HR07
Managing Change through Organisational Development
Assignment - I
Assignment Code: 2015HR07A1 Last Date of Submission: 15th May 2015
Maximum Marks: 100
Attempt all the questions. All the questions are compulsory and carry equal marks.
Section-A
1. A systems approach views and focuses on organizational phenomena and dynamics in their relatedness, their connectedness, their interdependence, their interaction and the holistic point of view. Explain the significance of viewing OD from this perspective.
2. On what criteria are OD Interventions designed? Discuss the types of OD Interventions initiated in organisations specifying the objective of each using an example of each. How would Action research help in this process?
3. (i) What is the difference between leading and managing change?
(ii) Describe the role of change agent in organizational change. Describe how does the capability of change agent impact effective interventions in organisation development interventions. Support your answer with examples.
4. Force Field Analysis is an extremely useful tool when an organsiation requires a cultural change. Explain how this can be done for a government organization getting prepared to face competition both domestic and global. Explain using Lewin’s three stage model of change what steps would have to be taken to initiate the interventions.
Section-B
Case Study
Lockheed Martin: A Survival Story
The Lockheed Corp., one of the world’s largest aerospace companies lost 60 percent of its business in 1989 because of the reduction in the U.S. government’s spending on national defense, severe budget cuts at NASA, and losses in the airline industry. Lockheed was fighting for its life. A decade later, Lockheed has tripled sales from $10 billion to $30 billion and is thriving.
In 1995, Lockheed joined forces with Martin Marietta Corp. to become Lockheed Martin. Each company had some technical expertise the other did not. Lockheed Martin is now the world-leader in building satellites and the U.S. leader in launching spacecraft and the largest provider for the U.S Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and NASA.
Survival was based on restructuring to trim costs as well. Lockheed Marlin reduced its plant space by 16 million square feet and its workforce by 100,000 people, thereby saving $2.6 billion annually. Ultimately, a company must get the most from its workforce. Lockheed Martin officials, therefore, have focused on eliminating layers of hierarchy pushing decision making down the organization chart. Lockheed Marlin execu¬tives keep an open line of communication to the company’s 200,000 employees. By doing so, they hope to keep employees focused on their jobs by dispelling rumors about the company’s future.
Case Questions:
5. a. What factors led to the change? Were they push factors or pull factors?
b. What type of change was initiated?
c. Were there any better alternatives
HR07
Managing Change through Organisational Development
Assignment - II
Assignment Code: 2015HR07A2 Last Date of Submission: 15th May 2015
Maximum Marks: 100
Attempt all the questions. All the questions are compulsory and carry equal marks.
Section-A
1. The survival of the fittest is quickly becoming the survival of the fittest to learn and perform. In this context, building ‘High Performance Organisations’ is going to be critical for continued success. Suggest OD interventions that would facilitate achieving this objective.
2. Describe T –Group training, behavior modeling and life goal exercises explaining the premise, the process and purpose of such interventions. How are they different from Grid OD and Process Consultation?
3. Pick-up 4 cases of OD interventions (i) Cultural Intervention ii) Human Resources Management Intervention iii) Techno structural intervention and (iv) a Strategic intervention. Describe the intervention design, the inputs and the outcomes in each of these cases.
4. Discuss the concept of Schein’s cultural analysis taking an example of a cultural change in an organization. According to you, which is more challenging –a cultural intervention or a structural one? Give arguments to support your answer.
Section-B
Case Study: Turnarounds are when Leadership matters most.
Gillette’s performance was strong through the mid 1990’s but by the beginning of 2001, this global consumer products company had experienced several years of flat sales, declining operating margins, loss of market share. Its Mach3 shaving system was a blockbuster product, but the company was suffering the effects of its own reliance on trade loading- the practice of offering discounts to retail customers at the end of a quarter in order to move products and achieve sales targets, thus sacrificing margins and jeopardizing the next quarter’s sales. Meanwhile, because executives in different product groups and locations rarely sat in the same meetings, initiatives in their various areas were not coordinated. SKU’s (stock keeping units, or product variations) proliferated as groups made decisions without informing other departments, leading to waste and duplication. Respect among peers declined.
Jim Kilts was appointed CEO at this time. On his first day as CEO of Gillette in February 2001, he held a full meeting of the operating Committee. He presented a detailed set of slides outlining his style and leadership philosophy. He expected fact based management, open communication, simplicity, and collaboration from Gillette’s line managers and employees. Featured prominently on the list titled” My style” was the statement, “If something bothers you, I want to open dialogue.” Kilts then outlined the results of his month long external review of the company prior to joining, a detailed analysis of Gillette’s strengths and weaknesses. He was also planning to present this information to the Board. Kilts immediately established multiple communication channels- weekly staff meetings, weekly business overviews from all executives worldwide, quarterly two –day off site meetings for senior executives, a Chairman’s page on Gillette’s intranet where anyone in the company could post questions and receive answers from Kilts himself, the distribution of videotaped dialogues with Kilts for managers in the international locations he couldn’t visit personally, and employee roundtables.
One of Kilts ‘s most controversial moves, but one that increased disclosure among colleagues at Gillette and pushed communication forward, was to expose the performance data regarding his top team. The CEO introduced quarterly report cards for senior managers, and after the first ones were completed, he posted the results for the whole team to see (anonymously at first) so that everyone knew where they stood in relation to their peers. Those scorecards were followed by senior manager’s open presentations of their priorities for the next quarter. Secrecy and denial were relegated to the trash bin; there was no way to hide information.
The nature of conversations at Gillette shifted from individual reports to group dialogue. Previously, managers told me, they would go to meetings, say their piece, and go away. With Kilts at the helm, managers said their piece- and stayed to answer question. “He does not attempt to wrap himself or the company in any sort of mystical qualities,” an executive observed. Anything was open for questioning.
Kilts’s initial actions at Gillette helped people look at facts without becoming defensive about them. Kilts’s message from day one was that he had no preconceived notions about people and no plans to make sweeping changes in the management ranks.” We have a very good cadre of people who want to do the right thing,” he said. One of his priorities was to eliminate the finger pointing that had gone on in the past. Frequent meetings among managers who never had much of an opportunity to sit together before made this possible. If an executive said that he did not reach a certain target because someone else didn’t do his part, Kilts would turn to that person and ask what happened and to remind everyone of the overarching objectives and priorities linking the areas. A participant recalled that the first quarter off-site under Kilts was tension ridden, with outbursts of anger as people played out the blame game culture of the past. But over time the meetings became more effective and team oriented. “ I don’t want competition among functions or senior staff. Anything that even hints at it is countered productive. I hate anyone saying ‘Jim said’ or ‘ Jim wants’ or ‘the board said’ or ‘the board wants ‘ as the reason for doing or not doing something. Things are done, or not based on rigorous assessments and considered deliberations,” Kilts said.
Executive Committee meetings were increasingly devoted to themes that cut across divisions and members discovered areas in which they could combine forces to tackle new business opportunities. Gillette’s complex organizational matrix meant that many operations issues arose at the intersection of groups- for instance, product managers required resources and support from IT department or needed to coordinate their launches with the help of sales representatives at the field. Jim Kilts encourages the formation of operating committees in each business unit or regional group, and then further encouraged the creation of cross matrix operating committees that included representatives from all the functions and areas on which business unit depended. The view across the organisation revealed business opportunities that would have been hard for any unit to see by itself. For example, Gillette’s Oral-B business unit, centered in the United States, produced a quality line of toothbrushes, and its Braun division, headquartered in Germany, had developed world-class portable appliances technology. But, unlike its competitors, Gillette did not make a battery-powered toothbrush-until new relationships were formed across the ocean.
The above is a case in reference to an unmistakable conclusion: Turnarounds are when leadership matters most. Managers can stem losses with a few bold strokes, such as slashing budgets. But putting an organisation on a positive path toward future success also requires that leaders energise their workforce, throughout the ranks. The small wins that newly empowered people create are the first signs that a turnaround is on track. How this is done has a big impact on whether the turnaround is a temporary fix or a path to sustainability.
Case Questions:
5. a. What kind of intervention has been introduced here?
b. The diagnosis process in planned change is the most crucial element of an OD exercise. Examine this statement with reference to the case.
c. Discuss the change process planned and worked out by Jim Kilts. Was it the best method? If not, suggest some alternative course of action/ modifications.
d. Can turnaround be made possible without effective leadership? Why?
Managing Change through Organisational Development
Assignment - I
Assignment Code: 2015HR07A1 Last Date of Submission: 15th May 2015
Maximum Marks: 100
Attempt all the questions. All the questions are compulsory and carry equal marks.
Section-A
1. A systems approach views and focuses on organizational phenomena and dynamics in their relatedness, their connectedness, their interdependence, their interaction and the holistic point of view. Explain the significance of viewing OD from this perspective.
2. On what criteria are OD Interventions designed? Discuss the types of OD Interventions initiated in organisations specifying the objective of each using an example of each. How would Action research help in this process?
3. (i) What is the difference between leading and managing change?
(ii) Describe the role of change agent in organizational change. Describe how does the capability of change agent impact effective interventions in organisation development interventions. Support your answer with examples.
4. Force Field Analysis is an extremely useful tool when an organsiation requires a cultural change. Explain how this can be done for a government organization getting prepared to face competition both domestic and global. Explain using Lewin’s three stage model of change what steps would have to be taken to initiate the interventions.
Section-B
Case Study
Lockheed Martin: A Survival Story
The Lockheed Corp., one of the world’s largest aerospace companies lost 60 percent of its business in 1989 because of the reduction in the U.S. government’s spending on national defense, severe budget cuts at NASA, and losses in the airline industry. Lockheed was fighting for its life. A decade later, Lockheed has tripled sales from $10 billion to $30 billion and is thriving.
In 1995, Lockheed joined forces with Martin Marietta Corp. to become Lockheed Martin. Each company had some technical expertise the other did not. Lockheed Martin is now the world-leader in building satellites and the U.S. leader in launching spacecraft and the largest provider for the U.S Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and NASA.
Survival was based on restructuring to trim costs as well. Lockheed Marlin reduced its plant space by 16 million square feet and its workforce by 100,000 people, thereby saving $2.6 billion annually. Ultimately, a company must get the most from its workforce. Lockheed Martin officials, therefore, have focused on eliminating layers of hierarchy pushing decision making down the organization chart. Lockheed Marlin execu¬tives keep an open line of communication to the company’s 200,000 employees. By doing so, they hope to keep employees focused on their jobs by dispelling rumors about the company’s future.
Case Questions:
5. a. What factors led to the change? Were they push factors or pull factors?
b. What type of change was initiated?
c. Were there any better alternatives
HR07
Managing Change through Organisational Development
Assignment - II
Assignment Code: 2015HR07A2 Last Date of Submission: 15th May 2015
Maximum Marks: 100
Attempt all the questions. All the questions are compulsory and carry equal marks.
Section-A
1. The survival of the fittest is quickly becoming the survival of the fittest to learn and perform. In this context, building ‘High Performance Organisations’ is going to be critical for continued success. Suggest OD interventions that would facilitate achieving this objective.
2. Describe T –Group training, behavior modeling and life goal exercises explaining the premise, the process and purpose of such interventions. How are they different from Grid OD and Process Consultation?
3. Pick-up 4 cases of OD interventions (i) Cultural Intervention ii) Human Resources Management Intervention iii) Techno structural intervention and (iv) a Strategic intervention. Describe the intervention design, the inputs and the outcomes in each of these cases.
4. Discuss the concept of Schein’s cultural analysis taking an example of a cultural change in an organization. According to you, which is more challenging –a cultural intervention or a structural one? Give arguments to support your answer.
Section-B
Case Study: Turnarounds are when Leadership matters most.
Gillette’s performance was strong through the mid 1990’s but by the beginning of 2001, this global consumer products company had experienced several years of flat sales, declining operating margins, loss of market share. Its Mach3 shaving system was a blockbuster product, but the company was suffering the effects of its own reliance on trade loading- the practice of offering discounts to retail customers at the end of a quarter in order to move products and achieve sales targets, thus sacrificing margins and jeopardizing the next quarter’s sales. Meanwhile, because executives in different product groups and locations rarely sat in the same meetings, initiatives in their various areas were not coordinated. SKU’s (stock keeping units, or product variations) proliferated as groups made decisions without informing other departments, leading to waste and duplication. Respect among peers declined.
Jim Kilts was appointed CEO at this time. On his first day as CEO of Gillette in February 2001, he held a full meeting of the operating Committee. He presented a detailed set of slides outlining his style and leadership philosophy. He expected fact based management, open communication, simplicity, and collaboration from Gillette’s line managers and employees. Featured prominently on the list titled” My style” was the statement, “If something bothers you, I want to open dialogue.” Kilts then outlined the results of his month long external review of the company prior to joining, a detailed analysis of Gillette’s strengths and weaknesses. He was also planning to present this information to the Board. Kilts immediately established multiple communication channels- weekly staff meetings, weekly business overviews from all executives worldwide, quarterly two –day off site meetings for senior executives, a Chairman’s page on Gillette’s intranet where anyone in the company could post questions and receive answers from Kilts himself, the distribution of videotaped dialogues with Kilts for managers in the international locations he couldn’t visit personally, and employee roundtables.
One of Kilts ‘s most controversial moves, but one that increased disclosure among colleagues at Gillette and pushed communication forward, was to expose the performance data regarding his top team. The CEO introduced quarterly report cards for senior managers, and after the first ones were completed, he posted the results for the whole team to see (anonymously at first) so that everyone knew where they stood in relation to their peers. Those scorecards were followed by senior manager’s open presentations of their priorities for the next quarter. Secrecy and denial were relegated to the trash bin; there was no way to hide information.
The nature of conversations at Gillette shifted from individual reports to group dialogue. Previously, managers told me, they would go to meetings, say their piece, and go away. With Kilts at the helm, managers said their piece- and stayed to answer question. “He does not attempt to wrap himself or the company in any sort of mystical qualities,” an executive observed. Anything was open for questioning.
Kilts’s initial actions at Gillette helped people look at facts without becoming defensive about them. Kilts’s message from day one was that he had no preconceived notions about people and no plans to make sweeping changes in the management ranks.” We have a very good cadre of people who want to do the right thing,” he said. One of his priorities was to eliminate the finger pointing that had gone on in the past. Frequent meetings among managers who never had much of an opportunity to sit together before made this possible. If an executive said that he did not reach a certain target because someone else didn’t do his part, Kilts would turn to that person and ask what happened and to remind everyone of the overarching objectives and priorities linking the areas. A participant recalled that the first quarter off-site under Kilts was tension ridden, with outbursts of anger as people played out the blame game culture of the past. But over time the meetings became more effective and team oriented. “ I don’t want competition among functions or senior staff. Anything that even hints at it is countered productive. I hate anyone saying ‘Jim said’ or ‘ Jim wants’ or ‘the board said’ or ‘the board wants ‘ as the reason for doing or not doing something. Things are done, or not based on rigorous assessments and considered deliberations,” Kilts said.
Executive Committee meetings were increasingly devoted to themes that cut across divisions and members discovered areas in which they could combine forces to tackle new business opportunities. Gillette’s complex organizational matrix meant that many operations issues arose at the intersection of groups- for instance, product managers required resources and support from IT department or needed to coordinate their launches with the help of sales representatives at the field. Jim Kilts encourages the formation of operating committees in each business unit or regional group, and then further encouraged the creation of cross matrix operating committees that included representatives from all the functions and areas on which business unit depended. The view across the organisation revealed business opportunities that would have been hard for any unit to see by itself. For example, Gillette’s Oral-B business unit, centered in the United States, produced a quality line of toothbrushes, and its Braun division, headquartered in Germany, had developed world-class portable appliances technology. But, unlike its competitors, Gillette did not make a battery-powered toothbrush-until new relationships were formed across the ocean.
The above is a case in reference to an unmistakable conclusion: Turnarounds are when leadership matters most. Managers can stem losses with a few bold strokes, such as slashing budgets. But putting an organisation on a positive path toward future success also requires that leaders energise their workforce, throughout the ranks. The small wins that newly empowered people create are the first signs that a turnaround is on track. How this is done has a big impact on whether the turnaround is a temporary fix or a path to sustainability.
Case Questions:
5. a. What kind of intervention has been introduced here?
b. The diagnosis process in planned change is the most crucial element of an OD exercise. Examine this statement with reference to the case.
c. Discuss the change process planned and worked out by Jim Kilts. Was it the best method? If not, suggest some alternative course of action/ modifications.
d. Can turnaround be made possible without effective leadership? Why?
No comments:
Post a Comment