Question Paper of MS-02:Managing Men Dec-2001

Q.1 Define recruitment. What are the methods and techniques of recruitment! Explain the advantages and limitations of recruiting from internal sources and external sources.

Q.2 Discuss the significant processes of collective bargaining. What are thd objectives and functions of collective bargaining? Explain the different forma of collective bargaining. Is the scope of collective bargaining widening in lie] present scenario? Discuss.

Q.3 What is the use of job analysis in managing human resources? Explain iej methods that can be used to analyse jobs and discuss the advantages and limitations of them.

Q.4 Define the term discipline. Discuss different approaches to discipline. Explail the context in which disciplinary procedure is conducted.

Q.5 What is the process involved in selection? How does it differ from placemei?) Explain the steps involved in an effective selection programme.

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

(i) Motivation and Morale
(ii) Job evaluation
(iii) Job enrichment vs Succession planning
(v) Suspension

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

Moksham Industries Ltd. (MIL) is an automobile manufacturing company in Bangalore. A subsidiary of a multinational company, it has a turnover of over Rs. 900 crores. It employs around 5000 persons, of which about 600 are in the supervisory and managerial cadre. The company is professionally managed and is well known for its sound business practices.

The management team is headed by a dynamic Managing Director. Performance of a high order and unquestionable integrity is expected at every level. This is more so at the officers’ and managers’ levels. Normally people of high calibre are selected through open advertisements, to meet the personnel requirements at these levels. Over a period of time, the company has built up a strong team of manpower, which excels in several fields.

The Purchase Department is headed by a Divisional Manager, Mr. Joshi. The activities of the Purchase Department have been broadly bifurcated into three groups, each of which is headed by a Group Manager.

Mr. Kulkarni, the Purchase Manager, heads the group in charge of procurement of castings, forgings and pressed parts. There are three purchase officers under him, each dealing with a particular category of items.

Mr. Kumar is the Purchase Officer responsible for planning and procurement of forgings. He joined the company in 1987 as a Purchase Assistant and rose to the position of Purchase Officer in a short period of eight years. He has a good track record and is known for his competence and hold on matters he deals with. After he was made responsible for looking after forgings around 1998, he had brought about several improvements and optimised the cost of procurement.

It is the normal practice in MIL. to develop and retain multiple suppliers for major items. The company believes that this practice would assure them uninterrupted supplies in any eventuality. Further, this would ensure healthy competition among the few suppliers for the same item. This is particularly in the case of forgings.

Mr. Kishen Singh established his company, ‘Singh Forgings Private Ltd. (SFPL)’ in 1990. He started his dealings with MIL as a small supplier around the same time when Mr. Kumar took over the charge of procurement of forgings. He has grown with MIL in the last four years and today he is one of their major suppliers. SFPL is rated high as a dependable supplier Mr. Singh and Mr. Kumar have an excellent rapport.

However, the Group Manager, Mr. Kulkami, does not see eye to eye with Mr. Kumar, particularly with respect to his dealings with Mr. Singh. The practice in MIL is that the concerned purchase officers are the suppliers from time to time. They decide the split up of the total quantity amongst the few suppliers for the same items. This is done generally on the basis of the supplier rating done by them.

The Problem

Mr. Gupte of M/s Gupte and Co. is another supplier of forgings to the company. One day Mr. Gupte informed Mr. Kulkarni that Mr. Kumar had taken some money from Mr. Singh. Mr. Kulkami called Mr. Kumar and inquired whether this was so. Mr. Kumar admitted that he had borrowed money from Mr. Singh when he needed it badly to arrange a religious trip for his parents. He further clarified that he had not approached Mr. Singh. When Mr. Singh came to know through a common friend that he needed money, he volunteered to help him. It had been a year since he borrowed the money, but he had not been able to return the amount so far. Mr Kulkami reported this matter to Mr. Joshi, the Divisional Manager. He complained that Mr. Kumar had entered into an unfair liaison with Mr. Singh. This was in bad taste and might lead to misunderstandings and complications. He emphasised that Mr. Kumar should have kept his superiors informed about his personal financial dealings with the supplier if it was inevitable. He recommended taking action against Mr. Kumar.

Mr. Joshi promptly called Mr. Kumar and asked for an explanation for what had happened. Mr. Kumar repeated his earlier explanation and further stated that Mr. Kulkami was using this as an opportunity to snub him. He told Mr. Joshithat Mr. Kulkami was in favour of releasing a larger order on Mr. Gupte as he happened to be his friend and relative, but Mr. Kumar was not in favour of this move, since Mr. Singh was rated comparatively better as a supplier. Mr. Gupte was given a much smaller order and this was not to Mr. Kulkarni’s liking.

Mr. Gupte has since the inception of MIL been supplying forgings to MIL. Till 1999 he had not faced much competition; he used to get far larger orders than at present. Later on, SFPL proved themselves to be a better supplier and as a result Mr. Gupte lost his share of the supplies. He was quite bitter that he had to lose his share to a later entrant in the field. His pride was hurt. His relationship with Mr. Kumar too, was lukewarm.

Mr. Joshi obtained the past records of both M/s SFPL and M/s Gupte and Co. and compared their performance as suppliers to MIL. The rating system maintained by Mr. Kumar showed that SFPL was a superior supplier. He then called Mr. Kulkami and appraised him about the counter allegations on him by Mr. Kumar and enquired from him whether he wanted to favour Mr. Gupte. While Mr. Kulkami admitted that Mr. Gupte was his relative and friend, he assured him that he never sought any favour from Mr. Kumar. This was evident from the available facts and figures.

Mr. Joshi, further, called Mr. Singh and enquired from him about this episode. The latter too admitted that he had loaned Rs. 6000 lo Mr. Kumar, after he came to know of his financial problems at that time, through a common friend. He had merely helped him as a good friend and did not have any ulterior motive.

Mr. Singh further admitted that there was no discussion with Mr. Kumar, either in regard to when the amount was to be returned or on the interest on the amount. He just assumed that he would get his money back whenever Mr. Kumar found it convenient to do so. He had never reminded Mr. Kumar about the amount during all those months. He begged to be pardoned if his gesture had resulted in any misunderstanding in the purchase department. Mr. Joshi is known for his high integrity and fair practices which are a common tradition of the company, at his level. He personally believes that anybody who works in a purchase department should be above any kind of suspicion and is known to act fast without fear or favour. However, in this case, he is still contemplating what mode of action he should take.

Questions

1. In view of the facts of the case, should Mr. Joshi take action against Mr. Kumar? Why?

2. Should the supplier, Mr. Singh, be blacklisted for having given money to one of the officers in the purchase department who has to directly deal with him? .

3. Should the supplier, Mr. Gupte, be blacklisted, for unnecessarily interfering in a matter which is of no concern to him and trying to play mischief?

4. Is Mr. Kulkami, the Group Manager overreacting to the incident?