Activity 3
.docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Polytechnic University of Puerto Rico *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1000
Subject
Industrial Engineering
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by BailiffRhinoceros2255
Rafael Calderon
IE1000
What went wrong with Levi’s move to teams in their plants?
Levi's move to teams in their plants faced several challenges that led to negative outcomes:
1.
Pay Reduction for Top Performers:
The shift from piecework to team-based pay led to reduced
earnings for top-performing workers. Since teams were paid based on the overall output,
individual high performers had their compensation reduced when they were working alongside
slower or less skilled colleagues.
2.
Internal Conflict and Morale Issues:
The new team-based system created internal conflicts and
damaged morale. Skilled workers were frustrated by having to compensate for the slower output
of their teammates. This led to resentment and infighting within the teams, which further
undermined the collaborative spirit.
3.
Inequity Perceptions:
The unequal distribution of workload and the need to cover for
underperforming team members caused feelings of inequity among the high-performing
workers. They felt that they were shouldering a disproportionate burden of the work without fair
compensation.
4.
Lack of Effective Supervision:
The introduction of teams brought limited supervision from
coaches, which meant that teams had to handle most workflow and interpersonal issues
themselves. This lack of clear guidance and leadership exacerbated the internal conflicts and
problems within the teams.
5.
Nature of Work:
Levi's factories had tasks that required varying levels of skill and speed. Unlike
assembly lines for products with standardized components, garment-making required individual
workers to perform specific tasks that could differ in terms of complexity and speed.
What could Levi’s have done differently to avert the problems?
To avert the problems associated with the team-based approach, Levi's could have taken several
different measures:
1.
Balanced Pay Structure:
Instead of solely tying pay to overall team output, Levi's could have
implemented a hybrid pay structure. This structure could include both team-based rewards and
individual performance incentives, ensuring that high-performing workers are adequately
compensated.
2.
Clear Role Definition:
Defining roles and responsibilities within teams would help allocate tasks
more fairly. It would also set clear expectations for each team member's contribution and avoid
potential resentment caused by uneven workload distribution.
3.
Enhanced Training:
Levi's could have invested more in training programs to help workers
develop the necessary skills for different tasks. This would have reduced the performance gap
between team members and mitigated conflicts arising from varying skill levels.
4.
Effective Conflict Resolution:
Implementing a system for effective conflict resolution and
mediation within teams could have helped address issues before they escalated and damaged
morale.
5.
Gradual Transition:
Levi's could have phased in the team-based approach more gradually,
allowing workers and management to adapt to the new system over time and identify and
address challenges as they arose.
Team Incentive Plan:
A potential team incentive plan could be a combination of group rewards and individual bonuses. For
example, Levi's could allocate a portion of the team's bonus based on the overall team output,
promoting collaboration. Additionally, individual workers could receive performance bonuses based on
their personal contributions, skills, and the quality of their work. This approach would encourage both
teamwork and individual excellence.
Could Levi’s have averted the need to move jeans production offshore and avoid increasing labor
costs?
The need to move jeans production offshore might not have been entirely inevitable if Levi's had
effectively addressed the challenges of their team-based approach and found ways to improve
productivity and control labor costs. One way to tie worker performance to incentive pay to avoid
increasing labor costs could be:
Skill-based Pay:
Implement a pay system that rewards workers based on their skill levels and efficiency.
Workers who consistently produce high-quality work at a faster pace would receive higher pay rates. This
approach aligns with the nature of garment-making, where skill and speed play a significant role in
productivity.
By establishing skill-based pay, Levi's could have encouraged workers to improve their proficiency,
reduce repetitive-stress injuries, and enhance overall productivity. This approach would have provided a
clear path for workers to earn more while maintaining or increasing the quality of their output. It might
have minimized the need for offshoring by improving competitiveness and reducing labor costs through
increased efficiency.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help