Case Analysis on:BoldFlash: Cross- Functional Challenges in Mobile Division

Case No: 2 Submitted to: Hardik Shah

Group No: 1 12DCP-030 Devneet Bohidar 12DCP-032 Dhruv Goyal 12DCP-115 Swathi Burugupalli 12DCP-123 Vaibhav Agrawal 13FRN-296 Peenaz Sherdiwala

Brief Summary of the Case

Boldflash Inc. was founded in 1982 in Waltham Massachusetts, which was involved in manufacturing of computer storage media like floppy disks as well as various other product mixes. However, presently the company is facing turbulent times because of weakening innovative practices and customer satisfaction. There have been issues in regards to bad management as well as the autocratic style of leadership which lead to breakdown in communication and teamwork. There was no laid down standard of reporting and clarity in regards to functioning of various department. This became a cyclical chain leading to inefficiency in creating value for the company and that for the customer. Therefore there was an urgent need for organizational change and introducing new innovative product to stay competitive in the marketplace.

1. What are the main problems that the Mobile division is experiencing? Describe them in terms of conflicting performance metrics, current organizational design, leadership and culture.

The main problems facing the Mobile division were Missing on storage devices market for tablets Pressure on Price reduction from competition Inability to get new products to market quickly Developing redundant customized chips for mobile markets Couldnt commercialize the technology it developed as they didnt always align the product developments with the customer needs Unproductive conflict between the functional departments

Organization culture No sub contracting. Operated its own plants Focused on organic growth Reputation for quality Strong commitment to on-going research Not always focused on results

Employees with patents are richly rewarded and recognized Most of the employees were Americans Most of them were lifelong BoldFlash employees

Organization structure & Performance metrics Cost reduction pressure leading to manufacturing plant in Shanghai Manufacturing plants operated as individual profit centers and was evaluated on gross margin Manufacturing specific metrics quality, on-time delivery, inventory management No manufacturing at head quarters leading to isolation of the plants Product development made requests to run trials of new products which lowered the efficiency and margins of the plants and jeopardized delivery dates The newly designed chips cant be manufactured at the required profit margin with the existing line setup Sales, in order to meet their revenue goals, sell the products at any price they could without looking at the impact on margins Marketing specialists were smart and analytical but lacked experience. Their roles and authorities were also not clearly defined Revenue and profit projections were expected to be made by marketing team but in this industry, such long-run projections were not feasible due to high volatility They dont get the technology, as they are fresh graduates out of b-schools. So, they are not able to find customers for the products developed by the product development department Sales team had a significant number of new employees. The turnover is high due to high expectations about rapid promotions Onsite sales person at each plant to ensure delivery and customer service Sales team sends proposals and makes delivery promises without consulting the manufacturing department. Their performance metric was revenues. The product development group tended to keep to itself

Performance metric for product development team is academic criteria i.e. no. of new patents approved, presentations made at industry conferences, academic papers published in journals

Led to Communication problem between PD group and sales, marketing teams due to unavailability of the PD team often

Product development process Process and also meeting are Dysfunctional Practices were similarly structured to other divisions of BoldFlash which were not that rapidly changing The heads of functional departments lacked information to make decisions in the meetings Meetings were not very effective. Problems were discussed later in small group talks The status of the new product development project was not known to many

2.

Should one particular group (marketing, manufacturing, etc.) or individual bear

more of the responsibility than any other for fostering cross-functional coordination? Why or why not? There had been rapid changes in the customer preferences and therefore the Mobile Division had to respond and act swiftly to stay competitive. With the growing changes there were growing responsibilities in the organization and therefore individual group like that of marketing, manufacturing ,sales and product development should have been made responsible for fostering cross functional coordination for the following reasons as listed below: Roles and responsibility were not well defined; therefore there was misscommunication among various functions like marketing and product development Since the manufacturing was no longer taking place at headquarter, employees there were feeling neglected

Trial runs for the new product had reduced the efficiency and disturbed the delivery date Sales department sold products at any price they could in order to earn their share of revenue; there was difficulty in maintaining cohesive sales team due to high turnover

The projections made for revenue were unmet which reduced the credibility of the marketing department as a whole In marketing department there were intra-departmental issues like unclear roles and responsibility and lack of experience as it had been recently separated from sales

There was a communication gap between various functions like that of sales and product development team, where Bryant the Sales Director was unable to discuss about the new product launch

Therefore it was essential for every functional group as a whole to be responsible for cross functional coordination. 3. To what extent is Cahill the cause of the problems? What about his predecessor, Jim Harrison? Harrison Brilliant entrepreneur Top-down directives Compliant culture Overpowering People became more protective and political Encouraged Research driven by technological curiosity Didnt attend the Product development process meeting The expectations from the different groups are not clearly defined

Research was not a business mandate

Robert Cahill Not naturally a quick decision maker He was not sure if what he did was right, but he had to do something Open, generates trust and involvement Scientist at heart, not yet a general manager His technical expertise didnt help in solving the managerial problems He is not used to many aspects of leadership He went by instinct in implementing the changes Separated sales and marketing Clubbed all non-manufacturing employees and brought them to Waltham headquarters. Manufacturing director left the company refusing to relocate. Manufacturing responsible for meeting delivery date instead of sales

Though everybody was comfortable working under him, they are not sure of his competency as a leader 4. Were all the Rogers changes necessary? Describe.

Roger Cahill was immediately replaced as the Vice President of the companys mobile division after the demise of Jim Harrison. He was made responsible to: Motivate employees Handle resistance from staff Invent new products Implement the new ideas

He acted as a changing agent and proposed the following three changes:

Separate marketing and sales team. Relocation of non-manufacturing staff to Waltham headquarters Manufacturing department to be made responsible to meet the delivery date

Yes, these changes were necessary for the following reasons: Changes in the external environment-Changing customer preferences -Tough Competition Unmeet Organizational Goal-Unproductive meeting -Absence of discipline and focus The thought process of Roger was good still it created problem because of poor execution. The main problems were: 5. Separation of marketing department from that of sales created communication and various other issues They faced resistance from the staff in regards to relocation of the plant Discuss the upcoming meeting. What should Cahill do to increase its productivity?

Roger Cahill was to chair the next quarterly product development meeting to coordinate the problems undermining the product development process. In order to increase the productivity, margins and morale of the employees Cahill should focus on the following areas: Design a well-defined organizational structure with focus on inter-departmental communication Plan out well defined and distinguished goal of different unit which are attainable yet challenging

Discuss the reasons for the objectives that werent achieved and make people accountable for the same Mandate attendance of various departments in the meeting as previously this was conducted only by marketing division which created in-group bias Facilitate more of participative culture to encourage employee to have greater commitment towards the organizational goal To monitor the progress of pant by making frequent corporate visits as well as to discuss any problem at ground level Educate and communicate the logic behind the change so as to reduce the resistance from staff members

6.

If you are appointed as OD consultant what additional changes you would like to

make? What interventions you would like to suggest for BoldFlash Inc.? If appointed as an OD consultant I would recommend the following interventions for BoldFlash Inc.: To solve the inter-departmental conflict by laying down well defined roles and responsibility Assist the organization in developing positive relationship with the staff members so as to create an atmosphere of trust; so as to communicate that the change will be for mutual benefit Encouraging more of communication and leadership programs so that potential employees can be identified which will aid in generating innovative practices Product development team to be encouraged not only to focus on new technologies but also on day to day business goals Designing of a matrix structure Encourage upward communication to create a participative culture More of senior team involvement to drive the change so that employees at all level connects to the same.