The Top Technician on the New Automated Cell
You supervise a 14-person machining shift. Dana has eight years on the manual press, was your go-to trainer, and ran at a 1.2% scrap rate. Six weeks ago the plant installed an automated cell; Dana was assigned to it because she had the strongest record. Since then her scrap rate has risen to 4.8%, she has made three setup errors that stopped the line, and she declines the vendor's buddy-training sessions, saying 'I've got it.' In stand-up she reports 'no issues,' but the cell's alarm log shows she clears faults without logging causes. The plant manager wants scrap below 2% in three weeks or the cell loses its second operator. You initially delegated because Dana had been a D4 on the manual press; now you are considering taking the cell away from her, which would embarrass her in front of the shift.
1. Diagnose Dana's development level on the automated cell. Why is her previous D4 not transferable, and what specific evidence separates D2 from D4?
Read the worked answer
Diagnose D2 on the automated cell, despite her D4 on the manual press. SLII development level is goal-specific, and the goal has changed from manual press operation to reliable automated-cell setup and fault logging. Competence evidence: scrap rose from 1.2% to 4.8%, three setup errors stopped the line, and she clears faults without logging causes. Those are not D4 behaviors; they show she has some transferable mechanical knowledge but lacks the specific setup and diagnostic discipline the cell requires. Commitment evidence is mixed: she says 'I've got it' and reports 'no issues,' but declining buddy training and hiding fault causes suggest defensiveness and low willingness to be seen as a learner, not D4 self-reliance. D4 would require sustained high performance and high commitment on this task. Her manual-press record is a reason to invest in coaching, not a reason to delegate. Treating her as D4 would let the scrap and undocumented faults continue; treating her as D1 would miss her substantial mechanical foundation. D2 fits: some competence, variable commitment, and a need for structured practice.
2. Choose your leadership style and outline the direction and support behaviors for the next three weeks. How would you handle her refusal of buddy training?
Read the worked answer
Lead with S2 coaching: high direction and high support. Direction: require a setup checklist with sign-off for every run; schedule two supervised setup cycles; make fault-cause logging mandatory before clearing any alarm; set a daily 10-minute scrap review with the actual numbers; and make the vendor buddy sessions part of the ramp-up, not optional. Support: normalize the learning curve, acknowledge her manual-press expertise, explain why logging matters for the whole shift, and recognize specific improvements. Handle the refusal in a private one-on-one, not at stand-up: 'Dana, I'm not questioning your ability. The cell is new, and the data says we need a ramp-up. The buddy sessions are how we get your scrap back under 2%. I need you to attend the next two.' Pair that with a real consequence and a real offer of help. Do not remove the cell yet; removing it before coaching would punish her for your earlier diagnosis error. If she still refuses after a clear contract, then the issue is performance management, not style choice.
3. What would you do if scrap is still above 3% after two weeks of coaching? How does your diagnosis change, and what does SLII say about staying with the same style?
Read the worked answer
After two weeks, reassess rather than automatically escalating style. If scrap has improved but is not yet below 2%, keep S2 and tighten the direction: more observed setups, a narrower set of fault types to log, and a shorter review cycle. If scrap is flat and she is still hiding faults or skipping buddy sessions, the commitment problem has become primary. That is still not D4; it may be D2 with low commitment or a performance issue outside the development-level model. In SLII terms, do not keep providing high support for non-performance indefinitely. Have a direct accountability conversation: restate the 2% target, show the data, ask what she will commit to, and state the consequence if the standard is not met. You might shift toward S1 for a short, defined period because direction needs to dominate while support is being rejected, but S1 is not a punishment; it is a temporary structure. If she remains unwilling, move to formal performance management or reassign the cell. The diagnostic error to avoid is calling her D4 again because of her history.