Sample Management Case Studies Paper on Galaxy Toys Inc, Management Roles

Galaxy Toys Inc, Management Roles


            The roles of the management in every organization are divided into four major profiles which include planning, organizing, leading and controlling. Galaxy Toys Inc, like any other organization, requires the management to perform its roles in entirety for the organizational vision and mission to be accomplished. This may not be easy in light of different challenges that the company is facing and which may continue in the future. One such challenge is the de-motivation of some workers due to fears of an inexistent future in the company. Similarly, the quest for continued growth through innovation also requires the company managers to take all their roles seriously, in terms of various concepts in management. The following report describes the details of what the management at Galaxy Toys ought to do in various aspects of their duties in order to accomplish the organizational goals more completely.

Part 1: Organizing as a Management Role

            In order for the company to achieve its goal for the production of Moon Mission to Jupiter’s Europa 1 project, the company has to effectively plan both in entirety as well as within the production floor alone. The organizing role of the management in this aspect includes various practices. The first and most important would be to design the jobs that need to be done within the floor. The job design duty entails providing a comprehension of what the job entails; detailing all the resources necessary for the accomplishment of the job and giving the expected timelines for the completion of each of the tasks as outlined. In this regard, the main objective of the management would be to give all the employees a view of what to expect by the end of the project completion duration. Following this, the management would then allocate resources for the completion of the jobs that have been detailed.

Resource allocation as a role of the management involves provision of the requisite resources such as finances, human resources as well as other equipments that may be necessary for the completion of the tasks. Each of the jobs detailed previously is assigned the resources that are applicable to it in order to initiate its beginning. While allocating the resources, the management also has the responsibility of conducting valid recruitment practices that foster trust among the employees and their managers. Effective recruitment practices include dependence on the job competence to assign roles rather than on other personality traits. As such, it is crucial for the management at Galaxy Toys Inc to not only assigns all resources fairly and according to demand, but also to ensure that the employees assigned to each task are effective at the particular task.

For the management to improve the possibility of success in its project, it will also be mandatory to organize the work force in teams. According to a study by Schraeder et al (2014), trust is one of the key aspects that influence organizational success, particularly in terms of management roles and objective. Team work as explained, fosters trust among employees and that inter- personal trust in teams results in improved efficiency, productivity and competence. The teams may be allocated according to the nature of tasks to be performed. For instance, the 3D printers could be under one team. This would then be followed by the decentralization of authority. At Galaxy Toys Inc, this is easily achieved through the team leaders and the singular floor supervisor, which encourages collaborative decision making among the employees in the production floor.

For the company to best achieve its objectives, the production floor could be organized as follows in terms of the structural component of the floor.

Figure 1: Production Floor Team Organizational Structure

From the chart above, the decision making authority for the floor is the floor supervisor. While it may seem that this encourages individual decision making, this is contrary to the case. According to a study by Morgeson et al (2010), decentralized decision making is crucial in the organizing role of the management. A single supervisor encourages decentralized decision making since he/ she cannot be competent in all areas and this encourages the different teams to take charge of their sections and to make or recommend decisions that affect their teams directly. This is good for both the floor and the entire organization since such inclusion breeds a perception of empowerment and value for the employees hence resulting in greater motivation, a prerequisite for effective performance.  This structure also makes it easy to communicate to all teams through a single individual.

Part 2: Leading as a Management Role

From a study conducted by Zaleznik (2004), one of the key objectives of leadership is influence. Zaleznik asserts that for leadership to be influential, it has to be associated with power. This implies that the organization’s management has to indicate the possession of power that enables them to influence the others. Lack of motivation is one of the factors that can result in poor productivity among workers as they tend to pay less attention to their roles in the absence of motivation. At Galaxy Toys Inc, the major cause of motivation loss among older workers is linked to the fear of obsolescence. Through the years, the company has valued its employees and made them feel as part of the family. This has subsequently led the workers, particularly the older ones to identify more with the company in various aspects of their jobs. The fear of obsolescence among workers arises from the potential organizational change that comes through the introduction of 3D printers that can work much faster and thus accomplish more in a relatively short time. It can thus be linked to change resistance among employees. Finding effective ways to deal with change resistance would be a crucial step towards improved motivation among employees. Fairholm (2009) opines that organizational change resistance results from lack of understanding of the potential impacts of change and difficulty in aligning personal goals to the organizational goals that come with change. This implies that any action taken by Galaxy Toys Inc management has to take into consideration the potential for change acceptance among employees.

To effectively achieve this, the workers need to be assured of their usefulness to the organization. First, the process of change initiation should come with the promise of job security at least until the end of tenure. This can be achieved through providing explanations to the workers on how the machines operate. Training workers on the use of the new equipment and encouraging them to continue learning at their own time is one of the ways that the older personnel may be encouraged to continue participating in the company. In addition to this, the managers should also recognize the essence of each individual in the company. Interaction with employees, rewarding effective performance, communication and involving workers in the organizational decision making are all ways through which motivation of workers can be achieved at Galaxy Inc. Moreover, Schraeder et al report that effectively managing change can result in better performance and greater motivation among workers (2014). It is therefore recommended that the management at Galaxy Toys Inc should take these factors into consideration in order to improve the employee motivation and subsequently improve their level of productivity.

Part 3: Control as a Management Function

The planned new production comes with specifications, goals and objectives. From the data given by the company, it appears that there are some areas that need addressing to ensure that the costs incurred are balanced and are repaid effectively. For instance, production in Juarez appears to be most expensive in comparison to production in other areas. It is necessary that while the costs, damage ratios, the 3D damages ratio and the production times are needed to be low, the production rates should be sufficiently high to be able to obtain profitability in the project. In comparison to the standard set for cost of 7.56, Toledo, Dayton and Juarez all indicated higher production costs. Only White Plains and Huntsville indicated lower production costs, with the lowest cost of 7.45 being portrayed in White Plains. The production time also showed somewhat similar discrepancies between the set standard and the actual operational times in various locations. In Toledo, White Plains and Huntsville recorded 7.32, 7.31 and 7.32 respectively relative to the standard of 7.36 that had been set in the design phase. These records were lower in comparison to those of Dayton and Juarez which used 7.46 and 7.59 respectively.

Other aspects of production observed in various locations, include quality control problems, which were observed to be higher than the standard of 1 per 500 that had been previously set. In this regard, Juarez had the highest number of quality control problems i.e. 8.75 per 500 units produced. Additionally, the training duration per hour had been set at 30 minutes yet all of the locations except Juarez spent at least 35 minutes in training. Juarez had a record of 25 minutes of training per hour. The 3D printing problems observed also indicated higher values in Toledo, Dayton and Juarez in comparison with the set 0.2 problems per 10,000 units. In White Plains and Huntsville, the ratios were 0.11 and 0.1 respectively. All the locations satisfactorily achieved both shipping and production limit standards. From this analysis, it is clear that Juarez performed poorest among all the locations in most of the aspects. However, there is still need for corrective actions to be carried out in various aspects of production depending on the level of discrepancy between the standard and the achieved value. The performance of Juarez can be linked to the training time dedicated to performance. As such, from the observed results, it can be concluded that the training time needs to be adjusted for all the locations to enhance performance. Juarez needs an all round corrective measure while other aspects such as the training time, quality control measures and the 3D printing control measures need to be reviewed to enhance performance.

For the different aspects of operation, each of the managers in different locations needs to clearly highlight the specific measures that need to be addressed in their areas. For instance, Dayton and Toledo need to focus on finding ways to reduce their production costs. All locations need to control their product qualities more effectively, through the use of more updated quality control equipments. Similarly, 3D printing should be improved by improving the qualifications of the printers and increasing the frequency of use of those machineries. I recommend that Keith should therefore take corrective actions on each of these aspects of operations. In particular, corrective actions for improving cost effectiveness would involve contacting less costly suppliers for raw materials and reducing the labor costs in the organization by removal of obsolete employees. It will also be necessary to control employee behavior and subsequently improve productivity and reduce the time spent in production (Abbass, 2012). Furthermore, taking disciplinary actions against employees that indicate unwillingness to embrace change would be warned either verbally or through written notices. Correction of quality issues can be achieved through investment in better quality control systems and better monitoring practices.

Part 4: Planning as a Role of Management

From the results obtained previously, it is clear that the company needs to create a strategic plan in order to accomplish the organizational objectives. Due to this, the particular issues that raise concern to organizational future include: the need for skills and role alignment; establishment of organizational strengths and weaknesses and quality control. From the production reports described in the previous section, there is still need for training the key personnel into the roles that they have to play in accomplishment of the company’s vision and mission. The different branches are spending different amounts of time in the training of personnel to take charge of their responsibilities. This has the potential impact of resulting in either unqualified candidates for the task profiles to be achieved or increased time wastage and quality control problems. While it may seem cost saving in the short term, limited training can cause more harm than good as it increases the company’s vulnerability to poor production practices and time loss. Similarly, high rates of damages per 500 products also increase the potential for poor company perception as it increases the probability that the customers will purchase damaged products hence lowering the company reputation. The managers also have to understand the organizational strengths and weaknesses in order to capitalize on the opportunities that are presented through the organization’s strategic plan.

In order for the company to effectively plan its future, all these issues have to satisfactorily. From the work of Lamond (2004), strategic planning requires establishment of the organization’s potential progress route. This involves highlighting what needs to be done and the particular competency levels and the set of skills possessed by the company. Training employees is crucial in this as it helps to improve the skill set of the company and subsequently to align the required skills to the project needs. It is impossible to structure an effective strategic plan without possessing the right resources for a project as well as for the company business. In this regard, the control issue comes in handy as it helps to recognize the areas where there are specific training needs and subsequently plan the best course of action to be used in providing necessary skills to the employees. Quality control is also a critical part of strategic planning for the future as it can enable the management to chart viable options for improved profitability. Understanding organizational strengths and weaknesses is described by Toor (2011) as one of the most essential aspects of strategic planning. This is because it enables the company to recognize its key competencies as well as the areas in which it can improve to enhance effectiveness. Without this conceptualization, strategic planning can be in vain as it would give the competitors an opportunity to realize organizational strengths and weaknesses and thus tune their operations to exploiting the opportunities that the company presents through its weaknesses.

In conclusion, it is recommended that the management at Galaxy toys Inc should initiate a feedback process from the different organizational branches. The aim of this would be to enable employees identify the specific issues that they find relevant to their particular branches and thus enable planning to take into consideration the desirable changes.

In addition to this, the management should also encourage an environment of innovation. This would entail innovations in product characteristics as well as in the production processes to encourage lower production costs, better efficiency and improved flexibility in production. Innovation can also play a crucial role in training employees and in maintaining the best qualities of products.

In areas such as Juarez, it is also crucial that the company management should outline the significance of the project to encourage participation in its accomplishment. This can be achieved through explaining the position of the project in the organizational vision and mission and providing time frames for the accomplishment of specific tasks. It will also enhance seriousness and encourages efficient time use.


Abbass, I.M. (2012). “Management Skills- Tools for Leadership imperatives in Democracy.” European Scientific Journal, 8(16), 114-129.

Fairholm, M.I. (2009). “Leadership and Organizational Strategy.” The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 14(1).

Lamond, D. (2004). “A Matter of Style: Reconciling Henri and Henry.” Management Decision, 42, (2): 330–56.

Morgeson, F., DeRue, D.S. and Karam, E.P. (2010). “Leadership in Teams: A functional Approach to Understanding Leadership Structures and Processes.” Journal of Management, 36(1), 5-39.

Schraeder, m., Self, D., Jordan, M. and Portis, R. (2014). “The Functions of Management as Mechanisms for Fostering Interpersonal Trust.” Advances in Business Research, 5: 50-62.

Toor, S. (2011). “Differentiating Leadership from Management: An Empirical Investigation of Leaders and Managers.” Leadership Management Engineering, 10(4), 310-320.

Zaleznik, A. (2004). “Managers and Leaders: Are they Different?” Harvard Business Review.