Mattel Toy Recall free essay sample

Although many observers give the company credit for responding to the crisis quickly with an apology from the CEO and pledges to institute more rigorous product safety checks, Mattel still faces a number of problems, including significant costs associated with the recalls and new monitoring systems, potential lawsuits and a hit to its reputation just as the holiday shopping season gets ready to launch1. Introduction Mattel Inc. has recalled more than 20 million toys it manufactured in China, citing problems with lead paint and concerns about loose magnets that children could swallow. Mattel blames the most recent recall on a practice that may be all-too-familiar to engineers with experience manufacturing in China – namely, a vendor’s furtive change in materials or manufacturing processes2. Tom Debrowski, Mattel’s executive vice president for worldwide operations, explains that a subcontractor hired to decorate parts of the Sarge toy ran out of the paint Mattel specified for the car’s roof and windshield. We will write a custom essay sample on Mattel Toy Recall or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The subcontractor, a company called Hong Li Da (HLD), then substituted a paint that contained lead. Debrowski says HLD acted without informing Mattel or its primary vendor for the car, Early Light Industrial Co. The product safety problem may seem especially pronounced in the toy industry because it relies so heavily on Chinese production. According to the Toy Industry Assoc. , China makes about 80 percent of all toys sold in the U. S. Not all of Mattel’s recall woes can be blamed solely on Chinese manufacturing. In fact, Mattel called back 18. 2 million toys because they contain small magnets that could become loose3. Mattel is working in cooperation with the U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and other regulatory agencies worldwide. Mattel is also working with retailers worldwide to identify and remove affected products from retail shelves. Where the lead paint is concerned, it was negligent of Mattel not to have specified more concretely, and inspected more closely, what its Chinese suppliers were doing and where the magnets are concerned, it was negligent of Mattel not to have had a better design for its products4. Case presentation Mattel’s Global Manufacturing Principles (GMP) apply to all parties that manufacture, assemble, license or distribute any product or package bearing any of the Mattel logos. GMP provides guidance and minimum standards for all manufacturing plants, assembly operations and distribution centers that manufacture or distribute Mattel products. GMP requires internal and periodic independent monitoring of Mattel’s performance and its partners performance to the standards. Mattel is prepared to end partnerships with those who do not comply5. Mattel’s recall involves 83 products and was discovered by an European retailer in early June 2007. Mattel even helped the contract manufacturer blamed for the recall, due to use of lead paint, to set up its own testing laboratory, which should have guarded against the paint problem. But while Mattel follows strict labour laws at its own facilities in China, it has also followed other manufacturers in relying on dozens of other contractors and sub-contractors. With a supply chain that may contain as many as 3000 factories in China, the task of quality control, audits and inspections becomes increasingly difficult6. Cheating on the use of raw materials, exploiting workers, employing children and paying bribes to avoid safety inspections are all a consequence of markets that have seen the prices of some goods at all time low real prices7. Mattel has years of manufacturing experience there before this lead paint incident8. The company runs its own factories in China and has successfully managed dozens of vendors there over the years. Mattel already has an extensive quality assurance program (GMP) in place long before the bad paint job. That program involved mandatory quality tests by Mattel’s vendors as well as testing of in-process and finished goods by Mattel itself. The Toys delivered were clearly not the ones ordered and specified by Mattel and somehow toxic materials had found their way into the production process. To try and increase profits suppliers will often switch raw materials for something similar and cheaper and have got good at passing audits and appearing compliant without actually being compliant. In many cases, it is the supplier’s sub-contractors and the sub-sub-contractors where the switch occurs and the deeper down the supply chain the problem exists, the more difficult it is to spot. The ultimate responsibility for the product quality rests with the company that owns the brand9. Contracts between the corporations and the suppliers clearly stipulate the materials to be used and not to be used. For instance, lead-based paint for toys or azo-dyes for garments are forbidden10. The problem it seems is not with the contract but with the implementation. It is essential for Mattel to enforce stringent quality controls to catch any vendor who tries to trick them again. At the same time it is also essential for Mattel to ensure that this happens long before the products hit the market and get into the hands of consumers, especially consumers who are kids and vulnerable. Recommendations Long-term quality assurance measures: Quality assurance needs to cover all activities from design, development, production, installation, servicing and documentation as well. Product quality and safety have their roots in the design process. Mattel must screen designs for a range of safety issues long before a part goes into production. For example, they could look for strangulation and suffocation, as well as part features that could pinch, cut or poke a child much before these designs hit the production floor. Mattel needs a quality assurance process that will permit only approved raw materials to be used in the production, will check every batch of goods from the sub-contractor (and sub-sub-contractor) before it reaches the supplier, will check every production run of finished toys from its suppliers to ensure compliance before they reach its customers. Mattel also needs to increase random inspections by both internal and external auditors and quality inspectors. Mattel needs to test failure rather than test compliance, which is the practice in the rest of the toy industry11. Testing to failure has its own benefits as it reveals root causes of problems in ways that often remain hidden with compliance testing. Mattel needs to continue to invite independent and public monitoring of its manufacturing facilities12. To address the above long-term quality assurance measures, it is recommended that a cross-functional, cross-organizational and cross-geographical team be created at Mattel. This team, functioning under the leadership of Mr. Jim Walter, will lead Mattel through this crisis and ensure that all issues that have arisen from the series of product recalls are successfully addressed. Forming the team to address issues that have arisen from the series of product recalls: The team will be charged with developing and implementing of worldwide programs to underscore Mattels commitment to conducting business with the utmost integrity, and continue to enhance the companys leadership role in global citizenship. The team will enhance the already existing GMP with the addition of the above recommendations thereby functioning as an internal audit organization that will monitor Mattel and vendor facilities compliance with Mattels Product Integrity standards. The team must have representation from Mattel’s and its acquired company’s design, development, production, installation, service documentation departments, representation from Mattel’s suppliers’, sub-contractors and sub-sub-contractors as well as representation from internal and external auditors. The team will function under the leadership of Mr. Jim Walter, if feasible, or under the leadership of a suitable leader having similar experience and experience with such a product recall situation. The leader’s role must reflect a combination of a directive and participative leader behaviors proposed by House’s Path-Goal theory of leadership13. Team selection predicts team performance: Effective teams base member selection in technical and behavioural competence. A prospective team member’s area of technical expertise, perspective and interest need to be considered in the light of the project team’s scope of work. Effective teams that focus on organisation-wide issues reflect a deliberate diversity of membership across design, development, production, installation, service documentation departments of Mattel and its acquired companies, representation from Mattel’s suppliers’, sub-contractors and sub-sub-contractors as well as representation from internal and external auditors. Thoughtful selection processes correspond to high member satisfaction and commitment. Team organization and processes predict team performance: An effective team will establish and adhere to behavioural standards regarding team member roles, team practices, norms, and ground-rules. A mature group must have a social structure with several dimensions. These dimensions include group member roles, role relationships, the communication network of the group and influence patterns within the group14. Typically, effective teams designate a coordinator (who may or may not be an outsider). Typically, the team leader is an effective project manager and coach. Expectations of all roles, including that of team sponsor, are discussed and documented. An effective team will adjust roles, goals, and tasks to match individual team members’ styles and strengths. Potential strengths and weaknesses of the team: The benefit from cross-functional team interaction is the ability to bring greater knowledge and skill together at one time. Creating a team whose members have heterogeneous skills, backgrounds, and experiences increases the probability that each member can contribute the knowledge and skill required to support sourcing team assignments. Unique contributions by individual members, in turn, increase the likelihood that a team will benefit from dynamic cross-functional interaction. A cross-geographical team will ensure incorporation of the knowledge of the local market conditions in business decisions The main drawback in using a cross-functional team is the time required to solve a problem or complete an assigned task. Team interaction may not be the most efficient approach to decision making. For the cross-functional team process to be successful, a trade-off must occur between the additional time often required for team decision making (efficiency) and the ability to reach higher quality and executable decisions (effectiveness) through team interaction and consensus decision making. The other drawback with cross-functional teams is that information must take a form that all users understand, again making decisions difficult. Clarity of role and customer focus could also be issues with cross-functional and cross-geographical teams15. Team leadership and Conflict management: Conflict is inevitable while managing cross-functional, inter-organizational and cross-geographical teams. Conflicts could begin due to poor communication, power struggle; dissatisfaction with management, weak leadership, lack of openness, etc. Inter-organization conflict16 could also arise between Mattel and its vendors over quality and delivery issues. Strong public statements, airing disagreements through media and withholding bad news are the indicators of conflict. Reaching Consensus through Collaboration: The team leader could use the collaborative conflict orientation17 to reach consensus or agreement to manage team conflicts. The ability to use collaboration requires the recognition of and respect for everyones ideas, opinions, and suggestions. Consensus requires that each participant must agree on the point being discussed before it becomes a part of the decision. Not every point will meet with everyones complete approval. Unanimity is not the goal. The goal is to have individuals accept a point of view based on logic. When individuals can understand and accept the logic of a differing point of view, you can assume you have reached consensus. The following guidelines could be followed for reaching consensus: †¢Avoid arguing over individual ranking or position. Present a position as logically as possible. †¢Avoid win-lose statements. Discard the notion that someone must win. †¢Avoid changing of minds only in order to avoid conflict and to achieve harmony. Avoid majority voting, averaging, bargaining, or coin flipping. These do not lead to consensus. Treat differences of opinion as indicative of incomplete sharing of relevant information, keep asking questions. †¢Keep the attitude that holding different views is both natural and healthy to a group. †¢View initial agreement as suspect. Explore the reasons underlying appar ent agreement and make sure that members have willingly agreed. A collaborative orientation can leave the cleanest aftermath when it successfully identifies and satisfies the desires of all parties to the conflict.