How to handle deviations caused by unit interdependence: A case study at Scania CV

Title How to handle deviations caused by unit interdependence: A qualitative case study at Scania CV Grant sponsor Scania CV Södertälje Author Sara Franklin Supervisors at Scania Johan Hasselborn Global Powertrain Production, Head of Business Control Jessica Robertsson Global Purchasing, Head of Business Control & Analysis Supervisor LiU Erik Jannesson – Associate professor, Department of management and engineering Purpose The thesis purpose is to contribute with understanding about managers’ opinions about how to handle deviations caused by unit interdependence. Methodology Qualitative data has been gathered to this exploratory study by semi-structured interviews with 14 managers within the R&D, purchasing and production units at Scania, Södertälje. The result has been interpreted and analyzed by dividing the managers in five smaller groups. Result from analyzing empirical findings It is found in the analysis that the largest part of the managers in this study seem not to believe it is worth striving for excellence through procedural justice. Reoccurring similarities in opinion between managers is that visualization, dialogue, clear responsibility and less tolerance towards deviations are needed for handling and preventing deviations. Differences in opinion are primarily related to how costs occurred from deviations should be allocated and the purpose with such reallocation. Most managers express a strong concern about undesired behavior developed by a control system where a causing unit always should take the effect from a deviation. However, all managers state that costs occurred from deviations due to interdependence with a external supplier should be invoiced to the supplier. Conclusion The concern about undesired behavior that may be developed by the way of handling and preventing deviation is strongly mediated by the managers. Instead of handling deviations by justly reallocating effects according to the controllability principle it is perceived as more important to extend the areas of responsibility and increase consciousness between interdependent units through improved dialogue and cross-functional transparency. One should therefore not seek equitable allocation of impacts and cost of devices in dealing with anomalies of this type.