Business report

Introduction FixituP is a manufacturer of children’s toys. This report focuses on analyzing three main problems and giving recommendation in the Toy Soldier department. In terms of information system, the trade off strategy and excessive control that operators have a negative impact on effective project management. In human resource management, the poor communication between staffs and managers as barriers to excellent project management. Additionally, the root cause analysis indicates that little control that operators have result to job redesign. By using six elements of CARWOE to analyzing current reputation situation of FixituP, and the marketing theory of 4Ps will help to explain the plan of recommendation. 2. Information system The most common problem occurs in information system is machine breakdown, which possibly leads to excessive scrap that are produced in the production process because supervisors always try to tighten control over increasing the working rate (CS, Pg22). They utilized trade offs strategies at the expense of resource cost, which accelerates the speed of completing a task (Pearlson, 2001). In this way, operators feel less control about their tasks and not concerned about accurate information recording. The exercise of control contributes to the effective project management (Pearlson, 2001), but the excessive people controls in FixituP affect work performance of operators. Another problem is that consulting group consider weight, batch target and efficiency of production are not correspond closely, which may result from scrap and overtime work (CS, Pg24). The operators have to work extra hours available due to the loss of production time that arises from machine breakdown. In addition, the unfair depression about efficiency results from the inaccuracies in the information system, which means that the root causes of this problem are machine breakdown and information recording. The root cause analysis is an effective tool for planning project management (Wilson, Dell and Anderson, 1993). However, Stuart has a positive attitude towards information system (CS, Pg36) and his father chose to not listen to the advice of factory manager about improving machine efficiency (CS, Pg17). Furthermore, operators are unable to receive useful feedback from managers about the problems of information system (CS, Pg21). The poor coordination in FixituP management team is regarded as barrier to improve the function of machinery because coordination among organization is an essential component for any project (Pearlson, 2001). The difficulty in changing information system also concludes that the different views on counting materials in terms of batches and cases between operators and packers (CS, Pg25). Kotter (1996) claims that people only support change when they respect the leaders and expect personal gain in change management. As mentioned before, operators are not given to their own responsibility in controlling machinery and demotivated by managers so that the change about judging materials proves more difficult. The effective solution, in the first place, is to hold a meeting between FixituP management and consultants. By discussing about inaccurate recording and breakdown in information system that may affect machinery efficiency and work performance respectively, Stuart may be advised to agree the improvement in recording. For example, the supervisors are responsible for recording information in time so that the measure of efficiency would be revised. On the other hand, machine breakdown is considered as the technology risk in risk management (Chapman and Ward, 1997). The company should make efforts to update machinery so as to minimize risk. In this way, by reducing machine breakdown, the efficiency would improve since the operators are likely to work on time due to less waste of production time and supervisors are under less pressure to control tasks. The work reallocation is also needed because supervisors should not make decisions all the time. The operators and packers should make an agreement about the methods of counting materials. The moderating conflict between operators and supervisors would benefit this change. Reference Chapman, C. and Ward, S. (1997). Project risk management. Chichester: Wiley. Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press. Pearlson, K. (2001). Managing and using information systems. New York: J. Wiley & Sons. Wilson, P., Dell, L. and Anderson, G. (1993). Root cause analysis. Milwaukee, Wis.: ASQC Quality Press.