is no self regulation. The functioning of the varied groups depends on the coordination of their activities by leader. Even when the tasks can be performed independently, members do not regulate themselves. There seems to be a lack of guidelines on work methods, assignment and production goals. This is amplified by the high turnover rate of personnel. This means that before individuals can develop group norms, the composition of the group changes. Whether it is the leader of the members that change, a new identity must be established, resulting in new directions on working methods. Composition The composition of groups is not guided by any guidelines. Personnel belong to a group according to their expertise, since the groups are task specific. This means that only the skills of a person determine the groups they will belong. Consequently, the groups vary continuously on gender, age, race, educations and experience. For example, a group in marketing may be composed of personnel who have relevant aptitudes and experience in marketing. This is independent of age, gender and such other factors. In some divisions, these compositions have had counterproductive effects. This most expressed by members of the design teams. The younger members of these design teams opine that the presence of older members limit their productivity. The reason they cite for this is the presence of numerous debates on the appropriateness of different designs. They opine that the older members are conservative and do not always approve different designs; 87% of members under 30 years expressed this notion. Additionally, they suggests that group composition should consider age, rather than being indiscriminate. As a result, group activities are not satisfying and are often stressful. This has been pointed out as one of the reasons for the elevated turnover rate for the young personnel. In other divisions, for example, manufacturing, the group compositions does not seem to distress performance. In fact, the homogeneity is accredited with improving productivity, since the older employees induct the younger ones. This improves the speed of new employees, since they learn faster, which boosts overall productivity. Functioning The problems in composition expressed in marketing and design divisions translate to problems in functioning. The members often compete and form adversarial teams instead of cooperating. This is expressed, especially, is design groups. In these groups, there seems to be competition between the older and younger members of the groups. Each of the differentiations seeks to develop design prototypes that will be developed by the other members into manufacturing stage. Since the choice of these designs is dependent on votes by the members, the decision may be biased and bypass quality in favor of achieving superiority within the group. 90% of the members indicated that this has affected the design output from the various groups within the division. Additionally, there are no group maintenance attempts. The members of different groups meet during working hours and disperse after that until they meet again during the next working hours. There are no activities attempting to enhance group cohesion and functionality. Nevertheless, due to factory conditions, members of the manufacturing division seem to be closer together than others within the other division. There is a lower turnover rate among this group; therefore, there are stronger group norms. Feedback For effective feedback sessions, the data collected during the analysis will be delivered in groups that are facing the same problems. This is because if all the members in the meeting realize they are facing the same challenges, they are more likely to confront the problem. If they are mixed with those not affected by the predicament, a possible response is to react negatively or look for justifications. For example, group members in marketing and design who share the same group composition problems may attend the same meeting. This will help improve the probability of the data arousing positive reactions. Different feedback meetings will also occur on the basis of cadre. There are general problems affecting the different categories of personnel. The data regarding such groups may be better delivered from to the group, without the other categories learning of the problem. This will have the effect of maintaining proper relationships and perceptions within the entire organization. Finally, problems affecting the entire organization, for example, the lapse in working methods, task assignment and production targets; will be addressed to the entire organization. This are problems effectively presented as organizational challenges rather than group or individual challenges. Feedback survey will then be overseen through questionnaires. The feedback from the survey will then be presented again to the organization to enhance the implementation of the changes. Recommended interventions One of the challenges facing the company is a high employee turnover rate. This can be amended by the increasing pay to a level comparable to the industry average. The pay package is essential in attracting and maintaining qualified personnel. Additionally, this can be enhanced by adopting a promotion model that promotes career development on the basis of performance. An improvement of the working conditions, especially, in the factories will aid in retaining more workers. Another identified problem relates to work designs. The conflict between employees results in numerous grievances and absenteeism. There is the need for a deliberate move to increase job satisfaction. One of the options is to develop a strategy for assigning tasks, and production targets for the entire organization. This would prevent conflict between personnel working in interdependent tasks. Promoting self-regulation is essential in the smooth functioning of such tasks; therefore, there is the need to establish guidelines on the expected output of each individual within the group. There is also need for structural alterations. The head of a division should only consult the head of a division in which he/she is seeking information form. Increased coordination within the organization will ensure that all people work collaboratively towards the same goals. Therefore, there is the need to institute a communique procedure, especially, at the management level. To improve group relations, the company may consider hiring an expert in the field. The expert will design activities for different personnel to interact and cohere to amplify group productivity. There is the need to encompass, within the organizational culture, a sense of the family to enhance cooperation. Works cited Cummings, Thomas, and Worley, Christopher. Organization development & change. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning, 2008. Print. Read More