Edryn Corporation: Quantitative Analysis for Organizational Improvement - Essay Example

Edryn Corporation: Quantitative Analysis for Organizational Improvement May 10, 2006 [Insert [Insert [Insert Edryn Corporation Primary Research Dimensions The primary research was conducted to discover the holistic ideals of Edryn Corporation's employees as they understand the core competencies and relationships that drive the corporate atmosphere, with a strong focus on the interpretations of participants regarding the team as a whole, with specific phrasing towards 'Everyone' and 'Our organization,' as understood to represent employees working within the direct environment of the participant and the team as a whole. The research methodology was a descriptive survey sent vie electronic mail to twenty participants within the Edryn Corporation, and subsequently returned to the surveyor by email, a cautionary remark here could be made towards the loss of ambiguity because email signatures trace the participant's identity, however, this is viewed as a non-issue, and confidence is high regardless of the loss of ambiguity due to the fact that participants were volunteers. The participants were all employees of Edryn, with no biases or references towards race, gender, or nationality, and were directly surveyed so that no proxies were used. Observations were made from the primary research method only. The survey encompassed a total of fifty descriptive questions explicative of the participants' view on coworkers as a whole, citing relevance towards: 'Teamwork;' 'Measurement;' 'Training;' 'Customer satisfaction;' 'Continuous improvement.' The answer parameters were scaled from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating 'Do not agree at all,' and 5 indicating 'Strongly agree.' The definitive for Teamwork was questions 1-10 on the survey. Teamwork as it correlates to the facility can be holistically described by these parameters, abstracted in order from the survey questions: a developed sense of belonging; harmonious; commitment to team goals; pride; freedom of information; helping one another; knowledge based; total involvement. Teamwork as it correlates to the facility can be holistically described by these parameters, abstracted in order from the survey questions: a developed sense of belonging; harmonious; commitment to team goals; pride; freedom of information; helping one another; knowledge based; total involvement. In regards to measurement, the participants gauging of the establishment were approached with these abstracted concerns, voiced in a positive approach towards both internal and external suppliers: performance standards; systems of measurement; internal performance standards; tracking improvements; awareness of cost and work; quality of product and service; quality of process; potential of improvement; reliance on data for improvement. The answer parameters were scaled from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating 'Do not agree at all,' and 5 indicating 'Strongly agree.' Organizational Improvement Data Analysis Table 1 shows the dispersed quantitative responses of all participants. Table 2: Data Analysis shows the average, median, mode, standard deviation and variance between all test dimensions. The average measures the mean; this is used to describe the intermediate values across the boards. The median defines the midpoint in the series of responses, and the mode is used to note the most commonly occurring value. Standard deviation measures the spread of the test scores; this is used to define the difference average difference in the data set, and is the square root of the variance. Variance measures the dispersion of the test scores as the average squared deviations from the mean. The data analysis uses a 0.05 significance level to gauge the probability of rejection with the sample size and standard deviation to signify the confidence intervals for east dimension. Table 2: Data Analysis Teamwork Measure Training Customer Satisfaction Continuous Improvement AVG 3.76 3.56 3.57 3.925 3.055 MED 4 4 4 4 3 MODE 4 3 4 4 3 STDV 0.666801 0.662264 0.653633 0.656911 0.784251 VAR 0.444623 0.438593 0.427236 0.431533 0.61505 SIG 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 SAMP 20 20 20 20 20 CONF 0.292233 0.290244 0.286462 0.287899 0.343707 Organizational Improvement Interpretation The lowest average score is in Continuous Improvement, with the highest in Customer Satisfaction. The lowest median score is 3, in Continuous Improvement, with the other dimensions equivocal to one another at 4. The lowest modes were in Measurement and Continuous Improvement, with the other dimensions also equivocal at a score of 4. The highest standard deviation is also in Continuous Improvement, and the lowest is in Training. Variance is also highest in Continuous Improvement, and lowest in Training. In the data set with a sample population of 20, the average scores and standard deviation per dimension, a 95% confidence can be assumed that test scores will be +/- the confidence interval, with Continuous Improvement having the largest range for confidences and Training having the lowest, which is also indicative that there is a wider range of deviations in Continuous Improvement. It can then be assumed that values above this inference are significant of a positive experience, showing that with a 95% confidence, Customer Satisfaction is the highest value and has low variation from that value, followed by Teamwork. Measurement and Training are fairly similar in their statistical inferences, which would denote only a mediocre connotation towards their value amongst coworkers as well as the understanding employees have regarding these dimensions. The most worrisome dimension of statistical interpretation is in Continuous Improvement, citing the lowest comprehension and lowest coworker empowerment. This is significant also because of the highest deviations from the mean, which means that awareness of Continuous Improvement varies more than comprehension of all other dimensions, this could be indicative that coworker evaluations and rewards as well as commitments towards facility improvement are low for many coworkers but high for some. This inference could be highly influenced by poor communication or simply the absence of organizational and facility wide goals. To understand which dimensions can be improved to statistically influence Continuous Improvement, the correlations between the other four dimensions of Teamwork, Measurement, Training, and Customer Satisfaction will be correlated against Continuous Improvement. Important Correlations and Relationships There are five dimensions with this survey, and it becomes important to understand which test scores have an effect on the other. This research project is not going to correlate all dimensions of the test; instead it will focus on the most important ones with the intention of weeding out what areas can be improved by adjusting which methods. The lowest values across the board with the highest deviations were in Continuous Improvement. To find the correlations between all other dimensions of the test scores, the four dimensions will be placed against Continuous Improvement The correlation coefficient quantifies the relationship as being between -1.00 and +1.00, where -1.00 indicates there is not a correlation between the two variables, and +1.00 indicates a high correlation between the two variables. Where there is a correlation coefficient between -1.00 and 0, there is none or a minimal amount of correlation. Furthermore, if the correlation coefficient is between 0 and +1.00, it can be concluded that there is a relationship, the stronger the coefficient is, the stronger the relationship. The results are noted in Table 3: Correlations. Table 3: Correlations Continuous Improvement Teamwork Measure Training Customer Sat Correlations -0.08994 0.095204 0.124792 -0.01146 There is a slightly negative correlation coefficient in Teamwork and Customer Satisfaction, which is statistically indicative that these test scores do not have an influence on Continuous Improvement, however, there is a positive correlation coefficient in Measurement and Training, which is highly indicative that these dimension influence Continuous Improvement, with Training having the greatest influence. This means that there are little or no adjustments that can be made in Teamwork and Customer Satisfaction that will have any effect on Continuous Improvement. Why then, does Measurement and Training have a positive correlation on Continuous Improvement The survey questions in Measurement are specifically noted to gauge the manner in which an employee measures and evaluates the business environment and goals. The Training questions are specifically indicative of the manner in which the employee is taught Measurements and the other dimensions. Continuous Improvement is the employees understanding of why and how these dimensions are improved upon. Furthermore, an investigation into the correlation between Measurement and Training resulted in a 0.094727 correlation coefficient, showing that these two statistical dimensions are positively dependant on one another. The relationships between Measurement, Training and Continuous Improvement do go beyond a numerical value, in fact these inferences are directly related to the manner in which the employee perceives the facility's measurements and dictations of his and coworkers work as well as the manner in which the employee perceives the goals set for him and the goals set to improve the needs of the business. It then becomes important to alter the employees' discernment and intelligence as it coincides with Training and Measurements to increase the employees' proficiency in ascertaining and developing in accordance with Continuous Improvement. Realizations in Secondary Research Measurement The employees' understanding of the measurements which drive organizational goals towards Continuous Improvement is important for procedure management. Jack and Suzi Welch 2006 iterate the importance of a good system of measurement to engage employees "It goes without saying that no company, small or large, can win over the long run without energized employees who believe in the mission and understand how to achieve it" (pp. 2), but in this instance it is shown by the statistical analysis above that employees may not fully understand how to achieve the companies goals, and in fact may not understand what those goals are. At the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, UK, a team of researchers states these specific dictations on the importance of measurement: In essence, the performance management process defines how an organization uses various systems to manage its performance. / In this context integration means that the performance measurement system should enable the correct deployment of the strategic and tactical objectives of the business as well as providing a structured framework to allow the relevant information to feed back to the appropriate points to facilitate the decision and control processes (p 522,525. 1997). There is a need for change in the manner in which measurements of internal and external forces are conducted so that the process can better harmonize procedures and processes that gauge measurements, and specifically to amend the negative connotations seen in Continuous Improvement. Training The data analysis signified a strong relationship between Training, Measurement and Continuous Improvement. Appropriate training methods are important to any organization regardless of its size. Will Hipwell (2005) indicates a relationship for training development as being "Estimation, Isolation and Adjustment." The statistical analysis above was used to estimate the common responses from the participants in regards to training while the correlations were used to isolate what improvements were needed to create a positive response. Now, training is the foremost method used for adjustment, and the PM Realty Group (2005 p 28) asserts that "employees want to do a good job," but for an employee to achieve their goals, they must "have a sense of how to achieve that goal and a belief that their hard work will be noticed by management." The analysis shows that employees are various in their assertion that the measurements of quality and control are measured and conducive to Continuous Improvement, therefore adjusting the Training within the organization as to how employees are measured and to what extent improvements and goals are made will increase the employees' scores in Continuous Improvement. Continuous Improvement Due to the lowest scores and high correlations, the primary goal is to improve employee's views on Continuous Improvement and the employees' understanding of how improvement is measured and recorded. Comprehension of the values and principles that are measured to drive improvement in the organizations goals are a key institution of an employees perception of trust towards the organization, when the relationships are not clearly measured the elements of trust do not exist with any 'implicit commitments' and the workplace loses some effectiveness (Chenhall and Langfield-Smith pp 118,119. 2003). To that effect, if an employee does not understand the measurements, then the employee will not trust the organizations goals and in turn will not strive towards improvement. There are at least five defined characteristics that could alter employees' comprehension of Continuous Improvement, as shown by Dr. Richard B. Waina (2002 pp 2): I. Motive - What are the critical businesses issues driving process improvement II. Model - Which reference model best maps to the organization practices III. Method - How can you quickly and effectively identify improvement opportunities IV. Managing Change -What factors impact the effectiveness of introduced changes V. Measures - What are critical factors in setting up a measurement program These qualitative concerns are directly related to the organizations goals that drive Continuous Improvement. Organizational Improvement Proposal It has been shown that the lowest test scores with the highest deviations were in Continuous Improvement, which is highly indicative that all staff is not on the same page as far as that dimension is concerned, and the majority of responses were negative. Furthermore, it has been proven that Measurement and Training have the strongest correlation to Continuous Improvement. The dimensions of Measurement, Training and Continuous Improvement as well as their importance were discussed in the preceding section. Now, the concluding proposal towards the advancement of Continuous Improvement through adjusting Training on Measurements is made. The preliminary plan is to initiate a training course to remove any irresolution regarding Continuous Improvement and Measurements. The qualitative inference suggests that there is very limited training available for supervisors in writing performance reports as they pertain to internal and external forces of the organization. Also, it has been noted in interviews separate from the statistical data gathered that there are often ten supervisors in the review process. Therefore, the initiation of an Enlisted Performance Report Training will be the primary recommendation. The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) should be developed with the qualities of Measurement and basic organizational goals regarding improvement and core competencies. The EPR will be developed with regards to the organizational goals and the lacking qualities discerned from the data analysis with strong reflection on the core competencies of measurement and resources available for deployment of the EPR. Specifically, the goals of the EPR will be to answer the questions outlined in the Continuous Improvement section above. Secondly, the EPR will be organized to enlist both internal and external qualities and manners in which those qualities are critiqued. The proposal of the EPR is to enhance employee comprehension of Measurement and Improvement, as there is an obvious need for these categories to have a training method. The working plan is to develop, initiate and implement the EPR in a scheduled facility wide distribution. Interdepartmental collaboration is recommended to further understanding between resources, as well as gain input from various sources within the organizational capacity. The EPR plan should result in greater test scores through a solid project management plan. The proposed budget for this implementation is fairly low, however it should be noted that budget is highly dependent on the final format for deployment of the EPR-audio/visual, classroom, or web-based. In conclusion, further communication and evaluation of the specific test scores as they relate to Measurement, Training and Continuous Improvement will be researched upon the facility wide completion of the EPR. References Chenhall, Robert H. Langfield-Smith, Kim Performance Measurement and Reward Systems, Trust, and Strategic Change. Journal of Management Accounting Research; 2003, Vol. 15, p117-143, 27p. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from EBSCO Host Database. Dismukes, Jim and Dukes, Bob (2005) Quality Control: Benefits Outweigh Difficult Process. Journal of the Quality Assurance Institute; Oct2005, Vol. 19 Issue 4, p28-29, 2p. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from EBSCO Host Database. Garengo, Patricia, Biazzo, Stefano, and Bititci, Umit S. Performance measurement systems in SMEs: A review for a research agenda University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, UK. International Journal of Management Reviews; Mar2005, Vol. 7 Issue 1, p25-47, 23p. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from EBSCO Host Database. Jack and Suzi Welch (2006) How Healthy Is Your Company Business Week; 5/8/2006 Issue 3983, p126-126. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from EBSCO Host Database. Hipwell, Will (2005) Value Creation and Measurement: in Learning Environments. Chief Learning Officer; Oct2005, Vol. 4 Issue 10, p36-41, 6p. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from EBSCO Host Database. Waina, Dr. Richard B. (2002) Five Critical Questions in Process Improvement. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from www.chips.navy.mil Appendix A A score sheet matrix from the Administrator's Guide will be included as Appendix A Appendix B Raw Questionnaire Data Results Teamwork: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T Statement 1 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 5 5 Statement 2 5 3 5 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 Statement 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 5 5 Statement 4 3 4 5 3 4 3 4 3 5 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 Statement 5 5 4 4 5 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 Statement 6 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 7 4 4 2 4 4 3 4 3 2 5 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 2 2 Statement 8 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 Statement 9 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 Statement 10 4 3 5 4 3 3 3 3 5 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 Measurement: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T Statement 11 3 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 Statement 12 3 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 Statement 13 4 4 3 4 5 3 5 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 Statement 14 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 Statement 15 4 4 5 4 4 3 4 3 5 5 5 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Statement 16 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 Statement 17 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 18 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Statement 19 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Statement 20 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 Training: A B C D E F G H 4 J K L M N O P Q R S T Statement 21 3 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 22 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 23 3 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 4 3 1 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 Statement 24 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 5 4 5 4 4 5 5 Statement 25 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 Statement 26 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 Statement 27 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 28 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 Statement 29 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Statement 30 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 Customer Satisfaction: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T Statement 31 5 4 4 5 5 3 5 3 4 5 5 4 5 3 3 3 5 3 4 4 Statement 32 4 3 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 3 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 Statement 33 5 4 4 5 5 3 5 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 Statement 34 4 3 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 35 3 4 5 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 Statement 36 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 37 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 Statement 38 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 39 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 5 4 5 5 Statement 40 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 Continuous Improvement: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T Statement 41 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 Statement 42 2 3 3 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 Statement 43 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 Statement 44 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Statement 45 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 Statement 46 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Statement 47 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Statement 48 3 2 2 3 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 Statement 49 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 Statement 50 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 Appendix C Tables Table 1.0 Total Test Score Values of the Questionairre Table 2.0 Data Analysis Statistical Inferences Teamwork Measure Training Customer Satisfaction Continuous Improvement AVG 3.76 3.56 3.57 3.925 3.055 MED 4 4 4 4 3 MODE 4 3 4 4 3 STDV 0.666801 0.662264 0.653633 0.656911 0.784251 VAR 0.444623 0.438593 0.427236 0.431533 0.61505 SIG 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 SAMP 20 20 20 20 20 CONF 0.292233 0.290244 0.286462 0.287899 0.343707 Table 3.0 Correlation Chart Continuous Improvement Teamwork Measure Training Customer Sat Correlations -0.08994 0.095204 0.124792 -0.01146 Read More