Reference no: EM132307147

Management at Kellogg Company of Canada Inc. had long been concerned with the welfare of its employees. Beginning in the late 1960s, Kellogg had started using techniques such as job enrichment as a means of improving the quality of work life. Already providing excellent wages, benefits and working conditions, Kellogg management believed it was important to provide meaningful jobs which met its employees‘ needs for growth, participation, and fulfilment through their work. Kellogg Company of Canada Inc. was a wholly owned subsidiary supplying the Canadian market with all Kellogg‘s products. It had captured over 50 per cent of the ready-to-eat cereal market, producing several million pounds of cereal per year. Kellogg‘s recently completed corn mill was still unable to provide enough flaking grits1 to meet production demands. To remedy the problem, up to 10 per cent of the company‘s production needs for flaking grits had to be imported that year from the parent company in the United States. In addition to production difficulties, there had been greater than normal problems with cleanliness and safety. All these issues were of concern to top management, and all seemed to be the type of problems which better mill operations could solve. Mill problems, however, were often difficult to isolate, since the conversion ratios in milling corn into flaking grits and other byproducts were partly a function of the operations in the mill and partly a function of the quality of the raw corn available. Fred Duncan, recently appointed supervisor of the corn mill, thought that these might be the types of problems that a job enrichment program could help solve, and that at the same time would be consistent with the corporation‘s genuine concern for its employees. Job Improvement “The people who are doing the work really make it happen,“ said Fred Duncan. Fred had recently introduced a job improvement program for the 19 hourly workers in the corn milling operation. The program had its impetus from a recent in-house seminar for managers. —Job improvement“ was Kellogg‘s name for job enrichment, since the latter was felt to imply that existing jobs were tedious. Job enrichment resulted from horizontal or vertical job enlargement, or a combination of both. Horizontal job enlargement was characterized by increasing the variety of functions performed at a given level. It reduced boredom, broadened employees‘ perspectives and prepared them for vertical job enlargement. Vertical enlargement permitted employees to take part in the planning and control functions previously restricted to supervisors and staff. 1Produced from raw corn, along with brewer‘s grits, #8 grits, corn flour, and hominy grits. Raw corn is first cleaned using a screening process, washed, and put into storage for future use. When taken out of storage, it is put through a —degerminator“ to grind off the outer shell and extract the —germ“ at the center. The shell and the germ are added into hominy grits, and the remaining grits proceed down the line. The grits are vacuumed to remove the fine powder on them; this powder becomes corn flour. The grits are then sorted by size, with only the very largest being used for cereals (flaking grits). Although unionized, the corn mill seemed an ideal place for such a program. It was physically separate from the rest of the plant and any changes would cause minimal interference with other production operations. The mill was small, with only 19 hourly workers spread over three shifts, and consequently was more manageable than a larger department. Finally, the plant manager, George Sharp, felt that the men were over-supervised and that, perhaps, the three foremen (one per shift, each earning $39,500 per year) could be eliminated. (See Exhibit 1 for a partial organization chart of the Kellogg plant.) Just prior to starting the job improvement program, Fred Duncan, then shipping and warehousing supervisor, was asked, in addition to his existing responsibilities, to replace Art Johnson as supervisor of the corn mill. Since the seminar, Fred had been interested in the concept of job improvement; his acceptance of these new responsibilities was conditional on going ahead with a job improvement program in the mill. His first step was to distribute the attitude survey which had been used by the consultant at the seminar. The last page of the survey contained a set of specific suggestions. When the results were compiled, Fred found that one of the most common complaints was over-supervision – many of the men felt that the foremen‘s jobs were redundant. The attitude survey set in motion the process of job improvement which transformed working life in the corn mill. The Removal of the Foremen In the attitude survey, the men expressed the opinions that not only were the foremen bad for morale, but also that they added nothing to the performance of the job. A first miller, Tom McKnight, stated: The main thing in the whole setup is trust. When you‘re working with a foreman-supervisor relationship in a department, I think the whole overriding factor is that the company just does not trust you. And if they did, what‘s the need for a foreman to tell you what to do? You have to understand more of your job when you get along without supervision. Really, there‘s no other way of putting it, you just have to understand more of it. Frank Sommers, another first miller, echoed similar sentiments: We all can‘t be doctors or lawyers and professional people. At the same time, there‘s no reason to feel that because people are not, they‘re incompetent to do the job which is given them without somebody watching over their shoulder. This whole idea of having that feeling towards an ordinary fellow, that he may not be able to handle a job, is ridiculous! I‘ll prove it to you this way – in all probability, the people that they appoint as foremen are people who‘ve just come off that job themselves. As a follow-up to the survey, Fred Duncan called a meeting of the foremen, and they agreed with the hourly men. During the discussions, it was made clear that no one would be laid off from the company. As a result of these discussions, two of the foremen were shifted to other departments and the third became mill coordinator to assist Fred Duncan. (See Exhibit 2 for the new organization chart.) The decisions the foremen previously had made were now to be shared among the men. Fred also instituted weekly Tuesday meetings with the day shift to discuss any problems. Since the workers rotated shifts, each shift met with Fred once every three weeks. These meetings became the vehicle by which future changes were to be made. The interchange was primarily between the hourly men and Fred Duncan himself, although the union was invited to send a representative – an invitation that was rarely accepted. The tone of the meetings was informal. There was never an agenda. The men were encouraged to talk about any matter that concerned them. Tom McKnight described the atmosphere: When you set up these meetings and talk with the company, you don‘t know whether you‘re stepping out of bounds. In a lot of cases you say things at the meetings that the union wouldn‘t consider quite proper; but under the circumstances, the way the meetings were set up and the way they worked was the best that could have happened. I think that an y interference coming from the union could destroy it before it ever got off the ground. I think it has to be done with the complete cooperation of the union, and I think that the union has to be willing to overlook a lot of things that could happen . . . . In the areas of the contract that you work under, you just have to ignore them – there‘s just no other way you can do it. It has to be an agreement between yourselves that if something happens, you‘re going to ignore that for the benefit of everybody. Such a situation was fragile and depended on mutual trust. Surprisingly, the union maintained a low profile with respect to the meetings and seemed to be content that the burden of dealing with grievances was now on the shoulders of the men. The union steward, Jake Menard, commented: It took us quite a few meetings. I attended a few of them and didn‘t want to get directly involved in making decisions . . . . Let them make their own decisions . . . and make their requests directly to the company, because it‘s more effective that way and they feel more a part of making that minor change. All the small bitches that people had – they‘re gone. They don‘t exist any more, and it‘s hard to realize that . . . you have to almost see these people shift after shift, day after day, to realize this – the petty little arguments that go on there because somebody didn‘t sweep the floor on the shift before them, and so on. They don‘t exist any more; they just aren‘t there, because there‘s no one there pushing them. Now, there‘s some explanation for it not being done, but with more involvement. In a period of 12 months, I haven‘t handled a grievance from that department on that issue . . . oh, there‘s been a few, as I say, I‘ve attended some of their meetings, but most of all I have kept out of the thing as much as possible and let them file their arguments here, on paper, and give them directly to the supervisor, and he handles them from there. I saw them afterwards, after they were filed with the supervisor, and supported them. The increased sense of responsibility achieved from the weekly meetings also promoted a more cooperative atmosphere in the mill. If we have a big problem, the packer may come up and pitch in and help. Before, they‘d do it, but the general feeling was, unless the foreman told you to, you didn‘t have to do it, but . . . actually, most of the guys would if you went and asked them, they‘d give you a hand. With the foreman there, it‘s a matter of, well, you had your job to do, and Joe Blow had his job to do, and you did it. (Ted McKie, second miller.) The men also began to find that with no foremen around, any extra time breaks taken merely added to the time that their partners spent at the job. As one miller said: We have our relief periods. Well, here it‘s according to the contract, two 15-minute and one 30- minute break. It‘s no secret to anybody that they‘re well spent and an awful lot more. We were in the habit, with the foremen and the supervisor, of taking somewhere around 25 minutes for our first break in the morning, and 30 to 35 minutes for our lunch, and another 20 to 25 . . . and do you know something, I don‘t think there‘s one of us damn individuals who leaves any later than we ever did before! With this system, I turn my job over to my partner and he looks after it. Now, if I overstay until the cows come home, he‘s the guy that‘s gonna give it back to me when it comes his turn – either that, or he‘s gonna say ”Hey, I‘m not going to go along with this – smarten up!‘ You know, an awful lot of that ”jailer and key‘ business is going to have to be taken out of that contract in the future. Mill Clean-Up Initially, the early meetings with Fred Duncan were primarily concerned with airing gripes. These were related to hygiene matters, and mechanical and safety problems. One of the first issues confronted was the weekly clean-up in the mill. Particular difficulties had been encountered in scheduling this clean-up, which generally took place on Saturdays. On one hand, the job was dirty and few wished to disrupt their weekends for such a task. On the other, overtime was paid. Attendance had been skimpy, and there were no regular procedures to be followed. In the meetings, the men proposed a solution – to put up a schedule for clean-up on a notice board where the men could sign up in advance. They also agreed to draw up detailed procedures for clean-up, and assumed complete responsibility for scheduling their own participation. Those wishing to participate simply signed up and were allocated on the basis of who, on the day shift, had the fewest overtime hours. This system resolved a long-standing grievance. Although it was strictly in violation of the union contract, it was mutually agreed upon by the men and the company. Tom McKnight commented on the improvement: The clean-up . . . is normally considered the job nobody really wants to do, but it has evolved now to the point where the people don‘t mind doing it when they can do it within their own hours that they want to do it in – they‘re only too willing to do it. Under our old system, those areas like clean-up and that, it was thought that they had to be done at a certain time – and it just isn‘t so. As long as the work is done and done right, who cares what hours it‘s done in! In the corn mill, there was a battle not only to keep equipment clean but to control infestation. In the past, problems had been encountered in this area, thus jeopardizing product quality. Here too, there was a marked improvement. The sanitation auditor wrote Fred Duncan a memo stating: “Regular cleaning of the interior of the equipment such as the grit abyer and the dust take-off stacks has been instrumental in keeping infestation to a minimum. Better daily housekeeping has also added to the improved appearance of the mill.” The improvement appeared to be not only the result of better attitudes in the mill, but of the revised scheme of conducting clean-ups. One interesting incident occurred when one of the men, Dick Timmons, felt that he should have been chosen for clean-up the week before – he wanted the overtime. In a fit of anger, he went straight to the union steward and explained the situation. The steward agreed that DickS was entitled to the overtime and prepared to confront Fred Duncan. Fred was somewhat surprised by a formal delegation, including union representatives and DickS himself. This behaviour seemed to Fred to be totally out of proportion to the nature of the problem. He heard the complaint and readily agreed to the claim. To the surprise of the delegation, he offered no resistance but, rather, proposed to pay DickS the overtime to which he was entitled. When DUck returned to the mill, the men had heard of the incident and began to chastise him. After all, with the new clean-up scheduling system that they had proposed, it was them men themselves who were responsible. DUck could just as well have brought his problem to them and it could have been readily sorted out. As it was, however, he had not only jeopardized the clean-up scheme but the whole job improvement program as well. The pressure was such that DUckS went back into Fred‘s office to

Do you think Fred Duncan should give employees the raise they have requested at Kellogg Salada Canada Inc.? What factors do you think he should consider while making the decision. 2. What factors of Motivation exist at Kellogg? How does the Job Enrichment Program help in this regard? 3. Make your own recommendation plan for motivating employees at Kellogg Canada Salada?