Question

Two construction companies were vying for market share dominance. Company A embraced total quality, whereas company B did not. After an initial transition created by various change initiatives, during which company A lost some of their employees because of the quality initiative, a period of equilibrium and growth ensued. Customer were surveyed, employees were trained, and team began working on customer value and satisfaction improvements. At first company B was not concerned with company A Actually Company B hired the former employees from company A and watched as company A’s employees talked to customers and spent their off-season conducting employee training and forming problem and project teams However things changed. Company B began losing customers, to its rival, and they were replaced with other customers who had strained credit and multiple grievances. In addition, some of Company B’s finest employees left Company A despite promises of higher salaries and future bonuses. Company B decided to mimic Company A’s quality program by hiring an outside consultant. Time was spent advertising for and screening an appropriate consultant. The consultant was empowered to lead the program, with the blessing and support of the owner and president. The consultant met with the executive team and later with the employees and laid out the vision for the new quality program. This included training all employees in the concept and principle of total quality. Shortly with after the training sessions ended, teams were assembled with specific issues to solve. Meanwhile, valuable of- seasons time was expended, and the new construction seasons was drawing near. The new season meant employee workloads increased, which in turn required more employee work hours. Profit opportunities quickly replaced quality meetings and employees were left angry and confused. The initial hope of more involvement with work activities, netter contact with customers, and increased communications was replaced with frustration and cynicism. Before much could be done, the new construction season was in full swing. Later, as Company B’s construction season came to end, the consultant had difficulty finding volunteers to staff the quality teams. Conscripts were found, and teams resumed their work. Team meetings were plagued with personal attacks, finger pointing and conflict. Employees were threatened and some times fired before the whole quality program was solved. What went wrong? Why couldn’t company B mimic company A’s apparent success with quality? What might you have done differently?

Answer 1

Company B was unable to ape the quality initiatives of company A. the key reasons are as follows:

• The company hired an outside consultant to analyze and execute the quality initiative.
• The company started a quality initiative in full stream and before it could be properly executed quickly changed the objective to maximize business profits and service the customers abruptly shifting the key objective. It created confusion in team members.
• The key team members were directed by the consultant and did not feel involved.
• The company has a top-down hierarchy structure where decisions are dictated to the lower team members. We see the consultant an outside party hired for quality initiative and imposed on the team to bring about changes in the system. Then suddenly the quality initiatives are sidelined for profitability initiatives. There organizational behavior and culture are not balanced.

They could not mimic Company A’s initiative because of the following reasons:

• Company B is not making any changes in their management system.
• They are shifting abruptly from a production-oriented company to a quality oriented company and back to a profit and production oriented company.
• They are driven by the goals of profit maximization only and are not having an inclusive management with a balanced view of their objectives.
• The quality initiatives are superficial and not integral to company culture. This is seen by the shift of management behavior for quality programs to overtime and the only business maximization once lean period is over.
• There also seems to be a lack of communication between the top management and the employees where the business goals are not clearly discussed or uploaded.
• They are imposing consultant a third party on the staff without getting them involved. This is creating a conflict and a hostile environment in the organization.
• The staff is not aware of the needs to change and are simply being told they must change because Company A has changed.

The way things were handled in Company B could be hanged as follows:

• The consultant was hired and they explained the vision and quality initiatives to the employees.
• The employees should have been divided into many teams and the team should have been assigned team leader. The team leader should be a person already liked and respected amongst the group.
• The team roster should be created whereby their quality initiatives continue despite changes in business needs. The time spent on theoretical discussions could be reduced.
• The overall organizational culture should have changed and executed quality initiative by example by the top management.
• The quality parameters should have become an integral part of company B and not remain superficial and to be done during the lean period.
• The use of quality initiatives in the daily job should have been the key deliverable.

To conclude the management did not seem devoted to the quality initiatives. It appeared that it was a one of activity to keep employees busy during the lean period. It was not executed as a part of organizational culture and behavior. The involvement of employees is limited and there is zero communication.