Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 44 views

    Case Paradoxical Twins Group 6

    Uploaded by

    ronitr209
    The document summarizes the differences between two electronics manufacturing companies, Acme and Omega, that were spun off from the same parent company in 1955. While both competed for the same contracts, Acme had a rigid organizational structure and prioritized meeting deadlines over quality, resulting in defective prototypes. Omega took a less structured approach, involved managers early in opportunities, carefully reviewed designs, and delivered high-quality prototypes on time. Ultimately, Omega's effective working style led to it securing the major contract despite Acme's lower initial bid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case Paradoxical Twins Group 6

    Uploaded by

    ronitr209
    44 views10 pages
    The document summarizes the differences between two electronics manufacturing companies, Acme and Omega, that were spun off from the same parent company in 1955. While both competed for the same contracts, Acme had a rigid organizational structure and prioritized meeting deadlines over quality, resulting in defective prototypes. Omega took a less structured approach, involved managers early in opportunities, carefully reviewed designs, and delivered high-quality prototypes on time. Ultimately, Omega's effective working style led to it securing the major contract despite Acme's lower initial bid.

    Original Description:

    Paradoxical Twins

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes the differences between two electronics manufacturing companies, Acme and Omega, that were spun off from the same parent company in 1955. While both competed for the same contracts, Acme had a rigid organizational structure and prioritized meeting deadlines over quality, resulting in defective prototypes. Omega took a less structured approach, involved managers early in opportunities, carefully reviewed designs, and delivered high-quality prototypes on time. Ultimately, Omega's effective working style led to it securing the major contract despite Acme's lower initial bid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    44 views10 pages

    Case Paradoxical Twins Group 6

    Uploaded by

    ronitr209
    The document summarizes the differences between two electronics manufacturing companies, Acme and Omega, that were spun off from the same parent company in 1955. While both competed for the same contracts, Acme had a rigid organizational structure and prioritized meeting deadlines over quality, resulting in defective prototypes. Omega took a less structured approach, involved managers early in opportunities, carefully reviewed designs, and delivered high-quality prototypes on time. Ultimately, Omega's effective working style led to it securing the major contract despite Acme's lower initial bid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 10

    The Paradoxical Twins:

    Acme and Omega


    Electronics Submitted By- Group 6

    Aman Jain (024006)


    Gnaneswara Kumar Maripi (024018)
    Pulkit Dhanava (024036)
    Ronit Guha Roy (024042)
    Piyush Kukreja (024070)
    Background

     Year 1955 – Technological Products of Erie, Pennsylvania was bought by a


    Cleveland Manufacturer

     Cleveland firm sold two manufacturing units of printed circuit boards to


    different investors

     After divestment, one unit was renamed Acme Electronics (Waterford,


    Pennsylvania) and other unit was renamed Omega Electronics Inc. (Erie)

     Both Acme and Omega were in same segment of business (manufacturing


    of PCBs) and often competed for same contracts
    Differences between Acme &
    Omega
    Acme Omega

    Acme retained its original management and Omega hired a new president and upgraded
    upgraded GM to president several of the existing personnel within the plant

    The annual sales of Acme was $10 Mn The annual sales of Omega was $8 Mn

    Acme had 550 employees Omega had 480 employees

    Greater net profit Relatively less net profit

    Organization structure was retained Doesn’t believe in organization structure


    Contract of Photocopy
    Manufacturer
     Year 1966 – Shift in market environment as demand for Integrated Circuits (ICs)
    started growing in electronics industry

     One of the major photocopy manufacturers was looking for a sub-contractor for
    IC’s

     Contract was to assemble the memory unit for its new experimental copier

     Projected sales: $5-$7 Mn annually

     Both Acme and Omega were geographically close, submitted highly


    competitive bids for production of 100 prototypes

     Deadline for prototype development: 2 weeks


    Comparative Analysis – On
    Functioning
    Acme Omega
    At Omega, Jim Rawls (President) had already
    When John Tyler (President) received the
    informed all the department heads about the
    blueprints at Acme, he sent a memo to the
    potential contract they were about to receive
    various departments and started working on the
    and once he received the blue prints, he
    project
    informed the head that production could begin
    When a particular component was not available
    at the time of assembly, Acme decided it to still They did an analysis whether to make or buy the
    go ahead with the production and install the missing component and decided on ordering
    missing component later, which was very time Japanese substitutes for the missing parts
    consuming
    There was a friction between the methods
    Omega found an error in the connector cable
    engineer and the production foreman as the
    design, they redesigned it and asked for
    normal procedure to contact method engineers
    approval from the manufacturer
    for setting up the assembly line was not done.
    Comparative Analysis – On
    Functioning….. Contd
    Acme Omega
    The process was inefficient and not well
    coordinated and the method engineers felt
    useless in the company
    All the units had to be taken apart first to
    conform to the new blueprint and second time Omega conducted quality test on all the units
    again to install the missing parts in the units before shipping them
    There was a delay in the production and
    shipping of units and Acme shipped off the
    goods by inspecting only one sample out of the
    50 units
    Retrospect
    Acme Omega
    Ten of Acme’s final memory units were ultimately Omega’s units passed the photocopier’s firm
    defective test
    Acme’s delivery was delayed Omega’s delivery was on time

    Reasons for the final contract being handed over to Acme-

     Extensive cost cutting helped them to reduce the costs by a huge margin-
    20%
     They placed the lower bid initially
     Acme’s market standing was better than Omega as they had greater sales
    and greater net profits
    Analysis – Working Style of Acme
     Organization Structure was defined and rigid

     Compromised on quality to meet the deadline

     Decision making was only with John Tyler and gave little scope to the
    engineers to give their inputs

     Flow of communication was from top to bottom and inefficient as the


    method engineers felt unwanted in the organization

     The plant manager was biased and had a short term vision where he
    wanted the prototypes to be out by any means
    Analysis – Working Style of Omega
     No organizational chart, written memos were prohibited and oral
    communication was promoted
     No proper division of labor with job description
     Decision making lied with the management
     Omega was aware of potential contracts it may be awarded and it showed
    they were proactive
     Efficient in their work as they studied the design carefully, detected an error
    and re-worked on the manufacturer’s blueprint
     Supplied prototypes to the manufacturer before the stipulated time
     Took the formal approval of the photocopier manufacturer on design
    changes which showed professionalism
    Thank You

    You might also like