- Email: [email protected]
Factory work groups
Factory work groups Sweden has spent much time and energy trying to find ways to make work more livable and life more workable. There are also stringent labour laws requiring full consultation with employees and full participation by their representatives in decision making from board level to the shop floor, aimed at improved worker satisfaction. At Kalmar, the site of a new Volvo factory for 500 people, continuous assembly lines typical of conventional autombile factory design were eliminated in favour of an auto carrier system where individual cars were directed to buffer or short term storage areas awaiting autonomous work groups. Self paced work groups in instrumentation, in electrical systems, in finish and so on take responsibility for their own work and learn from each other. A development from this has been rules of thumb evolved by Volvo whereby the initiative for change should be line responsibility; work groups should be free to develop individually; to encourage inside changes, changes of work organizations must be integrated with a structure of employee consultation.
PROJECT Volvo's Kalmar project was proposed as a non-traditional factory that without sacrificing efficiency and economic results would enable the employees to work in groups, in communicate freely, to carry out job rotation, to vary their rate of work, to feel identification with the products, to feel responsibility for and also be in a position to influence their working environment. The building design focussed on the working groups and architect Ove Sw~irt developed a system of one and two storey interlocking hexagons that permitted each working group to have its own separate area and to remain visually and socially connectd to nearby work groups.
CLIENT By international standards Volvo is a medium-sized
218
company, but by Swedish standards it is large. Although Sweden's labour costs have become the highest in the world, Volvo remains a profitable company. Since its inception in 1927, Volvo had incorporated production systems from other countries until the early 1970s when worker dissatisfaction and high absenteeism stimulated the development of the Kalmar project. A renewed emphasis on good working conditions influenced the development of a non-traditional plant whose goal was to give individuals as much control as possible over their own working lives. The Kalmar experiment which included the design of supervision, group structure, reward systems, and physical environment has been viewed as an extension of the Hawthorne studies where the work organization was viewed as a social system. 1 In 1924, the Western Electric company conducted a research programme at its Hawthorne Works on the factors in the work situation which effect the morale and productive efficiency of workers. The results of this experiment, described as the 'Hawthorne effect', which baffled the engineers, was that production increased no matter what changes they made in any direction, even return to the original conditions. 2 The experiment had subsequently grown into in-depth interviews, physical examinations, and sociological group analysis in order to better understand these unusual findings. The discovery suggests that 'other factors cannot be held constant' in dealing with conscious persons who are part of a production process. The mere observation of people, the showing of management concern, the process of the experiment and the interaction of the people with those conducting the experiment are themselves a stimulus to production efficiency. The major significance of the Hawthorne studies was the discovery of the social system in the work place and its importance to management. Volvo's Kalmar project represents a major advance in thinking since the Hawthorne studies with their introduction of new production technology. The car industry's production system was initially based on groups of skilled craftsmen working on a single car until they t'mished it and drove it out the door. Volvo became heavily mechanized in the 1950s when group
0142-694X/85/04218-05 $03.00 (~ 1985 Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd
DESIGN STUDIES
work declined in the face of increasing specialization and shorter work cycles. The human side of planning never merited much emphasis because economic growth was the company's prime objective. However, by the late 1960s employee turnover soared and absenteeism was increasing. Management began to pay more attention to social and psychological factors. As the 1970s arrived, each plant began to develop more human working patterns, but each in its own way. Work councils, a network of employee elected groups, are the backbone of Volvo's relationship with its employees. Joint project groups or consultation groups connect the corporate and work-council structures at every level. The Kalmar project was initially a normal planning exercise for a new but traditional plant. On the premise that humanity and efficiency could be combined, their recommendations emphazied group work, expanded worker responsibilities, and opportunities for workers to vary the speed of their work. It focussed on good physical conditions, ample space and noise control, but still included the conveyor line. Recognizing that a new factory presents a unique opportunity to try new solutions, Volvo's president Pehr Gyllenhammar set up an alternative task force to design a new factory with the aim of having employees identify with the cars that they made. The original objectives for the new planning groups assumed that they could develop a new materials handling system and a new product transportation system. The design intention was to give individuals as much control as possible over their working lives. The basic design guidelines stated that instead of a conveyor belt moving through a warehouse, Kalmar should be based on stationary work, with the materials brought to the work station. Each group work area would contain fifteen workers. Tasks could be varied within a group and each group would assume more responsibility for the quality of its own work. Since the traditional factory plan had been completely acceptable to managers and workers, the difficulty lay in getting a large, successful company to make changes that did not seem a necessity. While the risks were high in terms of proving or failing to prove that there were realistic alternatives to the traditional assembly line, top management decided to go ahead with the nontraditional Kalmar project. This presented a unique opportunity to try new approaches to work design and many of the management changes that Volvo has recently adopted were initiated in the 1970s at Kalmar. 3 In response to the traditional assembly line where people are subservient to the conveyors, it was proposed that people could do a better job if the product could stand still while they worked on it. Reactions to the anti-social atmosphere that is built into the production line where people perform jobs of short duration stimulated the development of work groups where people could act in cooperation, and decide among themselves how to organize the work. The design of the plant was focused entirely on the working groups. Architect Ove Sw/irt developed a
Vol 6 No 4 October 1985
concept of one and two storey interlocking hexagons that permit each of the four groups to have an identifiable section of the building, generally one wall of a hexagon (Figure 1). They wished, however, to remain visually and socially connected with nearby work groups. The corners of the hexagons, between work groups, were usually buffer zones to accommodate three carriers. Generally the group working areas were located along the exterior walls where there were large windows that opened to a view of the countryside (Figure 2). Most of the 25 teams had their own work areas, their own entry, and their own rest areas. These consisted of coffee areas and lounge, each fitted with working equipment and pantry visually accessible to their work area. In addition, each set of two work groups had its own sauna, changing rooms, washing facilities and lockers. The work itself was organized so that each group was responsible for a particular portion of the car such as interiors or electrical systems. Individual cars were built up on self propelled carriers (Figure 3) that moved around the factory following a moveable conductive tape on the floor. Each work group had its own buffer areas for incoming and outgoing carriers so it could pace itself as it wished and organize the work inside its own area to permit members to work individually or in subgroups as they preferred. (Figure 4). Groups also assumed responsibility for their own work through individual inspection as well as a computer-based information system that informed teams when their work had been particularly problem free. Since car assembly is, by its nature, a noisy process, involving m.any pneumatic tools, a design goal was to reach a noise level that allowed normal conversations about 65 decibels. In addition to sound-absorbing walls and screens, assembly tools were chosen to give a high output at low speed. The result has been a pleasant working environment acoustically. In planning Kalmar, industrial doctors were involved from the start so that assembly work was carried out with the least physical strain and the greatest comfort. Orthopaedic specialists helped to design products that would improve the comfort of the work stations. The carriers were paid similar attention so they would permit people to work in physically correct positions throughout the assembly process. In 1976, the results of the first outside evaluation of Kalmar were released. The evaluation was requested by the employees at Kalmar who thought the assignment should be given to the Swedish Productivity Council, a research body sponsored jointly by the unions and the employers' association. The evaluation was based partly on interviews with over 100 blue and white collar workers at the factory and partly on the observations of the research team. The findings were quite positive in that the majority of workers participated in job rotation and most felt that it was a good way of working. They also felt that they wanted to take responsibility for the quality of the product and were partly able to do so. The employees said that the physical working environment was very
219
Figure 1. Hexagonal building from where each work group has its own wall and windows
good and that the original goals for noise, light and health service had been met, but they asked for certain changes regarding working postures and summer ventilation. At the 8,000 employee Torslanda factory built in 1964 outside Gothenburg, changes that occured as a result of the experience at Kalmar were locally generated. 4 One of the first changes was to make four main departments (pressing, body work, painting and assembly) as auto-
,
nomous as possible. Each department had its own problems and its own style for solving them. For example, the body shop formed a working group to consider problems of noise and dust. The working group enlisted architects from the Gothenburg School of Applied Art, and from their suggestions employees selected schemes for cutting noise, eliminating dirt, and brightening the environment.
J
Figure 2. Plan of Kalmar factory showing assembly flowing from outer perimeter and internal areas used for materials
220
DESIGN STUDIES
Figure 3. Self propelled car-carriers which can be controlled by workers
When groups became cohesive, they could take on other tasks that were well beyond their original purpose. Gyllenhammar reported that as later groups also learned rotating jobs they found it was often more satisfying than continually performing single short cycle tasks.5 Enrichment, whereby the group took on supervision, control and planning, usually occurred when the group was well formed. The function of management at Volvo was to create an atmosphere where people would be able to have ideas and try them out. Joint consultation on an informal basis, provided the best opportunity for a group to develop ownership of an idea and therefore fred good reasons to ensure its success. Participation at the Volvo factories demanded individual self-discipline and a leadership style based on self-confidence and employee respect. Kalmar was an example of a work system integrated with the social system characteristics desired. Kalmar redesigned the production technology and the internal construction of the product to accommodate a desirable work system.
SAAB Despite economic problems in the automobile industry, transformation of the workplace in Sweden continues. 6 The most notable development had been the introduc-
Vol 6 No 4 October 1985
tion of semi-autonomous work groups at the Saab auto assembly plant at Trollh~ittan, The change was made gradually here as opposed to Volvo's assembly plant at Kalmar which was built to the specifications of a team assembly. The workers at Trollh~ttan have experienced, both assembly work and group work arrangements and, therefore, could make meaningful comparisons. Workers' complaints about the tempo of the assembly line, high accident and absenteeism rates, caused management to initiate a pilot project with team assembly of car doors in 1971. The success of the pilot project led to group production in 1975 requiring a sudden shift from 3 6 minute work stations on a line to a 45 minute work cycle. Production teams were composed of seven workers where six worked in pairs and the seventh was the coordinator seeing that materials arrived on time. This position, while similar to that of a foreman was rotated among the members of the groups on a weekly basis. Work groups could set their own tempo since each pair had a buffer stock of work-in-progress material, equal to an hour's work on each side of them. They could work more to fdl the buffer and take an extra hour off to read or play cards. Team assembly has eliminated long shut downs of the assembly line due to mechanical breakdowns or excessive absenteeism. Consequently, Saab's production was more stable. Since the teams have assumed quality control responsibilities, quality has improved and the number of quality control specialists -
221
Figure 4. Canopy over work area, helping to create sense of identity for small group within open factory space
reduced. Saab recovered the initial investment necessary to convert the body line to production after only two and a half years. The question arises: If team assembly is so advantageous, why don't more companies adopt it. The general reply is that managers who are trained to be authoritarian feel insecure when they go onto a shop floor and see some workers sitting and talking, others sleeping and yet others playing cards.
As Hawthorne demonstrated, changes in the social and physical environment can create a sense of excitement on the part of the workers which influence group cohesion and motivation. While the original premise of the Hawthorne experiment tried to create the best organization, a more dynamic response by Kalmar has shown that change was a continuous ingredient as workers diagnosed p r o b l e m s , d i s c o v e r e d o p p o r t u n i t i e s and evolved appropriate processes.
CONCLUSIONS While the Hawthorne studies were a major breakthrough in understanding the importance of the social system, Kalmar went further in redesigning both the production technology and the internal construction of the product to accommodate a desirable work system. The Hawthorne researchers found that the meaning attributed to any physical or procedural change will vary depending upon the reasons for the change. The alternative meanings attributed to job rotation illustrate this important insight. When job rotation was initiated by supervisors, workers regarded it as disruptive and further evidence of their powerlessness. At Kalmar, the same type of job movement was appreciated by employees and perceived as a source of variety and job knowledge because it was adopted by those who were directly involved. 7
222
REFERENCES 1 Walton, R E 'From Hawthorne to Topeka and Kalmar' in Cass, E L and Zimmer, F G (eds) Man and work in society Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. New York (1975) 2 Boettinger, H 'The learning of doing: Hawthorne in historical perspective' in Cass E L and Zinuner F G (eds) Man and Work in Society Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. New York (1975) 3 Gyllenhammar, P C People at work, Addision Wesley Publishing Co. Reading, Mass. (1977) 4 Ibid 5 Ibid 6 Logue, J 'Semi-autonomous groups at Saab: more freedom, high output.' ManagementRev. Vol 71, No 9. (1982) p. 32-33 7 Walton, R E (see Reference 1)
DESIGN STUDIES
PROJECT Volvo's Kalmar project was proposed as a non-traditional factory that without sacrificing efficiency and economic results would enable the employees to work in groups, in communicate freely, to carry out job rotation, to vary their rate of work, to feel identification with the products, to feel responsibility for and also be in a position to influence their working environment. The building design focussed on the working groups and architect Ove Sw~irt developed a system of one and two storey interlocking hexagons that permitted each working group to have its own separate area and to remain visually and socially connectd to nearby work groups.
CLIENT By international standards Volvo is a medium-sized
218
company, but by Swedish standards it is large. Although Sweden's labour costs have become the highest in the world, Volvo remains a profitable company. Since its inception in 1927, Volvo had incorporated production systems from other countries until the early 1970s when worker dissatisfaction and high absenteeism stimulated the development of the Kalmar project. A renewed emphasis on good working conditions influenced the development of a non-traditional plant whose goal was to give individuals as much control as possible over their own working lives. The Kalmar experiment which included the design of supervision, group structure, reward systems, and physical environment has been viewed as an extension of the Hawthorne studies where the work organization was viewed as a social system. 1 In 1924, the Western Electric company conducted a research programme at its Hawthorne Works on the factors in the work situation which effect the morale and productive efficiency of workers. The results of this experiment, described as the 'Hawthorne effect', which baffled the engineers, was that production increased no matter what changes they made in any direction, even return to the original conditions. 2 The experiment had subsequently grown into in-depth interviews, physical examinations, and sociological group analysis in order to better understand these unusual findings. The discovery suggests that 'other factors cannot be held constant' in dealing with conscious persons who are part of a production process. The mere observation of people, the showing of management concern, the process of the experiment and the interaction of the people with those conducting the experiment are themselves a stimulus to production efficiency. The major significance of the Hawthorne studies was the discovery of the social system in the work place and its importance to management. Volvo's Kalmar project represents a major advance in thinking since the Hawthorne studies with their introduction of new production technology. The car industry's production system was initially based on groups of skilled craftsmen working on a single car until they t'mished it and drove it out the door. Volvo became heavily mechanized in the 1950s when group
0142-694X/85/04218-05 $03.00 (~ 1985 Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd
DESIGN STUDIES
work declined in the face of increasing specialization and shorter work cycles. The human side of planning never merited much emphasis because economic growth was the company's prime objective. However, by the late 1960s employee turnover soared and absenteeism was increasing. Management began to pay more attention to social and psychological factors. As the 1970s arrived, each plant began to develop more human working patterns, but each in its own way. Work councils, a network of employee elected groups, are the backbone of Volvo's relationship with its employees. Joint project groups or consultation groups connect the corporate and work-council structures at every level. The Kalmar project was initially a normal planning exercise for a new but traditional plant. On the premise that humanity and efficiency could be combined, their recommendations emphazied group work, expanded worker responsibilities, and opportunities for workers to vary the speed of their work. It focussed on good physical conditions, ample space and noise control, but still included the conveyor line. Recognizing that a new factory presents a unique opportunity to try new solutions, Volvo's president Pehr Gyllenhammar set up an alternative task force to design a new factory with the aim of having employees identify with the cars that they made. The original objectives for the new planning groups assumed that they could develop a new materials handling system and a new product transportation system. The design intention was to give individuals as much control as possible over their working lives. The basic design guidelines stated that instead of a conveyor belt moving through a warehouse, Kalmar should be based on stationary work, with the materials brought to the work station. Each group work area would contain fifteen workers. Tasks could be varied within a group and each group would assume more responsibility for the quality of its own work. Since the traditional factory plan had been completely acceptable to managers and workers, the difficulty lay in getting a large, successful company to make changes that did not seem a necessity. While the risks were high in terms of proving or failing to prove that there were realistic alternatives to the traditional assembly line, top management decided to go ahead with the nontraditional Kalmar project. This presented a unique opportunity to try new approaches to work design and many of the management changes that Volvo has recently adopted were initiated in the 1970s at Kalmar. 3 In response to the traditional assembly line where people are subservient to the conveyors, it was proposed that people could do a better job if the product could stand still while they worked on it. Reactions to the anti-social atmosphere that is built into the production line where people perform jobs of short duration stimulated the development of work groups where people could act in cooperation, and decide among themselves how to organize the work. The design of the plant was focused entirely on the working groups. Architect Ove Sw/irt developed a
Vol 6 No 4 October 1985
concept of one and two storey interlocking hexagons that permit each of the four groups to have an identifiable section of the building, generally one wall of a hexagon (Figure 1). They wished, however, to remain visually and socially connected with nearby work groups. The corners of the hexagons, between work groups, were usually buffer zones to accommodate three carriers. Generally the group working areas were located along the exterior walls where there were large windows that opened to a view of the countryside (Figure 2). Most of the 25 teams had their own work areas, their own entry, and their own rest areas. These consisted of coffee areas and lounge, each fitted with working equipment and pantry visually accessible to their work area. In addition, each set of two work groups had its own sauna, changing rooms, washing facilities and lockers. The work itself was organized so that each group was responsible for a particular portion of the car such as interiors or electrical systems. Individual cars were built up on self propelled carriers (Figure 3) that moved around the factory following a moveable conductive tape on the floor. Each work group had its own buffer areas for incoming and outgoing carriers so it could pace itself as it wished and organize the work inside its own area to permit members to work individually or in subgroups as they preferred. (Figure 4). Groups also assumed responsibility for their own work through individual inspection as well as a computer-based information system that informed teams when their work had been particularly problem free. Since car assembly is, by its nature, a noisy process, involving m.any pneumatic tools, a design goal was to reach a noise level that allowed normal conversations about 65 decibels. In addition to sound-absorbing walls and screens, assembly tools were chosen to give a high output at low speed. The result has been a pleasant working environment acoustically. In planning Kalmar, industrial doctors were involved from the start so that assembly work was carried out with the least physical strain and the greatest comfort. Orthopaedic specialists helped to design products that would improve the comfort of the work stations. The carriers were paid similar attention so they would permit people to work in physically correct positions throughout the assembly process. In 1976, the results of the first outside evaluation of Kalmar were released. The evaluation was requested by the employees at Kalmar who thought the assignment should be given to the Swedish Productivity Council, a research body sponsored jointly by the unions and the employers' association. The evaluation was based partly on interviews with over 100 blue and white collar workers at the factory and partly on the observations of the research team. The findings were quite positive in that the majority of workers participated in job rotation and most felt that it was a good way of working. They also felt that they wanted to take responsibility for the quality of the product and were partly able to do so. The employees said that the physical working environment was very
219
Figure 1. Hexagonal building from where each work group has its own wall and windows
good and that the original goals for noise, light and health service had been met, but they asked for certain changes regarding working postures and summer ventilation. At the 8,000 employee Torslanda factory built in 1964 outside Gothenburg, changes that occured as a result of the experience at Kalmar were locally generated. 4 One of the first changes was to make four main departments (pressing, body work, painting and assembly) as auto-
,
nomous as possible. Each department had its own problems and its own style for solving them. For example, the body shop formed a working group to consider problems of noise and dust. The working group enlisted architects from the Gothenburg School of Applied Art, and from their suggestions employees selected schemes for cutting noise, eliminating dirt, and brightening the environment.
J
Figure 2. Plan of Kalmar factory showing assembly flowing from outer perimeter and internal areas used for materials
220
DESIGN STUDIES
Figure 3. Self propelled car-carriers which can be controlled by workers
When groups became cohesive, they could take on other tasks that were well beyond their original purpose. Gyllenhammar reported that as later groups also learned rotating jobs they found it was often more satisfying than continually performing single short cycle tasks.5 Enrichment, whereby the group took on supervision, control and planning, usually occurred when the group was well formed. The function of management at Volvo was to create an atmosphere where people would be able to have ideas and try them out. Joint consultation on an informal basis, provided the best opportunity for a group to develop ownership of an idea and therefore fred good reasons to ensure its success. Participation at the Volvo factories demanded individual self-discipline and a leadership style based on self-confidence and employee respect. Kalmar was an example of a work system integrated with the social system characteristics desired. Kalmar redesigned the production technology and the internal construction of the product to accommodate a desirable work system.
SAAB Despite economic problems in the automobile industry, transformation of the workplace in Sweden continues. 6 The most notable development had been the introduc-
Vol 6 No 4 October 1985
tion of semi-autonomous work groups at the Saab auto assembly plant at Trollh~ittan, The change was made gradually here as opposed to Volvo's assembly plant at Kalmar which was built to the specifications of a team assembly. The workers at Trollh~ttan have experienced, both assembly work and group work arrangements and, therefore, could make meaningful comparisons. Workers' complaints about the tempo of the assembly line, high accident and absenteeism rates, caused management to initiate a pilot project with team assembly of car doors in 1971. The success of the pilot project led to group production in 1975 requiring a sudden shift from 3 6 minute work stations on a line to a 45 minute work cycle. Production teams were composed of seven workers where six worked in pairs and the seventh was the coordinator seeing that materials arrived on time. This position, while similar to that of a foreman was rotated among the members of the groups on a weekly basis. Work groups could set their own tempo since each pair had a buffer stock of work-in-progress material, equal to an hour's work on each side of them. They could work more to fdl the buffer and take an extra hour off to read or play cards. Team assembly has eliminated long shut downs of the assembly line due to mechanical breakdowns or excessive absenteeism. Consequently, Saab's production was more stable. Since the teams have assumed quality control responsibilities, quality has improved and the number of quality control specialists -
221
Figure 4. Canopy over work area, helping to create sense of identity for small group within open factory space
reduced. Saab recovered the initial investment necessary to convert the body line to production after only two and a half years. The question arises: If team assembly is so advantageous, why don't more companies adopt it. The general reply is that managers who are trained to be authoritarian feel insecure when they go onto a shop floor and see some workers sitting and talking, others sleeping and yet others playing cards.
As Hawthorne demonstrated, changes in the social and physical environment can create a sense of excitement on the part of the workers which influence group cohesion and motivation. While the original premise of the Hawthorne experiment tried to create the best organization, a more dynamic response by Kalmar has shown that change was a continuous ingredient as workers diagnosed p r o b l e m s , d i s c o v e r e d o p p o r t u n i t i e s and evolved appropriate processes.
CONCLUSIONS While the Hawthorne studies were a major breakthrough in understanding the importance of the social system, Kalmar went further in redesigning both the production technology and the internal construction of the product to accommodate a desirable work system. The Hawthorne researchers found that the meaning attributed to any physical or procedural change will vary depending upon the reasons for the change. The alternative meanings attributed to job rotation illustrate this important insight. When job rotation was initiated by supervisors, workers regarded it as disruptive and further evidence of their powerlessness. At Kalmar, the same type of job movement was appreciated by employees and perceived as a source of variety and job knowledge because it was adopted by those who were directly involved. 7
222
REFERENCES 1 Walton, R E 'From Hawthorne to Topeka and Kalmar' in Cass, E L and Zimmer, F G (eds) Man and work in society Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. New York (1975) 2 Boettinger, H 'The learning of doing: Hawthorne in historical perspective' in Cass E L and Zinuner F G (eds) Man and Work in Society Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. New York (1975) 3 Gyllenhammar, P C People at work, Addision Wesley Publishing Co. Reading, Mass. (1977) 4 Ibid 5 Ibid 6 Logue, J 'Semi-autonomous groups at Saab: more freedom, high output.' ManagementRev. Vol 71, No 9. (1982) p. 32-33 7 Walton, R E (see Reference 1)
DESIGN STUDIES