Similarly, another scientific management principle stipulates that to achieve efficiency, firms to establish a scientific way of managing and standardizing each task (Taylor, 2004). An analysis of Titanoya Motors’ case study reveals that this company faces production capacity problems since it had failed to use scientific approach in management different tasks in its Thai plant. As a result, whereas the objectives of the company are to produce 8,000 vehicles per week in its Thai factory, it was yet to produce even 5,000 vehicles per week. This implies that the company was operating at approximately 60 percent optimal level, and as such, underperforming. The production capacity problems are compounded by the fact that even with the fewer car units that the company produces per week, it is unable to meet the production deadlines.
同样，另一项科学管理原则规定，为了实现效率，企业必须建立一种科学的方法来管理和规范每项任务（Taylor，2004）。对Titanoya Motors案例研究的分析表明，该公司面临产能问题，因为它未能在其泰国工厂的不同任务中使用科学方法进行管理。因此，尽管该公司的目标是在其泰国工厂每周生产8000辆汽车，但它甚至还没有每周生产5000辆汽车。这意味着该公司在大约60%的更佳水平上运营，因此表现不佳。生产能力问题因以下事实而变得更加复杂：即使公司每周生产的汽车数量较少，也无法满足生产期限。
1.2 Poor control of processes at Titanoya Motors Titanoya Motors的工艺控制不力
Controlling involves evaluating the actual performance, gauging the actual performance against the standard, and implementing appropriate managerial actions to correct deviations in performance levels (Robbins, Bergman & Coulter, 2018). This is affirmed by Covell and Walker (2013), who observe that effective managerial controlling involves evaluating the actual performance, evaluating the actual performance against the standard performance, and taking a managerial action. With this in mind, there is a need to observe that Titanoya Motors has failed to implement controlling principles in its operations, thus failing to establish why it was not performing well.
控制包括评估实际绩效，对照标准衡量实际绩效，并实施适当的管理措施以纠正绩效水平偏差（Robbins，Bergman&Coulter，2018）。Covell和Walker（2013）证实了这一点，他们认为有效的管理控制包括评估实际绩效，对照标准绩效评估实际绩效，并采取管理行动。考虑到这一点，有必要观察到Titanoya Motors未能在其运营中实施控制原则，因此无法确定其表现不佳的原因。
To begin with, the management of Titanoya Motors was not using measurement of actual performance as a controlling tool to establish its actual performance. In reference to Robbins, Bergman and Coulter (2018), measuring the actual performance can be done using four tools namely personal observations, oral reports, statistical reports and writer reports. For example, the management of this company had failed to observe that most of its employees had low morale and were dissatisfied with their jobs. In addition, Verburg et al. (2017) reiterate that controlling in organizations should not just focus only on the needs of the firm in terms of performance and production but also on needs of employees. Furthermore, through observation, the company could have established that most of its employees lacked the necessary skills to carry out different tasks in the company, a factor that contributed to their low performance levels.
首先，Titanoya Motors的管理层没有使用实际绩效衡量作为确定其实际绩效的控制工具。参考Robbins、Bergman和Coulter（2018），可以使用四种工具来衡量实际绩效，即个人观察、口头报告、统计报告和作家报告。例如，这家公司的管理层没有注意到其大多数员工士气低落，对工作不满意。此外，Verburg等人（2017）重申，组织内的控制不仅应关注公司在绩效和生产方面的需求，还应关注员工的需求。此外，通过观察，公司可以确定其大多数员工缺乏在公司执行不同任务所需的技能，这是导致他们绩效水平低下的一个因素。