assignmentssolution@gmail.com

Get Assignments and Projects prepared by experts at a very nominal fee.

More than 8 years in assisting assignments and projects/dissertation/thesis of MBA,BBA,BCA,MCA,PhD and others-

Contact us at : Email : assignmentssolution@gmail.com

Help for : SMU, IIBM,IMT, NMIMS, NIBM ,KSBM, KAIZAN, ISBM, SYMBIOSIS, NIMS, IGNOU, XAVIER, XIBMS, ISM, PSBM, NSBM, NIRM, ISBM, ISMRC, ICMIND, UPES and many others.

Help in : Assignments, projects, M.Phil,Ph.D disseration & thesis,case studies

Courses,MBA,BBA,PhD,MPhil,EMBA,MIB,DMS,MMS,BMS,GDS etc

Contact us at : Email : assignmentssolution@gmail.com



Wednesday 20 December 2017

AIMA assignments : Contact us for answers at assignmentssolution@gmail.com

DHR 12
Organizational Change and Development
Assignment - I

Assignment Code: 2017DHR12B1                                               Last Date of Submission: 15th November 2017
                                                    Maximum Marks: 100

Attempt all the questions.
SECTION – A (25 marks for each question)

1.    How OD is applied in organizations follows its historical roots and psychological foundations? Briefly describe its evolution and its application in training program?

2.    Organizational Diagnosis is the prerequisite for designing intervention programs? What are the various diagnostic tools you will deploy to collect the data and gather information?


Section-B (50 Marks)
Case Study

Problem

The CEO felt quite alone in driving the corporate strategy. He wished that his team would realize that they needed to work together as a united team, rather than in separate silos - often working at cross purposes to one another.
He wished that the heads of the departments take on responsibility for playing a leadership role in driving the implementation of the strategy. Many viewed that CEO had communicated the strategy and it was only up to the people to flesh out what was needed to be done to implement the strategy. The Head of the Departments felt that he has not provided right orientation and direction to the teams.
The CEO was disappointed. He'd spent months with his executive team developing a new organizational strategy. Later he spent weeks flying around the country on a road show to communicate the new strategy. He set up a number of projects to implement the strategy. Strategic objectives were put into each of his executives KPAs.
Howsoever, 6 months later, he felt quite frustrated. He felt the head of the departments were still confused and were unable to drive the strategy in the right direction. And this led to their inability to focus and quite often unable to implement the strategy. This has led to work was being duplicated and people were unable to fit and align themselves in the projects.
The CEO wanted to initiate exercises to implement strategy. For this he wanted to bring strategic intervention. His intention was to help the departmental heads to generate a feeling of belongingness to the vision of the organization. He wanted his team to understand the areas they need to focus on, in an integrated way, as a leadership team. Not only this, he needed an intervention that would help his executive and management team to understand the projects,  company strategy, values, and the Contribution of each division in a holistic way. This would require a tool that used a combination of systems thinking and visual thinking.

For this purpose he (CEO) wanted to hold a 2 day strategy implementation workshop for his executive team and their direct reports. He wanted the workshop objective to help his team to develop a coordinated strategy implementation plan.

Case Questions:
1.    What intervention techniques should be used to bring in the participation and trust in the group? Describe in details citing relevance for each of the technique?                       (20)

2.    What are the various hurdles and barriers which CEO and HR team would face? Explain with the help of suitable model to overcome the change.                                                                                (15)

3.    Which model do you think is the best to measure progress? Explain in detail.                             (15)      


DHR 12
Organizational Change and Development
Assignment – II

Assignment Code: 2017DHR12B2                                               Last Date of Submission: 15th November 2017
                                                    Maximum Marks: 100

Attempt all the questions.
SECTION – A (25 marks for each question)


1.    Write in your own words, the issues OD practitioners must check in order to avoid falling into certain common traps.

2.    Describe the organizational restructuring strategies and discuss the new perspective on organization change and managing change.


Section-B (50 Marks)
Case Study
In 1995 Ford motor company announced a major reorganization called "Ford 2000". The idea, championed by chairman and CEO, Alex Trotman and vice chairman Edward E. Hagenlacker, eliminated more than a dozen engineering design centre around the world and consolidated them into only five of which four are in Dearborn, Michigan, and one in Europe. The one in Europe was responsible for creating one basic design for small acres for the world market and then marking minor modifications for local markets. For example, the same template will be used in Europe, South America, and Asia. The four design centre in Dearborn will do the same for large front-wheel drive cars, rear-wheel drive cars, pickup trucks, and commercial vehicles. The consolidation effort requires that more than twenty-five thousand salaries employees relocate or at least report to new managers. Manufacturing and assembly will still take place in plants around the world.
The purpose is to integrate Ford's operations around the world and revolutionize the way it designs and builds more than seventy lines of cars and trucks, which it sells in more than two hundred markets. The goals have reduced duplication of effort, increase volume purchasing, save more than $ 4billion per year, and double profitability. All this for a company made #3.8 billion profit from automotive operations in 1995 and $ 5.3 billion overall. Trotman continues to have the support of the Ford family, who still controls 40% of the voting stock in the company.
Part of the new plan is a top-secret strategic document that outlines every new car and truck which Ford will design, produce, and sell around the world through 2003. The plan calls for reducing the basic design platforms from 24 to 16 and increasing the total number of models by 50%, while saving billions of dollars. For example, the new 1996 Taurus serves as the platform for several other models, both in the United States and around the world.
In structure, the system is really a matrix. rather than working in a functional organization with traditional hierarchies and centralized decision making, employees are assigned to a design centre, such as small cars, and then to a group according to their specialities, such as drive trains. Mangers then mediate the disputes that occur between the design centres and the specialities. Employees will have to change their ways of doing their work as they design cars and trucks to fit global markets rather than a single, relatively homogenous one. Management knows that employees feel a great deal of insecurity and uncertainty about the company and their jobs as they make the shift. Carrying the message to all employees has been a constant job for Trotman and Hagenlacker since the original announcement.
Management also knows that Ford tried similar design integration with their "World Car" in the late 1970s, which failed primarily due to turf battles among designers and engineers. The cars that resulted were rarely the cost savers Ford hoped for, and were so dull in their design that no one bought them. Trotman expects different results this time because of the consolidation of the design centre, the new organization structure, and because advances in technology have made the inner working of cars so similar that only the outer, visible portions of the car need to be different to satisfy regional tastes.
By mid-1996, however, the reorganization was not going so well. The transaction had left many employees still wondering whom they worked for and with a feeling that everything was out of control. The culprit seems to have been a reorganization of the reorganization! Trotman now plans to reduce the number of design centre from 5 to 3 leading to people moving and reporting relationships to change once again. Group vice president Jacques A. Nasser, who may succeed Trotman by 1998 or so has promised $1.1 billion in savings under the new system. Some have claimed that the "new" reorganization really puts things back the way they were before the first reorganization. However, there design centre is a lot fewer than dozens that existed before. But this second reorganization, before employees really got settled into the first one, may have devastating effects. Suppliers and employees do not know whom to contact to get questions answer or disputes resolved. All they get on phone is voice mail, since everybody is in meetings trying to work out the new reorganization. Top management has been relatively successful through the years. They say that the organization needs to evolve to meet their ambitions goals and the competition.
Case Questions:
1.    Describe the benefits which is expected due to structural changes coming through Ford 2000.

2.    Do you think that the employees are resisting to change? How do you explain the continuing problem that employees are having with adapting to the new structure of Ford 2000?
3.    What are the various challenges which will be faced Jacques in reorganizing the structure?   How can he win the hearts of the employees again.





No comments:

Post a Comment