150 likes | 263 Views
The Individualised Team: Individual and collective in a team based production system at the Volvo Bus Plant. Margareta Oudhuis. University College of Borås. Background. The Volvo Bus Plant, Borås, Sweden, was established in 1977 Number of employées: 365 (today)
E N D
The Individualised Team:Individual and collective in a team based production system at the Volvo Bus Plant Margareta Oudhuis University College of Borås
Background • The Volvo Bus Plant, Borås, Sweden, was established in 1977 • Number of employées: 365 (today) • The dock model was in use 1977-1999 • The FLiSa organisational model was introduced between end 1998 up to the summer of 2000
Assembly stations 1 – 3 Completed bus- chassis ompleted frames Tyres, fluids, batteries and testing on rolling road C Assembly station 4 (q uality assurance) = Bus-chassis The Dock Model
= Bus-chassis The FLiSa Organisational Model Pre-assembly of Pre-assembly of coolers, Pre-assembly of engine instruments, electrical central, etc. valves and air tanks (“engine dressing”) Tyres, fluids, batteries and testing on rolling road Completed frames Completed bus-chassis Assembly station 1 Assembly station 2 Assembly station 3 Assembly station 4 Assembly station 5 (quality assurance)
Expected advantages with the new model • Increased possibilites for competence development and to become multi-functional through rotation and support roles • Increased efficiency/productivity • Increased quality level
Outcomes • FLiSa is no longer spoken of • The support-roles have been brought together/to the teamleaders • The expected rotation did not take place • A couple of pre-assembly stations have been re-centralised • The birth of the individualised team
Reasons – System Imbalances • Resources spent on the technical vs the social system • The line layout • Workload differences • Difficulties to balancethe time between pre-assembly- and line work • The lean organization; few retirement positions • Contradicting demands • Operators’ time orientation
Consequences • Loss of community • Difficulties to learn from one another • Tension among teams • Tension within teams • Tension between individuals • Feelings of disappointment, anger, irritation • Whining
Operators’ time orientation ”Saved in time is my own private time”
Operators’ time orientation – reasons and consequences • The balance time is the target and what one is able to control (to some degree) • Distrust toward other stations/individuals • Unwillingness to help each other • Unwillingness to share improvements/ shortcuts
The individualised team -explanation • Individuals/teams are time-oriented, not task-oriented • Lack of control, other than over time • Lack of holism • ’Us against them’ • Lack of team development investments • Lack of a supporting reward system
CONCLUSIONS • Increased participation/involvement/autonomy/ learning possibilities for the teams • A better balance between resources spent on the social vs the technical system • Team development activities • A supporting reward system
Conclusions cont.. • Attitude change; production and operators are to be in focus amongst everybody at the plant • Model for taking advantage of operators’ continuous improvements • Create a sense of a ”we” throughout the plant
Definition of a well functioning team by the operaters • ”Trusting everyone is minding his own business” • ”Trusting everyone to help out when needed”