Reference no: EM13373811 , Length: 366 words

 It is about my group's simulation experience, and the question is "What mistakes did your team make?"

The first mistake that my team made was failure to maintain the current productivity level. The productivity level decreased to 195 from 200. This can be explained by our failure to effectively allocate our training costs in quarter 1. In quarter 1, we newly hired 42 employees from outside and promoted 4 employees within the firm in order to meet its production goals. Our training cost analysis stated that we need to spend $34,400 on New Hires and Promotions training; however, we only ended up spending $14,000 on this training. We believe the insufficient investment on New Hires and Promotions training led to failure to train employees for their new positions. Therefore, the productivity level dropped to 195 units per employee. The other factor that can explain our low productivity level is the employee's relatively low morale. The employee's morale still stayed at 50, which indicates many employees were coming to work with indifferent attitudes. There could be many reasons for their low morale. For example, we decided not to include pension benefit and spent only $5000 on Performance Appraisal program.

The second mistake we made was our decision that resulted in a higher accident rate than other groups in quarter 2. Although our accident rate (414) was still lower than the industry average (494), it is relatively higher than the average accident rate of 10 teams (405.9) in our class. We believe this is because we did not spend enough amount of money on Safety & Accident Prevention Program. The simulation case states that "in order to have a full-time Safety Director, you will need to allocate at least 12,000 per quarter." Unfortunately, we decided to spend only $10,000 on this program, which led to the higher accident rate than other teams. Also, during this period, we decided to hire 68 employees from outside and promoted 3 employees within the firm. However, the number of projected resignations was only 45, and hiring 68 employees from outside who did not have any knowledge of the safety guidelines of the firm could have contributed to our high accident rate compared to other groups.