Organizational Behavior: Steel Plant Accident Case Study- Case Study Assignment Help

Internal Code: 1HCGB

Case Study Assignment Help:

Case Study: Steel Plant Accident BY ROBIN CHENG, TAYLOR’S UNIVERSITY, MALAYSIA Ian Seah, the production manager, was still in mourning. The conscientious manager of an established steel company in Malaysia had tendered his resignation three months ago. Until then, Ian had taken great pride in the fact that the steel plant had remained accident-free during his 15 years of service. In the last five days of Ian’s tenure, the process of melting scrap metals was in progress as usual. All the employees have to cope with intense heat at work, as aluminium melting furnaces burn at a temperature of 1000°C. The job is very perilous, as even a 0.0001 mm drop of liquid from the furnace will burn right through human skin. Then, the steel plant situated in the northern region of Malaysia exploded. This was the last thing that anyone had expected to happen under the watch of the meticulous plant manager. The magnitude of the explosion was so great that it had caused a big hole in the roof of the plant. When the incident happened in the late afternoon, there were more than 89 employees working in the plant. Many employees suffered minor burns despite wearing safety glasses and gloves. One of the employees, from China, did not recover. He died as a result of 60% burns to his body. The steel production halted for one month. The relevant authorities, consisting of the police and the Energy Information Agency Administration (EIA), conducted a thorough investigation of the explosion. However, nobody could ascertain what actually happened during the production process. Despite the psychological trauma of the experience, all the employees resumed work. The employees worked in three shifts: 7 am–3 pm, 3 pm–11 pm and 11 pm–7 am. Of all the three shifts, Ian was most troubled by his night-shift employees. As the supervisor was not strict, the night-shift employees would get their colleagues to punch their attendance cards for them. Many of them would log in on time, but they would leave the plant and come back at 5 am. Ian had conducted several rounds of consultations with the employees and encouraged them to rotate the work shifts. However, no one was willing to take up the offer as the night shift allowance was higher than those for the day shifts. Ian proceeded to assign the uncooperative employees to the day shifts anyway. However, every time Ian rescheduled his employees’ work plans, the night-shift workers would retaliate by complaining to their union. The night-shift employees blamed the company for victimising them. The union would then contact the company to find out how the company had discriminated against its employees. The meetings between the union, Ian and the HR manager were unpleasant and unfriendly. There was always an air of tension, as the union would tend to protect its members. On a few occasions, the union would conduct demonstrations in front of the factory together with the group of unruly employees. These events attracted a great deal of interest from the news media in Malaysia, causing much embarrassment to the company when it was then accused of discriminating against its employees. The steel produced by the company was to be delivered to the construction and property development industry in Malaysia, the Asia–Pacific region and Middle Eastern countries. However, the coordination between the purchasing and delivery departments was poor. There was always a delay in the delivery of the raw materials due to the company’s suppliers or because of late payments to suppliers by the company. This caused the production schedule to be interrupted, the company to suffer ‘down time’ as the employees would be idle while waiting for raw materials to arrive, and additional costs to be incurred when employees were then required to work overtime. Yet when the sales orders were received, the delivery of steel was required within the same week. It was therefore difficult for Ian to plan the production schedule. As a result, the company’s clients would receive their goods one week later, and the company would be charged a 0.1% liquidated agreed damages (LAD) penalty per day on each purchase order. Required:

1. Introduction clearly stated the presentation purpose and objectives. (what is the purpose and objectives of this presentation?) (60 words)
2. A brief overview of the case (300 words)
3. Conclusion noticeably highlighted overall statement of learning: (200 words)
   1. Draw the conclusion, tying in the OB (Organisational Behaviour) concepts and theories.
   2. What has the case study taught you about OB (Organisational Behaviour) theory?