Unit Code: Applied Problem Solving - Honeywell Subcontracting Issues

This report delves into the complex challenges Honeywell Security faces regarding subcontracting and engineering shortages. It begins with an executive summary and then meticulously restructures the problem, identifying stakeholders and key aspects. The report sets boundaries, analyzes stakeholder recognition of the problem, and explores interactions through brainstorming and stakeholder mapping. It proposes and compares potential solutions, evaluating them using appropriate tools and techniques. The analysis considers internal and external stakeholders, including project teams, program managers, management, subcontractors, and customers. The report utilizes models like PESTLE and SWOT to assess the problem's relevance and provides recommendations for improvement. The document concludes with a summary of findings and emphasizes strategies to control complex problems, offering a comprehensive overview of applied problem-solving within a business context.

Assignment Title: Subcontracting and shortage of engineers in Honeywell Security
Student Name:
Student ID:
Unit Title: Applied Problem Solving
Unit Code:
Unit Tutor:
Date of Submission: 25th March 2018
Word Count: 6307.

1
Table of Contents
1. Executive summary:..................................................................................................................3
2. Problem restructuring:...............................................................................................................4
2.1 Arguments in the literature:..................................................................................................4
2.2 Identification of the complex problem:.................................................................................4
2.3 Stakeholders linked to the identified problem:.....................................................................4
2.4 Key aspects and the context of the problem:......................................................................5
2.5 Problem statement:..............................................................................................................6
3. Boundary Setting:......................................................................................................................6
3.1 Literatures to identify the relevance of the problem:............................................................6
3.2 Models to discuss the relevance of the problem:................................................................6
3.3 Limitations and advantages of the problem boundaries:.....................................................8
3.4 Assessments of problem boundaries with models:.............................................................8
4. Recognition:...............................................................................................................................8
4.1 Ways through internal and external stakeholders recognise the problem:..........................8
4.2 Analysis of management and leadership perspectives:......................................................9
4.3 Extent of conflict between stakeholder views:...................................................................10
5. Interaction:...............................................................................................................................11
5.1 Classical brainstorming and round-robin brainstorming for improving interaction between
participants:.............................................................................................................................11
5.2 Stakeholder mapping diagram to explain the importance of stakeholders and their effect
on solution and implementation plan:......................................................................................12
5.3 Probable constraints to influence stakeholder consensus:................................................13
5.4 Communication and action plan for developing interactive environment:.........................13
5.5 Reflection focuses on the approach and areas of improvement:......................................13
6. Solutions:.................................................................................................................................14
6.1 Solutions:...........................................................................................................................14
6.2 Comparison of the solutions:.............................................................................................16

2
6.3 Review of key insights:......................................................................................................17
7. Evaluation:...............................................................................................................................17
7.1 Use of appropriate tools and techniques for narrowing down the potential solutions:......17
7.2 Evaluation of the three preferred solutions:.......................................................................17
7.3 Review of the approaches and steps taken:......................................................................19
Conclusion:..................................................................................................................................20
References:.................................................................................................................................21
Appendix:.....................................................................................................................................25

3
1. Executive summary:
21st century is the era of organisational growth and complexity in business culture. Due to rise in
inter dependence among the firms, organisational structure has become highly intricate and it
has lead to various complexities in business operation. For instance, firms are now facing
issues with resource allocation and managerial as well as skill gap in their organisational
framework, which are mainly germinated through the complexity in the business environment. In
this research paper, Honeywell Security will be analysed and check how, ever evolving
business environment are making it hard for the firms to enhance its business. In addition to
this, this report has analysed how well tools like checklists, attribute listing and Force Fitting
Triggers can help the managers to assess the complex problem of the business. Through this
research, it has been found that, Honeywell being one of large firms, deals with various
subcontractors and ever evolving market scenario demands high level of technological
advancement in the business. Under this situation, the report has identified subcontractors and
technological performance gap of as the complex problem of the firm. Through analysing the
complex issue, the report has provided strategies to gauge the situation. According to the
checklists, it has been found that managers of the firm can perform quantitative analysis of the
performance of subcontractors, which will aid them to trace the performance gap net to this the
report has mentioned how the managers of the selected organisation can utilise attribute listing
to deal with the performance gap of the subcontractors. From the analysis of the attribute listing,
it has been found that the firm can use quantitative analysis of subcontractors depending upon
eight factors that affect the performance of the same. And lastly, the report has tried to express
view regarding Force Fitting Triggers as the mean to deal with the complex problem of the firms.
From this analysis it has been found that factors like, production time, efficiency, guarantee
period and communication are the factors that affect the efficiency. Honeywell needs to provide
specific focus and aid the subcontractors to adhere with the firm’s benchmark. In addition to this
the report has mentioned the ethical consideration for implementing the strategies and how to
deal with the change in organisational framework. To conclude the report has provided
summarised overview of the finding and emphasised how it can control its complex problems.

4
2. Problem restructuring:
2.1 Arguments in the literature:
21st century is the world of complexity in business environment and with rise in
interdependence among the firms, business framework has become highly intricate. It has been
observed that most of the businesses lack in resources for achieving the tasks (Kerzner and
Kerzner, 2017). At other times, organisations realise that they do not possess the required
expertise to obtain the desired results (Armstrong 2016). Finally, the management could
ascertain the external suppliers specialised in a specific field, as they could conduct work at
reduced cost in contrast to the internal departments. In all such cases, organisations view
subcontracting as a practical alternative (Fleming and Koppelman, 2016). It helps in solving the
immediate problem, which the organisation faces; however, it has its own disadvantages.
2.2 Identification of the complex problem:
Since Honeywell Security is a large organisation, it uses various subcontractors for
undertaking projects, which are larger in contrast to those it could manage (Fischer et al. 2017).
They make a profit on the project parts that the subcontractors manage and this could help in
increasing the overall revenue. The bigger projects carry greater amount of risk, however it not
the case always (Sadgrove, 2016). According to the same source various factors like project
size, magnitude, complexity leads lead to fluctuation in the project risk irrespective of the firm’s
size. At the time, the organisation places orders with the subcontractors, the risk that one of
them might not perform as expected is greater. Along with this, gap in the technological
advancement is another issue that constraints the firm to coordinating properly with these
subcontractors is another complex issue (Heagney, 2016). Thus, it is necessary for Honeywell
to assure that the additional revenue and profit is adequate for making the greater-risk project
worthwhile, since it acts as the principal.
2.3 Stakeholders linked to the identified problem:
For Honeywell, there are both internal as well as external stakeholders to the identified
problem. The internal stakeholders comprise of the following:
Project team:
As commented by Kerzner and Kerzner (2017), project team is a team, the members of
which belong to various groups, functions and they are allocated to activities for the identical
project. In order to mitigate this issue, a team could be subdivided into sub-teams based on

5
need. Normally, project teams are utilised only for a defined timeframe (Rekonen and Bjorklund,
2016).
Program manager:
For Honeywell, the program manager is viewed as the visionary leader for the entire
program (Schwalbe, 2015). The personnel are engaged in formulating the goals and objectives
of the program and the way it would influence the business operations. In addition, the person
concentrates on strategy and implementation along with appropriate delegation of projects.
Management:
The management of Honeywell is the key internal stakeholder to the identified problem.
The management decides the personnel to be involved in the projects and they are responsible
to report all the ongoing activities and tasks to the management.
The external stakeholders of Honeywell Security:
Stakeholders of Honeywell Security are as follows –
Subcontractors:
In the words of Leach (2014), a subcontractor is an individual or in many situations, an
organisation signing a contract to carry out portion or all the obligations related to the contract of
another. A subcontractor is an individual recruited on the part of a general contractor to carry
out a particular task as portion of the entire project and the person is paid usually for the
services provided to the project on the part of the originating general contractor. The motive of
recruiting subcontractors is either to minimise costs or to mitigate project risks. Being
competitive in nature, the subcontractors are highly efficient. Thus, if the firm can buy in the
skills of the firm, then it would aid it to enhance its production efficiency and help the firm to
have better productivity.
Government:
The project manager of Honeywell works in highly regulated environment, would need to
deal with the government departments and regulators. These could consider all or few levels of
government from provincial, federal, municipal or international (Martinelli and Milosevic, 2016).
External customers:
External customers, are those individuals at the time projects could be marketed to the
outside customers. In case of Honeywell, the external customers comprise of the purchasers of
automobiles. In addition, if an organisation is managing the project for Honeywell, it would be its
external customer.

6
2.4 Key aspects and the context of the problem:
The business projects could be characterised in terms of process, people and
technology (Kerzner and Kerzner, 2017). Such aspects of a project are related to each other
and there is amplification of challenges in complex environments. The nature of the activities of
Honeywell needs optimisation of the utilisation of resources (Browning and Yassine 2016). The
utilisation of operational staffs develops conflicting priorities for project members (Kerzner and
Kerzner 2017). Even though the project manager possesses greater authority and access to
resources, such conflict could arise from the project volume where the organisation is involved
More explanation required. The scarce resources could result in conflict along with lack of focus
on critical project activities (Mir and Pinnington, 2014). The specialist skills needed at certain
project stages might not be present. Thus, it is necessary for Honeywell to take into account the
skills needed along with setting expectations with the main stakeholders.
2.5 Problem statement:
The lack of documentation and process is a significant indicator of the complex project
environment. Large organisations have typical process and in its absence, it needs to be
defined. The procedures or processes are significant. This type of technology could have
significant effects, as it might lack needed skills, leaving them dependent on outside contract or
consulting staffs for guidance. This would cause enhancement in the cost of operation and the
firm will face additional problem. It will make it hard for the firm to assess the performance gap
between the subcontractors.
3. Boundary Setting:
3.1 Literatures to identify the relevance of the problem:
According to Heide et al. (2014), individual governance mechanism along with larger
sourcing context are the two major factors that lead to mediocre performance of subcontractors
in the auto industry. According to the Storey et al. (2016) large firms face most of the cases of
poor performance by contractors due to the stakeholder’s loopholes into the system. Honeywell
being one of the largest security service providers is prone to the problems stated above, and
considering the present market scenario on behalf of the firm it has become more evident.

7
3.2 Models to discuss the relevance of the problem:
Various models are there to assess the relevance of the problem. However, among
them, details regarding PESTLE, SWOT, TOWS matrix and EVR congruence have been given
below:
PESTLE:
This model depicts the Political, Economic, Social, Technology, Legal and
Environmental aspects of a business (Makos, 2015). Considering Honeywell, it can be stated
that the firm is effectively indulged in corporate lobbying that provides the scope to penetrate the
firm’s performance with their action. Though the firm has strong growth of GDP, currency
volatility has made it uncertain in future due to varied performance of stakeholders
(Mahalingaiah, Prabhakara and Williams, 2016). Considering social and technological frontier of
Honeywell, it can be stated that the firm continuously invests in modern technologies that not
only make the firm’s performance better, rather make it potent to sustain in future even in the
case of deteriorating contractor performance. Honeywell has strong compliance with local
governments and it tries to perform according to the environmental norms set by local
authorities.
SWOT:
SWOT is another model for internal analysis of a firm, which stands for Strength,
Weakness, Opportunity and Threat (Siciliano, 2016). Honeywell has strong and consistent
financial performance and unmatched technology has aided it to become where it is now.
However, as the weakness, it has high backlogs, generated through inferior performance of the
stakeholders and weakened credit profile has hampered the brand image. As the opportunity, it
can be stated that worldwide demand rise of the firm has helped it to revive from the past
dwindling situation, though, there is threat from the government regulation and risks from
contract compliance.
TOWS matrix:
TOWS matrix is a combination of internal and external analysis of business environment
of a firm. It stands for Threat, Opportunity, Weakness, Strength that describes the firm’s
performance and its market of operation (David, David and David, 2017). TOWS matrix is one of
the best tools to produce, and then compare and chose ideal strategies for the firm
(Thiradathanapattaradecha et al. 2017). Considering the case of Honeywell, it can be seen from
the TOWS matrix that the firm has strong potential to grow in the evolving markets. TOWS
matrix has been evolved from the SWOT and comparing the threat and opportunity frontier of

8
the selected firm, it aids the firm to bring out ideal strategies (Alaaraj and Hassan, 2014).
Utilising the TOWS matrix, it can be found that, with their vast experience the firm can become
one of the market leaders in those regions, where the security services are still new. As the
threat it can be said that internal and external stakeholder issue is one of the major concerns
facing the firm. However, if the firm can influence their stakeholders properly, then there is
opportunity for growth at a higher rate than ever, leading to sustainability in the firm (Mugo et al.
2017). In addition to this, to overcome the threat the firm need to indulge itself in the attributes of
the stakeholders.
EVR congruence:
This is the tool of strategic perspective of entrepreneurship, which stands for
Environment, Values and Resources in order to bring in strategies of a firm. Using this model,
the firms can assess their social and corporate responsibilities properly and determine the future
strategies to have sustainable growth (Kew and Stredwick, 2017). Considering the EVR
congruence performance on similar situation, it can be stated that this tool will aid the Honeywell
securities to have better environmental framework to comply with the CSR as well as Values
and Resources of the firm will be enhanced largely (Kew and Stredwick 2017). For contesting
the entrepreneurial achievement of the managers to make the organisation sustainability the
firm has maintained its environmental obligation with proper strategies and implementation.
Besides, this resource constraint is elastic in nature because the stakeholders are performing
properly. Value chain of the firm is one of the concerns, where it needs to consider. According to
Christopher (2016), lack of strategies in value chain is one of the primary factors that lead the
stakeholders to face serious issues. Due to lack of strategies in value chain, the firm has faced
serious issues with its stakeholder and if necessary steps are not taken, then it can happen
again (Shenhar et al. 2016).
3.3 Limitations and advantages of the problem boundaries:
Honeywell works with both, internal and external contractors, who are the stakeholders
in principal too. Thus, inferior performance of one contractor can lead to the overall loss of
revenue subject to poor production rate and reduced efficiency. However, it is also true that in
case of loss of a single stakeholder, the firm can withstand for future growth with the other
stakeholders (Coombs, 2014). Thus, sustainability of the firm is ensured with the help of both in-
house contractors and external contractors.

9
3.4 Assessments of problem boundaries with models:
Considering the above-mentioned models, it can be stated that the technological gap
between the firm and subcontractor and inability to assess the performance gap of the
subcontractor in front of Honeywell is large. Depending upon internal as well as external
stakeholders in the scope of problem, is going to aggravate in coming days (Stoica, Pelckmans
and Rowe, 2015). Thus, it is necessary for Honeywell to assure that the additional revenue and
profit is adequate for making the greater-risk project worthwhile, since it acts as the principal.
4. Recognition:
4.1 Ways through internal and external stakeholders recognise the problem:
The following are the ways through which the internal and external stakeholders
recognise the problem:
Alert for simple comments by project team members:
Sometimes the simple comments in a project team meeting could be an issue. Such
simple response is to be called out, evaluated and a resolution to be found, or else it could pose
serious issue.
Halting developmental work:
In case, there is something that is stopping progress like halt in developmental work,
then it could be an issue. Halting development work will lead to deterioration of the outcome of
the firm and can lead the subcontractor problems to a new level (Shah et al. 2017). This is one
of the feasible ways of identifying issues.
Using some form of tracking document:
An excel spreadsheet is effective in detecting issues. This is because it could be
circulated along with storing it centrally for all the team members to access. The issues could be
in the form of date, description of the issue, personnel responsible for the resolution and agreed
time span for resolution. In this way, it is possible to track with each person about their
responsibility and the ways they are progressing with the proposed timeframes. This is an item,
which could be shared easily with the project team at team meetings (Nicholas and Steyn,
2017).
Use of issue register:

10
All the stakeholders could add issues to the issue register. Such register for need of a
better word is not just for the project manager only. This is important, since it is important for the
team of Honeywell to raise issues, which all the stakeholders could see (Bryson, 2018).
Preparing bigger list of issues:
Along with the main issue, the other list of issues is to be prepared as well to be worked
on and closed. If those issues are not in the list, it might not be possible for the stakeholders to
identify them and the work made to resolve them. Therefore, the team needs to be encouraged
for including their items in the list (Pinto, 2015). This is because all the stakeholders would be
benefitted in the long-run.
4.2 Analysis of management and leadership perspectives:
The following management and leadership perspectives have been followed on the part
of Honeywell to maintain the ethics of decision-making process:
Communication:
The management as well as the project leader communicate with the staffs; however, it
varies. The management of the organisation communicates with its staffs for solving problems,
assigning tasks along with setting expectations (Schwalbe, 2015). The project leader is involved
in communicating with the team members for setting direction along with providing inspiration
and motivation.
Planning:
The management of Honeywell is involved in organising, budgeting and controlling for
assuring the most effective journey, which is to ensure the overall success of the project. The
project leader, on the other hand, is involved in setting direction for the entire organisation, team
or department (Northouse, 2018).
Staffing:
The management of Honeywell is often involved in recruiting managers and arrange
them accordingly to complete the tasks assigned successfully. The project leader is involved in
determining the amount of human capital required for accomplishing future business needs
along with aligning the staffs to meet the goals of the organisation in an effective fashion
(Walker, 2015).
4.3 Extent of conflict between stakeholder views:
The conflict between stakeholder views occurs when the needs of some groups of
stakeholders comprise the expectations of other stakeholders (Turner, 2016). Hence, it is

11
necessary for Honeywell to make choices that some stakeholders might not find interesting. For
instance, the cheapest supplier products, which could lower down the prices for the end
consumers need not arrive at the expense of ethical practice on the part of the suppliers or
product safety. Tightening the ethical practice would aid the firm to adhere with the fiduciary
relationship of trustees and the subcontractors. In addition to this it would help the firm to
perform fair dealing with its subcontractors and confidentiality between the subcontractors and
the trustees. While the end product is cheaper, relationship with an unethical supplier or
cheaper quality product, risks the damage of business reputation along with financial loss.
Few activities might not provide immediate financial return on investment; however, they
support the ethical standards of the business. These policies are required to be communicated
and they need to be described with all the stakeholders associated for gaining an insight of the
long-term project value. For instance, if Honeywell invests in green energy, it might be
expensive; however, it could help the organisation in minimising its environmental footprint. The
supporting staffs might result in trade-offs as well (Verzuh, 2015). The employees of the
organisation offer developmental opportunities for accomplishing their overall potential. The
organisation needs to justify its investment against the opportunity cost of utilising the resources
and time for other purposes. In addition, it has the potential drawback of not providing training to
its staffs. This could take into account the loss of efficient staffs to the other mistakes or
organisations occurring due to lack of training.
5. Interaction:
5.1 Classical brainstorming and round-robin brainstorming for improving interaction
between participants:
In order to enhance interaction between the identified participants, Honeywell needs to
use classical brainstorming and round-robin brainstorming to develop potential solutions to the
identified problem.
Classical brainstorming:
In this technique, Honeywell needs to form a team comprising of subject matter experts
and non-subject matter experts (Adam and Trapp, 2015). After this, the team needs to be
defined about the subcontracting problem for brainstorming solutions based on the above-stated
problem statement. Questions need to be asked to all the team members for ensuring that the
problem is understood effectively (Schneider and Buser, 2018). The rules related to
brainstorming need to be explained to the team members, which include recording of all the