WE ARE PROVIDING CASE STUDY ANSWERS AND PROJECT REPORTS
ISBM / IIBMS / IIBM / ISMS / KSBM / NIPM
MBA EMBA BMS GDM MIS MIB
DMS MMS DBM PGDBM DBA
WEBSITE: www.casestudies.co.in
aravind.banakar@gmail.com
ARAVIND 09901366442 09902787224
WE
ARE PROVIDING CASE STUDY ANSWERS AND PROJECT REPORTS
ISBM /
IIBMS / IIBM / ISMS / KSBM / NIPM
MBA EMBA
BMS GDM MIS
MIB
DMS
MMS DBM PGDBM
DBA
ARAVIND 09901366442 09902787224
Note: Solve any 4 Cases Study’s
CASE: I Pushing Paper Can Be Fun
A large city government was putting on a number of seminars for
managers of various departments throughout the city. At one of these sessions
the topic discussed was motivation—how to motivate public servants to do a good
job. The plight of a police captain became the central focus of the discussion:
I’ve got a real problem with my officers.
They come on the force as young, inexperienced rookies, and we send them out on
the street, either in cars or on a beat. They seem to like the contact they
have with the public, the action involved in crime prevention, and the
apprehension of criminals. They also like helping people out at fires,
accidents, and other emergencies.
The problem occurs when they get back to the
station. They hate to do the paperwork, and because they dislike it, the job is
frequently put off or done inadequately. This lack of attention hurts us later
on when we get to court. We need clear, factual reports. They must be highly
detailed and unambiguous. As soon as one part of a report is shown to be
inadequate or incorrect, the rest of the report is suspect. Poor reporting
probably causes us to lose more cases than any other factor.
I just don’t know how to motivate them to do
a better job. We’re in a budget crunch, and I have absolutely no financial
rewards at my disposal. In fact, we’ll probably have to lay some people off in
the near future. It’s hard for me to make the job interesting and challenging
because it isn’t-it’s boring, routine paperwork, and there isn’t much you can
do about it.
Finally, I can’t say to them that their
promotions will hinge on the excellence of their paperwork. First at all, they
know it’s not true. If their performance is adequate, most are more likely to
get promoted just by staying on the force a certain number of years than for
some specific outstanding act. Second, they were trained to do the job they do
out in the streets, not to fill out forms. All through their careers the
arrests and interventions are what get noticed.
Some people have suggested a number of
things, like using conviction records as a performance criterion. However, we
know that’s not fair—too many other things are involved. Bad paperwork increases the chance that you lose in court,
but good paperwork doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll win. We tried setting up the
team competitions based on the excellence of the reports, but the officers
caught on to that pretty quickly. No one was getting any type of reward for
winning the competition, and they figured why should they bust a gut when there
was on payoff.
I just don’t know what to do.
Question:
1.
What performance problems is the captain trying to correct?
2.
Use the MARS model of individual behavior and performance to
diagnose the possible causes of the unacceptable behavior.
3.
Has the captain considered all possible solutions to the
problem? If not, what else might be done?
CASE: II How Did I Get Here?
Something was not right. John Breckenridge opened his eyes, saw the
nurse’s face, and closed them once more. Cobwebs slowly cleared from his brain
as he woke up from his brain as he woke up from the operation. He felt a hard
tube in his nostril, and tried to lift his hand to pull it out, but it was
strapped down to the bed. John tried to speak but could make only a croaking
sound. Nurse Thompson spoke soothingly, “Just try to relax, Mr. Breckenridge.
You had a heart attack and emergency surgery, but you’re going to be OK.”
Heart attack? How did I get here? As the anesthesia wore off
and the pain set in, John began to recall the events of the past year; and with
the memories came another sort of pain – that of remembering a life where
success was measured in hours worked and things accomplished, but which of late
had not measured up.
John recalled his years in college, where
getting good grades had been important, but not so much as his newly developing
love for Karen, the girl with auburn hair who got her nursing degree the same
year as he graduated with a degree in software engineering. They married the
summer after graduation and moved from their sleepy university town in Indiana
to Aspen, Colorado. There John got a job with a new software company while
Karen worked evenings as a nurse. Although they didn’t see much of each other
during the week, weekends were a special time, and the surrounding mountains
and nature provided a superb quality of life.
Life was good to the Breckenridges. Two years
after they were married, Karen gave birth to Josh and two years later to Linda.
Karen reduced her nursing to the minimum hours required to maintain her
license, and concentrated on rearing the kids. John, on the other hand, was
busy providing for the lifestyle they increasingly became used to, which
included a house, car, SUV, ski trips, and all of the things a successful
engineering career could bring. The company grew in leaps and bounds, and John
was one of the main reasons it grew fast. Work was fun. The company was
growing, his responsibilities increased, and he and his team were real buddies.
With Karen’s help at home, he juggled work, travel, and evening classes that
led to a master’s degree. The master’s degree brought another promotion—this
time to vice president of technology at the young (for this company) age of 39.
The promotion had one drawback: It would
require working out of the New York office. Karen sadly said goodbye to her
friends, convinced the kids that the move would be good to them, and left the
ranch house for another one, much more expensive and newer, but smaller and
just across the river in New Jersey from the skyscraper where her husband
worked. Newark was not much like Aspen, and the kids had a hard time making
friends, especially Josh, who was now 16. He grew sullen and withdrawn and
began hanging around with a crowd that Karen thought looked very tough. Linda,
always the quiet one, stuck mostly to her room.
John’s new job brought with it money and
recognition, as well as added responsibilities. He now had to not only lead
software development but also actively participate in steering the company in
the right direction for the future, tailoring its offerings to market trends.
Mergers and acquisitions were the big things in the software business, and John
found a special thrill in picking small companies with promising software,
buying them out, and adding them to the corporate portfolio. Karen had
everything a woman could want and went regularly to a health club. The family
lacked for no material need.
At age 41 John felt he had the world by its
tail. Sure, he was a bit overweight, but who wouldn’t be with the amount of
work and entertaining that he did? He drank some, a habit he had developed
early in his career. Karen worried about that, but he reassured her by
reminding her that he had been really drunk only twice and would never drink
and drive. Josh’s friends were a worry, but nothing had yet come of it.
Not all was well, however. John had been
successful in Colorado because he thought fast on his feet, expressed his
opinions, and got people to buy into his decisions. In the New York corporate
office things were different. All of the top brass except the president and
John had Ivy League, moneyed backgrounds. They spoke of strategy but would take
only risks that would further their personal careers. He valued passion,
integrity, and action, with little regard for personal advancement. They
resented him, rightly surmising that the only reason he had been promoted was
because he was more like he president than they were, and he was being groomed
as heir apparent.
On November 2, 2004, John Breckenridge’s
world began to unravel. The company he worked for, the one he had given so much
of his life to build was acquired in a hostile takeover. The president who had
been his friend and mentor was let go, and the backstabbing began in earnest.
John found himself the odd man out in the office as the others jostled to build
status in the new firm. Although his stellar record allowed him to survive the
first round of job cuts, that survival only made him more of a pariah to those
around him. Going to work was a chore now, and John had no friends like those
he had left in Aspen.
Karen was little help. John had spent nearly
two decades married more to his job than his wife, and he found she was more of
a stranger than a comforter as he struggled in his new role. When he spoke
about changing jobs, she blew up. “Why did I have to give up nursing for your
career?” she said. “Why do we have to move again, just because you can’t get
along at work? Can’t you see what the move did to our kids?”
Seeing the hurt and anger in Karen’s eyes,
John stopped sharing and turned to his bottle for comfort. In time that caused
even more tension in the home, and it slowed him down at work when he really
needed to excel. John would often drink himself into oblivion when on business
trips rather than thinking about where his life and career were going. On his
last trip he hadn’t slept much and had worked far too hard. Midmorning he had
been felled by a massive heart attack.
All of this history passed through John
Breckenridge’s mind as he woke after the operation. It was time for a change.
Question:
1.
Identify
the stressors in John Breckenridge’s life. Which ones could he have prevented?
2.
What
were the results of the stress? Would you consider these to be typical to
stress situations and lifestyle choices John made, or was John Breckenridge
unlucky?
3.
Assume
you are a career coach retained by John Breckenridge to guide him through his
next decisions. How would you recommend that John modify his lifestyle and
behavior to reduce stress? Should he change jobs? Do you believe he is capable
of reducing his stress alone? If not, where should he seek help?
CASE: III The
Shipping Industry Accounting Team
For the past five years I have been working at McKay, Sanderson, and
Smith Associates, a mid-sized accounting firm in Boston that specializes in
commercial accounting and audits. My particular specialty in accounting
practices for shipping companies, ranging from small fishing fleets to a couple
of the big firms with ships along the East Coast.
About 18 months ago McKay, Sanderson, and
Smith Associates became part of a large merger involving two other accounting
firms. These firms have offices in Miami, Seattle, Baton Rouge, and Los
Angeles. Although the other two accounting firms were much larger than McKay,
all three firms agreed to avoid centralizing the business around one office in
Los Angeles. Instead the new firm—called Goldberg, Choo, and McKay
Associates—would rely on teams across the country to “leverage the synergies of
our collective knowledge” (an often-cited statement from the managing partner
soon after the merger).
The merger affected me a year ago when my
boss (a senior partner and vice president of the merger) announced that I would
be working more closely with three people from the other two firms to become
the firm’s new shipping industry accounting team. The other team members were
Elias in Miami, Susan in Seattle, and Brad in Los Angeles. I had met Elias
briefly at a meeting in New York City during the merger but had never met Susan
or Brad, although I knew that they were shipping accounting professionals at
the other firms.
Initially the shipping team activities
involved e-mailing each other about new contracts and prospective clients. Later
we were asked to submit joint monthly reports on accounting statements and
issues. Normally I submitted my own monthly reports to summarize activities
involving my own clients. Coordinating the monthly report with three other
people took much more time, particularly because different accounting
documentation procedures across the three firms were still being resolved. It
took numerous e-mail messages an a few telephone calls to work out a reasonable
monthly report style.
During this aggravating process it became
apparent—to me at least—that this team business was costing me more time than
it was worth. Moreover, Brad in Los Angeles didn’t have a clue about how to
communicate with the rest of us. He rarely replied to e-mail. Instead he often
used the telephone tag. Brad arrived at work at 9:30 a.m. in Los Angeles (and
was often late), which is early afternoon in Boston. I typically have a
flexible work schedule from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. so I can chauffeur my kids
after school to sports and music lessons. So Brad and I have a window of less
than three hours to share information.
The biggest nuisance with the shipping
specialist accounting team started two weeks ago when the firm asked the four
of us to develop a new strategy for attracting more shipping firm business.
This new strategic plan is a messy business. Somehow we have to share our
thoughts on various approaches, agree on a new plan, and write a unified
submission to the managing partner. Already the project is taking most of my
time just writing and responding to e-mail and talking in conference calls
(which none of us did much before the team formed).
Susan and Brad have already had two or three
misunderstandings via e-mail about their different perspectives on delicate
matters in the strategic plan. The worst of these disagreements required a
conference call with all of us to resolve. Except for the most basic matters,
it seems that we can’t understand each other, let alone agree on key issues. I
have come to the conclusion that I would never want Brad to work in my Boston
office (thanks goodness he’s on the other side of the country). Although Elias
and I seem to agree on most points, the overall team can’t form a common vision
or strategy. I don’t know how Elias, Susan, or Brad feel, but I would be quite
happy to work somewhere that did not require any of these long-distance team
headaches.
Question:
1.
What
type of team was formed here? Was it necessary, in your opinion?
2.
Use the
team effectiveness model in Chapter 9 and related information in this chapter
to identify the strengths and weaknesses of this team’s environment, design,
and processes.
3.
Assuming
that these four people must continue to work as a team, recommend ways to
improve the team’s effectiveness.
CASE: IV Conflict In
Close Quarters
A team of psychologists at Moscow’s Institute for Biomedical Problems
(IBMP) wanted to learn more about the dynamics of long-term isolation in space.
This knowledge would be applied to the International Space Station, a joint project
of several countries that would send people into space for more than six
months. It would eventually include a trip to Mars taking up to three years.
IBMP set up a replica of the Mir space
station in Moscow. They then arranged for three international researchers from
Japan, Canada, and Austria 110 days isolated in a chamber the size of a train
car. This chamber joined a smaller chamber where four Russian cosmonauts had
already completed half of their 240 days of isolation. This was the first time
an international crew was involved in the studies. None of the participants
spoke English as their first language, yet they communicated throughout their
stay in English at varying levels of proficiency.
Judith Lapierre, a French-Canadian, was the
only female in the experiment. Along with obtaining a PhD in public health and
social medicine, Lapierre had studied space sociology at the International
Space University in France and conducted isolation research in the Antarctic.
This was her fourth trip to Russia, where she had learned the language. The
mission was supposed to have a second female participant from the Japanese
space program, but she was not selected by IBMP.
The Japanese and Austrian participants viewed
the participation of a woman as a favorable factor, says Lapierre. For example,
to make the surroundings more comfortable, they rearranged the furniture, hung
posters on the walls, and put a tablecloth on the kitchen table. “We adapted
our environment, whereas Russians just viewed it as something to be endured,”
she explains. “We decorated for Christmas because I’m the kind of person who
likes to host people.”
New Year’s Eve Turmoil
Ironically, it was at one of those social
events, the New Year’s Eve party, that events took a turn for the worse. After
drinking vodka (allowed by the Russian space agency), two of the Russian
cosmonauts got into a fistfight that left blood splattered on the chamber
walls. At one point a colleague hid the knives in the station’s kitchen because
of fears that the two Russians were about to stab each other. The two
cosmonauts, who generally did not get along, had to be restrained by other men.
Soon after that brawl, the Russian commander grabbed Lapierre, dragged her out
of view of the television monitoring cameras, and kissed her
aggressively—twice. Lapierre fought him off, but the message didn’t register.
He tried to kiss her again the next morning.
The next day the international crew
complained to IBMP about the behavior of the Russian cosmonauts. The Russian
institute apparently took no against the aggressors. Instead the institute’s
psychologists replied that the incidents were part of the experiment. They
wanted crew members to solve their personal problems with mature discussion
without asking for outside help. “You have to understand that Mir is an
autonomous object, far away from anything,” Vadim Gushin, the IBMP psychologist
in charge of project, explained after the experiment had ended in March. “If
the crew can’t solve problems among themselves, they can’t work together.”
Following IBMP’s response, the international
crew wrote a scathing letter to the Russian institute and the space agencies
involved in the experiment. “We had never expected such events to take place in
a highly controlled scientific experiment where individuals go through a
multistep selection process,” they wrote. “If we had known… we would not have
joined it as subjects.” The letter also complained about IBMP’s response to
their concerns.
Informed about the New Year’s Eve incident,
the Japanese space program convened an emergency meeting on January 2 to
address the incidents. Soon after the Japanese team member quit, apparently
shocked by IBMP’s inaction. He was replaced with a Russian researcher on the
international team. Ten days after the fight—a little over the month the
international team began the mission—the doors between the Russian and
international crews’ chambers were barred at the request of the international
research team. Lapierre later emphasized that this action was taken because of concerns
about violence, not the incident involving her.
A Stolen Kiss or Sexual Harassment
By the end of experiment in March, news of
the fistfight between the cosmonauts and the commander’s attempts to kiss
Lapierre had reached the public. Russian scientists attempted to play down the
kissing incident by saying that it was one fleeting kiss, a clash of cultures,
and a female participant who was too emotional.
“In the West, some kinds of kissing are
regarded as sexual harassment. In our culture it’s nothing,” said Russian
scientist Vadim Gushin in one interview. In another interview he explained,
“The problem of sexual harassment is given a lot of attention in North America
but less in Europe. In Russia it is even less of an issue, not because we are
more or less moral than the rest of the world; we just have different
priorities.”
Judith Lapierre says the kissing incident was
tolerable compared to this reaction from the Russian scientists who conducted
the experiment. “They don’t get it at all,” she complains. “They don’t think
anything is wrong. I’m more frustrated than ever. The worst thing is that they
don’t realize it was wrong.”
Norbert Kraft, the Austrian scientist on the
international team, also disagreed with the Russian interpretation of events. “They’re
trying to protect themselves,” he says. “They’re trying to put the fault on
others. But this is not a cultural issue. If a woman doesn’t want to be kissed,
it is not acceptable.”
Question:
1.
Identify
the different conflict episodes that exist in this case. Who was in conflict
with whom?
2.
What are
the sources of conflict for these conflict incidents?
3.
What
conflict management style(s) did Lapierre, the international team, and Gushin
use to resolve these conflicts? What style(s) would have worked best in the
situation?
CASE: V Hillton’s Transformation
Twenty years ago Hillton was a small city (about 70,000 residents) that
served as an outer to a large Midwest metropolitan area. The city treated
employees like family and gave them a great deal of autonomy in their work.
Everyone in the organization (including the two labor unions representing
employees) implicitly agreed that the leaders and supervisors of the
organization should rise through the ranks based on their experience. Few people
were ever hired from the outside into middle or senior positions. The rule of
employment at Hillton was to learn the job skills, maintain a reasonably good
work record, and wait your turn for promotion.
Hillton had grown rapidly since the
mid-1970s. As the population grew, so did the municipality’s workforce to keep
pace with the increasing demand for municipal services. This meant that
employees were promoted fairly quickly and were almost guaranteed employment.
In fact, until recently Hillton had never laid off any employee. The
organization’s culture could be described as one of entitlement and comfort.
Neither the elected city council members nor the city manager bothered the
department managers about their work. There were few costs controls because
rapid growth forced emphasis on keeping up with the population expansion. The
public became somewhat more critical of the city’s poor services, including
road construction at inconvenient times and the apparent lack of respect some
employees showed towards taxpayers.
During these expansion years Hillton put most
of its money into “outside” (also called “hard”) municipal services such as
road building, utility construction and maintenance, fire and police
protection, recreational facilities, and land use control. This emphasis
occurred because an expanding population demanded more of these services, and
most of Hillton’s senior people came from the outside services group. For
example, Hillton’s city manager for many years was a road development engineer.
The “inside” workers (taxation, community services, and the like) tended to
have less seniority, and their departments were given less priority.
As commuter and road systems developed,
Hillton attracted more upwardly mobile professionals to the community. Some
infrastructure demands continued, but now these suburban dwellers wanted more
“soft” services, such as libraries, social activities, and community services.
They also began complaining about how the municipality was being run. The
population had more than doubled between the 1970s and 1990s, and it was
increasingly apparent that the city organization needed more corporate
planning, information systems, organization development, and cost control
systems. Resident voiced their concerns in various ways that the municipality
was not providing the quality of management that they would expect from a city
of its size.
In 1996 a new mayor and council replaced most
of the previous incumbents, mainly on the platform of improving the
municipality’s management structure. The new council gave the city manager,
along with two other senior managers, an early retirement buyout package.
Rather than promoting form the lower ranks, council decided to fill all three
positions with qualified candidates from large municipal corporations in the
region. The following year several long-term managers left Hillton, and at
least half of those positions were filled by people from outside the
organization.
In less than two years Hillton had eight
senior or departmental managers hired from other municipalities who played a
key role in changing the organization’s value system. These eight managers
became known (often with negative connotations) as the “professionals.” They
worked closely with each other to change the way middle and lower-level
managers had operated for many years. They brought in a new computer system and
emphasized cost controls where managers previously had complete autonomy.
Promotions were increasingly based more on merit than seniority.
These managers frequently announced in
meetings and newsletters that municipal employees must provide superlative
customer service, and that Hillton would become one of the most
customer-friendly places for citizens and those doing business with the
municipality. To this end these managers were quick to support the public’s
increasing demand for more soft services, including expanded library services
and recreational activities. And when population growth flattened for a few
years, the city manager and the other professionals gained council support to
lay off a few outside workers due to lack of demand for hard services.
One of the most significant changes was that
the outside departments no longer held dominant positions in city management.
Most of the professional managers had worked exclusively in administrative and
related inside jobs. Two had Master of Business Administration degrees. This
led to some tension between the professional managers and the older outside
managers.
Even before the layoffs, managers of outside
departments resisted the changes more than others. These managers complained
that their employees with the highest seniority were turned down for
promotions. They argued for more budget and warned that infrastructure problems
would cause liability problems. Informally these outside managers were
supported by the labor union representing outside workers. The union leaders
tried to bargain for more job guarantees, whereas the union representing inside
workers focused more on improving wages and benefits. Leaders of the outside
union made several statements in the local media that the city had “lost its
heart” and that the public would suffer from the actions of the new
professionals.
Question:
1.
Contrast
Hillton’s earlier corporate culture with the emerging set of cultural values.
2.
Considering
the difficulty in changing organizational culture, why did Hillton’s management
seem to be successful at this transformation?
3.
Identify
two other strategies that the city might consider to reinforce the new set of
corporate values.
No comments:
Post a Comment