Hank Kolb’s Case Study: Equipment Malfunctions & Quality Issues

Abstract

The present work contains an analysis of the case of Hank Kolb, quality assurance director. Kolb has identified that the equipment is not functioning properly, being used for purposes, for which it was not originally created. In this work, the main problems that Kolb has to solve, such as the incompetence of the staff, the malfunctioning of the equipment, and the safety hazard, are identified and graded according to their relative importance and urgency, and the root causes of these problems are presented. The alternatives and options for solving the problems are generated, and recommendations are made on the basis of decision criteria appropriate for the examined company. The guidelines for implementation, monitor, and control are given to Kolb.

Executive Summary

In the proposed case, Hank Kolb, quality assurance specialist, has identified a problem of malfunctioning equipment that was used for the tasks, for which it was not originally designed. Having talked to his colleagues, Kolb received information that made him believe that the staff lacked the concern about quality.

The purpose of the present work is to identify the main problems that Kolb has to handle, find the root causes of these problems, identify their importance and urgency, develop alternatives for problem-solving and discuss their advantages and disadvantages, propose possible solutions and reflect on their implications, make appropriate recommendations that are in accordance with the company strategy, work out a contingency plan, establish the details related to the implementation of the recommendations, and describe the mode of monitoring and control.

In the course of the work, it was identified that Kolb is facing the problems with malfunctioning equipment, neglect towards safety, and incompetent (in terms of quality) staff. The root causes of the problems are the strive of the firm to beat competitors using limited resources and the unawareness of the personnel of quality and safety requirements. Kolb is recommended to hold a safety awareness campaign, consult specialists about the possibility of switching or modifying the equipment, and develop a quality strategy.

Issue Identification

A detailed analysis of the present study has detected the following main issues, with which Hank Kolb has to deal.

1. First, Kolb is not acquainted with the personnel (particularly, the managerial one) of the plant, their mode of working, the specificities of their collaboration, and the way in which they handle problems. He is also not entirely sure about his technical knowledge regarding the product. This issue has a serious impact on the process of finding a solution, making it more challenging.
2. Second, an incident has happened at the plant (high pressure was identified in some cans), and Kolb, as a quality control manager, has to make a decision regarding this episode. This issue ties together other problems.
3. Third, the operator for the filling equipment apparently has no proper training and denies his responsibility for the incident. This issue makes the problem more complicated since the person in charge does not want to assume the responsibility.
4. Fourth, the equipment used in the manufacturing process was not originally designed for this type of production, but the personnel does not seem to be bothered by this fact. It is one of the primary problems which Kolb has to solve.
5. Fifth, an investigation has discovered a burr application problem that makes it hard to fit a top to a can. It is a problem that no one at the plant intends to solve, but it leads to other technical problems at the plant, including the above-mentioned incident.
6. Sixth, the current equipment (Greasex) makes the plant more competitive, but the managers never tried to investigate the actual effect of the use of this equipment. If Kolb makes an attempt, he will likely create an unwanted stir at the plant.
7. Seventh, manufacturing manager does not seem to care about the quality problem, and he is favored by the superiors. It presents a people problem for Kolb.
8. Eighth, the plant cannot stop using Greasex right now because of the heated competition.
9. Ninth, even though Kolb is not entirely sure, it is quite possible that the personnel at the plant is ignoring a serious safety problem. The safety problem could affect both the staff and the customers of the firm.
10. Tenth, it is obvious that the managerial personnel of the plant is used to ignoring quality problems, which means that Kolb would be alone struggling for quality, and he would most likely face strong opposition.

Environmental and Root Cause Analysis

The mentioned issues have different levels of relative importance and urgency.

The most important issue is the neglect of the personnel towards quality since this issue has led to the emergence of the others. The second issue is the safety problem; it follows the quality problem since quality and safety are intertwined in the current production process. The necessity to beat competitors as the primary factor for continuing the use of Greasex is the third in importance since it has entailed several other issues.

The fourth place in importance should be given to the inadequacy of Greasex for the tasks that it is currently fulfilling and the fact that Greasex gives the firm a competitive advantage. The incompetency of the manufacturing manager and the operator for the filling equipment regarding quality is the fifth in importance. The sixth issue is the fact that Kolb is unacquainted with the colleagues and the situation at the plant since it can be easily solved. The seventh important issue is the incident that has happened since it is merely the manifestation of deeper problems.

The urgency of the issues should be indicated in a different way. Some issues that are not the most important are relatively urgent. The safety problem is the most urgent among the issues since, if not removed, it poses a danger to the lives and health of the personnel. The next issue is the incident since it is directly connected with safety. The third issue is the unfamiliarity of the environment to Kolb; the sooner it is solved, the sooner Kolb will be able to solve other problems.

The equipment issues are the fourth urgent problem since they are also connected with safety. The fifth issue is the inability of the company to switch equipment; it is connected with the fourth one. The incompetence of the managers and the necessity to beat competitors are less urgent than others, so they have the sixth and seventh place, respectively. The neglect towards quality is a fundamental but not urgent problem since other problems require immediate solution while this one needs a careful, risk-weighed approach.

The root analysis conducted for the present case has identified the following root causes of the problems that Hank Kolb has to handle.

First, the firm is striving to beat its competitors and sell more product to the customers while having minimum time and limited resources. This cause makes the staff use Greasex since it allows to prevail over the competitors, and for the same reason Greasex cannot be eliminated from the production process, and the burr application problem cannot be solved right now.

Second, the events described in the case indicate that the neglect towards the quality of production is a long tradition at the plant. The visible neglect of managers leads to the neglect of the employees. It is also the root of the safety problems. The fact that the other managers discuss the problem with Kolb is probably the effect of the fictional, not real care for quality.

Third, quality control is not properly included in the manufacturing process as one of its integral steps. Neither the managers nor the employees are used to checking the quality of the final product and returning it back if the quality requirements are not fulfilled.

Alternatives and Options

Having identified the issues that Hank Kolb is facing and the root causes of the problems, it is possible to generate the alternatives and options available to Kolb that could help him to solve the problems of the plant.

In general, two main alternatives are available to Kolb. First, he can apply to the general manager who is on his side and shares his concern regarding quality. Kolb can report the neglect of the other managers to the general manager, present him the possible solutions, seek his advice, and agree all the steps of the problem-solving process with him. This alternative is advantageous since the general manager has enough authority to implement Kolb’s decisions, and he shares Kolb’s views, which facilitates the decision-making process.

However, such an action will most likely lead to the disapproval of the staff: they would probably feel betrayed if Kolb reports their behavior and speaks to the general manager over their heads (Furnham & Taylor, 2011, p. 42). Second, Kolb can focus on the collaboration with the personnel (especially the other managers) rather that with the general manager. Such a decision would definitely enrich his perspective, for he would receive the opinions of various specialists, each of whom is qualified in a particular field.

It would strengthen the ties between Kolb and the staff as well, which is beneficial for problem-solving (Chartered Management Institute, n.d, p. 4). Kolb would also get an opportunity to apply to the staff directly rather that via the orders of the general manager. The greatest disadvantage of this alternative is that the other managers do not share Kolb’s concerns about quality, so it would be hard to convince them to collaborate with the quality assurance specialist.

Without any regard to his choice between the two alternatives, the following options can be chosen by Hank Kolb as solutions to the existing problems. Each of these options can be used either to solve an immediate issue or to ensure the achievement of a long-term goal.

1. Group the problems into such categories as “people,” “equipment,” and “materials” and then deal with them separately. Such an action does not solve any issues directly; instead, it helps to distinguish between different problems and work out better solutions for them (7 steps to a fishbone diagram and to identifying those causes, 2016).
2. Develop a detailed quality strategy. The strategy must be consistent with the current general strategy of the company (attaining a new market share and beating the competitors). This solution addresses the long-term goal of establishing a proper attitude to quality at the plant and ensuring a professional quality control.
3. Find out whether it is possible to find a new kind of equipment or modify Greasex further to make it adjusted for the tasks that it is currently fulfilling. This option addresses the immediate problem of malfunctioning equipment. It should be remembered that this solution requires financial resources and collaboration with technical specialists.
4. Address the employees directly to make them aware of the requirements of quality control. This solution handles an immediate problem of the neglect of the employees towards quality checks. However, the employees are not acquainted with Kolb yet, which may make them less willing to comply.
5. Work out guidelines for the proper maintenance of the equipment. It would provide some relief with the urgent problems of the equipment. However, this solution is not suitable for dealing with the long-term problems related to the equipment.
6. Provide some of the specialists, such as the operator of filling equipment, with proper training that would introduce them to the quality requirements to their work. It is a solution to a long-term problem of the incompetency of the staff.
7. Prepare an educating speech on the topic of the latest incident and present it to the staff. It can help to prevent such incidents in future.
8. Employ various means to raise the safety awareness. It deals with both immediate and long-term problems since it would help to modify the current behavior of the personnel and have implications for their overall attitude to quality and safety.
9. Convince the general manager to make other managers attend quality seminars similar to the one that Kolb has attended (Leonard & Sasser, 1993, p. 3). It would make them aware of the important details of the quality control process that they are currently ignoring. However, this option requires spending financial and time resources.

Recommendations and Implementation

The selection of the appropriate alternatives and options should be based on the decision criteria that apply to a particular situation. For the present situation, the following decision criteria were identified: the quality of the product, safety level, the level of managerial responsibility, and the level of managerial ethics.

Considering these criteria, the best choice for Hank Kolb is combining the two alternatives, i.e. collaboration with colleagues and with the general manager. Kolb should seek advice from colleagues while informing the general manager, which will unite the advantages of the two alternatives.

As for the relevant solutions, Kolb is recommended to select and implement the following options presented in the order of priority:

1. Raise safety awareness immediately. Kolb should inform the managerial staff about the health risk. It has to de done first to prevent the danger to worker’s lives and health. This measure would also have positive implications for the quality of the product.
2. Consult colleagues regarding the change of equipment. Kolb should talk to the plant maintenance, manufacturing manager, and the purchasing department asking whether the equipment can be switched and modified. If the answer is yes, they should speak collectively to the general manager and recommend this measure. It is consistent with managerial ethics and responsibility, and it can help maintain quality.
3. Develop a detailed quality strategy. It is the most important step for ensuring quality, though not the most urgent. The work should be done by Kolb since he is in charge of quality. He may consult the manufacturing manager to ensure the consideration of all technical details.

Kolb will surely succeed with the third recommendation. In case if the first two recommendations cannot be implemented, a contingency plan should include the following steps:

1. Consult the general manager on safety issues: report the hazard to Morgenthal and recommend him to raise safety awareness.
2. Compose schedules that would ensure normal maintenance of the existing equipment to prevent it from malfunctioning. For this step, Kolb should consult the technical specialists of the plant.

Monitor and Control

Controlling and monitoring the performance is highly important for the improvement of the overall performance level (Bititci, Garengo, Dörfler, & Nudurupati, 2012). In our case, the effectiveness of the recommended measures would also depend on proper monitoring and controlling.

Considering the recommendations and their implementation, as well as the corporate strategy, the following performance measures would be appropriate: the maintainability of the equipment, the overall equipment effectiveness, failures (regarding the quality of the product), and the uptime and downtime of the equipment (Tillman & Cassone, 2012, p. 17-20).

Hank Kolb should be in charge for monitor and control and provide constant and regular feedback to the managers. The latter, in their turn, should provide feedback to the employees.

Conclusion

In the present work, it was established that the main issues that Hank Kolb is facing are the neglect towards safety and quality and the malfunctioning equipment. The identified root causes are the wish of the company to acquire the market share with limited resources and the unawareness of the personnel on quality and safety standards. The recommendations given to Kolb include raising safety awareness, proposing the colleagues to switch or improve the equipment, and working out the plan for quality strategy.

References

7 steps to a fishbone diagram and to identifying those causes. (2016). 

Bititci, U., Garengo, P., Dörfler, V., & Nudurupati, S. (2012). Performance measurement: Challenges for tomorrow. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(3), 305-327.

Chartered Management Institute. (n.d.). Using teamwork to build a better workplace. Web.

Furnham, A., & Taylor, J. (2011). Bad apples: Identify, prevent & manage negative behavior at work. New York City, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Leonard, F.L., & Sasser, W.E. (1993). Hank Kolb, director, quality assurance. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School.

Tillman, F.A., & Cassone, D.T. (2012). A professional’s guide to decision science and problem solving: An integrated approach for assessing issues, finding solutions, and reaching corporate objectives. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: FT Press.