Donya Brewer, the Director of Human Resources at Stress Engineering Services , was asked to evaluate the firm's peer feedback system and update it to better align with the organization's needs as it continued to grow in the 21st century. Developed internally, the current system had undergone minor revisions over several decades, used cumbersome proprietary software and, increasingly, had not been meeting the needs of managerial and supervisory personnel to provide effective guidance for continuing professional development of employees in all lines of work. Brewer and her project team were tasked to increase the efficacy of the peer feedback system while preserving the system's role in fostering the collaborative culture at SES. Part A describes the organization and its peer feedback system and details the front-end, investigative phase of the project. Data is presented and students are asked to assess utilization of the current system. Brewer's team was particularly interested in learning about employee participation in the program, and the quality of the data that it provided to participants. Was it useful to each employee and to their supervisors to guide further professional development?

Donya Brewer, the Director of Human Resources at Stress Engineering Services , was asked to evaluate the firm's peer feedback system and update it to better align with the organization's needs as it continued to grow in the 21st century. Developed internally, the current system had undergone minor revisions over several decades, used cumbersome proprietary software and, increasingly, had not been meeting the needs of managerial and supervisory personnel to provide effective guidance for continuing professional development of employees in all lines of work. Brewer and her project team were tasked to increase the efficacy of the peer feedback system while preserving the system's role in fostering the collaborative culture at SES. Part B continues the analysis of the peer feedback program at Stress Engineering Services. Rich qualitative data, gathered through structured interviews, is presented. Students are asked to identify issues that must be addressed, and to make recommendations in numerous areas about what would constitute best practices in the new system. Part B also contains material on implementation issues in managing the change process. This case challenges students to redesign a peer feedback system facing major issues regarding employee engagement, the quality of the data, timeliness of feedback, outdated technology, methodological issues in instrument design, program execution, and contributions to employee development, among others.

This case focuses on a major manufacturing division ($1.2 billion sales; 5500 employees) of a global oilfield services company as it converts from a departmental organization with a "traditional" machine shop hierarchy to a team-based environment. During the conversion, roles and responsibilities change from a traditional foreman structure to a Self-Directed Work Team (SDWT) structure for the Radial Bearing Team. Individual behaviors and the dynamics of change influence how the team copes with new responsibilities, authority and problem solving as together, they manage equipment utilization and the day-to-day workflow, and control quality. Some dysfunction arises as the leaders of this organization manage the change process while trying to support the new roles and ideas. The team is successful, but everyone has to encourage innovation while adapting to the changing environment. The case also highlights specific techniques the team adopts for monitoring its performance as it assumes responsibility and accountability for quality improvement. Management had challenged the unit's leadership to produce results that justified the implementation of Self-Directed Work Teams (SDWTs). Now, George Smiley, the machine shop manager, and Shane Husky, the internal OD specialist, had to present evidence to help management decide if expansion of the SDWT program was warranted and the best practices learned from the RBT experience that would contribute to future success.

This Industry Note examines the state of the digital signage industry in 2010. The industry came into being to meet the emerging commercial and communications need for more dynamic messaging. It is a nexus between two industries - those who manufacture the equipment and those who create the messaging content. Together, they created an industry that provides instantaneous messaging at the speed of light. In 2010, the industry was a technically complex, multi-product, multi-segment, multi-channel, highly fragmented market with few dominant firms, rapidly-evolving technologies, and relatively low entry barriers for many segments of the industry. Global opportunities exist and multi-national electronics firms are entering the market. The Note reviews the industry's external environment, the forces that are shaping the industry, its competitive landscape, the emerging industry structure, and the near-term future of the industry. Those firms that emerged as dominant competitors tended to have higher levels of vertical integration, greater financial strength, and greater breadth in their product lines; served multiple market segments; and had the design and engineering capabilities to provide high-level product customization. Increased capabilities in design, product engineering, fabrication, and technology integration led to broader and more diversified product lines and the ability to meet demanding customer requirements in multiple market segments.