Why do you think the autocratic approach worked so effectively for four years in this situation?
I think the autocratic approach worked for four years because it just took that long for the effects of the rigid management to work its way down to the supervisors and employees. In regards to the production level of the mill being low when the new plant manager arrived this probably put employees on the spot of fear of losing their jobs. This therefore increasing production. With the new management, style put in place with strict rules this changed the authority from being lax to tight allowing at first people to come together and get on the same page. In time, the authority and responsibilities was taken away from supervisors so employees are
…show more content…
First of the biggest problems is the fact that there is no trust from the mill manager. Trust is necessary in anything you do in business. The issue with not having trust is that it does not allow the opportunity to delegate tasks and levels of management are bypassed.
This said there are so many levels of management. According to the organizational chart, there are seven levels of managers or supervisors above the employees. With there being so many levels the issue here is, all levels seem to have a different set of expectations for each other that communication is a mess. In this case, there is too many levels of management.
Another problem is that employees do not accept the supervisors’ job in return not accepting their authority. The issue with this is that supervisors’ having little authority is useless because even the higher supervisors do not support it.
Therefore, in the end I feel that trust, communication and too many levels of management are the biggest problems leading to no acceptance of authority and lower production.
Develop a set of recommendations that you or your consulting team will present to the mill manager. Include suggestions regarding his leadership
…show more content…
Doing this would also would allow the authority to be widespread doing away with the dictator style that middle managers felt existed.
Next, it is clear that communication is a big problem as foremen do not feel like upper management is hearing them likewise top management does not feel like the foremen understand them. With this being the case, they need to hold a meeting for all employees and managers. During the meeting, they need to be specific with the expectations of all employees managers included. The holding another meeting individually with each manager to set production goals.
Lastly, I would defiantly recommend taking some team building exercises with all of the managers to improve the trust issues at hand that the mill manager has with his management. When they are able to build trust and gain some authority in reasonable quantity this should eliminate a lot of the low morale and encourage empowerment by motivation with managers and employees alike, thereby increasing production that is lacking in this
The primary problem would be the structure of the organization. This is due to the fact that there are thirteen departments in total which would lead to the failure of the ability to concentrate on long term viability of the business.
... Chet, as Plant Manager, to operate more efficiently, the change must be implemented to empower employees to make their own decisions and feel confident in doing their work without constant assurance. Every employee and supervisor must be retrained so they are clear on their job description and their responsibilities. Chet will have more time to work on his own projects and feel like an effective Plant Manager at the end of each workday. This change will increase the plant's productivity and the entire staff's satisfaction and development. The important part of instilling the change is to make it transparent to all the members of the organization, ensure they embrace the change, offer and receive frequent feedback from employees, practice effective communication to all the members, and conduct performance appraisals to ensure productivity is meeting company standards.
Something as simple as working with the customers is a major part of management. When the plant was having problems with its throughput, instead of changing their whole system to keep things the same for their customers, they asked the customers if they would be alright with having a change in their products from the plant. The customers loved their idea and agreed to go ahead with the change. This shows that sometimes it’s okay to take risks by asking the customers if they’re alright with
First, I would recommend eliminating a few levels of management and redefining what each position is to do (an idea the mill manager already had in terms of rewriting job descriptions). Based on the chart provided in the text book on page 158, I feel that eliminating the Production
Within an organization one of the key tools that they use is that of: communication. Communication is a primary key to any organization and without it there is no cohesion, no leadership, and no functionality. As communication begins to diminish, so does the organization – as one article puts it: “These new economic…. imperatives have significantly contributed to the demise of the old classic command-and-control bureaucracy…” (Tiernan et al, 2002, 47-48). From what this article states, the lack of communication has led to a semi-collapse of the mechanistic structure of an organization. Though communication does seem like a huge factor of an organization, communication does not come without its troubles within the inter-organizations; if there is communication going on in a company, there is going to also be a lack of communication. When a company has employed thousands of people (or maybe just a small amount) they are hiring a whole selection of individuals to work as whole group in unity – though this does seem like an amazing idea, these sets of individuals will have quite ...
Another problem is ineffective communication. According Herman Aguinis, managers should listen to others, process the information and communicate effectively. They should also instill trust and provide proper direction to their team. As leaders, they should guide, develop and motivate to im...
The main problems that are affecting the company were the high level of labour turnover, below target production rates, high levels of scrap, the employees had little input in the decision making, therefore resulting in low motivation and job satisfaction, and didn't have enough feedback on there performance. Added to this was the conflict between the supervisors and employees in the production and packing areas, and the grading and payment levels wasn't satisfactory to the employees.
3. The contributing factors to their ineffectiveness were poor planning and leadership. The company grew to quickly. In their desire to grow and expand, the company’s senior management did not establish and follow ethical practices that would sustain the company. Controls were not established in key places, such as, accounting practices and principles. Senior management failed to appropriately manage the activities of lower level managers and set a bad example.
...ially our management team, many of the issues brought to my office may be avoided. The problem begins with a lack of communication and our management team does not seem to ask the right questions to get to the bottom of the lack of communication within their areas.
Stagnation can also become a problem. When every decision has to go through a manager and every function is scrutinized to the core, creativity dies a slow, steady death. Employees become unwilling to step forward with suggestions for process improvements. They may
The main problem here was the inability of the company to introspect and understand the changing
Another reason for failure, according to Buono & Bowditch (2003) is that managers should not underestimate the people issues that might arise and neither the cultural aspects.
It is very clear that the problems experienced in the companies are not lone standing but in most of the cases they are dependent on each other and there are strong bonds or relationships with regards to the cause and effects between them. It is therefore important to form or establish a strong cause and affect between them.
Each individual is and will always be different. When you look at a company as a whole, sometimes a problem, does not have a one size fits all solution. In this case, the CEO needs to realize that while all of the employees are having their basic needs met, there are small steps that could increase the amount of higher order needs being met.
Effective communication is more than just barking orders, or speaking loud that makes every person afraid. It is the ability to have the words spoken processed in the minds of the workers, which will enable them to carry out their assign tasks with a very small number of hindrances. Often times there is a failure in communication once lower-level management departs meetings with higher echelons, that often leads to loss in money. “What is important is that the parties recognize the misunderstanding and address it rather than allow it to evolve into a more damaging level of conflict” (Runde & Fanagan, 2007). Not only does misunderstanding lead to conflict between supervisors and employee, when tasks are not clearly stated it can lead to conflict between workers trying to accomplish day to day operations. This starts with the entire organization understanding and using feedback in not only corporate meetings, but in all facets of the company. One way top level management could ensure this is being put into practice on a regular basis is, perform random checks with lower-level workers.