MNGT 3004

BRIEFING NOTE INDIVIDUAL

CASE STUDY: ARNOTT ENGINEERING



















Name: Katherine Ann Ongkowijoyo

Student Number: 3151585

Lecturer/Tutor Name: Dr. Keith Ng/Magdalene Kong


Table of contents

Page
1.0 Introduction....1
2.0 Current Issues1-2
3.0 Relevant Theories and Model.....2
3.1 Organizational Culture.......2
3.2 Rationality in Decision Making......2
4.0 Recommendations and Suggestions to Solve the Issues...2-3
5.0 Conclusion..3
6.0 References.4












1.0 Introduction
Arnott Engineering, formed twenty years ago, is a metal processing company
focusing in manufacturing silos for grain stores. In March 2001, Christine Arnott, the
daughter, took over the company as the inheritor.

In the attempt to expand and diversify, Christine attended an Engineering
Conference and came to know that Philip, her old friend, knows of an offer in the
Morrisset region, where a mechanically distinctive bridge designs needed steelwork
support. Thus, without doubting, she requested Philip to enter her Company as a
Project Manager, which equivalent to David Dobsons level, who has been with the
company from the beginning. Herewith, the problems then arise leading to current
situations. The employees are unable to work cooperatively with Philip as they failed
to share his views. Furthermore, David who felt disrespected also finds it difficult to
continue the project while bottling up his feelings and thoughts. Consequently, it may
be challenging for the company to stay within the six months contract qualifications
timeframe.

2.0 Current Issues
There are several significant issues that lead to the current critical situation of the
company. Some of these include: corporate culture, organization decision-making,
and organization conflict.

Firstly, employees in this company are accustomed to the corporate culture of
constructing grain silos for the past twenty years, as mentioned in their job
descriptions. Thus, it is certainly challenging for Arnott Engineering Company to
change these employees culture that has been embedded in them for a long period
of time in the attempt to manufacture a different product.

Secondly, Christines action to hire Philip as a Project Manager to work on the new
contract, without discussing with any of the employees show that Christine has a
poor decision-making. In order for a company to be successful especially when
operating in a different fieldwork than the original, Christine needs to hear the
employees opinions as it may help to bring a different perspective.
1



Lastly, employees wrong mindset and lack of cooperation also contribute to the
internal conflict. In this case, Davids discontentment towards the fact that Philip was
hired to be on the same position as him, resulted in an unpleasant cooperation
between Philip and the employees.

3.0 Relevant Theories and Models
3.1 Organizational Culture
Organizational culture is defined as 'the way we view and carry out businesses over
here', which mostly concluded due to the organizations beliefs, legends, values,
language and meanings (Andrew Brown, 1998). In addition, an organizations culture
also compresses what it has been competent at. Therefore, culture provides an
organization with a feel of distinctiveness such as who we are, what we do, what we
stand for (Maull, et al., 2001). Referring to this, the culture in Arnott Engineering
Company has been clearly about producing grain silos ever since establishment.
Without a doubt, the employees have seen themselves to be committed in working in
this field that it has become part of their identity. As a result, this makes it
challenging for the employees to work on the new project.
3.2 Rationality in Decision Making
Decision-making is described as the selection of choice of act (Scott-Ladd, et al.,
2004). To perform successful decision-making, managers need to follow a decision-
making model, which includes certain steps such as gathering significant
information, reviewing information, assessing and making choice (Simon, 1997).
However, when applied to this case, Christine as the Manager does not seem to
follow these basic steps and she directly requested Philip to join the company and
entered the contract in the hope of extending and diversifying the company, without
attempting to collect information about any alternatives. In addition, while making this
choice, Christine did not check and communicate her decision with any of the
employees. As a result, due to the absence of group decision-making, organizational
conflicts arise.

4.0 Recommendations and Suggestions to Solve the Issues

2



In order to solve the issues in Arnott Engineering Company, there are several
actions that Christine can take into considerations.

Firstly, to tackle the problem with organization culture, Christine should consider
changing the culture, as the current organizational culture is hindering the companys
diversification and expansion. Thus, Christine needs to first acknowledge that
changing all members simultaneously is an impossible task (Hamel, et al., 1994).
Instead, she should start off with member who has greater impact in the organization
such as David. After he is dedicated to adjustment, Christine should emphasize on
his achievements, so the rest will be able to identify the idea (Dow Jones &
Company, 2014).

Another recommendation to address the issue is for Christine to take a systematic
approach to decision-making as it can aid to focus on the key features. Firstly,
Christine should define the objective so that the employees are clear of what to
achieve. In addition, reassuring David Dobson and the employees to have a say in
the debates and discussion, will also provide a clear understanding about the
importance of the action (Sanna, 2011).

Lastly, to ensure that decision is widely accepted, Christine needs to communicate
her decision before starting the project. This is because the more information she
delivers concerning the projected benefits and risks, the higher the possibility of
people supporting the decision (Deloitte Development LLC, 2011). Besides, group
decision-making advantages include a wider range of options, and higher
commitment amongst the group members (Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn, 2011).

Conclusion
To sum up, there are several possible actions that Christine should consider before
starting the project such as changing the organizational culture, adapting to
systematic approach in decision-making process and communicate the decisions.
These implementations should be carried out in a way that everyone in the
organization is involved. Nevertheless, only when the objectives, new culture and
decision made are widely accepted, business will then be able to operate smoothly.
3


References
Andrew Brown. (1995, 1998). Organisational Culture. (2
nd
ed). Pitman Publishing.
pp. 9, 33, 176.

Deloitte Development LLC. (2011). Its Your Decision. Retrieved on February 1, 2014
from http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-
UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/us_consulting_OrganizationDecisionMaki
ng_051111.pdf

Dow Jones & Company. (2014). How to Change Your Organizations Culture. The
Wall Street Journal.

Hamel, Gary, & C.K. Prahalad. (1994). Competing for the Future. Harvard Business
School Press.

Maull, R., Brown, P. & Cliffe, R. (2001). Organisational culture and quality
improvement. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol.
21, No. 3, pp. 302-326.

Sanna. (2011). Decision Theory Approach in Management. Retrieved on February 1,
2014 from http://www.slideshare.net/sanna1/decision-theory-approach-in-
management

Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. (2011). Organizational behavior
(11
th
ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

Scott-Ladd, B., & Marshall, V. (2004). Participation in Decision-making: A matter of
context. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 25(8), 646-662.

Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes
in administrative organizations (4
th
ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

4