I am coming to xxxxxxxxx with a research proposal that could quite possibly revitalize the spirit in which it was founded. Since xxxxxx first began in 1978, quality workmanship has been one of the principles around which its foundation was constructed. It is that very same principle that established a clientele which has supported xxx over the years with repeat business and word of mouth recommendations. After having the privilege of working for xxx this past summer I was able to gain some insight on a problem that could potentially crack that foundation.
After years of high quality performance it appears to me that, like many other opportunistic companies, xxx has let targets and numbers get in the way of the thing that made them the largest residential painting company in the world. That thing is quality. It is my assertion that the production target driven structure which xxx has grown to embrace is the culprit in an ongoing decrease in overall quality. If given the chance I am capable of doing pertinent business research that can determine the existence or lack there of of an association between production targets and quality ratings. This research will not only allow management to understand the connection between these targets and quality but also enable them to pick any desired level of overall quality by choosing the corresponding production target.
Such understanding will inherently lead to and increase in overall quality. However, there are countless indirect results of such an understanding. To name a few: increased profits, increased demand, lowered stress, less turnover and on and on. The majority of this proposal details specifically how I would go about obtaining and analyzing this data as well as what it could do for you. Thank you for your time and consideration. NOTE: If the reader is not familiar with xxx please read the brief company description in Appendix A.
xxxx has three main principles by which it stands. These principles are intended to guide administrators in the decision making process and lead managers on a daily basis as they work with customers and painters. As I understand it, these three statements are the commandments of the xxx business. Do as they say and you can do no wrong. In everything you do quality should be the motivating factor. three principles and today this commandment is under scrutiny.
Recently I had the privilege of working for The Franchise Company(founder of xxx), so I have some insight as to how the company operates. One of the things that I noticed was a discrepancy between quality and production targets(aka Designated Target DT). Larger production targets do not inherently imply that quality will go down. If an emphasis is placed on quality above all things then a well run business can maintain the same level of quality no matter what the DT.
However, I believe that one can find some drastic inconsistencies between what xxx preaches and what xxx teaches. From personal experience, I can attest to the fact that hitting your DT is the number one priority. As I would expect, xxx administration maintains that quality(one of the founding principles) is their number on priority no matter what the DT. The problem here is, through no fault of their own, xxx is unaware of the impact that higher DTs have on young managers interest in quality.
In an insert from a xxx field manual called Manager Success Model, the contradiction is blatantly obvious. On one side of the sheet points are given for quality, profit and volume. (see Appendix C) The points awarded at the star level are twice as much(twice as significant) as both profit and volume which are equal in points. However, on the other side of the sheet the exact wording is xxx and your General Manager will deem your summer a success provided that you hit your sales target, make between $6,000 and $10,000 and deliver quality service to your customers In my opinion the order of the latter is more indicative of the true culture. There are three factors that undermine the quality commandment. 1) When a manager hits his DT he pays less royalty on each job produced thereafter.
2) The general managers who .