Case Study Resources

Downloading Archived (ZIP) Files

In order to prevent long periods of Internet connect time, many people like to download files for off-line viewing, studying, and printing. Accordingly, the files for this Case Study are available for downloading and installation. While the total space required for the full complement of files is approximately 20.5 Mb, many of the download files are compressed (i.e., smaller). Unfortunately, included in the case study data are numerous and rather large image files that -- because of their native .JPG and .GIF formats -- are already stored in a "compressed" format. For this reason, the ZIP files are also large. However, all the necessary files are conveniently stored together so that installation is easy.

During installation, the space necessary for decompressing the files is larger than the final, total file size of the case study. If you choose to download and install the single ZIP file (CET-FULL.ZIP, 19.1 Mb), you will need approximately 25Mb of available free space on the target drive. If you do not have 25Mb of free space on an available drive, you may choose to download the eight smaller ZIP files and, after "unzipping" each file, delete the .ZIP file. You will need to download all eight (8) smaller ZIP files for the complete case study. The files sizes have been kept "small" to assist with downloading via modem.

The process for downloading the files is pretty straightforward:

1. You will need to have installed on your computer an archival application such as PKZIP for Windows, WinZIP, or equivalent. Install before preceding.
   
   
2. On your computer, find approximately 25 Mb of free space on a hard drive or removable media to load and install the files.
   
   
3. Using a file manager application (e.g., Windows Explorer or "My Computer"), create a new directory called SEATEC.
   
   
4. Within the SEATEC directory, create a new subdirectory called CET.
   
   
5. Download into the SEATEC\CET directory either the CET-FULL.ZIP file or all eight (8) of the files below the blue bar. To download, simply right click your mouse on the desired hyperlink and choose the "Save this file to disk" option.
   
   

6. When you have downloaded all of the desired files, then, from within your operating system's file manager application (e.g., "My Computer", Windows Explorer, Mac Chooser, etc.) double click on each of the downloaded ZIP files to unzip or extract the individual files from the archive.
   
   
7. Once you have unzipped the file(s), you may delete the .ZIP file(s) to free up space on your hard drive.
   
   
8. You may now launch the case study by double clicking on the INDEX.HTM file on the SEATEC\CET directory.
   
   
9. If desired, you can create an application shortcut to the SEATEC\CET\INDEX.HTM file on the desktop to make launching the case study easier.
   
   

Back to top of page

Decision-Making Tools & Techniques

Problem solving process.

1. Write a problem statement to ensure that all team members agree on the problem.
2. Generate multiple solutions using the brainstorming technique.
3. Sub-problem identification using cause and effect diagrams. This step helps team members explore possible causes of events and how these events may affect any solution.
4. Choose a final solution using the multi-voting method.
5. Arrive at a solution.

Teams

1. Some of the qualities of a strong team are - Commitment, Trust, Purpose, Communication, Involvement, Personal Responsibility, Group Accountability, and a Process Orientation.
2. Typically, new teams evolve in five transition stages from "working group" to "high-performing team" as noted below. Emphasize to students that the most effective and productive teams are high-performance teams.

1. Working Group:  This is a group for which there is no significant incremental performance need or opportunity that would require it to become a team. The members interact primarily to share information, best practices, or perspectives, and to make decisions to help each individual perform within their area of responsibility. Beyond that, there is no realistic or truly desired "small group" common purpose, incremental performance goals, or joint work-products that call for either a team approach or mutual accountability.
   
   
2. Pseudo-Team:  This is a group for which there could be a significant, incremental performance need or opportunity but it has not focused on collective performance and is not really trying to achieve it. It has no interest in shaping a common purpose or set of performance goals, even though it may call itself a team. Pseudo-teams are the weakest of all groups in terms of performance impact. They almost always contribute less to company performance needs than working groups because their interactions detract from each member’s individual performance, without delivering any joint benefit. In pseudo-teams, the sum of the whole is less than the potential of the individual parts.
   
   
3. Potential Team:  This is a group for which a significant, incremental performance need exists and that is trying to improve its performance impact. Typically, however, it requires more clarity about purpose, goals, or work-products; more discipline in hammering out a common working approach, and collective accountability.
   
   
4. Real Team:  This is a small number of people with complementary skills who are equally committed to a common purpose, goal(s), and working approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. Real teams are a basic unit of performance.
   
   
5. High-Performance Team:  This is a group that meets all the conditions of real teams and has members who are also deeply committed to one another’s personal growth and success. That commitment usually transcends the team. The high-performance team significantly outperforms all other like teams and outperforms all reasonable expectations given its membership.
   
   

http://www.bham.wednet.edu/mod8team.htm

http://www.organizedchange.com/teamhome.htm

Jon R. Katzenbach & Douglas K. Smith, The Wisdom of Teams. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School, 1993.

Richard S. Wellins, William C. Byham, and Jeanne M. Wilson, Empowered Teams. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991.

Back to top of page

Brainstorming techniques

1. Collect as many ideas as possible from all participants with no criticisms or judgments made while ideas are being generated.
2. All ideas are welcome no matter how silly or far out they seem. Be creative. The more ideas, the better; at this point you don't know what might work.
3. Absolutely no discussion takes place during the brainstorming activity. Talking about the ideas will take place after brainstorming is complete.
4. Do not criticize or judge. Don't even groan, frown, or laugh. All ideas are equally valid at this point.
5. Do build on others' ideas.
6. Do write all ideas on a flipchart or board so the whole group can easily see them.
7. Set a time limit (i.e., 30 minutes) for the brainstorming session.

http://www.kanten.com/vedemo/Brainstorming.html

http://www.smartbiz.com/sbs/arts/act4.htm

http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/authoring/studio/guidebook/brain.html

http://www.jboyett.com/tools.htm

http://www.west.asu.edu/tqteam/tools/brainst.html

Back to top of page

Cause and Effect Diagrams

Using cause and effect diagrams, a team can identify causes to an effect (problem.) By doing so, solutions for correcting the problem become more apparent. See the On-line Resources section (below) for more information.

On-line Resources for Cause and Effect Diagrams

http://www.jboyett.com/tools.htm

http://www.west.asu.edu/tqteam/tools/fishbone.html

http://www.robertluttman.com/cause-effect.html

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~ogehome/CQI/Ishikawa.html

Back to top of page

Multi-Voting Method

A quick and simple method used to reach team consensus when a list of possible solutions has been generated during a brainstorming session. The process consists of a few steps.

1. Take a first vote; each person votes for as many items as desired but only once per item.
2. Circle the items receiving a relatively higher number of votes than the other items.
   (e.g.,  with a team of six members, items receiving three or more votes are circled).
3. Take a second vote; each person votes for a number of items equal to one-half the total number of circled items, again only once per item (e.g., if six items received three or more votes during the first vote, then each person gets to vote three times during the second vote).
4. Repeat step c. until the list is reduced to three solutions. These three solutions should then be further analyzed and another vote taken to rank the items from highest to lowest.

This process was adapted from
http://129.252.51.247/sealand/multivoting.htm

On-line Resources for Multi-voting Methods

http://www.west.asu.edu/tqteam/tools/multivot.html

http://www.jboyett.com/tools.htm

---

Back to top of page

---

Decision-making tools and
techniques content developed
for the SEATEC Case Study
The Case of the GUMMIs
A Multi-Media (CD) Enhanced Case Study
Prepared by Jim Barrott, Richard Seehuus, Stuart Hilton, & Tom Williams
Chattanooga State Technical Community College in Cooperation with Brachís Confections
Used with permission