John Smithers At Sigtek
John Smithers Case in Leadership
January 30, 2009
Professor Curry
Case # 2: John Smithers
Participating Members:
CANADY, WR.
Response Summary:
Group Response to the John Smithers’ Case
1. In the case of Sigtek, was the change to a Six-Sigma Quality program a directed change or an elected change for the company? Does this make a difference in how top management supported change of the organization? Identify at least two instances in the case, which demonstrate the level of support provided by top management.
It was definitely a directed change after the dismal first [1st] quarter of 2001, Telwork a $5 billion European organization seized the opportunity to capitalize off a poorly managed company. The direct change was to find acceptable solutions to problems Sigtek faced in the area of quality, production, and managerial practices. The change was also to implement Six Sigma Quality program, primarily, because the model was successful in other large organizations. Nonetheless, we agree that Telwork fail to adequately plan and research Sigtek before implementation to range its effectiveness.
Because the change was not elected, support rendered by Richard Patricof, VP of Operations, other members of management, and several employees served as a facade, a false cover for non-supportive management as in the case of Sigtek. There was one prominent supporter of Six-Sigma, John Smithers, the Engineering Service Manager and passively Andrew Cross, VP of Engineering. To complicate matters, Sigtek reputation as an autocratic management style was untrusting and non-supportive of employees and new ideas. As a finale, Telwork terminated Mr. Charles Bradley, President, and Founder of Sigtek. Mr. Richard Patricof met his destiny, promoted to General Manager of Sigtek, and in his new capacity, he demoted Andrew Cross.
One particular instance was illustrated when Mr. Patricof told Smithers and Murphy to go for the know wins, even though they were small accomplishments. Another was
January 30, 2009
Professor Curry
Case # 2: John Smithers
Participating Members:
CANADY, WR.
Response Summary:
Group Response to the John Smithers’ Case
1. In the case of Sigtek, was the change to a Six-Sigma Quality program a directed change or an elected change for the company? Does this make a difference in how top management supported change of the organization? Identify at least two instances in the case, which demonstrate the level of support provided by top management.
It was definitely a directed change after the dismal first [1st] quarter of 2001, Telwork a $5 billion European organization seized the opportunity to capitalize off a poorly managed company. The direct change was to find acceptable solutions to problems Sigtek faced in the area of quality, production, and managerial practices. The change was also to implement Six Sigma Quality program, primarily, because the model was successful in other large organizations. Nonetheless, we agree that Telwork fail to adequately plan and research Sigtek before implementation to range its effectiveness.
Because the change was not elected, support rendered by Richard Patricof, VP of Operations, other members of management, and several employees served as a facade, a false cover for non-supportive management as in the case of Sigtek. There was one prominent supporter of Six-Sigma, John Smithers, the Engineering Service Manager and passively Andrew Cross, VP of Engineering. To complicate matters, Sigtek reputation as an autocratic management style was untrusting and non-supportive of employees and new ideas. As a finale, Telwork terminated Mr. Charles Bradley, President, and Founder of Sigtek. Mr. Richard Patricof met his destiny, promoted to General Manager of Sigtek, and in his new capacity, he demoted Andrew Cross.
One particular instance was illustrated when Mr. Patricof told Smithers and Murphy to go for the know wins, even though they were small accomplishments. Another was