Question Paper of MS-01 Management Function and Behaviour Dec-2003

Q.1 Discuss the range of tasks and roles performed by a manager in a service organization. Citesuitable example.

Question Paper of MS-01:Management Function and Behaviour June-2003

Q.1 Compare and contrast Theory X and Y. Discuss their relevance in Indian conditions.

Question Paper of MS-01:Management Function and Behaviour Dec-2002

Q.1 Describe various tasks and responsibilities of a professional manager in today’s context. Cite suitable examples from your experience.

Q.2 Explain briefly the major elements of management processes. What new skills would a manager require as he/she moves from middle to top management level? Discuss.

Q.3 Differentiate between the decision-making models and techniques. Explain with suitable examples.

Q.4 What are the various determinants of organizational culture? How does leadership influence the culture of an organization? Discuss.

Q.5 Identify major sources of conflict in an organization. What approaches will you suggest for managing conflict in a service organization in today’s context?

Q.6 Describe the interpersonal needs in terms of expressed behaviour and wanted behaviour. Give suitable examples.

Q.7 Write short notes on any three of the following :

(i) Delegation and Decentralization
(ii) Process of organizational change
(iii) Johari Window model of communication
(iv) Enriching relationship with others
(v) Group dynamics

Q.8 Read the case and answer the question given at the end.

The ABC Manufacturing Company is a metal working plant under the direction of a plant manager who is known as a strict disciplinarian. One day a foreman noticed Bhola, one of the workers, at the time-clock punching out two cards - his own and the card of Nathu, a fellow worker. Since it was the rule of the company that each man must punch out his own card, the foreman asked Bhola to accompany him to the Personnel Director, who interpreted the incident as a direct violation of a rule and gave immediate notice of discharge to both workers.

The two workers came to see the Personnel Director on the following day. Nathu claimed innocence on the ground that he had not asked for his card to be punched and did not know at the time that it was being punched. He had been offered a ride by a friend who could not wait for him to go through the punch-out procedure. Nathu was worried about his wife who was ill at home and was anxious to reach home as quickly as possible. He planned to take his card to the foreman the next morning for reinstatement, a provision sometimes exercised in such cases, i

These circumstances were verified by Bhola. He claimed that he had punched Nathu’s card the same time he punched his own, not being conscious of any wrongdoing.

The Personnel Director was inclined to believe the story of the two men but did not feel he could reverse the action taken. He recognized that these men were good workers and had good records prior to this incident. Nevertheless, they had violated a rule for which the penalty was immediate discharge. He
also reminded them that it was the policy of the company to enforce the rules without exception.

A few days later the Personnel Director, the Plant Manager, and the Sales Manager sat together at lunch. The Sales Manager reported that he was faced with the necessity of notifying one of their best customers that his order must be delayed because of the inability of one department to conform to schedule. The department in question was the one from which the two workers had been discharged. Not only had it been impossible to replace these men to date, but disgruntlement over the incident had led to significant decline in the cooperation of other workers.

The Personnel Director and the Sales Manager took the position that the discharge of these two valuable men could have been avoided if there had been provision for considering the incident was costly to the company in the possible loss of a customer, in the dissatisfaction within the employee group, and in the time and money that would be involved in recruiting and training replacements.

The Plant Manager could not agree with this point of view. ” We must have rules if we are to have efficiency; and the rules are no good unless we enforce them. Further more, if we start considering all these variations in circumstances, we start considering all these variations in circumstances, we will find ourselves loaded down with everybody thinking he is an exception.” He admitted that the grievances were frequent but countered with the point that they could be of little consequence if the contract agreed to by the union was followed to the letter.

Questions

(i) Place yourself in the position of the Personnel Director in this situation. Which of the following courses of the information which he has available at the time of the decision?

(a) Would you have discharged both men?
(b) Would you have discharged Bhola only?
© Would you have discharged Nathu only?
(d) Would you have discharged neither of them? Justify your choice of decision.

(ii) What policy and procedural changes would you reco of future cases of this type?

Question Paper of MS-01: Management Function and Behaviour June-2002

Q.1 What are the various determinants of organizational culture? How does leadership influence the culture of an organization?

Q.2 Describe the responsibilities of a professional manager towards customers and society. Illustrate your answer with suitable examples.

Q.3 Why do people generally resist change? Identify the major factors which play a significant role in this process. Discuss, what are the common strategies for change and its management.

Q.4 Describe conflict avoidance, conflict diffusion and conflict confrontation strategies with the help of suitable examples.

Q.5 Distinguish between decision making under risk and decision making under conflict or competition. Support your answer with suitable examples.

Q.6 “Managers are known by the work they do and the function they perform.” Elaborate and critically evaluate the statement.

Q.7 Write short notes on any three of the following:

(a) Line and Staff functions
(b) Managerial Values and Ethos
© Socialisation process in an organization
(d) Management Information System
(e) Theory X and Y

Q.8 Please read the case given below and answer the questions that follow: Ceylon Fertilizer is a urea-manufacturing unit having a capacity of 500 tonnes per day. The total work force of the plant is around 2,000. Being a self-contained plant, it has its own workshop in order to take care of regular
maintenance work. The workshop functions in two shifts a day under a shift in charge for each shift who is in the cadre of AEE. The workers have been grouped into two groups, i.e., Relay ‘A’ and ‘B’. The shift routine changes once a week, Sunday being a weekly holiday. Besides the two shifts, there are a group of people under a Senior AEE attending in general shift hours.

The Relay ‘A’, consisting of 18 workers is placed under the charge of Shri Muthu who is a graduate in mechanical engineering. After undergoing training for a period of six months in various divisions in fertilizer, he had acquired a thorough knowledge of works to be undertaken by the Workshop. After being as a Relay Supervisor for 3 years, he has been recently promoted to the post of AEE, who is the shift in charge. When he joined the workshop, he found that the tasks were done with application of thumb-rules and higher officers had to be satisfied with such a quality of work.

Shri Muthu, on witnessing this, started to instruct his workers in various theoretical aspects of welding, machines etc., which he has studied in his college. They all highly appreciated the skill and techniques he had taught. The workers not learnt to do things in a better way. Thus, he gained the confidence of workers. As he was able to finish his work in time and in a better way than relay ‘B’, more work orders were allotted to his group. A few workers in his group started to grumble and Foreman came and told Mr. Muthu that the “other relay workers do not have much work-load and our workers too do not want to strain much and they are murmuring over getting “more work". Mr. Muthu, however, convinced the Foreman that extra work should be taken as a credit and recognition, and they should do their best. After this had happened some workers even tried to get transferred to the other Relay.

One morning, Mr. Muthu was making arrangements for the work to be taken and was giving instructions to his foreman. Turner, Kali, came and told him, “Sir, father of Fitter Sami expired last night and we all want to go and attend the funeral,” and added, “It is customary for the men in workshop to attend such funerals and the shift-incharge has to arrange a lorry or any conveyance for the people to go to Sami’s house, which is nearly eight kms. from the Plant.” Since Muthu joined the company, this was first such instance occurring and as he had to finish some urgent work orders, he told the worker Kali , ” You all need not go the funeral. I can, however, permit a few of you as representatives of Relay ‘A’ to go and offer condolences to Sami’s family.” Further, he regretted that he would not make any arrangements for conveyance. This statement created a turbulence among the workers and a group of workers stopped the work and started demanding that they be allowed to attend the funeral or else they wanted to stop work in the coming shifts. Foreman hurried up to AEE Mr. Muthu to explain the turbulent situation in the shop-floor. On hearing this, Muthu told his Foreman, “1 have given you an alternative 1 and I have already told the urgency or work and 1 am going to allocate the I work as per planning schedule. If the work is not done, 1 may have to take I action against you.” Then the group of workers started discussing among themselves as to what to do next. A turner came forth and said, “You are not considerate enough to human matters and if you are still adamant we may prefer half-a-day wages-cut as we must go and attend the funeral. Any how you have to make arrangements for our conveyance.” Mr. Muthu at this instance noted that a small group, who were usually complaining about the workload and were murmuring, were keenly interested in the affair. He decided to face the situation as a matter of prestige. He issued the gate pass to 1 whoever wished to go, still emphasizing that he would not arrange any conveyance. Nearly 25 per cent of the workers remained and the others collected money from all for the funeral and went off.

On that day Mr. Muthu, could finish only a part of the work as planned and he had to explain what had happened in his Relay, to his boss.

Mien he came the next morning, it was rumored that only a few of the workers attended the funeral and the others had gone to the cinema theatre near the village. Mr. Muthu got irritated by the workers’ behaviour and started writing memos to those who had received the gate pass the previous day. Some workers got annoyed by this action of Mr. Muthu and they approached the union to intervene. The news had spread to other divisions and there was an air of protest at all places in the Fertilizer Plants.

Questions

1 What are the dominant features of this case?
2 What us your view of the action taken by Mr. Muthu?
3 What are the weaknesses and strong points, as you consider, of Mr. Muthu as a Manager?
4 How would you have tackled the situation, if you were Mr. Muthu?

Question Paper of MS-01: Management Function and Behaviour Dec-2001

Q.1 “Coordination is imperative for the success of any organization.’1 Explaining the need for coordination suggest the ways to achieve effective coordination in a decentralised private sector manufacturing organization.

Q.2 Describe the interpersonal needs in terms of expressed and wanted behavior. Cite suitable examples to support your views.

Q.3 Why do managers need to acquire different skills at various levels? What are the skills conceptualized by Katz? Explain how they are proving useful for Indian managers at different levels.

Q.4 Discuss various strategies used in implementing organisational change in the context of a large public sector manufacturing organization.

Q.5 Identify major barriers of communication and explain why do they arise. Explain ways to overcome these barriers with suitable examples.

Q.6 Write short notes on any three of the following :

(i) Delegation and Decentralisation
(ii) Line and Staff functions
(iii) Theory X and Y
(iv) Domino Effect
(v) Organisational culture and climate

Q.7 Read the case carefully and answer the questions given at the end.

One afternoon in June 1972, Rao, industrial engineer of P.M. A. company, wascalled to the office of his immediate superior V.R. Naik, the production manager Naik said, “Roa, I want to discuss a situation in the production department. I lot of people feel that Govindan is not the right man for the Assistaiy Superintendent’s position. The President and others have decided that | have got to fire Govindan or at least move him out of production. Everyone wants to fire Govindan, but I won’t do it to him. I was talking with Bhadra this morning, and we decided that you might be able to make use of Govindan in your department.”

Rao was surprised by both the information, and the proposal.

Naik concluded his comments with, “Rao 1 am asking you to take Govindan. You can say ‘No’. But then he gets fired. I have told Govindan this- Also, Govindan knows that if he goes with you he will take a pay cut. However, 1 think you can make use of him both to your own and his satisfaction. You are, anyway, carrying out an in-process quality control, and you might be able to make good use of Govindan in view of his long technical experience of production work. Think it over, and let me know by tomorrow. Rao thought over the matter.

PMA company had been a successful enterprise until March 1972 at which time it suffered a sharp decline of profits: sales had fallen off, and production costs had risen. The President adopted three measures which he hoped would improve the condition. First, by creating an Industrial Engineering department for establishing work standards on all production operations, to determine which manufacturing costs were out of line and where remedial action should be taken. Rao, 28 years old, who had, been with the company for two years in the Purchasing department, was selected. Rao had B.E. and MBA degrees to his credit. What he lacked in his business experience he made up by his eagerness to learn. He was ambitious and liked by his associates. He wanted a transfer from Purchasing to Production for better opportunities for advancement.

Secondly, he consulted a Management Consultation firm to make a study of the Production Department. They pointed out that the chain of command was too long from Production Manager through Plant Superintendent through Assistant Superintendent to Foremen. They recommended the elimination of the position of Assistant Superintendent.

Thirdly, he engaged an Industrial Psychologist to appraise all the Supervisory Personnel.

Govindan had been with the Company for 20 years since its founding and during this period had worked on every production operation, and his last I years had been in supervisory capacity. His manners were rough an aggressive, he had little formal education. The Industrial Psychologist’s report about Govindan contained the following points :

(1) Evaluation forthe position of Assistant Superintendent: Not good enough.
(2) Capacity for good human relations in supervision : Will have friction frequently.
(3) Need for development counselling: Counselling greatly needed.
(4) General evaluations: Govindan had a good ability profile. He suffers from a sense of inferiority. He does not like the responsibility of making decisions. His supervision is that of Autocratic type. Though he has the ability, as far as his personality make-up is concerned, he is out of place in the present position.

Questions

(a) What is the problem in the case? Explain.
(b) Explain Govindan’s behavior and work experience vis-a-vis the psychologist’s report.
© How do you see Naik’s suggestion to Rao? Give reasons.
(d) What are Rao’s considerations is taking a decision? What should he do? Explain.

Question Paper of MS-01: Management Function and Behaviour June-2001

Q.1 Define organisational effectiveness. How do you differentiate effectiveness from efficiency? Comment critically with suitable examples from Indian organizations.

Q.2 “Hiring good people is still a relatively simpler task as compared to the task of retaining them. People may join a company because of its favorable image but will stay on only if they find appreciation for and satisfaction from their work.” Critically evaluate the statement and discuss the underlying concepts.

Q.3 What are the salient features of different models of decision making? Explain any two of them in details and compare them.

Q.4 What are the consequences of inter-group conflict? What are the ways to reduce the negative consequences of inter-group conflict?

Q.5 Why do people generally resist change? Do personality factors have any role in the process? Explain common coping mechanisms adopted for managing change.

Q.6 Write short notes on any three of the following:

(i)M.B.O.
(ii) Managerial Values and Ethos
(iii) B rain-Storming
(iv) Effective delegation
(v) Leadership Styles

Q.7 Read carefully the case and answer the questions given at the end.

SARVODAYA STRUCTURALS LTD.

Sarvodaya Structural Limited was engaged in the fabrication of heaw structural. The company had six shops besides engineering, accounts. personnel, sales, and administrative departments. It employed 7000 men. The chief executive of the company was the General Manager.

In one of the shops employing 1000 men. 900 tons of structural were fabricated every month. The day-to-day management of the shop was entrusted to the Manager, who was assisted by the shop were Preparation. Marking, and Finishing,

In the Marking and Finishing Sections, the work was supervised by two Foremen each. The Preparation Section was under the direct supervision of the Senior Foreman, who, in addition, planned and coordinated the work of all the three sections. The Preparation Section was responsible for the collection and classification of works orders, for reading intricate machine and structural drawings, determination of priorities of execution orders, checking bills of materials, and processing raw materials for fabrication. This section had 200 men on the rolls.

In 1981, the shop started receiving heavy order;,’and as the work-load increased considerably, the Senior Foreman was unable to cope with it. On the Manager’s recommendation, the General Manager sanctioned two new posts of Foremen for the Preparation Section. Two Progress Incharges attached to the Senior Foreman were thus rendered surplus and their principal work, namely, reporting progress of work in the shop, was transferred to the Production Planning Department. This action of the General Manager had the concurrence of the Manager. The Incharges themselves were not transferred to the Production Planning Department as this had its own departmental men to take care of this work. They continued on the rolls of the shop, awaiting orders for transfer to vacancies of equivalent grade in other shops.

The minimum qualifications for the recently created posts of Foremen, prescribed by a Joint Committee, were a diploma in engineering and five years’ experience in structural shop. The posts were advertised for in the organization but none of the applicants was found suitable for appointment. The Incharges concerned, who were non-matriculates, did not apply, as they did not possess the prescribed qualifications. The posts were therefore advertised in the press. Three outside candidates applied. Only one appeared for the interview and he was not considered suitable for appointment.

The case of the two surplus Incharges did not come within the purview of the grievance procedure in operation, in the company, as it involved a change in the minimum qualification prescribed for the post of Foreman. As, however they were powerful members of the Union executive, the Secretary of the recognized trade union took up their case for appointment as foreman with the General Manager The Union Secretary argued that they had been doing part of the foremen’s job before that posts were created and, in the absence of suitable candidates they should be preferred for promotion.

The General Manager maintained that the men concerned were not qualified for the posts and did not possess the technical background required to perform the Foremen’s duties. The written job-description of the posts of Progress Incharge and Foreman prepared by the Joint Committee indicated that the job content of the former was only about 25% of that of a Foreman, and only, on the administrative side. They did not way, where that were mistress in line for promotion. The latter, though good in their own area, could not be promoted as they were not technically qualified to hold the higher position.

After prolonged discussion, the General Manager conceded that in the circumstances, the Incharges would be given an opportunity to prove their fitness for the job. It was also agreed that in the first place, test specifications for the posts of Foreman would be worked out by Joint Committee and given to the men concerned. If they wished, they would also be given guidance for a period of three months, to learn the job. They would then be subjected to a test by Training Officer, and if they passed the test, they would be promoted to foremen.

The Manager communicated this decision to the Senior Foreman in the presence of the two men. He readily agreed to give them the necessary guidance whenever they requested it. However, they maintained that the decision was not only to give them guidance when asked for, but full-time training and guidance in order to enable them to pass the test. On hearing this, the Senior Foreman remarked: i have no one to spare primarily for the purpose of training them to pass the test.1

Questions

(a) What is the main problem in the case?
(b) Identify and discuss the stage and action required to tackle the problem before it became a grievance Comment on the role of the management.
© Critically evaluate the grievance and the follow-up action. Evaluate the union-management compromise and its possible consequences with your own point of view, in detail.
(d) If you were the manager of the ’shop’, how would you handle the problem, after the senior foreman’s remark about sparing the incharges’ for three months?

Question Paper of MS-01:Management Function and Behaviour Dec-2000

Q.1 What are the major sources of conflict in an organisation? Discuss the consequences of inter-group conflict and the ways to reduce its negative impact.

Q.2 Identify the various characteristics of effective work groups. Suggest a process for effectively managing a group.

Q.3 What are the dominant features of managerial decision making? With the help of suitable examples, discuss the various skills required for decision making;

Q.4 Discuss various strategies used in implementing organisational change in the context of a large manufacturing organisation in the private sector.

Q.5 Compare and contrast Theory X and Y. Discuss their relevance in Indian organizational context.

Q.6 What is the System Approach to management? Examine the salient features of this approach.

Q.7 Write short notes on any three of the following:

(a) Interpersonal dynamics in an organization
(b) Management by objectives
© Delegation and decentralisation
(d) Domino effect
(e) Psychological problems in communication

Q.8 Please read the case given below and answer the questions that follow:

In the course of an informal discussion with his friend Mr. Bans Raj, Personnel Manager, Lucknow unit of Hindustan Printing Press (Pvt.) Limited, the Officer Commanding at Meerut Headquarters, recommended Captain R.P. Singh, a released army officer, for the post of a supervisor (night shift incharge) which arose in the production department of the press, insisting that he knew him personally for the last three years and had no doubt about his suitability for a supervisory position. Captain R.P. Singh was 31 years old and had passed his B.Sc. examination from Patna University. He was a member of different clubs and the Institute of Surveyors and possessed six years experience including three years as a captain, in the Corps of Engineers. On the basis of formal recommendation by the Officer Commanding and his personal interview with the Managing Director of Hindustan Printing Press, Captain Singh was offered the above position. Captain Singh joined the press on 1″ September 1970. He had to report to the Production Manager and supervise about 50 workers in the night shift. At the end of the probationary period, the Production Manager assessed him on the four-point merit rating scale of the company which ranged from A (high) to D (low) and consisted of the 15 factors as shown in Exhibit-1 (below on page).

On the basis of recommendations of the Production Manager, Captain Singh was confirmed in the job. Subsequently, on 7* June, 1971, he was transferred to Bombay unit of the company which urgently needed a production supervisor. In this position he had to supervise about 80 workers. The company operated three shifts a day, changing once a week. As soon as he assumed the charge of his section, he submitted a representation to the management as follows:

“I understand that I shall be entitled for house rent allowance which should take effect from the date I resumed duties at Bombay, i.e., 7* June, 1971.1 may add here that I have already rented a house in the city to live with my family. Moreover, as management has been considerate towards other supervisors to provide conveyance facilities/allowance to them, I hope similar facilities/ allowance will be given to me as well.”
The management, though resenting the tone of the above representation, allowed him the benefits.

Exhibit-1
Factors Ratings

1. Attitude towards company B
2. Attitude towards superiors B
3. Attitude towards peers B
4. Quality of work B
5. Quantity of work B
6. Length of service D
7. Attendance and time keeping C
8. Ability to plan for himself and to execute such plans B
9. Supervision of safety rules B
10. Avoidance of waste B
11. Leadership B
12. Discipline (including ability to maintain cleanliness and tidiness) B
13. Ability to instruct C
14. Ability to deal with human relations problems D
15. Neatness B

Final Rating after assigning weights to crucial factors: B

On 5* November, Ram Sumer, an operator and a union leader visited Personnel Manager’s office and handed him the following written complaint against Captain Singh’s misbehaviour:

I wish to draw your kind attention regarding the misbehaviour with me by Captain Singh, supervisor in the section, on 2nd instant. It happened that I went to collect tape from the electrician but I was puzzled when suddenly ^Captain Singh appeared and shouted at me, ‘Why are you standing here? He abused me like anything in spite of my request not to do so. He used worst possible words like ’sala’, ‘chamar1 etc., which were intolerable.

Please look into this matter so that each of us maintains his prestige while working in the company.”

The Personnel Manager assured him of proper action and attempted to make him easy. As soon as he left his office, the Personnel Manager telephoned the Production manager and informed him about Captain Singh’s misbehaviour towards Ram Sumer, requesting an immediate inquiry into the matter.

The Production Manager called Captain Singh and the following conversation took place:

Production Manager: Captain Singh, I have heard very embarrassing things about you today. Is it true that you abused Ram Sumer, an operator, on the shop-floor?

Singh: That’s true, Sir. But I did so with a good motive. It was in the interest of the company itself.

Production Manager: Interest of the company? How does it serve the company’s interest?

Singh: Sir, as you are aware, Ram Sumer was issued 33 reams of paper to cue.

He cut one sheet which was found to be undersized. Instead of rejecting that sheet, he wasted the entire ream intentionally.

Production Manager: (becomes alert) How?

Singh: Sir, he did very cleverly. He saw me involved with other workers in the section. He sliced the entire ream into small pieces and disposed it off as waste.

Production Manager: But how did you come to know of it? What evidence do you have for these charges against him?

Singh: Sir, I have substantial evidence for all his mischiefs. Firstly, the output was less than normal. Secondly, an unexpected amount of waste was recovered on his machine.

Production manager: But as you claim, one sheet was undersized. How can you claim that his act was intentional, unless you were present on the scene?

Singh: I have caught him red-handed doing so twice in the past and warned him not to repeat it. Since then, I have observed, he avoids my eye and when he finds an occasion he plays mischief. In fact, I am convinced some union leaders are instigating him and other workers in the section to cause damage to the property of the company.

Production manager: (becomes tense) So that is the story! (Keeps silence for a short time.) But you should not have abused him. It is always a better course of action to insist on explanations in writing. Alternatively, you should have better reported the matter to me next day.

Singh: Sir, I rebuked him because I lost my temper finding him roaming about aimlessly. Indeed, I was already extremely annoyed with his mischiefs. It went beyond my tolerance and I abused him. Later on, I felt extremely sorry for it and could not pass the matter to you because that might have caused his suspension from the company, leading to undesirable repercussions.

Production Manager: O.K. In future do not use abusive language and always keep us informed about the happenings without any hesitation. Keep it in mind, otherwise we may be involved in trouble. Now you can go but submit every detail about the matter in writing immediately, which I have to forward to the personnel department.

In the report forwarded by the production manager, both Singh and Ram Sumer were found guilty Subsequently, the personnel manager called them into his office to settle the issue. Captain Singh regretted his behaviour in the presence of Ram Sumer, while Ram Sumer accepted that he destroyed the entire ream of paper and promised not to repeat it. They submitted their statements in writing to the Personnel Manager.

Later on, the management realized that most of the workers did not like Captain Singh because of his autocratic and repressive style of work. They made several complaints against him to the personnel department. Ultimately, the management decided to transfer him to security department where, it was felt that being an army officer, he could realise his full capacities.

He took over the charge of this department as a Security-cum-Establishment Officer with responsibilities of security, sanitation and establishment.

On 2nd December, 1972, while a union leader was instigating the factory workers to go on strike at the gate of the company, Captain Singh rushed to the scene and rebuked him and his men. He forced them to leave within a short time, dispersing the crowd from the company’s gate. Though the management appreciated his boldness and blind loyalty to the organization, he was also warned by the Personnel Manager not to act impulsively and behave rudely with, atleast, the union leaders because they could create trouble for him as well as for the company.

Next day, about 60 per cent workers of company went on indefinite strike at the instance of the union pressing a large number of demands including captain Singh’s dismissal from the company. The Personnel manager thereupon advised Singh to act very tactfully and collect information on those workers who were instigating the others to continue the strike indefinitely. Despite all his sincere efforts, Singh failed to locate these trouble makers” and consequently could not furnish any information to management. Later on conciliation took place between the management and the workers’ Union. The union dropped some of its demands, including Singh’s dismissal when he regretted his rough treatment of the union leader, whereas the management accepted Partially some of the union’s demands regarding bonus and modified some of the personnel policies in the company. Consequently, the strike was called off.

Questions

1. What is the problem in the case? Discuss.
2. How do you see Captain Singh as a Supervisor ? Evaluate his behaviour.
3. How would you tackle a union leader, if you where in Singh’s position?
4. Evaluate the conciliation and its impact in the long run.

Question Paper of MS-01: Management Functions and Behaviour June-2000

Q.1 Explain the approaches to leadership and discuss which could be the best suitable style of leadership. Give reasons.

Q.2 “Communication is considered to be the most important and most effective ingredient of the management process.” Elaborate this statement and discuss the underlying concept with suitable examples.

Q.3 Discuss whether you need any control when everything is going as planned.

Q.4 Define organisational structure and explain with suitable examples, how structure and productivity can be linked to each other.

Q.5 Define and differentiate between centralisation and decentralisation of authority. Critically evaluate the
advantages and disadvantages of the two systems in organisational context.

Q.6 Write short notes on any three of the following : (i) Delphi technique

(i) Johari Window
(iii) Democratic vs Laissez-Faire
(iv) Semantic barrier
(v) Informal groups

Q.7.Read the case given below and answer the questions given at the end. Ms. Subhashini had graduated with a degree in foreign languages. As the child of a military family, she had visited many parts of the world and had travelled extensively in Europe. Despite these broadening experiences, she had never given much thought to a career until her recent divorce from Mr. Srinivas.

Needing to provide her own income, Ms. Subhashini began to look for work. After a fairly intense but unsuccessful search for a job related to her foreign language degree, she began to evaluate her other skills. She had become a proficient typist in college and decided to look into secretarial work. Although she still wanted a career utilizing her foreign language skills, she felt that the immediate financial pressures would be eased in a temporary secretarial position.

Within a short period of time, she was hired as a clerk/typist in a typing pool at Life insurance Company. Six months later, she became the top typist in the pool and was assigned as secretary to Mrs. Arora, manager of marketing research. She was pleased to get out of the pool and to get a job that had more variety in the tasks to perform. Besides, she also got a-nice raise in pay. Everything seemed to proceed well for the next nine months. Mrs. Arora was pleased with Subhashini’s work, and she seemed happy with her work. Subhashini applied for a few other more professional jobs in other areas during this time. However, each time her application was rejected for lack of related education and/or experience in the area.

Over the next few months, Arora noticed changes in Subhashini. She did not always dress as neatly as she had in the past, she was occasionally late for work, some of her lunches extended to two hours, and most of her productive work was done in the morning hours. Arora did not wish to say anything because Subhashini had been doing an excellent job and her job tasks still were being accomplished on time. However, Subhashini’s job behavior continued to worsen. She began to be absent frequently on Mondays or
Fridays. The two-hour lunch periods became standard, and her work performance began to deteriorate. In addition, Arora began to suspect that Subhashini was drinking heavily, due to her appearance some mornings and behavior after her two-hour lunches.

Arora decided that she must confront Subhashini with the problem. However, she wanted to find a way to help her without losing a valuable employee. Before she could set up a meeting, Subhashini burst through her door after lunch one day and said:

“1 want to talk to you Mrs. Arora.”
“That’s fine,” Arora replied,” Shall we set a convenient time?1′
“No ! I want to talk now.”
“OK, why don’t you sit down and let’s talk?”
Arora noticed that Subhashini was slurring her words slightly and she was not too steady.

“Mrs. Arora, I need some vacation time.”
“I’m sure we can work that out. You’ve been with the company for over a year and have two weeks’ vacation coming.”
“No, you don’t understand. I want to start it tomorrow.”

“But, Subhashini, we need to plan to get a temporary replacement. We can’t just let your job go for two weeks.”

“Why not? Anyway anyone with an IQ above 50 can do my job. Besides, | need the time off.”
“Subhashini, are you sure you are all right?”
“Yes, I just need sometime away from the job.”

Arora decided to let Subhashini have the vacation, which would allow her some time to decide what to do about the situation.

Arora thought about the situation the next couple of days. It was possible that Subhashini was an alcoholic. However, she also seemed to have a negative reaction to her job. Maybe Subhashini was bored with her job. She did not have the experience or job skills to move to a different type of job at present. Arora decided to meet with the Personnel Manager and get some help developing her options to deal with Subhashini’s problem.

Questions

1 What is the problem in your opinion? Elaborate. .
2 Assume that you are the Personnel Manager. What are the alternatives available with Mrs. Arora?
3 What do you consider the best alternative? Why?

Question Paper of MS-01: Management Function And Behaviour Dec-1999

Q.1 What are the various determinants of organisational culture? How does leadership influence the culture of an organization?

Q.2 Describe the responsibilities of a professional manager towards customers and society. Illustrate your answer with suitable examples.

Q.3 Why do people generally resist change? Do personal factors play a role in this process? What are the common coping strategies for change?

Q.4 Describe conflict avoidance, conflict diffusion and conflict confrontation strategies with the help of suitable examples.

Q.5 Distinguish between decision making under risk and decision making under conflict or competition.

Q.6 Write short notes on any three of the following :

(i) Line and staff functions
(ii) Managerial values and ethos
(iii) Socialisation process in an organisation
(iv) Management Information System
(v) Theory X and Theory Y

Q.7 Read the case given below and answer the questions given at the end.

Modem Industries Limited (MIL) in Bangalore, a subsidiary of a multinational company, is a consumer durables manufacturing industry. Presently, the company has over 5000 employees and an annual turnover of about Rs. 75 crores. It is a reputed high-technology industry with a strong team of technological experts.

The company offers an excellent training scheme for fresh technical graduates, known as “Graduate Engineer Training (GET) Scheme” which is of 2 years’ duration. The objective of this scheme is to identify and train engineers for the specialised technological requirements of the company. Over the past decade several fresh graduates have undergone this training programme and at present hold key positions in the organisation, having proved their worth to the company. Even those who have left the organisation are reported to be doing extremely well in their jobs. The company regarded it as a Prize Scheme. It has gained high reputation among the student community and there is keen competition among graduates country-wide to join this scheme.

Mr. Mohan joined the company as a Graduate Engineer Trainee in 1986 after obtaining his B.Tech. degree in Mechanical Engineering from I.I.T. Bombay. He has secured the second position in the class, and had a brilliant academic record to his credit. After his B.Tech., he had several attractive offers for employment including a scholarship from an American University, but he preferred to join MIL as a GET. He had reasons to do so. Firstly, the scheme had a high reputation and was helping fresh engineers to start their career in industry on a sound footing. Secondly, he was interested in getting practical experience rather than continuing his education. Thirdly, he was the eldest son of his parents, who were settled in Bangalore, and he wanted to stay with them and lessen their financial burden. He did quite well during his training, which included working in different departments on specific assignments. This helped the trainees to get a feel of the challenges in different functional areas and at the same time enabled the departmental managers to know them. This helped the managers to identify the aptitudes of trainees and place them finally in suitable areas of specialization.’

Mr. Mohan’s training was oriented towards his final placement in the production engineering department. After his training in 1988 he was placed in that department as an Engineer. The job was quite challenging: it called for a lot of hard work and ingenuity. He was required to tackle technical problems related to a particular manufacturing workshop, and was also expected to improve the existing process and parameters. The workshop was one of the key manufacturing areas. He was quick to understand the complexities of his job and was able to show improvements in a short period of time.

The company had a reasonably good system of performance appraisal and rewards, and the contributions of individuals were usually well rewarded. Mr. Mohan earned an additional increment in 1990 in appreciation of his contribution. This encouraged him to work with greater enthusiasm. He was
also a member of some of the workgroups, which were formed from time to time for tackling specific problems; and did well in this capacity. He was quite competent in his area of work and earned an extra increment in 1991.

However, trouble started brewing from then onwards. He and his superior, Mr. Tagore did not agree on many matters. Mr. Tagore felt that Mr. Mohan was not cooperative, and tended to be dogmatic in his approach. This adversely affected their work relationship.

Mr. Tagore, who was the head of the production engineering department, had over 25 years’ experience and held a Diploma in Mechanical Engineering. He had worked for other organisations before joining the company in 1976. He was placed as Manager of production engineering department in 1984. He had sound practical knowledge and was handling the production engineering department quite effectively.

Generally ex-trainees were considered for promotion after 3 to 4 years of experience. In 1992, many of those who completed training in 1988 were promoted as Senior Engineers. Mr. Mohan was expecting his name to be in the list of promotees, but to his surprise it was not. His performance during
the year was rated as normal, and this upset him greatly leading him to feel frustrated.

He met the Training Manager and appraised him of the situation. He requested. him to arrange for his transfer to some other functional area. The Training Manager took up the case but could not transfer Mr. Mohan, as the workshop serviced by him was a critical one and his expertise was very much in demand
there..

The differences between Mr. Tagore and Mr. Mohan were widening and becoming serious on technical matters. Mr. Tagore complained that Mr. Mohan unnecessarily argued on every minor detail, and that this amounted to disobedience. Mr. Mohan was considered an obstacle to work; his annual increment for 1993 was also withheld.

Mr. Mohan was thoroughly upset. He met the General Manager and contended that he was fully competent in his job and, therefore, there was no reason for withholding his increment. He argued that his superior was less educated than him, and that this accounted for the widening of differences between him and the Manager. He requested the General Manager to look into the matter, and he promised to do so.

A week later, the General Manager called him and informed him that he was being transferred to another department. Mr. Mohan was quite willing to work in that department provided he was posted there on promotion. Inter-departmental transfers were not uncommon. Young engineers, in particular, were transferred from one department to the other with a view to building them up for higher positions which required better inter-functional understanding. In all such cases the practice was to post them on promotion. However, Mr. Mohan’s demand was not conceded. He was transferred in June 1993. His performance in the new department was far from satisfactory and he was considered to be a “deadwood” there. He was understandably disgusted. He tried for a scholarship abroad and succeeded. This lead to his decision to quit his job. He left ti.3 country in January 1994, full of bitterness and disgust.

Questions

(a) How did a brilliant engineer turn out to be a “deadwood"?
(b) Was Mr. Mohan too sensitive and arrogant?
© Did Mr. Tagore handle sensitive and intelligent engineers properly?
(d) Was it not advisable to transfer Mr. Mohan in 1992 when the signs of trouble were seen?
(e) Should Mr. Tagore have stopped Mr. Mohan’s increment in 1993, knowing fully well that he was quite competent?

Qquestion Paper of MS-01: Management Functions And Behaviour June-1999

Q.I (a) What kind of decisions is a manager generally required to make in the organisational context?Explain with examples as to which of these correspond to programmed and non-programmed categories.

(b) Discuss various strategies used in implementing Organisational change in the context of a large manufacturing company.

Q.2 (a) What is the system approach to management? Explain the salient features of this approach.

(b) Describe various managerial skills briefly. Discuss the roles these skills could play in building an institution.

Q.3 (a) Distinguish between the individual and the group decision making, explaining the advantages and disadvantages of group decision making,

(b) Distinguish between individual change and organizational change.

Q.4 Write short notes on any three of the following :

(i) Domino Effect
(ii) Functional and Dysfunctional conflict
(iii) Formal and Informal groups
(iv) MBO
(v) Organisational Culture and Climate

Q.5 Please read the case given below and answer the questions given at the end.

One afternoon in June 1972, Rao, industrial engineer of P.M.A. Company, was called to the office of his immediate superior V.R. Naik, the production manager. Naik said, “Rao, I want to discuss a situation in the production department. A lot of people feel that Govindan is not the right man for the Assistant
Superintendent’s position. The President and others have decided that I have got to fire Govindan or at least move him out of production. Everyone wants to fire Govindan, but I won’t do it to him. I was talking with Bhadra this morning, and we decided that you might be able to make use of Govindan in your department.”

Rao was surprised by both the information, and the proposal. Naik concluded his comments with, “Rao, 1 am asking you to take Govindan. You can say ‘No’. But then he gets fired. I have told Govindan this. Also,
Govindan knows that if he goes with you he will take a pay cut. However, 11 think you can make use of him both to your own and his satisfaction. You are, anyway, carrying out an in-process quality control, and you might be able to make good use of Govindan in view of his long technical experience of production work. Think it over, and let me know by tomorrow.” Rao thought over the matter.

PMA company had been a successful enterprise until March 1972 at which time it suffered a sharp decline of profits: sales had fallen off, and production costs had risen. The President adopted three measures which he hoped would improve the condition. First, by creating an Industrial Engineering Department for establishing work standards on all production operations, to determine which manufacturing costs were out of line and where remedial action should be taken. Rao, 28 years old, who had been with the company for two years in the Purchasing department, was selected. Rao had B.E. and MBA degrees to his credit. What he lacked in his business experience he made up by his eagerness to learn. He was ambitious and liked by his associates. He wanted a transfer from Purchasing to Production for better opportunities for
advancement.

Secondly, he consulted a Management Consultation firm to make a study of the Production Department. They pointed out that the chain of command was too long from Production Manager through Plant Superintendent through Assistant Superintendent to Foremen. They recommended the elimination of the position of Assistant Superintendent. Thirdly, he engaged an Industrial Psychologist to appraise all the Supervisory Personnel.

Govindan had been with the company for 20 years since its founding and during this period had worked on every production operation, and his last 11 years had been in supervisory capacity. His manners were rough and aggressive, he had little formal education. The industrial Psychologist’s report about Govindan contained the following points:

(i) Evaluation for the position of Assistant Superintendent: Not good enough.

(ii) Capacity for good human relations in supervision : Will have friction frequently.

(iii) Need for development counseling : Counseling greatly needed.

(iv) General Evaluation : Govindan had a good ability profile. He suffers from a sense of inferiority. He does not like the responsibility of making decisions. His supervision is that of Autocratic type. Though he has the ability, as far as his personality make-up is concerned, he is out of place in the present position.

Questions

1 What is the problem in the case? Explain.
2 Explain Govindan’s behavior and work experience vis-a-vis the psychologist’s report.
3 How do you see Naik’s suggestion to Rao? Give reasons.
4 What are Rao’s considerations in taking a decision” What should he do? Explain.

Question Paper of MS-01: Management Functions And Behaviour Dec 1998

Q.1(a) Why do people generally resist change? Do personal factors play a role in this process? Discuss what are the common coping strategies for change.

(b) Describe the inter-personal needs in terms of expressed and wanted behaviour.

Q.2(a) “Managers are known by the work they do and the function they perform."! Elaborate and critically evaluate this statement.

(b) What are the various determinants of organisational culture? How does leadership influence the culture of an organisation?

Q.3(a) Why do conflicts arise in an organisational situation? Describe various conflict handling strategies, with suitable examples.

(b) Distinguish between decision making under risk and decision making under conflict or competition, with examples.

Q.4 Write short notes on any three of the following:

(i) Managerial values and Ethos
(ii) Leadership style
(iii) Socialisation process
(iv) Management Information System
(v) Theory X and Y

Q.5 Please read the case given below and answer the questions that follow: Ceylon Fertilizer is a urea-manufacturing unit having a capacity of 500 tonnes ‘ per day. The total work force of the plant is around 2,000. Being a self-contained plant, it has its own workshop in order to take care of regular i maintenance work. The workshop functions in two shifts a day under a shift in charge for each shift who is in the cadre of AEE. The workers have been grouped into two groups, i.e.. Relay ‘A’ and ‘B The shift routine changes once a week, Sunday being a weekly holiday. Besides the two shifts, there are a group of people under a Senior AEE attending in general shift hours.

The Relay ‘A*, consisting of 18 workers is placed under the charge of Shri Muthu who is a graduate in mechanical engineering. After undergoing training for a period of six months in various divisions in fertilizer, he had acquired a thorough knowledge of works to be undertaken by the Workshop. After being as a Relay Supervisor for 3 years, he has been recently promoted to the post of AEE, who is the shift in charge. When he joined the workshop, he found that the tasks were done with application of thumb-rules and higher officers had to be satisfied with such a quality of work.

Shri Muthu, on witnessing this, started to instruct his workers in various theoretical aspects of welding, machines etc., which he has studied in his college. They all highly appreciated the skill and techniques he had taught. The workers not learnt to do things in a better way. Thus, he gained’ the confidence of workers. As he was able to finish his work in time and in a better way than relay ‘B more work orders were allotted to his group. A few workers in his group started to grumble and.Foreman came and told Mr. Muthu that the “other relay workers do not have much work-load and our workers too do not want to strain much and they are murmuring over getting “more work". Mr. Muthu, however, convinced the Foreman that extra work -should be taken as a credit and recognition, and they should do their best. After this had happened some workers even tried to get transferred to the other Relay.

One morning, Mr. Muthu was making arrangements for the work to be taken and was giving instructions to his foreman. Turner, Kali, came and told him, “Sir, father of Fitter Sami expired last night and we all want to go and attend the_ funeral,” and added, “It is customary for the men in workshop to attend such funerals and the shift-incharge has to arrange a lorry or any conveyance for the people to go to Sami’s house, which is nearly eight kms. from the Plant.” Since Muthu joined the company, this was first such instance occurring and as he had to finish some urgent work orders, he told the worker Kali, ” You all need not go the funeral. 1 can, however, permit a few of you as rep representatives of Relay ‘A’ to go and offer condolences to Sami’s family.” Further, he regretted that he would not make any arrangements for conveyance. This statement created a turbulence among the workers and a group of workers stopped the work and started demanding that they be allowed to attend the funeral or else they wanted to stop work in the coming shifts. Foreman hurried up to AEE Mr. Muthu to explain the turbulent situation in the shop-floor.

On hearing this, Muthu told his Foreman, “I have given you an alternative and I have already told the urgency or work and I am going to allocate the work as per planning schedule. If the work is not done, I may have to take action against you.” Then the group of workers started discussing among themselves as to what to do next. A turner came forth and said, “You are not considerate enough to human matters and if you are still adamant we may prefer half-a-day wages-cut as we must go and attend the funeral. Any how you have to make arrangements for our conveyance.” Mr, Muthu at this instance noted that a small group, who were usually complaining about the workload and were murmuring, were keenly interested in the affair. He decided to face the situation as a matter of prestige. He issued the gate pass to whoever wished to go, still emphasizing that he would not arrange any conveyance. Nearly 25 per cent of the workers remained and the others collected money from all for the funeral and went off.

On that day Mr. Muthu, could finish only a part of the work as planned and he had to explain what had happened in his Relay, to his boss.

When he came the next morning, it was rumored that only a few of the workers attended the funeral and the others had gone to the cinema theatre near the village. Mr. Muthu got irritated by the workers’ behaviour and started writing memos to those who had received the gate pass the previous day. Some workers got annoyed by this action of Mr. Muthu and they approached the union to intervene. The news had spread to other divisions and there was an air of protest at all places in the Fertilizer Plants.

Questions

1. What are the dominant features of this case?
2. What us your view of the action taken by Mr. Muthu?
3. What are the weaknesses and strong points, as you consider, of Mr. Muthu as a Manager?
4. How would you have tackled the situation, if you were Mr. Muthu?