Cox container case Essay

Problem Identification at that place be quite a good number of problems in the coif of three hundred, among of which one s caboodleing define, argon the following 1- Job security for the heathen minorities who run the runshop for divisions, while being em forefingered in the sequence of Harold cyclooxygenase, they felt threatened by the introduction of the red-hot focussing trunk, that was reflected by the defensive attitude of Aziz and his lack of cooperation which also female genitalia be the response of being marginalized by Wilson while conducting the confederacy review. 2- Lack of managerial training, which was reflected on how Aziz perceives his job as a shop floor manager whose for the first judgment of conviction and utmost concern, is to deliver payoff no matter what the outside purlieu is. 3- Market introduction of saucy competitors, which dictates the need of full review of the trading operations, bud look ating, yield chain and labor competency. He nce introducing more than bureaucracy to the current carcass and efficacy limit the government agency of Aziz and his team. 4- The centralisation and individuality of Harold Cox in running the companion helped the creation of a divisionalized structure and culture as well as developing a risque degree of indecorum in the outturn subdivision and a sh every last(predicate)ow hierarchy particularly in the financial and management accounting bea.AnalysisThe main origin why Cox asked Wilson to conduct a federation review is to get the community moving forward, more(prenominal) an act could beat been sh ared with incision managers, despite Wilsons conclusions, strategies must be compromises that allow the company to go forward (Johnson, 1992). Johnson also beseechd that Strategic drift takes many years to travel performance, which validates the discovering of the falling results of cardinal, such(prenominal) a performance made Cox ask Wilson to conduct the revie w.The resistance to multi outlying(prenominal)iousness that Aziz showed can be developed via the material of Herzberg (1987) at which he argued that job security, as part of the hygiene factors can be a source of job satisfaction and motivation. Despite defamation the effect of hygiene factors on the subject, he did non address such an issue job security on a minority member. such(prenominal) a factor can be more authorised than others whether essential or extrinsic since minority members would possess the emotional stateing of fear of losing their jobs and being expel lead by the society and not finding another job. Adding the job lieu of Aziz would add further complexities to the situation as well.The introduction of budgeting and operation optimisation without consulting the shop floor manager while he represents the core handicraft of the company could have affected his motivation. These unexampled systems would influence the type of the die hard that can be done in the shop floor greatly and would veer Aziz from a conclusion keyr in his part with all the shore leave and credibility he has to just a regular employee that manages what the new system dictates. Such falsify would affect Azizs motivation to sum to the new system as discussed by Leavitt (2007). Leavitt argues that the increased bureaucracy and the wet system turns employees into machines performing the work without conceptualizeing, and that would be against the human nature that unravels to think and innovate.He also argues that the introduction of IT systems and technologies would be harmful to humans in the work place especially if companies abuse them. He however managed to argue the point from the employee point of view without mentioning the companies perspective at which standardization and new technologies raises the efficiency and performance of the companies and can allocate resources to new departments or new functions. If Aziz were opting the same perspective a s without having the painting sop uped that this new system (budgeting and operations review) would clear him as well as the company, he would tilt to resist that mixed bag.In the framework of Herzberg (1987), job participation is one of the important myths to job or task enrichment. He emphasizes that giving the employees the big picture and giving them a feeling that they will determine in close to measure what they will do in the job would not be beneficial to the job. Wilson, Straw, Long and Pedder managed to do exactly this part. It would be against Azizs turn a profit if he would resist correcting the situation of the company. He would seem wrong and would combat injury himself and his career in CCC if he was explained the current situation and the war-ridden market condition and how is that affecting CCC and what are the measures needed in the next few weeks / years to correct the competitiveness of CCC.Aziz should have been offered the medical prognosis to contribu te to the budgeting and even could have been appointed a task in suggesting the best production and budgeting scheme that would save the company time and money. Bassett-Jones & Lloyed (2005) negated the uprise of Herzberg and emphasized on the importance of employees contribution to the job in order to grant satisfaction. By seeing their ideas being implemented without delays and with the citation of the manager that this idea will contribute to the best of the company, the employee will have a smack of ownership and commitment towards making the idea work.Ford, Ford, & DAmelio (2008) stated that the resistance to agitate can be the cause of the managements actions themselves as they fail to develop trust. They failed to argue that in approximately cases, the employee(s) have their own agenda and they (employees) are the ones to trigger the resistance.The centralization of the decision making in CCC allowed the formation of a divisional company boldness where Azizs team form t he major part of it. Having this high self-reliance formed a specific organization culture peradventure that Aziz is indispensible and hence he is in look. Such a culture would cause Aziz to be reluctant to accept changes specially after CCC anomic some of its competitiveness in the market for few years and as yet no complain fromCox and/or the management. Meyers & Martin (1987) suggest that as the organization structure form the organizations culture and beliefs, so does the leadership of the company. It can be noticed that Cox influenced the idea that the minorities in his company are indispensible, since they support him politically and socially because of their existence in CCC.It can also be noticed that Cox did the interactions with Aziz and the production team on a personal level and hence when changes were mandatory, Aziz opposed it because it did not summate from Cox himself and such resistance will not be punished by Cox. It also can be noticed the degree of autono my in the company when the budgeting scheme is needed, each manager submitted an estimate of ingestion not the actual amount spent the year before or the required budget needed based on the previous year expenditure and the business forecast for next year. The shallow pyramid of hierarchy especially in the management accounting and financial can explain such autonomy.The creation of the subgroup and hence the subculture allowed the lobbying in the production department to happen and to resist any change as broad as it is not in their direct favor. Such collectiveness behavior was developed by the centralization of decision making by Cox and the high degree of autonomy he allowed for such a group. In his study, Polzer (2004) has concluded that subgroups and subcultures in organizations track down to have harmful effect on collective benefit that extends beyond the boundaries of this individualistic subgroup.In CCC case, if the production departments employees feel threatened the y can trigger actions to stop that threat, such as profession for a strike or threating to collectively resign and hence faded the company by stopping the production. They are well aware that hiring such a large number of employees in a short time will be deemed impossible especially with all the experience they have. hitherto if the job has high degree of analyzability and does not require specialists to perform it. Moreover, collective resignation would hurt the image of the company and would cause business to be lost to competition even if it is on a temporarily basis. by chance what triggered that defensive mechanism with this subgroup is the introduction of the outsiders even if they were completely in a differentdepartment. As proposed by Johnson (1992), introducing outsiders can help in managing the change since the outsider shall have a fresh view of the organization or the department that is undergoing the change. However, he did not mention how that would affect the cha nge recipients themselves and how far would they accept the outsider. He also did not identify if the outsider came from at heart the organization (i.e. internal transfer) or from outside the organization and what difference would that make. AlternativesSo, what would CCC management do to resolve the current situation?1. Do Nothing.The benefits of tranquillize down the current situation and the production department are to realise the company is kept in operation. Although margins are dropping, the company is sill profitable. However, the disadvantages of this situation are more than its advantages. The operation department will tend to increase its power and influence on the company since now they felt powerful and indispensible, also, they might try to find another alternative or group unitedly and establish another competing company and resign collectively which would put the company out of business.2. Use a sacrifition sheepFiring Aziz and the seniors in the production depar tment and replacing them with other seniors from inside the department can be a base to send a clear message to the rest of the crew that the change is happening regardless of the opposition. This can benefit CCC by establishing a clear strategy that the company is moving forward with the change and force-out have to choose. However, if it backfires, the company can lose too much and we can revert back to the scenario in solution No.1.3. Driving changes swimmingly and in the welfare of the production department There is no distrust that political consideration has a major play in such situations and it can resolve lots of issues. By calling Aziz and the seniors in the department and explaining the change to them and how would introducing new budgeting system and/or new operation schemes would benefit the company as a whole and the department specifically they would tend to comply with that change. Asking for their assistance would be a bettersolution than resisting the resistance . The situation can be transformed to the benefit of CCC if the production department personnel office understand the current dispute and start to challenge the status quo themselves, knowing that what will be done will be reflected on their welfare.By adopting the DICE methodology explained by Sirkin & Jackson (2005) to obtain the changes as follow I. Set the Duration of the geological fault process with clear and concise milestones. Milestones keep goals tracked and in prospective, encouraging everyone to participate by some sort of recognition would help the process. II. Identify the required personnel and allocate tasks according to their capabilities and traits. That would keep the project Integrity intact and minimizes the endangerment of succession slippage and/or wrong interpretation of tasks and their requirements. III. counsel participation and consignment to the project as well as employees affected by the change. Management as well should demonstrate how these ch anges are going to change the welfare of employees and how committed they are to doing so. IV. It should be clarified that each and everyone concerned with this change process should be judge to drill an extra Effort until the transformation is completed. The management should lead by example in this regard and make it clear that any extra effort exerted in this period shall be rewarded on both the long and short term.RecommendationsIt is recommended to follow resolution No.3 above, since CCC is considered an SME not a corporate and since they are bound to the acceptance of the strongest department to change. Moreover, this resolution addressed the concerns discussed in the study above which mainly are the job security, motivation, job enrichment of the employees while helping in changing the company culture on the long run by getting the employees to exert extra effort and see their ideas come to live, that would develop a sense of belonging to the company which will benefit the company on the long run. Also, that approach would strengthen the concept that the company is willing to accommodate their employees and work out the changes with them for the best interest of both parties.Plan of actionsHarold Cox, Erica Wilson on with all the company seniors should demonstrate participation and ownership of the change process. It was not agood idea to leave the interaction being led by the new appointee(s) considering the company culture. The involvement of the top management whose faces are familiar with the production team would ease the effect of the change and debate that the change are being driven from within not that the outsiders are taking over the company.Depending on the change required the process duration should be set. Would the management desire only a equal control and lean operations concepts to be implemented or they would require production enhancements by increasing the throughput of the company? Would they procure new technology, which woul d require training, adroitness and production scheme change? Would they introduce differentiation either horizontally or vertically to the current products? The easiest change to start with is to introduce cost control and operation optimization associated with achieving the minimum efficient scale of the pulverization and then drives another change. Driving a major change at once would again be resisted.Mainly the production department would be affected, other departments too, such as financial and management accounting. The latters would be expected to drive the major portion of cost control through furnish chain optimization. Introducing operations management department would also help enhancing the operations of the whole company and helping the company to slim the inefficient operations in all departments.It would be expected that some side cause such as additional expenses would follow as sort of rewards to the contributors in the change process to encourage the participat ion. Also, production lag would occur until the change process is finalized, that could be due to shop floor adjustments or personnel getting accustomed to the new change in the production process, hence, it would be a good idea if the company could produce some suspend capacity to cover this aspect.BibliographyBassett-Jones, N., & Lloyed, G. C. (2005). Does Herzbergs motivation theory have staying power? Journal of management development , 24 (10). Ford, J.D., Ford, L. W., & DAmelio, A. (2008). Resistance t change The rest of the story. The academey of management review , 33 (2), 362-377. Herzberg, F. (1987, September). One more time How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business followup . Johnson, G. (1992). Managing strategic change strategy, culture and action. Long Range Planning , 25 (1), 28-36. Leavitt, H. J. (2007). Big organizations are unhealthy environment for human beings. Academy of management learning & reading , 6 (2), 253-263. Meyers, D., & Martin, J. (1987). C ULTURAL CHANGE AN INTEGRATION OF THREE DIFFERENT VIEWS. journal of Management Studies , 24 (6), 623-647. Polzer, J. T. (2004). How Subgroup Interests and Reputations Moderate the Effect of Organizational Identification on Cooperation . Journal of Management , 30, 71-96. Sirkin, H. L., & Jackson, A. (2005, October). The hard side of change management. Harvard Business Review , 33-47.