Management and the Technology Professional – B302
Case study answer 2
As the supervising engineer I would firstly thoroughly assess the step which has been missed, in an attempt to conclude the overall impact on the manufacturing process. This would initially involve looking at the critical path from which it can be said that this step is on the critical path hence meaning it plays a vital role to the finished product. Even though only one test was missed, this could be the test which identifies an issue in that particular batch which needs to be resolved before the product is distributed. If this test was simply ignored the worst case scenario could be that the product is distributed and a fault is then found by the end user, hence leading to a product recall. This would obviously severely reduce profits and possibly negatively effect company reputation.
Alternatively the engineer could accept a delay and carry out the test, which in theory could be a form of damage limitation. The delay could cause reduced profits but the money loss would be far less than in the scenario described above. Another possible scenario could be that the test is carried out causing a delay but then a problem is found leading the whole production line process to be started from the beginning anyway. One final possible outcome could be that the test is missed and on this occasion it wouldn’t have had any impact, but initially when making this decision it’s almost based on a gamble, which shouldn’t play such a large factor within this type of business.
In my opinion, being the supervising engineer I would be held accountable if later on a fault was identified with this particular batch, from which my actions would certainly be questioned by the person in charge of the entire production process. This could also bring in a further suggestion, should I approach my superior and discuss the matter with them? So now I have thought about the possible outcomes, I would take the following action. I would accept I have made a mistake, report this to my superior and state the approach I would take. This would involve going back to phase 6 of the process and ensure the product is fully tested before it’s shipped. There are multiple reasons which I would provide, firstly that in this situation it will be difficult to accurately estimate the damage costs if the customer realises there is a fault, as some customers may go elsewhere for their products in the future. The second point is related to the short term and long term effects. For example if a decision was made primarily based on the short term maximum profit, then the highest risk approach would be taken to distribute the product and get the return. On the other hand the problem could be dealt with and delay incurred, but then not running the risk of possible long term damage to the company reputation.
Further to all of the above, ethical issues should be considered. If the test was ignored and the product distributed, this means there could potentially be a fault with it that could have been resolved before reaching the customer. Obviously the end user would expect a level of quality from a large company providing such hardware, but in this case there is the possibility it’s being released knowing full well the quality of this particular hardware is not up to their normal standard. Being the supervising engineer it’s within my power to justify this and in my opinion do what is morally and ethically correct even though it could affect the financial return.
This scenario could actually be related to the Sony BMG case when the CD’s were released with added software unknown to the user. This was an example of not considering all possible outcomes when a product reaches the end user, when a questionable action has been undertaken in the creation of the product. Obviously the effects on Sony from that were detrimental, so I would certainly be asking myself, others have made similar mistakes shouldn’t I be learning from them?
To clarify my actions as the supervising engineer I would acknowledge the problem and clearly state my approach to a superior. From calculating the critical path this provides evidence that this stage is important so must be fully completed, as the potential risk outweighs the delay on phases 7 and 8. I personally relate this scenario to the saying “if a job is worth doing, its worth doing properly” which is shown through which path I would take.
