Case Study OB

Amasi implemented self-directed teams (SDTs) at RL Wolfe to improve productivity and quality. He expected 30-40% improvements based on prior studies showing SDTs delivering a ROI 3x the industry average. The director agreed with Amasi's decision to empower workers through SDTs. SDTs improved workers' motivation by reducing hierarchies, allowing cross-training, and giving workers more ownership. The new plants had fewer management layers than old plants, streamlining roles from 8 to 4. However, some workers still saw their jobs traditionally and lacked commitment to problem-solving, shown in higher absenteeism. When hiring, managers should seek candidates committed to teams and competent in operations, which may require assessing

Uploaded by

Gts Pierre

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

18 views

Case Study OB

Uploaded by

Gts Pierre

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 2

Case Study: RL Wolfe: Implementing Self-Directed Teams

1. What are the goals and rationality of Amasi when he decided to implement self-directed teams
(SDTs)? Do you agree with his decision?

As director of Production and Engineering, Amasi took the decision to implement SDTs in order to
improve the productivity and quality of the PE pipes manufactured in terms of design capacity (tons
per year) for each plant where SDT is used compared to the traditional ones. In fact he had learned
that “30 to 40% improvements” are available thanks to the SDT method which drives a ROI 3 times
“higher than the industry average”.

Being in such a top management position requires to take such bold actions to boost returns for the
investors. Hence that choice to increase the operational productivity of the Corpus Christi plant. I
totally agree with his decision-making process and would have done the same to weight the pros and
the cons of such new productivity methods where employees feel more committed and part of the
company’s process. I believe that it’s crucial to empower line workers or technicians so that they feel
considered by their management without the traditional ivory tower perception or Chinese wall
between the management and the workers.

To prevent absenteeism and poor productivity, SDT seems to have real benefits on all aspects, which
is why I would have implemented that method too.

2. How would you describe the effects of SDTs on RL Wolfe workers’ motivation?

Thanks to SDTs differences between the maintenance and line operator personnel decreased as SDTs
redesigned the shift system. Before implementation of SDTs, line workers were paid less than
maintenance technicians and even foremen on the line weren’t allowed to perform any maintenance
on the line, which is paradoxical as these foremen are the best placed to understand the operational
issues.

To solve that problem SDT allow workers to learn every job at the pant and acquire new skills on the
job. The shift became leaner with less middlemen included and a more horizontal hierarchy allowing
a direct communication between the technicians and the operators. This led to improvements in
team’s collaboration and consequently on worker’s motivation as the collapse in absenteeism rates
show in Exhibit 5. Workers disclose that thanks of SDT, they feel more considered, they act in a less
rigid framework and enjoy more there activity than their peers in Austin or Colombus. Even if some
may feel doubtful since management takes their advice into account, it drives their motivation more
than having a traditional vertical management of separate teams.

3. Compare and contrast the new plant to the old plant in terms of work design. Identify the most
challenging problems.

First of all in terms of the global hierarchical system, new plants have less layers than the old ones,
meaning that middleman jobs have been erased to empower workers more than in the old plant
design. Whereas before there used to be foremen of each separate team working distinctively, now
in the new plants, there is only one global coordinator whose role is to consider workers as experts
and accountable to each other, rather than relying on foremen. Consequently, the management
design is more effective, empowers people and drive teams to work together as a group rather than
separately in some competitive process.
If we look at the shifts, their design stayed at 27 FTEs per shift in the old plants and the new plants,
only the roles attributed to everyone changed. Thanks to that streamlining and rationalisation of job
descriptions, it became easier to understand who does what on the line and hence earn time in
handling operational issues. The SDT allowed to change from 8 different roles to 4, thus showing the
economies of scale in terms of management.

The most challenging problem which is remaining is maybe the differences in empowerment
between employees in the new plants. For instance, as workers are required to take more decisions
by themselves, maybe it doesn’t suit to each worker’s definition of the job, as some of them still see
it as a traditional 8h/day job without assessing the added value of SDT. This could explain the
absenteeism rate in the 3rd shift in the new plants, which remained equivalent the industry average,
as people haven’t changed drastically their day-to-day work tasks in a meaningful way. That
challenge is intrinsically linked to the hiring process of those workers, which is according to me, the
biggest issue to highlight.

4. If you were in the position of a hiring manager and looking for employees who would excel in self-
directed teams, what characteristics (personality, competencies...) would you seek?

As I began to draw conclusions in my previous question, the success of SDT relies on the quality of
the workers you want to hire. As shown in Exhibit 4, it seems that the hiring manager should focus on
people with high commitment as well as competence to excel at their operational work.
Furthermore, they should be comfortable with working in a team and taking ownership, which is
quite hard to assess in an 1 to 1 interview. Maybe I would prefer collective interviews, gathering
candidates and assessing how they interact with one another in a given situation like a line
operation.