Kenworth Motors Case Study Essays and Term Papers
Kenworth Motors Case Study Essays and Term Papers
Read “Kenworth Motors” beginning on p. 212 of Cummings & Worley (2009) and answer the four questions at the end of the case.
1. How well the OD consultant did prepares for the meeting with Denton? I do not believe that the OS consultant was quite prepared for the meeting. He stated that he was about to talk to a man and go to a firm that he knew nothing much about. He did have a little bit of facts about his title and his job tenure. But one thing is that he knew that it was Kenworth Motors’ Seattle truck manufacturing operations. He did not have agenda of what the business was all about and he was not focused about the agenda.
Would you have done anything differently?
Yes I would. If I knew that I was going on an appointment and I did not know anything about the firm or the person that I was going to see. I would have prepared myself a little better than that. I would have tried to find out more information about Mr. Denton, and I would have done a research about Kenworth Motors’ Seattle truck manufacturing operations.
2. In the discussion between the OD consultant and Denton, what was effective and ineffective about the consultant’s behavior?
One thing about the OD consultant is that when he had the interview with Mr. Denton he had a change to ask Mr. Denton question first about the plant and products. Denton was able to talk about 10 or 12 minutes on different topic—daily production rate of 23 trucks, the cost of the truck, the sales order backlog, some equipment updating just finished, his coming to this job from a plant in the Midwest, his spending a lot of time lately with the next year’s budget. This was effective because OD consultant was able to learn some things about Mr. Denton and the firm that he did not knew. They were able to communicate effectively with one another. Bob and the OD consultant both had a positive attitude.
The ineffective about the consultant’s behavior is that he was
Read “Kenworth Motors” beginning on p. 212 of Cummings & Worley (2009) and answer the four questions at the end of the case.
1. How well the OD consultant did prepares for the meeting with Denton? I do not believe that the OS consultant was quite prepared for the meeting. He stated that he was about to talk to a man and go to a firm that he knew nothing much about. He did have a little bit of facts about his title and his job tenure. But one thing is that he knew that it was Kenworth Motors’ Seattle truck manufacturing operations. He did not have agenda of what the business was all about and he was not focused about the agenda.
Would you have done anything differently?
Yes I would. If I knew that I was going on an appointment and I did not know anything about the firm or the person that I was going to see. I would have prepared myself a little better than that. I would have tried to find out more information about Mr. Denton, and I would have done a research about Kenworth Motors’ Seattle truck manufacturing operations.
2. In the discussion between the OD consultant and Denton, what was effective and ineffective about the consultant’s behavior?
One thing about the OD consultant is that when he had the interview with Mr. Denton he had a change to ask Mr. Denton question first about the plant and products. Denton was able to talk about 10 or 12 minutes on different topic—daily production rate of 23 trucks, the cost of the truck, the sales order backlog, some equipment updating just finished, his coming to this job from a plant in the Midwest, his spending a lot of time lately with the next year’s budget. This was effective because OD consultant was able to learn some things about Mr. Denton and the firm that he did not knew. They were able to communicate effectively with one another. Bob and the OD consultant both had a positive attitude.
The ineffective about the consultant’s behavior is that he was
Cited: Thomas G. Cummings & Christopher G. Worley, Organization Development & Change, 9th Edition, South-Western Cengage Learning