Kaiser ODP roject by n1y8XM5

VIEWS: 6 PAGES: 30

									        Kaiser Aluminum




Developing People and Organizations
             Dr. Elloy




           Erin Millar
        Andy Van Inwegen
           Lori Lazo




         December 8, 1998
                                   Table of Contents

I.     Executive Summary

II.    Diagnostic Model

III.   Data Analysis

IV.    Proposed Implementation/Intervention

V.     Data Gathering Synopsis
                                       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

       After performing an extensive survey we have concluded that Kaiser has more

weaknesses than strengths. Kaiser excels in dealing with others, job clarity, long term

commitment, and producing a high quality product. However, Kaiser is overshadowed with bad

communication, poor management, lack of teamwork, insufficient feedback, role ambiguity, role

conflicts, poor overall job satisfaction, and a strong need to change.

       After applying our diagnostic model, weaknesses stem from culture, performance norms,

interpersonal relationships, feedback, communication, appraisal, empowerment, decision-

making, group involvement, task structure, task identity, task significance, skill variety,

autonomy, job clarity, and role conflict. These variables either require to be nourished or to be

eliminated. We have designed a specific program to assist Kaiser Aluminum at three levels in

the organization: management, supervisors, and lower-level employees. Furthermore,

management shows a need to develop strategic planning, training, and employee involvement in

decision making.

       It is critical for an organization to understand the environment it operates in. The

organizational level where decisions are made is dependent upon the relationship between

information uncertainty and resource dependency. A high level of resource dependency exists in

the aluminum industry. Inflow of materials and the prices of these materials coupled with the

demand of processed materials and outflow dictates Kaiser’s strategies. The volatile

environment requires quick decisions. Decisions must be made at a lower level to insure quick

responses to the changing environment.
       Management must set the tone for the rest of the organization to follow. A commitment

must exist amongst all to achieve a change. Through this we suggest management brain storm

methods in which to improve goal setting and develop a mission for improvement.

       The Human Resource issue that must be addressed is proper feedback. We recommend a

one-day seminar that encourages supervisors to motivate and give constructive feedback.

Supervisors give feedback as well as receive feedback from the employees. The supervisors

must understand when the proper time is to give feedback and how to give it. Once they know

how to provide feedback they can devise a plan that has incentives to perform well. It is Human

Resources duty to train the supervisors in feedback. When the supervisors are well educated then

they can gather and develop a feedback system with the employees. Once at this stage,

employees and supervisors will sit and discuss what are the most encouraging and positive forms

of feedback. This will improve communication and affect reward systems in the organization.
                              DIAGNOSTIC MODEL

       INPUTS                       DESIGN COMPONENTS                    OUTPUTS
Organizational Design      Culture               Appraisal               Organizational
Personal Characteristics    -supervisor           -pay                   Effectiveness
Group Design                  relationships       -benefits              Job Satisfaction
Strategy                    -favoritism and       -time                  Trust
Environment                   discipline         Decision Making         Commitment
Goals                       -respect              -timeliness
                            -team standards       -delegation
                           Performance            -initiative
                              Norms               -supervision
                            -team standards       -accuracy
                            -job involvement      -guidance
                           Interpersonal         Group
                              Relationships        Involvement
                                                  -problem solving
                            -friendship           -conflict resolution
                              opportunities       -participation
                            -social support      Task Structure
                           Communication          -job requirements
                            -timeliness           -time / manpower
                            -accurate            Skill Variety
                            -complete            Autonomy
                            -open/thorough        -independent
                           Feedback                thought and action
                            -information on       -teamwork
                              performance        Job Clarity
                           Empowerment            -role ambiguity
                            -job influence        -uncertain authority
                           Role Conflict          -uncertain
                            -uncertain authority    objectives
                            -unclear/unplanned
                              goals and
                              objectives




Strengths                     Weaknesses
Dealing with others                Commitment
Role Clarity and Conflict          Trust in supervisors
Commitment                         Feedback
Organizational Effectiveness       Organizational Design
                                   Culture
                                   Performance Norms
                                   Group Involvement
                                   Communication
                                   Leadership
                                   Decision Making
                                   Skill Variety
                                   Autonomy
                                   Interpersonal Relationships
                                   Empowerment
                                   Task Structure
                                   Role Clarity and Conflict
                                   Task Significance
                                   Appraisal
                                   Job Satisfaction


                                        DATA ANALYSIS

       This list of strengths and weaknesses was composed from overlapping factors. Job

Clarity and Commitment were listed as both strengths and weaknesses because questions on

these topics recorded positive and negative responses. Each weakness will be discussed and

illustrated with graphs at the end of the report.

       Long-term commitment is a strength at Kaiser. Over eighty percent of responses

indicated that employees cared about the fate of the organization. There were several questions

that indicated a lack of short term commitment. Short term commitment is the connection

employees feel to their daily work. Of those surveyed, 41 percent would not accept almost any

assignment to keep their job. Two questions indicated that employees are not proud of working
for Kaiser or talk up the organization among friends. The employees indicated a lack of

inspiration for top performance. Thirty-one percent of employees do not think that Kaiser is the

best of all possible organizations to work for. These factors lead to a conclusion that short-term

commitment is one area for improvement.

       Questions measuring trust in supervisors have high percentages of negative responses.

Overall, employees do not feel that they can ‘level’ with their supervisor or that things told to

him will be kept confidential. Thirty percent of employees disagreed with: “My supervisor is not

likely to give me bad advice.” The data indicated severe problems with trust between employees

and supervisors.

       Another problem related to supervisors is feedback. Feedback is the amount of

recognition received. Over fifty percent disagreed with the statement: “I can count on a pat on

the back when I perform well.” Over thirty percent of employees think that their supervisor is

not quick to recognize good behavior. Another question indicated that supervisors do not

feedback strengths to the workers.

       The organizational design is an area of improvement for several reasons. Innovation

ranked low on survey results. Employees did not feel that their supervisor encouraged their

opinion. These results can be interpreted as having two root problems: culture and supervisor

relationships.

       The present culture at Kaiser needs significant changes. The employees surveyed do not

work in an environment that encourages top performance. According to the survey, fairness,

respect, and expectations and confidence in others ranked low. Supervisors were surveyed as

unfair through discipline and by playing favorites.
       When working in a team, workers feel that team standards are not enforced by their peers.

This information can indicate two factors. The first is that supervisors and employees do not

have a solid working relationship. The second is that a culture conducive to top performance

does not exist. The supervisor greatly influences the culture, but is not the only factor.

       Another problem found was performance norms. As stated previously, expectations of

other team members were not enforced. Employees do not feel involved in their jobs. One

reason for their lack of involvement is that performance norms are not influencing workers to be

committed and produce high quality work.

       Group involvement is found to be an area needing improvement for several reasons.

Conflict within the team is not resolved adequately. Ubiquitous norms do not exist throughout

the teams. Furthermore, teams are not setting short-term goals adequately. Over twenty-five

percent of respondents disagree that their team members counsel other workers that they are

having a problem with. Finally, twenty-five percent of respondents disagreed about involving

everyone in group decisions.

       Organizational communication is found to have several areas for improvements. First of

all, communication is not considered to be timely, accurate, open. Furthermore, communications

consisting of directives are not complete. The channels of communication are not well

understood. Communication does not flow up and down through the organization. Considered

in organizational communication, feedback is not sufficient.

       Leadership is a problem in the supervisor level. Throughout many questions the

supervisor comes into play as being the cause for lack of trust, communication, feedback, and

other relevant questions. Supervisors need to be leaders to the employees. If employees view

them as a problem, someone that is unfair and difficult to approach there is lack of proper
leadership. Leadership needs to implement goals and make clear what the goals and objectives

are. Employees remain unclear about objectives and what the planned goals are.

        Skill Variety is a weakness due to lack of different tasks on the job. Slightly over twenty-

four percent and thirty-five point six percent felt dissatisfied with the variety in their current job.

Decision-making was a weakness because of delegation and timeliness. Not enough authority is

given to those that know bottom line causes of the problem on the main floor. Also there is a

sitting on their hands approach at Kaiser. There is a long wait for approval from the upper ladder

to make a decision. As a result, decisions are slow and cause dissatisfaction.

        Autonomy is a problem in Kaiser. Twenty-five percent of employees felt that the extent

to which they do their job is very little. One third of the employee population felt that little

freedom is given to do what they want on the job. Twenty-four point two percent felt little

opportunity is offered for independent thought and action.

        Kaiser appears to be weak in Interpersonal Relationships. A slight weakness in friendship

opportunity suggests that employees do not have a chance to meet individuals whom you would

like to develop friendships with. Social supports in ranges differently throughout Kaiser; some

employees depend on spouses and friends to talk to when things are going tough at work.

Problem in this is that nearly half of the employees do not talk to their supervisor when there is a

tough time at work. This suggests that poor relationships exist between employees.

        Kaiser lacks in empowering their employees. Employees do not have a strong influence

in what goes on in their job, can not influence their supervisors in issues that concern the

employee, supervisors inadequately ask for opinions in the work the employee is involved, and

finally, it is not easy to suggest improvements. Thirty-nine point nine percent felt little time is

left to get things done on the job. This poorly influence task structure.
       Another weakness in Kaiser is their job clarity. They have ambiguous role that that

causes uncertainty in authority and lack clear, planned goals and objectives. Over fifty percent

receive assignments without the proper manpower to complete them. As a result, there is

confusion as what is wanted out of the job and whether it is necessary. A whooping fifty- percent

of employees are dissatisfied in their appraisal system. Only thirty-four percent is satisfied with

this system. Feedback is poor as well as the degree to which the employee is fairly paid for is

low.

Job satisfaction to some degree is poor. Over fifty percent are dissatisfied with the amount of

personal growth and development they get in the job. Over 20% of the employees either felt

their job did not offer a feeling of worthiness in the job, independent thought and action on the

job, or that their job was challenging. About thirty percent or more were dissatisfied with their

future outlook in their job at Kaiser; security issues seem to fall in place.
                      IMPLEMENTATION / INTERVENTION

STRATEGIC INTERVENTIONS

       An organization’s strategy is formulated from an analysis of its informational uncertainty

and resource dependency. Informational uncertainty is the availability, accuracy, and timeliness

of information about the industry in which the company operates. Resource dependency is the

level to which the company depends on natural or other resources. Resource dependency and

informational uncertainty play a vital role in the aluminum industry.

       Operating in the steel industry may have a great deal of informational uncertainty. A

majority of Kaiser’s products go to the aluminum can and aeronautic industries. Although the

aluminum can industry is relatively stable, all things considered, the aeronautic industry has

recently witnessed excessive volatility. This volatility represents the reasons supporting the

merger between Boeing and McDonald Douglas. Furthermore, the weakening foreign economies

resulting from the stock market collapse in several Asian countries has had a detrimental effect

on airplane sales from the United States. As orders for new planes are being canceled from

foreign clients, Boeing has been forced to downsize. This will no doubt have negative effects on

the amount of processed aluminum Kaiser sells to Boeing. Coupled with weakening foreign

economies, Kaiser’s international competitors are being forced to lower costs and stream-line

production. Decreased demand and less expensive products result in declining aluminum prices.

Fluctuations, like this scenario, make strategic management even more important for an

organization.

       It is critical for an organization to understand the environment it operates in. The

organizational level where decisions are made is dependent upon the relationship between
information uncertainty and resource dependency. A high level of resource dependency exists in

the aluminum industry. Inflow of materials and the prices of these materials coupled with the

demand of processed materials and outflow dictates Kaiser’s strategies. The industry is volatile

and thus requires decisions to be made quickly by using up-to-date information. The criticality

and availability of resources is what should be analyzed at Kaiser. Environmental constraints are

at a maximum and thus require accurate and timely responses to maintain a successful business.

The relationship between information uncertainty and resource dependency is illustrated below:




                                                Resource Dependence

                                         Low                            High

                               Minimal environmental          Moderate constraint and

                   Low        constraint and need to be           responsiveness to
Information
                              responsive to environment             environment

 Uncertainty                   Moderate constraint and        Maximal environmental

                   High    responsiveness to environment      constraint and need to be

                                                             responsive to environment




       Strategic interventions should focus on key areas such as segmented markets, changing

laws and regulations, customer and supplier behavior, market research, and public relations for

example. Strategic planning at Kaiser should include an analysis of product development,
pricing, and customer/supplier behavior. The environment in which Kaiser operates is volatile,

thus requiring decisions to be made at the lowest levels of the organization.



INTEGRATED STRATEGIC CHANGE

   I. The relevant unit of analysis is Kaiser's strategic orientation or the configuration of

   strategy, structure, and process. A business strategy and the organization design that supports

   it must be considered as an integrated unit.



   II. Creating the strategic plan, gaining commitment and support for it, planning its

   implementation, and executing it is treated as one integrated process. The ability to conduct

   such a process over and over again when conditions warrant it represents a sustainable

   competitive advantage.



   III. Individuals and groups throughout the organization are integrated into the analysis,

   planning, and implementation process to create a more achievable plan, to maintain the

   firm’s strategic focus, to focus attention and resources on the organization’s key

   competencies, to improve coordination and integration within the organization, and to create

   higher levels of shared ownership and commitment.




Four Steps Involved in A Strategic Change Plan:

   1. Performing a strategic analysis

   2. Exercising strategic choice
   3. Designing a strategic change plan

   4. Implementing the plan



Performing a strategic analysis:

       Begin with a diagnosis of the organization’s readiness for change and current strategy.

Kaiser must have senior management’s willingness and ability to carry anything out. Two key

dimensions in analysis are the leader’s willingness and commitment to change and the team

members’ willingness and ability to follow the leader’s initiative. Organizations whose leaders

are not willing to lead and whose senior managers are not willing and able to support the new

strategic direction when necessary should consider team-building processes to insure their

commitment.

       Strategy is represented by the organization’s mission, goals and objectives, intent, and

business policies. The organization design is described by the structure, work, information, and

human resource systems. Kaiser must assess customer satisfaction, product and service

offerings, financial health, technological capabilities, organizational culture, structure, and

systems. This analysis must actively include organization members in the process. Search

conferences, employee focus groups, interviews, and other methods allow employees and

managers to participate in the endeavor and increase the amount and relevance of the data

collected. This builds commitment and ownership of the change effort. Should a strategic

change be initiated, members are more likely to understand why and be supportive of it.

Exercising strategic choice:

       The strategic analysis points out problem areas among the organization’s environment,

strategic orientation, and performance. As the process unfolds, alternative strategies,
organization designs, and member preferences will emerge. Based on this analysis, senior

management visions the future and broadly defines several alternative sets of objectives and

strategies for achieving them. Although participation from other organizational stakeholders is

important (i.e. MAXXAM, Kaiser’s parent company) in the alternative generation phase,

choosing the appropriate strategic orientation ultimately rests with top management and cannot

be easily delegated. Senior managers are in the unique position of being able to view strategy

from a general management position. When major strategic decisions are given to lower-level

managers, the risk of focusing too narrowly on a product, market, or technology increases.

Effective means of delegating decision making authority will be discussed later.

       The desired strategy defines the products or services to offer, the markets to be served,

and the way these outputs will be produced and positioned. The desired organization design

specifies the organizational structures and processes necessary to support this new strategy. The

alignment of an organization’s design with a particular strategy can be a major source of superior

performance and competitive advantage.

Designing a strategic plan:

       The strategic change plan is a comprehensive agenda for moving the organization from its

current strategy and organization design to the desired future strategic orientation. It represents

the process or “how” of strategic change. The change plan describes the types, magnitude, and

schedule of change activities, as well as the costs associated with them. It also specifies how the

changes will be implemented, given power and political issues, the nature of the organizational

culture, and the current ability of the organization to implement change.

Implementing a strategic plan:
       The implementation of the change plan draws heavily on knowledge of motivation, group

dynamics, and change processes. It deals continuously with such issues as alignment,

adaptability, teamwork, and organizational and personal learning. Implementation requires

senior managers to champion the different elements of the change plan. They do this by

initiating action and allocating resources to particular activities, setting high but achievable goals,

and providing feedback on accomplishments. In addition, leaders must hold people accountable

to the change objectives, institutionalize each change that occurs, and be prepared to solve

problems as they arise. There must be a willingness to adjust the plan as implementation unfolds

to address unforeseen and unpredictable events and to take advantage of new opportunities. A

closer look at Kaiser’s group dynamics, motivation, and feedback will follow later.



STRUCTURAL DESIGN

       An uncertain, volatile environment suits a flat organizational structure where employees

are empowered to take responsibility to meet changing demands. If employees are to make these

decisions, substantial employee development must take place. Employees should be trained so

that labor needs change with each step along the production process. The work groups could

adapt by shifting resources to their most valued use. An important benefit from this could be that

employees gain a better understanding of the entire business process from product development

to production through marketing and sales and a better understanding of how their work fits into

the company’s success.



EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT

Below, a list of desired outcomes for general employee involvement is illustrated.
Desired Individual Outcomes:

       1. Adequate and fair compensation

       2. Safe and healthy environment

       3. Development of human capacities

       4. Growth and security

       5. Social integration

       6. Constitutionalism

       7. Social relevance



Key Elements of Employee Involvement:

       1. Power

       2. Information

       3. Knowledge and Skills

       4. Rewards



Power:

       This element includes providing people with sufficient authority to make decisions. Such

empowerment can cover a variety of work-related decisions involving work methods, task

assignments, performance outcomes, and employee selection. The amount of power given to

employees can vary enormously, from simply asking them for input into decisions that managers

subsequently make, to managers and workers jointly making decisions, to employees making

decisions themselves. The environment in which Kaiser operates suggests that decision making

should be delegated to the lowest levels allowable.
Information:

       Timely access to relevant information is vital to making effective decisions. Kaiser can

promote employee involvement by ensuring that necessary information flows freely to those

empowered to make decisions. This can give information about operating results, business plans,

environmental conditions, new technologies and work methods, and ideas for organization

improvement.

Knowledge and skills:

       Employee involvement contributes to organizational effectiveness only to the extent that

employees have the necessary skills and knowledge to make good decisions. Kaiser should

facilitate employee involvement by providing training and development programs for improving

members’ knowledge and skills. Training should cover performing tasks, making decisions,

solving problems, understanding how the business operates, and team-work.

Rewards:

       Because people generally do those things for which they are recognized, rewards can have

a powerful effect on getting people involved in the organization. Meaningful opportunities for

involvement can provide employees with internal rewards, such as feelings of self-worth and

accomplishment. External rewards, such as pay and promotions, can reinforce employee

involvement when they are linked directly to performance outcomes that result from participation

in decision making. Kaiser must find new and fair ways to reward its employees. Solutions to

the reward system problems will be discussed later.

       The four elements of power, information, knowledge and skills, and rewards determine

how much participation in decision making is possible at Kaiser. The farther that all four

elements are moved downward throughout the organization, the greater the employee
involvement in decision involvement. Moreover, because the four elements of employee

involvement are interdependent, they must be changed together to obtain positive results. For

example, if organization members are given more power and authority to make decisions but do

not have the information or knowledge and skills necessary to make good decisions, then the

value of involvement is likely to be negligible. High involvement organizations using lower

level decision making are necessary for volatile industries. Considerations for improving

employee involvement and decision making must be made.


HUMAN RESOURCE ISSUES:

       In order to improve employee feedback human resource needs to develop an appraisal

system that encourages the positive outcome management wants. Management must develop a

high quality product without trading off employee satisfaction. Communication, trust, clearly

defined roles, and the right mix of pay and benefits affect how the organization competes. As a

conclusion, Kaiser must improve their feedback system. Employees need to know when they

performing well on the job and what they can improve on. However, the method in which the

feedback is conducted has many flaws and creates animosity.

       Supervisors must provide constructive criticism when needed and acknowledge a great

performance when merited. Therefore, all supervisors need to be trained proper feedback and in

motivating employees. A one-day seminar on how to provide constructive criticism, how to

communicate, and how to acknowledge a job well done is recommended. The seminar will

highlight feedback timing and methods of feeding back information. Next, human resources

must develop a method in which the employees can evaluate the supervisor. Factors to evaluate

include communication, approachability, availability, trust, training, and group involvement.
Overall, lower level employees have an opportunity to evaluate their supervisors and supervisors

have an opportunity to evaluate employees.

       Benefits and pay must be related to this appraisal system. Rewards that employees

suggest will be used to acknowledge a job well done. These rewards can range from vacations to

end-of-the year bonuses. Employees must view the motivation factor as a reward and not as a

given. They need to understand that good performance is encouraged and that Kaiser values them

for their performance. Human resources must keep lower level employees in this change

process. Therefore, management must take a day off to plan the one-day seminar and understand

the needed change in the process. The Director of Human Resources will be responsible to

insure human resources stay on task. Union will be included in all of the process. From

beginning to end, Union should be involved and at least one man should be present.

Interventions

       We felt a performance appraisal intervention would be best for a feedback intervention.

Performance appraisal maintains the bridge between goal setting and reward systems. From the

Kaiser survey, it was concluded that supervisors do a poor job of feeding back information to

employees. A multi-feedback program is recommended. Employees and supervisors must be

actively involved in providing information about job performance to one another, a.k.a. 360-

degree feedback. Supervisors and employees must come together to discuss what kind of

feedback is currently being provided and whether or not the feedback is accurate and

motivational as well. As a result, supervisors will then have a one-day seminar to discuss how

they can improve their feedback skills and when to implement the change.

Implementations
One day will be set aside, in which employees, supervisors, human resources, and management

will sit and discuss their feedback process. By now Human Resource should have somewhat of

an idea on what is faulty in their appraisal system. Management should make it clear as to why

employees and supervisors are meeting, to improve feedback. Groups of 5 or 6 people will hold

discussion circles. These groups will be randomly selected. The group to relate back will then

elect a spokesman. This spokesman will then gather with the rest of the spokes to further

develop the change. The aggregate information will then be separated into the most important

areas to improve in feedback. An issue that may come up is the process in which feedback is

given, timing, personalities etc.

After all these issues and suggestions are given, at the end of day supervisors are to decide when

to set aside a day to improve their feedback skills and analyze what those poor feedback skills are

influencing, i.e. poor delegation, unsatisfied workers, role ambiguity, poor communication, etc.

Six months later a follow should be conducted. The spokesmen selected the first day to speak on

behalf of the groups will be in the follow-up committee as well as a nominated supervisor and a

human resource individual. Once the feedback issue is on the back burner, pay and rewards will

be evaluated by the follow up committee. We chose pay and rewards after feedback because

these factors are high related. You can not have a proper pay and reward system without proper

feedback. Therefore, feedback is the first issue that Kaiser must consider.




Human Resource Management Interventions

       There were several human resource problems discovered in the survey. Many of these

problems are related to the supervisors' skills. The intervention consists of three parts. First,

goals to improve the working environment will be set according to an ideal described by the
supervisors. These goals will relate to issues from the survey. Second, the supervisors will be

divided into the four departments surveyed: Coil, Vertical/Salem, CPL, Batch, and FPL. Each

group of supervisors will choose three areas of improvement. Next, seminars would be

organized to train the managers in these topics. The last part of the intervention is to give

another survey in one year to measure the effectiveness of the training.

   The intervention would begin with a confrontation meeting with the supervisors, consultants,

and a representative from top management. The supervisors would work together to describe the

ideal working environment and how it can be created through managing employees. The

consultant and the top management representative would lead the discussion. This discussion

will be used to set goals for changes in supervisor's skills. It is crucial that they own the whole

process, rather than the consultants and top management handing down a plan. There are many

factors that compose the best working environment. An employee needs to feel motivated,

empowered, appriciated. The best conditions produce excellent results and employees feel

commited and satisfied in their work.

     When the ideal standard had been established, the results of the survey would be presented.

First, the questions pertaining to the supervisor’s skills would be read and a copy of the questions

given to the supervisors. Next the managers would be divided into the four groups surveyed:

Coil, Vertical/Salem, CPL, Batch, and FPL. Supervisors may feel defensive at first because of

the number of questions that had high negative responses. They should be divided into work

teams to coordinate a consistent approach within the team. Another reason is that each

department has different results for each question.

   Each group would determine an acceptable rating on the questions rating supervisor

performance. This acceptable rating should lead to creating an ideal working environment. For
example, an acceptable rating of trust may be for strongly agree to be greater than 35%, and

strongly disagree be less than 5%. This may be discouraging, but it will motivate a need for

change. These ratings will be used to measure success another survey given in one year.

       Next, the results from the survey would be revealed. Each group would get data for the

whole organization and its division. In this method, each supervisor would discuss only factors

that he had control over. Strengths and weaknesses would be discussed in comparison to the ideal

working environment and acceptable ratings established. There are many areas needing

improvement, but a few should be improved on at a time. Each group would choose three areas

of improvement from the survey. These areas will be the greatest weakness determined by the

data. These areas would be discussed in separate seminars designed to improve skills of the

supervisors. The supervisors and the consultants would share ideas in these seminars. Changes

in rewards systems, and goal setting would yield the greatest improvements for the whole

organization.

       Each seminar would present several methods to improve its factors. Scenarios and case

studies would be used to practice the implementation of these techniques. Goal setting skills will

be reviewed in a seminar. Goals must be specific, measurable, challenging, and clear. The

supervisors should develop a schedule for periodic review of goals with their departments. After

the seminar, the supervisors would meet with their department to implement goal setting.       The

work teams could meet once a month to review progress on current goal and to change them

accordingly.

       Another seminar would be reward systems. Reward systems are highly correlated to

goals set. The value expectancy theory the effectiveness of reward systems to motivate

employees is based on six factors: availability, timliness, performance contingency, durability,
equity, and visibility. Availability is the amount of reward offered. The reward must be

significant enough to motivate a change in behavior. A reward also needs to be timely. Desired

changes of behavior should be quickly recognized and rewards given. The reward should be

specifically linked to a measurable performance. Earning a reward can only occur if a worker

knows exactly what is required. Employee recognitions such as an attendance award or

employee-of -the month can be created. The last step in the implementation is another survey,

given in one year to determine the success of the training.


                               DATA GATHERING SYNOPSIS

       Data gathering for the organizational change process consisted solely of a survey. The

survey was designed to provide data on different work designs. The purpose of the survey was to

provide data which can be used in further organizational design and assist in determining

organization effectiveness.

       A Kaiser employee administered the questionnaire. Employee’s answers were completely

confidential. The response choices were different in separate sections of the survey. For

example, employees were asked whether they agree or disagree, are satisfied or dissatisfied, or

whether something is likely or not likely to happen, etc. After analyzing the results, the

consultants agreed that weaknesses were significant if 20 percent of the population, or greater,

responded as disagree, dissatisfied, etc. Likewise, strengths were significant if 80 percent of the

population responded as agree, likely, etc.

       The length of the survey was of concern to the consultants. A survey of this extreme

length may tend to skew the results due to respondents growing uninterested, irritable, and/or

uncomfortable with the act of filling out the survey. Furthermore, the columns in which answers
were perceived as negative or positive (i.e. satisfied or dissatisfied) changed on a few occasions.

When filling out a survey, one tends to comprehend one end of the spectrum (i.e. 1 through 5) as

either negative or positive. Some answers that were positive would be marked in the negative

end of the spectrum. For example, one suspect question states, "Most of my personal life goals

are job oriented." 61.5% of respondents disagreed with the statement. We believe that this is a

positive response. Moreover, respondents should set personal life goals separate from job

orientation. The question had respondents answer in the disagree or negative column. Switching

back and forth between the positive and negative columns may invalidate the results because the

respondent may become confused by what the survey is implying.

       Finally, the data gathering process would have been greatly enhanced by conducting

interviews. Interviews are probably the most effective techniques for collecting data in

organizational development. Interviews permit the consultant to ask the respondent direct

questions. Further probing and clarification is, therefore, possible as the interview proceeds.

This flexibility is invaluable for gaining private views and feelings about the organization and for

exploring new issues that emerge during the interview. Before continuing with an intervention

and implementation, we would want to conduct interviews of as many employees as possible.
                            Culture

100.00
 80.00
 60.00
                                                           Average
 40.00
 20.00
  0.00
         Trust       Fairness   Satisfaction     Team
                                               Standards




                     Performance Norms

100.00
 80.00
 60.00
                                                           Average
 40.00
 20.00
  0.00
          Team Standards              Job Involvement




                 Interpersonal Relationships

100.00
 80.00
 60.00
                                                           Average
 40.00
 20.00
  0.00
             Friendship               Social Support
         100.00
          90.00
          80.00
          70.00
          60.00
          50.00                                                                      Average
          40.00
          30.00
          20.00
          10.00
           0.00
                       n




                                                                  gh
                                    s


                                                     e
                     io


                                    es



                                                  at


                                                                ou
                   at




                                               ur
                                  in
                 ic




                                                             or
                               el



                                              c
               un




                                           Ac


                                                           Th
                              m
             m



                           Ti




                                                        n/
            m




                                                      pe
         Co




                                                  O




                                              Feedback

100.00
 80.00
 60.00
                                                                                                     %
 40.00
 20.00
  0.00
         Feedback Avg      WIP           Supervisor      Supervisor    Opportunity     Individuals
                                      Appraisal

 100.00
  80.00
  60.00
                                                                            Average %
  40.00
  20.00
   0.00
          Recognition      Fairness       Pay Scale        Growth




                                 Empowerment

 100.00
  80.00
  60.00
                                                                                  %
  40.00
  20.00
   0.00
          Say in Job     Influence      Asked       Easy to get    Overall Job
                        Supervisors    Questions   Ideas Across     Influence




                                 Decision-Making


100.00
 80.00
 60.00                                                                             %
 40.00
 20.00
  0.00
                  Delegation                          Timeliness
                              Leadership

100.00
 80.00
 60.00
                                                                         %
 40.00
 20.00
  0.00
                 Delegation                       Innovation




                         Group Involvement

100.00
 80.00
 60.00
                                                                         %
 40.00
 20.00
  0.00
          Team Goals        Team        Team Prob-          Team
                        Effectiveness      Solv          Participation




                              Task Structure

 100.00
  80.00
  60.00
                                                                         %
  40.00
  20.00
   0.00
                               Job Requirements
                                             Skill Variety

          100.00
           80.00
           60.00                                                                            %
           40.00
           20.00
            0.00
                            Variety in Job                    # of things on Job




                                             Autonomy

100.00
 80.00
 60.00
                                                                                                  %
 40.00
 20.00
  0.00
         Extent of Independence              Freedom on Job         Opportunity for Independent
                                                                             Thought




                                    Role Clarity and Conflict

         100.00
          80.00
          60.00                                                                              %
          40.00
          20.00
           0.00
                         Role Ambiguity                       Role Conflict

								
To top