dixie weaving
2) Why might Dixie Weaving employees choose not to cooperate with the consultants at this stage in the project?
The observations and interviews will mainly concern the content of the jobs and the working conditions. Still observations will probably show how the employees are fulfilling their job. As you can read in the story of the article a lot of the employees seem to be disqualified to perform their work. A lot of the employees barely speak English and aren’t capable to perform their job effectively. So the employees are probably afraid that the observations will show that their performance is weak. The employees can be afraid that the observations of their weak performance can eventually result in dismissal or extra training. With the long shifts the employees are already making it seems logic that they do not want to spend more hours at work for training. This can also be a reason for employees to choose not to cooperate with the consultants. For supervisors the problem of the working conditions could be a good reason to choose no to cooperate with the consultants. The supervisors are letting the employees work in very weak conditions. For instance, it feels like 95 degrees in the Weaving department. In combination with an abnormally long 12-hour shift this cannot be healthy. There are also a lot accidents on the work floor because the workers cannot focus of keeping the workplace safe. That is a result of the fact that the employees are too busy with focusing on the basics of their jobs to meet the quota. These things will probably come forward when it is examined. So it is plausible that this can be a reason for the supervisors to choose not to cooperate with the consultants at this stage.
3) Do you agree with the multipronged diagnostic strategy outlined by Joe and Ian in their e-mail to Bill? How would you carry out each of the prongs they describe?
The multipronged diagnostic strategy outlined by Joe and Ian seems like a solid
The observations and interviews will mainly concern the content of the jobs and the working conditions. Still observations will probably show how the employees are fulfilling their job. As you can read in the story of the article a lot of the employees seem to be disqualified to perform their work. A lot of the employees barely speak English and aren’t capable to perform their job effectively. So the employees are probably afraid that the observations will show that their performance is weak. The employees can be afraid that the observations of their weak performance can eventually result in dismissal or extra training. With the long shifts the employees are already making it seems logic that they do not want to spend more hours at work for training. This can also be a reason for employees to choose not to cooperate with the consultants. For supervisors the problem of the working conditions could be a good reason to choose no to cooperate with the consultants. The supervisors are letting the employees work in very weak conditions. For instance, it feels like 95 degrees in the Weaving department. In combination with an abnormally long 12-hour shift this cannot be healthy. There are also a lot accidents on the work floor because the workers cannot focus of keeping the workplace safe. That is a result of the fact that the employees are too busy with focusing on the basics of their jobs to meet the quota. These things will probably come forward when it is examined. So it is plausible that this can be a reason for the supervisors to choose not to cooperate with the consultants at this stage.
3) Do you agree with the multipronged diagnostic strategy outlined by Joe and Ian in their e-mail to Bill? How would you carry out each of the prongs they describe?
The multipronged diagnostic strategy outlined by Joe and Ian seems like a solid