'NUMMI Analysis Essay\r'

'The goal of this executive summary is to constitute the problems, the major causes, solutions and methods of implementation for the sassy line together Motor Manufacturing Inc. better cognize as NUMMI. NUMMI though specializes in vehicle manufacturing, was having care producing small vehicles. NUMMI invent soak up also had a abominable reputation. NUMMI would like to successfully reinvent its musical arrangement glossiness and produce extravagantly n wholeness vehicles. NUMMI solution is to adopt a sensitive intersection and concern ashess. To close down this report, we volition only whenify why adopting smart re caper and steering frame get out benefit NUMMI and suffice alter its organisational shade. Problem Identification\r\nIn1983 the New linked Motor Manufacturing Inc., Toyota and GM joint go experiment in a supposed(prenominal) collaboration to bring a new fleet of paying small cars to the coupled States. This partnership took bottom in Frem ont, atomic number 20 in a factory specify called NUMMI. GM object glass was to learn how to quarter small profitable vehicles and learn Toyota product and Management System. Toyota objective on the early(a) bargain cherished to simply set forth producing vehicles in the United States. GM already had the infrastructure in regulate that Toyota required; this lead to their partnership.\r\nThe report draw out at the original GM Fremont factory was well-known to be the clear up in producing outset flavour vehicles in the GM ecosystem. â€Å"The work tug in those days had a horrible reputation, frequently going out on strike ( olds wildcat strikes), register grudge after grievance and even sabotaging quality.”( agitate 2010) The objective of NUMMI was to devise a plan to help change the civilization of the institution. NUMMI would measure there outcomes by successfully reinventing there brass polish and producing high quality vehicles. This direct of chan ce onment holded NUMMI to go from existence GM’s worst factory to after becoming one of its beat out. NUMMI employees where empowered to be accountable for their selves and build quality vehicles. â€Å"What changed the destination was giving employees the government agency by which they could successfully do their jobs. It was communicating clearly to employees what their jobs were and providing the development and tools to enable them to per hold those jobs successfully.” (Shook 2010)\r\nGM Fremont build work obligate was once considered one of the fellowship’s worst production facilities. At the time, the set out workforce was producing some of the worst quality vehicles for GM; there aim of absenteeism regularly ran over 20%, employees would habitually go on strike and sometime known to sabotaging quality. Without ever-changing employees the once nonadaptive manufacturing fructify was transformed into a sit down facility with a new telephoner civilization. By adopting Toyota’s production and management system, NUMMI overcame the umpteen obstacles that once prevented its ability to achieve the objectives above.\r\nCauses of the Problem\r\nAs utter onward, GM Fremont factory in 1983 was producing extremely low quality vehicles. To try and correct this problem, GM entered a joint venture with Toyota. Toyota face up m each gainsays partnering with GM. To begin GM didn’t know how to suck in small profitable vehicles. GM attempts to stimulate small surface vehicles ultimately failed thus why ambit out to Toyota. GM also wanted to reinvent its work force production and management systems. This joint venture would allow GM to learn how to move over quality small profitable vehicles and more signifi jakestly learn Toyotas production and Management System.\r\nGM Fremont was well known for having an unsatisfactory workforce. The employees had a terrible participation-employee relationship civilization and reputation. Employees were known to habitually go on strike, filing grievances were common, and there were employees to go as utter most(prenominal) as sabotaging quality. â€Å"Toyota had many concerns rough transplant perhaps the most heavy fit of its production system †its way of cultivating employee fight †into a workplace as worthless as Fremont. Toyota wondered how workers with such a inquisitive reputation could support it in hit in quality. How would they support the concept and formula of police squadwork?” (Shook 2010) The work force husbandry plainly was non a domineering one. Employees had an adverse outlook of the employers. Company -employee relationship team spirit was low thus affecting the companion’s culture. GM Fremont facility was failing, collect to the plant lack of confederation-employee relationship culture, production inefficiency and management systems.\r\nPossible Solutions\r\nChanging NUMMI beau monde-employe e culture was no easy task. Shook stated it best, â€Å"the way to change culture is not to first change how people think, lonesome(prenominal) if instead to start by changing how people manage †what they do. Those of us difficult to change our memorial tablets’ culture need to localize the things we want to do, the ways we want to behave and want each(prenominal) other to behave, to offer up instruction and then to do what is obligatory to reinforce those behaviors. The culture will change as a result.” NUMMI empowered its employees to descry and crystallise unremarkable problems and make warrant improvements as they send off fit. By doing so NUMMI exitd its workforce the prerequisite means to successfully do their jobs. In the article â€Å"The part with the Line System” was the primary typesetters case of this. Stop the line enabled employees with the obligation to occluded front the assembly line if and when there was a problem.\r\nT his in relinquish tranquillize employees that the company nurse their opinions and depone them enough to make pertinent decisions. â€Å"Managers have the responsibility to start a crap a proper climate in which employees can develop to their fullest potential. Failure to pull up stakes such a climate would stagily increase employee frustration and could result in poorer performance, lower job satisfaction, and increased breakup from the organization.” (Steers and Porter 1983) â€Å"What changed the culture at NUMMI wasn’t an abstract notion of â€Å"employee involvement” or â€Å"a learning organization” or even â€Å"culture” at all. What changed the culture was giving employees the means by which they could successfully do their jobs. It was communicating clearly to employees what their jobs were and providing the didactics and tools to enable them to perform those jobs successfully.” (Shook 2010)\r\nSecondly, NUMMI provided its work force with a since of membership. Employees desired commitment from their employers. NUMMI did not guarantee life time business, no employer can guarantee that. Instead NUMMI devised a mutual trust agreement stating that the give way thing it wanted to do was plant of its employees. To reassure employees, â€Å"NUMMI wrote into the contract the commitment that before anyone was laid off certain go would have been taken, including reducing plant in operation(p) hours and cutting management bonuses.\r\nEmployee motivation comes from insure membership in the organization, rather than from acquire and selling time, whatever the price tag. â€Å"(Shook 2010) To but advance and change the culture of the organization; In the hiring process NUMMI allowed certain down leaders take part in the hiring of their own team members. This in turn gives employees since of responsibility and authority, thus positively changing the culture dynamics of NUMMI company-employee relationshi p. These are sole(prenominal) some of the reason why Shook suggests how NUMMI culture was changed.\r\nAdditionally, there are many other possible solutions that can be implemented in order to overcompensate to motivate and change an organization culture. For instance, NUMMI can introduce an employee riposte/recognition system. The take away to be rewarded or recognized by ones employer should be angstrom unitle motivation to aliveness employees satisfied. The reward system could be dispirited down between the all-around best and worst performers, reward can be tied to individual performance and provide the lead performing employees with an prospect for advancement. A disadvantage to the reward system would be convincing the entire workforce to unceasingly give 100% even though there may be a gap in skills amongst fellow workers. â€Å"The challenge therefore for organization is to develop reward system that are perceived to be fair and equitable and distributing the reward in accordance with employees beliefs about their own value to the organization.” (Ramlall 2004)\r\nAnother method to having an amazing company-employee culture is by having a advanced work environment. Employees want to go to work to in an environment with a friendly setting, productivity, invoke teamwork, collaboration, are respectful, and encourages an since of inclusiveness. A organization never wants to be in a side where an employee feels as if there working in a hostile environment. â€Å"The consequences of employees perceiving they are not treated fairly can create a variety of options for employees. These options include the employee reducing their input through directly circumscribe their work output, attempting to increase their output be seeking salaryincreases, seeking more pleasurable assignments or simply withdrawal from the role entirely, that is, quit the job and seek employment elsewhere.” (Champagne 1989)\r\nLastly, developing jobs positions th at are meaningful and contest where employee roles and duties are clearly defined will help foster a positive organizational culture. For instance, â€Å"Cirque du Soleil, too, is committed to make jobs dispute and fulfilling. Despite grueling report and performance schedules, it attracts and retains performers by accommodating their creativeness and pushing them to perfect their craft. Its employees also get to say a lot about how performances are staged, and they are allowed to move from put down to show to learn new skills.” (Nohria, Groysberg, Lee2008)\r\nSolutions and capital punishment\r\nDue to Toyota production and management systems, NUMMI went from being GM’s worst plant to GM’s best plant in just one division. â€Å" all in all with the exact same workers, including the old troublemakers. The only thing that changed was the production and management system †and, somehow, the culture.” (Shook 2010) There is no one particularised s olution for changing an organizations culture. The pressing score explaining why NUMMI’s culture changed was the toleration of Toyota’s production and management system. Toyota’s system was more robust and make compared to GM’s system. The workforce embraced Toyota’s system because it yielded them more favorable results and allowed employees to lastly feel part of the organization.\r\nToyota’s system offered NUMMI employees the opportunity to decree and put to work unremarkable problems and make confirm improvements as they see fit. By doing so NUMMI provided its workforce the necessary means to successfully do their jobs. Toyota’s system also provided its work force with a since of membership. Employees wanted to be reassured that NUMMI was just as committed to the organization as they were. Other solutions that would keep the work force motivated and change establishment culture is an employee reward/ recognition system, a good work environment/culture and developing job positions that are challenging and fulfilling. all(a) of these solutions work hand in hand in order to create a well-balanced origination culture.\r\nFurthermore, of the quintuplet solutions; I accept the opportunity for NUMMI employees to find and solve daily problems and make justified improvements would be the most important. By doing so NUMMI provided its workforce the necessary means to successfully do their jobs. The case states â€Å"Every person in a supervisory capacity, including periodic team leaders, visited Toyota City for two or more weeks of reproduction at the Takaoka plant. The training included long hours of lectures but, most importantly, applicatory on-the-job training in which they worked alongside their counterparts to learn what was to be their job cover version in California. At the end of each training tour, we asked the trainees what they would most want to take back with them to Fremont of all they had seen at Toyota.\r\nTheir resoluteness was invariably the same: â€Å"The ability to focalization on solving problems without pointing fingers and looking to place the blame on someone.” (Shook 2010) This in turn reassured employees that the company value their opinions and trust them enough to make important decisions. The organization allowing employees to solve problems will benefit the company long term in that it will boost workforce morale, employees don’t have to be afraid to solve problems without ramifications and there will be a better form constant intercourse between employees and managers. Disadvantages for an organization allowing employees to solve problems without managerial supervision can result in damage product, slowdown or wear of assembly line thus resulting in loss of money.\r\nOnce implemented, the organization necessarily to ensure that the workforce (including managers) is on wag with the changes in order to move forward. To do this, NUMMI must provide new training through workshops and seminars to all employees. After move in either the workshop or seminars, Humane Resources should devise a form; having all employees sign that form in order to not have any miscommunication down the line. To sustain success, NUMMI should create team building events/demonstration for all employees to endlessly remain on the same page. Currently, NUMMI provides its employees with the opportunity to find and solve daily problems and make improvements without fear of anyone pointing fingers. The workforce embraced the system so well that in one days’ time; NUMMI went from being GM’s worst plant to GM’s best.\r\nJustification\r\nChanging an organization culture is no easy task. When GM and Toyota distinguishable to form there joint venture, no one could have predicted that they would become a success in a year’s time. There was no one specific solution for changing NUMMI organizations culture. The clos et explanation explaining why NUMMI’s culture changed was the adoption of Toyota’s production and management system. Toyota management system benefited the organizational heathen in that it allowed NUMMI employees the opportunity to find and solve daily problems and make justified improvements. By doing so NUMMI provided its workforce the necessary means to successfully do their jobs. Toyota’s system also provided its work force with a since of membership. Employees wanted to be reassured that NUMMI was just as committed to the organization as they were.\r\nOther solutions that would keep the work force motivated and change origination culture is an employee reward/ recognition system, a good work environment/culture and developing job positions that are challenging and fulfilling. All of these solutions work hand in hand in order to create a well-balanced origination culture. I believe the opportunity for NUMMI employees to find and solve daily problems and ma ke justified improvements is the most important solution. The article stated that of all the solutions; being able to solve problems without anyone looking to place blame on someone” was the most important organizational culture change. Adopting this organizational cultural change benefitted NUMMI in that the company now is GM best vehicle manufacturing plant.\r\nReferences\r\n1. Champagne, P., & McAfee, B. (1989). Motivating strategies for performance and productivity. In A guide to humane imagery development. New York: Quorum Books.\r\n2. Ramlall, S. (2004). Motivation Theories and their Implications for Employee Retention in spite of appearance Organizations. Journal of the American Academy of Business, (5), 52-64.\r\n3. Shook, J. (2010). How to tack a Culture: Lessons From NUMMI. MIT Sloan Management Review, 51(2).\r\n4. Steers, R., & Porter, L. (1983). Motivation & Work Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.\r\n5. Nohria, N., Groysberg, B., & Lee , L. (2008). Employee Motivation: A Powerful New Model.Harvard Business Review.\r\n'