Slade Plating Case Management Summary

Slade Plating Case Management Summary

Despite the success of the Slade Company as manufacturer of metal

products designed for industrial application, the production manager,

Ralph Porter, was concerned about the dishonesty among employees in

the Plating Department. Some of the workers were misusing the punch

in-out system for those who wanted to leave early or arrive late.

Given the long working hour and low payment, they lacked of motivation

in performing their tasks, resulting in the dishonest action. However,

because of informal groupings among some of them, they operated as a

team to work harder doing peak orders. Therefore, the desired output

of the department was still satisfied. Yet, some employees who were

not in the main group were slack off and misused the system even

during the peak period, which potentially resulted in internal

conflict in the department. Thus, in order to motivate employees and

prevent the dishonesty, we propose to remove punch in-out system and

launch a better payment system with both financial and non-financial

incentives. Also, the working environment should be improved with

various campaigns to enhance the unity in the department. We also move

an employee who could not perform fully his talent to other department

to maximize his capacity. With these solutions, the Slade Company

could motivate their employees, encourage the teamwork, avoid internal

conflict, and finally increase the productivity in the Plating

Department.

Analyzing the present situation

There were 38 workers in the Plating Department of the Slade Company.

Their jobs, working conditions, values and tasks varied significantly.

They were all dependent on each other as they only received their

workload after work at the previous stage was done. Work was

supervised by a punch in-out system and a supervisor, Otto Schell.

Payment was low and the working hours were long due to the company

policy to keep training and benefit cost down by requiring overtime

instead of hiring new workers. In addition, informal groupings were

formed in the department, which significantly affected the daily run

of the work. The largest group was the Sarto group, which could

practically influence the whole department as others tended to copy

this group’s ideas and values. Without doubt, this group was a real

driving force of the department, both ...

... middle of paper ...

...

However, for Herman Schell, he is found to be inappropriate and

non-manageable and thus to be removed from the department, to say,

“promoted” to other department to maximize his personal abilities and

talents that we unfortunately cannot utilize in this department. This,

we acknowledge, is a very easy and usually not the manager’s way to

solve an issue like that. But we believe we just identified the case

when a significant and sustainable change is not likely at all and by

getting rid of him would eliminate the conflict source from the group

and enhance group dynamics on the floor in all. Of course, a con to

that is the feeling of safety, the lifetime job experience of the

workers. Yet, we believe this does not endanger the good workers’

positions and therefore does not pose threat to the regular employee.

A reason why he might not have been sacked before – apart from the

general practice of the department – is probably the family ties to

Otto Schell, the supervisor. In our opinion, such ties can be good but

in no way shall be hindering performance, and this shall not be a base

for delivering improper results both professionally and personally in

the workplace.