Paradoxical Twins: Acme and Omega Electronics

Organizational differences between Acme and Omega

Acme
 Retained original management and promoted GM to president.(Mr John)
 Well defined organizational structure
 Decisions taken by top management without consulting manufacturing dept.
 Well defined job responsibilities

Omega
 Hired new president and upgraded several existing personnel within plant.(Mr. Jim)
 Organizational chart seems like artificial barrier.
 Filling people who could not contribute to solution (participative management)
 No well-defined job specification

Acme electronics

Accountability was missing…(purchase & production didn’t consult the peer)

Manager lacked the ability of formulating operational decisions…
Decision making process was centralized…
Organization should have balanced centralization and decentralization…
Internal communication was missing…
info sharing was not there with the client…
Situation demanded mutual adjustment rather than standardization…
It had mechanistic structure(centralization,standardization) rather having organic
structures(decentralization & mutual adjustments)…
Manager lacked risktaking abilities…
Taskforce comitee should be set up…
Value creation and addition was missing…
Contingency plan was seriously missing…
certain norms and SOP was violated led for the losining behavior control..

Acme is consistently more effective and achieve greater net profits.

has an well definedorganisation hierarchy where employees activities can b

monitored easily.....since it has a four level hierarchy communication can b made
better....the only problem s that msgs can b distorted and may b manipulated to
serve someones own interest as here d production foreman ignored d efficient
assembly process......
clearly specifies d task and responsibility of d other level of organisation....
innovations restricted since it follows a specified sequence of action.....
production s delayed due 2 improper coordination......

omega electronics

bureaucraticcost sminimised since it maintains a flat organisation ......

the principle of minimum chain of command s carried out well since it has a flat
org......
provides employees with wider perspective of thinking.....
production s accomplished earlier since managers and subordinates together
determine d goal.......

latitude
CASE ANALYSIS
ACME

information flow was unidirectional

LACK OF COORD AND INFO EXCHANGE BETW DEPTS
Direct contact between management and technical experts was lacking
COST REDUCTION TECH, CUT DOWN ON DEFECTS EVENTUALLY
well defined organizational structure
HIGHLY SPECIALISED PERSONNEL

OMEGA

INNOVATIVE
PROB SOLVING MINDSET
Departmental communication was strong
BIDIRECTIONAL FLOW OF INFO
MULTITASKING PERSONNEL

Paradoxical Twins: Acme and Omega Electronics

Case Summary for "Paradoxical Twins: Acme and Omega Electronics" by John F.
Veiga as discussed and presented in class

Organizational differences between Acme and Omega

Acme
 Retained original management and promoted GM to president.(Mr
John)
 Well defined organizational structure
 Decisions taken by top management without consulting
manufacturing dept.
 Well defined job responsibilities
Omega
 Hired new president and upgraded several existing personnel within plant.
(Mr. Jim)
 Organizational chart seems like artificial barrier.
 Filling people who could not contribute to solution (participative
management)
 No well defined job specif
  ication

Both of these firm competed for a major photocopier manufacturer’s project. Photocopier firm
gave 2 weeks time to manufacture 100 prototypes each. Based on the prototype photocopier
manufacture will award the final order.
Prototype Development at Acme

Mr John president of Acme , issued a memo to purchase department , drafting department,

Industrial Engineering dept. and all heads and executives indicating time constrains.

sent a memo to all dept heads & executives indicating the critical time contraints and what
was expected of them to perform as on past.
Purchase dept. notice that a component could not be purchased for next 2 weeks.
Head of the purchagedept had no problem solving approach….loking for other options.. Acme
decided to built the prototype except for the one component and add component later.
In haste to make things going production foreman ignored the normal procedure of contacting
the methods engineers and set up assembly line and started assembly.
Method engineers complained to head industrial engineer, who immediately complaint to
plant manager. Plant manager ignored the complaint.

Later , a design error was identified and photocopier manufacture instructed Acme to rectify
the problem. The alteration in design , lead to disassembly and unsoldering of several
connections.
Value creation by omega…
After design error was rectified missing components were installed by again disassembly.
Acme should have told designer for the problems faced…info gap…
This increased the time of production and final prototype was sent withoutfinal inspection.

Prototype Development at Omega

A meeting was called with all head of the departments, criticality of issue was explained and
department heads agreed to start process at their end.
Purchase dept. notice that a component could not be purchased for next 2 weeks. Head of the
electrical engineer suggested for substitution. Head of mechanical department stated that in
absence of the component assembly time and cost will increase.
Electrical dept head was giving decisions which normally JR gives.
Electrical department inspected the design and came up with substitute.
All dept heads worked together to ensure that no snags in production.
Error was found out…value addition..communicated to designer …repaired o nfast track
mode by mech and electiengg
While building the unit they discover the error in design, Error was corrected and changes
were approved from photocopier manufacturing firm.
They developed the prototype before the deadline and final prototype was sent after
inspection by quality control.
Result
Acme had delivery delays. Acme’s 10 /50 units were found defective. Omega’s all prototype
were passed. The final contract was split between the two firms. Acme reduced its unit cost
by 20 percent and was ultimately awarded the total contract.

Case Analysis
Acme had a well-defined organizational structure but was information flow was
unidirectional. Direct contact between management and technical experts was lacking.As one
of the employee has mentioned that, “ I wish I had a little more information about what is
going on”. Interdepartmental communication was only possible at management level.

In case of Omega , It’s president was from a research laboratory and thus respect input of
every one. Organizational structure and work allocation was not clear. Departmental
communication was strong, when purchase department raise concern for delay in a particular
component there was prompt response from electrical department for substitution and
mechanical department told that without this particular component cost and assembly time
will increase. Information was flowing in both directions without routing it from president.
This enabled Omega to manufacture at time.
In long run, as we know that Acme was more successful than Omega. This could be attributed
to the fact that job allocation was not clear. Moreover information flow was better in Omega
but sometimes such information flow also create hindrance by creating interference in each
other’s domain.
http://industrialeducation.blogspot.com/2008/10/paradoxical-twins-acme-and-omega.html

Acme had a well defined organizational structure but was information flow was
unidirectional. Direct contact between management and technical experts was lacking. As one
of the employee has mentioned that, “ I wish I had a little more information about what is
going on”. Interdepartmental communication was only possible at management level.
In case of Omega , It’s president was from a research laboratory and thus respect input of
every one. Organizational structure and work allocation was not clear. Departmental
communication was strong, when purchase department raise concern for delay in a particular
component there was prompt response from electrical department for substitution and
mechanical department told that without this particular component cost and assembly time
will increase. Information was flowing in both directions without routing it from president.
This enabled Omega to manufacture at time.
In long run, as we know that Acme was more successful than Omega. This could be attributed
to the fact that job allocation was not clear. Moreover information flow was better in Omega
but sometimes such information flow also create hindrance by creating interference in each
other’s domain