The degree to which workers interact with each other during work. Examples of social interaction may include talking to other workers, or just working together on tasks.

 

Improvement Action: Schedule breaks so entire teams, or even plant, takes breaks at the same time

Source:

P.G. Gyllenhammar, People at Work, Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1977 p 82

  • GWT Analysts Summary:  At Volvo's Torslanda plant, the moving assembly line stops three times per day; once for lunch and twice for coffee. The line stops so that workers are allowed to have a break together and socialize. While it may appear less productive than staggering breaks to avoid stopping the line, Volvo experienced no loss in productivity.
  • Excerpt from text: “Many jobs are still paced by the speed of the assembly line - a matter determined by negotiations between union and company representatives. The speed is monitored by computers. Torslanda’s employees actually have a strong say in the speed of the line…” “Three times a day at Torslanda the line stops; twice for coffee breaks and once for lunch. Stopping the line ostensibly costs the company money, but the employees asked for it so they could have their breaks together; we get better coordination and no real loss in overall productivity from the shared breaks.” p 82

 

Improvement Action: Use small groups working together

Sources:

P.G. Gyllenhammar, People at Work, Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1977 p 96

  • GWT Analysts Summary:  Volvo's Torslanda plant relied heavily on autonomous groups to perform work. These groups are allowed the decision latitude of managing their processes. The results of autonomous work groups for the plant included increased quality, and reduced absenteeism. For the workers, the work became more interesting as there was an element of it that was now self-directed.
  • Excerpt from text: “The union people have initiated a strong drive to shift the focus from rotation to group working, setting up production groups with more autonomy. This makes a great deal of sense, because once groups exist and have autonomy, they can choose for themselves the rotation, enlargement, or enrichment patterns that best suit their own tasks.” “The benefits of group working are obvious, in terms of quality and cost for the company and better work and interrelationships for the workers. Groups have an effect on absenteeism, too, beyond the drop that naturally occurs when the work becomes more interesting. In one case in the body area, a man in the work group was absent one morning, so group members phoned him at home and said: “Why aren’t you here?” He came in to work that afternoon.” “There are problems associated with the change to group working, of course. Many outsiders wonder what happens if the group rejects a member, or how groups succeed at selecting their own members. We anticipated the rejection problem, and set up in-house employment agencies to find places elsewhere for people who had trouble getting along with a group, but there have been rather few instances of this.” p 96

Jurgens, U. (1994). Group work and the reception of Uddevalla in German car industry. In A. Sandberg (Ed.), Enriching Production: Perspectives on Volvo’s Uddevalla Plant as an Alternative to Lean Production (pp. 199-213). Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.

  • GWT Analysts Summary:  At German automaker Volkswagen, the conventional assembly line required task cycle times of under one minute. In an effort to make the work safer and better for its workers, engine assembly was transformed into four groups who each assembled entire engines. The workers had more interaction and worked together to assemble engines. Their work stations had cycle times of around 45 minutes and produced whole components.

Shaiken, H., Lopez, S., and Mankita, I. (1997) Two Routes to Team Production: Saturn and Chrysler Compared. Industrial Relations, 36(1), 17-45

  • GWT Analysts Summary:  The Saturn plant outside of Nashville, Tennessee relied on work groups with higher levels of autonomy than traditionally found in an automotive assembly environment. Teams were given more authority and decision latitude as to how to perform their tasks, and had more responsibility to self-manage. Teams were typically 6 to 15 workers, and the organization structure used less direct supervision of individuals. Saturn management viewed team work as a valuable framework for in which workers help one another and valuable knowledge is passed down from more experienced workers. The results were a workforce that rated the plant highly in a survey, particularly those workers who had worked in other automotive plants previously.

 

Improvement Action: Schedule regular team meetings to encourage communication

Source:

Shaiken, H., Lopez, S., and Mankita, I. (1997) Two Routes to Team Production: Saturn and Chrysler Compared. Industrial Relations, 36(1), 17-45

  • GWT Analysts Summary:  At the Saturn plant outside of Nashville, Tennessee, workers gather for regular meetings in the team’s work area. The team leader begins with reports and announcements, but quickly turns the meeting over to the ‘point people’ on the team. These team members lead the remainder of the meeting, discussing quality and production difficulties and use the time for group problem solving. The team lead takes necessary information back to engineering if a part redesign is necessary to resolve the issue. After point reports, the meeting is opened up for general discussion from all team members. Saturn leadership found this to be the most effective way to promote the flow of information and worker involvement.

 

Improvement Action: Cross train employees on their co-workers tasks

Sources:

J.R. Hackman and G. R. Oldham, Work Redesign, Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1980

  • GWT Analysts Summary:  In the book Work Redesign, Hackman and Oldham suggest two methods to prevent worker stagnation and better integrate the skills of a workforce. The first is short term rotation through jobs of equal skill and responsibility. The second is forming lateral career paths to enable a worker to move through other departments or jobs which they are qualified to perform.
  • Excerpt from text: “What would one do to retain current levels of challenge and responsibility and yet not create conditions where stagnation may develop? Two types of developmental practices may be especially appropriate in these circumstances.” “The first is traditional job rotation. In this practice individuals are periodically rotated through jobs where new learnings and skills can be obtained, yet which require little additional responsibility. Movement is short-term, with employees eventually returning to their regular positions.” “A second possibility is the formation of lateral career paths. These paths would allow employees to move into different functional areas at approximately the same horizontal level in the organization.” p147

Nilsson, Lennart.(1994). The Uddevalla plant: Why did it succeed with a holistic approach and why did it come to an end. In Ake Sandberg (Editor), Enriching Production: Perspectives on Volvo’s Uddevalla Plant as an Alternative to Lean Production (pp. 75-86). Brookfield, VT: Ashgate

  • GWT Analysts Summary:  At Volvo's Uddevalla plant, workers were rotated through other stages of the assembly process in order to gain a better understanding of all the other jobs. Workers were allowed to select the jobs that suited them to specialize in. The Uddevalla workforce had a greater understanding of the whole process as a result.
  • Excerpt from text: “The work content was at that same time approximately one quarter of the total assembly time of the car. After a certain period the worker would continue to the next quarter stage of assembly work, and so on, in order to obtain a good understanding of the total assembly process. Following this, the worker would choose which of the four stages to become more professional and specialized in, in terms of quality and productivity.” p 82

Vanderburg, David, “The Story of Semco: The Company That Humanized Work”, Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, Vol. 24, No. 5, October 2004, pp. 430-434

  • GWT Analysts Summary:  At Semco, managers are encouraged to trade jobs with one another so that they do not grow bored and unproductive. The managers train each other on their jobs.
  • Excerpt from text: “To further employee involvement, Semler encouraged managers to trade jobs with one another so that people would not grow restless, bored, unmotivated, or unproductive. For the transition to take place smoothly, they trained each other. This worked so well that Semler devised a rule that stated that someone could stay no longer that 5 years at one job. the only exception was if employees could prove to their superior that they could continue to challenge themselves in their present job. p. 433