Team Building / Selection - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Team Building / Selection

Description:

Title: Team Building / Selection Author: Clyde Briant Last modified by: Gregory P. Crawford Created Date: 5/1/2000 11:05:10 AM Document presentation format – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:65
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 15
Provided by: Clyd73
Learn more at: https://www.brown.edu
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Team Building / Selection


1
Team Building / Selection
2
Background
  • Coolidge developed process around 1910
  • Process used world wide
  • Little change in process since that time
  • GE has long been the leader in the US lighting
    marked
  • Competition and new management philosophy
    demanded that process be examined

3
General Process
  • Mining of tungsten ore
  • Production of ammonium paratungstate
  • Production of tungsten oxide
  • Production of tungsten
  • Ingot
  • Wire

4
Potassium
  • All lamp quality tungsten must contain about 60
    ppm potassium
  • Discovered by accident

5
Comments about Process
  • The ingot to wire stage takes about two weeks
  • Most problems occurred at the end of the two week
    process - LOSS OF
  • Unused tungsten sold as scrap

6
Company Profile - 1988
  • RD Center - Schenectady, NY
  • Lighting Engineering - Cleveland, Ohio
  • Tungsten Plant - Cleveland, Ohio

7
RD Center
  • Employed mostly PhDs.
  • Placed high value on patents and publications
  • Sometimes viewed as irresponsible/country club
  • Researchers pursued their hobbies away from the
    real problems

8
Lighting Engineering
  • Degree level varied
  • Engineers responsible for products and daily
    problems
  • Patents / products / trade secrets important

9
Plant Engineers
  • Bachelors degrees / hourly workers
  • Ship product
  • Make numbers ()

10
Team I
  • Composed of about 30 people
  • Manager of each group tried to be in charge
  • Group polarized between two ideas about how to
    run plant
  • Took philosophy that process could not be changed
  • But after three years no real improvement

11
Good Results of Team I
  • Got RD engineers into plant
  • Increased quality control
  • Made teams spanning from PhDs to hourly workers -
    developed friendships across the entire group
  • Realized we do not need a perfect product but do
    need consistent production

12
Problems with Team I
  • Too big and too many managers
  • No single leader and no single vision
  • Too many people wanted to be heroes
  • Attention of team members divided
  • Without success, team members became disgruntled

13
Team II
  • Smaller and more focused
  • Little duplication of talent
  • Assignments/accountability/prime assignment for
    all team members
  • Frequent meetings (technical and social)
  • Single goal and vision with total buy-in
  • Good working conditions / rewards

14
Team II - Other Lessons Learned
  • You must constantly sell your product to your
    customer
  • Do not expect immediate acceptance
  • Be prepared to take product all the way to
    completion
  • Take incremental steps where necessary to get
    end results
  • Try to anticipate every issue as they arise be
    the first to solve them
  • Determine what information would make your
    customer more comfortable
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com