top answer: Running head: RL WOLFE CASE STUDY 1 Running head: RL WOLFE CASE STUDY 3 RL WOLFE Case Study A




Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
top answer: Running head: RL WOLFE CASE STUDY 1 Running head: RL WOLFE CASE STUDY 3 RL WOLFE Case Study A
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay



RL WOLFE Case Study

A. Background Summary

John Amasi worked with Jay Winslow to manage the company in techniques that were directed to improve level of performance. Plastic pipe’s production shapes the company’s management and thus team handling was the suitable method to create better performance for extrusion line operators and materials handlers. Decision making involved collaboration with different parties to ensure employees would be able to attain stakeholders’ goals but many conflicts developed. Major problems were lack of suitable personnel to fix technical issues, one employee got provided with many different roles, and loss of morale that led to diverse issues. It became difficult for the company to operate in expected standards in connection to limitations in the work environment that resulted in workers getting fired for lack of conformity to company rules. Integration of a hierarchical arrangement for the employees was required to determine suitability after dealing with the shifts all employees were expected to work. As the central employee in charge of other areas, the plant manager produces a reliable method to handle the responsibilities evident among all subordinates.

Improvement of the business environment is an integral requirement for John Amasi since he discovered the robustness of team activities. The use of self-directed teams creates a centralized method of generating better outcomes at the plastic pipe manufacturing plant. The Corpus Christi Plant had been robust, and this pushed the implementation of a new plant to connect to existent competition in the business environment. Management of raw materials got performed based on the pipe manufacturing methods conversant with industry standards. The proposal of self-directed teams was valid and got performed as an example using Amasi and Winslow, who integrated a proper example by collaborating with managers. The business environment used semi-autonomous work processes and unionized plants. Elimination of unionized teams was a strong requirement by then employees since this would not limit their capability of serving the entire work environment.

According to Winslow, a delegation of duties was a critical factor in the entire professional environment based on the possibility of offering resource management. Introduction of roles such as coordinators, foreman, coach, and facilitator all operated in the work environment’s expected standards. The best solutions for the work environment were individual recognition, performance evaluation, team sizing, and employees’ welfare. All these are appropriate methods of generating better employee output after correlating production requirements with the existent raw materials. The newly implemented self-directed teams were not as productive as expected since this concept was not the usual procedure involved in generating boundaries in the work environment then ensuring all persons work as required. Use of different coordinators created a change in the work environment yet workers were unsatisfied with the work environment, and this led to worse outcomes at the work area (Garvin, 2009). Another issue is the problem of unionized workers that resulted in limitations in the entire work environment causing a problem in connection with the suitable model for delivery of work expectations.

B. Problems

1) Role Division Problems

There were issues in connection to the role division of different persons in the initial plant. Traditional divisions got used, yet they were not appropriately provided with expected equality and flexibility, which were all imperative when managing the existent line operations.

2) Inaccurate human resource allocation

It was difficult to establish a proper human resource handling procedure since production and maintenance personnel were not provided with suitable wages. The difference was that maintenance personnel got paid higher, and this seemed inappropriate in terms of promoting a fair work environment. In terms of promotion, production personnel got promoted after one year.

3) Inappropriate Maintenance

Another issue is evident whereby the lack of a structured maintenance process affected the plant’s operations. Only maintenance persons were allowed to fix issues regardless of their location.

Hostility was evident among some Corpus Christi employees who did not realize the importance of self-directed teams. Problems related to role division affected the entire work environment since it got difficult to handle technicians, line operators, technicians, and material handlers whose roles were not previously assessed while at Corpus Christ. Handling of responsibilities did not get conducted effectively since there were limitations in connection with loaders and their basic roles, which would generate positive outcomes for the entire work environment. Analysis of all the issues indicates that there is a need to integrate suitability among all work environment needs in connection with production line procedures and the existence of technical operations for the best outcomes in material handling. Systems handling is a requirement to facilitate proper growth in the entire work environment.


Garvin, D. A. (2009). RL Wolfe: Implementing Self-Directed Teams.

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more
colle writers

Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code ESSAYSHELP