Arctic Mining Essay

2445 Words10 Pages
After reading and reviewing the Arctic Mining Consultants case, we have come to the conclusion that they were not as efficient as possible. They did not work up to their full potential and we believe this might be due to the situation itself. The situation that these workers were under was not the most favorable. They were under time constraints in the fact that the goal was to complete 15 claims in seven days. There were four workers (Parker, Millar, Boyce, and Talbot) so this meant that each worker was to complete a little over seven lengths each day. This goal was set by Parker, the project manager for this specific job. With only four of them to complete this whole job, they seemed to have a workforce that was on the somewhat smaller side compared to the task at hand. There were also some environmental conditions that led to less than perfect outcomes. The workers came across heavy and unexpected brush. This made it difficult to work at the intended pace of a little over seven lengths a day. Another situational factor that made the Arctic Mining Consultants not efficient was the planning of the project. Parker could have planned a little better and made it more reasonable for completion. Part of the poor planning was also the lack of good communication between Parker and the rest of the workers. With better execution of every step in the Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing process the Arctic Mining Consultants would have been a lot more efficient and successful. When it comes to Forming, Parker selected three other workers who had previously worked with him before. Even knowing that these field assistants are paid a fairly low daily wage, Parker only selected three workers. If he would have chosen more workers, they would have been able to split up the work even more and in turn would have become more efficient and successful. As for Storming, or the
Open Document