Henry Larsen, the Director of Engineering at SEC - Essay Example

?Case Study Contents Executive Summary 3 Technical aspect 3 Ethical aspect 4 Legal aspect 4 Contractual aspect 5 Communication aspect 5 Training and Human resources aspect 6 Other aspects 7 Reference 9 Executive Summary Here we can see a complex situation faced by a project engineer, Gary Allison of SEC who was offered the position of a project manager by his senior Henry Larsen. The case deals with the job complications faced by Gary along with some ethical issues. We can find here how an unethical step can lead to disasters in professional life. Moreover, we can see here that Gary, who is a project engineer by profession, has been offered with the position of project manager and it was accepted by him. This also shows how getting appointed for an unsuitable position can lead to disputes and confusions both for the employee and for the organization as a whole. From the ethical point of view Gary was correct on his part but if we consider the case from the business viewpoint then it can be said that on certain aspects Gary was wrong. The case focuses on a number of aspects of an organization and exhibits the outcomes providing the reader a food for thought towards finding out paths to better results. In the following sections we will discuss about the various aspects related to the case. Technical aspect Henry Larsen, the director of engineering at SEC appointed one of his most trusted employees, Gary Allison, as the project manager for the Orion Shield project. Soon Gary realized that the design prepared by their firm was unable to meet the technical specifications. He informed Larsen that the customers are looking for a design that would operate successfully and normally within -65 degree F to 145 degree F. He tried and tested several other approaches but failed. Then he suggested that the customers should be informed about this issue. However Henry Larsen felt that it is not necessary to inform the customers about this technical error since it could lead to dissatisfaction and the passing on of the contract to another firm. Larsen advised Gary to prepare a proposal which would state that the design would be operative up to 155 degrees. Further Larsen told that later on they will convince the customers to change their specifications. Ethical aspect Gary was in dilemma when he came across Larsen’s unethical approach towards the Orion Shield Project. He thought it would be unethical to conceal the fact from the customers which can possibly give rise to mistrust and dissatisfaction among the customers later on. But he was rebuked for this ethical thought. Larsen clearly told him that if he wished to move on with this project with an ethical viewpoint then he would have easily selected some ethical manager and not Gary. Since he needed someone who can tactfully handle such situations without getting ethically influenced therefore he chose Gary for this project and he wants Gary to act as per his instructions. Also Gary stated in the financial report about the progress of the project and the cost allocated. He represented all the facts truthfully. However his endeavor was totally discouraged by Elliot Grey who informed him that his truthfulness has caused a huge loss to the company as Grey had asked for $3, 00,000 additional amounts from the headquarters by some manipulation so that Gary could get rescued from the complex situation. Now this amount would be restricted to only $ 150,000. Legal aspect Gary got informed by Larsen that a new material JXB3 has proved to be suitable for satisfying all the specifications mentioned in the contract. This material had been tested for the past two weeks by Larsen and Paula and now they have come to the conclusion that it is the perfect one. Larsen also told that all these testing had been done with the money paid for the deal and it is against the contract to use the amount for some other purpose and the revelation of this fact might lead to cancellation of the contract. Also it was illegal on SEC’s part to develop a new material and introduce it within the project without prior notice to the STI. Gary was also instructed by Larsen to tell the STI that SEC carried on this testing with its own R&D money. Contractual aspect In this particular project, Gary gets assisted by the chief-project engineer Paula Arnold who told him that the contract is of Firm-Fixed Price nature. In this type of contract the customer pays the charge on the basis of a prefixed value which is subject to no adjustment in future in spite of the contractor’s further cost addition. Here no added fees or incentives are provided by the customers. The cost responsibility is entirely placed on the contractor. This is a risky contract type as the burden is wholly placed on the contractor and they are expected to continuously monitor the cost in order to control any over-runs (Department of Energy, 2008, p. 10). Therefore no way Gary can increase the workforce or introduce additional costs which will be bearable by his own organization and STI will not be liable for the additional charges. However STI thought that a trade-off would be possible later on but that will depend upon the second design review meeting. Communication aspect Gary experienced a lot of communication problem primarily because he was new to such role. As a project manager he was expected to strike a balance between the administrative work and the technical work. But STI stated that they tried to contact Gary a several times but he was always found busy in the R&D lab and as a result he missed the vital discussions. He continuously failed to meet his administrative duties and totally concentrated on the technical parts. He even missed the event when his team presented the administrative data which led to lots of gap between the administrative and technical departments. Also in order to save costs, Gary prepared every handout personally without burdening the staffs. But this step consumed more time and he didn’t get enough time to communicate rescheduling process in earlier. Ed Anderson, the representative from the production department was quite displeased with Gary’s miscommunication and he told Gary that the resources are committed for the coming month. Rescheduling might lead to overtime, which will increase the costs. Also STI stated that they have decided to establish a customer office to follow SEC’s work more closely, as proper communication was missing between the two organizations. Training and Human resources aspect Primarily Gary faced major hurdle in staffing the project. The continued existence of SEC relied upon the profits obtained from the production programs. Keeping tune with this philosophy Gary found that the engineering managers were unwilling to give up their significant personnel to the Orion Shield Program. However, with some support from Larsen, Gary finally was able to form a team. Later on Gary over burdened himself with all the managerial jobs. He did this to reduce workload on his staffs but ultimately this situation created complications for him and for his team. He personally created all the technical handouts for the interchange meeting that was scheduled for two days. To reduce the costs, Gary started preparing the minutes of the meeting on his own and that too manually. Due to lack of administrative personnel Gary got so much occupied with the paperwork that he didn’t get time to visit the R&D lab for few days. Moreover it was found that while rescheduling the project Gary faced strong resistance from the staffs who lost motivation towards their job. The staffs felt that the work that had been done by them till date was a mere waste. This was the result of poor HR management and improper training. Other aspects Gary accepted the position of project manager for the Orion Shield Project. But his educational background and professional experience clearly exhibits the fact that he was good at mechanical engineering and over the preceding 14 years he had gained an established reputation as a talented and respected project engineer. The job of a project manager is very different from the job of a project engineer. Project managers are responsible for effectively and efficiently execute projects. On the other hand a Project Engineer has the key responsibility of producing an accurate, biddable, buildable and complete set of tactics for all the structures in a project. This responsibility is expected to be performed with the least possible expenditures on labor and materials, with the minimum amount of wastage (Memo to designers, 1995). Therefore we can conclude that it was a quite wrong decision on Gary’s part to accept the position of project manager in the Orion shield project. Also Gary committed a major mistake by proceeding according to the unethical approach of Larsen which ultimately caused Gary a lot of trouble and his hard work was not even recognized, instead he got re-assigned to his previous position. From business perspective we can say that Larsen’s advice was right and it is not always possible to satisfy the customers by revealing the bitter truth. But it can also be stated that if Gary faced some dilemma then it would have been better for him to step back and return to his previous job. Gary also would have applied the RESOLVEDD decision making approach as was suggested by Jonathan L. Kvanig when he got stuck in issues related to decision making. The model involves- R-Review the facts E-Estimate the conflict S-List the possible solutions O-State the probable outcomes L- Describe the likely impact of the solutions V-Explain the values upheld and those infringed E-Evaluate each main solution D-Decide which solution is best D-Defend the decision against objections (ryerson.ca, n.d.) Reference Memo to designers (1995) Duties of Project Engineer. Available at http://www.dot.ca.gov ryerson.ca (n.d.) The Ethics Network. Available at http://www.ryerson.ca Department of Energy, (2008) General Guide To Contract Types For Requirements Officials. Available at http://energy.gov Read More