Production of Hawk Car Company - Essay Example

?Hawk Car Company: Case Analysis Contents Question 3 Question 2 5 Question 3 6 Question 4 10 Reference 14 Question Analyze the issues arising from hierarchical and Taylorist methods of production at Hawk Car Company. What theories explain the changes made? Why were they more effective? Answer Hawk Car Company has been recently facing the issues of employee turnover and increased absenteeism. The plants also faced issues regarding the recruitment of employees. The managers were worried about the situation and they wanted to tackle the situation strategically. For this purpose they focused on the hierarchical structure of the organization. The hierarchical structure followed by the company exhibits a Tall structure. The number of personnel reporting to each manager tends to be lesser in case of Tall structures. This results in better opportunities for the superiors to monitor and supervise the activities of the subordinates (courses.jonesinternational.edu, n.d., p.185). The employees of the organization played no role in designing and running the production lines. Also the organization followed the Taylorist style of production which refers to the mass production system. The Taylorist production approach was established by F.W.Taylor, who gave birth to Scientific Management. His school of thoughts is termed as Taylorism. Taylorism believed that any job can be learnt and taught. This theory treats the humans like machines and proposed that for the achieving higher production the management must eliminate inefficiency from its functioning. However, this theory completely neglects the usual complications that happen within a normal human being (Boyd, n.d). Taylorist production style supports the assembly line system where each worker performs the same task repetitively. Here the concept of division of labor was given significance and people started getting experienced in a certain domain while the rest of the production system remained unknown to them. A strict supervision policy was maintained within the organization which created distance between the management and the employees. The repetition of same task created frustration among the workers. The quality of work started to decline which affected the management adversely. In turn the employees were threatened and scolded which ultimately resulted in more and more employee turnover. The theories which were employed to channelize the changes within the organization made the Hawk Car Company to eliminate the tall hierarchical structure and instead of that, they introduced Adhocracy. The adhocracy structure is characterized by dynamic and organic units which have limited standardization and formalization, and is inclined toward decentralized decision making. These units are associated with least routine task and lower vertical differentiation which encourage greater responsiveness and flexibility among the employees (Robbins and Mathew, 2009, pp 199- 200). The management also took vital steps towards training the employees in such a manner so that they can gain knowledge about the entire production system. The workers were provided with the opportunity to grow in their position by better performance. The new management style took great care of the employee’s personal lives too and helped them in solving those to the possible extent. The aim of this remodeling decision was making the workforce competent and motivated about studying the process of manufacturing of the whole car and not just learning some specialized functions. These changes made the jobs entirely interesting and the employees felt free to approach their seniors in any case of complexity. The managers also took care of the issues arising regarding the work and paid full attention toward its solution. Team work and motivation played an important role in rectifying the conventional organizational structure that the company had been following for the past years. Question 2 McGregor suggested two management styles according to which managers regarded the work potential of their employees. Examine McGregor’s theory in the light of the management styles before and after the changes. Which management style worked better? Answer Douglas McGregor in his book named “The Human Side of Enterprise” stated that The Theory X and Theory Y concept forms the foundation for behavioral science within an organization. It follows two styles of treating employees. Theory X is based on the viewpoint that does not treat workers as human beings and this model implements a dictatorial style of management. On the other hand, the Theory Y principle treats the staff in a distinguished manner and encourages their full involvement within the management. In theory X it is believed that human beings generally hate working and they always try to avoid responsibility whenever possible. The employees are generally considered as self-centered and scared of changes. As a result of these characteristic the individuals feel the need of being controlled, directed, threatened and coerced by their superiors. The managers also follow the process of monitoring and supervising by clearly defining the individual task for achieving the organizational goals. Therefore in this style of management the managers get engaged in an autocratic and directive control system which can give rise to misunderstandings and bitterness from the part of the workers. Theory Y is based on the assumption that most of the human beings love to work and are capable of efficiently completing it if they are asked to do their work benignly. It generally depends upon the higher authorities to guide their employees as friends or associates if some quality work is expected from them. According to theory Y, the employees are characterized by their inclination towards innovation, discipline and dedication. They think about the progress and welfare of the organization and works together as a family. The employees are entirely committed to their work and take initiative to achieve the organizational goals. In the case of Hawk Car Company, the managers followed the theory X style of management previously. The management used to be extremely tyrannical and they exerted extreme pressure on the employees regarding the completion of the work on time and they also focused on increased volume of production which used to set higher targets for the employees. The continuous autocracy and work pressure completely exhausted the workers. As a result the quality of the products started to fall. Soon the management found that their workers are feeling frustrated and de-motivated with their work and the working conditions. The management realized that workers are the strongest force of the organization which can lead to higher revenues and greater sales volume only if they are provided with adequate facilities and sufficient training and knowledge. In this scenario they decided to introduce the principles of theory Y and proved to be successful in motivating the employees by introducing the concept of teamwork and worker’s participation in management. The monotony of the work was removed efficiently from their works by making the employees learn each and every task related to car manufacturing. Better wage structures were also introduced. Question 3 Various motivation theories- both content and process- can explain the improvement in the motivation of the workforce after the changes at Hawk car Company. Carry out an in-depth analysis of the changes supported by the motivation theories to explain the effects on employees in the company. Answer Content theory is about the needs of the workers in the work field. According to this theory the individual need of the employee is more important to take care for the betterment of the company. The strong point of the employee must be identified by the authorities and also how to motivate them. An individual must be motivated appropriately in order to achieve the organizational goals. This theory has been discussed in various motivational theories like Maslow’s need hierarchy model, Alderfer’s ERG model and Herzberg’s two factor concept. Maslow’s motivation model deals with a pyramid that contains 5 levels. Each level represents a need of the general individual. In this model the basic need of an individual has been given importance. The model is just like a pyramid where the base is constructed on the basic need of an individual, the need for food, clothing, air, water and shelter. It is the physiological need without which it is very difficult to sustain. After these requirements get fulfilled an individual craves for safety and security (Kreitner, 2007, p.378). A person who is secured and no fear exist in his life he can be more useful as well as productive compared to someone who is insecure. The fear of falling sick can also make an individual insecure and thus his concentration power may get affected. Thus these kinds of insecurities can harm the potentiality of an employee. After the satisfaction of the safety and security need, comes the need for belonging to a particular group or community. Social security is very important in the life of an individual for his proper functioning. If society gives recognition to us we can live more firmly and with self respect. Here the term respect means respect which can be gained through personal accomplishment and also from the members of the society by participating into different social activities. The higher level of the pyramid refers to self-actualization need that defines the need for self-satisfaction, a feeling that the individual’s talent has been realized. Maslow identified that an employee’s performance is influenced mostly by several need levels, but their behavior is motivated mostly by the lowest unsatisfied need. When the basic needs are satisfied the employees get encouraged to perform better and at this time the next higher level need act as a motivator for them. Herzberg’s two factor model deals with two factors which are motivators and hygiene factors. The motivators are factors like Promotion, Responsibility, Achievement, and Recognition which exhibits significant amount of increased motivation within the staffs but their absence never causes dissatisfaction. The hygiene factors like salary, work environment, organizational policies, and efficient supervision create a satisfactory mindset but it never contributes towards the motivation of the employees. However the absence of these factors is responsible for job dissatisfaction. ERG is a motivational model concerned with the understanding of the factors that greatly influences the individual behavior. It is one of the content theories that believe the intrinsic elements influences a person significantly towards acting in a specific way. In this theory Alderfer dealt with the existence needs that refers to the basic requirements for living, relatedness needs that involves the needs that are met through social relationships particularly with friends and family and at work with co-workers and Growth needs which illustrates the need for self development of a person (Caulton, 2012, p.1). The process theories deals with the discipline that addresses the question like how the process takes place and maintains, and finds the answer to this question by focusing on the degree of endeavor, the modification of the endeavor and the continuation of the endeavor (sielearning.tafensw.edu.au, n.d.). The Equity theory and the Expectancy model are based on the concept of process theory. The equity theory focuses on the exchange relationship where employees give their best and expect the best in return. Here the things offered by the individuals are called inputs and the things they receive in return are called outputs. A third variable plays a significant role in this process which is called the reference group. The reference group has a huge influence on the activities of the individual (Al-Zawahreh and Al-Madi, 2012, pp. 1-2). Therefore in work context, the team with which the employees are working contributes greatly towards the performance of each employee. The expectancy theory developed by Victor Vroom states that the motivation to act in a certain manner is determined by a worker’s expectation which in turn directs their behavior towards a particular goal, in association with the preference the individual has for the particular outcome that the action will result in (Schmidt, n.d.). The three aspects of this theory are- 1. Expectancy: E -> P. The idea of the individual that his/her efforts (E) will result in realization of desired act (P) goals. In case of employees, this the performance expected from them by the organizations. 2. Instrumentality: P -> R. The certainty of the individual that he/she will obtain a reward (R) if the performance (P) expectation is achieved. This is the employee’s expectation from the employer. 3. Valence: The worth of the reward according to the individual. (E.g. is the reward motivating the person?) Hawk Car Company specifically focused on their management style that introduced improved wages, working conditions and different organizational structure. These changes were the results of both the process and content theories of motivation. The content theories like Maslow’s need hierarchy and Herzberg’s two factor theory focused on the basic necessities of the employees like wages and better working conditions, which were followed by the company in restructuring their organization. The organization also implemented significant process theory concept by providing training facilities and promotional growth for the up gradation of each individual’s talent and skill. Question 4 Contrast the advantages and disadvantages of teamwork with individual work. What effects did teamwork have on the workers in Hawk Car Company? Explain these effects further using theories both about teamwork and about other aspects of organizational behavior. Answer Teamwork is beneficial as information sharing in a group paves the way for a wide range of ideas and thoughts to come up. It is unlikely for innovative ideas to come out as a result of two-sided communication between the decision-maker and the individual worker. Idea sharing in a group of equal level people can arouse exceptional ways of thinking. An employee may perceive an issue from an entirely unusual perspective than their coworker (Denkovska, 2010). This way of thinking can introduce changes in the process of carrying out performance, in policy creation, and in developing a product. Additionally, each employee’s understanding is negligible in a sense that it is not possible for an employee to make right decisions every time which becomes easier when they perform in a group. However teamwork also has some disadvantages among which the primary one is that too many viewpoints can possibly give rise to conflicts and confusions. Also in a team, the members tend to pass on their responsibility. Moreover teams which are formed with members having conflicting thoughts can often lead to failure and prevent the team from achieving the organizational objectives (uhv.edu, n.d.). On the other hand, the search for personal achievement and contentment is an influential motivational force that enables an individual to work dedicatedly. It is believed that one quality worker can contribute more towards the betterment of the organization than a group of inefficient employees. Also individuals who have innovative thoughts and ideas can apply those in their work which gets restricted in teamwork as the team expects to run on the basis of the application of every member’s viewpoint (Stibel, 2011). The concept of individualism also suffers from some limitations among which the significant one is that the individual feels troubled while keeping their flow of ideas intact, because once the thought process of the person get interrupted it takes longer time to bring them back and make them concentrate towards their work. Also when individuals are given complex tasks, they often get confused and look for other’s help as work pressure together with time pressure makes some particular jobs really tiresome to accomplish alone. For example if an individual is given the responsibility of making the whole car then he will take longer time and the outcome will be full of defects. Therefore particularly in manufacturing sector, individual work is highly discouraged. We can find that the Hawk Car Company was religiously following the assembly line procedure of production which makes an individual repeat his tasks throughout the day. This process was believed to enhance task specialization but on contrary this production process proved to be boring and hectic. The logic behind this outcome is that anyone would not like to repeat the same task everyday that too for such negligible wage. Later on, the management introduced the concept of workshops. Workshops helped the people to learn every part of car making very minutely. The advantage of workshop concept was that every employee would be capable of knowing the technical aspects and manufacturing details about the entire car. Also the people were given the opportunity to work in teams where everyone learnt something new and interesting. Proper training was also provided to the individuals. Also any issue related to the groups was efficiently removed by the careful interference of the supervisory team. Learning as a team encouraged creativity and new perceptions which was impossible while the employees worked individually. Each team maintained harmonious relations among themselves and any errors made by a member of the team were efficiently addressed, teaching him the right procedure but without hurting their ego. The work by each team was again analyzed carefully by all the members and the mistakes or defects were handled with proper decisions where participation of every member was considered necessary. The employees were also offered adequate leisure time with the inclusion of sauna and coffee rooms in the organization. Sufficient growth opportunities were also offered where the system of bonus for better performance was introduced. These changes in the management style encouraged the team to get self motivated. The leadership approach was changed to transformational from transactional style (Northouse, 2010, chapter9). The leaders or its better to mention the managers, started dealing with the employees as their friends and mentors. They always extended their helping hand whenever the employees needed them. They also worked passionately towards removing all sort of misunderstanding and conflicts from within the management. The organizational structure was converted to Adhocracy which limited formalized culture within the management. The motivational factors were also considered in this change process which included increased wages for the employees. The employees were offered with better working conditions. Any kind of grievance was sorted out effectively to provide the employees a feeling of content so that they could focus on their work, without worrying about other things. Reference courses.jonesinternational.edu, n.d. Organizational Structure and Change. Available at http://courses.jonesinternational.edu Boyd, A. n.d. TAYLORISM. Available at http://www.uh.edu [7th July 2013] Robbins, S.P. and Mathew, M. 2009. Organization Theory: Structure, Design, And Applications. New Delhi : Pearson Education India. Kreitner. 2007. Management. USA : Cengage Learning Caulton, J. R. 2012. The Development and Use of the Theory of ERG: A Literature Review. Regent University. Available at http://www.regent.edu [7th July 2013] sielearning.tafensw.edu.au, n.d. Process theories of Motivation. Available at http://sielearning.tafensw.edu.au [7th July 2013] Al-Zawahreh, A and Al-Madi, F. 2012. The Utility of Equity Theory in Enhancing Organizational Effectiveness. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences. Available at http://www.eis.hu.edu.jo [7th July 2013] Schmidt, C. T. n.d. Motivation: Expectancy Theory. The University of Rhode Island. Available at http://www.uri.edu [7th July 2013] Denkovska, I. 2010. The Benefits and Costs of Teamwork. Business Education Center. Available at http://www.csub.edu [7th July 2013] uhv.edu, n.d. TEAM LEADERSHIP AND SELF-MANAGED TEAMS. Available at http://www2.uhv.edu [7th July 2013] Stibel, J. 2011. Why a Great Individual Is Better Than a Good Team. HBR blog network. Available at http://blogs.hbr.org. [7th July 2013] Northouse, P. G. 2012. Leadership: theory and practice. UK: SAGE. Read More