Production Planning And Team Leadership Assignment: A Compan ✓ Solved

Production planning and team leadership assignment: A compan

Production planning and team leadership assignment: A company produces an automotive component. Current capacity is 5,000 units per week and capacity must increase to 7,500 units per week. Consider these methods for increasing capacity: dedicated and flexible facilities; flexible workforce hours; subcontracting; product design flexibility. Answer: 1) Which methods are hard ceiling increases? Explain. 2) Which are soft ceiling increases? Explain. 3) Which method(s) would you recommend and why? 4) Identify advantages and disadvantages of the recommended method(s).

Team leadership and motivation: Discuss what motivates people and whether motivation is the same for every person; what demotivates employees and whether that is universal; why uncertainty makes motivation difficult; and how to keep morale high in a department during a planned corporate downsizing, explaining why the strategy would be effective.

Motivational theory chart: For each theory below provide a description, an appropriate environment or situation with an example, and pros and cons: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs; Douglas McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y; Herzberg’s Two-Factor (Motivation-Hygiene) Theory; Hawthorne Effect; Expectancy Theory.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction

This paper analyzes production planning options for increasing capacity from 5,000 to 7,500 units per week and examines leadership approaches to sustain employee motivation, particularly during uncertainty and downsizing. The discussion integrates operations management principles and established motivation theories to recommend practical capacity strategies and leadership actions that balance short-term responsiveness with longer-term organizational capability (Heizer & Render, 2017; Robbins & Judge, 2019).

Production Planning Analysis

Classification of capacity-increase methods

Hard ceiling increases change long-term, structural capacity limits and typically require capital investment or permanent process change. In this scenario, dedicated and flexible facilities (if expanded or acquired permanently) and product design flexibility that entails retooling production lines constitute hard ceiling increases because they modify fixed assets or production architecture (Slack et al., 2013). Soft ceiling increases are temporary or reversible measures that exploit existing resources without permanently raising the upper limit. Flexible workforce hours (overtime, shift changes) and subcontracting are soft ceiling measures since they allow temporary throughput gains without large capital commitments (Heizer & Render, 2017).

Recommended approach

Given the required increase to 7,500 units per week (a 50% rise), a blended approach is recommended: deploy soft-ceiling measures immediately (overtime and selective subcontracting) to meet short-term demand while initiating targeted hard-ceiling investments (modular production-line upgrades and judicious expansion of storage/facility capacity) to sustain capacity if demand persists (Slack et al., 2013; Heizer & Render, 2017). This hybrid strategy balances lead time, cost, and operational risk.

Advantages and disadvantages of the recommended methodology

Short-term measures: Flexible workforce hours and subcontracting enable rapid response with low initial capital outlay and preserve customer relationships (Heizer & Render, 2017). However, overtime increases labor costs, risks fatigue-related quality issues, and may reduce morale over extended periods (Robbins & Judge, 2019). Subcontracting can introduce quality control, intellectual property, and supply-chain visibility concerns (Huselid, 1995).

Long-term measures: Product design flexibility and selective expansion of facilities create scalable, sustainable capacity with improved unit costs and process stability (Slack et al., 2013). Drawbacks include significant capital expenditure, longer lead times, and potential underutilization if demand falls (Heizer & Render, 2017).

Team Leadership and Motivation

What motivates people and individual differences

Motivation arises from a mix of intrinsic and extrinsic drivers. Intrinsic drivers include meaningful work, mastery, and autonomy; extrinsic drivers include pay, security, and recognition (Deci & Ryan, cited in Robbins & Judge, 2019). Motivation is not identical for every person because needs, values, life stage, and cultural context differ (Maslow, 1943; Robbins & Judge, 2019). For example, early-career workers may prioritize career development, while later-career employees may prioritize job security and work–life balance (Maslow, 1943).

What demotivates employees

Common demotivators include perceived injustice, unclear goals, micromanagement, poor communication, excessive workload, and lack of recognition (Herzberg, 1959; Robbins & Judge, 2019). These factors are not universal in impact: an action that demotivates one employee (e.g., public feedback) may motivate another (e.g., public recognition), so diagnosis must be individualized (McGregor, 1960).

Why uncertainty impedes motivation

Uncertainty reduces perceived control, increases stress, and undermines employees’ ability to form reliable expectancy–instrumentality–valence judgments (Expectancy Theory), thereby lowering effort (Vroom, 1964). Uncertainty about role continuity, objectives, or rewards triggers defensive priorities (job protection) that can displace discretionary effort and creativity (Robbins & Judge, 2019).

Maintaining morale during downsizing

To preserve morale during planned downsizing, transparent communication, fair process, and supportive measures for affected and remaining staff are recommended. Tactics include early, frequent information sharing; clearly communicated rationale and criteria; survivor support programs (training, career counseling); and reinforcement of mission and achievable short-term goals (SHRM, 2012). These practices reduce rumors, restore a sense of procedural justice, and maintain trust, which supports sustained performance (Robbins & Judge, 2019; Huselid, 1995).

Motivational Theory Chart (Narrative Summary)

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Description: A hierarchical model where basic physiological and safety needs precede belonging, esteem, and self-actualization (Maslow, 1943). Appropriate situation: Use in workforce planning where basic needs (pay, safety) are at risk—e.g., facilities upgrades after plant relocation. Pros: Simple, intuitive; highlights progressive needs. Cons: Empirical support limited; not all employees progress linearly (Maslow, 1943).

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y

Description: Two managerial mindsets—Theory X assumes employees dislike work and require control; Theory Y assumes employees are self-motivated and seek responsibility (McGregor, 1960). Appropriate situation: Theory Y suits knowledge work requiring autonomy; Theory X may be applied in highly routine, compliance-driven contexts. Pros: Encourages reflection on managerial assumptions; adaptable. Cons: Risk of stereotyping and over-simplification (McGregor, 1960).

Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory

Description: Distinguishes hygiene factors (prevent dissatisfaction) from motivators (create satisfaction) (Herzberg, 1959). Appropriate situation: Job redesign initiatives to improve job enrichment in manufacturing or service teams. Pros: Guides targeted interventions to improve satisfaction. Cons: Overlap between factors; context-dependent (Herzberg, 1959).

Hawthorne Effect

Description: Observed productivity gains occurred when workers felt observed and cared for, highlighting social and attention factors (Mayo, 1933). Appropriate situation: When launching improvement pilots, close management attention and feedback can boost short-term performance. Pros: Emphasizes human and social influences. Cons: Effects may be temporary and do not substitute for systemic improvements (Mayo, 1933).

Expectancy Theory

Description: Motivation depends on expected linkages among effort, performance, and outcomes—expectancy, instrumentality, valence (Vroom, 1964). Appropriate situation: Incentive design and performance-management systems. Pros: Actionable for reward structure design. Cons: Requires clear measurement and credible reward contingencies (Vroom, 1964).

Conclusion

A blended capacity-increase strategy that uses flexible workforce and subcontracting immediately, paired with measured investments in production-line flexibility and facility capacity if demand persists, balances responsiveness and cost. Leadership must apply individualized motivational approaches grounded in established theories—ensuring basic needs, procedural fairness, transparent communication, and meaningful work—to sustain morale, especially during uncertainty and downsizing (Maslow, 1943; Herzberg, 1959; Vroom, 1964).

References

• Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.
• McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. McGraw-Hill.
• Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The Motivation to Work. John Wiley & Sons.
• Mayo, E. (1933). The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. Macmillan.
• Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. Wiley.
• Heizer, J., & Render, B. (2017). Operations Management (12th ed.). Pearson.
• Slack, N., Brandon-Jones, A., & Johnston, R. (2013). Operations Management (7th ed.). Pearson.
• Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational Behavior (18th ed.). Pearson.
• Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). (2012). Managing layoffs and reductions in force. SHRM.org.
• Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635–672.