CASE STUDY

Production slowdown at Sundaram Metal Fabrication, Inc.

Rakesh khurana was made the supervisor of a production line at Sundaram

Metal Fabrication, Inc. The plant manager, Sameer Awasthi, put him in charge
of operating the entire production line efficiently & effectively. Rakesh
supervised six foreman and 48 assembly line workers. His job was to keep the
assembly line going at the scheduled 150 units per hour.

When Rakesh Khurana took the supervisor’s job two months ago, the
production line was losing 90 minutes a day. Some of the causes of the
declining production were line stoppages, maintenance problem, absenteeism,
and repair work. The 90-minute loss meant approximately 15 percent decrease
in production.

Rakesh reduced absenteeism and took other steps to prevent the loss of
scheduled production time. He kept the main line going even when some feeder
lines stopped. He said to Sameer, ‘The workers don’t like it and the resent
working the required 7 hours and 45 minutes a day and only want to work for 6
hours and 30 minutes, as they were doing in the past.’

The issues of dissatisfaction of the production line workers towards Rakesh

Khurana was taken up by two of the workers, Ramesh Talwar and Mohit
Dewan. The complaints against Rakesh were varied. Both Ramesh and Mohit
said that he laid off workers for being two minutes late and even asked the
foremen to pick up trash. Mohit said that Rakesk had threatened him with an
iron bar and claimed that he was guilty of making the worker’s life miserable,
whereas Ramesh said that he had friends in high places and would go to any
limit to get some action against Rakesh Khurana. These events led the workers
to file a formal grievance complaints against him.

Sameer came to know that Rakesh Khurana was the target of increasingly
spiteful verbal protests by Ramesh and Mohit. Both, especially Mohit, were
openly rebellious and implied that they were ready to take matters in their own
hands.

Confronted with this high and rising level of employee unrest, Sameer reflected
upon Rakesh Khurana’s inability to achieve simultaneous adequate production
and interpersonal relations with his workers. He wondered,‘ Are these two
goals necessarily incompatible? Does the problem lie with Rakesh Khurana, the
assembly line workers, or the situation?’ More importantly, Sameer Awasthi
knew that prompt decisions and actions were essential to defuse the explosive
situation. He, particularly, did not want the press to get hold of all this and
blow it all out of proportion.

While action was immediately needed to extinguish the agitation among

assembly line workers, Sameer wished to use Rakesh Khurana in a positive role
and desired to maintain the improve production rates achieved under his
leadership. For the long run, he would be essential in areas such as supervisory
training, introduction of change, team building and other areas relevant for
balancing supervisory concern for task performance and interpersonal
relationships. He knew that the implementation of these policies would be
difficult. As Sameer pondered over his plight, his stress increased. He was
uncertain where to begin. Should he call his lawyer first, later? He was very
disturbed and decided to call upon the HR head.