The issue

RSA Ground is a subsidiary of Rising Sun Airlines, a Japanese company that conducts

domestic and international air transport businesses. The main responsibility of RSA Ground

is servicing Rising Sun Airlines’ planes at airports across Japan. Due to higher demand for air

travel, Rising Sun has witnessed an increase in percentage of seats filled as well as number of

flights, which means there is more work needed to be done by RSA Ground’s crews. In spite

of the rise in workload, the number of employees in RSA Ground remains the same. As a

result, “turn times” had almost doubled in the past year, turning from an average of 12

minutes to 20 minutes. However, as hiring more staffs is not considered a favorable solution

by executive committee, the only way to solve this problem is improving the efficiency of

crews. After several unsuccessful meetings and consultations with managers and industry

experts, Kentaro Hayashi, president of RSA Ground, decided to investigate this matter on his

own by getting first – hand experience of the job and listen to his employees.

Identifying the problem

This case study demonstrates a problem of discrepancy between actual production level,

which is “turn times” in the case of RSA Ground, and desired production level. Performance

of employees depends on a number of elements, including employees’ motivation and ability

(Jackson, 2018). Goal – setting theory states that more challenging goals help direct

employees’ attention toward achieving target and encourage them to work with higher

intensity and persistence (Jackson, 2018). According to Toshi, one of the new recruits,

manager has been successful in motivating crew members by creating a sense of urgency,

which earns her the title of Lady Stopwatch. The constant pressure from manager indeed

increases crew’s efficiency, as it is mentioned that in the afternoon when manager is present,

the average turn time is cut down by two minutes. However, goal – setting can only be
effective when the goals assigned are S.M.A.R.T (Jackson, 2018). While target turn times are

specific, measurable, and time – bound goal, they are neither achievable nor reasonable since

they do not take into account other antecedents of turn times, such as plane size, and crew

size. Lady Stopwatch requires teams to complete all tasks within the same amount of time, in

spite of the fact that some flights have much more work to attend to than others. Even though

the more difficult the goals are, the better task performance is, an impossible goal has adverse

effects on performance and demotivates employees to achieve targets (Jackson, 2018), which

explains Toshi’s discontent toward the manager’s practice. Moreover, as crews are often

overloaded and have little control over their job, they may face negative stress that comes

from their high strain job, which would adversely affects performance (Jackson, 2018).

Another method that Lady Stopwatch has been using to motivate her teams is creating

competition among members, and rewarding winners by announcing their names. By doing

so, she provided employees with informational extrinsic motivation, confirming their

competency and the value of their work. Extrinsic motivators can contribute to task

performance; however, the extent of its effect largely depends on how employees perceive

the work intrinsic values (Jackson, 2018). For staffs who take pride in their job like Nobuo,

the woman who won the competition, and Ken, they appreciate the recognition given by

managers and strive to receive that encouragement. However, for Toshi, who considers this

job menial, this practice of providing extrinsic motivator has limited effect on him.

In the past year RSA Ground has also encountered the problem of rising attrition rate.

Voluntary turnover comes from experienced, long term workers, the Nobous, and temporary

or part time staffs, the Toshis. For Nobous, their commitment to the company falls into the

category of continuance commitment. They cannot afford to leave this job due to lack of

skills and unavailability of work alternatives. Hence, if another opportunity arises, there is

little chance they will stay with the organization. Furthermore, since every job has a learning
curve, the more experienced staffs tend to work more efficiently (Jackson, 2018). As in this

case, Nobou, despite his old age, excels at his job and is trusted by manager. It is evident that

his method is more effective than the manual; however, it is not transferred to other

employees. Thus, if he leaves the company, he will bring with him the expertise and

knowledge that are valuable to the improvement of company operation.

On the other hand, Toshis tend to resign since they are unsatisfied with the job. Traditional

models of turnover state that those who are less satisfied with their jobs are more likely to

leave the company (Jackson, 2018). As Ken points out, employees who find the servicing job

physical demanding and low - paying are prone to quit when better jobs arise. Another

environmental factor that influences employees’ job satisfaction is relationship with

colleagues. Ken noticed that RSA Ground crew is not appreciated and recognized by the

flight crew even though their work can only be done with the help of his team. According to

Hertzberg’s Two Factor theory, lacking support and interpersonal relations with colleagues is

a hygiene factor that may undermine one’s job satisfaction (Jackson, 2018). The combination

of these factors leads to low job satisfaction, which affects task performance and ultimately

results in employees leaving the organization.

Implementation plan

Turnover is costly as company has to bear recruiting costs, training costs, and cost of reduced

efficiency and quality of performance (Jackson, 2018). HR Department has resorted to

employing 20 to 30 temporary staffs and part time workers every month, which increases

monthly expenses and reduces work efficiency since new recruits are inexperienced. This

approach disregards the dynamic interactions between subsystems of organization, and

consequently, has worsened the problem of turnover rate and poor performance. Instead of

trying to fill the vacancy, Ken and his coworkers should tackle the root cause of the problem,
which is decreased productivity. As per Force – field analysis, production can be increased by

enhancing driving forces and reducing restraining forces (Jackson, 2018).

Firstly, Ken should revise the target turn times to be more realistic and attainable. As

mentioned earlier, goals that satisfy the S.M.A.R.T criteria are effective in improving

employees’ performance. However, the current target only meets 4 out of 5 criteria, since

crew members consider it unachievable at times. The target turn time should take into

consideration the amount of work needed to be accomplished, number of seats and the size of

crew. Crews servicing larger planes should be allowed longer time to finish their work, or

they should have more staffs to complete the job. This might require thorough research to

deduce the appropriate goal for each case, however, if done properly, it will motivate

employees to work more persistently and also provide a framework to correctly evaluate

employees’ efficiency.

Secondly, a career path should be devised to increase employees’ motivation at work.

Managers may offer outstanding employees opportunity to advance to higher positions or to

switch to another service line. People are more likely to pursue goals that they consider to be

important and worthwhile than goals that are of minimal importance (Jackson, 2018). Thus,

by presenting employees clear career advancement, staffs who value self – enhancement

might be more determined to achieve the set target in order to have a chance to improve their

skills, social status, and success. This career path should also be introduced to applicants

during the recruiting process, so that company can attract people who desire to stay in

aviation business, improve the job – fit level of new recruits, which shall lead to an increase

in job embeddedness and retention rate (Jackson, 2018).

Thirdly, the job should be redesigned so that crew teams shift toward self – managing teams

which will increase their autonomy, skill variety, task identity and task significance (Jackson,
2018). Ken should build stable crews with fixed members and limited rotation of staffs

between crews. Experienced employees would be appointed to be crew leader and be

responsible for assigning, monitoring, supervising crew members’ performance. By doing so,

higher managers are released from this duty and can focus on more meaningful tasks, while

staffs have more room for autonomy, development and challenges. The self - managing

structure and stable teams would enhance trust, collaboration, and efficiency, as well as

encourage learning among members.

Finally, employees with innovative ideas should be granted monetary reward, or other

benefits, such as 2 paid days off, discount tickets. This way, employees are encouraged to

contribute their knowledge and experience to the company, which will result in better

practices and improved efficiency.

Plan Evaluation

The change intervention once implemented should improve employees’ motivation and job

satisfaction. As employees become more determined at work and content with their job,

performance shall be improved and employees would be less likely to resign from their

position. In order to evaluate of the success of the plan in decreasing turnover rate and

improving performance, RSA Ground may rely on analysis of its organizational records.

Regarding employees’ motivation and job satisfaction, evaluation requires a combination of

multiple strategies, including observation, surveys, and workshops (Jackson, 2018). Focus

group interviews may also be carried out in order to generate ideas and feedbacks on

company plan. In addition, performing SWOT analysis before and after conducting the plan

could help managers decide whether the goals have been reached and what should be the next

step (Jackson, 2018).

 References:

Bernstein, E. and Buell, R. (2016) “Can you cut “turn times” without adding staff?”. Harvard

Business School Case Collection, viewed 28 October 2018.

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 2: Personality & Individual Differences., Lecture 2 slide 31.,

MGMT1002: Organisational Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 3: Work Attitudes., Lecture 3 slide 17., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales, delivered

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 4: Motivation., Lecture 4 slide 11., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales, delivered

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 4: Motivation., Lecture 4 slide 16., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales, delivered

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 4: Motivation., Lecture 4 slide 18., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 4: Motivation., Lecture 4 slide 19., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 4: Motivation., Lecture 4 slide 23., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 4: Motivation., Lecture 4 slide 65., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 6: Job Design., Lecture 6 slide 48., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 7: Fear and Stress., Lecture 7 slide 42., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 8: Turnover., Lecture 8 slide 10., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 8: Turnover., Lecture 8 slide 18., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 8: Turnover., Lecture 8 slide 19., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 11: Change., Lecture 11 slide 5., MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 11: Change., Lecture 11 slide 21, MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 11: Change., Lecture 11 slide 31, MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,

Jackson, C. 2018., Unit 11: Change., Lecture 11 slide 34, MGMT1002: Organisational

Behaviour, University of New South Wales,