Operational Strategy The author of this report has been asked to answer several questions relating to operational strategy at a firm of the author's choice. These questions include the evaluation of a firm's operational strategy and three tasks that are currently being done that do not align with the operational strategy. There will also be an identification of the weaknesses associated with each task. Subsequent to that, there will be the formulation of a new operations strategy that is based on the four competitive priorities of any given firm, those being cost, quality, time and flexibility. The structure of the competitive priorities and the infrastructure of the production process will be included in the analysis. There will be the listing of three new enablers that are aligned with the long-term plan of the organization. Three pros and three cons of each enabler will be used. While there is more than one way to craft an operational strategy of an organization, there are some things that are wiser and more prudent than others.

Analysis

One thing that is occurring at the firm in question is that there are top-down policy moves that are being applied the precise same way to each group and department even when the factors and situation of each department are obviously different. For example, cutting overtime across the board may save money in the short-term, it can cripple the workflow of some departments of they are swimming in work but are not given the opportunity to get the work done. If there is a problem with the way the work is being done, this can be addressed. However, making decisions across the board without knowing the situation of all of the employees and stakeholders involved is less than wise. The second thing that is going on that does not align with operational strategy is that the firm is a little off-base at times when it comes to its priorities. For example, there are sometimes training events that require a lot of time (2-3 hours or more) and/or travel but these are occurring at the same time as the aforementioned overtime restrictions. When trainings that can easily be delayed are happening at the same time as cuts in overtime and so forth, it will be nothing short of perplexing to the workers who are stuck doing things that detract further from getting their work done. In short, keeping overtime minimized is a good thing but it is sometimes needed. If a training can wait, it needs to wait. If more people need to be hired, then this is what should happen. However, making decisions on a whim and/or based on making the "budget numbers work" without worrying enough about the context that should be considered and/or the effects that will be rendered by the cuts is just not a good idea. The third thing that needs to be assessed and changed is that assessment of employee productivity and behavior is not happening at the proper level. Rather than assuming employees are breaking the rules, ignoring their duties and so forth, it should instead be the norm to take a look at the full picture and make a decision based on the totality of the evidence. If an employee does wrong, that person should be punished. However, it should never be assumed and no one should be punished without incontrovertible evidence. Also, work can be done late or improperly based on employees being rushed, not being given good information and so forth. Punishing employees that are doing their best and/or are under improper pressure is not a good thing ("Management Q&A," 2006).

Rather that continuing with the above pathways, there should be two major things that occur. First, there needs to be an assessment why employees are crying out for overtime that is more than what is allowed under current policy. A modest amount of overtime can be tolerable and does not require hiring any more people. Indeed, little spikes here and there are not worth the effort of hiring people except percent a temp here and there. However, if there is a huge amount of work and not enough people, then there needs to be an assessment of what, if anything is going wrong. It could be that the workflow is screwed up but it is also possible that more bodies are needed for the department. Either way, ramping overtime amounts up or down without knowing that answer is unwise. Indeed, it would take time to hire people and resources like overtime and bringing help from other departments (or temps) can be used to bridge the gap between the current situation and...

On that note, things that are not mission critical should not be taking place when situations like this occurs. For example, trainings that are not mission-critical should not be occurring during peak times of the year. All hands need to be on deck and those hands need to be focusing on core business tasks that keep the strategy of the firm moving at a good clip. Keeping costs down is a good thing but it should not be done at the expense of quality or time spent getting the job done right. Getting the work/staff ratio at the right levels will also leverage the proper amount of flexibility and such for the company. The use of temps for menial and repetitive work can be done to keep costs down even further while avoiding the hiring of permanent help that will cost the company more in the long run (Narsh, 2015).
One enabler for the firm would be a feedback system, both public and anonymous, that can allow people in the organization to have their voice and suggestions heard. An upside to this enabler is that the employees feel they are part of the process and the solution. A con to this approach is that employees quite often do not understand the complexities and intricacies of business and thus their suggestions may reflect that (Westerman & Westerman, 2013). Another enabler is to do a top-to-bottom review of the labor situation at least once or twice a year. This can help ensure that staffing levels are where they need to be. To be effective, this would need to be done on a department-by-department basis and, as mentioned before, should include a comparison between the workload and the labor present. When there is an imbalance, there can be a shift or even a reduction in personnel. There can also be hiring of new permanent employees or temps as needed. The upside is that the headcount and the labor are kept in balance. The downside is that spikes and valleys can come quickly and the employer needs to be sure they do not over- or under-compensate. Further, when it is known a valley or spike is coming, the firm should be prepared in advance rather than being reactionary and/or putting things off until the last minute. The final enabler to be discussed relates the trainings mentioned earlier in this report. To be sure, it is important to have classes and training that create and form the vision of the company. It is important for all employees to be on the same page as far as that is concerned. However, having people traveling and spending thousands of dollars for this when it could easily be done remote and those dollars could easily be spent on making clients happier and making more money (Fagerstram, Lanning & Andresen, 2014).

In short, the firm is doing a lot of things right. They worry about labor dollars being spent effectively but the overall program used to manage all of the above is less than efficient and proper. Further, there are trainings and seminars that really do not add value for the organization as the sessions are detracting from the fact that the current workflows are fairly out of whack right now and they should be as current and well-managed as possible. As noted before, the mission and vision of the company is extremely vital but creating and maintaining smooth operations first is much more important and thus should be the focus of the company's short-term plans.

Conclusion

If there is a single piece of advice to take away from this report, it would be to make informed decisions. Having trainings that are not mission-critical when some departments are stretched to their limit is not informed. Making an across-the-board overtime cut with no inspection of individual department or business unit issues is not informed. Not staffing departments based on the conditions as they truly exist is not informed. The firm in question for this report is doing all three of these things and they need to change course quickly.