Invigilator Manufacturing

The current state of the invigilator industry has made it extremely difficult to manufacture reliably functioning widgets, which continues to hurt out business. If this is not addressed, we will experience decreased profits, lower public trust and a loss of organizational autonomy as a result of lawsuits we may face. This report explores legal and regulatory alternatives to confront this issue. The first outlined option is the internal manufacturing of invigilators, providing us with more organizational autonomy, alternatively we could set an industry standard either contractually or through a standard setting procedure, an expensive yet effective option, we could also develop resilience to poor invigilator manufacturing by increasing our capacity
Self-regulation would eliminate our reliance on unpredictable independent producers, whose lack of expertise likely hinders the production of reliable invigilators. We can potentially build the infrastructure to produce invigilators internally given WIC’s understanding of this product. Our expertise exceeds that of government bureaucrats and civil servants, so we can produce an ideal, efficiently produced product due to low monitoring and and enforcement costs (Baldwin el al 140). One area of difficulty is ensuring our compliance with current regulations involving invigilator manufacturing. This can happen from a plethora of reasons ranging from ignorance to managerial incompetence. The most important way to ensure compliance is to ensure consistent and clear information throughout all levels of the organization. Organizational misconduct has been identified as one of several leading causes of noncompliance (Corneliussen 4). We need to ensure proper information flow. Inadequate information availability is a common shortfall in businesses. Also, proper accountability must be established to prevent subordinates from taking shortcuts or unknowingly performing their tasks incorrectly (5). These are just a few
We, as a larger manufacturer, can invest our resources towards lawyers who would establish our organization as repeat players in the legal system. These one-shot, fly-by-night producers have limited capacity to legally retaliate; this could create higher barriers to entry into this market and increase the quality of their product (Galanter 108). The concern lies in the fact that the high rates of entry and exit make it difficult for the litigation of a few firms to influence the organizational competency of the industry. This alternative is also very costly and we are unlikely to gain any financial compensation from a volatile, niche industry such as this one. We could also create resilience by creating warning labels for the use of our widgets which would place blame on the consumer protecting us in court. However, this would not help us acquire better