Exploring formal and informal controls during organizational restructuring : the case of KLM engineering and maintenance

(1)

Exploring Formal and Informal Controls

during Organizational Restructuring:

The Case of KLM Engineering & Maintenance

Sophia Reuser, Student No. 5753422 Master Thesis Business Studies University of Amsterdam

Supervisor No. 1 University of Amsterdam: Dr. Christopher Williams Supervisor No. 2 University of Amsterdam: Dr. Ir. Sander van Triest Supervisor No. 1 KLM: Drs. Sijbrand Veenstra

Supervisor No. 2 KLM: Wim van Gool 1st of June, 2010

(2)

Abstract

Organizations apply formal and informal controls in order to perform their activities and achieve their set goals. Formal controls are needed so that it is possible to measure and monitor the behavior of employees during their work. Informal controls focus on relationships and socialization within the organization. However, little research has been done on how the balance between formal and informal controls is affected during organizational restructuring. A shift in this balance during organizational restructuring can lead to tensions between these two control types. This research will explore these tensions between formal and informal controls by conducting a case study at KLM Engineering & Maintenance (KLM E&M). Qualitative data is collected through different data collection methods such as documents, direct observation, participative observation, interviews, and a group discussion. Research results indicate three tensions between formal and informal controls. These tensions concerned firstly the coordination from higher management levels towards the lower levels in the organization, secondly a lack of communication and socialization, and thirdly employee behavior and performance. Coordination is needed to monitor correct work performance and the achievement of the desired results. Communication and socialization are needed so that the exchange of knowledge and experience, the provision of feedback and goal sharing are stimulated. The results of lacking coordination, communication and socialization during organizational restructuring can be that employees might feel uncertain about the future because they are not involved, and might develop negative behavior attitudes that might decrease their performance. These tensions provide focus points for an organization’s management during restructuring and provide areas for future research.

(3)

List of Figures

Figure 1: Conceptual Model……….17

Figure 2: KLM E&M Mission, Strategy and Goals ………...20

Figure 3: KLM E&M BPM Structure……….22

Figure 4: Current KLM E&M Organization Structure………25

Figure 5: New KLM E&M Organization Structure: Process Oriented Organization………...26

List of Tables

Table 1: Characteristics of Formal and Informal Controls………..15

Table 2: KLM E&M Strategic Goals………..20

Table 3: Interview Questions………...30

Table 4: Interview Participants………...39

Table 5: Interview Results………...45

Table 6: Group Discussion Facts and Participants………...48

(4)

List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Planning Master’s Thesis Sophia Reuser………..65

Appendix 2: Interview Questions for Forms Officer……….67

Appendix 3: Interview Questions for Business Process Management contact persons………..72

Appendix 4: Interview Questions Senior Vice President of Operations………..79

(5)

Glossary

AF – KL Air France – KLM Group.

AFI Air France Industries.

ARIS Process Web KLM E&M BPM intranet application, part of the KLM E&M quality system.

Base Maintenance All the maintenance that is done on all types of aircraft, which takes place in the hangars at Schiphol East. This includes the A, C, and D checks, and can also be called ‘heavy’ maintenance.

BPM Business Process Management.

BPM contact person Business Process Management contact person; person that is responsible for the KLM E&M quality system of his or her domain.

Building 404 KLM E&M headquarters at Schiphol East

Building 411 Offices of Engine Services and Human Resources

Building 425 Offices of Component Services

Component Services KLM E&M business unit that provides logistical support by guaranteeing the availability of components within the organization and clients. Situated in building 425, the business unit has the possibility to test the avionic and hydraulic equipment. Mechanical equipment is situated in hangar 14, one of the largest hangars in Europe.

DAR Document Amendment Request

Domain Area of a main process or supportive process within KLM E&M that can be

a combination of different KLM E&M business units.

EASA European Aviation and Space Agency.

Engineering KLM E&M business unit that evaluates services bulletins that come from among others, Airbus and Boeing. They provide information on how to improve the fleet. The Engineers are responsible to implement these improvements within the maintenance processes.

Engine Services KLM E&M business unit that performs maintenance and repair of General Electric engines, parts and accessories.

FAA Federal Aviation Administration.

FO Forms Officer.

Hangar 11 Maintenance Hangar for wide-body aircraft such as Boeing types 747 and

777, McDonnell-Douglas (MD) 11 and Airbus 330.

KLM E&M KLM Engineering & Maintenance.

KLM E&M Quality System The entire system of monitoring and measuring quality related subjects within KLM E&M. This is done by performing audits and inspections frequently.

(6)

Line Maintenance Maintenance that is done at the platform, at Schiphol Airport or at one of the KLM Line Stations world wide. This is ‘light’ maintenance because it includes pre-flight checks and the required daily checks.

Line Station KLM E&M has world wide more that 50 line stations at airports where employees perform light maintenance on KLM aircraft.

Maintenance Checks on aircraft and including components that is divided in different programs: A, C, and D checks. The A check is the shortest maintenance program, and takes maximum one month to inspect the aircraft. The C and D checks are long maintenance programs, where the aircraft is out of service for at least a month. It often includes painting the entire aircraft.

MCC KLM E&M Maintenance Control Centre, the business unit that provides

technical support during flights.

MRO Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul.

Operational Management Team Team of all the process owners of the KLM E&M operational processes. These process owners also take place in the Executive Board of KLM E&M.

Purchasing The KLM E&M department that offers supportive services to the operational business units by purchasing the needed equipment.

QA Department of Quality & Safety at KLM E&M.

Quality Assurance Manager Leader of a team of Quality Engineers who represent a business unit at KLM E&M and part of the QA management team.

Quality Engineer Member of the QA department. A Quality Engineer performs audits, monitors the KLM E&M quality system.

Schiphol East Location of KLM E&M headquarters and hangars.

SVP of Operations Senior Vice President of Operations; end responsible person for the operational processes within KLM E&M, which are maintenance, repair and overhaul of Components, Engines, and Aircraft and Engineering. Is a member of the executive board of KLM E&M.

(7)

1. Introduction

An organization needs control to be able to measure and/or monitor whether it is achieving its goals and whether its employees are behaving in ways that are conforming to their roles (Selznick, 1948; Litwak & Meyer, 1966; Schollhammer, 1971; Ouchi and Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977; 1979; 1980; Eisenhardt, 1985; Ferner, 2000; Johnson, Scholes & Whittington, 2006). An organization can be seen as a system that is built of relationships between people who in a certain way cooperate with each other and/or are mutual dependent to each other in order to perform effective and efficient and to achieve the organization’s strategic goals (Selznick, 1948; Johnson et al, 2006).

Litwak & Meyer (1966), Ouchi (1977; 1979), Eisenhardt (1985), Nonaka (1994), and Ferner (2000) argue that within an organization formal controls and informal controls are integrated and complement each other. Formal controls in terms of standardization of behavior and/or results are very important in organizations where work processes are concerned with satisfying governmental standards on quality and safety. At the same time, these organizations strive to meet high levels of effectivity and efficiency to save costs (Schollhammer, 1971; Ouchi, 1977; 1979; Eisenhardt, 1985; Ferner, 2000; Seeliger, Awalegaonkar & Hunter, 2006; Ward, McDonald, Morrison, Gaynor & Nugent, 2010). Informal controls can enable cooperation and exchange of information and experiences which can lead to sharing goals and ideas, which can contribute in improving organizational processes (Nonaka, 1994). However, little research has been done on how the balance between formal and informal controls in an organization can be affected as a result of restructuring, which might lead to possible tensions between the two control types. The purpose of this research is to explore tensions between formal and informal controls that arise during organizational restructuring. This has led to the following research question:

How do formal and informal controls manifest themselves at times of organizational restructuring?

Within the airline industry, processes regarding the maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) of aircraft, have to be performed conforming set standards by international aviation authorities

(9)

and government. MRO organizations strive to standardize these processes in a way that they become efficient and effective, so that quality and safety is maintained of both employees and passengers, and to hold a competitive position in the MRO industry (Seeliger et al, 2006; Ward et al, 2010). KLM Engineering & Maintenance (KLM E&M), the technical division of KLM, is currently restructuring towards a process-oriented organization. The emphasis will become more on the four main processes, which are the maintenance, repair and overhaul of aircraft, engines and components and engineering. Other processes such as the provision of documentation support these main processes by making use of forms. The organization makes use of forms to document process results and communicate in an efficient and standardized way, next to it being obligatory by the international authorities (KLM E&M, 2009). Resulting from the organizational restructuring, the management of the forms administration has become a point of discussion. Issues that occur are that there exists a lack of clarity about the different roles and responsibilities of people that are involved with forms and who must be responsible for the management of the forms administration. Furthermore, there is no official forms policy, which might lead to employees interpreting and using forms in different ways and possibly a lack of awareness about the importance of forms at KLM E&M.

The research will be an exploratory case study at KLM E&M. By reviewing existing literature on formal and informal controls there will be explored whether there are possible tensions between these two control types during organizational restructuring. The collection of qualitative data will be the result of performing a document study, observations, conducting interviews and organizing a group discussion. By making use of various data collection methods, the findings can complement each other, which will enhance the level of validity and reliability (Yin, 2004). The research results will aim to describe the tensions between formal and informal controls within the organization during restructuring. Furthermore, these tensions will be discussed with the literature and will present managerial implications. These are tensions concerning coordination, communication and socialization, and the behavior and performance of employees. In addition, areas for future research will be provided.

The structure of this thesis will be as follows. In the following section, a theoretical framework will provide previous research on formal and informal controls and critiques on these theories by presenting tensions between these within an organization. The third section will describe the research method of an exploratory single case study by explaining how data will be collected and analyzed. Furthermore, the research context will be described, which is

(10)

the organization of KLM E&M. The research results will be presented in the fourth section. In the fifth section, the research results will be discussed with the theoretical background and will provide managerial implications, limitations of this research and suggestions for future research. The following section will provide the theoretical framework on formal and informal controls.

(11)

2. Theoretical Background

This section will provide theoretical background on control in organizations. The major focus of the theory will be on formal and informal controls and themes that are of major importance within these two control types. Furthermore, tensions between formal and informal controls will be explored and summarized in a conceptual framework. The section will be structured as follows. The first paragraph will describe the essence of control in organizations. The second paragraph will provide background on formal controls, and the third paragraph about informal controls. The fourth paragraph will provide a summary and the conceptual framework.

2.1 Organizational Control

Organizations are structures in where processes and activities are performed in order to achieve strategic goals, which were set in advance (Selznick, 1948; Johnson et al, 2006). Organizational processes can be seen as sets of activities that are performed in an order so that the desired output is achieved (Connor & Becker, 1975; Teece, Pisano & Shuen, 1997). Selznick (1948) emphasizes the importance of people that perform the processes in an organization in his paper on the foundation of organizational theory: “an organization is the arrangement of personnel for facilitating the accomplishment of some agreed purpose through the allocation of functions and responsibilities” (1948, p. 25). Blau & Scott (1962) and Ouchi (1980) share this definition in the sense that they speak of an organization being a collect of individuals who are performing activities that will result in achievement of shared goals. To be able to control and monitor in how far a strategy is implemented and goals are achieved, an organization develops plans and processes (Johnson et al, 2006). Organizational processes can be seen as “the controls on the organization's operations”, which can either contribute or hinder execution of the organization’s strategy, and shape the organization’s “control management” system (Ouchi and Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977; Eisenhardt, 1985; Ferner, 2000; Johnson et al, 2006, p. 410). For an organization thus to achieve its goals, it can develop a control management system or control system, in where processes are performed by people that fulfil a certain role. Ouchi (1977) argues that an organization’s control

(12)

management system or control system consists of two interrelated parts, also called the “organizational design” (Ouchi, 1977, p. 96; Eisenhardt, 1985). These interrelated parts are a set of conditions that determines in what way the control is used, and the control system itself, which is shaped by the conditions.

Research on control strategies over the past decades has discussed different types of control, but can be divided in two major categories: formal and informal control systems. Studies that have been done on formal control systems have focussed on the predefinition of processes and activities and/or the results of these processes and activities (Selznick, 1948; Litwak & Meyer, 1966; Blau, 1970; Schollhammer, 1971; Ouchi and Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977; 1979; 1980; Eisenhardt, 1985). Research on informal control systems has laid the emphasis on the organization being a social group where there is a high degree of communication and cooperation among employees (Litwak & Meyer, 1966; Ouchi 1975; 1977; 1979; Eisenhardt, 1985, p. 135; O’Reilly, 1989; Nohria & Ghoshal, 1994; Ferner, 2000). The following paragraphs will describe in more depth the characteristics of formal and informal control.

2.2 Formal Controls

An organization applies formal controls to ensure that it achieves a high degree of efficiency by rationally structuring the organizational processes and activities and the ability to coordinate the performance and outcome of the processes and activities (Selznick, 1948; Ouchi & Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977; 1979; Benner & Tushman, 2002). Characteristics of formal control in an organization are centralized decision-making and the monitoring and/or measuring of performance (Ouchi & Maguire, 1975). As a result of formalizing its processes, an organization can achieve a high degree of efficiency because the focus is on a high degree of standardization and rationalization of either behavior and/or outputs (Ouchi & Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977; Eisenhardt, 1985; Teece et al, 1997; Benner & Tushman, 2002). Furthermore, the organization can focus on continuous improvement because it can measure and monitor its progress during the performance of processes and activities and evaluate the outcomes of them (Ouchi & Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977; Eisenhardt, 1985). In addition, standardization of task performance and/or output makes processes and activities for supervising people more transparent and traceable (Ouchi & Maguire, 1975).

(13)

An organization can decide to formalize the way in which processes and activities are performed by applying a set of rules which lead to the desired results when applied correctly. Furthermore, it is possible to measure and/or monitor whether employees are behaving conforming to these rules (Thompson, 1967; Ouchi, 1977; 1979; Eisenhardt, 1985). Another way of formal control is to define clear quantifiable and simple goals, but the way in which these goals are achieved is less important (Thompson, 1967; Ouchi & Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1979; Eisenhardt, 1985). Formal control can thus take place in three ways. This can be either the standardization of behavior or the standardization of output or standardization of both behavior and output (Eisenhardt, 1985).

Ouchi (1979) and Ferner (2000) argue that a formal organization applies rules to standardize the performance of activities. A rule can be defined as “an arbitrary standard against which a comparison is yet to be made” (Ouchi, 1979, p. 835-6). In other words, a rule can only be applied when it can be measured whether that rule leads to a desired outcome, or whether the performed behavior has resulted in the desired outcome (Ouchi, 1979). Ferner (2000) adds that a bureaucratic organization has developed a “central organized framework” that consists of formalized standards for performance of tasks or results (2000, p. 522). Furthermore, it seems that the definition of a process by Teese et al (1997) and Johnson et al (2006) shows certain formal characteristics as described by Ouchi (1979) and Ferner (2000). Characteristics of both a process and formal control are that rules are applied, which makes behavior standardized and enhances the chance to achieve a desired outcome.

A formal control system can be preferred when large groups of people that perform similar tasks need to be coordinated. Setting clear goals or standards in advance can then be more efficient and managers have to spend less time on supervising their subordinates (Litwak & Meyer, 1966; Ouchi & Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977). Another reason to prefer formal control in an organization is that employees become experienced in performing their tasks because they perform them routinely (Litwak & Meyer, 1966; Ouchi & Maguire, 1975). The decision on applying formal control will be based on whether tasks are based on routines and thus are standardized. This also makes them traceable for someone in a higher organizational level (Ouchi & Maguire, 1975).

(14)

2.3 Informal Controls

An organization that does not have predefined sets of rules and standards, and does not have clear task descriptions which makes it possible to measure or monitor the progress of performance and results, relies heavily on a high degree of informal and social processes. This type of organization can be characterized as a ‘clan’, ‘people based organization’ or ‘social group’ (Litwak & Meyer, 1966; Ouchi, 1979, p. 836; Eisenhardt, 1985, p. 135; Ferner, 2000). Characteristics of these organizations are that they have a high degree of cooperation and communication among employees. As employees feel dedicated to the organization and become “socialized” into the organization, their goals become integrated with each other and with those of the organization which enhances motivation and mutual interdependence to achieve the desired result (Parsons, 1956; Abegglen, 1958; Etzioni, 1965; Dore, 1973; Nakane, 1973; Ouchi, 1977; 1980; Eisenhardt, 1985; Ferner, 2000; Chu, 2001). This enhances cooperation and communication and can result in an organizational environment with an emphasis on learning within the organization because experiences are shared (Ouchi, 1979; Eisenhardt, 1985; Nohria & Ghoshal, 1994; Nonaka, 1994). The need for coordination reduces as a result of the individual’s goals becoming integrated with the organization’s goals. This will create a positive attitude among employees towards the organization that might motivate them to work hard in order to achieve high performance (Parsons, 1956; Etzioni, 1965; Posner, Kouzes & Schmidt 1985; Chu, 2001). Polanyi (1966), Bateson (1973), Johnson-Laird (1983), and Nonaka (1994) argue that communication enables the exchange of tacit knowledge, which is knowledge that is created as a result of experience and skills, and the way in how people interpret the environment. Furthermore, an organization in where informal controls are dominating can easily adapt to changes because of the flexible character of the employees (Litwak & Meyer, 1966). A summary of the main characteristics of formal and informal controls is given in table 1.

(15)

Table 1. Characteristics of Formal and Informal Controls

Characteristic Formal Control Informal Control

Monitoring and Measuring Performance and

Behavior High Low

Standardization High Low

Descriptions of Tasks and Roles High Low

Control and Coordination High Low

Relationships and Socialization Low High

Cooperation Low High

Exchange of Knowledge and Experiences Low High

Sharing Goals Low High

Sources: Selznick, 1948; Parsons, 1956; Abegglen, 1958; Etzioni, 1965; Litwak & Meyer, 1966; Thompson, 1967; Dore, 1973; Nakane, 1973; Ouchi & Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977; 1979; 1980; Eisenhardt, 1985; Nonaka, 1994; Ferner, 2000; Chu, 2001; Benner & Tushman, 2002.

2.4 Tensions between Formal and Informal Controls During Times of Organizational Restructuring

Previous research has described characteristics of formal and informal controls. However, for an organization it seems almost impossible to apply only formal or informal controls. Ouchi (1979) for example argues that too much focus on formal controls might negatively influence performance. Ouchi (1977; 1979) and Eisenhardt (1985) argue that organizations seek to find a balance between formal and informal controls because both are related with each other. Litwak & Meyer (1966) and Ferner (2000) state that even the most formalized organizations need informal characteristics such as “relationships, knowledge and a flexible attitude” because formal characteristics need to be complemented by these informal controls in order to achieve their goals in an efficient way (2000, p. 522). Schollhammer (1971) adds that exercising formal control needs to be done by communication. Unclear communication can be the effect of the business units not being situated on the same location and the different requirements of information that every business unit can have (Schollhammer, 1971). Schollhammer (1971) concluded that relatively large organizations do prefer to standardize

(16)

communication by having a reporting system, when this communication takes place frequently. Communication that does not take place frequently but is more randomly cannot be standardized. Having communication standardized can make it easier for business units that are located on different places and where people work that don’t know each other to exchange information (Schollhammer, 1971).

In a large organization with various business units, formal control can be preferred above informal controls because it can be more efficient (Ouchi, 1977, p. 99; 1979; Ward et al, 2010). Litwak & Meyer (1966) argue that a disadvantage of informal control is that it is difficult to exercise control over a large group of people, and that it lacks expertise. Control in large organizations is distributed over more hierarchical levels, both horizontally and vertically. However, centralized formal controls can be difficult when every business unit has its own specialization, which leads to a high degree of internalization of goals within the units, but diversification across the business units (Ouchi, 1977, p. 99; 1979; Ward et al, 2010). Giving employees the opportunity to decide how they will contribute in achieving the organizational goals and making them mutual dependent to each other would then be more appropriate (Ouchi & Maguire, 1975; Ouchi, 1977). More emphasis on informal controls will increase the sharing of organizational values across employees, which will ‘reduce the risk of opportunistic behavior’ (Nohria & Ghoshal, 1994, p. 491-2). Critique by Simon (1945) and Ouchi (1980) on goal sharing as an informal control which can affect cooperation is that individuals have their own interpretation of the organizational goals, and that goal sharing occurs because individuals possibly have “overlapping goals” (Barnard, 1939; Ouchi, 1980, p. 130, Chu, 2001, p. 86). Furthermore, individuals also have created their own personal goals, which they bring with them as they enter the organization (Selznick, 1948). However, Nonaka (1994) argues that the ideas that individuals bring into the organization add in creation of new knowledge, because routine tasks that result from formal controls do not allow this.

During times of organizational restructuring, an organization strives to “increase efficiency and effectiveness of management teams through significant changes in the organizational structure” (Bowman & Singh, 1993, p. 6). However, a consequence of organizational restructuring is that existing routines that employees have to perform their activities are eliminated and new routines are introduced of which the employees have to get used to (Amburgey, Kelly & Barnett, 1990; Bowman & Singh, 1993). Furthermore, existing relationships that employees have developed between each other as a result of frequent

(17)

contact during work processes can be disturbed (Anderson, 1991; Bowman & Singh, 1993). A result of organizational restructuring thus can be that the balance between formal and informal controls changes. This might lead to the rise of tensions between formal and informal controls, as a result of the reaction of the employees on organizational restructuring. An organization is based on a combination of formal and informal controls, which are managed in the way that is best within the organization’s context (Nohria & Ghoshal, 1994). These arguments lead me to pose the following conceptual model that is given in figure 1.

Figure 1. Conceptual Model

Formal Controls Informal Controls Organizational Performance Tensions Organizational Restructuring

(18)

3. Method

This section will describe how the research will be conducted. The research method of a single case study has been chosen because the research is conducted during an internship at KLM E&M. The first paragraph of this chapter will describe this research method and in how far a case study is valid and reliable in academic research. The second paragraph will describe the case organization. In the third paragraph, the data collection methods and analysis will be described.

3.1 Case Study Approach

A case study can be described as the study of “a phenomenon of some sort occurring in a bounded context” (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 25). Within this research, a case study is useful because “it can contribute to knowledge of organizational phenomena” (Yin, 2004, p. 1). It allows focusing on contemporary events because the research is conducted in a real-life situation, which is in this case at KLM E&M (Yin, 2004). Characteristics of a case study are the local, temporal and social factors; the case is located within an organization, the phenomena that take place at that moment will be part of the research, and there will be key players involved in the research (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Furthermore, a single case is “the stuff of much qualitative research and can be very vivid and illuminating” (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 26). A case study is preferred in this research is because of the absence of the possibility to manipulate the relevant organizational behavior (Yin, 2004). Furthermore, the case study has an exploratory character, and thus will not provide significant outcomes (Yin, 2004). However, the research results will provide areas for future research. The following paragraphs will describe the case organization, which is KLM E&M. Furthermore, the data collection methods and analysis will be described.

(19)

3.2 Case Description: KLM Engineering & Maintenance

This paragraph will introduce the context of the case study, which is KLM E&M. KLM E&M is the technical division of KLM and is located at Schiphol East. It is one of the five engineering and maintenance facilities of the Air France – KLM Group (AF – KL). The AF-KL exists since the merger of the two airlines in 2004. At the moment, AF-AF-KL is “leading in the airline business” (KLM, 2009). The AF-KL strategy is stated as “one Group, two Airlines, and three Core Businesses” (KLM, 2009). The three core businesses are the transport of passengers, cargo and aircraft maintenance. The aircraft maintenance core business consists of KLM E&M and Air France Industries (AFI) and is one of the largest MRO organizations in the world. The mission of KLM E&M is “Safety, Involvement, and Reliability”. The organization has set seven strategic goals to achieve higher performance and maintain their reputation and competitive position (KLM, 2009). Within the organization, the focus is continuously on the revision of its processes and procedures to maintain the achievement of high performance, efficiency and quality and of course safety of its product and service. An overview of the KLM E&M mission, strategy and goals is given in the figure 2. The organization’s strategic goals are described in table 2.

(20)

Figure 2. KLM E&M Mission, Strategy and Goals

(21)

Table 2. KLM E&M Strategic Goals

Strategic Goal Description

Leadership in safety Safety is the top priority in product, services and for the employees.

Operational excellence Driving continuous improvement and stabilizing operational performance.

A good place to work

Active participation of employees to feel emotional attached to the organization by creating possibilities for self development, and strive towards effective collaboration.

Build good relations Being a transparent organization and create commitment with internal and external customers.

Focus on unit costs and profitability Achieve a high level of efficiency and keep costs as low as possible.

Optimal cooperation Become one organization with AFI to create a strong position in the MRO market.

Future capabilities Invest in new capabilities for new products. Source: KLM E&M, 2009

The current organization structure of KLM E&M consists of eight operational domains and eight supportive domains (KLM E&M, 2009). Each domain is organized through applying a “Business Process Management” (BPM) structure. Within a domain, different roles represent the different organizational levels. The domain owner (domein eigenaar) is the end responsible person of all processes and activities that are performed within his domain. He is responsible for applying the organization’s strategy within his domain by defining a policy, the roles, the organization, and the processes. The domain owner has to assure the internal coherence and achievement of the organizational goals by performing process reviews continuously in the sense that they are executed efficiently. Furthermore, he is responsible for implementing changes and/or adjustments. The process owner (process eigenaar) coordinates a process within a domain. He is responsible for translating the goals of the domain to the goals of his own process. Furthermore, he assures that the process is structured efficiently and that it meets the requirements of international authorities and that of the customers. This includes keeping the documentation that is used in that process adequate and up to date. Process owners are required to achieve a consensus on KLM E&M processes that concern more than one domain. The process owner frequently accords with the BPM contact person about new projects and changes in procedures. The process manager (proces manager) coordinates the execution of the process within the unit. He is responsible for reviewing the process periodically. When there is a demand for change within a process, he checks what the effects could be on other activities or processes and presents the request for a change at the

(22)

process owner. Furthermore, he is responsible for communicating the changes of processes and activities within his own unit. The BPM contact person (BPM aanspreekpunt) acts as a contact person within a domain. He calendars and administers changes in organizational data of KLM E&M, of which among others are the forms and Work Place Instructions (WPIs)1. A WPI is a detailed instruction on how an employee must perform an activity or a task within a process. The role of the BPM contact person is to maintain the adequacy of the quality system within his domain, so that work is performed guarantying safety internally and externally, in an efficient and effective way. The ARIS modeller (modelleur) implements changes in the ARIS Process Web (ARIS) and is responsible for the correct functioning of ARIS. The Business Architect guards the principles and structure of BPM within KLM E&M (KLM E&M, 2009). An overview of the BPM structure is given in figure 3.

Figure 3. KLM E&M BPM Structure

Source: KLM E&M, 2009

1

WPIs are documents that describe how a person has to perform his or her task. There are more than 1800 WPIs within KLM E&M. The reason for having a big amount of WPIs is because the majority of the tasks are performed on aircrafts, components and engines, often using hazardous liquids. Next to the fact that international authorities require it, KLM E&M strives to maintain a high level of safety at work and for the passengers. By describing in detail how a task has to be performed and what type of documentation is needed, KLM E&M shows a certain level of transparency in their working method. The WPIs can be found on ARIS, and often refer to forms that have to be used when carrying out an activity (KLM E&M, 2009).

(23)

One of the KLM E&M domains focuses on quality and safety (QA) for both for its employees and its customers by applying a quality system throughout the organization, training and certification of maintenance staff, and performing internal audits frequently. This quality system contains all the information and documentation about the processes that are performed within KLM E&M, like governmental standards and requirements, WPIs, and forms (KLM E&M, 2009). By performing audits, the quality engineers examine whether the organization is following international standards and so that the recognition as an MRO organization is maintained. These audits are held both for KLM E&M their self and their customers, at their main location at Schiphol East and on location at about 60 line stations all over the world. QA continuously seeks to improve processes within KLM E&M by striving to optimize internal processes and to maintain safety for its employees and the customers (KLM E&M, 2010). They do this by providing high-level support to the other KLM E&M business units (KLM E&M, 2009).

Part of the QA department is the forms management and administration. In this administration, all the KLM E&M digital and hardcopy forms are kept and listen in an Excel spreadsheet to be able to provide overview of the existing forms within the organization. KLM E&M makes use of three types of forms. The first type of forms is obligatory by the international aviation authorities like the FAA and EASA (EASA, 2009; FAA, 2009). These forms have to be filled in when any work is performed that is directly related to an aircraft or a component. These types of forms are ‘Maintenance Records’ (MR) and these forms show what, when and by whom a job on an aircraft or a component is performed. The two other types of forms that are used within KLM E&M are ‘Process Related’ (PR) and ‘Quality Registrations’ (KR). These forms are for internal KLM E&M use, to assure that work is standardized and to exchange information with employees that work in other shifts, perform other activities in that process, and/or are on other locations (KLM E&M, 2010). A Forms Officer (FO) is responsible for keeping the administration and handles requests that come from BPM contact persons from the KLM E&M domains. KLM E&M strives to an up-to-date and adequate forms management and administration. This means that the forms that are in the administration and used within the organization must contribute to achieving high quality of work processes. The current forms administration contains 632 forms (KLM E&M, 2009).

At the moment, the management of KLM E&M is focussing on restructuring towards a process-oriented organization. Processes are currently being reviewed, restructured and

(24)

optimized where needed, and the aim is to reorganize the organization from eight to four main operational processes. These four processes are “Aircraft”, which concerns Hangar and Line Maintenance, “Engine”, which concerns all processes that embrace the maintenance and repair of aircraft engines, “Component”, which embraces all processes concerning the maintenance and repair of all aircraft components from tires to cockpit equipment, and “Engineering”, embracing all technical support during flights and within the maintenance, repair and overhaul of aircraft. The management will focus more strongly on defining the strategic goals, finance, agreements & certificates and an integrated management system for the entire organization. The eight staff and support domains will be restructured into seven staff and support domains and will be renamed as follows: Material Resources, Procurement, Operational Logistics, the provision of Facilities, Tools & Equipment, the provision of Documentation, Human Resources and Information Management. Each of these processes will have a process owner as the end responsible person who also participates in the Executive Board of KLM E&M and the Operational Management Team. Process managers will be responsible for coordinating the execution of the processes within the main process. Furthermore, Key Process Indicators (KPIs) will be introduced and agreed on, which makes it possible to monitor and measure process performance (KLM E&M, 2010). A schematic overview of the current KLM E&M organization is given in figure 4 on page 25. The new KLM E&M organization structure is presented in figure 5 on page 26. The orange rectangle represents the restructured processes that are going to be supportive to the main operational processes, which are presented in the light blue rectangles. The data collection methods and analysis will be described in the following paragraphs.

(25)

Figure 4. Current KLM E&M Organization Structure

(26)

Figure 5. New KLM E&M Organization Structure: Process Oriented Organization Restructured Supportive Processes Material Resources Procurement Operational Logistics Facilities, Tools & Equipment

Documentation Human Resources Information Management

Maintenance _Component _Engineering _Engine

(27)

3.3 Data Collection and Analysis

The following paragraphs will describe how and what type of data will be collected to perform the research, and how the data will be used for the analysis. The collected data will be qualitative because it can serve as “a source of well-grounded, rich descriptions and explanations of processes in identifiable local contexts” (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 1). Within a single exploratory case study, it is difficult to set up a clear research plan prior to conducting the research. Furthermore, it could affect the data collection in the sense that important aspects will not be taken into account, because the essence of qualitative research is that it are the specific characteristics of the data that shape the context (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The reason for not setting up a clearly defined research plan is because parameters and dynamics of the setting are unknown before starting the research (Miles & Huberman, 1994). A research is reliable when the collected data is representative for the organization. Reliability and validity can be increased by collecting data from different resources and by applying different data collection methods and comparing them, which is called “triangulation” (Denzin, 1978; Jick, 1979; Yin, 2004). Yin (2004) describes six data collection methods that can be applied in a case study research. These are “documentation studies, archival records, interviews, direct observation, participant observation, and physical artefacts” (Yin, 2004, p. 83). The data collection methods that are used in this research are documentation study, direct observation, participant observation, interviews, and a group discussion. This will be done as detailed as possible so that the research will be generalizable and possible for another person to conduct the research and collect the same data. Furthermore, data that is collected from documents and observations can help in developing interview questions that cover relevant subjects within the case that are related to the theoretical framework. This will enhance the construct validity of the research (Yin, 2004). The external validity in this case study will probably be small, because the research is conducted within one organization, which might result into collecting firm-specific data. A research that is externally valid can also be conducted in other organizations, with other persons and in another time period (Blumberg, Cooper & Schindler, 2005). First of all, the different data collection methods will be described.

(28)

3.3.1 Document Study

The first data collection method will be a document study of available documents at the department of the QA forms administration. This will give a broader insight on the actual situation within the forms administration. Available documentation resources are ARIS, the Excel spreadsheet “TDfrms” in where all the forms are listed, and the “Form Standard”. The data collected from the document study will contribute in developing the interview questions.

The KLM E&M quality system is registered in ARIS. ARIS is the short name for “Architecture for Integrated Information Systems” and is a digital application that is accessible for all the KLM E&M employees through the organization’s intranet. The entire organization structure can be found in this application, next to information and requirements for the organization’s processes and needed documents. This consists of process descriptions on different organizational levels, internal and regulatory standards, work instructions, forms, and organization charts (KLM E&M, 2009). The TDfrms spreadsheet contains information about all the KLM E&M forms, like for example the domain in which they are used, when they were introduced in the organization, and what type of form it is. The Form Standard contains the guidelines for introducing a new form and gives the definition of a KLM E&M form.

3.3.2 Direct Observation

The ability to visit the site of KLM E&M during the internship creates the opportunity for direct observation. It will give an overall impression of the KLM E&M organization and its work processes. The main goal of these observations is to get more insight in the daily functioning of the organization and the setting. The observations will be presented in the results section as anecdotes.

3.3.3 Participant Observation

During the internship it will also be possible to do participant observation. Being treated as a member of the organization with an own KLM pass, a desk with personal computer at the headquarters of KLM E&M and access to the intranet will be possible during the research Participant observation will be useful in getting to know the daily routines of the employees and get an impression of the atmosphere at the QA department. This type of observation

(29)

differs from direct observation, because during participant observation, I will focus on the FO’s work processes.

3.3.4 Interviews

The interviews that are conducted in this research are qualitative. Qualitative interviews are interviews with open-ended questions. The reason for conducting qualitative interviews is to collect and create understanding of the respondent’s opinions (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2007). By using open-ended questions, it is possible to ask the respondents about their opinions and current events within the organization (Yin, 2004, p. 90). People that will be interviewed are the FO, the BPM contact persons and the Senior Vice President (SVP) of Operations. Furthermore, the FO also functions as informant in this research, because he is available during the research and he has general knowledge about the documentation process at KLM E&M. The reason for interviewing the BPM contact persons is because they are key players in the management of the KLM E&M quality system and are thus directly involved in the forms process and administration. The SVP of Operations will be approached with the initiative to collect information about the strategic contribution of documentation within operational processes at KLM E&M. The SVP of Operations is the end responsible person for the execution of the KLM E&M operational processes and is indirectly involved in the forms process and administration. The interview questions will be developed resulting from the knowledge about the forms management and administration that was collected during the documentation study.

Prior to conducting the interviews, all of the respondents will receive a letter in which they will be informed about the purpose of the research and what their added value could be when they would participate in the interview, which will take approximately one hour and a half to two hours. In the letter, the respondents will also be asked whether they would allow the interview to be recorded on a voice recorder. This letter will be sent by email about three weeks before the first interview with one of the BPM contact persons is planned. A week before the first interview takes place, all the interview participants will receive the interview questions so that they are able to prepare. The location of the interviews will be the office of the respondent. After recording the interviews, which will be held in Dutch, they will be transcribed completely. The key interview questions are listed in table 3. An overview of the complete interviews is added in appendices 2, 3, and 4.

(30)

Table 3. Interview Questions

No. Question Characteristic Control Type

1 Why does KLM E&M keep a forms administration? Monitoring and Measuring Performance and

Behavior Formal

2 What is the relation between the forms management and administration and the strategic goals of KLM E&M?

Behavior Formal

3 What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of the forms management and administration of KLM E&M?

Can enhance all characteristics, is derived

from interview results Formal and Informal

5 Can you describe your role within the forms process & administration? (tasks &

responsibilities?) Descriptions of Tasks and Roles Formal

6 How can the forms process be described (one-way, two-way, …..)? Is there room for interaction between you/unit employees/FO/others?

Standardization & Control and Coordination

& Relationships and Socialization Formal and Informal

7 Do other people need to be involved in this process? Who and why? Exchange of Knowledge and Experiences Informal

8

Is there room for feedback when a new form is introduced (between you and the FO)? How is this feedback managed? In how far is this feedback applied in the forms process?

Relationships and Socialization Informal

9 In how far are there standardized processes within the forms management and

administration? Standardization Formal

10 Are you aware of the fact that every form within KLM E&M needs to fulfill a certain

‘forms standard’? How is this checked? Standardization & Control and Coordination Formal

11 What are from your perspective the tasks and responsibilities of the FO? Descriptions of Tasks and Roles Formal and Informal

14 Do you think more coordination is needed? From which side? Control and Coordination Formal

17 Would more integration between the BPMs stimulate higher performance within the forms process?

Exchange of Knowledge and Experiences &

Relationships and Socialization Informal

18 How can employees feel more responsible for keeping the forms administration up to date?

(31)

3.3.5 Group discussion

After conducting all the interviews, the respondents will be invited to join in a group discussion where the interview results will be discussed in an interactive session of two hours to discuss remarkable findings or tensions between formal and informal controls that occurred in the interviews. Bronfenbrenner (1976) and Miles & Huberman (1994) argue that presenting findings to the research participants might lead to a high level of validity. The interview results will be summarized in discussion points and will be mailed to the respondents a week before the date of the group discussion, so that they have the possibility to prepare their arguments for the discussion. Like the interviews, the group discussion will be completely recorded and transcribed to be able to hear the discussion back in detail.

3.4 Triangulation

In order to assure that the collected data is valid and representative for the case study, the data will be triangulated. Miles & Huberman (1994) state that there are different types of triangulation. Data can be triangulated by data source, by method or by researcher (Miles & Huberman, 1994). In this research, the data will be triangulated by method of data collection, as a result of the availability to collect data in different ways. Furthermore, Miles & Huberman (1994) state that collected data can be divided in ‘stronger data’ and ‘weaker data’ (1994, p. 268). They give some factors that can add in collecting stronger data from interviews. These are conducting the interviews in an informal setting, being trusted by the respondents, and the absence of other people during the interview. Not being trusted by the respondents and the presence of other people during the interview can weaken the data. However, Miles & Huberman (1994) also state that these factors do not stand for every data collection.

Miles & Huberman (1994) explain how data that is collected from different cases can be analyzed and presented in a case-ordered matrix. This provides clarity of the research results. As this research is a single case study, the data will not be ordered by case but per data collection method. In this way the findings from the different data collection methods can be compared and contrasted with each other (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Characteristics of

(32)

formal and informal controls will be found by going through the content of the collected data. Tensions between formal and informal controls are formulated in discussion points for the group discussion to collect stronger data. The next section will provide the research results.

(33)

4. Results

This section will provide the results from the document study, the observations, the interviews and the group discussion.

4.1 Document Study

The results of the document study will be presented in this paragraph. Firstly, the general use of forms in MRO organizations will be described to get familiar with the reason for the existence of a forms administration at KLM E&M. Secondly, the current forms process will be described.

4.1.1 Use of Forms in MRO Organizations

The international aviation authorities require MRO companies to provide an overview or sample of the documents that are used within MRO activities. This overview must be added in the Maintenance Organization Exposition (MOE). The MOE contains all the rules and regulations that are predefined by the EASA and FAA and is part of the KLM E&M quality system. The MOE is available for KLM E&M employees on the intranet and is updated frequently (KLM E&M, 2009). Part of keeping the MOE up to date is that the forms administration is also up to date. Resulting from a finding during an FAA audit in the late 1990s, KLM E&M introduced the FO. This finding was that the organization’s documentation was not meeting the international required standards, which could have lead to loosing their recognition as MRO organization (KLM E&M, 1996). The FO keeps the forms in the administration and handles requests that come from the BPM contact persons from every KLM E&M domain. Having an FO and BPM contact persons from the domains that can contact the FO concerning requests about forms has contributed in the forms administration of KLM E&M fulfilling the requirements of the international aviation authorities (KLM E&M, 2009). However, an article that was published recently on the front page of the organization’s HR bulletin “ADREM” explained that it is unclear for KLM E&M employees which forms they have to use (KLM E&M, 2010). The article explained that there are so many forms

(34)

within the organization, which makes it difficult for employees to know which forms they have to use and for managers to keep overview and control whether correct forms are used. One of the goals of the QA department is to reduce the amount of forms. The reason is that there are currently too many forms within KLM E&M at the moment, which makes it difficult to keep overview. Possible risks of not having overview of the forms administration is that forms might not contribute in achieving the organization’s strategic goals anymore. Furthermore, it might also have effect on the reputation of KLM E&M as a key player in the maintenance repair organization (MRO) business, also in relation to all the relevant aviation authorities (KLM E&M, 2010). For example operational excellence might be affected when employees make use of the wrong forms. Furthermore, making use of outdated or wrong forms can affect safety as not all necessary data or wrong data is reported..

4.1.2 Forms Policy and Administration

In striving to make the forms process and administration a more standardized process, the FO has developed a ‘Form Standard' in 2004. This document counts eight pages and contains the regulations that are also found in the MOE about using forms in MRO organizations. The definition KLM E&M uses for a form is the following: “A form is used to register data in a predefined way and has a standard lay-out, which functions as a formal record or formal control. It is published at least hard copy” (KLM E&M, 2009). Next to the describing the regulation, requirements for the lay out of a form are also presented. Furthermore, there is also a WPI that explains how to use the forms standard. When going through the WPI, a remark was that some of the information was overlapping with that of the forms standard. Another document that has to be worked through is a ‘document amendment request’ (DAR), which also has an instruction to assure correct use (KLM E&M, 2009). In summary, requesting or changing a form requires KLM E&M employees to work through more than ten pages of administration.

The need for a form arises from the mechanics, process managers or process owners that work within a KLM E&M domain. In cooperation with the BPM contact person, the need is discussed and a concept of the form is developed. The BPM contact person can then contact the FO and can send him the concept form. The FO then checks if there is a similar form in the administration. If this is the case, the BPM contact persons is informed and asked whether it is possible to adapt or change the existing form. If this is not the case, the FO will develop

(35)

the form and publishes it on ARIS. Furthermore, the form is registered in the TDfrms Excel spreadsheet. This document is a list of all the forms that have been published between 1981 and 2009, and contains 632 forms (KLM E&M, 2009). As a backup, the FO prints out the form and keeps it in his office. Forms that have been published recently are available through digital applications such as ARIS and have instructions attached to them, which makes it easier for an employee to use the form correctly and does not need additional documents.

4.2 Direct Observation

In the following paragraph, some anecdotes that are the result of direct observation will provide more insight of the organization of KLM E&M. The office of the QA department will be described, and a visit to one of the hangars of KLM E&M to get an impression of the KLM E&M site at Schiphol East. A short anecdote about the ‘Bosdag’ (literally translated: ‘a day in the forest’), which is organized for the entire QA department twice a year, will describe how the department brainstorms about plans for the upcoming year.

4.2.1 Schiphol East Restricted Area and the Office at QA

A part of Schiphol East is a restricted area, where KLM, Martinair, and Transavia perform the maintenance, repair and overhaul of their aircraft and that of their clients. This site is only accessible for employees of the airline companies mentioned above and employees of Schiphol Airport. The hangars and office buildings of KLM E&M are located here, including the headquarters of KLM E&M in building 404. The department of QA is also located in this building. The building is white and remarkable shapes around the windows, and is often called the “egg box” by employees. It counts eight floors, and the QA department is located on the sixth floor. The QA department is divided in several groups. There is a Liaison Office that has contact with international authorities and consists of two Liaison Officers and a Liaison Manager. The Hangar Maintenance, Line Maintenance and Component Services & Engine Services teams each have their own offices which they share with about seven to ten people, which makes it easy to communicate with each other. These teams consist of Quality Engineers and a Quality Assurance Manager, and they are responsible for the quality management of the operational processes at KLM E&M, among other activities by

(36)

performing audits frequently. The Staff & Support team is responsible for assuring that the quality engineers have access to the administrative systems and that these are up to date. The FO and WPI officer are part of the Staff & Support team. They share an office in where they keep the forms administration and the WPI administration. The management of QA consists of two people, the manager of Staff & Support, who is also the deputy Vice President, and the Vice President of QA, who is also member of the Executive Board of KLM E&M. Furthermore, the area contains a lot of facilities where employees can have their lunch or dinner. The lunch facility for building 404 is located in the hangar next to the building, so that the employees that work in the hangar can also eat there. This results in a mixed group of people, with mechanics in their blue overalls having lunch next to a manager in a business suit.

4.2.2 Visiting the Hangar, Part of the Project “QA on the Floor”

A project that has started recently within QA is “QA on the floor” (QA op de vloer). This was the outcome of a survey among the people that work in the hangar. Conclusions of this research were that the majority of the mechanics that work in the hangar never see the people that work at QA, nor do they know what they actually do except for performing audits and writing audit reports. During “QA on the floor”, I joined one of the Quality Engineers in a visit to one of the hangars. We walked around and the Quality Engineer checked whether the mechanics were performing their work correctly. Furthermore, he checked whether the hangar was safe, clean and tidy. Next to being more present under the employees in the hangar, the checks are done to reduce the chance of a finding during an official audit as much as possible. During the hangar visit, there were two aircraft where the mechanics were busy replacing one of the winglets2. The atmosphere under the mechanics seemed to be good, and they enjoyed telling about their job. Pictures of the visit to the hangar are added in appendix 5 to get an impression of KLM E&M.

4.2.3 QA Bosdag

Twice a year, the department of QA organizes a “Bosdag” at the KLM sports centre in Amstelveen. The first Bosdag of QA of 2010 was organized on the 30th of March. All 45 QA employees spend this day presenting each other about recent developments and happenings,

2

(37)

and brainstorm with each other about plans and focus points for the upcoming year. The SVP of Operations gave a presentation about the current situation of KLM E&M, and his vision of how the department of QA can add to the KLM E&M strategy in the future, by being the department that assures next to quality also safety. Projects that had been launched recently were evaluated by giving presentations. This enabled the others provide feedback and ask questions. Brainstorm sessions were organized to collect input about upcoming projects. Everyone was divided in groups with people they do not usually work with and had one hour the time to work on their assignment and present this to the rest of the group. The atmosphere during the day was very informal and there was a lot of discussion. At the end there of the day, everybody stayed to have some drinks together.

4.3 Participant Observation

Being present at the office of the FO during the research made it possible to observe him during his working hours. The FO shares the office with the WPI officer, a person who keeps all the WPIs. His tasks are similar to that of the FO. The FO works five days a week, eight hours a day starting at 7 AM until 3.30 PM. The FO is also able to handle form requests quickly; a form can be developed in ten minutes and is ready for use for the entire organization within fifteen minutes. However, if a person comes with a request for a form, after 3.30 PM he or she has to wait with the request until the next day. The WPI officer does not have knowledge about developing and publishing forms and can not act as a back up for the FO. Furthermore, the amount of forms that is requested lately has been relatively low comparing to the amount of forms that was requested until 2008. To give an example, only twelve forms have been introduced in the period between December 2009 and March 2010. Other projects the FO has been working on, is the revision of forms of the domains of Engineering and Hangar Maintenance as a result of the introduction of a new digital application in these domains, which require them to revise their processes and documents. In summary, the FO works on an ad hoc basis, and his actions are responsive to requests from the BPM contact persons. At the moment, he takes initiatives to develop more knowledge about making forms by learning how to work with certain computer programs that are specialized in developing forms.

(38)

4.4 Interviews

This paragraph will present the results from the interviews. By taking the factors that Miles & Huberman (1994) discuss about collecting strong data into account, I visited the different business units of KLM E&M in the first two weeks of the internship, where I introduced myself to interview participants and told them about the research. The interview was my second meeting with them, which added in creating an informal atmosphere. Information about the interview participants is given in table 4. By going through the data, characteristics of and tensions between formal and informal controls within KLM E&M will be presented by comparing the interview results with each other and looking for arguments that were made by different respondents. These are summarized at the end of the section in table 5. In the following paragraph, the interview results will be presented by using quotes from the respondents. For privacy reasons, the names of the respondents are not given when quotes are described. Each respondent is given a number between 1 and 11 at random.

(39)

Table 4. Interview Participants

Role Name Length of

Interview

Number of Words

Transcribed Location of Interview

BPM contact person Component Services Peter Ottolander 46 min. 4343 Building 425, Component Services

department

BPM contact person Engine Services Coert Hoogland 1 hr. 20 min. 6547 Building 411, Engine Services department

BPM contact person Engineering Bas Otting 49 min. 4993 Building 404, Engineering department

BPM contact person Hangar Maintenance Stephan van Rennes 1 hr. 18 min. 6151 Hangar 11

BPM contact person Human Resources Gerrit Kunst 51 min. 4609 Building 411

BPM contact person Line Maintenance Peter van Wees 43 min. 4137 Building 404

BPM contact person Maintenance Control

Centre Alex Molin 1 hr. 13 min. 5937 MCC

BPM contact person Purchasing Susan Wijnveldt-te Blaak 1 hr. 25 min. 6729 Building 404, Purchasing department

BPM contact person Safety & Quality Ruud van Rhijn 1 hr. 10 min. 5974 Building 404, Safety & Quality department

FO Wim van Gool 1 hr. 17 min. 8184 Building 404, Safety & Quality department

(40)

4.4.1 Formal Controls

KLM E&M makes use of forms for several reasons. The first one is the maintaining of the recognition as a key player in the MRO business. “The goal of the forms administration is to maintain the recognition [as a key player in the MRO business] and have a clear forms policy” (1). “International authorities require that a process description is needed and data concerning repair and overhaul of aircraft has to be registered by making use of forms. However, satisfying the international standards does not imply that this is done in the most optimal and efficient way” (5,7,11).

Secondly, forms have a supportive role in the flow of a process in the sense that they are a reflection of the activities that are performed. This makes a process traceable, and assures safety of the performed activities. Data is recorded so that it is possible to review how and under which circumstances a process was performed. “Forms have a supportive function within process management at KLM E&M” (5,7,11). “To make the forms really adding to a process, they should be a reflection of the process. If we need to make use of forms within a process or procedure, then these have to be the correct forms with the correct data” (3,6,7,11). The BPM contact persons argued that the FO is “too much focussed on a form being a piece of paper and that he focuses too much on the amount of forms, and not whether they are really needed in a process. He goes through forms and compares the lay out of a form with other forms not considering in which process or which domain it belongs. This can lead to confusion across the different domains and will not reduce the amount of forms, but the amount of form numbers” (5,7). “From the quality perspective, a form is more than a sample or a document. It is essential that correct data is processed in the correct way. Forms are part of a process or procedure, and I have the feeling that not everybody realizes that” (5,7,11). The BPM contact persons’ opinion about forms is that a form is “a model in where data can be assimilated that can take different formats. Different processes have different forms. These might look like each other in an editorial perspective, but the content of the form is different” (5,7). “At this moment, forms and processes are not well integrated” (3,6,8,11). “A form has a function to support the steps within a process flow. When it is not clear in which part of the process a form has to be used, then it should be considered why that form still exists” (7,11). Furthermore, “people hardly look at the order in which data has to be filled in, while this is very important for the accessibility and use of a form” (7). In an organization where the majority of the employees are technicians, “people do not like paperwork, but want to

Exploring formal and informal controls during organizational restructuring : the case of KLM engineering and maintenance