Maladroit Cosmetics

Maladroit Cosmetics investment in machinery is necessary due to the obsolescence of the current equipment. The new machinery has the capability of providing a more consistent and higher quality product and increased productivity (Reinert, 2010). However, the initial success of the project and the benefits of the new machinery cannot be realized if the investment in human capital is not given the same importance as the investment in the machinery.

The Plant Manager cannot and should not implement the machinery. If she is already overloaded with responsibilities either the day to day operations of the plant or the installation of the new machinery will suffer. If the manufacturing company is responsible for installing the machinery and getting it up and ready for production and employees are disengaged, there is the potential for failure. The manufacturing company will not be involved in day to day operations, routine maintenance, issues that arise etc. The operators of the machinery are ultimately responsible for running and maintaining the equipment. The expectations of management in regards to productivity rest on the employees' shoulders. If employees do not fully understand the new technology at the time of implementation, productivity will decline and a negative perception of the new machinery will be cultivated (Smith, 2010). If the staff runs the implementation, questions, concerns and potential issues can be raised prior to implementation not after. In my opinion, the best option for Maladroit Cosmetics is option 2.

It is natural for employees to fear change, to fear the unknown. When new technology is introduced in a company, especially in the current economic climate, employees may be concerned if it will result in layoffs, or if they have the skills to operate the new machines (Baker, 1989). To value change, employees must understand why the change is being made and how it will benefit them. If employees are involved in the process they will make a bigger commitment to the transition (Marks, 2010). Studies have found that a company's investment in human capital result in lower employee turnover as well as greater productivity and financial performance (Liao, Mo, Grant, 2008).

Although the investment in the manufacturing company installing the machinery and in-house employees installing is the same, the return on the investment of having employees do the installation would be greater. Utilizing the Training Top 100 surveys from 2003-2006, Liao, Mo and Grant (2008) researched the relationship between the expense of employee training and operation costs. Taking a sample of public companies, the researchers found a "significantly positive relationship between training expenditures and both contemporaneous and future operating performance" (p. 62). This included employee productivity, machine efficiency and customer satisfaction. Additionally, they found training is necessary to a user's acceptance