Hrm Case Study Paper

Submitted by: Submitted by

Views: 536

Words: 423

Pages: 2

Category: Business and Industry

Date Submitted: 06/04/2012 04:29 AM

Report This Essay

ABC Tool Engineering is a company producing machinery and machine tools and some other related engineering products for specialist production companies. It’s workforce consists of 1000 employees, two-thirds of which work in the production department. In 2000, the Management decided to introduce a total quality Management Scheme to increase efficiency and quality control. Throughout the 1990’s, more flexible arrangements had been introduced together with a breakdown of old work demarcation lines. Machines were now built by flexible teams of workers employing different skills like fitters, electricians, hydraulic engineers, etc. In 2000, the initiatives towards TQM were made with the introduction of BS 1110. Workers were asked to inspect the quality of their work which resulted in reduction of the need for specialist inspectors and both time and money were saved. Agreements were negotiated with the union for extra pay as a result of the increase in worker responsibility. In 2001, the Management decided to introduce a full-blown Total-quality Management Scheme on the basis of the success with the introduction of BS 1110. Problem solving groups were formed based on work groups with voluntary participation. Group leaders, who were mainly supervisors, were trained is how to run a group and in problem-solving techniques. The aims of the groups were

1. Identifying problems inside their work area.

2. Propose solutions

3. Identifying problems outside their work area

4. Refer external problems to a review team.

The review team consisted of Managers with one representative from each group, usually the group leader. The unions were lukewarm to the scheme and some shop stewards were directly against it. Within a period of 9 Months, the Total quality Management Scheme was reviewed and the senior Management came to the conclusion that it had not lived up to expectations, and few board members called it a failure. Some reason s they had identified were...