Management Decision Making
Part A
I) Workplace Issue
The management decision issue arose when a processed food company decided to implement quality improvement measures. To achieve this objective, the head office sent a team to investigate the processing plant’s poor performance. The plant has been established ten years ago but this has never achieved the targeted levels of profitability and productivity, which was expected by the company. The investigation was quite extensive covering all areas of plan management and operation. Results of the investigation identified various problems in the processing plant. First problem is the poor use of plan equipment and labour resources because not all equipment was being used and workers are concentrated in a number of manufacturing areas while other areas were undermanned. Second problem is inadequate means for equipment and plan maintenance. It turned out that the reason why some of the equipment was not being used is because some equipment were overused until these broke down and then discarded before using the other equipment. Equipment maintenance schedules were sparingly made, only once every quarter when the usual industry schedule should be daily for basic equipment check-ups and weekly for major checks to ensure that equipment is always in top shape. Third problem is poor record keeping of plant operations from levels of production, quality measures, yields and wastage. There was poor communication between the supervisor, middle management, and floor management making it difficult to actually arrive at a precise record of operations information. Fourth problem is the abuse of the plant’s shift system by workers who insisted on one shift to the discontent of other workers who were assigned to the grave yard shift when the policy should have been rotating shifts every two weeks to ensure the wellbeing of plan workers. A comprehensive report was provided to the plant manager. Attached to the report were also a set of recommendations for actions to address these problems.
During the deliberations between the investigating team from head office and the plant manager, the plant manager opted for an improvement plan able to target instant results. The plant manager propounded that efforts should be centred on simple operational issues requiring attention so that the plant will be able to minimize budget deficits in the current financial year. The investigating team argued in favour of systematic overhaul of fundamental processes to target long term improvements. The difference in opinion was not settled and the parties were not able to reach an agreement amenable to both parties. This eventually led to the investigating team being banned by the manager from the plant premises. To bridge the parties, a lower-level manager was made to handle the dispute by acting as reporting links between the two parties.
II) Metaphors
Based on the organizational issue arising in the plant factory, there arise dominant and dependent metaphors that help in analysing the issue. According to Flood and Jackson (1991) and Jackson (2000), in a holistic systems intervention particularly in problem solving, the utilization of metaphor systems help in creative thinking encompassing the organization and the complex issues that managers face. These metaphors are then linked to various systems methodologies (Banat, 1988). By applying this tool, managers are able to cover various problem characteristics in a thorough manner using different perspectives (Jackson, 2000).
Concurrently, Flood and Jackson (1991) also identified three major phases of systems thinking and intervention. First phase is creativity that includes the tasks of identifying objectives, concerns and issues, utilising system metaphors, and linking dependent and dominant metaphors to enhance understanding of major problems. Second phase is choice that involves the tasks of determining the appropriate system intervention methodologies in solving the issues, utilising system of systems methodologies (Sums) that relates metaphors with methodologies, and selection of dependent and dominant methodologies for use in intervention. Third phase is implementation that covers the tasks of arriving at specific change proposal, implementation of systems methodologies based on systems intervention logic, and facilitating a highly responsive and coordinated intervention.
Based on the circumstances resulting to the organisational issue, the two metaphors of transformation and interaction arise with transformation as the dominant metaphor and interaction as the dependent metaphor.
Dominant Metaphor
Transformation pertains to the sought after organisational change by the food processing plant. Organisational change is the rightful objective since the problem in the processing plant is quite comprehensive covering resources utilisation, production processes, and human resource management. Although the plant was adequately resourced with equipment and employees, these were not used efficiently either singly or in precise combination to achieve the targeted production levels. This resulted to the degradation of resources due to over-utilisation or under-utilisation. Operating processes were poorly executed so that even with a clearly defined process, the plant was not able to consistently follow the process in order to meet targeted production levels. Human resource management is poorly executed because this resulted to the workers abusing the shift process when there was a policy to ensure equal treatment for all workers and prevent feelings of discontent or unfair feelings from the plant’s workforce.
This became a metaphor because even if the food processing plant wants an organisation change, the change was without precise direction. The organisation becomes akin to Northrop, a two-headed dog in Greek mythology. The only difference is that the tow heads cannot agree over the direction that the company would take. As long as the two heads cannot agree on a single direction or pace, the body cannot comply or follow through with the direction of the head. In the food processing plant, the investigating team sent by the head office constituted one head while the plant manager constituted the other head. Although both parties wanted change in the organisation, particularly in its plant operation, the parties were not able to agree on what solution to follow and more so how to implement the solution. In Greek mythology, although Northrop was portrayed as neither good nor bad, in the end this creature was slain by Hercules as part of his labours. This would also be the fate of the food processing plant. If it will not be able to decide on a unified solution, then it will eventually be killed if not naturally die with the emergence of other food processing plants with more effective systems.
Food processing industry is a highly competitive business because of ease of entry especially of larger firms with sufficient resources to support the investment as well as internal competencies that supports the creation of value for the company. If the food processing plant will not be able to address its internal issues, then it will not be able to implement a unified, directed and responsive solution to meet its production level targets as a short term goal and overhaul the organisation to support sustainability as a long term goal. Organization transformation through change without a focus or direction is futile.
Dependent Metaphor
Interaction is the dependent metaphor based on the issues arising in the food processing plant. Collaboration pertains to process-linked relationship engaged into by different parties in order to accomplish common goals. This may also be considered as the process involving individuals, groups and systems working at a task or tasks at a higher level than mere coordination. This then involves joint planning, resource sharing, and joint task management and occurs only in instances when there arises a shared understanding of issues, mutual trust, open communication, and high tolerance for divergent perspectives. (Matisse and Nielsen, 2000) The result should be clearly defined set of solutions targeted to achieve predetermined objectives.
Although the food processing plant seeks to achieve collaboration in problem solving, the effort became a metaphor when it proceeded to accomplish this activity without utilising effective communication as facilitator. This is like putting a blind and mute person as partners who do not know about the condition of the other and they do not have a common means of communication. The result would be the accomplishment of a different task, the non-completion of the task, or the engagement of the parties of the time allotted to them trying to express their ideas even if the other party cannot comprehend the ideas expressed.
This is expressed in the fact that when the investigative team was sent by the head office to the plant, this constituted an imposition on plant management rather than an invitation. This implied that even if the problem lies in the management of the plant, the solution finds source in the head office. Although, the plant manager was informed that an investigative team will arrive at the plant, he was not consulted beforehand regarding the problems arising in the plant and the reasons for the inability of the plant to meet targeted production levels. This meant that the plant manager, although in charge of plant operations was not considered as an important player in the investigation.
Apart from the isolation of the plant manager in the investigation, the investigative team also excluded the other members of the plant management staff such as the middle and floor managers with first hand information on the different tasks and activities in the plant. The investigation process became a ‘them and us’ situation with an exclusionary effect. The investigative team converse about plant operations among themselves while the plant management discuss among them. In effect, there was no sharing of information or educational process and the report was solely based on the perceptions of the investigative team without in-depth and long term exposure to plant operations.
In addition, prior and during the investigative process, there was no agreement between the plant management and the investigative team over the process that will occur, the role or participation of each party, and the expected outcome. This is important to ensure the full cooperation of the parties involved in providing information needed in decision-making. The result is that the plant management becomes weary of the investigation process since they do not know what to expect while the investigative team is completely in the dark about where to begin and how to gather information since they have not been exposed to plant operations. Lack of involvement of the parties who are key and direct players in plant operations in the investigation decreases the validity and reliability of the report and the recommendations based on the report.
Moreover, the investigative and plant management team got carried away in a tribal battle instead of addressing head-on the problems identified in the plant. The improvement process was diverted to clashes of opinion that failed to result to learning. According to John (1992), the influence of a conflict to an organization relatively depends upon the type of conflict, which are either relational or task conflict. An adverse relationship arises between relational conflict and productivity as well as with group satisfaction. This is because relational conflicts intervene in task accomplishment when the organization members become engrossed in power relations such as threat minimisation, power enhancement, and cohesion instead of the group targeting issues as a single entity. Concurrently, John, North craft and Neal (1999) provide that relational conflict minimises interpersonal understanding preventing the group from accomplishing the problem solving process. If most of the time of the organisational members is allocated to interpersonal issues instead of the process of decision-making, then improvement efforts suffer. John (1992) explains that on the contrary, task conflict results to creativity and innovativeness because different perspectives result to the determination of various solution options to ensure that the organisation is able to come up with the best option appropriate to its problem context.
Linking Dominant & Dependent Metaphors
Transformation is the dominant metaphor and interaction is the dependent metaphor because understanding the latter involves the consideration of the former as context and the latter problem fall under the former issue. Organisational transformation is an all-encompassing issue that include a variety of issues such as company culture, resource allocation, plant processes, management systems, assessment measures, tools, and other areas covered by the transformation. Understanding the dominant metaphor leads to the clarification of the dependent metaphor while the comprehension of the dependent metaphor contributes to the understanding of the dominant metaphor. In the case of the food processing company, knowing the manner that the organisation works coupled with the underlying principles explaining its workings gives rise to the reasons for the difficulties in collaboration while the issue of collaboration provides one of the reasons for the difficulty of the plant management and the investigative team to come up with a unified solution to its operations problems.
The figure below shows the relationship between the dominant and dependent metaphor that also serves as the guide for selecting the methodology that applies to the problem. Thus, directed organisational transformation coupled with collaboration facilitated by effective communication should reverse the failure of the plant management and the investigative team to come-up with unified, responsive and effective improvement activities.
In the dominant metaphor, the fusion of the two heads into a single decision-making entity would strengthen the mind-to-body coordination of thoughts to action. The organisation functions more efficiently if the head provides a single direction instead of two heads directing the body to move in different directions.
In the dependent metaphor, providing a common means of communication through computer assisted software able to voice out the ideas typed by the deaf and translates into readable text the ideas expressed by the blind would make the team work or team mates. With a common means of communication, the group members are able to express their ideas clearly and the parties do not have to experience frustration in explaining their ideas to the other party and misinterpreting the silence as lack of assent.
III) System of Systems Methodologies (Sums)
Under the system of systems methodologies, there are different methodologies applicable to problems depending upon the classification of the metaphors as either simple or complex and the attitude of the parties involved in the metaphors as unitary, pluralist or coercive. According to the criteria discussed by Flood and Jackson (1991) in determining classification of the system expressed by the metaphors, the system of the food processing plant is complex because the organisation is large and there are many systems being applied, there is also loose organisation and strong interactions, and the organisation is governed probabilistically.
Flood and Jackson (1991) also provide for means of classifying systems according to key features as well as the appropriate methodology that applies to the specific context. The case of the food processing plant shows that the system is pluralist because of the parties involved in the system and the beneficiary parties of system implementation. Based on the table below, the food processing plant has the methodology option of applying interactive planning covered by the soft systems methodology.
Since, the system characteristic of the food processing plant is complex-pluralist the methodology that applies is soft systems. This methodology applies to the given situational context because of the several underlying concepts of the methodology that capture the situation of the food processing plant.
First concept is the concentration of efforts toward the horizontal aspects of the system (Keys, 1988). This pertains to the need to focus on the relationship between equal parties involved in the system, the investigative group and the plant management with diverging ideas. This means that the parties should work more on interactive relationships in order to strengthen the working relationship between them to come-up with a unified solution. Second concept is the handling of disagreements, which is the primary role of systems thinking (Check land and Scholes, 1990). If the source of the differences in opinion, ideas and values is addressed, then the disagreements may be minimized or the conflict would be limited only to task conflicts that support creativity and innovativeness in systems solutions. Third concept is the exploration of purposes that serves as the unifying factor for the conflicting parties (Keys, 1988). If the investigative group and the management team agree on a set of objectives, then this would support the transition into a more purposive interaction. Fourth concept is the recognition of varying beliefs and values (Mingress and Taylor, 1992) so that there is need to focus attention on accommodating differences to gain the commitment of different parties to the set of objectives for organizational change. Fifth concept is systematic learning process generated by the exchange and respect of ideas (Howell, 2000) so that the parties involved in the problem situation are able to achieve a high level of appreciation of the value of other people’s views. Sixth concept is consensus building among the parties involved (Mangers and Taylor, 1992). This involves a high degree of tolerance for other people’s opinions to in order to derive the best recognized solution to the problematic situation.
Thus, soft systems methodology sufficiently addresses the metaphors of undirected organisational transformation and collaboration without communications through the application of the learning approach that involves tolerance, respect and accommodation of differences in opinion. These in turn support the development of solutions for organisational change and enhance effective communications when the parties are open to the contribution of the other party.
Part B
At the heart of a learning organization is a shift of mind “from seeing ourselves as separate from the world to connected to the world, from seeing problems as caused by someone or something out there to seeing how our actions create the problems we experience. A learning organization is a place where people are continually discovering how they create their reality and how they change.” (Singe, 1990, pp. 12-13) Critically discuss how the previous quotation is relevant to your own business organization.
Singe (1990) captures a description of a learning organisation as a living organism that is able to chart its course, direct itself towards that course, and make the necessary adjustments in the process. This means that organisations are active participants in the achievement of its goals and the solution to its problems (Bowman and Deal, 1997) and change agents (Singe et al., 1999) because of the learning it obtains from the continuous process of commencing and completing various projects, facing and addressing problems, and changing or enhancing existing systems and processes.
Singe (1990) defines learning organisations as groups “where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning to see the whole together” (p. 3). The underlying concept behind this definition is that amidst the life span or business cycle of organisations, they face rapidly changing situations so that only the organisations and organisations members who are adaptive, flexible and productive enough are able to excel. To achieve an organisation that is adaptive, flexible and productive, it should be able to draw the commitment and capability of its members to learn from its experiences.
In application to the food processing company, it will be able to survive the competitive environment necessary to change its current processes and systems only if it motivates its members to consciously derive learning from its contextual experiences. If the managers are open and highly committed to learning, they become open to other perspectives, ideas and values. In processing these aspects of differences, they are able to make value judgments whether to accept or reject fully or in part other peoples’ ideas as well as whether to abandon their ideas in favour of the ideas of others or integrate various ideas. In effect, the respect and accommodation of ideas minimises unnecessary and unproductive conflicts.
Since the process is highly interactive, managers adhering to the learning approach then become conscious of their part as contributing members to the organisation and not just single deciding entities. As a member of an organisation, a manager influences the organisation in the same manner that the organisation influences the attitudes and behaviour of the manager. In the case of the plant manager, applying the learning approach could have made him more active in the investigative process. Although, he was not consulted regarding the investigation, he could have welcomed this as part of the learning process to improve plan operations. Even if he does not agree with the decision to the head office to conduct an investigation without his involvement, he could have communicated his concerns to the head office prior or during the investigation instead of alienating himself from the investigating team. By communicating his concerns, the head office gains knowledge on his perspectives and could have considered his vital participation in the deliberations over the appropriate solutions. The head office, in applying the learning approach, it recognises the necessary participation of the plant management in the investigation process because of the common objective of wanting to improve production levels. In doing so, the plant management would not isolate or alienate the investigative team and instead cooperate in the process to ensure that comprehensive information is gathered and the recommendations are accurately based on the true accounts of plant operations.
The result of the implementation of the learning approach is the implementation of self-assessment and assessment of individual participation relative to the organisation that are necessary in accountability. Accountability in leadership pertains to an individual’s recognition and acknowledgement of responsibility for decision and actions coupled with the provision of reports and explanations as well as answering for consequences. (Dupree, 1990)
In the case of the plant manager, perhaps the necessity of conducting an investigation without his participation came about because of his inability to hold accountability for the poor performance of the plant for ten years. If the head office receives regular reports that detail the factors that cause the inability of the plan to meet productivity levels and the actions taken by the manager to address these problems, then there would be no need to conduct an investigation. It could also happen that the head office is looking for a fall guy due to its ability to provide good leadership to support the needs and objectives of plant operations. If this is the case, then the exclusion of the plant manager from the investigation is intended to prevent the manager from knowing the real intent of the investigation.
However, if the organisation applies the learning approach as part of the company’s values, there would be accountability from the different key players in the food processing operations. The head office constantly evaluates its leadership decisions and actions relative to the plant operations; the plant manager takes responsibility in implementing company policies assessing plant performance, and enhancing plan operations; the middle managers take charge of linking the plant manager decisions to the state of floor operations; and workers compliant with organisational policies.
Thus, with recognition that organisation members are change agents as they are objects of change, learning is maximised leading to the optimisation of adaptability, flexibility and productivity. As change agents and active participants in the organisation, organisation members not only find purpose in understanding their inevitable role in the organisation but also their fulfilment in knowing they are able to create change to improve the organisation. Ultimately, the organisation benefits by becoming a learning organisation.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment