Cox container case
People, Management & Organizations
Course Assignment 1
Problem Identification: 3
Analysis: 4
Alternatives: 8
1.Do Nothing. 8
2.Use a sacrifition sheep: 9
3.Driving changes smoothly and in the welfare of the production department: 9
Recommendations: 11
Plan of actions: 11
Bibliography 13
Problem Identification:
There are quite a good number of problems in the case of CCC, among of which one can define, are the following:
1- Job security for the ethnic minorities who run the workshop for years, while being empowered in the age of Harold Cox, they felt threatened by the introduction of the new management system, that was reflected by the defensive attitude of Aziz and his lack of cooperation which also can be the reaction of being marginalized by Wilson while conducting the company review.
2- Lack of managerial training, which was reflected on how Aziz perceives his job as a shop floor manager whose first and utmost concern, is to deliver production no matter what the outside environment is.
3- Market introduction of new competitors, which dictates the need of full review of the operations, budgeting, supply chain and labor competency. Hence introducing more bureaucracy to the current system and might limit the power of Aziz and his team.
4- The centralization and individuality of Harold Cox in running the company helped the creation of a divisionalized structure and culture as well as developing a high degree of autonomy in the production department and a shallow hierarchy especially in the financial and management accounting area.
Analysis:
The main reason why Cox asked Wilson to conduct a company review is to get the company moving forward, such an act could have been shared with department managers, despite Wilson’s conclusions, strategies must be compromises that allow the company to move forward (Johnson, 1992). Johnson also argued that Strategic drift takes many years to affect performance, which validates the
Course Assignment 1
Problem Identification: 3
Analysis: 4
Alternatives: 8
1.Do Nothing. 8
2.Use a sacrifition sheep: 9
3.Driving changes smoothly and in the welfare of the production department: 9
Recommendations: 11
Plan of actions: 11
Bibliography 13
Problem Identification:
There are quite a good number of problems in the case of CCC, among of which one can define, are the following:
1- Job security for the ethnic minorities who run the workshop for years, while being empowered in the age of Harold Cox, they felt threatened by the introduction of the new management system, that was reflected by the defensive attitude of Aziz and his lack of cooperation which also can be the reaction of being marginalized by Wilson while conducting the company review.
2- Lack of managerial training, which was reflected on how Aziz perceives his job as a shop floor manager whose first and utmost concern, is to deliver production no matter what the outside environment is.
3- Market introduction of new competitors, which dictates the need of full review of the operations, budgeting, supply chain and labor competency. Hence introducing more bureaucracy to the current system and might limit the power of Aziz and his team.
4- The centralization and individuality of Harold Cox in running the company helped the creation of a divisionalized structure and culture as well as developing a high degree of autonomy in the production department and a shallow hierarchy especially in the financial and management accounting area.
Analysis:
The main reason why Cox asked Wilson to conduct a company review is to get the company moving forward, such an act could have been shared with department managers, despite Wilson’s conclusions, strategies must be compromises that allow the company to move forward (Johnson, 1992). Johnson also argued that Strategic drift takes many years to affect performance, which validates the
Bibliography: Bassett-Jones, N., & Lloyed, G. C. (2005). Does Herzberg 's motivation theory have staying power? Journal of management development , 24 (10). Ford, J. D., Ford, L. W., & D 'Amelio, A. (2008). Resistance t change: The rest of the story. The academey of management review , 33 (2), 362-377. Herzberg, F. (1987, September). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review . Johnson, G. (1992). Managing strategic change - strategy, culture and action. Long Range Planning , 25 (1), 28-36. Leavitt, H. J. (2007). Big organizations are unhealthy environment for human beings. Academy of management learning & education , 6 (2), 253-263. Meyers, D., & Martin, J. (1987). CULTURAL CHANGE: AN INTEGRATION OF THREE DIFFERENT VIEWS. journal of Management Studies , 24 (6), 623-647. Polzer, J. T. (2004). How Subgroup Interests and Reputations Moderate the Effect of Organizational Identification on Cooperation . Journal of Management , 30, 71-96. Sirkin, H. L., & Jackson, A. (2005, October). The hard side of change management. Harvard Business Review , 33-47.