Imt_Custom_Machine_Company_Case_Study

IMT Custom Machine Company, Inc. (CMCI) is a subsidiary of International Machine and Tool—USA (IMT-USA). They are a highly regarded company and are the world’s leading manufacturer of custom machines. IMT has a lengthy history involving multiple acquisitions and mergers which have led the company to its current form. Throughout the extensive changes that have taken place throughout the company’s history, and especially within the last twenty years, the company has lost much of its cohesion and unity. By 1999, the CMCI culture was fractured, its work flow stuttered, and many changes were needed in order for the company to remain abreast of market changes in a competitive world. In 1999 June Page, an experienced manager in the custom machines industry, was appointed Vice President of CMCI. She was mainly responsible for two manufacturing plants in Chicago, Ill and Fort Wayne, Indiana, that together produced around 150 machines per year. She was also in charge of a third factory that provided support to the two main factories through the production of spare parts and other necessities. The production of these large, complex machines was handled by teams of educated, highly experienced engineers and designers. The machines were built for the production of parts for large items, primarily used within the automobile industry. June Page did not have any background in Information Technology, nor was she particularly aware of how information systems of each of her factories worked. She did realize upon being appointed to her position as VP of CMCI, however, that the underlying organizational problem at IMT was the lack of a clear and cohesive company culture. One of her first duties as VP was to work with upper management to create a statement of the corporate mission, guiding principles, and vision. This statement was meant to be universally applicable to IMT and its various subsidiaries throughout the world. Page understands the value of a clear and concise set of core company values, which will help her make a decision when it comes to the improvement of the CMCI IT department. Page realizes that CMCI needs to improve the efficiency and organization of their information systems across each of its manufacturing plants and other centers of operation. An overarching vision for the company as a whole has been created, which is a positive foundation for the future. This new vision for the future needs to now be applied to other aspects of the company, starting with its information systems. The company’s IT structure is extremely fractured, consisting of many different systems. Many of them are important and necessary, while others border on superfluous. Problems There are a number of clear issues that need to be addressed before the company’s information systems can begin to get back on track. Firstly, in order to maintain a functioning IT department, a senior level manager needs to be appointed. This position will be designed to oversee all information systems concerns and issues, and provide clear cut direction. They will also act as a liaison between members of management who may be disconnected from information systems, such as Page, and the IT department. In order to facilitate a strong company culture for all information systems, a statement of vision, architecture, and strategy needs to be developed that is consistent with business objectives. Many of IMT’s values can be directly related to the importance of information systems. For example, one of the guiding principles states, “concentrate on priority actions rather than procedural issues.” Currently, employees of CMCI are forced to juggle the use of handful of different systems, many of which are not updated nor optimized for their current work requirements. This creates the need for unnecessarily complicated workarounds that keep engineers bogged down in “procedural issues,” when other tasks of greater priority exist. Another guiding principle states, “remove barriers to performance,” one of which are the slow-moving, complicated machines and illogical systems the employees are required to work with. But the IT issues continue: Systems at CMCI are supported by a team split between two separate groups (MIS and ES) with no real collaboration or interconnection. A large portion of mainframe CPU capacity is being used to run CAD software for the engineers. In order to keep the aging systems functioning, frequent and costly software updates are required. Security is everything for large company systems, but at CMCI there is no data redundancy in case of mainframe failure. During system downtime (which really should never happen), groups are having to rely on inefficient paper systems. There is no real consistency in the software developed for use at each of the manufacturing plant. When a local issue arises, software is developed to address the problem, but little to no consideration is given for the application of such software at other company centers. In short, there are an array of problems plaguing the information systems at the CMCI manufacturing plants, but there are fortunately a few different options for a solution. Solution 1: Centralized Computer Environment This solution is the most similar to the current system, and involves the elimination of existing Sun and IBM workstations. This will benefit the system overall by freeing up a large amount of mainframe CPU capacity. CMCI will want to purchase a newer mainframe with updated software in order to handle the extra users and workload requirements. The IS staff would be highly prepared for this system, and may appreciate the simplicity of working from a quicker, more centralized system. Unfortunately, CMCI would have to spend a sizable amount of money in order to invest in the updated software and mainframe. Significant costs would also be incurred through the transfer of CAD workstations from one platform to another, not to mention potential personnel backlash. With a centralized system, the tragedy of a mainframe failure would be accentuated, but a sophisticated system of data redundancy would solve this potential headache. Solution 2: Workstation Computing This is a system whereby the mainframe will be slowly phased out over time, meanwhile CMCI would make major investments in upgrading its workstation structure. This would spread the data across multiple systems, adding multiple layers of date security. Each work station would be connected via LAN, along with important plant data. This type of system would require a large amount of adjusting by the IS staff, as they retain little knowledge of distributed computing. This may even require the hiring of additional staff in order to provide the potential increase in tech support and training. New applications may also have to be developed in order to adapt work flow to the new system. Solution 3: Linux Environment This option would move the company from a centralized mainframe system in favor of Linux-based workstations connected to an off-site data hosting company. This is an extremely scalable option, because it would not require the purchase of additional hardware to function. In the future, when increased systems capacity is required, CMCI would simply pay more, rather than having to update the entire local system again. This is by far the more affordable solution, but it requires placing company data in the hands of an external hosting company. Linux is also a very flexible and affordable system that can be installed on almost any system, and many members of the IS group would be familiar with how it works. However, there will always be costs incurred with the conversion of existing applications the company currently uses to the new system, along with the period of growing pains from staff. The entire system in general would be far removed from the one that CMCI currently employees, so training systems and new management positions would likely be mandatory in order to grease the transition. Solution 4: Wait and Watch The idea behind this option is to simply wait until IMT is in a more suitable position for such a drastic systems change. Germany is currently moving toward a workstation environment, and waiting would provide time to prepare for the conversion. In the meantime, Linux could be brought in and tested on a few different systems to see how well the IS staff adapt. On the other hand, waiting is what CMCI has been doing already, and further delay could exacerbate its problems. My Recommendation I recommend a deft combination of a couple options. Firstly, work toward phasing out the company’s reliance on the mainframe— they are expensive machines and costly to maintain. Rather, push toward a workstation environment, but universally employ Linux—it is cost-efficient, flexible, and similar to existing systems being used by the IS employees. Workstations will be locally connection via LAN, and regionally connected via WAN for the rapid sharing of data. Data will no longer be centralized which will add a greater amount of security. A senior level executive also needs to be appointment to function as CIO in order to direct the transition to the new system, and for necessary maintenance and guidance thereafter.