Reframing Organizations: General Motors Automotive Divison Lordstown Plant Case - Essay Example

? Reframing Organizations: General Motors Automotive Divison Lordstown Plant Case As a Consultant to the Lordstown plant, there are a lot of things that I would like to recommend for the management to improve not only the operation and efficiency of the plant, but also on how to effectively exercise leadership so that the present issues that are hounding the Lordstown plant will be minimized if not totally eliminated. In pushing my recommendation forward to the management of Lordstown plant, I will be using the Bolman & Deal’s frameworks in identifying issues and in designing interventions. Bolman & Deal’s framework in identifying issues and in designing interventions are structural framework, human resource framework, political framework and symbolic framework Structural Framework  Structural framework focus on the roles, relationships, rules, policies, procedures and hierarchies on they are used to achieve the goals of the organization. In General Motors Assembly Division, structural issues in the plant abound that no matter how the management tried to impose hard measures to improve employee’s attendance and performance. The organization’s structure at General Motors Assembly Division was really bound to produce problems. When the company increased the production to more than 100 cars an hour without reducing the number of paces, it really was bound to create problem. Due to the extremely hectic pacing of work that is beyond human capacity, employees had to “double up” to cope with work and have a breather from the maddening nature of work in the plant. Worst, when General Motors Assembly Division discouraged employees from taking a day off that literally made them work for almost the entire year, the employees are bound to burn out and become less effective. This policy is reinforced by GM’s strict direction for the company nurses to refuse permission for workers to go home sick. This policy could raise an ethical and legal question which could prove to be more costly for GM if it will reach litigation. Its employees need for rest was manifested on the extreme that an employee even provoked a foreman to give him a disciplinary layoff just to avoid the monotony of his tasks. This is a very obvious symptoms of employee burn out that GM should address for them to become more effective. One of its ill effects is the increased absenteeism in the plant that costs the company more than the money it generated in imposing draconian measures to make employees work almost the entire year long. On Mondays, report of line shut down for as much as half an hour because there are simply not enough people to perform the operations. If GM produces more than 100 cars an hour, they just lost more 50 cars every week because people are absent from work. GM acknowledges that absenteeism, particularly on Mondays and Fridays, constitutes its most distressing discipline problem. Workers report line shutdown “for as much as a half hour” on Mondays because there are simply not enough people to perform the operations To address these issues, GM management should realize that its employees needs go beyond the pay. They also, need rest, recreation, and fulfillment with their jobs. In Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, management should also provide the other factors in the hierarchy and not only the basic physical need of giving them a good pay. Human Resource Framework  Perhaps the most obvious result of the structural flaw in the Lordstown plant was the Human Resource Framework issue. Its employees find their policies and workload inhuman and such, their performance suffered. The perspective of the management of General Motors Assembly Division in Lordstown about managing its human resource is flawed. It still employs the Taylorist perspective about human resource management. It only relies on attracting and managing people through pay and made its jobs simple but monotonous. This can be gleaned on the case of Joe who appreciates the $13,000 a year income which is way above the national average income of $11,000 in 1972. Even if he had differences with the company and find the job “too confining” that did not like what he does every day, he still stayed with the job because he did not know where else he could get a retirement plan which would give him substantial benefits after thirty years of service, full hospital benefits, and real job security. And GM is taking advantage of its employees’ vulnerability and inability to find work elsewhere which is why it did not exert much effort to have employee satisfaction. In fact, it did not exist in their vocabulary was what can be gleaned from the case. Such, despite of its high pay, attrition rate and labor turnover is still high at GM Lordstown plant. To enable General Motors Assembly Division Lordstown plant to increase the productivity of its employees and minimize if not totally eliminate employee discontent that resulted in waste (plant shutdown during Mondays for half an hour), it should change its perspective about its leadership of its human resources. Its leadership should cease believing that since it is one of the highest paying companies, it would follow that its employees will be happy with their work. This is based on classical thinking of Frederick Taylor’s Scientific Management theory which has already been proven inadequate. Modern management theorists have already proven that pay is not an enough motivator to make people more productive. Relying on extrinsic incentives such as fat paychecks, perks, or pay does not necessarily mean that people will work harder and smarter as put forth by Taylor. According to Herzberg, what it does however is stimulate people to endure the grind of work and will only likely to perform until they get the next pay raise. For Herzberg, what really makes people tick are “intrinsic rewards such as interesting, challenging work and the opportunity to achieve and grow into greater responsibility” (2003 pg. 49). In an organizational setting, this can be done through “job enrichment” whereby employees are provided with responsibilities where they have the opportunity to psychologically grow and have the fulfillment that they did a terrific job with an interesting work. Employees are already complaining that their job at Lordstown plant are “too confining” and this should be addressed because it burns down their plant workers. This concept of Herzberg about motivation is not only an academic musing. This has been tried and proven in an actual organization where it also manufactured products such as the case of General Motors. This can be seen at work at Semco, a Brazilian company where employees are rotated among the various functions of the organization for diversity, increased functionality of employees and higher productivity due to higher learning curves resulting to a 600% increased in productivity (Semler 1993). Employees are empowered to make decisions with their work that employee job satisfaction with Semco is rated as one of the highest in Brazil with a long waiting list of prospective applicants who wants to join Semco (Semler 1993). In addition to making the work interesting, it is critical that employees should be given a rest from the drudgery of work. It should also introduce work-life balance program and handsome time off which is just designed to refresh the employees from the drudgery of work. Political Framework  The shabby treatment of Lordstown human resource plant is reinforced by the political framework of which GMAD operates. It knows that there is no job in the Warren area that could compare with high wages and benefits enjoyed by the GM workers. And such, it did not exercise any employee relations effort that would lower its attrition and labor turnover rate. This can be gleaned in the case of GMAD forty five year old factory worker Joe whom GMAD knows that he is not going anywhere. GMAD is capitalizing on the fact that even if employees will have issue with its leadership, they will stick with their jobs because they cannot a job somewhere else that pays equally. GMAD should change this point of view. Assuming that many employees are like Joe, it is not a guarantee that they will perform well even if they will stick with their jobs. A concrete manifestation of employees underperformance is its continuous absenteeism, tardiness, low morale, us versus them mentality and regular half hour shutdown on Mondays. It is recommended that management should cease the use of coercion (harassment, not letting employee leave work even if they are sick, mandatory overtimes) and instead use their power to make the work and the workplace interesting and engaging. Symbolic Framework  The Symbolic language at GMAD can be said to be far from ideal. Symbols which are supposed to inspire are seen to be a burden by the employees. For the GMAD employees, the Lordstown plant is nothing more than a source of good income that they have to bear or put up inorder to make a living. This symbolic framework at Lordstown plant which forms part of its corporate/manufacturing culture is problematic because employees do not care about their work and in fact the relationship with it can be sum up as drudgery and confrontational. Developing positive symbolic frameword at the Lordstown takes time and effort. It involves improvement in many facets of the organization to shed off the old negativist symbols of the plant. It involves improvement in policy (i.e. reducing work hours), implementation of good employee-employer relationship programs (i.e. work life balance), career-pathing, job rotation (to make the work interesting) and perpetual training to improve not only the proficiency of its workforce but also to improve them as a person as well. Conclusion To effectively implement the abovementioned recommendations, it is imperative that leadership in GMAD must first change its leadership perspective. It should start treating its employees as its most important asset and not as a mere cog behind the manufacturing line. When there is already a change of perspective in leadership, implementation of the abovementioned recommendation will be effective that the usual production issues of shutdown, absenteeism, tardiness and low productivity will be significantly reduced if not eliminated. References Herzberg, Frederick I. (1987). 'One more time: How do you motivate employees?  Harvard Business Review, (65):30, 48-61. Semler, Ricardo (1993). Maverick!: The Success Story Behind the World's Most Unusual Workplace. Warner Books Read More