Overview
Despite a clear evidence of problems facing the assembly line workers at the WizzyWats factory, the hired consultant was unable to identify any specific problems. The poor performance of the workers in the assembly line in identification of defect problem resulted to serious problems in the production line. Key among these problems included the loss of production, increase in the number of defective products, and frustration on the side of management (University of Phoenix, 2013). The hiring of the consultant to dig deep into the workflow of the employees was expected to expose any flaws that could possibly have resulted to the unfortunate problem in the production line. The consultant concluded that fatigue and alertness of the employees as the factors leading to the problem. In respect to this, the consultant delivered two main recommendations to solve the issue; adding more comfortable chairs and incorporating breaks in the work schedules of the employees working in the assembly line management (University of Phoenix, 2013). However, these recommendations did not bear any fruits as workers still failed to identify the defective components properly.
Following a deep analysis and careful consideration of the above situation, I have come to a conclusion that the consultant hired overlooked some critical factors that are crucial in enhancing the productivity of factory employees. Similarly, I have also devised my own strategies that can be helpful in enabling WizzyWats achieve their desired goals. In this connection, therefore, I will also provide a set of recommendations as a part of solution to solving the problem faced at the factory. Similarly, I will also provide the best intervention level for the implementation of the solution provided, the reasons for selecting the given solution, and the possible evaluation technique to gauge the effectiveness of the solution in solving the problem.
Factors overlooked by the consultant
The comfortable chairs timely breaks in the work schedule of the employees working in the assembly line are important factors in boosting the morale of employees. However, these are not the sole answers as to why the employees could not accurately identify defect products in their lines. In the process of trying to obtain reasons for the low productivity of employees, the consultant only observed the workflow of the specific assembly line workers. However, no interviews were conducted with the employees. While observation is a very important tool of obtaining helpful data and information, it might not reveal some other data, which might be instrumental in boosting the morale and in turn the productivity of the employees (Pershing, 2006). Interviews could produce insights about the feeling and motivation of employees. Interviews are very essential when seeking to obtain data or any kind of information concerning the feelings, opinions, and the attitudes of specific individuals. In depth analysis from personal interviews provides a base where a researcher can find problems which cannot be manifested from the outward observation.
Additionally, the consultant did not solicit for the opinions of the assembly line workers in his bid to discover the functional problems related to the employees. It is always informed for any researcher to explore the views and suggestions of the respondents in a given situation. In a situation where one seeks to explore emotional related issues, there is always a need to come up with a strategy to put oneself into the shoes of the employees, and then trying to obtain suggestions on the best possible way of dealing with a given problem (Pershing, 2006). However, it is very evident that the hired consultant did not make an effort of doing this. I am deeply convinced that if the consultant could have tried to solicit for the opinions of the assembly line workers, a better solution to the problem could have been obtained.
The consultant failed to assess and evaluate the individual and group tasks while doing his investigation of the employees’ workflow in the assembly line. When trying to find a problem, especially in a large assembly line such as the one in the WizzyWats factory, it is very important to evaluate and assess the individual as well as the group tasks to reveal the source of error. While sometimes the error may result from a certain individual, other errors could be from lack of team work coordination. Setting up a control assessment could have been helpful in doing this. However, the consultant only observed the whole group from far without any effort to evaluate the individual task. This can be attributed to the poor observational technique utilized by this particular consultant.
Solution and Intervention Level
Evaluating of the company’s resources is also another solution. There is a need to evaluate the resources of the company to ensure that they are adequate and effective. For instance, the company has to ensure that the number of employees working in the assembly line is enough. It should guarantee that the required instruments, such as precision equipment are in place. Managers should also be involved in the process to aid a smooth coordination between employees and the managers.
As a starting point, the secondary level of intervention would appropriate. It will entail effective and efficient research based interventions, adjustments according to the needed information and frequent monitoring of the process.
Reasons for the Selected Solution and Intervention Level
Involvement of the assembly line workers in the decision process regarding their work process is critical in revealing the most wanting areas. It owes to the fact that the consultant will be in a position to obtain first-hand information, which in turn gives a more tailored and customized solution towards a given problem. Engagement of the employees in the decision process is crucial in boosting the morale of the employees. Similarly, evaluating the company resources will allow the company to discover any deficiency which needs to be corrected. For instance, if the company lacks enough equipment or an inadequate number of employees, a better corrective action can be taken. The secondary level of intervention will be the best in providing corrective measures in case of deviations from the expectations.
Evaluation of the intervention
The key success factors in evaluating the effectiveness of any intervention program in the factory would definitely be the number of defects, the level of production, and the level of management satisfaction. In evaluation of the above intervention provided, the above three factors will be put in to consideration. The evaluation will be done on weekly basis to tract the improvement levels. In the first week of implementation of the intervention, the defective products will be determined. Similarly, the level of production will also be noted. Management level of satisfaction will be determined through a direct interview program. This will then be compared with the defective and production levels prior to the intervention. Any deviation from the expected will then be corrected.
Conclusion
The hired consultant failed to put into consideration some key factors. Some of these factors included the failure to engage the employees in the problem-seeking process, use of ineffective observational techniques and failure to assess individual and group tasks. In order to improve the situation, employees need to be engaged and the company needs to evaluate its resources as well. The secondary intervention level would be ideal in this situation.
References
Phoenix, AET 550 - Performance Improvement and Management website.
Pershing, J. A. (2006). Handbook of human performance technology. San Francisco:
Pfeiffer.
