The Paradoxical Twins: Acme and Omega Electronics
In this case, two similar electronic companies named Acme and Omega, Which situated closely one to another. Both of them are originally formed from the same company, but they grew into completely different companies. Below listed their company details and unique points, right after company’s establishment:
Company size: 550 employees, with annual sales $10 million
The president: John Tyler
Retaining the original management and upgrading general manager to president Has a relatively more effective management and bigger net profits Management culture: bureaucracy/ hierarchy culture, it is stated by John Tyler “he retained the basic structure” and company has a well structured organization chart. Management get used to routine and predicted activity, stated in “Tyler was confident that has the demand had not been so great….”, and “we have been able to beat Omega regularly..”
Company size: 480 employees, with annual sales $8 million
The president: Jim Rawls
Hired a new president who is a former director of a large electronics research laboratory, and upgrading several of the existing personnel within the plant. Relaying on face to face communication which leads to ineffective time management. Management culture: adhocracy/ entrepreneurial culture, stated in “Jim Rawls did not believe in organization charts…”, “..people from mechanical, electrical, production and industrial engineering got together..”, and “Jim Rawls called a meeting on Friday, July 8, that included all departments head..”
Team oriented and project based organization are used, based on Jim Rawls’ background as a researcher and his capacity as the president.
In July 1996, on of major photocopy manufacturer was looking for a subcontractor to assemble the memory unit, whereas this project worth $5-7 million. This project required 100 prototypes, and speed is a critical factor indeed. Both Acme and Omega had at most 2 weeks to get this project done. Acme Timeline:
Monday (July 11th): Blueprint arrived and purchasing decision has been made by purchasing department.
Tuesday (July 12th): mechanical engineering received manufacturing prints and evaluated their capabilities in completing this project.
Wednesday (July 13th): Purchasing found that a particular component could not be purchased due to summer vacation in manufacturer region. Tyler decided to continue on producing with the missing component, and add the missing on the last stage. Friday (July 15th): Mechanical engineering informed an additional assembly time might be occurred because of the missing component.
Monday (July 18th): Tyler got information from shipping department if most of the component has arrived. Foreman ignored the normal procedure of contacting method engineers due to time limit. As a matter effect, the method engineers were very upset because they have no chance in designing proper layout. They had spent an entire weekend in analyzing the motion needed and his process was very inefficient and imbalanced. The foreman refuses to stop working, due to short time limit. Tyler got himself complained by the method engineers, but no one of them could change his decision and he wants to get all the prototypes ready as soon as possible. They just said each other if the units must be almost completely tear down in installing the missing unit.
Friday (July 22nd): They have their last unit produced
Tuesday (July 27th): Missing parts have delivered
Wednesday (July 28th): Foreman found that they have to tear the units to install the missing units.
Thursday (July 28th): Tyler decides to tear down all units.
Friday (July 29th): 50 units of prototypes have been completed, and shipped without final inspection.
Tuesday (August 2nd): The rest 50 units were shipped
Please join StudyMode to read the full document