| Name: |
Lifer
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 8:49:45 AM
|
Ok Hound, I will NEVER forget the 'discussion' with a mangament class professor that this question sparked.
Test question: (parphrased of course)
Company XYZ manufactures widgets. The company runs four teams on the line. The company standard for defects is 3%. One month team 2 turns in zero defects for the month. All other teams were within standard deviation. Which option should the company take?:
A. Lay off team 2.
B: Reprimand the other teams.
c: Change the company standard to zero defects.
D: Have maintenence check the team 2 line equipment to ensure it is running at capacity.
I'll check back and see if Hound can give the "proper" answer. Any of you others feel free to chime in also. I am interested as to how some of you would answer.
|
| Name: |
lakngulf
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 9:16:08 AM
|
None of the above
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Wrong, but thanks for playing.
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 9:34:00 AM
|
You must choose from listed options.
|
| Name: |
oneshot
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 10:52:39 AM
|
D
|
| Name: |
Jural
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 10:53:49 AM
|
Lay off team 2. They are causing poor morale:) Over achievers!!
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 10:58:23 AM
|
Those nasty effecient workers. How dare they do that. Don't they know that the others might have self-esteem issues now.
Good answer but not the 'correct' one according to the book/professor.
Come on hound, I am waiting for your answer before I reveal the rest of the story.
:)
|
| Name: |
Jural
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 11:14:46 AM
|
Then through the process of elimination and wacky logic the answer would have to be C. B "should" not be correct as the other teams were within spec. This is assuming that multiple answers are not allowed. Personally I would opt for E. Celebration drinks all around bought by the losing teams. :)
|
| Name: |
Yankee06
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 12:59:17 PM
|
-I agree with oneshot; my answer is "D"
-Here's my rationale:
---Not A: because you shouldn't punish a team for doing better then the average. ...you should praise them.
---Not B: because you shouldn't reprimand teh other team for performing at what you decided was the best achieveable rate
---Not C: because you shouldn't change the company standard beased on just one month's performance by only 25% of the workforce
---Yes A: because you should want to find out what made this one team perform at such a high level. Checking teh production line would be one avenue of inquiry. But management should also be reviewing other performance variables to determine the cause or causes.
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 1:03:46 PM
|
I would respond D and if they were at capacity, reduce to 1% defect the following month and gradually begin to reduce to 0% if another similar month occurs.
|
| Name: |
lotowner
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 1:12:15 PM
|
First, make sure that the sample size is significant and representative.
Statistically, none of the four teams may be different from each other over a longer period of time.
If the process capabilities of the 4 teams are known after a significant period of time and one is different, then try to understand what the contributing factors are.
|
| Name: |
lakngulf
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 2:31:21 PM
|
I would want to know more information before doing anything, therefore my immediate reaction of "none of the above". For instance, did team 2 produce just one item that was perfect, therefore a 0% defect? And, did the other teams produce 100 each with 2 defects for each team, therefore the less than 3% defect?
The production of the other three teams might have been so much in excess of team 2 that other measures should be taken.
Also, don't JTC, like so many businesses do, on one month. The jump to conclusion syndrome is rampant where I work, and we make up things to count to determine production, but I digress.
None of the above is STILL the correct answer. Now after a few months or an year, and after considering other items than just defects, then we would be ready for some action.
For instance, I typed this fairly fast and more than likely have some defects. Team 2 might still be on the first paragraph, but with no defects.
|
| Name: |
Maverick
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Agree with Lotowner
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 2:36:43 PM
|
One months results does not necessarily represent a trend. And would have to assume the QC is random sampling, so there is an allowed standard deviation.
SO FIRST QUESTION IS - if this team continues to produce outside the norm them I would study their processes to see what has changed, if anything.
NEXT QUESTION IS -- they have 0% standard defects, but what is there throughput. It may be that while they have 0% standard defects their throughput is below acceptable levels and in fact their cost of production is higher even after taking into consideration their defect rate.
So my answer is D, if the trend continues and they are within standard levels of throughput as compared to the other teams.
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Interesting responses so far.
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 2:45:10 PM
|
Some are on he right track, some are on the same track I was. But before I reveal the rest of the story I really wanted to hear from Hound and MM in particular. Like I said in the original post, this question sparked the liveliest debate of that entire semester.
|
| Name: |
lamont
-
|
|
| Subject: |
My Vote..... None of the above.....
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 2:58:03 PM
|
The government should take over the business therefore, there would be no standards to adhere to and everybody's happy.
|
| Name: |
Astro
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 7:28:28 PM
|
The answer would be A based only on what is given. You certainly would not choose B when the teams are meeting company established goals. C is not practical since previous studies had to set the 3% defect goal so zero defects would not be possible. If the machine capacity was not at full production then there still would have been the 3% defect on what was produced. Therefore A, they either did not make enough widgets to get a 3% sample or QC reports were not completed properly.
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Since hound wont play
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 8:38:57 PM
|
Not that I actually expected her too. This question/answer is a prime example of the difference between education and experience. Obviously I missed the question. I answered (D) have maintenence check the eqquipment. The textbook answer was (c) Change the company standard. Now anyone that knows business, especially manufacturing, would NEVER consider changing set company standards on a one time anomilly such as zero defects.
This whole scenario was straight from the textbook in "Case Study" section that I didn't read. Several of us argued the point, but to no avail. Through the years I have run this scenario by several groups and freinds. All have agreed that based on the info given (D) would be the proper answer. One of them is an effecincy expert for a major manufactuer.
Ultimately what one would do is to check the equipment, note the anomally and revisit the situation at the end of each reporting period. If the trend continues then one would look at retraining the other crews, and then eventually changing standards, but only after extensive study. Yada yada....
But I was REALLY wanting to know what the resident MBA would do.
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 8:45:37 PM
|
One additional item, as the defect percent is reduced to a goal of 0%, a tiered monetary incentive would be implemented for each team tied to the percent below 3%. Or, a winner take all each week for the team with the lowest defect percent with 3% as the base.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Dang
|
|
Date:
|
5/10/2010 9:23:09 PM
|
GF sounds like a capitalist!!
|
| Name: |
lakngulf
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Since hound wont play
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 8:31:08 AM
|
Because something is written in a textbook does not make it right. I never fully trusted textbooks anyway. And, you should have just thrown the question out generally, instead of doing the call out.
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Since hound wont play
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 9:10:42 AM
|
But what would be the fun in that? I did it to make a point about her MBA being worthless without actual experience to go along with it. She so proudly hailed her MBA, implying that she would know better than folks that have/are actually doing it just because she can pass some tests. Is education important? Absolutely. Is it better than experience? Rarely.
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Harvard MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 9:57:17 AM
|
Exerpt from article in American Thinker
February 03, 2004
By Thomas Lifson
President George W. Bush is the very first President to hold a Masters Degree in Business Administration. Even better (or worse, depending on your perspective), his MBA is from Harvard Business School. The comparatively small amount of attention paid by the political press to the President's Harvard MBA partially reflects a generalized ignorance of, and hostility toward, the degree itself.
The very first lesson drummed—into new students, as they file into the classrooms of Aldrich Hall, is that management consists of decision—making under conditions of uncertainty. There is never perfect information, and decisions often have to be made even when you'd really prefer to know a lot more. Given this reality, students are taught many techniques for analyzing the data which is available, extracting the non—obvious facets, learning how read into it the reasonable inferences which can be made, while quantifying the risks of doing so, and learning the costs and value of obtaining additional data.
The job of the executive is to weigh probabilities in evaluating imperfect information; to assess the costs and benefits of acting or not acting; and to construct scenarios around the various possible time frames for taking action, taking into account the probable reactions of the other vital actors. That political opponents at home carp at him over his imperfect data at the time is no surprise, and no reason to regret his decision. The costs of not acting were simply too great, and the downside potential of erroneous information too low to prefer inaction. Better data would have been preferable, of course, but President Bush shows no sign of remorse for doing what he knows was the prudent thing under the circumstances.
A second broad and important lesson the President learned at Harvard Business School is to embrace a finite number of strategic goals, and to make each one of those goals serve as many desirable ends as possible. The truism of this lesson is that if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. If you can't focus on everything, then you need to be able to focus on those few goals which will have the broadest impact, leading to a future capacity to attain other desirable ends. No exact number of goals is the limit, but three is an awfully good number to aim at. Those goals should be mutually consistent, so that the step—by—step accomplishment of each one aids in the achievement of the others.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Harvard MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 10:08:16 AM
|
Hmmm...GWB has an MBA from Harveard....thus he must be imminently qualified as a businessman....according to Hound....but apparently that MBA didn't prepare him to run the biggest business of all...according to Hound. Do I sense a dichotomy here?
BTW, GF, nice to see you learned how to cut and paste...
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Hodgieee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 10:14:02 AM
|
I have no problem with a cut and paste as long as the source is provided. As that great philosopher GF said "Not all great thoughts are original".
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Goooffiieeee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 10:29:31 AM
|
But usually a cut and paste accompanies a point to be made....which in this case is missing...but then most of your posts miss the point....:>)
|
| Name: |
greycove
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lets test Hound's MBA
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 11:09:50 AM
|
When you use the word "standard deviaion" is this the formal variance of the defects divided by the number of defects overtime (the formal statistical variation) or is the company's acceptable range of defects? If mathematical, would need to know the actual standard deviation to assess the probabilities of the teams performance.
I am probably jumping off the deep end here.
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Clarity for Hodgiee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 11:21:40 AM
|
To clear it up for you, since we are discussing an MBA the post was strictly to show a brief description of what is covered in the MBA course at Harvard. I thought it was interesting and just wanted to share it with all my Forum buddies.
I often wonder why you waste your time reading my pointless posts? Save time and just put me on ignore as that is what someone with an MBA would do.
Cheers!!!!!
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Clarity for Hodgiee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 12:29:55 PM
|
Your lightweight posts lighten my day...
|
| Name: |
lakngulf
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Clarity for Hodgiee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 12:35:17 PM
|
So I still want to know "What is the correct answer?" I still stand by mine. Good management would have had more info than that, so that the gut feeling decisions would be sound
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Clarity for Hodgiee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 1:32:16 PM
|
The beauty of management questions is that a lot of times there is no one correct answer. The key to this one in my opinion is the reference to "one month". None of the answer options would be the correct course of action. You wouldn't fire them for doing better than expected. You wouldn't want to chastise the other teams if they met the established standard...and I would think that production records would tell you if the overachievers were slacking on quantity in favor of exceptional quality.
That brings us to changing the standard. I wouldn't do that with only one month's experience of zero defects, as it might truly be an anomaly that isn't easily repeated. I would provide the overachievers with a reward - not necessarily monetary but recognition of some sort (although monetary might spur the others to do better), and watch the results over a period of several months. If it looks like the standard is indeed too low, then raise it (by lowering the percentage of defects allowed).
|
| Name: |
lakngulf
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Clarity for Hodgiee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 1:42:21 PM
|
Mr Hodja has clarity. I fully agree.
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Clarity for Hodgiee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 2:25:18 PM
|
After the study, Team 2 continues to perform at a 0 to .25% defect while the other teams remain within the 3% level reaching 2-2.75%.
Would you fire all of the other teams, split up the teams so members of Team 2 would not be eavenly divided to infuence the production of the other teams, leave everything alone and just reward 0% defects, or something else?
|
| Name: |
lakngulf
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Clarity for Hodgiee
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 2:33:39 PM
|
I would ask for a bailout.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Too Simplistic
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 3:11:32 PM
|
A good manager, noting the disparity, would be quietly observing and documenting the reasons for the disparity during the trial period....team morale and cohesiveness, process, technique, leadership style, even the time of day the team is on duty. If possible (although you can't legislate good morale) the manager would implement the positive things the good team was doing into the other teams' processes and/or techniques. He might decide to relieve some team leaders - or even lower the maximum allowed defects if they all are exceeding the quality target.
Off the thread now - to DC tomorrow for a day then to Italy Sunday for two weeks of work and then another week of vacation with my wife. Y'all keep the water clean and don't let 'em drain the pond while we are away...
|
| Name: |
lakngulf
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Too Simplistic
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 4:23:12 PM
|
Be safe, Hodja
|
| Name: |
alahusker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Too Simplistic
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 6:41:34 PM
|
Call your CPA and see if XYX is making tons of money. If so, go to happy hour.. If not, sue someone or see if TARP money is available... Just don't unionize because when you do, answers A - D are no longer in the manager's span of control..
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
For Clarity
|
|
Date:
|
5/11/2010 11:21:34 PM
|
First of all, I never said that education trumps experience.
My only point was in response to MM's accusation that I did not have any knowledge of business; in fact, he is wrong. I have explained in subsequent posts.
Now, I'm really sorry that I did not see this thread yesterday, because I would have asked Bruce to delete it. I don't appreciate being "called out" to be "tested". You see, I am RETIRED and I no longer have to prove anything to anyone. I have a successful career behind me, and I am now reaping the benefits of having time to pursue the things I want to do.
But, perhaps Lifer can have a "career" of challenging all of you with his textbook business case studies -- looks like a lot of people enjoyed responding.
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Touched a nerve did we!?!
|
|
Date:
|
5/12/2010 8:51:03 PM
|
LMAO Hound. You are too much. Fish in a barrell.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I wasn't wrong.....
|
|
Date:
|
5/13/2010 5:44:27 PM
|
I said we agree to disagree on whether your career in government qualifies you to lecture us in the business world on how we ought to do things. I even complimented you and said how fortunate we were to have the one government employee of all the millions of them that ran their operation like a business......except that profit part which is actually the entire reason for the existence of a business....but otherwise......
As you can see I didn't participate in this thread. I think it was a trick question but apparently it really generated some spirited debate. Gotta love the forum.....
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
No, you didn't
|
|
Date:
|
5/13/2010 8:00:03 PM
|
Lifer, I'm really sorry to tell you that I have endured far more challenging people than you or anyone else on this forum during the course of my career.
If anything on this forum touched my nerve, I just wouldn't bother with the forum.
I keep telling you I am retired and I don't have anything to prove to you or to anyone else. As far as I'm concerned, that is the beauty of middle age -- I can just smile and shake my head.
|
| Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Middle age?
|
|
Date:
|
5/15/2010 9:30:14 AM
|
How many 110 year olds do you know?
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Middle age?
|
|
Date:
|
5/15/2010 2:36:43 PM
|
None, but I doubt anyone beyond their 20's would consider 55 to be "old" age. But call it what you will. I don't have a problem with age. I feel fortunate to have made it this far -- so many don't.
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
California Lakes
»
Tule Lake
Login
|
Home
