AN ANALYSIS OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE PACKAGING DEPARTMENTS OFTEN DOMESTIC PLANT LOCATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION THESIS FOR THE DEGREE OF M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY THOMAS HERBERT NOWACK 1965 III III II II II III III I I III. III II 3 1293 10357 51 III 1 L; 2011' TM.“ 6/21qu ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE PACKAGING DEPARTMENTS OF TEN DOMESTIC PLANT LOCATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION by Thomas Herbert Nowack Body of Abstract It was necessary to relate the persPectives oi the organization of the packaging activities at ten plant locations of International Business Machines Corporation to their objectives. Within the past several years, the packaging activity has been placing a greater degree of emphasis on the shipping characteristics of their products; thus changing some of the long-range objectives of packaging. In view of these changing objectives, this study was under- taken to analyze the organizational structure of the packaging departments of each individual plant. The research study included collecting data from the various plants' packaging managers through personal interviews and a written, structured questionnaire asking questions on the interaction patterns of the packaging departments and, also, the opinions of the packaging personnel in relation to their organization. Thomas Herbert Nowack The major findings of the study were: first, the packaging activity in most plant locations is oriented to- ward the activities of materials handling, plant layout and internal warehousing. Second, the objectives, however, of both the Corporate Packaging Program and in individual plants pointed to a closer alignment with such functions as Product and Development Engineering, Customer Engineering and Quality Control.1 AN ANALYSIS OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE PACKAGING DEPARTMENTS OF TEN DOMESTIC PLANT LOCATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION By Thomas Herbert Nowack A TILES IS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of T-IASTER OF SC ENCE Department of Forest Products School of Packaging PREFACE The purpose of this study is to both synthesize and analyze IBM's packaging activities from.an organi- zational viewpoint. It was felt there was a definite need to stand back and view the overall operations of the packaging activities to see just where we are today and to point up some real or potential organi- zational problems that may exist for further examina- tion by the discrete management of the various IBM plants. The scope of this study encompasses more than can be learned from a formal organization chart. I hope that this research will be of assistance to the students of packaging by giving them a greater insight into the organization of packaging departments and the relationship of packaging to other functions within a business enterprise. ' In studying and gathering data concerning the packaging activities in IBM, I had to call on all the packaging department managers and their personnel for assistance. Their cooperation was excellent and I am I indebted to them. I would like to thank.many indivi- duals within IBM; both at Rochester and Corporate Headquarters, who spent a great deal of time answering ii questions and giving valuable advice in their areas of Specialty. I would also like to express Special thanks to Thomas Murray of IBM, Rochester; and to acknowledge the assistance of two professors at Michigan State University's School of Packaging, Dr. H. J. Raphael, my academic advisor, and Dr. J. W; Goff. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREFACE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . ._. vi INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 CHAPTER I The Meaning of Organization. . . . . . 9 Universals of Organization II Packaging Organization Within IBM. . . 14 Organization: From a Corporate Standpoint Organization: From an Individual Plant Standpoint III Questionnaire Results . . . . . . . . 46 Summary of Classification Data Objectives Project Assignments and Distribution of Wbrkload Relationships IV COHCIUS ions 0 o o o o o o o o o O o o 6 U APMDIX : .0 : .0 O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 75 BIBLImRAPIN O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 76 iv :0 LO 4. h r. —o ‘3 J 14 15 13 I7 19 20 21 I Terr .1 -'.LJ .— Survey Survey Survey S Lurvey SLer‘ Survey Survey S urvey .-~ .017 U) {I (TV-7' -.~T T T-rmr-v‘ 4_ k -. .'..L.J_..: U'.’ .'. J. _ Qtestion 30. Question So. Question 30. Question Ho. Question No. Question To. Question No. Question No. Cress’on Ho. Question No. Cuestion Question No. 0 estion No. Ouesc-on ho. Ouestion No. Question No. Quescion No. rT‘I'T'On‘ffl .3. -’- 1. . Q 53 5 4. 55 55 Ln LA \I \9 U1 U1 U1 U1 (3 fix 0 (D L. x CD / p U1 H L)\ L) u Table 1 LIST OF TABLES Interaction Patterns Between Plants Before describing the methodology and organi- zation of this paper, I felt it would be helpful to briefly summarize a few facts about IBM so that the reader will have a better perSpective of the size and complexity of this world-wide organization. With this background information in mind, he can then begin to realize the varied and highly technical problems that face one small part of the corporation - packaging. International Business hachines Corporation had its beginning in 1911 when three companies: The International Time Recording Company, The Tabulating Machine Company and The Computing Scale Company, merged to form the Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company. Three years later, in 1914, the late Thomas J. Watson, Sr. took over its presidency. In 1924 the name International Business Machines Corporation was adopted. The company's early product line consisted of commercial scales, tabulating machines and time recording equipment. Until the start of World War II, IBM was primarily developing office machines which performed inventory control, billing, sales analysis, 1 cost accounting and other administrative functions. In 1944, IBM built its first large-scale computer and presented. it to I? arvard University. T1 is electro- -me chani cal machine performed three cal- culations a second by utilizing relays and tape- controlled programming devices. The company's s first production computer, the IBM 701, was introduced in 1952 and did 21,00 calcula- tions a second. Today an IBM 7074 can perform 350,000 additions or subtractions a second. The advent of electronics b1 ought substantial changes in data processing machines and methods. Equally important, however, has been the change in the concept of data processing, its advancement from a bookkeeping tool to a technique for advanced manage- ment and operational control of an organization. As a manufacturer, IBM produces several hundred separate products, including: Electronic data processing machines. Punched card accounting and statis- tical machines. Typewriters, electronic typing calculators and dictation equipment. Advanced systems for mili wry and space applications. Special purpose and advanced electronic information processing systems for business and government use. LO ma’netic arcs and carbon Supplies, inelL d tapes, tabulet n . " "' -" I‘\ GI‘T“1'L.GI J. i.) L)": 0 ,CJ CD 0 (.3 In keeping 7:1'h the CLIIatrII‘ zed program tiated in 1953 within the company and including . I- I I, ,I I I . “I .1 . x: I. -I most IecenL oIganiflrIL_onal enInge OI JanuaIy, there are now ten divisions: The Advanced Syste; IS Develooma nt Division explor ETZRFz P]. L: bi J.- L :5 -ing Operations: This ("- . .J 1_.; _J_ Eotes on the Plant and Packa plant's original facility was completed in the early 1930's. It manufactures components: transistors, diodes, magnetic cores, thin film memories, resistors and capacitors. Within the past month, there was an .C .C' organization change trat arrected the seven-member Material Handling and Packaging group. In order to provide in-line reSponsibility for standards and methods, the group was divided, with three men going into three different Operations Engineering groups. The remaining material handling and packaging personnel had then divisional responsibility; i.e., to coordinate the activities of all the packaging and material hand- ling people no matter where they might be. Objectives: Because packaging in this department is in a state of organization change, the direction in which the department was headed rather than Specific objectives was given. The manager envisioned packaging to be more restricted to the end of the manufacturing line and attempting to build packaging into the product. Packaging will be more relegated to the distribution and shipment system. Right now they are satisfying their people, acting more as industrial engineers than pack- aging engineers. It was believed that this direction will be reversed and they will become more customer- oriented. Formal Na me: material Handling and Packam Engineering Chain of Command: 1) In 10- 1|.) .In “‘11:" “cl (.9, ’—_—I - A) Industrial Engineering Manager 3) I oduct Operation Plannin ng I 'nager 4) Product Operations Manager 5) General Manager Job Coverage of Department: Material landling, Pack- aging and Operations Engineering. Personnel in Packaging: Four, or 27% of the total in the department. Of the four, two could be thought of as devoting most of the ir time to packaging and two to materials handling, with some pack"ging involvement. Job Coverage in Packagin ng: The packaging in the plant location is closely tied in with materials handling in that the four men act as coordinators for all the activities of the pacm aging and materials handling personnel in the three Operations Engineering groups. They initiate many projects that are not specifically tied to a particular p1 roduct. They provide support to the warehousing function and the distribution function and much of the shipping function. The job coverage in packaging would include support to product, parts and in-process packaging. . Organization: The packaging activity uses the group leader concept within the department. Although there is one group leader, the work of the four personnel is 26 divided between materials handling and packaging, 'with two principally in materials handling and two (group leader included) mainly in packaging. The ' group leader's responsibility encompasses being the primary contact with the materials handling and packaging people in the other operational engineering groups, maintaining lines of contact with both corporate and other plant locations and defining and balancing the work-load of the people within the department. Interaction Patterns: (taken from Questions 9, 14, 15, 16 and 18 on the Questionnaire) In answer to the question, ”How often do you work with other activities within the department?", three said "often“. Job Requests: 1 Manufacturing 2 Manufacturing Engineering 3 Shipping 4)Materials Distribution Contacts: l)Purchasing EgManufacturing Engineering 3 Manufacturing 4)Facilities Planning Hindrances: lgmanufacturing Engineering 2 Purchasing 3§Qua1ity Control 4 Facilities Engineering Plants 1)Plant F Contacted: 2)Plant E 3)Plant C See Table No. 1 Plant C Notes on the Plant Operation: This plant was completed in the mid-1950's. It manufactures new power supply 27 units, STRETCH* computing system, IBM 7040 and IBM 7044 of the solid state computer series. Objectives: The long-range objectives as stated by management are: ”To see that our products are getting to the customers safely and free of damage, and that the operation doesn't involve undue amounts of money. And also to leave a good impression with the customer." In Speaking of the packaging activity on a corporate level, it was stated that alot could be done in the education of the people at each of the plants - ”the local streng- thening of the type of peOple we have doing a job." A more Specific long—range objective of this plant's management includes the upgrading of packaging personnel in their knowledge and eXperience in materials, termino- logy, technology and distribution. Through education and professional development, the packaging engineer can share with the product designer, develOpment engineer and produc- tion engineer in providing the customer with a quality product. Formal Name: Manufacturing Layouts and Materials Handling Chain of Command: 1) Space and Manpower Planning Manager 2) Industrial Engineering Manager 3) Assistant General Manager 4) General Manager Job Coverage of Department: Manufacturing Plant and Ware- housing Layout and Materials Handling. Included in the *IBM Trademark materials handling function is the packaging activity, which encompasses shipment of the product. Personnel in Packaging: Four, or 36% of the total personnel in the department. Job Coverage in Packaging: Packaging at this plant location falls into four areas: Vendor packaging on a limited basis in problem areas; packaging for in-process parts; product packaging, including shock and vibration studies and systems packaging; and parts packaging. Organization: Of the four men, three of these are assigned projects by type of product. Their responsibility covers supporting their product lines in the areas of in-process parts handling, vendor packaging and product packaging. The other person has a more specialized assignment in shipping of large units and is more concerned with the shipping characteristics of the product, shock and vibra- tion testing and installation of the product at the customer's location. There was a packaging group leader in the department prior to a recent organizational change. Now he is the manager. Interaction Patterns: (taken from Questions 9, 14, 15, 16 and 18 on the Questionnaire) In answer to the question, "How often do you work with other activities within the, department?”, one said "often", three said "occasionally". Job Requests: 1 Manufacturing Engineering Manufacturing Development Engineering Shipping Qua ity Control Ln¢4pna 29 Contacts: 1; Plant Engineering (Maintenance) 2 Purchasing 3 Production Control 4g Shipping 5 Manufacturing {indrances: l; Shi ping 2 Qua ity Control 3) Purchasing Plants _ 1; Plant F Contacted: 2 Plant a 3; Plant H 4 Plant G See Table No. 1 Plant D Notes on Plant and Packaging Operations: This plant was completed in the late 1950’s. It is the manufacturing facility of the Office Products Division. All electric typewriter manufacturing activities are located here; also, the manufacture of accounting and dictating equip- ment. The Packaging Engineering Department has existed in its current organization for about two years. Prior to this, there wasn't a packaging department but rather just a group that was under Production Engineering. This was when there was Production Engineering on typewriters only. Because of growth - more products - this plant was organ- ized on product lines with each product line having its own Production Control, Purchasing, Assembly, etc. divisions. Packaging Engineering is organizationally under one of those product lines, Production Engineering which is 30 concerned with IBM SELECTRIC* printers. The Packaging Engineering group is different from those in other plants in that it uses Product Test to package-test all its products, and it is the only depart- ment that has only the activity of packaging in it. Objectives: The long-range objectives revolve around getting the manpower to give adequate support in each of the five product lines from the standpoint of cost reduc- tion, quality control and one person to provide coverage within the product group for new products only. Formal Name: Packaging Engineering Department Chain of Command: 1) Production Engineering Manager 2) Manufacturing Engineering Manager 3) SELECTRIC Production Engineering Manager Personnel in Packaging: Four. Job Coverage in Packaging: One engineer provides support to in-plant containers, assembly trays, skids, pallets, vendor packaging and sub-contract packaging.. The other three work on all machines and supplies packaging and assist on a very limited basis in field parts packaging. The work load is the heaviest in machine and supply packaging, and about five percent of one man's time is devoted to vendor packaging. The department sends a considerable amount of their drafting out to other departments or subcontractors, and also uses Product Test as their testing laboratory. 31 Organization: The division of work within the department is on a product line basis. he manager supports one of the five lines, and three men support the other four; with the fifth person working on in-plant containers for all products. Within the product lines the personnel are responsible for a particular package from the request for assistance from the Product Manager to the completion and follow-through of the project. Interaction Patterns: (taken from Questions 14, 15, 16 and 18 on the Questionnaire) Job Requests: 1) Production Engineering 2) Product Engineering 3; Manufacturing Engineering Manufacturing 5) Product Test Contacts: 1) Purchasing Production Control Production Engineering Manufacturing Product Test Hindrances: Quality Control Production Control Product Engineering Plant A Plant G Plant F See Table No. 1 Plants Contacted: l i g Product Test l 3 ) Plant E Notes on Plant and Packaging Operations: This plant was completed in the late 1950's. It, as the manufacturing . facility of the Federal Systems Division, concentrates on advanced information handling and control systems for the 32 United States Government Space and Development Agencies. They are not solely involved with military products, however. They also manufacture the whole family of sorters and total relays. In this manufacturing organization there are fewer people than there are in the Development Engineering Laboratory located here. This facility, from a corpora- tion point of View, has the most complete environmental testing facility that is available in IBM, in order to support the space products manufactured here. Because of this fact, the packaging department manager stated that it was unnecessary to keep the degree of capability within the confines of his department with the professional personnel available in the testing facility. Objectives: Since this plant's products are growing more in the direction of commercial products, they feel there will and should be more effort placed on expanding their use of the vacuum.forming machine for in-plant containers for finished parts and assemblies. Formal Name: Industrial Engineering Chain of Command: 1) Industrial and Plant Engineering Manager 2) Plant Administration Manager 3) Administration and Planning Manager 4) General Manager Job Coverage of Dgpartment: Materials Handling, Packaging, Facilities Planning, warehousing Layout and the responsi- { 33 bility of the plant’s capital surplus list. Personnel in Packaging: One man (or 9% of the total department personnel) who has additional responsibility in the area of materials handling. {e should not be considered as giving full-time support to packaging. Job Coverage in Packaging: Design and Specify in-plant containers and to a great degree, since purchasing a vacuum forming machine, build their own containers. Assist in vendor packaging to a very limited degree. Although Development Engineering is responsible for the shipment of the final machines in all military products, they provide coverage in parts and product packaging. Organization: Because of the diversity of the department, the manager uses and feels that a group leader in materials handling (packaging) is an absolute necessity. His res- ponsibility includes coordinating the efforts of two men involved in general materials handling. Interaction Patterns: One of the areas from which there are many job requests is Tool Engineering. They frequently make requests for the design of in-plant containers. The Manufacturing organization also makes numerous requests in the area of expendable packages for inter-plant shipping. Plant F Notes on Plant Operation: This plant was completed in the late 1950's. It manufactures random access desk files, image storage systems, process control systems and calculators. 34 It is also involved with desk and read- write head production. Objectives: are: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Establishment of Corporate-approved packaging document manual which would contain standar- dized documents such as: a; packaging instructions package test report format c) packaging glossary of terms d) packaging specification materials e) packaging graphics - labeling f) packaging cost evaluation format g packaging filing system index h) copies of Corporate package test standards Establishment of a Cor orate-approved packaging policy manua which would contain information on IBM packaging policies such as: a) overall packaging objectives of the company b) packaging engineers responsibilities c relationship of packaging versus product development cycle d) methods of controlling and filing packaging documents Establishment of local plant program for cost reduction of both packaging materials and/or packing procedures. Establishment of local plant program for develOping illustrated packaging instructions. Establishment of local plant program for packaging research activity in the areas of package testing. Example - shock and vibration, packaging materials and carrier handling methods. 3 Establishment of local plant program for periodic random inSpection of packaging on out-going field transferred or returned products. 0 The long- and short-range packaging objectives 35 . 7) Establishment of local plant program for maintaining close liason with the program administrators and the engineering design groups during initial phases of new product develop- ment. Formal Name: Industrial Engineering Chain of Command: 1) Industrial Engineering Systems Manager 2) Assistant General Manager 3) General Manager Job Coverage of Department: Plant Layout, Materials Handling and Packaging. Also included is scheduling the cafeteria, clean-room and environmental studies, operations analysis and building simulation models to determine in- process inventory, Space planning and special management studies. Personnel in Packaging: Three and one-half or 23% of the total personnel in the department. Job Coverage in Packaging: Primarily product packaging with one and one-half men providing support to parts packaging, vendor and sub-contractor packaging. The support in +auct packaging covers determining what packaging is needed, designing and Specifying it, and then testing the packaged product in the testing laboratory. Organization: A group leader, a senior associate industrial engineer, is used in the department to coordinate the efforts of others. He is also one of the two men providing job coverage to the completed products. One man is assigned to vendor packaging, while the other one-half man is called in on Special assignments. The work in the department is not broken down on a functional basis, such as drafting, designing or testing. Each individual completes his entire assignments from receipt of a request to testing and the follow-through. The department has a formalized method for scheduling and budgeting the work of the packaging activity in conjunction with the Program Administrator. They get reports as to where machines are in the develop- ment stage. The Program Administrator schedules a machine for them to package test. The packaging instructions and the package test are completed before the machines are run through their last product test. The Product Test Department will not accept a machine for their last test unless this schedule is followed. Interaction Patterns: (taken from Questions 9, 14, 15, 16- and 18 on the Questionnaire) In answer to the question, "How often do you work with other activities within the department?", three said "occasionally". Job Requests: 1 Shipping 2 Manufacturing Engineering 3 Industrial Engineering 4 Traffic Contacts: 1) Shipping 2 Purchasing 3 Traffic 4 Quality Control Hindrances: 1) Manufacturing Engineering Contacted: 2 Plant F Plants l§ Plant A Plant G 37 ' 4) Plant C See Table No. 1 Plant G Notes on Plant Operation: This plant is part of the Supplies Division. It provides punched cards, magnetic tapes, ribbons and other supplies.for use with data processing machines. It has recently become reSponsible for desk viewers and copiers. This plant designs and specifies the packaging for six manufacturing facilities throughout the country. Objectives: The objectives as seen by the manager of this department were prefaced by the comment that a packaging group has to concern itself with the best way to handle and merchandise a product. Therefore, there should be more emphasis on what the customer really wants and needs, how the product is handled and, along with these, a packaging cost reduction program. To aid in meeting these objectives, it has been advocated that an outside packaging consultant be contracted to do some work on this division's products. Formal Name: New Products Industrial Engineering and Packaging Engineering Chain of Command: 1) Industrial Engineering Manager 2) Manufacturing Engineering Manager 3) Manufacturing Manager 4) General Manager Job Coverage of Department: Evaluate and implement the manufacture of new products in the Supplies Division and product packaging. Personnel in Packaging: Three, with a cutback to two beginning in 1965, or 20% of the total personnel in the department. Job Coverage in Packaging: There are three areas of support as stated by the manager of this department: new products packaging, packaging support for existing products and packaging for cost reduction. However, the effort in 1965 will be mostly in terms of packaging for new products that will be introduced into the division. Organization: Within the Department there is a packaging engineer who acts as the group leader. He receives requests, conceives the idea for a particular package, discusses the concept with one of the two draftsmen who makes a model of the package. The group leader then tests it prior to the package going into production. The method used in scheduling the projected.workload of the packaging activity is a regular bar chart. The jobs scheduled are those that can be assigned an approximate ‘ number of man hours or days it will take to complete the assignment. Interaction Patterns: (taken from.Questions 9, 14, 15, 16 and 18 on the Questionnaire) In answer to the question, "How often do you.work with other activities within the department?", both personnel said "often". V 39 Job Requests: 1; New Products Industrial Engineering Direct Operations 3) Supplies Division Plants Contacts: 1) New Products Hindrances: Plants Contacted: Industrial Engineering Product Development Purchasing Marketing Product Development Marketing Purchasing Plant F Plant A See Table No. 1 NH (”NH J—‘UJN WVWWV Plant H Notes on the Plant Location: This plant was completed in the early 1940's. It manufactures IBM data systems, key- punch and several computers in the IBM solid state series. Objectives: The long-range objectives of this department are: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Promote machine reliability and service- ability throu h continuing study of causes and effects 0% shock and vibration in handling. Expand practice of minimum or no packaging wherever practical. Conduct research in new packaging materials and practices. Improve vendor packaging as required. Develop a broad concept of the packaging needs of our industry and strive for increased efficiency. Formal Name: Space Control and Materials Handling Chain of Command: 1) Project Manager in Industrial Engineering 4O 2) Division Head of Industrial Engineering 3) Assistant Plant General Manager 4) General Manager Job Coverage of Dgpartment: Space planning, plant and warehousing layout, materials handling; and included in materials handling, packaging. Personnel in Packaging: Three, or 30% of the total depart- ment personnel. Although there are five men in the materials handling section, three would be considered packaging personnel. Job Coverage in Packaging: Write Specifications, develop and test packaging for final machines and systems. Develop packaging for parts. Initiate standard containers for in- process parts, although they do not call out containers on routings. There is no effort placed in vendor packaging xcept in special problem areas. Organization: Since this plant produces mainly three types of products: data systems, general products and System/360 products, the workload is divided on a product line basis with one man covering each area. Although they are not organized on a "group leader" concept, there is what management refers to as a "lead" man who has no managerial responsibility. Each member does his own designing, specification writing and testing of packaged products. Interaction Patterns: (taken from Questions 9, 14, 15, 16 and 18 on the Questionnaire) In answer to the question, 41 ”How often do you.work with other activities within the department?", one said "always" and two said "occasionally". Job Requests: 1 Machine Shipping Product Engineering Purchasing Customer Engineering Product Engineering Purchasing Machine Shipping Manufacturing Contacts: Product Engineering Quality Control Production Control ' Purchasing Hindrances: Plant C Plant A Plant H Plant G See Table No. 1 Plants Contacted: WVV WVV VWV WW waH waH waH bum Plant I Notes on Plant Operation: The main plant here was occupied in the late 1950's. It manufactures collators, reproducers, bank proof machines, proof inscribers, card read punches, interpreters, test scoring machines, medical systems and terminals for banking and medical industries. Objectives: The department manager stated two general areas as being part of their long-range objectives. First, there is a need to give packaging direction at earlier stages of development to Development Engineering personnel as to what things should be done to a machine to make it shippable. Also, along this same line, there is a need to be more conscious of acting on the basis of the customer in 42 packaging the products. Second, there should be some further study of the effectiveness of the in-plant container system. Formal Name: Plant Layout and Materials Handling Chain of Command: 1) Plant Engineering Manager 2) General Manager Job Coverage of Department: Plant Layout, Materials Iandling and Packaging. Personnel in Packaging: Five, or 38% of the total personnel in the department. Job Coverage in Packaging: Product packaging, parts packaging, vendor packaging and assignment of containers to in-process parts. The depth of the support given to these four areas varies. Two men are assigned to designing, writing specifications and testing the completed products; one man to writing container Specifications for in-process parts; one person has the job of vendor packaging coor- dination; and one is assigned to designing and specifying packages for problem parts and assemblies shipped to the field and other plants. Organization: The continuing assignments within the department are divided on the basis of the areas supported; such as, product packaging, parts packaging, etc. In final machine packaging, the work is divided by product type. Management stated there was a group leader who gave technical direction, organized and coordinated the workload of the group. . 43 There is no formalized method for assigning projects. Interaction Patterns: (taken from Questions 9, 14, 15, 16 and 13 on the Questionnaire) In answer to the question, "How often do you.work with other activities within the department?", one said ”often”, three said "seldom”. Job Requests:e Production Control Plant P Plant 11 See Table No. l ‘- waI-J 2) Manufacturing Engineering 3 Shipping 4 Quality Control Contacts: 1 roduct Engineering 2 Purchasing 3 Manufacturing Engineering 4 Production Control Iindrances: 1 Purchasing 2 P1 oduct Engineering 3 P1 oduction Dc)Control 4) Manufacturing Engineering Plants Plant A Contacted: Plant C Plant J Notes on the Plant and PackagingOperations: 'This plant started operations in the late 1950's. It manufactures core planes, wire contact relays, reed relays and switches, data transmission systems and is involved with SMS card manufacture and SLT production. The current organization has existed about two months. Since 1'1 of the products that are going to be manufactured here have been in production at another it {:1}. plant for two or three years, most of their packaging and materials handling work has been well-engineered by an engineering department there. Objectives: The manager of this department stated one broad and a more Specific objective. 'First, there is a need to provide protective packaging for all products so they will arrive at the customer’s or other plant locations in a safe condition and at the least cost. Second, there will be effort eXpended in assisting the vendor in packaging his product. In this area of vendor packaging, there is also a need to more clearly define where the plant’s responsibility starts and ends. Formal Name: Plant Layout, Materials Handling and Packaging Department Chain of Command: 1) Plant Services Manager 2) Planning and Services Manager 3) Plant Manager Job Coverage of Department: Plant layout, materials handling and packaging will be the three major areas of support. The department will also have the responsibility of furniture and office equipment. Personnel in Packaging: There will be no one who will specialize in just packaging. However, there is one man who will act as the mainstay or contact in packaging, and he will be responsible for reviewing existing packaging, since they have not had packaging talent at this plant before. 45 Job Coverage in Packaging: Review existing packaging Since this plant is a second-source plant. It is not intended that packages will actually be designed here because there is too much talent in this area from vendors. The ideas, supervision and approval would originate from the packaging personnel, however. Organization: As was noted in the first section of this plant's Operation, it is in a high degree of organizational change. {owever, the manager’s philosophy should be mentioned in order to present the direction in which the internal organization of the department will go. The peOple in the department should not only have had indus- trial engineering experience; that is, materials handling, layout and packaging experience, but also plant engineering experience so they know what happens to their drawings after they leave the department. Interaction Patterns: MOSt of the job requests for future manufacturing facilities will originate from Manufacturing Engineering. CHAPTER III QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS Summary of Classification Data Within IBM's domestic manufacturing operations, there are ten plants with packaging activities. The number of packaging personnel at these various plant locations totaled thirty-seven, with a range of one to twelve men at any one plant. Their job coverage, again depending on the location, included support to product packaging, parts packaging, packaging for in-process parts and vendor packaging. A breakdown of the education of the personnel was: Six with Industrial Engineering degrees, three with Mechanical Engineering degrees, two with Packaging Tech- nology degrees and five with degrees in other fields. The average (mean) education of the total reporting was 2.3 years of college; and the average (mean) years of experience in the field of packaging was 6. Twenty-four men had job titles of either Industrial Engineer or Packaging Engineer, with those remaining classified as Technicians. The analysis of the data collected in the Opinion survey was divided into three categories: 46 47 1) Questions that pertain to the objectives of packaging both within the plant packaging departments (or groups) and the packaging objectives of the corporation as a whole. 2) Questions about division of work within the departments. (As a part of this category, there were questions about the assignment of projects and their effect- iveness in attaining a good distribution of projects.) 3) Questions about the relationships of the packaging group members to: a other members within their department b departments or divisions within plant locations c other plant locations d Corporate Headquarters At the end of each set of questions, I have briefly summarized the results and added a few pertinent comments, and in many cases, conclusions on the data. The task of cross-classifying and correlating answers to questions can be endless. I have attempted to do this in those areas where it would be the most meaningful. The results of the questionnaire are graphically presented in percentages. Not all results add up to 100%, since there were isolated cases whefe answers were omitted. 48 'OBJECTIVES "How'wogld you rate your knowledge of goals of the packaging group? Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent Fig. 1 "How well would go u say your job has been related to the objectives of t e packaging group?" Very Good [n A] l l l l ' Good [_ fl “_W ;: j::] Average IFW F l _ o 20 4o 60 ' 83 100 Percent Fig. 2 The answers to both of the previous questions (see Figures 1 and 2) were favorable. It should be noted, however, that the personnel answering both questions "average" were from the same three plant locations, which may indicate the absence or vagueness of their goals. Again, those indivi- duals reporting "poor" or "very poor" to the first question were from one of the just-mentioned plants. 49 "How would you rate the knowledge of the packaging group's objectives by the level of management that your department reports to?" Very Good D I I l Good _fl_‘* J l Average L Poor _ Very Poor i H J A 0 , 20 40 do 00 1 0 Percent Fig. 3 Although the bar graph of Figure 3 is skewed in favor of the next level of management's knowledge of packaging objectives, 26% of the answers were either "poor" or "very poor" and 40% "average" leading to these possible conclusions: 1) The packaging departments have not clearly communicated what they are attempting to accomplish to the next level of management; or, 2) Packaging in that department is not considered as the primary activity. The latter conclusion may be substantiated by a fact given in the personal interviews with managers. The question was asked, "HOW“much of your time, excluding personnel matters, is devoted to the packaging activity in your department?" The average (mean) time given as a percentage was 31%, with a range of from 5 to 90%. Therefore, if packaging managers spend less than one-third of their time with packaging, it can be correctly assumed that a small. 50 part of that percentage concerns packaging problems with the next level of management. "How important do ou feel it is that the next level of management know t ese objectives?" ¥mp8rtant E 'F W” I“ "” ”7:1 7 VI alga '1 Of little Importance 13150525 t A. 20 _ 4o 66. ad 101) Percent Fig. 4 * In the previous question (see Figure 4), I believe it can be said that the packaging personnel feel a basic need to be recognized by the next level of management and that management be cognizant of their work. There should be more emphasis on upward communications of the objectives of packaging by the department managers. "Are you aware of the goals of the Corporate Packaging Committee?" Yes l Somewhat, but not too clearly [ ffjl l I ' T No i. Adj 0 40 60 80 100 Percent Fig. 5 ' 51 Although almost one-half of the personnel stated they {neW'what the Corporate Packaging Committee's goals were (see Figure 5), there were a substantial number that either were not completely sure or had no idea of what they were. In analyzing the data, it was found that if the packaging personnel were divided into those involved in product pack- aging and those in the other packaging areas; such as, in- plant, vendor and parts packaging, the results looked quite different. Product Packaging Other Areas of Packaging Yes 52% . 23% Somewhat 33% 54% No 14% 23% These results are understandable if you were to refer back to the goals of the Corporate Packaging Program. of these goals are aligned with product packaging. "If your answer to the last question was "Yes" or "Somewhat”, rate how well staffed you think the various plant's packaging groups are in relation to attaining 3 goals? (The word "staffed" as used here means the technical competence and overall know- ledge of packaging rather than just the number of men.) '1 the Committee 7-_ ii w ._'/__ _ ._ ,._ ‘,._ _-._.._ ‘.h._._._i.. h—‘r Very Good Good .Average Poor Very Poor 40 60 Percent Fig.’ 5 L‘. 80 -<- -7. 14081: 100 52 In the results of this question (see Figure 6), 52% rated the packaging groups as being staffed "very good" or "good". Of the remaining 48%, 22% of the "average" or "poor" ratings came from what would be considered the most well-staffed packaging department. 53 PROJECT ASSIGNMENTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF WORKLOAD "Who assigns your projects in the packaging activity?” Manager ' I Group Leader ,i 3 L r_ Both Manager and Group Leader ii] I I l l I No One Assigns My Projects E 1| llll 0 20 40 60‘ 80 100 Percent Fig. 7 In most plants the manager assigns projects (see Figure 7) and 23% of the projects are assigned by a group leader. Twenty percent out of 23% of the answers pertain- ing to the group leader concept came from one plant. Of the 17% answering "No one assigns my projects", only one was a group leader himself; and 11% of this answer came from the two plants that have packaging managers who stated they devote 5 to 10% of their time to packaging. Without a deeper understanding of the definitions of individual jobs, it is difficult to say whether the persons answering "No one assigns my projects" are working as effectively as they should be. However, it does not seem possible that individuals can work at any length 54 without a source of authority and a coordinating force and still work at maximum effectiveness. "About what percentage of the work that you are now doing has been assigned to you?" 0-207. [V 5 L 20-40% . ._. 40-60% 60-80% SVVLZI Vt Iv— l “1’ 80-100% 1 0 20 ' 40 6O 80 100 Percent Fig. 8 In the previous question (see Figure 8), 55% of the answers fall at either extreme of "0 to 20%" or "80 to 100%". Half of those answering "80 to 100%" came from.one plant location. There was one plant in which all personnel answered in the "O to 20%" range. Two-fifths of those assigned "80 to 100%" of their projects were titled "technicians", the rest were engineers. 55 "Does the packaging group have a formalized method for assigning and controlling projects?” . Yes E W w _ —,l_-—-—.—: l l l I . No L j l j l J | 20 O O 80 0 10 Percent Fig. 9 " "If the answer was "yes", how effective do you think the method is?" Very Good ‘ I I | Good fiwjj l I | Average V "FF “Nil Poor : 1 Ver Poor A y 0t: 0 40 so so 100 Percent Fig. 10 Although most of the plants have a formalized method for assigning and controlling projects (see Figure 9), the rating of the effectiveness of the methods (see Figure 10) is skewed downward. The 24% in the "poor" and "very poor" categories came from two plant locations. It may be that those personnel felt that the system was not only ineffective but was too rigid or uncompromising. A 38% rating in the "average” category should also prompt a review of the plants' assignment system. 55 "If the answer is "No", do you feel you would.work.more effectively if there was a formalized.method?" [ Jvl'l—Wl *1] No if __ m]. 0 20 40 Yes 6O 80 100 Percent Fig. 11 ’ 5 "Again, if the answer is ”No", do you think the packaging group as a whole would accomplish more if there was a method?" Yes [CI [WV]: 553 No r; ! Li I ,1) O 20 8 10 Percent 'Fig. 12 Of those plants that had no system (see Figure 11 and Figure 12), the majority of the personnel felt that their packaging groups would benefit from.one. Although there was some correlation between those that answered "yes" to this question and the lower ratings on the follow- ing one (see Figure 13), it was not significant enough to draw any conclusions. 57 "Do you think the workload of the packaging activity is ‘wel distributed in keeping with the objectives of the packaging group?" Yes, there is a good distribution W *Jl I II There are some areas for improvement T1 7 I ll 1 l I There are many areas that need improvement ._. j . | _. 0, there is a poor distribution 20 ' "-40 6L 80 100 Percent Fig. 13 OIL: W Two-thirds of the answers to the question concerning the workload of the packaging activity in relation to the Objectives of the packaging group (see Figure 13) were of an affirmative nature in relation to the distribution of the workload. Twenty-six percent out of the 33% that answered negatively were from three plant locations. How-‘ ever, two of these three plants did have a formalized method of assigning projects. A majority of the members of the six remaining plants gave ratings in the first two categories. "About what percentage of your time is set aside for applied research; i.e., new ideas or innovations about packaging problems in general?" Less thanfilO% v- V—vwvw WW fi I I I 10-20% Fr Viv “I 4| 20-30% F=:| l l I 30-40% F:I | l l Other (name) 20 40 60 80 100 Percent 3 - Fig. 14 V ' . There is a limitation in the question shown in Figure 14 that should be pointed out. The breakdown of percentages should have been in smaller increments, since the 62% reporting "0 to 10%” may be Spending zero percent or 9% of their time on research. The latter may be termed completely adequate by some managers for certain job classifications. In all but two plants the majority of the personnel reporting said they spend less than 10% of their time on applied research. Of the 9% reporting "20 to 40%", two were technicians and one was a senior industrial engineer. 59 "In answering the last question, do you feel this is:" Too much time III An adequate amount F- a: l ‘ 1 Y A 6 Too little time I I l 1 I 20 40 00 1 80 a 100 Percent Fig. 15 "HoW'would you rate your packaging group in this area of applied research?" Very Good 1 Good Average 2_ ' j] | 1 Poor IT:_i i_ A A_, A Ag Very Poor t] I J I 1 I J 0 0 0 0 lOJI go 0 Percent Fig. 16 ' Over three-fourths of the personnel answered "too little time" (see Figure 15) and then almost the same number correSpondingly rated their packaging group as "poor" or "very poor" in the area of applied research (see Figure 16). It appears as though the problems and the workload of packaging perSonnel are very pressing and immediate with very little time remaining for applied research. This does not mean, however, that the personnel cannot or do not innovate in their day-to-day work. RELATIONSHIPS "How would you rate the cohesiveness of all the members of the packaging activity?" Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor I 0 20 ‘40 60 80 100 Percent Fig. 17 . See Table No.1 "In general, hOW'WOUId you rate the c00peration between those plants you contact and yourself?" Very Good rfiw m j I k_ l r f"; Good I Tl I _ I .Average [ si_i_ Peor Very Poor 0 20 40 60 so 100 Percent Fig. 18 Since the packaging departments and, in some cases, the packaging groups of several plants, must work as a 61 team in attaining common objectives, it is very necessary that their personnel work effectively together. Both of the graphs (see Figures 17 and 13) are skewed in the "very good" direction, eSpecially the 61% in Figure 18 that rated the cooperation between plants as "good" or "very good". In the first question there were two plant locations where one-half of the packaging personnel gave ratings of "average" or lower, leading to the possible conclusion that there may be internal conflicts which could reduce the group's effectiveness. "HOW'WOUld you rate the awareness of what the packaging group is doing (or trying to accomplish) by t e following: (leave blank if it does not apply)" Customer Engineering Very Good Good I I 2 I I g Average [ I A Poor I" I Very Poor J l ' 0 ‘ 4,0 . 60 80 100 ' Percent. 'Fig.'19a 62 Manufacturing Engineering Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor 40 ed - Percent Fig. 19b Plant Engineering Very Good I Good _ i] Average POO]? W I] Very Poor | O 20 40 60 Percent Fig. 19c Product Engineering Very Good ' Good 3 Average Poor Very Poor 40 60 Fig. 19d Parcent ca 0 80 1&0 100 Product Development Very Good Good Average Poor very Peor Production Control Very Good Good Average tr Poor I“ Very Peor 0—— Purchasing ._.-vyv 63 20 40 6 ' Percen‘ Fig. l9e STU ] Tm :1 20 40 60 Percent Fig. l9f‘ _ Average '| Very Good E I Good ;; . Poor -II'I. Very Peor 0 20 40 60 Percent Fig. 19g 80 100 80 ' 100 .80 ,100 64 Quality Control Very Good. E] I I I I Good __ A;_] . _ l _ l 1} __l Average 22 3 Poor Very Poor I 20 4O 60 80 100 Percent Fig. 19h The discrete plants' packaging groups rated the listed functions (see Figures 19a through 19h) quite differently. However, these charts give a general indica- tion of these functions' awareness of the goals of packaging as rated by the packaging personnel. In some packaging jobs, it may be very necessary that Manufacturing Engineering or Production Control have a good knowledge of what they're trying to accomplish. In other areas, in particular Product Packaging, I feel it is very important that Customer Engineering, Product Engineering, Product Development and Quality Control have an adequate understanding of packaging objectives. Overall, there were too many in the "average" and "poor" categories for these four functions. Each plant's packaging manager, depending on that plant's objectives, should strive for closer relationships ‘with those functions necessary in accomplishing packaging's work. 65 It should be noted that the writer made an omission in the listing of functions (or departments). The Traffic Department and the Product Test Department were not included and should have been, since they are, or should be, both involved with the packaging groups' work, especially in product packaging. There were two "write-in's" in these areas. The results were: Product Test - "average" and Traffic - "poor". "Do you think you could do a more effective 'ob if ou h d a better knowledge of what the packaging pegsonnely(wit§ similar JOb a831gnments) at other plant locations were working on?" Yes [— r— u —-— WW fl 1 E' No I 0 20 4O 60 80 100 Percent Fig. 20 Almost 80% of the personnel felt that they could do a more effective job if they knew'what other plants were doing (see Figure 20). This fact was substantiated by the personal interviews with managers also. In the course of these interviews, one-half of the managers stated that there should be a greater flow of information among plants on new'materials, packaging methods, etc. "If your answer to the last question is "Yes", then what means do you feel would be best used to get this information?" , Go through Corporate Headquarter's Packaging Coordinator F233 l I I | | | l I Direct Contacts with the other plants and yourself ELI I I JEN“! I I I | Periodic Seminars FIN”. “9| l | | l I Other (name) IIIIIIII- 0 4 6 8 100 Percent ' ' Fig. 21 In the previous question (see Figure 21) most of the personnel felt that this could be accomplished through direct contacts or seminars. Because of the relative newness of the Corporate Packaging Committee and their current work, I felt it would be meaningful to ask the following question in the survey: "Could you name those areas in packaging where you feel there should be more continuity or standardization among plants." Again, a word of caution is needed. In an open-end type question such as this, there were a wide variety of statements that required interpretation. It is hoped that none of these were misconstrued or omitted. The most often mentioned areas in order of frequency were 3 1) Package test standards. 2) 3) a.) 5) 6) 7) 9) 10) 67 Engineering Change Procedures and Release for packaging part numbers. Writing of packaging Specifications. Illustration and documentation of packaging and unpackaging instructions. Graphic design, including standardization of abeling. Shock and vibration analysis, environmental test specifications and fragility factor studies. measurement of manpower requirements and areas of reaponsibility for packaging personnel. Basic research activity. Packaging document manual. Interplant packages and containers. CHAPTER IV CONCLUSIONS Up to this point, I have attempted to View IBM's packaging activities from an organizational standpoint as objectively as possible. After spending a consider- able amount of time going over the data collected from the plants, certain organizational patterns became apparent. I will attempt to generalize on these patterns at this point and then get more Specific toward the latter part of my conclusions. In the analysis of each plant’s operations, the approximate date the plant was established was given. Of the ten plants, eight have started operating within the past nine years. During the start-up time there was a great deal of effort and emphasis placed in originating materials handling systems, container systems and layouts for the new plant by the Industrial Engineering Department or a department with similar industrial engineering functions. This staff group had very immediate and real problems to contend with in just "getting things off the ground." One of the last things to concern the plants at this stage was a sophisticated and well-thought-out product Ch C13 packaging program. After the plant layout, materials handling and warehousing problems settled down (and in some plants there has been very little relief to date) then packaging for the customer began receiving a greater degree of attention from a packaging technology standpoint. Although some plants may have begun investigating the shipping characteristics of their products prior to 1960, they were few; I believe I can correctly assume that the depth of packaging consisted of enclosing the product in a crate and making sure it could be handled ‘within the plant. However, in the past two or three years there has been greater emphasis placed on working closer to Development and Product Engineering and designing into the product as much ”packaging" as is economically possible. One point should be made at this time about most of IBM‘s products. The machines are not only prepared for shipment at the manufacturing plants but must be packaged for transferring and retransferring from one customer to another out in the field. Therefore, adequate product packaging cannot always be depended upon in the field, so any packaging designed into the machines will provide some of the necessary protection. Organizationally, what does all this discussion lead to? Packaging at the "start-up" of a plant is 7O primarily concerned with providing parts protection and establishing ackaging systems within its plant location. Therefore, it necessarily is closely aligned with materials handling, warehousing and plant layout. These areas, of course, should still be given support as new products are introduced. Warehousing and handling systems should be updated and layouts changed. {owever, as long as these functions are being performed by the same personnel within a department, packaging for customer products will not be given the effort it should. Although devoting effort to customer products is possible, there is a basic conflict which must be overcome. This conflict appears between the packaging personnel meeting the internal demands of the manufacturing plant and going outside of the function, which includes the packaging activity, and uncovering the potential of product packaging. In case this last remark is not completely clear to the reader, let me expand on this point. Chapter II included the long-range objectives of packaging from a corporate level and also from an indivi- dual plant level. In all but two instances, the objectives were aligned.with the shipment of the product and concern for the customer. However, although there are twenty-one persons out of the total of thirty-seven either partly or wholly involved in product packaging, 43% of these twenty- one personnel are from one plant. If the stated packaging 71 objectives are to culminate, then there must be greater emphasis placed on working more closely with the groups of Product Development, Product Engineering, Quality Control and Customer Engineering that are presently (according to the survey) least aware of what Packaging is attempting to accomplish. It would be incorrect to state that the packaging activity cannot Operate in the organizational structure it is currently in, but rather its greatest potential ‘will not be realized until it is primarily customer- oriented. One packaging manager was much more dogmatic in a statement about the organization structure of the packaging activity. He said, "I cannot see packaging being divorced as it is from the functions of shipping and traffic, as well as product design. we have a big res- ponsibility to the customer engineering people in the field. I don't think we are oriented right . . . their (other plants) orientations are inward instead of outward." The conclusion of this discussion is:' although the objectives of the packaging activities are and have I been changing over the past several years with greater emphasis placed on product packaging (i.e., shipment of products to our customers), the organization of packaging is, in most plants, still inwardly directed. What then are some of the organizational alternatives to move packaging in the direction of their objectives and 72 to be more customer-oriented? First, just stating that the packaging activity should be more outwardly oriented isn't going to bring Customer Engineering, Product Develop; ment and Product Engineering to Packaging's doorstep 'with valuable advice. They also have immediate problems of their own, so the packaging departments must earn their reputation through being knowledgeable about the potential of product packaging. Packaging personnel must know just what is happening to their products in transit. They must get accurate feedback from the field about what shipping damage is costing. Themeust know exactly how machines are being handled at the customer's locations and what problems a packaged product is causing a customer. Overall, they must take a professional approach to packaging technology. In order to do all this, a considerable amount of research time, coordinating effort and support from _ packaging management and the Corporate Headquarters Coordinator is necessary. Referring back to the data collected in both the personal interviews and the survey, there were several indications that the packaging activities had all they could do just to stay abreast of new product packaging. Very little was being done in the area of applied research and, consequently, 63% of the personnel rated their departments "poor" or "very poor" in applied research. 73 Therefore, if product packaging is to attain its goals, there must be specific well-formulated projects with research time allotted for selected personnel to carry out the assignments. Throughout this research study considerable emphasis has been placed on objectives. I believe that the philosophy of management by objectives, the effect of which is to develop the potential of the individual and ‘make him a willing partner in the organization, is well accepted. The first implication of this philosophy is that management starts with policies and objectives that are widely and cooperatively conceived. Involvement and participation in an objective setting by the packaging personnel are the sources of motivation. However, not even a dynamic program runs itself, no matter how democratic the sense of participation may be. Therefore, the greater the degree of delegation and cooperation, the more coordination must be emphasized. It is this area of coordination, both within the various plants' packaging groups and on a corporate level, that must be examined if the packaging organization as a whole is to operate at maximum effectiveness. TABLE 1 INTERACTION PATTERNS BETWEEN HJANTS Contactor .J A B C D E F G H I m m. m. m m. m m m m. m m m m m m m m m m m Ems" s. Pu Pm 8.0 Po Eb Pm Sh Sh. 9o Emunw .m .m Po .m Po Pu .m .m .m Ewan o Pm fio .m .m fo 8.0 Po Pu .m Swans .m Pm .u fo Ewan m .m Po ”Tu eh .m eh .m .m .m Ewan m. eh Sb Pm Hob Pu Fe Pu Fm To Swan 0 .m Sh Po Swan m Po To fo Fm To fo Fm Po .m Ema” H .m Po rm To Ewan o 28. 51.8%. .m rmmm aims osoo H no N .N no u u no 9 b no u wmonouu .m .H.w N.m w.w b.m contact other plants each month in Check the frequency with which you getting your job done. No. 18 74 75 APPENDIX A OPINION SURVEY To All Packaging Personnel This is a survey of the ideas and Opinions of all the personnel involved in packaging at IBM's domestic plant locations. Through this questionnaire, we hOpe to learn what patterns of organizational policies are the most effective in attaining packaging objectives. What you say in this questionnaire will remain completely anonymous. Do not sign your name. The answers on individual questionnaires will be combined with those of the packaging personnel at other plant locations so it will be impossible to identify any individual in the organization. The classification data will not be used in such a way as to single out any one individual. Whether the results of this study give a true picture of the packaging organization depends on whether you answer the way you really feel. INSTRUCTIONS 1. For most questions no writing is needed. Just mark the answer that fits your case best with a \/ 2. Please answer the questions in order. Do not skip around. 3. Be sure to answer all questions 4. REMEMBER. This is not a test. Your Opinion is the only right answer. CLASSIFICATION DATA Job Title Last completed year of formal education (circle one). High School 1 2 3 4 College . 1 2 3 4 What degree? Total number of years experience in packaging. A description of your present job coverage. Include in your answer the-areas you support such as in-plant containers, final machine or systems packaging, etc and also the depth of your coverage. THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS PERTAIN TO THE ORGANIZATION OF YOUR PACKAGING DEPARTMENT (OR GROUP) 1. How would you rate your knowledge of the objectives or goals of the pack- aging group? Very Good Good Average Poor Very Good ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 6a. How well would you say your job has been related to the objectives of the packaging group? Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Questions 3 to Sc pertain to specific job assignments in the packaging group. When you answer these questions think of the day to day, week to week, and month to month assignments you receive and _n_ot the very broad assignments such as "provide support to final machine packaging". Who assigns your projects in the packaging activity? (1) Manager (2) Group Leader (3) Both manager and group leader (4) No one assigns my projects About what percentage of the work that you are now doing has been as- signed to you? ' (1) 0 - 20% (2) 20 - 40% (3) 40 - 60% (4) 60 - 80% (5) 80 -lOO% Does the packaging group have a formalized method for assigning and controlling projects? (1) Yes (2) No If the answer to No 5 is HYes", how effective do you think the method is? Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) If the answer to No 5 is "No", do you feel you would work more effectively if there was a formalized method? (1) Yes (2) ,No 8a. 10. -3- Again, if the answer to No 5 is "No", do you think the packaging group as a whole would accomplish more if there was a method of assignment and control? (1) Yes (2) No About what percentage of your time is set aside for applied research, ie, new ideas or innovations about packaging problems in general? (1) Less than 10% (2) 10 - 20% (3) 20 - 30% (4) 30 - 40% (5) Other (Name) In answering No 7, do you feel this is: (1) Too much time (2) An adequate amount (3) Too little time How would you rate your packaging group in this area of applied re- search? Very Good Good . Average Poor Very Poor ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Answer this question 23111 if your department has other activities in it such as Materials Handling, Plant Layout, Planning, etc. How often do you work with the other activities within your department to get your job done? ' (1) Always (2) Often (3) Occasionally (4) Seldom (5) Never Do you think the workload of the packaging activity is well distributed in keeping with the objectives of the packaging group? (1) Yes, there is a good distribution (2) There are some areas for improvement (3) There are many areas that need improvement (4) No, there is a poor distribution 11. How would you rate the cohesiveness of all the members of the pack- aging activity? How well do they work together? Very Good Good Average Poor, Very Poor ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION OF YOUR PACKAGING DEPARTMENT (OR GROUP) IN RELATION TO OTHER DE- PARTMENTS IN YOUR PLANT LOCATION 12. 13a. How would you rate the awareness of what the packaging group is doing (or trying to accomplish) by the following: (leave blank if it does not apply) Very Very Good Good Average Poor Poor (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Product Engineering ( ) . ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Customer Engineering ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Manufacturing Engineering ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Production Control .( ) ( ) ( ) ( )- ( ) Quality Control ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Purchasing ' ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Plant Engineering ( ) ( ) ( ) . ( ) ( ) Other (Name) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) How would you rate the knowledge of the packaging group's objectives by the level of management that your department reports to? Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) How important do you feel it is that the next level of management know these objectives? (1) Very important (2) Somewhat important (3) Of little importance (4) Not very important —— fl —_ ——— 14. 15. 16. 17. List in order of frequency the departments from which you receive your job requests. (Name the department and division. Example: Tool Engineering -- Manufacturing Engineering Division). (1) (2) (3) (4) List in order of frequency the departments (and division) that you con- tact the most in order to get your job done. (1) (2) (3) (4) List in order of frequency those departments (and division) that slow down or hinder your work progress the most. (Try not to think of in- dividual personalities, but rather work conflicts.) (1) (2) (3) (4) In order to get your particular packaging assignments done, in what department or division do you feel you could work most effectively? (1) (name) (2) In right place now. THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS PERTAIN TO THE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE VARIOUS DOMESTIC IBM PLANTS' PACKAGING GROUPS TO ONE ANOTHER AND ALSO THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS 18. Check the frequency with which you contact other plants each month in getting your job done. (Contacts may include such things as information requests, packaging changes, damage reports, etc) Leave blank if no contacts are made. Less Than Once 1to2 2to3 3to4 4t05 Burlington ( > ( > < > < > < ) Endicott ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Fishkill ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) h ( ) Kingston ( ) g ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Lexington ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Owego ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Poughkeepsie ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Rochester ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) SanJose ‘() () () () () Vestal () () () _() () 19. In general, how would you rate the cooperation between those plants you contact and yourself? Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor ( ) ( ) ( ) ' ( ) ( ) 20. DO you think you could do a more effective job if you had a better knowledge of what the packaging personnel (with similar job assignments) at other plant locations were working on? (1) Yes (2) NO 21. 2%.. 23. If your answer to No. 20 is "Yes", then what means do you feel would be best used to get this information? (1 ) Go through Corporate Headquater's packaging coordinator (2) Direct contacts with the other plants and yourself (3) Periodic seminars (4) Other (name) Are you aware of the goals of the Corporate Packaging Committee? (1) Yes (2) Somewhat, but not too clearly (3) No . If your answer to No. 22 was "Yes" or "Somewhat", rate how well staffed you think the various plants‘ packaging groups are in attaining the Committee's goals. (The word "staffed" as used here means the technical competence and overall knowledge of packaging rather than just the number Of men.) Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Could you name those areas in packaging where you feel there should be more continuity or standardization among plants. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) PLEASE PLACE THE QUESTIONNAIRE IN THE ATTACHED ENVELOPE AND SEAL IT. THEN RETURN IT TO YOUR MANAGER IMMEDIATELY. BIBLIOGRAPHY Albers, Henry H. Organized Executive Action: Decision Making, Communicatibn andVLeadershifil New YorE; JOhn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1961. Allen, Louis A. Mananement and Oroanization. New York: HcGraw-UiII Book Co., 1958. Argyris, Chris. Personality and Organization, The Conflict Between System and’the Individuif. New York: ‘Harper & Bros., 1957. Barnard, Chester I. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, Mass.: ‘Harvard”UhiversityPPress, 1955. Bass, Bernard M; Leadership, Psychology and Organizational Behavior. _New York: Harper & Row,‘1960. Booz, Donald R.; Learned, Edmund P. and Ulrich, David N. Executive Action. Boston: Division of Research Craduate*S¢hOOI“Of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1951. Brooker, Michael. "Does Traditional Organization Theory Conflict with Theory Y?" Personnel, volume 41, No. 5, September-October, 1964. p. 65 Chapple, Eliot D. and Sayles, Leonard R. The Measure of Management, Designing Organizations fOr Human Effectiveness. *NeWVYOfk: PThe‘MECmillan Co., 1951 Charter of the Packaging (for Shipment) Subcommittee of the Interdivisional Industrial Engineering Council of IBM. Deming, Donald D. "Company Organization for Packaging Efficiency” A study carried out under the . direction of American Foundation for Management Research, New York. Dennison, lenry S.; Fayol, Henri; Follett, Mary P.; Graicunas, V. A.; Gulick, Luther; Henderson, L. J.; Lee, John; Mayo, Elton; Meoney, James D.; Urwick, L.; Whitehead, T. N. Papers on the Science of Administration. Editedey: ILuther Gulick andl. Urwick. New York: Institute of PUblic Administration, 1937. 77 Dimock, Marshall E. Administrative Vita .lity, The Conflict with Bureaucracy. New‘YOr : ‘harper é—Bros., I959. Drucker, Peter F. The Practice of Managgment. New York: {arper é. Bros., 1954 Engineering Manpower, low to Improve Its Productivity. A Speci.al Report fOr Manatemcnc by Gradhate Students of the G::aduate School of Business A ministration, Harvard university. Boston: Engineering Management Reports, 1957. Granger, Charles H. "The Hierarchy of Oh jectives," Harvard Business PevieW‘ (May-June, 1964). Kelley, Eugene J. and Lazer, William. Managerial Marketing: Perspectives and Viewpoints. Revised Editibn. ‘Homewood,‘Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1962. Massarick, Fred; Tanncnbaum, Robe1 t; Weschler, Irving R. Leadership and Organization, A Behaviorial Shience Approach. ‘NewCYOrk: lMCGraw5Hill Book CO., 1951} McGregor, Douglas. The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: MCG1aw-lIill Hook Co. , 19:30. MOoney, James D. The Principles of Organization. New York: narper &7Bros., 1947. O'Connell, Jermiah J. and Summer, Charles E., Jr. The Managerial Mind, Science and Theory in Pblic “Decisions. Iomewood, Illindis: 'RIc ar . rw1n, Inc., 1964. Project Description, Corporate Industrial Engineering May, 1964 llHIllIilIlH)|||\ll||||||llll||llllllHlllllllllllllllllllflil 3129310 03575142