California manufacturing leaders perception of automation and how it impacts the workplace

DEFENSE

PRESENTED BY: LAUREN TALIA

May 17, 2012

DISSERTATION TOPIC

CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURING COMPANIES’ LEADERS’ PERCEPTIONS FOR INTEGRATING AUTOMATON AND HOW IT IMPACTS THE

WORKPLACE

EXPLANATION OF THE TERMS  CALIFORNIA  Divided into two regions

 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA  San Jose   San Francisco  Silicon Valley  Mountain View

 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA  San Diego  Los Angeles  Orange County

 MANUFACTURING  32,000 companies in California according to Manta.com

 LEADER  Chief ExecuRve Officer (CEO)

 Vice President  Director

 AUTOMATION

 Self-‐OperaRng Machine

 RoboRc Technology

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

THE PURPOSE OF THIS RESEARCH STUDY IS TO ADDRESS TWO MAIN QUESTIONS

1. To examine the leaders of California manufacturing companies’ percepRons and objecRves towards integraRng automaRon.

2. To examine the leaders of California manufacturing companies’ percepRons concerning the impact of automaRon in the workplace.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURING COMPANIES’ LEADERS ARE INTEGRATING AUTOMATION WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACT

AUTOMATON MAY HAVE IN THE WORKPLACE.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. WHAT ARE CALIFORNIA’S MANUFACTURING COMPANY LEADERS PERCEPTIONS FOR INTEGRATING AUTOMATION?

2. WHAT ARE CALIFORNIA’S MANUFACTURING COMPANIES’ LEADERS PERCEPTIONS FOR ASCERTAIN AFTERMATHS FROM INTEGRATING AUTOMATION IMPACTING THE WORKPLACE?

LITERATURE AUTOMATON

 ImplemenRng automaton leads to a safer workplace environment for workers.

 AutomaRon promotes efficient operaRon by increasing producRvity quotas to saRsfy leader’s expectaRons (Tzafestas, 2010).

 AutomaRon decreases operaRonal costs by producing an increased quality of goods at a lower-‐cost (Wandner, 2010).

METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH METHOD  QualitaRve Research Method  In-‐depth and rich informaRon  What are your percepRons of automaRon?

RESEARCH DESIGN  Phenomenological Research Design  Allowed the researcher to survey a small populaRon sample of 10–20 parRcipants

SAMPLING

RANDOM SAMPLING  Professional contact  Personal contact

POPULATION SAMPLE  California manufacturing

 Leaders  AutomaRon

JUDGMENTAL SAMPLING  Over 20 parRcipants

SEARCH ENGINES AND KEYWORDS SEARCH ENGINES  Google.com

 Whitepages.com

 Manta.com

 Cmta.com

 Erascal.org

 Cmtc.com

 Apparelnews.net

EXAMPLES OF KEYWORDS  California manufacturing companies

 Northern California manufacturing companies

 Northern California network chips companies

 Southern California manufacturing companies

RECRUITMENT PROCESS

MS EXCEL WORKBOOK  Spreadsheet dated (that day date)  First Name  Last Name  Company Name  Job Titles  Email Addresses

DATA CONNECTED  External Hard Drive  Encrypted and Password protected

LOCKED CABINET  Only the researcher had access to the content

DOCUMENTING THE PARTICIPANTS INFORMATION

RECRUITMENT PROCESS, CONT.

EMAILS SENT FOR RECURITING

 Over 1800 individuals emails sent individually to each qualified candidates and follow-‐up phone call.

SCREENING QUESTION  Do you currently or did you used to parRcipate in the decision-‐making process for implemenRng automaRon

RECRUITMENT EMAIL  Provided link to access the web survey quesRonnaires online through Survey Monkey ™

DATA COLLECTION

PROS  Web Survey QuesRonnaire

 CompleRng the survey at the leaders convenience

 Anonymity of respondents

 More honest answers to sensiRve quesRons

 No Cost

CONS

 ParRcipants are unfamiliar with the site  Caused some parRcipants to quesRon the integrity of the study

 Poor response rate

 Less aftudinal behavior

Survey Monkey ™

RECRUITMENT TOTALS

22 ParKcipants Accessed the Survey

SCREENING QUESTION Do you currently or did you used to parRcipate in the decision-‐making process for implemenRng automaRon?

12 parRcipants ParKcipated in the screening process

10 parRcipants FAILED the screening process

PARTICIPANTS RECRUITED

DEMOGRAPHICS

 5 Northern California

 7 Southern California

AGE

 Was not factor in this study.  Seniority of the parRcipants posiRons was factor.

GENDER  9 Males  3 Females

JOB TITLES  5 President/CEO  2 Vice Presidents  2 Chief Officers  2 Directors

# Region Gender Title Manufacturing Industry

1 NoCal Male Chief ExecuRve Officer (CEO)

Automobile Parts

2 NoCal Male Director Snowboarding and Skateboarding products

3 NoCal Male Vice President (VP)

PlasRc

4 NoCal Female Sr. VP Label PrinRng

5 NoCal Female Chief OperaRng Officer (COO)

Networking Devices

NoCal PARTICIPANTS

SoCal PARTICIPANTS # Region Gender Title Manufacturing Industry 1 SoCal Male President/Owner Guitar Instrument 2 SoCal Male Director Aircraj Manufactures 3 SoCal Male President Medical Equipment

4 SoCal Male Chief Technology Officer (CTO)

Commercial Aircrajs

5 SoCal Male Director Apparel TexRles

6 SoCal Female President/CEO Apparel TexRles

7 SoCal Male CEO Food and beverages

HOW DATA ANALYSIS WAS CONDUCTED

CONTENT ANALYSIS  RelaRonships of among categories of data  SimilariRes in common wording

SURVEY QUESTION 1

9 PARTICIPANTS  Great tool  PosiRve  Cost reducRon  Improve process improvements for streamline efficiently

 Staying compeRRve

WHAT ARE YOUR FEELING ABOUT AUTOMATION?

3 PARTICIPANTS  Neutral Feelings for automaRon

 Its about how the workplace adapts to automaRon

SURVEY QUESTION 2

6 PARTICIPANTS  Improve complicated process  Streamline processes  Simplify processes  AutomaRon is an effecRve tool

5 PARTICIPANTS  To cut costs  Increase producRvity

1 PARTICIPANT  Higher producRvity number across all metrics  Reduces Dangers for injury

WHY DID YOU OR THE LEADERS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION DECIDE TO INTEGRA TATE AUTOMATION?

SURVEY QUESTION 3

8 PARTICIPANTS  Highly PosiRve  Eager to integrate automaRon in the workplace

1 PARTICIPANTS  IniRal investment of cost

1 PARTICIPANT  Mixed interpretaRons of automaRon

1 PARTCIAPANT  Change in any form is rarely accepted

1 PARTICIPANTS  Retraining the workers, where necessary

HOW DID YOU OR THE LEADERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION REACT TO THE INTEGRATION OF AUTOMATION IN THE WORKPLACE?

SURVEY QUESTION 4

9 PARTICIPANTS  Simplify processes  Increase employee producRvity.

3 PARTICIPANT  Perform repeRRve work  Sojware  Producing automated products

HOW WAS AUTOMATION INTEGRATED INTO YOUR WORKPLACE?

The ques;on asks “how” but the respondents seemed to respond to “why” instead.

SURVEY QUESTION 5

7 PARTICIPANTS  Employees who wanted to learn embraced automaRon

 Higher level of job security  Employees welcomed

HOW DID THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) REACT TO THE INTEGRATION OF AUTOMATION?

5 PARTICIPANTS  Workplace reacted negaRvely to automaRon

 Employees felt their jobs were in jeopardy

SURVEY QUESTION 6

8 PARTICIPANTS  Hired professional trainer to educate the employees

 Training took place In-‐house

WHAT TYPE OF TRAINING WAS INSTITUTED TO EDUCATE THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) TO LEARN AND OPERATE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS?

4 PARTICIPANTS  Management goes over the safety and maintenance requirements for the new equipment

 Leadership offered demonstraRon of uRlizing automaRon

 Process training

SURVEY QUESTION 7

10 PARTICIPANTS  Company insRtuted some form of onsite training

 Had an internal team leader on the floor to educate and assist the team with conRnuous training.

1 PARTICIPANT  Successful training, the employee

1 PARTCIAPNT  Change was challenge

HOW DID THE TRAINING ASSIST THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) TO LEARN TO USE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS?

SURVEY QUESTION 8

4 PARTICIPANTS  AutomaRon benefited the workplace

 Increasing morale which had a posiRve effect

 Beneficial to the leadership team.

2 PARTICIPANTS  Employees are now comfortable with the concept of automaRon

1 PARTICIPANT  ReducRon of repeated moRon faRgue

HOW DID AUTOMATION BENEFIT THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES)?

SURVEY QUESTION 8, CONT.

1 PARTICIPANT  Company invested in the employees

1 PARTICIPANT  New job opportuniRes opened

1 PARTICIPANT  AutomaRon resulted in the staff being bored easily

1 PARTICIPANT  AutomaRon assisted the execuRves more, by increasing the producRvity quotas

1 PARTICIPANT  Helped the company grow in size and increased profits


SURVEY QUESTION 9

9 PARTICIPANTS  Leaders in their organizaRon had a posiRve reacRon to the cost of integraRng automaRon.

1 PARTICIPANT  ResisRng the change

1 PARTICIPANT  Created debates amount the leaders

1 PARTICIPANT  The expense of automaRon was more than offset by the increased revenue

HOW DID YOU OR THE LEADERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION REACT TO THE COST OF INTEGRATING AUTOMATION?

SURVEY QUESTION 10

6 PARTICIPANTS  The effect of automaRon on their workplaces was neutral

 1 PARTICIPANT  AutomaRon was success.

4 PARTICIPANTS   AutomaRon had posiRve

effect 1 PARTICIPANT  Increased producRvity  Decreased errors  Reduced lead Rmes

OVERALL, HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE IMPACT OR EFFECT AUTOMATION HAS IN YOUR WORKPLACE?

SURVEY QUESTION 11

11 PARTICIPANTS

 Automaton exceeded their company’s expectaRons

 Decreased OperaRonal Costs   Increased employee producRvity numbers, saving the company money  PrevenRng outsourcing.

1 PARTICIPANT   AutomaRon did not increase

the companies sales growth.

AFTER INTEGRATING AUTOMATION, DID IT MEET OR EXCEED YOUR COMPANY’S EXPECTATIONS? WHY OR WHY NOT?

FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 1

 Lack of knowledge regarding how automaRon might influence the workplace through integraRon.

 The leaders seemed to have a basic understanding of the benefits automaRon provided to the workplace.

WHAT ARE YOUR FEELING ABOUT AUTOMATION?


 Increasing employee producRvity

 Improving accuracy

 Staying compeRRve

 China is United States biggest global compeRtor in low-‐cost.

 More products are being manufactured in the United States.

WHY DID YOU OR THE LEADERS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION DECIDE TO INTEGRATE AUTOMATION?


 Leaders need to have a comprehensive understanding of the nature of the company and the industry in which it competes (Ferrell & Hartline, 2010).

 Lack of understanding of automaton

 Examples or prototypes of automaton

 Strengths, Weaknesses, OpportuniRes, and Threats (SWOT) analysis

HOW DID YOU OR THE LEADERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION REACT TO THE INTEGRATION OF AUTOMATION IN THE WORKPLACE?


 Return of Investment (ROI)

 Prevented injury  Increased producRvity

 Improved accuracy  Simplified processes and procedures for the lean effecRveness

HOW WAS AUTOMATION INTEGRATED INTO YOUR WORKPLACE?


 Prevented the employees from conducRng dangerous acRviRes

 Their jobs were lost from automaRon

 Excited for the new opportuniRes would present itself

 AutomaRon might help to increase job security

HOW DID THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) REACT TO THE INTEGRATION OF AUTOMATION?


 Hiring professional trainers

 Having full-‐Rme trainer on-‐site

  Trial and error is costly

 Training Seminars

 Cross-‐training the workforce

WHAT TYPE OF TRAINING WAS INSTITUTED TO EDUCATE THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) TO LEARN AND OPERATE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS?


 Employees had the opportunity to ask the professional trainer any quesRons that they had.

 The training will assist the employees to begin operaRng the new machinery with certainty.

 Training assisted the employees in learning how to use and operate automaRon.

 The employees preferred learning from a professional trainer

HOW DID THE TRAINING ASSIST THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) TO LEARN TO USE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS?


 AutomaRon caused producRvity to increase while reducing the size of the workforce.   Lower morale

 Flexible working hours  Increase the morale

 Increasing the profit and sales margins



 Cost was an issue for the leaders in any organizaRon because automaRon implementaRon is expensive.

 Not all companies possess the funding necessary to integrate automaRon in the workplace.

 The findings from the study indicated that it is wise for any company (not just manufacturing companies) to set aside cash on reserve to be used for the integraRon of new prototypes of automaRon.

HOW DID YOU OR THE LEADERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION REACT TO THE COST OF INTEGRATING AUTOMATION?


 People in the workplace will always have mixed feelings regarding the effect automaRon has in the workplace.

 Each employee or leader has an individual aftude regarding adapRng to new changes.

 Some people enjoy change, while others resist it; some people enjoy structure and consistency.

 AutomaRon has improved the employees accuracy.

OVERALL, HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE IMPACT OR EFFECT AUTOMATION HAS IN YOUR WORKPLACE?


AutomaKon exceeded expectaKons

 Increased producRvity

 Improved accuracy

 Cut costs

  Higher cash reserves

 Prevented Injury

AFTER INTEGRATING AUTOMATION, DID IT MEET OR EXCEED YOUR COMPANY’S EXPECTATIONS? WHY OR WHY NOT?

AutomaKon cannot guarantee

 Increase in sales

 Increase profits.

FINDINGS AND RESULTS ADAPTING TO CHANGE  Workers were resistant to change

COST OF AUTOMATION  Costly  Cash reserve  Return on investment (ROI)

COMMUNICATION  EducaRng the workers that automaRon will not threaten their posiRons in the company.

TRAINING

 Hiring professional trainer to train the workplace

AUTOMATON ADDED TO THE LITERATURE

SHOWN IN THE LITERATURE

 Increased ProducRvity

 Prevented Injury

 Simplified processes

 Streamline effecRveness

 Improved Accuracy

WAS NOT SHOWN IN THE LITERATURE

 Improved Processes and Procedures

 ROI

 Some workers were resisted change

 Training the workplace on automaRon

INTERPRETATIONS OF RESULTS

. THE FINDINGS OF THIS STUDY REVEALED THAT CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURING LEADERS’

OVERALL PERCEPTIONS REGARDING AUTOMATION WERE POSITIVE.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

 GEOGRAPHIC

 INDUSTRY

 PARTICIPANTS

 QUALITATIVE

 RECRUITMENT EMAIL

 SURVEY MONKEY™

 SAMPLE SIZE

 RANDOM SAMPLING

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

 ROBOTEIC TECHNOLOGY

 GEOGRAPHIC’S

 PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS

 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE HARMED FROM AUTOMAITON

 TRAINING

 EFFECTS OF AUTOMATON

 RESISTANCE TO CHANGE

 IMPORT AND EXPORT

 MANUFACTURING WORKERS PERCEPTIONS FOR AUTOMATION

QUESTIONS

OR COMMENTS

California manufacturing leaders perception of automation and how it impacts the workplace

Business

Transcript of California manufacturing leaders perception of automation and how it impacts the workplace