Quality Management Challenge - Threatening Business Sustainability - Case Study Example

Mock White Paper Student’s name: Institution: Instructor: Subject: Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 1.0Introduction 3 2.0Case Analysis 3 3.0Solution Generation 5 3.1Solution Identification 6 3.2Solution Generation 6 3.3 Solution Evaluation 7 3.4Implementation 8 4.0Decision Making 8 4.1 Behaviors 9 4.2 Heuristics 9 4.3 Bias 10 5.0Conclusion 10 References 11 Mock White Paper 1.0 Introduction The business world is highly dynamic. The dynamism makes it imperative for organization to align their operations with changes in a bid to make themselves more competitive. In the light of this realization; research into continuous improvement, decision making, problem solution and organizational change have received much focus in the recent past. The following report is based on case of XX manufacturing company. The company in currently faced with problems of quality control & assurance and organizational culture. The report will give an in depth analysis of the case that will outline key dimensions of the company’s case. It will also discuss solution generation with respect to solution identification, solution generation, solution evaluation and implementation. In the lat section, the report will discuss decision making with respect to behavior, heretic and biases influencing the ability of the decision making team to make sound decisions. 2.0 Case Analysis XX Company manufactures polymer products for various spare parts of motorcycle companies in the country and in the region. Established in 1999 by Eng. David Steel, the company has risen to be a one stop solution hub for polymer based parts for the region’ motorcycle industry. In its research and development plans are scheduled releases for highly resistant polymers for use in the consumer electronics industry. Eng. Steel, a materials engineer by profession focuses on providing the consumer electronics industry with a highly elastic, strong and dimensionally stable polymer that will solve the challenges associated with breakages especially in mobile devices such as phones, tablets and laptops. Even though the company has a good reputation locally and globally due to its innovative products; Eng. Steel is faced with a problem that he had not anticipated while establishing the company. The company has about 1000 employees working in its entire business line from research and development, design, engineering and manufacturing. Currently, its research and development and executive administration is housed in an office block located 15 kilometers from the main factory where all the other employees operate from. In the recent past, XX Company has been faced with a problem of quality control and standardization. This has impacted negatively on the company’s business as illustrated by the cancellation of 3 orders by long time business partners that has seen the company’s revenue fall by 17 %. There have been numerous product recalls in the past three years in addition to rework and waste that collectively increase the company’s operation costs. Additionally, there has been the rise of other companies both locally and offshore that are offering competition to XX with respect to quality and time taken to deliver on a customer’ s order. Analyzing XX, it can be noted that its current challenges stem from various issues. First, the company has a poor quality control and assurance system. Steel has been unable to put in place appropriate structures to ensure that the company is able to run smoothly, competitively and sustainably. Quality control and assurance at the company is poorly done. There lacks a quality control policy to guide the company’s employees while executing their daily work. There is also a general laxity in the company with regard to quality control and assurance. Over years of growing success, the executive management had merely mechanized the company; making employees work according to laid down operation standards that make little or no meaning to them. As such, training on quality control and assurance to the employees has never been done. The role of quality control has been left to an individual who has taken up the laxity exhibited by other employees. Upon assessing the company’s culture; it is realized that it has little value for quality control. It emphasizes more on product development and sales while downplaying the importance of quality control and assurance that has the ability to sustain its gains. From the case analysis, it can be acknowledged that there is a need for a culture change in addition to the development of a quality control and assurance system so as to solve the eminent problem that is threatening XX’s current success. 3.0 Solution Generation After problem identification, an organization should generate an appropriate solution to solve it. From the case study analysis above, it was pointed out that XX Company has a quality control and assurance problem. Solution generation is considered to be a divergent process that expounds on a problem comprehensive in a bid to develop the most appropriate solution to a problem. There is always a need for creativity and innovation while generating solutions for organizational problems (Mumford, 2001) (Reiter‐Palmon & Illies, 2004). There are four main steps in solution generation namely solution identification, solution generation, solution evaluation and implementation. Under each of the four steps are various tools that are applied depending on the type of problem in being solved. The following section will discuss each of the four stages; giving special focus to the specific tool that will be used in relation to solving XX company’ problem. 3.1 Solution Identification As pointed out above, the first step towards solving a problem is identifying it. Problem identification is meant to equip the relevant stakeholder with finite detail about the problem in such a manner that allows them to understand why, how and when the problem identified occurs. In an implicit perception, solution identification follows an exhaustive ‘post mortem’ of a problem meant to unveil finite issues associated with a problem (Anderson, Sweeney, Williams, Camm & Cochran, 2015). Following exhaustive problem identification is the identification of solution that solves the specific problem/s identified. The tool that was used to identify XX’s problem is a case analysis. A problem tree would also be a convenient tool to use to identify various metrics related to the problem. A case analysis allows the problem solution team to make a critical analysis of a problem from various perspectives. Its major limitation is that its efficiency may be affected by personal bias. To mitigate the effects of this limitation, it is recommended that problem and solution identification be done by a multidisciplinary team so as to take care of various dynamics associated with a problem (Aarikka-Stenroos & Jaakkola, 2012). A problem tree allows a project team to identify and map a problem as it occurs in such a manner that allows it to single out what appropriate solution ought to achieve. 3.2 Solution Generation After the solution identification phase, it follows that an organization should generate the most appropriate solution to provide utility to the project stakeholders. From the solution generation phase, it can be acknowledged that the chosen solution should have the ability to improve quality control and assurance at XX manufacturing company. The most appropriate tool to generate the solution to the problem is the fish bone diagram. Also known as the Ishikawa diagram, the tool allows a problem solution team to map the causes and effects of problems surrounding a case. The tool is appropriate for use in situation that requires that the root cause of problems be identified so as to solve them appropriately. The Ishikawa diagram is also appropriate for a manufacturing company situation; having been developed by a quality control champion in the industry (Raghavan, 2015). With the fish bone diagram, the project management team is expected to identify various causes of poor quality control at XX Company after which they expound further on the causes so as to identify the root causes of the problem. The advantage of this tool is that it will enable the problem solution team to develop solutions that solve the root causes of the problems; thereby leading to the development of sustainable solutions to quality issues at the company; a factor that enhances the chances of long term success of manufacturing company (Silva, Delai, I., de Castro & Ometto, 2013). However, the tool has a major limitation of not being able to lead to the development of solution in addition to its inability to prioritize the causes according to the order of their significance on the problem. This limitation will be mitigated by the use of a multidisciplinary project team whose brainstorming skills and synergy will enable the company develop most appropriate solutions to its quality woes (Morgan & Ozanne‐Smith, 2012). 3.3 Solution Evaluation The solution evaluation phase is meant to provide the project team with an appropriate platform to assess the appropriateness of the developed solution to solve the problems identified. Based on a convergent thinking approach, this phase aims at narrowing down the problem and focusing on coming up with the best solution to solve an organizational problem (Cropley, 2006). It is recommended that XX Company uses the decision matrix tool in this phase. In this tool, the company will use a chart that will allow the project team in the identification, analysis and rating of the strength of the relationship between various sets of information (Triantaphyllou, 2013). This tool is appropriate when electing improvement solutions, designing solutions and evaluating most appropriate solutions to organizational problems hence convenient for use at XX. This tool will allow the project team to assign weights to various solutions thus enabling the company solve the high priority causes / problems first. 3.4 Implementation The implementation phase is the last stage that is responsible of bringing out the required change in solving an organizational problem. Implicitly, the phase is the most important in an organizational setting since it is responsible of effecting changes that lead to organizational improvement. Under this stage, it is recommended that XX Company uses appropriate project management principles to ensure that the solution developed is implemented successfully in the company. In line with the need to create a good organizational psychology environment to support the implementation of the solution, exhaustive quality training should be done so as to eliminate any change resistance that might be associated with its implementation (Unsworth, Dmitrieva & Adriasola, 2013). Business process reengineering should be conducted on the entire value chain so as to integrate aspects of total quality control in all the company’s business processes. 4.0 Decision Making There are various hindrances to appropriate decision making in an organizational setup. The following section discusses behaviors, heuristic and biases that are due to create challenges in developing appropriate solutions for the quality management problem at XX Company. 4.1 Behaviors Overconfidence is the main behavior that is likely to cause hindrance in decision making at XX Company. The generation and successful implementation of the best solution to solve quality management issues at the company is due to be hindered by overconfidence of the project team in providing solutions to the problem (Fung, 2014). Based on the fact that most of the members have been in the company for the better part of its life; it is expected that they would have a ‘know it all’ attitude when approaching the quality management issue at the company. Issues related to generalisability, over-precision, over-estimation and over-placement are due to occur during decision making processes. For this reason, it is recommended that the company seeks the services of an external consultant who will provide a third person perspective to XX’s company problems and solution generation. This mitigation strategy is expected to solve the challenges that are likely to crop up from overconfident project team members. 4.2 Heuristics Heuristics are principles that are used to guide decision makers in coming up with the best decision based on an analysis of various values that are considered important to a specific situation (Betsch & Haberstroh, 2014). The confirmation heuristic is most likely to affect the decision making process at XX company. The need to relate various variables with respect to their ability to provide solutions to various issues as identified in the root cause analysis will be a major challenge in the generation and implementation of quality management solutions at the company. With each of the members of the multidisciplinary team aiming at ensuring that the solution has positive effects on their functional areas; it is recommended that a checklist containing weighted checkpoints for various issues at the company be developed. This checklist would be appropriate for enabling the company makes appropriate decisions without bureaucracy and delays associated with the confirmation heuristic. 4.3 Bias With overconfidence that was identified to manifest itself in generalization, over-precision, over-estimation and over-placement, it is expected that bias related to the three will crop up. However, the use of a project team will be effective in mitigating the effects associated with the bias thereof. 5.0 Conclusion In conclusion, this report has been able to give a deep insight into the solution generation and decision making factors associated with XX’s case. In the case analysis, it was identified that XX Company has a quality management challenge that is threatening its business sustainability. It was identified that the company does not have a formal quality management system in addition to an organizational culture that is relaxed towards quality control and assurance. The report identified that case analysis and problem tree tools are appropriate for problem and solution identification of the organizational challenge facing XX. It was also identified that the fishbone diagram tool is conducive for solution generation, decision matrix for solution evaluation and process flow in implementation. With respect to the decision making process, over confidence, confirmation and biases were identified to be possible challenges in decision making but appropriate mitigation approaches were identified. References Aarikka-Stenroos, L., & Jaakkola, E. (2012). Value co-creation in knowledge intensive business services: A dyadic perspective on the joint problem solving process. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(1), 15-26. Anderson, D., Sweeney, D., Williams, T., Camm, J., & Cochran, J. (2015). An introduction to management science: quantitative approaches to decision making. Cengage Learning. Betsch, T., & Haberstroh, S. (Eds.). (2014). The Routines Of Decision Making, Psychology Press. Cropley, A. (2006). In Praise of Convergent Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391‐404. Fung, P. (2014). Influence of Overconfidence, Critical Thinking and Creative Thinking on Project Manager's Decision Making Skills–A Conceptual Paper.Critical Thinking and Creative Thinking on Project Manager's Decision Making Skills–A Conceptual Paper (December 18, 2014). Morgan, D, & Ozanne‐Smith, J. (2012). Surf Bather Drowning Risk and Exposure‐Related Factors Identified by an Expert Panel, International Journal of Aquatic Research and Education, 6, 336‐349. Mumford, D., (2001). Something Old, Something New: Revisiting Guilford's Conception of Creative Problem Solving. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3‐4). Reiter‐Palmon, R.,& Illies, J., (2004). Leadership And Creativity: Understanding Leadership From A Creative Problem‐Solving Perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 55‐77 Raghavan, A. (2015). Root Cause Analysis. In Management and Leadership–A Guide for Clinical Professionals, 105-121 Silva, L., Delai, I., de Castro, S., & Ometto, R. (2013). Quality tools applied to Cleaner Production programs: a first approach toward a new methodology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 1, 174-187. Triantaphyllou, E. (2013). Multi-criteria decision making methods: a comparative study, Springer Science & Business Media. 44 (1); 22-35 Unsworth, L., Dmitrieva, A., & Adriasola, E. (2013). Changing Behaviour: Increasing The Effectiveness Of Workplace Interventions In Creating Pro‐Environmental Behaviour Change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(2), 211-229. Read More