Search This Blog

Friday, 5 January 2018

Decision Analysis: Davidson and Alpha Plantations

1.0 Identifying main decisions/issues
Alpha is faced with a prospect of dwindling profitability as a result of the plummeting of world oil prices and Davidson’s main challenge is to return the company to profitability in light of the prevailing circumstances. After a close examination of the situation, Davidson decides to adopt a two-pronged solution whose components were: improving cost effectiveness by cutting waste and refining operational procedures; and improving productivity through enhanced performance standards and motivation.

The first component was implemented by putting installing new technologies that would help in minimising the level of wastage in the organisation. Steps aimed at improving productivity focused on empowering teams and providing them with tighter targets to encourage them to work to their full potential. These are crucial ways of motivating employees. However, subsequent altercations with the head mill supervisor Mr Ang and his resultant dismissal led to the plummeting of employee morale with all efforts aimed at motivating them proving futile. Motivating employees to master the new systems and work to their full potential is therefore Davidson’s main challenge at this point.

The approaches proposed were expected to have the overall effect of improving the profitability of the organisation despite the low prices of products.

2.0 Analysis of Issues and Decisions
2.1 Contextual background for decisions made
The decision making process is a complex process that involves finding solutions for problems ailing individuals and organisations with the main steps being problem recognition, setting objectives, generating alternatives and selecting the most viable alternatives before implementing and monitoring the implementation to gauge success or failure of the same (Gitman, 2005).

Even though the company’s problems are introduced as external, the problems at Alpha plantations were both internal and external. The internal environment in organisations refers to factors within the control of the organisation such as operational efficiency, productivity, possession of required skills and possession of the right technologies (Sabherwal, 2011). External factors on the other hand are factors beyond the control of organisations and could include political, economic, legal, environmental and technological factors. Economic factors could include economic instabilities and price fluctuations in the market among others. In oft times, organisations are tempted to focus on the difficulties posed by the external factors without concentrating on internal factors that may be contributing to their predicaments.

In the case of Alpha Plantations, the external factors are mainly economic where the prices of oil prices had plummeted causing the prices of palm oil to dip as well. As a result, the company’s profitability was threatened. One main characteristic of external factors is that they are beyond the control of the organisations affected. For instance, Alpha’s options were very limited in terms of influencing the pricing of their products and this prompted focus on the internal environment for solutions. It is not uncommon for organisations to turn to their internal environments when faced with heightened rivalry whose effect is often the downward movement of average product prices. Internal efficiency brings operational costs to a minimum hence allowing an organisation to charge lower prices for their products and maintain profitability.

2.2 Decision element I: Improving productivity
Productivity can be defined as the output per unit input. In other words, higher levels of productivity involve larger outputs with lower amounts of inputs both in terms of labour and other inputs. In most cases, productivity is used interchangeably with labour productivity which generally equates the amount of input to the number of employees employed in an organisation (Hilmola, 2005; O’Brien and Weder, 2003). An organisation that produces more with fewer employees can be said to be more productive.

Davidson’s approach to improve the level of productivity was to reorganise the working teams that were more independent and which were provided with more stringent performance targets. The raised performance targets were ostensibly introduced to push employees into working harder and producing more. Performance targets have been known to help in improving the performance of employees especially where objective appraisal systems are in place and where the rewards for good performance are good.

Davidson however fails to implement his idea on cutting down on the number of staff and instead simply introduces new technology. One of the main advantages of cutting down staff is the ability of the exercise to instil a culture of achievement and high productivity in organisations. This is of course in addition to the reduction of the wage bill. This failure to shake up staffing could be said to be partly responsible for the continued difficulty in the organisation.

2.3 Decision element II: Improving employee motivation
Employee morale is said to be a crucial determinant of the productivity of employees. Decisions to improve productivity must therefore factor in employee morale/motivation as well. Employees can be motivated by a number of factors in organisations with the main factors being monetary rewards, compliments, empowerment, provision of a healthy workplace, involvement in decision making and others (Althouse, et al., 2011). Motivation can also be enhanced by introducing challenging goals that could provoke an employee to work at achieving it. A motivated employee in turn puts in their best efforts and improves productivity levels significantly.

Davidson targets employee motivation by granting some level of autonomy to the working teams. This is a break from their previous experiences where they would basically be dictated to on how to work and therefore never owned the process. In addition to this, challenging targets are introduced to get employees to strive to work harder and raise their outputs. However, these approaches fail to produce the desired results due to lack of total change from the old system to the new one.

2.4 Decision element III: Improving operational efficiency and cost effectiveness
The introduction of new machines and technology was aimed at cutting down on wastage. Waste eats into the profitability and its minimisation implies that fewer raw materials are used hence lowering operation costs. The automation properties of new technologies also enable fewer employees to produce the desired output hence allowing the organisation the liberty to do away with excess staff (Baik, et al, 2010). New machines also tend to breakdown less often hence requiring lower maintenance expenditure while contributing to the high quality of products. Davidson introduces new machinery and technology to achieve this goal.

Operational efficiency on the other hand refers to the ability of the organisation to operate flawlessly and to the desired standards (Hejna and Hosking, 2004). This calls for the resolution of bottlenecks that could halt production from time to time and ensure that the time allocated for production is fully utilised in the production processes. This calls for elimination of unnecessary stoppages and scheduling maintenance activities in a manner that does not interfere with normal operations.

Having identified that there were unnecessary stoppages in the work, it is expected that the new shifts would be organised in a manner that ensures that no unnecessary interruptions in production are borne to make room for maintenance. This assumption is made based on the observation that maintenance interruptions are not mentioned among the issues dogging the company after the raft of reforms were implemented.

2.5 Hitches in implementation and analysis of decisions to be made
Flaws in the smooth implementation of the plans appear to be related in part to the manner in which the whole process was undertaken. Davidson appeared to ignore the principles of organisational change as well as the importance of employee involvement in initiating major changes in organisations. A change in the organisational culture where systems of operations would change significantly appears to have been little understood even by the head mill supervisor and this signifies inadequate or absence of discussion of the same (Burnes, Cooper and West, 2003). This is exhibited clearly when employees declare that they would support Davidson out of trust even if they did not understand his approach. Employee empowerment and involvement is a crucial component of employee motivation. It enables them to own the process and do their best in understanding and implementing it. This element of dedication is lacking and could be attributed to lack of involvement from the very beginning.

Organisational change management principles also call for a diagnosis of employees’ current roles and a description of how such roles are meant to differ under the new systems. Mr Ang was already used to a hands-on approach in managing the production facility. He was therefore foreign to the idea of stepping back and letting his subordinates make mistakes and learn from them. This causes him to interfere with the learning processes of the teams through his frequent interventions and authoritative approach in directing groups. In the end, the creativity and commitment of the teams is not improved and the high targets set cannot be achieved.

Davidson also fails to appreciate that Mr Ang is a non-managerial staff and is therefore not likely to be well versed with the essentials promoting natural growth in autonomous groups. He simply knew how to exercise active control and take personal responsibility of all eventualities. Identification of employee training needs is very good in change implementation in organisations. Any changes require that certain skills be possessed by employees and it is the responsibility of the managers to ensure that the same is done. Davidson also fails to handle the situation with Mr Ang properly when he makes the decision to dismiss him after a disagreement. He ought to have appreciated the fact that Mr Ang was a source of inspiration to the rest of the workers who would the feel disheartened by his departure. The process of getting Mr Ang to act within expectation would certainly have been easier than the daunting task facing him of ensuring that employee morale and productivity is raised substantially.

In the present circumstance, Davidson could either reinstate Mr Ang to restore employee morale or employ other avenues such as empowerment, greater involvement and reward systems to restore employee morale. Even though the first option would have an immediate effect, it would entrench indiscipline in the organisation. Besides, it would signify a return to the status quo where one person held all the technical information in the organisation. Upholding the decision to dismiss Mr Ang would leave a vacuum in terms of knowledge of the operations and this would prompt team members to embrace greater involvement in resolving the problems. Even though this option would be costly in the short term, it is likely to be more beneficial to the organisation in the long run.

3.0 Discussion of Alternatives
Improvement of motivation and subsequent productivity of employees could have been done very adopting a more consultative approach to problem resolution. Involving employees would have led to wastage of time as it would have taken longer for them to adopt the ideas as is common with group solutions. However, it is this discussion that would have enabled the employees to embrace the new system and give their all to ensure that the systems are implemented as they should. Davidson’s attitude towards employee involvement is also seen in his handling of Mr Ang who was an important asset to the organisation and a source of inspiration to fellow employees. The implementation hitches that resulted from Mr Ang’s poor understanding of a new system could have been prevented by ensuring that Ang is well trained for his new role. His objectives would change from being responsible for the smooth running of the machines to the smooth operation and independence of the reconstituted teams.

There is also little mention of reward systems for employees despite the introduction of very high targets. Rewards are very effective tools for promoting higher productivity levels in organisations. However, the excessive use of rewards have been decried as counterproductive especially where the improvement in productivity is overshadowed by the amount spent in rewarding the employees. Davidson would have to deal with higher wages through rewards and this could threaten the profitability he wishes to improve through enhanced productivity.

The decision to cut wastes by introducing new machines and automation was well founded. However, it was only implemented halfway. The automation was expected to have the effect of reducing the demand for labour and this would have made it necessary for the organisation to retrench some of its employees. This would have had the effect of lowering employee morale substantially. However, since retrenchment would have been based on productivity, this would have had the effect of highlighting the importance of productivity and provide a motivation for employees to secure their jobs through enhanced productivity.

4.0 Recommendations
Organisational change is bound to occur from time to time and managers should be able to apply the changes systematically for it to be effective. The decision making process is the first step in organisational change where the manager diagnoses the problems in the organisation and maps a way forward (Branson, 2008). The decisions would then need to be introduced into the organisation in a manner that ensures that employee participation is maximised.

The implementation process should begin with getting employees to embrace change by making the need for urgent change imperative and getting them to appreciate that things have to be done differently if the organisation is to survive. Discussions would then be initiated on the different approaches that could be adopted before the decisions arrived at by top management are introduced in form of proposals and their viability determined (Vakola, Soderquist and Prastacos, 2007). Ratification of such proposals would be crucial in getting employees to own them and participate fully in implementing them.

Once proposals have been identified, the roles individual employees are identified. A diagnosis of skills needed vis-à-vis skills possessed is done and training needs identified. Training is crucial in implementing change in organisations. A good example is the poor performance of Mr Ang whose performance and subsequent disappointments led to his dismissal. A skilled employee of his stature and expertise was an asset to the organisation and had he been better prepared for his new role, the implementation would have yielded the desired results.

As can be seen, the diagnosis done by Davidson was accurate and so were his proposed solutions to the problems of the organisation. However, the implementation process was not as smooth and it is therefore recommended that better application of the principles of organisational change be done to ensure effective implementation and delivery on the desired goals.


Referees
Althouse, N., Rose, S., Allan, L., Gitman, C.M., 2011. The Future of Business. 3RD Ed. Nielson
Baik, B., Chae, J., Choi, S., Farber, D.B., 2010. Changes in Operational Efficiency and Firm Performance: A Frontier Analysis Approach.  SSRN Working Paper Series, Sep 2010
Branson, C.M., 2008. Achieving organisational change through values alignment. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(3), pp. 376-395
Burnes, B., Cooper, C., West, P., 2003. Organisational learning: The new management paradigm? Management Decision, 41(5/6), pp. 452-464
Gitman, L.J., 2005. The future of business, Mason, Ohio : Thomson/South-Western
Hejna, w.j., Hosking, J.E., 2004. Five Critical Strategies for Achieving Operational Efficiency. Journal of Healthcare Management, 49(5), 289-292
Hilmola, O., 2005. Total productivity measurement and competitiveness: towards ensuring sustainable business performance in manufacturing organisations: a literature review. International Journal of Process Management and Benchmarking, 1(1), pp. 45-62
O'Brien, J., Weder, B., 2003. Stimulating productivity in complex global organisations. European Business Journal, 15(3), pp. 112-121
Sabherwal, R., 2011. Business intelligence : practices, technologies, and management / Rajiv Sabherwal, Irma Becerra-Fernandez. Hoboken, NJ : Wiley
Vakola, M., Soderquist, K.E., Prastacos, G.P., 2007. Competency management in support of organisational change. International Journal of Manpower, 28(3/4), pp. 260-275


No comments:

Post a Comment