On October 23rd, 2014, we updated our
By continuing to use LinkedIn’s SlideShare service, you agree to the revised terms, so please take a few minutes to review them.
California manufacturing leaders perception of automation and how it impacts the workplacePresentation Transcript
DEFENSE May 17, 2012 PRESENTED BY: LAUREN TALIA
DISSERTATION TOPIC CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURING COMPANIES’ LEADERS’ PERCEPTIONS FOR INTEGRATING AUTOMATON AND HOW IT IMPACTS THE WORKPLACE
EXPLANATION OF THE TERMS CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURING Divided into two regions 32,000 companies in California according to Manta.com NORTHERN CALIFORNIA San Jose LEADER Chief ExecuRve Oﬃcer (CEO) San Francisco Vice President Silicon Valley Director Mountain View SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AUTOMATION Self-‐OperaRng Machine San Diego RoboRc Technology Los Angeles Orange County
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 RESEARCH DESIGN QualitaRve Research Phenomenological Method Research Design In-‐depth and rich Allowed the researcher informaRon to survey a small populaRon sample of What are your percepRons of 10–20 parRcipants automaRon?
SAMPLING RANDOM SAMPLING JUDGMENTAL Professional contact SAMPLING Personal contact Over 20 parRcipants POPULATION SAMPLE California manufacturing Leaders AutomaRon
SEARCH ENGINES AND KEYWORDS SEARCH ENGINES EXAMPLES OF KEYWORDS Google.com California manufacturing companies Whitepages.com Northern California Manta.com manufacturing companies Cmta.com Northern California Erascal.org network chips companies Cmtc.com Southern California manufacturing companies Apparelnews.net
RECRUITMENT PROCESS DOCUMENTING THE PARTICIPANTS INFORMATION MS EXCEL WORKBOOK DATA CONNECTED Spreadsheet dated External Hard Drive (that day date) Encrypted and Password First Name protected Last Name LOCKED CABINET Company Name Only the researcher had Job Titles access to the content Email Addresses
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 Survey Monkey ™ PROS CONS Web Survey QuesRonnaire ParRcipants are unfamiliar with the site CompleRng the survey at the Caused some parRcipants to leaders convenience quesRon the integrity of the study Anonymity of respondents Poor response rate More honest answers to sensiRve quesRons Less aftudinal behavior No Cost
RECRUITMENT TOTALS 22 ParKcipants Accessed the Survey 12 parRcipants 10 parRcipants FAILED ParKcipated in the the screening process screening process SCREENING QUESTION Do you currently or did you used to parRcipate in the decision-‐making process for implemenRng automaRon?
PARTICIPANTS RECRUITED DEMOGRAPHICS GENDER 5 Northern California 9 Males 3 Females 7 Southern California AGE JOB TITLES Was not factor in this 5 President/CEO study. 2 Vice Presidents Seniority of the 2 Chief Oﬃcers parRcipants posiRons was factor. 2 Directors
NoCal PARTICIPANTS # Region Gender Title Manufacturing Industry 1 NoCal Male Chief ExecuRve Automobile Parts Oﬃcer (CEO) 2 NoCal Male Director Snowboarding and Skateboarding products 3 NoCal Male Vice President PlasRc (VP) 4 NoCal Female Sr. VP Label PrinRng 5 NoCal Female Chief OperaRng Networking Devices Oﬃcer (COO)
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 Commercial Aircrajs Oﬃcer (CTO) 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 WHAT ARE YOUR FEELING ABOUT AUTOMATION? 9 PARTICIPANTS 3 PARTICIPANTS Great tool Neutral Feelings for PosiRve automaRon Cost reducRon Its about how the workplace Improve process adapts to automaRon improvements for streamline eﬃciently Staying compeRRve
SURVEY QUESTION 2 WHY DID YOU OR THE LEADERS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION DECIDE TO INTEGRA TATE AUTOMATION? 6 PARTICIPANTS 5 PARTICIPANTS Improve complicated process To cut costs Streamline processes Increase producRvity Simplify processes AutomaRon is an eﬀecRve tool 1 PARTICIPANT Higher producRvity number across all metrics Reduces Dangers for injury
SURVEY QUESTION 3 HOW DID YOU OR THE LEADERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION REACT TO THE INTEGRATION OF AUTOMATION IN THE WORKPLACE? 8 PARTICIPANTS 1 PARTICIPANT Highly PosiRve Mixed interpretaRons of Eager to integrate automaRon automaRon in the workplace 1 PARTCIAPANT Change in any form is rarely 1 PARTICIPANTS accepted IniRal investment of cost 1 PARTICIPANTS Retraining the workers, where necessary
SURVEY QUESTION 4 HOW WAS AUTOMATION INTEGRATED INTO YOUR WORKPLACE? The ques;on asks “how” but the respondents seemed to respond to “why” instead. 9 PARTICIPANTS 3 PARTICIPANT Simplify processes Perform repeRRve work Increase employee Sojware producRvity. Producing automated products
SURVEY QUESTION 5 HOW DID THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) REACT TO THE INTEGRATION OF AUTOMATION? 7 PARTICIPANTS 5 PARTICIPANTS Employees who wanted to Workplace reacted negaRvely learn embraced automaRon to automaRon Higher level of job security Employees felt their jobs Employees welcomed were in jeopardy
SURVEY QUESTION 6 WHAT TYPE OF TRAINING WAS INSTITUTED TO EDUCATE THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) TO LEARN AND OPERATE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS? 8 PARTICIPANTS 4 PARTICIPANTS Hired professional trainer to Management goes over the educate the employees safety and maintenance Training took place In-‐house requirements for the new equipment Leadership oﬀered demonstraRon of uRlizing automaRon Process training
SURVEY QUESTION 7 HOW DID THE TRAINING ASSIST THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) TO LEARN TO USE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS? 10 PARTICIPANTS 1 PARTICIPANT Company insRtuted some Successful training, the form of onsite training employee Had an internal team leader on the ﬂoor to 1 PARTCIAPNT educate and assist the Change was challenge team with conRnuous training.
SURVEY QUESTION 8 HOW DID AUTOMATION BENEFIT THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES)? 4 PARTICIPANTS 2 PARTICIPANTS AutomaRon beneﬁted the Employees are now workplace comfortable with the concept Increasing morale which had of automaRon a posiRve eﬀect Beneﬁcial to the leadership 1 PARTICIPANT team. ReducRon of repeated moRon faRgue
SURVEY QUESTION 8, CONT. HOW DID AUTOMATION BENEFIT THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES)? 1 PARTICIPANT Company invested in the 1 PARTICIPANT employees AutomaRon assisted the execuRves more, by 1 PARTICIPANT increasing the producRvity New job opportuniRes quotas opened 1 PARTICIPANT 1 PARTICIPANT Helped the company grow in AutomaRon resulted in the size and increased proﬁts staﬀ being bored easily
SURVEY QUESTION 9 HOW DID YOU OR THE LEADERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION REACT TO THE COST OF INTEGRATING AUTOMATION? 9 PARTICIPANTS 1 PARTICIPANT Leaders in their organizaRon Created debates amount the had a posiRve reacRon to the leaders cost of integraRng automaRon. 1 PARTICIPANT The expense of automaRon 1 PARTICIPANT was more than oﬀset by the ResisRng the change increased revenue
SURVEY QUESTION 10 OVERALL, HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE IMPACT OR EFFECT AUTOMATION HAS IN YOUR WORKPLACE? 6 PARTICIPANTS 4 PARTICIPANTS The eﬀect of automaRon on AutomaRon had posiRve their workplaces was neutral eﬀect 1 PARTICIPANT 1 PARTICIPANT AutomaRon was success. Increased producRvity Decreased errors Reduced lead Rmes
SURVEY QUESTION 11 AFTER INTEGRATING AUTOMATION, DID IT MEET OR EXCEED YOUR COMPANY’S EXPECTATIONS? WHY OR WHY NOT? 11 PARTICIPANTS 1 PARTICIPANT AutomaRon did not increase Automaton exceeded their the companies sales growth. company’s expectaRons Decreased OperaRonal Costs Increased employee producRvity numbers, saving the company money PrevenRng outsourcing.
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 1 WHAT ARE YOUR FEELING ABOUT AUTOMATION? Lack of knowledge The leaders seemed to regarding how have a basic automaRon might understanding of the inﬂuence the workplace beneﬁts automaRon through integraRon. provided to the workplace.
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 2 WHY DID YOU OR THE LEADERS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION DECIDE TO INTEGRATE 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.
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 3 HOW DID YOU OR THE LEADERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION REACT TO THE INTEGRATION OF AUTOMATION IN THE WORKPLACE? Leaders need to have a Lack of understanding of comprehensive automaton understanding of the Examples or prototypes nature of the company of automaton and the industry in which it competes (Ferrell & Strengths, Weaknesses, Hartline, 2010). OpportuniRes, and Threats (SWOT) analysis
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 4 HOW WAS AUTOMATION INTEGRATED INTO YOUR WORKPLACE? Return of Investment Improved accuracy (ROI) Simpliﬁed processes and Prevented injury procedures for the lean eﬀecRveness Increased producRvity
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 5 HOW DID THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) REACT TO THE INTEGRATION OF AUTOMATION? Prevented the Excited for the new employees from opportuniRes would conducRng dangerous present itself acRviRes AutomaRon might help Their jobs were lost from to increase job security automaRon
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 6 WHAT TYPE OF TRAINING WAS INSTITUTED TO EDUCATE THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) TO LEARN AND OPERATE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS? Hiring professional trainers Training Seminars Having full-‐Rme trainer on-‐ Cross-‐training the workforce site Trial and error is costly
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 7 HOW DID THE TRAINING ASSIST THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES) TO LEARN TO USE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS? Employees had the Training assisted the opportunity to ask the employees in learning how professional trainer any to use and operate quesRons that they had. automaRon. The training will assist The employees preferred the employees to begin learning from a operaRng the new professional trainer machinery with certainty.
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 8 HOW DID AUTOMATION BENEFIT THE WORKPLACE (EMPLOYEES)? AutomaRon caused Flexible working hours producRvity to increase Increase the morale while reducing the size of the workforce. Increasing the proﬁt and Lower morale sales margins
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 9 HOW DID YOU OR THE LEADERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION REACT TO THE COST OF INTEGRATING AUTOMATION? Cost was an issue for the The ﬁndings from the leaders in any organizaRon study indicated that it is because automaRon wise for any company (not implementaRon is just manufacturing expensive. companies) to set aside cash on reserve to be used Not all companies possess for the integraRon of new the funding necessary to prototypes of automaRon. integrate automaRon in the workplace.
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 10 OVERALL, HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE IMPACT OR EFFECT AUTOMATION HAS IN YOUR WORKPLACE? People in the workplace Some people enjoy change, will always have mixed while others resist it; some feelings regarding the people enjoy structure and eﬀect automaRon has in consistency. the workplace. AutomaRon has improved the employees accuracy. Each employee or leader has an individual aftude regarding adapRng to new changes.
FINDINGS FOR SURVEY QUESTION 11 AFTER INTEGRATING AUTOMATION, DID IT MEET OR EXCEED YOUR COMPANY’S EXPECTATIONS? WHY OR WHY NOT? AutomaKon exceeded AutomaKon cannot expectaKons guarantee Increased producRvity Increase in sales Improved accuracy Increase proﬁts. Cut costs Higher cash reserves Prevented Injury
FINDINGS AND RESULTS ADAPTING TO CHANGE COMMUNICATION Workers were resistant to EducaRng the workers that change automaRon will not threaten their posiRons in the company. COST OF AUTOMATION Costly TRAINING Cash reserve Hiring professional trainer to Return on investment train the workplace (ROI)
AUTOMATON ADDED TO THE LITERATURE SHOWN IN THE WAS NOT SHOWN IN LITERATURE THE LITERATURE Increased ProducRvity Improved Processes and Procedures Prevented Injury ROI Simpliﬁed processes Some workers were Streamline eﬀecRveness resisted change Improved Accuracy 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 RECRUITMENT EMAIL INDUSTRY SURVEY MONKEY™ PARTICIPANTS SAMPLE SIZE QUALITATIVE RANDOM SAMPLING
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY ROBOTEIC TRAINING TECHNOLOGY EFFECTS OF AUTOMATON GEOGRAPHIC’S RESISTANCE TO CHANGE PROFESSIONAL IMPORT AND EXPORT CERTIFICATIONS MANUFACTURING UNEMPLOYMENT RATE WORKERS PERCEPTIONS HARMED FROM FOR AUTOMATION AUTOMAITON