John Smithers at Sigtek Case Study
John Smithers at Sigtek Case Study
Similarity if the implementation of TQM in the multiple companies
These companies are very compatible in a number of different production conditions and industries. Both companies needed a change in management programme, which would lay an emphasis on leadership, and managerial behavior. They needed new programmes, which would help in effective planning and support of employees. They needed to increase profit graph turnover for their companies. Both companies were working toward increment of outputs. They had to make sure that all transactions made the companies were profitable. They were able to achieve better products for customer satisfaction. They had a small number of workers (from 80-230). This made easy for them to establish new business strategies. They were able to set common goals for all employees and trained them to handle the new programs. The companies needed an evolution program on long-term effect. This would help in future management to avoid incurring losses. They are both located in the same city which is Michigan state in United States.
Factors that led to the adoption and persistent of new programs
The following are the factors that led to the adoption of new programs at Sigtek,
The first factor was capability, experience and fit of John Smither . He was aware of the program and had a strong believe that it would bring changes in the company. The other factor is Commitment of senior management. Sigtek management was motivated towards the implementation of the new programs. They were in haste to see them work. Senior managers motivated to unite all departments towards the achievement of a common goal. The next factor was compulsion for change. To facilitate change, Smithers was motivated to improve the quality of products with the new programs. Core philosophy is also a factor that led to the adoption and persistent of the new programs at Sigtek. The next factor is collateral changes. Sigtek under the management of Smithers was secure. The company was therefore thirsty to adopt new programs. Lastly, continuity of leadership factor also made Sigtek to adopt new programs. Smither held training sessions to the workers and made each employee empowered to move the organizations toward the achievement of its goals.
“Companies with a core philosophy that is consistent with TQM principles are also likely to make significant collateral changes”
If Sigtek is able to adopt a consistent core philosophy, then it is most likely to make significant collateral changes. Smither should work hard to empower employees by ensuring that there is commitment and support between workers and the upper management level. Smither`s ensure that he seeks support from the other employees and make them believe in the program. Core philosophy alone cannot guarantee successful and persistent implementations. The company needs changes in other areas, which if not worked on can bring the downfall of the company. With a combination of other factors, success of the company is guaranteed.
Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model
John Kotter wrote the eight steps change model in 1996 to help managers deal with organizational change and avoid failure. These steps have proved to be very useful to any organization willing to avoid failure at all cost today. This paper will discuss Kotter`s eight-step model in relation to smither`s case. The first step by Kotter is the establishment of a sense of urgency. For change to occur, a company needs to identify opportunities that need to be exploited. In sigteks case, it is clear that the company lacked a sense of urgency. Smither did not make efforts to seek honest discussions from the workers. He also opted to work alone and failed to ask for support from other stakeholders and people in the industry. He also failed to convince the team why change was important to the company. This led to the failure of the Six Sigma program. Kotter proposes that an organization should implement quality energy and time in this step. This is one of the main reasons as to why John Smither failed in his mission. He jumped in too fast to start the project, which brought short –term losses for the company.
The second step model according to Kotter is the creation of a guiding coalition. For an organization to achieve its goals, the managers of the company should possess the power to convince employees why change is important .According to Kotter, a person cannot work alone. He or she needs support from the other members. Smither`s effort to bring Sigtek workers together to help in the project failed. This is because he did not give them a reason as to why the change was important. Teamwork is also very important when it come to achievement of goals. John failed to put workers in the right union to help in decision-making.
The third step by Kotter is development of a clear vision. The presence of visions in an organization helps in determining values central to change. To implement change, an organization must come up with strategies to execute those visions. Sigtek under Smithers had defined visions but the ways to implement them was the challenge. The visions made by sigtek management were stiff, unpleasant, impossible and unmindful. The fourth model by Kotter is communicating the vision. Signet did not make an effort to make it employees conversant with the group visions. There was no order among workers and therefore, it was difficult for Smither to talk about the change vision. Empowering people to act on the vision and removal of barriers is the fifth step to help model change. To achieve this, an organization must apply the structure for change by checking all obstacles to it. Eliminating barriers empowers workers and helps the change move forward. For Sigtek to implement the program, it needed quick action to eliminate all obstacles and change the leaders to people whose main roles were to convey change.
Creation of short-term stage another of Kotter`s steps to organizational change. An organization should give its employees a taste of triumph in the early stages of the change process. Sigtek was focused on creating a long-term term instead of focusing on short-term objectives. Short- term goals leave no room for failure and encourage success. If the company had set the achievement of the short-tem goals first, then the program would become very successful. Workers were unsure of the expensive program that the company wanted worked on and therefore they were motiveless to work effortlessly on it. The other step is the implementation of the change. Kotter suggests that the failure of many projects is because of early victory declaration. Many companies achieve one goal and assume they have achieved ten others. Kotter`s advice to companies is to keep looking for much better improvements instead of celebrating little achievements. Lastly, organization should make the change stick. Change should become a part of the organization. Change should become a cultural aspect of each organization. If John Smither`s had applied all this steps in implementing change, then the program would have become a very great success.
Porter’s five forces model
Michael Porter introduced five factors that work jointly to verify the nature of competition within an organization. The approaches are buyers bargaining power, suppliers bargaining power, threat of entrants in the markets, suppliers’ degree of existing competitive rivalry and threat of substitute services. According to Michael Porter, buyers bargaining power describes the ability of customer to instill pressure in firms. Buyers are often affected by changes in product prices. Buyer’s decisions can impel price fall. This is driven by the significance of every individual consumer to an organization, the cost the organization will incur if the client moves to another supplier and the number of buyers in the market. Sigtek failure to mobilize the program led to a mass loses of customers. Clients shifted to look for better companies, which offered the same products.
Supplier power is the ability of sellers to coerce prices. Suppliers can use their ability to offer different raw materials, labor and services over their competitor firm. Suppliers took it to their advantage when Sigtek failed in its mission. They were guaranteed of more profits as buyers’ switched to their companies. The company stopped getting supplies, as it was hard for companies to trust them with their products. The other approach by Porter is the threat from new market entrants. If markets are profitable, then they will attract new investors. New market investors pose a threat to existing businesses as they erode profits. New entrants are likely to gain a market share if the barriers to entry are low thus intensifying rivalry. Sigtek failure created a new path for new entrants in the markets. Investors were very sure of better profits since the main rivalry was out of their way.
Threat of substitute services model occurs when there is an availability of substitute product in the markets. This raises the chances of consumers changing to other options in response to price incline. Sigteks idea was to produce a unique product, which would earn them a place in the market. Suppliers’ degree of existing competitive rivalry according to Porter shows the number of competitors in the market. Sigtek focused on getting a sustainable competitive benefit through innovation. Their strategy to implement the new program was purposely made to help gain a prevailing competitive approach in the market.
Both Kotter and Porter`s models are important in achieving organizational change. Porter`s forces are useful in making an evaluation of an organization strategic situation. They help firms comprehend the factors that affect profitability in the industry and helps them in the decision making process. With the use of these processes, corporations become aware of the steps to take in mounting a viable strategy. Kotter`s steps on the other hand help firms in the implementation of the change process. It shows all the steps that an organization needs to follow in their plans to build a suitable foundation to improve the probability of success. If firms are too edgy and anticipate, too see changes within a short period then, the entire plan to make the changes will definitely fall short.