Synopsis Northwest Canadian Forest Products Limited owns and operates five sawmills in British Columbia and Alberta

Canada. They produce high quality lumber for use in the manufacture of window frames, doors and moldings internationally and lower quality commodity type lumber for use in the Canadian construction industry. The president of the company has a monumental decision to make. She can reinvest $50 million in the Jackson mill for much needed upgrades or spend more than that total in building and additional mill in Alberta. The Jackson mill was built in 1950 and hasnt had any upgrades since 1986. If she chooses to focus on building a new mill in Alberta, not only will she spend more money, but she will also have to cut more than half of the 200 person work force with permanent layoffs. Half the supervisory and managerial personnel would lose their jobs as well. This seems like a pretty straight forward decision, right? Simply spend less upgrading the mill in Jackson and keep the already trained work force. Unfortunately it isnt that simple, the other alternative looks like a chance to start anew simply because the labor climate in Jackson is bitter and unpleasant. This particular mill has consistently been the poorest performer in terms of productivity and product quality even though its equipment is of similar age and quality. Despite having the legally required joint managementmanagement safety committee, they also have the worst safety record out of all of the companys mills. The president attributes most, if not all of the problems at Jackson to its poor labormanagement relations. The mill has had two walk offs because the laborers were upset when management fired two employees for insubordination. Both sides, management and the laborers, seem to be in an embittered battle tantamount to the legendary McCoy-Hatfield feud in the Kentucky-West Virginia region of the United States. Main Problems

One of the problems mentioned is that this mill has the poorest performance in both productivity and product quality. John, the plant supervisor, thinks that his workforce is not competent enough to perform the tasks given to them in a proper manner. He has a negative view of his workforce and therefore watches them like a hawk, he treats them like children that he has to babysit and then reprimand all day. On the other side of this divide is the workforce, who feels like they are constantly being belittled, they can sense that management has no confidence in their abilities or intelligence. They resent this treatment and as a result, they seldom come to a compromise or negotiate with management because they dont think that they are taken seriously. Their lack of cooperation is a statement that they are a force to be reckoned with, and that they cant just be pushed around like drones. Basically, there is no real organization here. An organization as defined by the text is a group of people who work interdependently toward some purpose. The key word in that definition is interdependently; this mills us versus them attitude is not how an organization is supposed to function. Each side has their own agenda and they have lost sight of the firms goals because of their internal feuds. Which brings us to the other problem this mill has; the crew feels that when they are reprimanded for misuse of a machine or for doing something wrong in general, there is no explanation as to why what they did was wrong. There is no time set aside to train the younger crew members. They feel that all they get is criticism and humiliation when they make a mistake, but never an explanation. The main problem here is that there are no goals set and the crew doesnt know what is expected of them. How can they fulfill managements expectations when they dont even know what those expectations are supposed to be?

All the management has done so far is to let the crew know that they want them to work faster, but there is no real motivation to work faster. Motivation defined by the text; the forces within a person that affect the direction, intensity, and persistence of voluntary behavior. Here again, we encounter another key essentials in this definition to make this definition true, voluntary behavior. The only thing that keeps the crew on the job is them not wanting to lose their jobs, but there is no voluntary behavior that makes them do their jobs well. Besides, they have the support of their co workers if management did want to fire just one of them as demonstrated by the entire workforce walking off of the job when management tried to fire one of them for insubordination. So why try to do the very best that you can when there is nothing to motivate you to do so? Another issue this mill is having is that there is no real channel for both parties to work out their differences or settle their grievance with one another. The safety committee is not equipped to handle production issues, however, Des, a management member of the committee, who also happens to be the production manager and second highest manager at the mill, is only prepared to discuss safety issues at the meetings while the union representative wants to talk about production issues. The meeting becomes a waste of time because nothing is accomplished; Des does his best to ignore or combat the production issues brought up while the union representative does his best to make the crew members voices heard. All the while, Des feels that production is none of the crews business and that they are just whining. Here again, there is a lack of what the goals of the safety meeting are supposed to be. Proposed Solutions

The first thing that this sawmill needs to do is to become an actual organization as defined by the text mentioned earlier. They need to start working together as team; an essential part of this is to set goals for every level of the mill. The entire mill, including the crew members, needs to see how they are measuring up in comparison to the other mills in the company and set their goals accordingly in order to improve their standing. The management needs to have goals and each different group in the mill needs to have their own goals that they need to reach. Realistic goal setting has six essential characteristics; when setting a goal, it has to be specific, relevant, challenging, accepted, participative, and there must be feedback. Once the crew members and management alike can agree with the goals that are set, there is bound to be a very noticeable change. Goals are like roadmaps, there are a starting point, a destination, and a way to get to where you want to go. If you left the house without any idea as to where you are supposed to go, you would be aimlessly walking around. In the case of our crew members here, they too need a map in order to perform more effectively. There is no use in criticizing someone without telling them how to improve their performance on the job. With a real goal, the crew would know exactly what is expected of them, it would be something that they can agree to, and with the valuable feedback, and crew members would strive to attain positive feedback about their strengths, not their flaws. This too can fix the lack of motivation in the mill. Unfortunately, there are some drawbacks to goal setting; the employees would start to work with blinders, so to speak. They would only focus on measurable performance, the goals being set may be too easy when tied to money, and goal setting would interfere with the learning process in new complex jobs.

Once goals have been established on the organizational level, there should be a yearly evaluation of each individual. The Evaluation would serve more as a way to inform the individual of what they are doing well and what they can improve on during the year. This is important for this organization because it gives the crew more power over their job performance. It also serves as a way to constructively criticize them rather than making them to feel humiliated and belittled. It would be a forum for the crew members to voice their concerns about their job to management without it being hostile and bitter. Once the crews know whats expected of them, perhaps they can work toward those goals. There also needs to be rewards set in place for reaching these goals, both as a group or team and at the individual level. The rewards need to be something valuable to all team members such as a bonus for all mill personnel for reaching their goals or paid time off for individual members who reach their goals. There could be a few minor setbacks to the reward system at all levels. The reward system at the organization level could blur the lines of individual effort and group efforts. The disadvantages of rewards at the individual level could cause people to hoard resources and knowledge in order to maintain their competitive edge over the other people in their organization. Conclusion Part of figuring out what to do with a problem child, such as this Jackson sawmill, is implementing solutions without more unintended problems. The company should start setting goals as was stated earlier despite the obvious disadvantages. This company is reminiscent of the Children of Israel lost in the desert and they are in desperate need of a map before the ultimate sacrifice is made. Setting clear goals that each side can agree on

would be a huge improvement over the current squabbling. The crew members would be able to give their input and get the sense the management is finally listening. The management would be able to better get to know the crew instead of assuming that they are a bunch of dunces. They would be able to see that they may have legitimate concerns that would aid the goals of the mill. Gaining the input of the crew members when setting goals would give them a sense of ownership in the mill; they would start to think form an affective commitment, not just a continuance commitment, to the mill. There would be a sense of pride connected to their job and they would work hard to keep up the positive feedback. This may include the senior crew taking time out to train the junior crew so that their team goals can be met, instead of them fending for themselves. In order to combat the disadvantages team rewards, there must be individual rewards as well. In a union setting there must be both because it can be hard to be promoted since usually the promotions are seniority based and then the team rewards will not be as affective. The rewards can be performance based and larger rewards given at the end of the year pending a satisfactory evaluation. This way, the individual will be able to gauge his or her own performance when compared to the teams accomplishment and of course this improves self efficacy. Of course implementing a new reward system and new goals will be difficult because change is always difficult. Those who conform to the changes can be rewarded with recognition like employee or team of the month, week, or year. Those who choose to not to conform can be weeded out with poor evaluations which will either cause them to change their ways or they will choose to leave on their own. The firm may lose valuable human capital with essential knowledge, skills, and abilities, but they will be able to mold

the mill into an effective organization with effective channels of communication and agreed upon goals that everyone would be working toward.