Franklin Equipment Ltd Case Study

Franklin Equipment Ltd Case Studyfranklin Equipment Ltd Fel Wi

Franklin Equipment Ltd (FEL), headquartered in Saint John, New Brunswick, has a 75-year history of manufacturing large, custom-designed machines for construction and aggregate processing markets. Its main focus has been on rock-crushing equipment used in dam and highway construction. Over the years, FEL expanded from regional to national markets in Canada and has recently started engaging in international projects. The company's international ambitions have led to a significant contract to design and build a rock-crushing plant for a construction project in Abu Dhabi. Project manager Charles Gatenby leads the team responsible for this endeavor, which necessitates collaboration among specialists in design, operations, finance, human resources, and management.

The project involves cross-cultural and international staffing challenges, especially considering local labor laws and training requirements. The team, composed of experienced managers such as design engineer Bill Rankins, operations manager Rob Perry, finance manager Elaine Bruder, and human resource manager Sam Stonebreaker, has a history of working together on past projects. FEL also employs a full-time internal consultant, Carl Jobe, who will facilitate team-building efforts for this international project. Gatenby, having secured his position partly through his success with this project, is eager for Jobe’s involvement, believing it will ensure team cohesion and project success.

Jobe begins his process by interviewing team members individually to understand their perceptions of each other and potential barriers. During interviews, he notices signs of skepticism, resentment, and interpersonal conflicts—particularly between Bruder, Perry, and Rankins. Bruder exhibits distrust and pessimism; Perry reveals personal gripes and issues stemming from past conflicts with Rankins; Rankins openly criticizes Perry's competence and suggests hostility. Stonebreaker, on the other hand, maintains a positive attitude, citing previous successful collaborations. Gatenby emphasizes the importance of teamwork, explicitly stating that team members are under pressure to meet aggressive goals, with potential consequences including termination if team dynamics deteriorate.

The situation highlights the complexities of assigning and managing team members based on expertise and availability rather than compatibility, especially in the context of international projects where regional and cultural differences add layers of difficulty. Jobe's task is complicated by statements from Gatenby, which suggest that management prioritizes meeting project goals over resolving interpersonal conflicts, with some conflicts potentially being ignored or tolerated if the team meets deadlines and budgets. Furthermore, explicit goals and threats of firing add pressure but may undermine genuine collaboration and trust among team members.

Paper For Above instruction

In the case of Franklin Equipment Ltd (FEL), the criteria used to assign managers to project teams primarily focus on their expertise, availability, and past experience rather than on their interpersonal skills or compatibility with other team members. Managers like Gatenby select team members based on their technical competencies and their capacity to contribute technical knowledge and skills necessary for the project's specific needs. This approach enables efficiency by ensuring that each team member has the relevant technical background required for their designated responsibilities, thereby allowing for streamlined task execution and technical proficiency within the team.

However, this criteria for assignment also presents notable problems. Relying solely on technical expertise neglects important team dynamics such as interpersonal compatibility, communication styles, cultural sensitivities, and conflict resolution skills. The case exemplifies this issue through the notable conflicts among the team members—such as the reported hostility and personal grievances between Perry and Rankins, which threaten team cohesion and project continuity. These issues illustrate that assigning solely based on competence can overlook potential sources of tension and disrupt the harmonious functioning of the team, especially in high-stakes, international projects.

Such a focus on technical skills facilitates efficiencies in project execution—each individual is likely to perform their tasks competently, meet technical standards, and contribute to meeting project deadlines. It also allows for clear accountability, as expectations are clearly linked to expertise and role-specific qualifications. Nonetheless, neglecting interpersonal factors can result in dysfunctional team dynamics, reduced morale, and increased risk of conflict escalation, ultimately compromising project success. Furthermore, high-pressure deadlines and international complexities, such as cultural differences and legal considerations, make compatibility and effective communication even more critical in global projects.

International projects, such as FEL's Project Abu Dhabi, heighten the importance of team cohesion because they involve multiple cultural contexts, different work ethics, legal frameworks, and communication styles. In such settings, the success of a project heavily depends on effective collaboration among team members from diverse backgrounds. Differences in language, cultural norms, and expectations can lead to misunderstandings and conflicts if not managed effectively. For example, in this case, the apparent animosity between Perry and Rankins could be magnified by cultural differences, unless actively addressed through team-building efforts and cross-cultural training.

Moreover, international projects entail additional logistical and legal complexities, including compliance with local labor laws, safety regulations, and environmental standards. These require seamless coordination and trust among team members to navigate smoothly through these challenges. A dysfunctional team in such a context risks delays, cost overruns, and even legal or safety issues. Hence, fostering a collaborative environment where team members can openly communicate and resolve conflicts is not just desirable but essential for project success across borders.

The dilemma faced by Jobe centers on how to address and resolve the interpersonal conflicts and poor team dynamics that jeopardize the project. On one hand, the company’s emphasis on meeting goals and adherence to directives—including the threat of termination—may suppress genuine conflict resolution efforts. On the other hand, ignoring dysfunctions could lead to project failure, loss of reputation, and financial fallout. Jobe must decide whether to prioritize team chemistry and long-term collaboration or to focus solely on compliance with short-term project goals.

Given the information, Jobe should recommend Gatenby several strategic steps. First, he should advocate for an honest assessment of interpersonal dynamics rather than solely relying on formal goals and threats. This might include facilitated team-building sessions emphasizing communication, trust, and conflict resolution skills tailored to cross-cultural contexts. Second, Jobe could suggest implementing structured conflict management and communication protocols to ensure issues are addressed promptly before escalating. Third, he should advise Gatenby to consider pairing or rotating team members to reduce friction and promote better understanding among conflicting parties. Fourth, the project team should develop a shared vision emphasizing collective success over individual egos or past grievances, especially considering the high stakes of the international project. Finally, Jobe can recommend establishing ongoing support mechanisms—such as coaching or peer feedback—to maintain team cohesion throughout the project's lifecycle.

By promoting a collaborative, culturally sensitive team environment and addressing conflicts directly with strategic interventions, Jobe can help Gatenby increase the likelihood of project success. Emphasizing the importance of interpersonal harmony, along with clear communication and shared objectives, aligns with best practices in project management for international teams. Ultimately, fostering relationships built on trust, respect, and mutual understanding is paramount for achieving high performance in complex, cross-cultural projects like FEL’s Project Abu Dhabi.

References

• Burke, R. (2014). Project Management: Planning and Control Techniques. John Wiley & Sons.
• Harrison, F. (2014). Managing Cross-Cultural Teams. Routledge.
• Kerzner, H. (2017). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
• Larson, E. W., & LaFasto, F. M. J. (1989). Teamwork: What Must Go Right/What Can Go Wrong. Sage Publications.
• Liu, C., & Cayer, M. (2020). Cross-Cultural Team Management. Journal of International Business Studies, 51(10), 1554–1572.
• Morris, P. W. G., & Pinto, J. K. (2007). The Wiley Guide to Project Management. John Wiley & Sons.
• Shenkar, O., & Starosta, W. J. (1998). Foundations of Intercultural Communication. Intercultural Press.
• Thomas, D. C., & Inkson, K. (2017). Cultural Intelligence: Surviving and Thriving in the Global Village. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
• Thompson, L. (2014). Making the Team: A Guide for Managers. Pearson Education.
• Wilson, S. (2011). International Project Management. Routledge.