Example of case study
Overview summary of the case -Pear is an electronics company Discarding their ideas Communication is poor Critical assumptions -There at least three members per team and there are several teams -Each members of the team have a basic understanding of common language -Members within team come from varied demographics Negative attitude toward younger people Satellite problems: Group members are skeptical about feasibility of ideas Members of the company are talking over one another Members feel their ideas are unimportant -Members are disgruntled and frustrated Primary problem: The structure of Pear company research and development department is inefficient at creating new ideas and creating proper communication flow between coworkers. Pear does not have an adequate method of ensuring appropriate communication to make group decisions. Implementation Personnel: Younger members may feel discouraged and want to leave the company Members will continue to be frustrated Members morale will decrease Members will stop trying to be innovated Stop showing up to meetings Organization: Organization can potentially loose profits because of the lack of new Ideas, higher costs, and leave org.
Alternative solution: Theories found in textbook Brainstorming -Nominal group (write down ideas, then read aloud) Delphi technique Devil’s advocate Recommendation -Why is this the best? -Why is it better than the other alternatives? Does it solve all problems? How will it affect personnel and organization? Implementation Immediate: Pay for training on how to assess/facilitate meetings Ensure employees are aware to new group technique Implement new technique in all meetings Short: Assess effectiveness of new technique Conduct survey Employee satisfaction Long: -Seek to provide additional decision making techniques in meetings -Virtual -Reward employees for working well in team Assess whether innovation has improves