Reference no: EM13974989

Case study (page 109 , 6th edition) - The Central Evaluation Unit

The Central Evaluation Unit that all the relevant and complete data were collected before the applications were processed. Staff productivity was high and there was always plenty of work waiting for processing at each section. A cursory inspection of the sections' in-trays revealed about 130 files in each with just two exceptions. The ‘receipt' clerks' tray had about 600 files in it and the checkers' tray contained about 220 files. Processing grant applications The processing of applications is a lengthy procedure requiring careful examination by checkers trained to make assessments. All applications arriving at the Unit are placed in an in-tray. The incoming application is then opened by one of the eight ‘receipt' clerks who will check that all the necessary forms have been included in the application. This is then placed in an in-tray pending collection by the coding staff. The two clerks with special responsibility for coding allocate a unique identifier to each application and code the information on the application into the information system. The application is then given a front sheet, a pro forma, with the identifier in the top left corner. The files are then placed in a tray on the senior checker's secretary's desk.

As a checker becomes available, the senior secretary provides the next job in the line to the checker. In the case of about half of the applications, the checker returns the file to the checkers' secretaries to request the collection of any information that is missing or additional informationthat is required. The secretaries then write to the applicant and return the file to the ‘receipt' clerks who place theadditional information into the file as it arrives. Once the file is complete it is returned to the checkers for a decision on the grant application. The file is then taken to auditors who prepare the acceptance or rejection documents. These documents are then sent, with the rest of the file, to the two ‘dispatch' clerks who complete the documents and mail them to the ULO for delivery to the academic who made the application. Each section, clerical, coding, checkers, secretarial, auditing or issuing, have trays for incoming work. Files are taken from the bottom of the pile when someone becomes free to ensure that all documents are dealt with in strict order. Véronique's confidence in her operation was somewhat eroded when she asked for comments from some university liaison officers and staff. One ULO told her of frequent complaints about the delays over the processing of the applications and she felt there was a danger of alienating some of the best potential applicants to the point where they ‘just would not bother applying'. A second ULO complained that when he telephoned to ascertain the status of an application, the CEUPU staff did not seem to know where it was or how long it might be before a decision would be made. Furthermore he felt that this lack of information was eroding his relationship with potential applicants, some of whom had already decided to apply elsewhere for research funding. Véronique reviewed the levels of applications over the last few years which revealed a decline of five per cent last year and two per cent the year before that on the number of applications made. Véronique then spent about ten minutes with four of the clerks. They said their work was clear and routine, but their life was made difficult by university liaison officers who rang in expecting them to be able to tell them the status of an application they had submitted. It could take them hours, sometimes days,to find any individual file. Indeed, two of the ‘receipt' clerks now worked full-time on this activity. They also said that university liaison officers frequently complained that decision-making seemed to be unusually slow, given the relatively small amounts of money being applied for. Véronique wondered whether, after all, she should agree to make the presentation.

Questions 1 Analyse and evaluate the processing of new applications at the CEUPU:

- Create a process map for new applications

- Calculate the time needed to process an individual application cycle time for the process

- Calculate the number of people involved in the processing of an application

- Explain why it is difficult to locate an individual file.

2 Summarize the problems of the CEUPU process.

3 What suggestions would you make to Véroniqueto improve her process?

Case Study (page 81 , 6th edition) - Long Ridge Gliding Club10

Long Ridge Gliding Club is a not-for-profit organization run by its members. The large grass airfield is located on the crest of a ridge about 400 metres above sea level. It is an ideal place to practiseridge soaring and cross-country flying. The gliders are launched using a winch machine which can propel them from a standing start to around 110 kilometres per hour (70 mph), 300 metres above the airfield, in just five seconds. The club is housed in a set of old farm buildings with simple but comfortable facilities for members. A bar and basic catering services are provided by the club steward and inexpensive bunkrooms are available for club members wishing to stay overnight.

The club has a current membership of nearly 150 pilots who range in ability from novice to expert. While some members have their own gliders, the club has a fleet of three single-seater and three twin-seater gliders available to its members. The club also offers trial flights to members of the public. (In order to provide insurance cover they actually sell a three-month membership with a ‘free' flight at the start.) These ‘casual flyers' can book flights in advance or just turn up and fly on a first-come, first-served basis. The club sells trial-flight gift vouchers which are popular as birthday and Christmas presents. The club's brochure and web site encourage people to: ‘Experience the friendly atmosphere and excellent facilities and enjoy the thrill of soaring above Long Ridge's dramatic scenery. For just £70 you could soon be in the air. Phone now or just turn up and our knowledgeable staff will be happy to advise you. We have a team of professional instructors dedicated to make this a really memorable experience.' The average flight for a trial lesson is around 10 minutes. If the conditions are right the customer may be lucky and get a longer flight although at busy times the instructors may feel under pressure to return to the ground to give another lesson. Sometimes when the weather is poor, low cloud and wind in the wrong direction, almost not fit for flying at all, the instructors still do their best to get people airborne but they are restricted to a ‘circuit': a takeoff, immediate circle and land. This only takes two minutes. Circuits are also used to help novice pilots practise landings and takeoffs. At the other end of the scale many of the club's experienced pilots can travel long distances and fly back to the airfield. The club's record for the longest flight is 755 kilometres, taking off from the club's airfield and landing back on the same airfield eight hours later, never having touched the ground. (They take sandwiches and drinks and a bottle they can use to relieve themselves!)

The club has three part-time employees: a club steward, an office administrator and a mechanic. In the summer months the club also employs a winch driver (for launching the gliders) and two qualified flying instructors. Throughout the whole year essential tasks such as maintaining the gliders, getting them out of the hangar and towing them to the launch point, staffing the winches, keeping the flying log, bringing back gliders, and providing look-out cover is undertaken on a voluntary basis by club members. It takes a minimum of five experienced people (club members) to be able to launch one glider. The club's membership includes ten qualified instructors who, together with the two paid summer instructors, provide instruction in two-seater gliders for the club's members and the casual flyers.

When club members come to fly they are expected to arrive by 9.30 am and be prepared to stay all day to help each other and any casual flyers get airborne while they wait their turn to fly. On a typical summer's day there might be ten club members requiring instruction plus four casual flyers and also six members with their own gliders who have to queue up with the others for a launch hoping for a single long-distance flight. In the winter months there would typically be six members, one casual flyer and six experienced pilots. Club members would hope to have three flights on a good day, with durations of between two and forty (average ten) minutes per flight depending on conditions. However, if the weather conditions change they may not get a flight. Last year there were 180 days when flying took place, 140 in the ‘summer' season and 40 in the ‘winter'. Club members are charged an £8.00 winch fee each time they take to the air. In addition, if they are using one of the club's gliders, they are charged 50p per minute that they are in the air.

Bookings for trial flights and general administration are dealt with by the club's administrator who is based in a cabin close to the car park and works most weekday mornings from 9.00 am to 1.00 pm. An answerphone takes messages at other times. The launch point is out of sight and 1.5 km from the cabin but a safe walking route is signposted. Club members can let themselves onto the airfield and drive to the launch point. At the launch point the casual flyers might have to stand and wait for some time until a club member has time to find out what they want. Even when a flight has been pre-booked casual flyers may then be kept waiting, on the exposed and often windy airfield, for up to two hours before their flight, depending on how many club members are present. Occasionally they will turn up for a pre-booked trial flight and will be turned away because either the weather is unsuitable or there are not enough club members to get a glider into the air. The casual flyers are encouraged to help out with the routine tasks but often seem reluctant to do so. After their flight they are left to find their own way back to their cars. Income from the casual flyers is seen to be small compared to membership income and launch fees but the club's management committee views casual flying as a ‘loss leader' to generate club memberships which are £350 per annum. The club used to generate a regular surplus of around £10,000 per year which is used to upgrade the gliders and other facilities. However, insurance costs have risen dramatically due to their crashing and severely damaging four gliders during the last two years. Two of the accidents resulted in the deaths of one member and one casual flyer and serious injuries to three other members. The club's committee is under some pressure from members to end trial flights because they reduce the number of flights members can have in a day. Some members have complained that they sometimes spend most of their day working to get casual flyers into the air and miss out on flying themselves. Although they provide a useful source of income for the hard-pressed club (around 700 were sold in the previous year), only a handful have been converted into club memberships.

Questions

1 Evaluate the service to club members and casual flyers by completing a table similar to Table 3.1.

2 Chart the five performance objectives to show the differing expectations of club members and casual flyers and compare these with the actual service delivered.

3 What advice would you give to the chairman?