Managerial Attitudes toward Change at VLSI in Scotland - Case Study Example

Managerial Attitudes toward Change at VLSI in Scotland Applying Relevant Theories in Management by January 16, 2008 Managerial Attitudes toward Change at VLSI in Scotland Applying Relevant Theories in Management Big business in the twenty-first century has created a need for drastic change, especially in digital manufacture, with global competition increasing and bringing about an escalating demand for innovative methods. Unfortunately, some companies resist change, feeling that as long as business is steady, no change is necessary. However, as other companies compete by trying new theories and including employees and customers in decision-making at all levels, companies that ignore a changing society will be left behind. As noted in a case study by Buchanan and McCalman (Gowler, Legge, and Clegg 1993), the Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) assembly business at Digital Equipment Corporations plant near Ayr in Scotland was in such a situation, and when the firm showed dramatic growth between 1985 and 1989, they found it necessary to hire a consultant to determine the best way to handle the rising need for change in this traditional semiconductor business . The VLSI facility at Ayr assembles and tests semiconductors, and the system used, according to the case study, has been very conventional. The assembly process is divided into individual steps and each stage of the process is self-contained with employees offered no explanation of the whole process. When operators on the shopfloor were questioned, they said they accept the working conditions as they are but would really like to have more input and more understanding of how decisions are made as well as more personal communication and training to keep up with international progress. Scientific Management At the beginning of the twentieth century, Frederick Taylor and Henri Fayol initiated time-motion studies, with managers as observers, but workers were not involved in decision-making (Sandrone 1997; Marino 2007). This was the beginning of assembly-line workers, a system called scientific management, and at the time it was a surprising change which has now become ordinary and no longer truly successful. Taylor saw the worker as but one element in a work and work control system—the worker was to do the work and management was to exercise control (Sandrone 1997; Backer 1998). The system at VLSI follows the theories of Taylor and Fayol, and although it is consistent with conventional semiconductor manufacturing, it has been slow to respond to fast change, which is very much a part of twenty-first century growth. At VLSI, there is increasing conflict between quality and engineering, and management seems to be concerned that by creating a functional team with collective responsibility, managers in these conflicting areas will become redundant. However, it has become a great deal more than a communication problem; the barriers have to be removed entirely. If managers are willing to go into training for a better-paying position, the workers will benefit as well since they also will have the ability to be better educated and more useful among the other members of the group (Accel Team 2007). Hawthorne Studies Elton Mayo advanced Taylors theory beyond anything attempted in the business world when he presented the Hawthorne studies (Accel Team 2007) and discovered the potential power of the informal workgroup by encouraging input by group and giving them freedom to express feelings without fear of retribution by management. According to Nishan (2001), “a group is a collection of individuals, sharing a common identity and contributing to a common aim under the direction of a leader” (6). Small informal groups are easier to handle with more common interests among teams. Employees tend to create informal groups. Management sets up formal goals and tasks with established roles, rules and processes. The formal task group is apt to be ongoing, whilst the informal group is usually temporary. Leadership should understand groups within their organisation and create feasible goals which can be reached without too much stress. “Effective groups tend to be informal and relaxed with a high degree of participation” (Nishan 6). Relevant Theories Barry Tuckman utilised Mayos discussion of the Hawthorne studies to categorise five stages to successful group interaction as noted below (Pino 2004; Famous Models 2001; Neill 2004): 1. Forming – Determination of the situation faced and learning about group members. Personal impressions are formed. 2. Storming – Discussing different opinions and looking toward resolution. Determining whether compromise can be achieved by different members of the group to create a cohesive whole. 3. Norming – Overcoming resistance and establishing norms. A framework needs to be established, utilising specific talents of individual group members in a comfortable work environment. 4. Performing – Final stage to effective task completion. If cooperation can be achieved, the group becomes a team and the goal can be reached without stress. 5. Adjourning – Ending the interaction. The Tuckman theory was developed further by British writer and psychologist R. Meredith Belbin to encourage the creation of teams rather than simply groups (Overview 2001), and he recommends the following functions among team members (Belbin 2007): Coordination Strength of Purpose Cooperation Action Innovation Specialised Abilities Strong Leadership VLSI Case Study It is obvious from the case study presented by Buchanan and McCalman (Gower 1993) that VLSI is following an obsolete method of management. There is a lack of opportunity for individual development because the supervisor chooses jobs for employees, apparently based on personal preference and not always agreeable to other employees. Hierarchical decision making is not always explained and employees feel that communication between management and employees could be better. Employees are apt to be unaware of the production process as a whole. Too much management input means employees are not being tapped for their special abilities, and there is resentment among staff. Management agrees that it is important to meet change by retraining, but consider this a problem, given the acceleration of changes in a global economy (Srivastava 2005). Workplace Structure At VLSI, the assembly operation is conducted in a “cleanroom” with double air locked doors. The product moves clockwise through the various stages of the operation. In the cleanroom, each wafer is visually inspected for defects and mounted on a film frame. Next, individual circuits or die are sawn from the wafer and and attached to their packages. Position of die relative to package is critical. The final step is another optical inspection before die is sealed. Each stage is self-contained with no communication among other workers. Between 1985 and 1989, the VLSI assembly facility grew dramatically. What began as an operation with 14 employees and 2000 units tested per week increased to around 35,000 per week in 1989. Due to a traditional management approach, most of the assemblers were unskilled and were not included in the decision-making process. Management agreed communication needs improvement but considered change unnecessary. Managerial Attitudes Toward Change It was agreed by some that increased training and skills development should be instituted at this point in the companys development. In the organisations small computer business, multi-skilled self-managing teamwork was successful, and this could be recommended for VSLI. Such a system has not been used previously in the semiconductor business. At VSLI it is important to look at the strengths and weaknesses of individual team members, and the Belbin model seems to be the most successful way for the organisation to create a balanced team (Manktelow 2003; Belbins Team Roles 2007). Knowing how an individual reacts in a team situation is necessary if the team goal is to be reached. In applying the Belbin theory to the VLSI case study, it becomes evident why change is necessary here. With the organisation leveling off in 1989, the majority of VLSI management realised change must be considered for future success. Some managers, however, felt that the system was working well and no change was necessary. In fact, they were concerned that change would put the business at risk. Other managers expressed concern that the assemblers were unskilled and not included in decision-making. With the company stablilised, it was suggested that it was a good time to look at the system and decide what changes were necessary for the future. It would appear from the case study that VLSI had the potential to create a balanced team, connecting each phase of the assembly process so that employees fully understood the process. Some members of VLSI were willing to change but were slow to accomplish this. Others were more challenging but apt to be insensitive in their excitement, creating resentment. There were those that could see the path to the final goal but did not always trust others. The most creative members could not always communicate clearly. Some were able to see the whole, but they might lack energy to inspire others, while others were able to solve problems in a specific area but ignored problems outside their expertise. Those who came up with innovative ideas did not always follow through. Strong leadership was necessary, but leaders are apt to be controlling, rather than setting up a team and letting participants use their strengths to improve the system. Each of the traits needed to create a balanced team has its weaknesses, but by following Belbins theory, these weaknesses can be identified at the outset, and choosing team members can be successful with the result a compatible group ready to achieve their goals without a great deal of stress. Change in a global economy is not only necessary, it is fast-moving. But companies will succeed only when change occurs at the level of the individual employee. The key word in the twenty-first century is “change management” (Jones, Aquirre, and Calderone 2004; Change Management 2008), and it is obvious from the VLSI case history that this has yet to occur within the organisation. Change management offers 10 guiding principles to accomplish new skills and capabilities: (1) Address the human side systematically; (2) Start with the highest level; (3) Involve all levels of organisation; (4) Present a formal case for change; (5) Leaders must accept responsibility for change; (6) Clear-cut communication must include the right information at the right time; (7) It is necessary to understand culture and underlying behaviours at each level of the organisation; (8) Culture should be explicitly addressed; (9) The unexpected must be taken into consideration; and (10) Individuals need to know how their work will change and what is expected of them. Team leaders should be as honest and explicit and involve employees in the process (Jones et al 2004; Heathfield n.d.; Motivation 2005). References Accel Team, 2007, Elton Mayos Hawthorne Experiment, ACCEL, viewed 13 January 2008, http://www.accel-team.com/motivation/hawthorne_01.html. Backer, P.R. 1998, Scientific Management, viewed 13 January 2008, http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/pabacker/scientific_mgt.htm Belbins Team Roles, 2007, ChangingMinds.org, viewed 13 January 2008, http://changingminds.org/explanations/preferences/belbin.htm Change Management, 2008, teamtechnology.co.uk, viewed 14 January 2008, http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/changemanagement.html Famous Models: Stages of Group Development, 2001, Chimaera Consulting Limited, viewed 14 January 2008, http://www.chimaeraconsulting.com/tuckman.htm Gowler, D. Legge, K. and Clegg, C, 1993, Organizational Behaviour and Human Resource Management, 2nd edition, Paul Chapman Publishers, London. Heathfield, S. M., n.d. Strategy, Planning, and Communication during Change, About.com, viewed 14 January 2008, http://humanresources.about.com/od/changemanagement/a/change_wisdom.htm Johnson, R.W., 2007, Managerial Attitudes Toward Older Workers: A Review of the Evidence, The Urban Institute, 1-34, viewed 14 January 2008, http://www.urbaninstitute.org/UploadedPDF/411548_managerial_attitudes.pdf Jones, J Aquirre, D and Calderone, M., 2004, 10 Principles of Change Management, 1-5, strategy+business magazine, viewed 14 January 2008, http://www.strategy-business.com/resilience/rr00006?pg=all Manktelow, J., Belbins Team Roles, 2003, Mind Tools, viewed 14 January 2008, http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_83.htm Motivation and Leadership, 2005, MBA Publishing Limited, viewed 14 January 2008, http://www.thetimes100.co.uk/theory/theory--motivation-leadership--265.php Neill, J. 2004, What Are the Stages of Group Development? Group Dynamics, viewed 14 January 2008, http://wilderdom.com/group/StagesGroupDevelopment.html Nishan, W. 2001, What Are the Characteristics of a Group, viewed 13 January 2008, ABE, http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:5SLRim7vPIEJ:www.nishanw.org/groups.doc+Belbin+tuckman+hawthorne&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=8 An Overview of Management Theory, 2001, kernsanalysis.com, viewed 14 January 2008, http://kernsanalysis.com/sjsu/ise250/history.htm Pino, L. J., 2004, Foundation of Human Relations Theory Part II. Money Makers of America, viewed 13 January 2008, http://www.moneymakersofamerica.com/archive.aspx?ID=3a4b28ba-00f4-4634-b13a-ec76733b9777 Srivastava, P. and Frankwick, G.L., 2005, Top Management Attitude and Inter-organizational Learning: The Moderating Effect of Environmental Uncertainty, Association of Collegiate Marketing Educators, 228-236, viewed 14 January 2008, http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/research/acme/2005/36.pdf Read More