Hello all,
Can we do some case studies in this section? The idea is this: One of us will come up with a case (real or fictional), which is not too long. This case will be open for analysis and discussion for a week. The readers, if interested, can analyze the case and come up with suitable solutions. Please feel free to modify the conditions to suit all.
Regards,
Sree
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
9Can we do some case studies in this section? The idea is this: One of us will come up with a case (real or fictional), which is not too long. This case will be open for analysis and discussion for a week. The readers, if interested, can analyze the case and come up with suitable solutions. Please feel free to modify the conditions to suit all.
Regards,
Sree
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sree,
Good idea. Here is one from me.
Case study
Satish was a Sales Manager for Industrial Products Co in City branch. A week ago, he was promoted and shifted to HO as Deputy Manager - Product Management for a division of products which he was not very familiar with. 3 days ago, the company VP - Mr. George, convened a meeting of all Product Managers. Satish's new boss (Product Manager Ketan) was not able to attend due to some other preoccupation. Hence, the Marketing Director - Preet - asked Satish to attend the meeting as this would give him an exposure into his new role.
At the beginning of the meeting, Preet introduced Satish very briefly to the VP. The meeting started with an address from the VP and soon it got into a series of questions from him to every Product Manager. George, of course, was pretty thorough with every single product of the company and he was known to be pushy and blunt veteran in the field. Most of the Product Managers were very clear of George's ways of working and had thoroughly prepared for the meeting and were giving to the point answers. George then started with Satish. Satish, being new to the product, was quite confused and fared miserably.
Preet immediately understood that George had possibly failed to remember that Satish was new to the job. He thought of interrupting George's questioning and giving a discrete reminder that Satish was new. But by that time, George, who was pretty upset with lack of preparation by Satish made a public statement, "Gentlemen, you are witnessing here an example of sloppy work and this can't be excused."
Now Preet was in two minds - should he interrupt George and tell him that Satish is new in that position OR should he wait till the end of the meeting and tell George privately. Preet chose the second option.
Satish was visibly angry at the treatment meted out by George but he also chose to keep mum. George quickly closed the meeting saying that he found in general lack of planning in the department and asked Preet to stay back in the room for further discussions.
Before Preet could give any explanation on Satish, George asked him, "Tell me openly, Preet, was I too rough with that boy?" Preet said, "Yes, you were. In fact, I was about to remind you that Satish is new to the job." George explained that the fact that Satish was new to the job didn't quite register with him during the meeting. George admitted that he had made a mistake and asked his secretary to get Satish to report to the room immediately.
A perplexed and uneasy Satish reported to George's room after a few minutes.
George, looking Satish straight into his eyes, said, "I have done something which I should have never even thought of and I want to apologize to you. It is my mistake that I did not recollect that you were new to the job when I was questioning you."
Satish was left speechless.
George continued, "I would like to state a few things clearly to you. Your job is to make sure that people like me and your bosses do not make stupid decisions. We have good confidence in your abilities and that is why we have brought you to HO. For everybody, time is required for learning. I will expect you to know all the nuances of your product in 3 months' time. Until then, you have my complete confidence."
George closed the conversation with a big reassuring handshake with Satish.
Now the questions in this case study::
1. Was it at all necessary for George to apologize to such a junior employee like Satish?
2. If you were in Satish's place, how would you respond to George's apology?
3. Was George correct in saying that Satish is there to correct "stupid mistakes" of his boss and George?
4. Would you employ George in your company?
5. Did Preet make a mistake by not intervening during the meeting and correcting George's misconception about Satish?
6. As an HR professional, how would you define the character of George - bullying but later regretting? Does his attitude need to be corrected?
7. Would you be happy to have George/Preet as your boss?
Thanks
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Good idea. Here is one from me.
Case study
Satish was a Sales Manager for Industrial Products Co in City branch. A week ago, he was promoted and shifted to HO as Deputy Manager - Product Management for a division of products which he was not very familiar with. 3 days ago, the company VP - Mr. George, convened a meeting of all Product Managers. Satish's new boss (Product Manager Ketan) was not able to attend due to some other preoccupation. Hence, the Marketing Director - Preet - asked Satish to attend the meeting as this would give him an exposure into his new role.
At the beginning of the meeting, Preet introduced Satish very briefly to the VP. The meeting started with an address from the VP and soon it got into a series of questions from him to every Product Manager. George, of course, was pretty thorough with every single product of the company and he was known to be pushy and blunt veteran in the field. Most of the Product Managers were very clear of George's ways of working and had thoroughly prepared for the meeting and were giving to the point answers. George then started with Satish. Satish, being new to the product, was quite confused and fared miserably.
Preet immediately understood that George had possibly failed to remember that Satish was new to the job. He thought of interrupting George's questioning and giving a discrete reminder that Satish was new. But by that time, George, who was pretty upset with lack of preparation by Satish made a public statement, "Gentlemen, you are witnessing here an example of sloppy work and this can't be excused."
Now Preet was in two minds - should he interrupt George and tell him that Satish is new in that position OR should he wait till the end of the meeting and tell George privately. Preet chose the second option.
Satish was visibly angry at the treatment meted out by George but he also chose to keep mum. George quickly closed the meeting saying that he found in general lack of planning in the department and asked Preet to stay back in the room for further discussions.
Before Preet could give any explanation on Satish, George asked him, "Tell me openly, Preet, was I too rough with that boy?" Preet said, "Yes, you were. In fact, I was about to remind you that Satish is new to the job." George explained that the fact that Satish was new to the job didn't quite register with him during the meeting. George admitted that he had made a mistake and asked his secretary to get Satish to report to the room immediately.
A perplexed and uneasy Satish reported to George's room after a few minutes.
George, looking Satish straight into his eyes, said, "I have done something which I should have never even thought of and I want to apologize to you. It is my mistake that I did not recollect that you were new to the job when I was questioning you."
Satish was left speechless.
George continued, "I would like to state a few things clearly to you. Your job is to make sure that people like me and your bosses do not make stupid decisions. We have good confidence in your abilities and that is why we have brought you to HO. For everybody, time is required for learning. I will expect you to know all the nuances of your product in 3 months' time. Until then, you have my complete confidence."
George closed the conversation with a big reassuring handshake with Satish.
Now the questions in this case study::
1. Was it at all necessary for George to apologize to such a junior employee like Satish?
2. If you were in Satish's place, how would you respond to George's apology?
3. Was George correct in saying that Satish is there to correct "stupid mistakes" of his boss and George?
4. Would you employ George in your company?
5. Did Preet make a mistake by not intervening during the meeting and correcting George's misconception about Satish?
6. As an HR professional, how would you define the character of George - bullying but later regretting? Does his attitude need to be corrected?
7. Would you be happy to have George/Preet as your boss?
Thanks
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Case Analysis
1. Yes, it was necessary for George to apologize to Satish. Even though Satish is new to the HO and is much junior to George, in order to keep up the morale of Satish, George should apologize. This will not only reassure Satish's attachment towards the company but also motivate him in learning things faster.
2. If I were in Satish's place, I would thank George and promise him to learn things well within the given time.
3. The word 'stupid mistake' creates confusion. George only meant that Satish should not make the top authorities feel that they have made a wrong decision by promoting Satish. What George wanted was Satish's support. Hence, the bosses expect Satish to work according to the policy (both written and unwritten) of the company.
4. Yes, I would employ George in my company. The ability of one to realize his mistake is truly appreciable, especially if he is in a much senior position.
5. Not really. It was alright for Preet to remain quiet during George's talk. But he made it a point to remind him after the meeting.
6. George is a natural task-oriented leader. He becomes people-oriented only when stimulated. When he is into a task, he does it with full dedication. He is a trustworthy person. He has to enhance his soft skills by making him an equal task-oriented and people-oriented leader.
7. Yes, I would be happy to have George or Preet as my boss.
A general comment: Satish's boss should have familiarized Satish with the formalities of the meeting with George.
Conclusion:
When a person goes up in a career ladder, he has to have an overall view of the people and the processes. He has to understand that it is people who do the processes. He has to understand the importance of HR Management. At the same time, he should be uncompromising in the processes and quality. This would make a leader a class apart.
Thank you, psyche, for the case.
Thank you, Bala, for your support.
Sree
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Yes, it was necessary for George to apologize to Satish. Even though Satish is new to the HO and is much junior to George, in order to keep up the morale of Satish, George should apologize. This will not only reassure Satish's attachment towards the company but also motivate him in learning things faster.
2. If I were in Satish's place, I would thank George and promise him to learn things well within the given time.
3. The word 'stupid mistake' creates confusion. George only meant that Satish should not make the top authorities feel that they have made a wrong decision by promoting Satish. What George wanted was Satish's support. Hence, the bosses expect Satish to work according to the policy (both written and unwritten) of the company.
4. Yes, I would employ George in my company. The ability of one to realize his mistake is truly appreciable, especially if he is in a much senior position.
5. Not really. It was alright for Preet to remain quiet during George's talk. But he made it a point to remind him after the meeting.
6. George is a natural task-oriented leader. He becomes people-oriented only when stimulated. When he is into a task, he does it with full dedication. He is a trustworthy person. He has to enhance his soft skills by making him an equal task-oriented and people-oriented leader.
7. Yes, I would be happy to have George or Preet as my boss.
A general comment: Satish's boss should have familiarized Satish with the formalities of the meeting with George.
Conclusion:
When a person goes up in a career ladder, he has to have an overall view of the people and the processes. He has to understand that it is people who do the processes. He has to understand the importance of HR Management. At the same time, he should be uncompromising in the processes and quality. This would make a leader a class apart.
Thank you, psyche, for the case.
Thank you, Bala, for your support.
Sree
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I fully agree with Sree in the analysis except that Preet should have intervened during the meeting to correct George's misconception about Satish. This would have reduced the embarrassment for Satish in front of others in the meeting.
Thanks, Bala, for the excellent case study.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks, Bala, for the excellent case study.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you, Sree and Ramesh.
Sree has presented excellent analysis. I tend to concur with Ramesh as far as Preet's intervention is concerned. In my opinion, senior people like George should ideally never forget that Satish is new to his job. In fact, instead of questioning him intensely, he should have given him encouragement and confidence. He has to be a mentor and get into this mode as he progresses in his career. He may tend to jump to quick conclusions, like "quickly closed the meeting saying that he found a general lack of planning in the department." Has he reached this conclusion solely based on Satish's response?
Thanks once again.
Bala
I also agree that Preet should have briefed Satish adequately on the modalities of such review meetings.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(1)
Amend(0)
Sree has presented excellent analysis. I tend to concur with Ramesh as far as Preet's intervention is concerned. In my opinion, senior people like George should ideally never forget that Satish is new to his job. In fact, instead of questioning him intensely, he should have given him encouragement and confidence. He has to be a mentor and get into this mode as he progresses in his career. He may tend to jump to quick conclusions, like "quickly closed the meeting saying that he found a general lack of planning in the department." Has he reached this conclusion solely based on Satish's response?
Thanks once again.
Bala
I also agree that Preet should have briefed Satish adequately on the modalities of such review meetings.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Dear all friends,
I have another case study for discussion:
Case Scenario
Adam, fresh from school, was a newly recruited HR practitioner. During his first month on the job, he was asked to be in charge of the orientation program for the entire organization. Being new, he followed closely to the processes. Recently, Roy joined the organization, and Adam is required to orient him. On Roy's first day of work, Adam brought him around the organization for an introduction to the rest of the staff. Unfortunately, Roy's assigned mentor was not around; hence, Adam was unable to make an official introduction for Roy to meet up with his mentor. In the afternoon, during the HR briefing, Adam mentioned to Roy that there is a buddy system in place but is only on an opt-in basis. Roy requested to opt for a buddy. Adam was rather surprised by Roy's request as, according to Adam's manager, Jean, no one in the organization has requested a buddy.
Hence, Adam checked with Jean on the criteria for getting a buddy for Roy, and according to her, Adam found out that it needs to be someone preferably from Roy's department. Having clarified the criteria, Adam was supposed to get a buddy for Roy; unfortunately, this issue was clearly forgotten by Adam due to his busy schedule as he was involved in other HR matters as well and did not follow up promptly with Roy's request.
One week later, Adam met Roy at a lunch gathering. Adam greeted Roy and asked him casually how he was doing and if he had adapted well to his job. Roy asked Adam bluntly and angrily where his buddy was that he had requested. At that moment, Adam recalled the existence of this request and unwittingly told Roy jokingly that he thought Roy was joking with him about the request for a buddy, as he did not admit to Roy that he had clearly forgotten about the whole issue. Roy was very angered by Adam's response and told him off, stating he was very serious about getting a buddy, and it was Adam's responsibility to do so. Adam, clearly embarrassed and guilty about his mistake, apologized immediately and promised to get him a buddy. On the same day, a buddy named Sam was found for Roy. Roy was very unhappy with Adam and confronted Adam and his buddy when he was able to have an official meetup session with his mentor. Adam explained to Roy that the organization has no current practice in place for meetup sessions to be arranged between mentors and mentees. It is a practice for mentees to take the self-initiative to arrange meetings with their mentors. Also, his mentor was currently out of town and would only be back the next day. Adam, being a new staff member himself, was speaking from personal experience and what Jean had told him at that moment. Sam, who was present, agreed and helped explain the practice to Roy. Roy kept quiet, and Adam unknowingly thought that Roy had understood the organization's practice. Hence, Adam did not continue to check with Roy on this aspect.
The following day, Roy had a feedback session with his manager, and Adam was called upon to sit in as part of the orientation program. Roy brought up the issues of Adam's failure to get him a buddy promptly and that he was not introduced to his mentor at all. He complained about the poor management of the HR mentor and buddy system, expressing his unhappiness with Adam as he felt Adam was not doing his job. Adam tried to explain to Roy and his manager about what happened, reassured Roy that he would take his suggestions for improving the system, and was apologetic about the issue. He told Roy's manager that he would bring Roy to see his mentor after the session as the mentor was back in the office after being on leave for the past week.
Roy was still very unhappy with Adam and continued telling Adam off in front of his manager.
Questions:
1. From an HR practitioner's point of view, what should Adam do to resolve the issue?
2. Roy is very unhappy with Adam and holds it against him even though all has been done and followed up. What should Adam, as HR, do to resolve this, and should Jean, as Adam's manager, do something?
3. What role does Roy's manager play in this issue, and should he be implicated?
Please discuss and help Adam resolve the case.
Regards,
Siew Chern :)
From Singapore, Singapore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have another case study for discussion:
Case Scenario
Adam, fresh from school, was a newly recruited HR practitioner. During his first month on the job, he was asked to be in charge of the orientation program for the entire organization. Being new, he followed closely to the processes. Recently, Roy joined the organization, and Adam is required to orient him. On Roy's first day of work, Adam brought him around the organization for an introduction to the rest of the staff. Unfortunately, Roy's assigned mentor was not around; hence, Adam was unable to make an official introduction for Roy to meet up with his mentor. In the afternoon, during the HR briefing, Adam mentioned to Roy that there is a buddy system in place but is only on an opt-in basis. Roy requested to opt for a buddy. Adam was rather surprised by Roy's request as, according to Adam's manager, Jean, no one in the organization has requested a buddy.
Hence, Adam checked with Jean on the criteria for getting a buddy for Roy, and according to her, Adam found out that it needs to be someone preferably from Roy's department. Having clarified the criteria, Adam was supposed to get a buddy for Roy; unfortunately, this issue was clearly forgotten by Adam due to his busy schedule as he was involved in other HR matters as well and did not follow up promptly with Roy's request.
One week later, Adam met Roy at a lunch gathering. Adam greeted Roy and asked him casually how he was doing and if he had adapted well to his job. Roy asked Adam bluntly and angrily where his buddy was that he had requested. At that moment, Adam recalled the existence of this request and unwittingly told Roy jokingly that he thought Roy was joking with him about the request for a buddy, as he did not admit to Roy that he had clearly forgotten about the whole issue. Roy was very angered by Adam's response and told him off, stating he was very serious about getting a buddy, and it was Adam's responsibility to do so. Adam, clearly embarrassed and guilty about his mistake, apologized immediately and promised to get him a buddy. On the same day, a buddy named Sam was found for Roy. Roy was very unhappy with Adam and confronted Adam and his buddy when he was able to have an official meetup session with his mentor. Adam explained to Roy that the organization has no current practice in place for meetup sessions to be arranged between mentors and mentees. It is a practice for mentees to take the self-initiative to arrange meetings with their mentors. Also, his mentor was currently out of town and would only be back the next day. Adam, being a new staff member himself, was speaking from personal experience and what Jean had told him at that moment. Sam, who was present, agreed and helped explain the practice to Roy. Roy kept quiet, and Adam unknowingly thought that Roy had understood the organization's practice. Hence, Adam did not continue to check with Roy on this aspect.
The following day, Roy had a feedback session with his manager, and Adam was called upon to sit in as part of the orientation program. Roy brought up the issues of Adam's failure to get him a buddy promptly and that he was not introduced to his mentor at all. He complained about the poor management of the HR mentor and buddy system, expressing his unhappiness with Adam as he felt Adam was not doing his job. Adam tried to explain to Roy and his manager about what happened, reassured Roy that he would take his suggestions for improving the system, and was apologetic about the issue. He told Roy's manager that he would bring Roy to see his mentor after the session as the mentor was back in the office after being on leave for the past week.
Roy was still very unhappy with Adam and continued telling Adam off in front of his manager.
Questions:
1. From an HR practitioner's point of view, what should Adam do to resolve the issue?
2. Roy is very unhappy with Adam and holds it against him even though all has been done and followed up. What should Adam, as HR, do to resolve this, and should Jean, as Adam's manager, do something?
3. What role does Roy's manager play in this issue, and should he be implicated?
Please discuss and help Adam resolve the case.
Regards,
Siew Chern :)
From Singapore, Singapore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Was it at all necessary for George to apologize to such a junior employee like Satish?
If you were in Satish's place, how would you respond to George's apology?
Was George correct in saying that Satish is there to correct "stupid mistake" of his boss and George?
Would you employ George in your company?
Did Preet make a mistake by not intervening during the meeting and correcting George's misconception about Satish?
As an HR professional, how would you define the character of George - bullying but later regretting? Does his attitude need to be corrected?
Would you be happy to have George/Preet as your boss?
Hi Bala,
Interesting Case,
Here are my answers:
1. Definitely, it's necessary to apologize.
2. Thank you, sir. I will prove my best. (Since he has apologized very honestly).
3. We can't say it is the right answer, but it would help an employee to understand that they are also human beings and sometimes they too make mistakes.
4. I will.
5. Yes, he should have explained on the spot.
6. Of course.
7. No.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If you were in Satish's place, how would you respond to George's apology?
Was George correct in saying that Satish is there to correct "stupid mistake" of his boss and George?
Would you employ George in your company?
Did Preet make a mistake by not intervening during the meeting and correcting George's misconception about Satish?
As an HR professional, how would you define the character of George - bullying but later regretting? Does his attitude need to be corrected?
Would you be happy to have George/Preet as your boss?
Hi Bala,
Interesting Case,
Here are my answers:
1. Definitely, it's necessary to apologize.
2. Thank you, sir. I will prove my best. (Since he has apologized very honestly).
3. We can't say it is the right answer, but it would help an employee to understand that they are also human beings and sometimes they too make mistakes.
4. I will.
5. Yes, he should have explained on the spot.
6. Of course.
7. No.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Here's my two cents...
Adam was new to the job; therefore, he was in the process of getting oriented. However, he did falter by not taking Roy's buddy request seriously. This was probably the only mistake he made, for which he later apologized.
As an HR practitioner, Adam should inform Roy about the situation and apologize, which he does. As for Roy's manager, it is up to Roy whether he wants to implicate Adam or not. Implicating him will only complicate the situation unnecessarily.
Roy should move on in the organization rather than dwelling on one mistake by Adam. It's understandable that he felt disappointed, but he should acknowledge that such lapses can occur in organizations. This is not to say it doesn't matter, but after Adam apologized, he should forgive.
Fair enough, if Roy complained about Adam, I think Jean should simply warn Adam, considering he is new. Jean should also ensure Adam understands the necessary procedures to avoid repeating similar mistakes.
That's all. Looking forward to more analysis. :)
Cheers
From India, Bhubaneswar
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Adam was new to the job; therefore, he was in the process of getting oriented. However, he did falter by not taking Roy's buddy request seriously. This was probably the only mistake he made, for which he later apologized.
As an HR practitioner, Adam should inform Roy about the situation and apologize, which he does. As for Roy's manager, it is up to Roy whether he wants to implicate Adam or not. Implicating him will only complicate the situation unnecessarily.
Roy should move on in the organization rather than dwelling on one mistake by Adam. It's understandable that he felt disappointed, but he should acknowledge that such lapses can occur in organizations. This is not to say it doesn't matter, but after Adam apologized, he should forgive.
Fair enough, if Roy complained about Adam, I think Jean should simply warn Adam, considering he is new. Jean should also ensure Adam understands the necessary procedures to avoid repeating similar mistakes.
That's all. Looking forward to more analysis. :)
Cheers
From India, Bhubaneswar
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Here is another case, Look forward to meaningful analysis
Lalitha joined XYZ, a family run business on November 04 as she was recommended by a VP of the organisation to the top man and as she required a break in her career. The money was better and the job profile also looked exciting from the outside. She was given the designation of Business Development Associate despite being an Asst Manager at her previous organization. As she was not much deterred by the designation, she accepted the position and joined office full of energy to do well in the new assignment.
However she has been sitting idle for the past one year not doing a single days work. Her boss just will not let her do any work nor will he accept any of her initiatives in the direction. At times he gives her some tidbits of work and just when she thinks she is getting some meaningful assignment, he snatches it away from her and she is again back to square one.
A couple of times she has walked into the Bosses office and told him blankly on his face that she is simply sitting and doing no work but it has not helped. A project proposal submitted by her on her own initiative was turned down without being given a valid reason.
1. Why is Lalitha's boss behaving so?
2. What should Lalitha do given the above situation
3. Lalitha has been looking desperately for a change but to no avail
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
Lalitha joined XYZ, a family run business on November 04 as she was recommended by a VP of the organisation to the top man and as she required a break in her career. The money was better and the job profile also looked exciting from the outside. She was given the designation of Business Development Associate despite being an Asst Manager at her previous organization. As she was not much deterred by the designation, she accepted the position and joined office full of energy to do well in the new assignment.
However she has been sitting idle for the past one year not doing a single days work. Her boss just will not let her do any work nor will he accept any of her initiatives in the direction. At times he gives her some tidbits of work and just when she thinks she is getting some meaningful assignment, he snatches it away from her and she is again back to square one.
A couple of times she has walked into the Bosses office and told him blankly on his face that she is simply sitting and doing no work but it has not helped. A project proposal submitted by her on her own initiative was turned down without being given a valid reason.
1. Why is Lalitha's boss behaving so?
2. What should Lalitha do given the above situation
3. Lalitha has been looking desperately for a change but to no avail
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
Now the questions in this case study:
1. Was it at all necessary for George to apologize to such a junior employee like Satish? -- YES
2. If you were in Satish's place, how would you respond to George's apology? -- ACCEPT AND REASSURE HIM OF MY ABILITIES
3. Was George correct in saying that Satish is there to correct "stupid mistake" of his boss and George? -- YES
4. Would you employ George in your company? -- YES
5. Did Preet make a mistake by not intervening during the meeting and correcting George's misconception about Satish? -- YES, IF PREET HAD DONE SO, THEN THE ENTIRE EPISODE COULD'VE BEEN AVOIDED.
6. As an HR professional, how would you define the character of George - bullying but later regretting? Does his attitude need to be corrected? -- NO
7. Would you be happy to have George/Preet as your boss? -- GEORGE - YES, PREET - NO
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Was it at all necessary for George to apologize to such a junior employee like Satish? -- YES
2. If you were in Satish's place, how would you respond to George's apology? -- ACCEPT AND REASSURE HIM OF MY ABILITIES
3. Was George correct in saying that Satish is there to correct "stupid mistake" of his boss and George? -- YES
4. Would you employ George in your company? -- YES
5. Did Preet make a mistake by not intervening during the meeting and correcting George's misconception about Satish? -- YES, IF PREET HAD DONE SO, THEN THE ENTIRE EPISODE COULD'VE BEEN AVOIDED.
6. As an HR professional, how would you define the character of George - bullying but later regretting? Does his attitude need to be corrected? -- NO
7. Would you be happy to have George/Preet as your boss? -- GEORGE - YES, PREET - NO
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Bala and Psyched,
I fully agree with Sree's opinion. The only point I differ from Sree on is that Preet should have introduced Satish to all the board members and conducted a formal induction for HQ people, not to all, but definitely to all the top brass people (HOD). I will be happy if my boss is like George, but not like Preet. Keeping silence in the meeting when George was speaking was quite okay on Satish's part. In this way, he is not spoiling the momentum of the meeting. It's only Satish's part that has gone bad. Thanks, Psyched. Can we have more such case studies?
Regards,
Kamal
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I fully agree with Sree's opinion. The only point I differ from Sree on is that Preet should have introduced Satish to all the board members and conducted a formal induction for HQ people, not to all, but definitely to all the top brass people (HOD). I will be happy if my boss is like George, but not like Preet. Keeping silence in the meeting when George was speaking was quite okay on Satish's part. In this way, he is not spoiling the momentum of the meeting. It's only Satish's part that has gone bad. Thanks, Psyched. Can we have more such case studies?
Regards,
Kamal
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for posting those case studies. Is there any other link within CiteHr.com where we could find other case studies or scenarios for HR? Your help in this matter is much appreciated. Bez.
From Serbia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From Serbia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Here's another Case Study...
Rakshita is working as the regional manager in the B2B marketing department of a company going through turbulent times. Although the product she is selling is great, she can feel that the clients are apprehensive about buying the product because of the issues being faced by the company. She cannot easily get the same profile in some other company because she lacks experience, and here she is feeling frustrated because she is not able to meet the targets due to the market situation. How should she deal with the situation?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Rakshita is working as the regional manager in the B2B marketing department of a company going through turbulent times. Although the product she is selling is great, she can feel that the clients are apprehensive about buying the product because of the issues being faced by the company. She cannot easily get the same profile in some other company because she lacks experience, and here she is feeling frustrated because she is not able to meet the targets due to the market situation. How should she deal with the situation?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Pranati,
(Case Analysis)
Firstly, Rakshita is a regional manager, so I can't understand how she is lacking experience. Maybe you are talking about her having less experience as a regional manager. In this case, even if she has less experience, she should consider moving on to another company for more job satisfaction. Moreover, if she has less than 6-10 months of experience, she should not feel bad if she gets the same position in another company. If she has more experience than that, she can easily find a good job based on her past experience.
However, she should first talk to her seniors as well as subordinates about the issue. By talking to her subordinates, she will understand the exact reasons why they are not able to achieve their targets and how other teams are succeeding.
If it is found that the targets are unreasonably high, then she should discuss this with her seniors presenting the facts.
Additionally, customers can also be contacted to understand why they feel apprehensive about purchasing their products.
Your analysis, suggestions, and feedback are sought after.
Regards
(Note: Corrected the spelling, grammar, and formatting for better clarity and readability.)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
(Case Analysis)
Firstly, Rakshita is a regional manager, so I can't understand how she is lacking experience. Maybe you are talking about her having less experience as a regional manager. In this case, even if she has less experience, she should consider moving on to another company for more job satisfaction. Moreover, if she has less than 6-10 months of experience, she should not feel bad if she gets the same position in another company. If she has more experience than that, she can easily find a good job based on her past experience.
However, she should first talk to her seniors as well as subordinates about the issue. By talking to her subordinates, she will understand the exact reasons why they are not able to achieve their targets and how other teams are succeeding.
If it is found that the targets are unreasonably high, then she should discuss this with her seniors presenting the facts.
Additionally, customers can also be contacted to understand why they feel apprehensive about purchasing their products.
Your analysis, suggestions, and feedback are sought after.
Regards
(Note: Corrected the spelling, grammar, and formatting for better clarity and readability.)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
my analysis for satish's case study is as follows:
rather then giving answeres to the questions raised, since it is from the perspective of HRM i would have following points.
1. Satish was promoted as a deputy manager- product Management from a position of sales manager of a city branch before some days only, before giving any assessments and reply to the posted querries, one should know that the person was promoted on what basis.........his ability to meet the sale targest....? or what? if he was promoted because he has till date meets only sales targets...he should have been promoted to a more accountable sales related positions, whereas for the position of product manager...one needs to know the technical , commercial and market related fundamentals of product in question. Ans since Satish has already accepted the offered position, my personal view suggested that he should have been thorough with his prepartion for the meeting.
hence, the answeres the the querries raised in randoms can be as.
1. George should not have apologised to satish.
2. If I was in the position of satish place , George apology can be taken as the goodwill gesture just to remind satish of what he expects out of him in future .
3. Yes George was correct in saying that ‘satish' is there to correct the stupid mistakes made by his seniors ..the only implications by saying this was he wanted to check the confidence level of a guy who has just been promoted to a more responsible position.
4. If I m the boss of the company, I would certainly employe geroge.
5. No, preet did not make any mistake by intervening into conversations between George and satish because it could have negatively impacted satish psyche that every time he does something which companies senior expects him to do , no matter whether he does it or not , I have someone to save me from the actions, and this very behavior of preet could have impacted the future performance of satish in his new position.
6. As a HR person , Georges attitude is of ‘result oriented' rather than an excuse oriented, if only correction George needed is to make him aware of the effects of negative comments he has made about a person who has been appointed at a new responsible place and he is meeting him for the first time. Others are as usual he did everythin right.
7. I would be happy to have George and preet as my bosses.
this analysis is from my perspective........
paulik.desai.
Rajhans group,Surat.
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
rather then giving answeres to the questions raised, since it is from the perspective of HRM i would have following points.
1. Satish was promoted as a deputy manager- product Management from a position of sales manager of a city branch before some days only, before giving any assessments and reply to the posted querries, one should know that the person was promoted on what basis.........his ability to meet the sale targest....? or what? if he was promoted because he has till date meets only sales targets...he should have been promoted to a more accountable sales related positions, whereas for the position of product manager...one needs to know the technical , commercial and market related fundamentals of product in question. Ans since Satish has already accepted the offered position, my personal view suggested that he should have been thorough with his prepartion for the meeting.
hence, the answeres the the querries raised in randoms can be as.
1. George should not have apologised to satish.
2. If I was in the position of satish place , George apology can be taken as the goodwill gesture just to remind satish of what he expects out of him in future .
3. Yes George was correct in saying that ‘satish' is there to correct the stupid mistakes made by his seniors ..the only implications by saying this was he wanted to check the confidence level of a guy who has just been promoted to a more responsible position.
4. If I m the boss of the company, I would certainly employe geroge.
5. No, preet did not make any mistake by intervening into conversations between George and satish because it could have negatively impacted satish psyche that every time he does something which companies senior expects him to do , no matter whether he does it or not , I have someone to save me from the actions, and this very behavior of preet could have impacted the future performance of satish in his new position.
6. As a HR person , Georges attitude is of ‘result oriented' rather than an excuse oriented, if only correction George needed is to make him aware of the effects of negative comments he has made about a person who has been appointed at a new responsible place and he is meeting him for the first time. Others are as usual he did everythin right.
7. I would be happy to have George and preet as my bosses.
this analysis is from my perspective........
paulik.desai.
Rajhans group,Surat.
From India, Vadodara
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Here is a case study for analysis.
The performance of supervisors and executives (225 in number) of MITCO LTD is conducted annually by superior officers. The parameters taken into account and given equal weightage are performance at work, sense of responsibility, superiors' dependability on subordinates, community activity, initiative, regularity, punctuality, potential to develop and take senior positions. The assessment reports prepared by seniors are discussed with employees in case there are deficiencies in the individual with the objective of counseling him. The report is referred to in deciding promotions, salary adjustments, determining training exposures, and transfers.
In 1992, some employees (supervisors and executives) were not given any increment as the overall total score was below standard due to low ratings in respect of community activity and potential aspects. They represented the case to the MD suggesting the entire performance exercise was faulty. They wanted all employees at all levels to be given time-bound increments and positions to ensure all employees a fair deal without any subjective bias. They were definitely against the two parameters for assessment - community activity and potential.
QUESTION
1. Do you think two different assessment systems should be adopted, one for supervisors and another for executives? If so, what would be the special features?
From India, Cuttack
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The performance of supervisors and executives (225 in number) of MITCO LTD is conducted annually by superior officers. The parameters taken into account and given equal weightage are performance at work, sense of responsibility, superiors' dependability on subordinates, community activity, initiative, regularity, punctuality, potential to develop and take senior positions. The assessment reports prepared by seniors are discussed with employees in case there are deficiencies in the individual with the objective of counseling him. The report is referred to in deciding promotions, salary adjustments, determining training exposures, and transfers.
In 1992, some employees (supervisors and executives) were not given any increment as the overall total score was below standard due to low ratings in respect of community activity and potential aspects. They represented the case to the MD suggesting the entire performance exercise was faulty. They wanted all employees at all levels to be given time-bound increments and positions to ensure all employees a fair deal without any subjective bias. They were definitely against the two parameters for assessment - community activity and potential.
QUESTION
1. Do you think two different assessment systems should be adopted, one for supervisors and another for executives? If so, what would be the special features?
From India, Cuttack
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Developing Managers
The executive vice presidents of two corporations were exchanging ideas concerning the efficiency of management education and development within their companies. Both had considerable experience with various types of formal training. They had experimented over a 10-year period with sending selected people to universities for both individual courses and degree work. They had extensive and costly internal programs under their personal guidance, directed by their chief training officers. At one time or another, representatives of the various approaches to management theory were employed to present a series of conferences and seminars in a program and make individual speeches on the subject.
"I must say," said Michael, "that our experience may be summed up as very expensive in time and fees and no improvement in management skills has appeared beyond those that one would see in any able manager who is ambitious. It is not that the 'trainers' were incompetent or uninteresting. It is not that they didn't have something to say. In fact, our people had a good time and the reports they turned in were highly complimentary. But I really don't think we made a nickel."
"A year ago I would have said the same thing," observed Jim. "We had the same results, though we tried everything. And the funny thing about it was that our people thought every program was great. They were unable to discern quality and productivity. I guess this was because they could see little relevance of anything to their jobs. But we changed that."
"What did you do?" inquired Michael.
"One thing we did was to stop these programs that wander all over human experience, on the one hand, and on the other, we dropped those interminable lectures. We decided to identify a particular aspect of managing that was rather poorly practiced. For instance, we thought our coaching of subordinates was being neglected, or at least poorly done. We called together a group of department heads, explained why we wanted a better coaching job done, explained how to go about it, and asked them all to confer with their managers concerning the need for coaching individual supervisors, the techniques to be used, and a later review of results. This way, we thought we had a direct line on a management need, and we insisted that the line managers do the training. On the whole, we feel we have got something that will work."
"I see," said Michael, who was now in a thoughtful mood. "It is not enough for top managers to show an interest in the development program. They actually have to train their own subordinates."
"That is right," concluded Jim. "If there is to be training, we have to do it. The manager is the great teacher in organized enterprise."
Q1: Can any manager be "trained" to manage better?
Q2: What should be done to get the most out of university programs?
Q3: Briefly describe your learning philosophy. If you were the director of training and development in a large company, what kind of an approach would you take?
Answers to the Case Studies:
1. Yes, any manager can be trained to manage better through targeted and practical training programs that address specific areas of improvement.
2. To get the most out of university programs, companies should ensure alignment between the content taught at universities and the practical needs of the organization. Additionally, providing opportunities for employees to apply the knowledge gained in university programs to real-world scenarios within the company can enhance the effectiveness of these programs.
3. As the director of training and development in a large company, my approach would focus on customized and interactive training programs that directly address the identified needs of the organization. I believe in a hands-on learning approach that emphasizes practical application and continuous feedback to ensure skill development and retention among employees.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The executive vice presidents of two corporations were exchanging ideas concerning the efficiency of management education and development within their companies. Both had considerable experience with various types of formal training. They had experimented over a 10-year period with sending selected people to universities for both individual courses and degree work. They had extensive and costly internal programs under their personal guidance, directed by their chief training officers. At one time or another, representatives of the various approaches to management theory were employed to present a series of conferences and seminars in a program and make individual speeches on the subject.
"I must say," said Michael, "that our experience may be summed up as very expensive in time and fees and no improvement in management skills has appeared beyond those that one would see in any able manager who is ambitious. It is not that the 'trainers' were incompetent or uninteresting. It is not that they didn't have something to say. In fact, our people had a good time and the reports they turned in were highly complimentary. But I really don't think we made a nickel."
"A year ago I would have said the same thing," observed Jim. "We had the same results, though we tried everything. And the funny thing about it was that our people thought every program was great. They were unable to discern quality and productivity. I guess this was because they could see little relevance of anything to their jobs. But we changed that."
"What did you do?" inquired Michael.
"One thing we did was to stop these programs that wander all over human experience, on the one hand, and on the other, we dropped those interminable lectures. We decided to identify a particular aspect of managing that was rather poorly practiced. For instance, we thought our coaching of subordinates was being neglected, or at least poorly done. We called together a group of department heads, explained why we wanted a better coaching job done, explained how to go about it, and asked them all to confer with their managers concerning the need for coaching individual supervisors, the techniques to be used, and a later review of results. This way, we thought we had a direct line on a management need, and we insisted that the line managers do the training. On the whole, we feel we have got something that will work."
"I see," said Michael, who was now in a thoughtful mood. "It is not enough for top managers to show an interest in the development program. They actually have to train their own subordinates."
"That is right," concluded Jim. "If there is to be training, we have to do it. The manager is the great teacher in organized enterprise."
Q1: Can any manager be "trained" to manage better?
Q2: What should be done to get the most out of university programs?
Q3: Briefly describe your learning philosophy. If you were the director of training and development in a large company, what kind of an approach would you take?
Answers to the Case Studies:
1. Yes, any manager can be trained to manage better through targeted and practical training programs that address specific areas of improvement.
2. To get the most out of university programs, companies should ensure alignment between the content taught at universities and the practical needs of the organization. Additionally, providing opportunities for employees to apply the knowledge gained in university programs to real-world scenarios within the company can enhance the effectiveness of these programs.
3. As the director of training and development in a large company, my approach would focus on customized and interactive training programs that directly address the identified needs of the organization. I believe in a hands-on learning approach that emphasizes practical application and continuous feedback to ensure skill development and retention among employees.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Choose the best option and solve, please help.
Baltimore Manufacturing Company Inc
Baltimore Manufacturing Company Inc. has developed a promising new product. The firm's management faces choices: It can sell the new product to a company for $20,000, hire a consultant to study the market and then make a decision, or arrange financing for building a factory and then manufacture & market the product.
The study will cost Baltimore $10,000, and its management believes there is about a 50-50 chance that a favorable market will be found. If the study is unfavorable, the management figures it can still sell the idea for $40,000. But even if a favorable market is found, the chance of an ultimately successful product is about 2 out of 5. A successful product will return $500,000. Even with an unfavorable study, a successful product can be expected about once in every ten new product introductions. If Baltimore Management decides to manufacture the product without a study, it figures there is only a 1 in 4 chance of its being successful. A product failure costs $100,000.
John Nash, the CEO of Baltimore, is in a dilemma and is unable to make a decision. He approaches a management consultant from Baltimore University for help. As a management consultant, suggest the best course of action to Baltimore Manufacturing Company Inc.
From India, Indore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Baltimore Manufacturing Company Inc
Baltimore Manufacturing Company Inc. has developed a promising new product. The firm's management faces choices: It can sell the new product to a company for $20,000, hire a consultant to study the market and then make a decision, or arrange financing for building a factory and then manufacture & market the product.
The study will cost Baltimore $10,000, and its management believes there is about a 50-50 chance that a favorable market will be found. If the study is unfavorable, the management figures it can still sell the idea for $40,000. But even if a favorable market is found, the chance of an ultimately successful product is about 2 out of 5. A successful product will return $500,000. Even with an unfavorable study, a successful product can be expected about once in every ten new product introductions. If Baltimore Management decides to manufacture the product without a study, it figures there is only a 1 in 4 chance of its being successful. A product failure costs $100,000.
John Nash, the CEO of Baltimore, is in a dilemma and is unable to make a decision. He approaches a management consultant from Baltimore University for help. As a management consultant, suggest the best course of action to Baltimore Manufacturing Company Inc.
From India, Indore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Tangent HR Solutions.ppt
Case studies on R & S.doc