Design_of_Work_Systems

Design of Work Systems In the “Making Hotplates” case study, 10 workers were responsible for assembling hotplates for medical and hospital laboratory use. Initially, each worker was responsible for assembling different parts of the hotplate as the hotplate was carried from station to the next. Once the hotplate was completed, someone would inspect the hotplate to make sure that it was efficiently working and then the last worker would place it in a box to be shipped. “Job design involves specifically the content and methods of jobs. Job designers focus on what will be done in a job, who will do the job, how the job will be done, and where the job will be done.” (Stevenson, 2011, p.291) Industrial engineers carefully designed this assembly line by studying the breakdown of each subassembly task that required each task to be completed in three minutes. The problem with this process is that it seemed to keep morale down and hotplates were not being assembled properly, generating controllable rejects at 23 percent. After discussing the low morale dilemma with management, they decided to try something new. Management asked workers if they would prefer to build the hotplates individually. This meant that instead one worker being responsible for assembling one part of the hotplate, the worker would be responsible for assembling a hotplate in its entirety. The workers decided to give this process a try, but would go back to the old process if this one was unsuccessful. After changing to this process, productivity elevated quickly to an increase of 84 percent higher than productivity of the first half of the year. The redesigning of the workflow and the increase of worker empowerment are the changes that occurred to increase productivity and lower the number of controllable rejects. By redesigning the workflow, the workers were responsible for assembling the entire hotplate instead of one part of the plate. This could also be called job enlargement. “Job enlargement means giving a worker a larger portion of the total task. This constitutes horizontal loading—the additional work is on the same level of the skill and responsibility as the original job.” (Stevenson, 2011, p.292) This made the tasks of the workers more interesting by allowing the workers to learn more skills and allowed them to be recognized for their role to the tasks. Employees then felt empowered because they completed the job on their own, with even one worker stating “Now, this is my plate.” The new process also gave the employees a sense of pride by in their finished hotplate. By the employees having more responsibility and accountability, employees became more empowered and motivated to get the job done. Employee motivation drives employees to work more efficiently and has a positive impact on productivity. With the initial process, employees had little motivation when working in the subassemblies with increased the number of controllable rejects. Now with the new process, employees are motivated by being accountable for the entire hotplate. Job satisfaction is important to the drop in absenteeism and increase in morale of the workers. A person’s response to the job experience is defined as job satisfaction (Berry, 1997). Because the original process did not allow the workers to feel like they had control over the outcome of the hotplates, they were not satisfied with their jobs. The old process possibly made workers feel like the work they were doing was redundant and boring. This can make workers less committed to the overall goals of the company. With the new process, workers felt more responsible and liable for the finished hotplates. “Job design involves specifically the content and methods of jobs. Job designers focus on what will be done in a job, who will do the job, how the job will be done, and where the job will be done.” (Stevenson, 2011, p.291) By redesigning the job of the workers, management was able to enrich the workers overall work environment. Management was able to change and increase the workers involvement in the overall outcome of the hotplates. Management also implemented training sessions in order for the workers to be proficient with the new job processes. The workers were in control of letting the management team know whether or not they wanted to embrace this new process. Although, the workers were motivated with the new process, it was their responsibility to increase productivity and stay motivated. With the new design in the workflow, management was able to increase the productivity of the workers with job satisfaction. The boost in job satisfaction also will increase the quality of the products and improve morale in the work environment. Reverting back to the old process can decrease morale and productivity. The workers could back to feeling unmotivated and unsatisfied with their jobs. The workers will also feel as though management did not trust them enough to be successful in the new process. “In an ideal work environment, there is a high level of trust between workers and managers. When managers trust employees, there is a greater tendency to give employees added responsibilities.” (Stevenson, 2011, p. 293) The work environment could actually get worse then what it was before the new process was implemented. Workers may begin to feel that their work in the new process was not appreciated and decide not accept to old process again. Workers may begin not to care of the quality of their work and any increases in productivity will immediately vanish. References Berry, Lilly M. (1997). Psychology at Work. San Francisco: McGraw Hill Companies Stevenson, W.J. (2011). Operations Management (11th ed). New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Irwin.