2005 Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) Post Graduate Diploma HR Management MANAGING CHANGE IN ORGANISATION Question paper

Course: Post Graduate Diploma HR Management

University: Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU)

1. Discuss the process of transformational change and the steps involved in it. Illustrate an instance where such a change was brought about.
2. What is an organizational intervention ? Briefly discuss the methods of task force and internal facilitator development with examples.
3. Describe the role of an internal change agent and its significance. Discuss the skills required for a successful change agent.
4. What are the reasons for the failure of implementation of change interventions ? What interface would you suggest between management and employees in such an instance?
5. Write short notes on any three of the following : (i) Work redesign (ii) Sources of resistance to change (iii) Observation method (iv) Role of chief implementor to change (v) Role efficacy
6. Why do people and organisations resist change? Describe few methods of managing resistance to change.
7. Justify the process of change evaluation and briefly discuss its process Highlight action research in evaluating change.
8. Discuss the role of business process re-engineering in organisational change and critically evaluate it significance.
9. Discuss the factors of a successful company in continuously adapting to change. Illustrate.
10. Write short notes on any three of the following : (i) Turn-around management (ii) Mergers and Acquisitions (iii) Role negotiation technique (iv) Transactional analysis (v) Role of a leader in change management
11. Read the following case carefully and answer the questions given at the end : TransAct Insurance Corporation (TIC) provides automobile insurance throughout the south-eastern United States. Last year a new president was brought in by TIC Board of Directors to improve the company competitiveness and customer service. After spending several months assessing the situation, the new president introduced a strategic plan to improve TIC competitive position. He also replaced three vice presidents. Ram Kumar was hired as vice president of claims, TIC largest division with 1,500 employees, 50 claims center managers, and 5 regional directors. Ram Kumar immediately met with all claims managers and directors, and visited employees at TIC 50 claims centers. As an outsider, this was a formidable task, but his strong interpersonal skills and uncanny ability to remember names and ideas helped him through the process. Through these visits and discussions, Ram Kumar discovered that the claims division had been managed in a relatively authoritarian,top down manner. He could also see that morale was extremely low and employee-management relations were guarded. High workloads and isolation (claims adjusters work in tiny cubicles) were two other common complaints. Several managers acknowledged that the high turnover among claims adjusters was partly due to these conditions. Following discussions with TIC president, Ram Kumar decided to make morale and supervisory leadership his top priority. He initiated a divisional newsletter with a tear-off feedback form for employees to register their comments. He announced an open-door policy in which any claims division employee could speak to him directly and confidentially without going first to the immediate supervisor. Ram Kumar also fought organizational barriers to initiate a flextime program so that employees could design work schedules around their needs. This program later became a model for other areas of TIC. One of Ram Kumar most pronounced symbols of change was the "Claims Management Credo" outlining the philosophy that every claims manager would follow. At his first meeting with the complete claims management team, Ram Kumar presented a list of what he thought were important philosophies and actions of effective managers. The management group was asked to select and prioritize items from this list. They were told that the resulting list would be the division management philosohy and all managers would be held accountable for abiding by its principles. Most claims managers were uneasy about this process, but they also understood that the organization was under competitive pressure and that Ram Kumar was using this exercise to demonstrate his leadership. The claims managers developed a list of 10 items, such as encouraging teamwork, fostering a trusting work environment, setting clear and reasonable goals, and so on. The list was circulated to senior management in the organization for their comment and approval and sent back to all claims managers for their endorsement. Once this was done, a copy of the final document was sent to every claims division employee. Jim also announced plans to follow up with an annual survey to evaluate each claims manager performance. This worried the managers but most of them believed that the credo exercise was a result of Ram Kumar initial enthusiasm and that he would be too busy to introduce a survey after setting into the job. One year after the credo had been distributed, Ram Kumar announced that the first annual survey would be conducted. All claims employees were to complete the survey and return it confidentially to the human resources department where the survey results would be compiled for each claims center manager. The survey asked the extent to which the manager had lived up to each of the 10 items in the credo. Each form also provided space for comments. Claims center managers were surprised that the survey Ram Kumar had promised a year ago would be conducted, but they were even more worried about Ram statement that the results would be shared with employees. What "results" would employees see ? Who would distribute these results ? What happens if a manager gets poor ratings from his or her subordinates? "We will work out the details later," said Ram in response to these questions. "Even if the survey results are not great, the information will give us a good baseline for next year survey. The claims division survey had a high response rate. In some centers, every employee completed and returned a form. Each report showed the claims center managers average score for each of the 10 items and how many employees rated the manager at each level of the five point scale. The reports also included every comment made by employees at that center. No one was prepared for the results of the first survey, Most managers received moderate or poor ratings on the 10 items. Very few managers averaged above 3.0 (out of a five-point scale) on more than a couple of items. This suggested that, at best, employees were ambivalent about whether their claims center manager had abided by the 10 management philosophy items. The comments were even more devastating than the ratings. Comments ranged from mildly disappointed to extremely critical of their claims manager. Employees also described their long-standing frustration with TlC, high workloads, and isolated working conditions. Several people bluntly stated that they were skeptical about the changes that Ram had promised. "We have heard the promises before, but now we have lost faith." wroie one claims adjuster. The survey results were sent to each claims manager, the regional director, and employees at the claims center. Ram Kumar instructed managers to discuss the survey data and comments with their regional manager and directly with employees. The claims center managers, who thought employees only received average scores, were shocked to learn that the reports included individual comments, Some managers went to their regional director, complaining that revealing the personal comments would ruin their careers. Many directors sympathized, but the results were already available to employees. When Ram heard about these concerns, he agreed that the results were lower than expected and that the comments should not have been shown to employees. After discussing the situation with the regional directors, he decided that the discussion meetings between claims managers and their employees should proceed as planned. To delay or withdraw the reports would undermine the credibility and trust that Ram was trying to develop with employees. However, the regional director in that area attended the meeting in each claims center to minimize direct conflict between the claims center manager and employees. Although many of these meetings went smoothly, a few created harsh feelings between managers and their employees. The source of some comments was easily identified by their content, and this created a few delicate moments in several sessions. A few months after these meetings, two claims center managers quit and three others asked for transfers back to non-management positions in TIC. Meanwhile, Ram wondered how to manage this process more effectively, particularly since employees expected another survey the following year. Questions : (a) Identify the forces pushing for change and the forces restraining the change effort in this case. (b) Was Ram Kumar successful at bringing about change ? Why or why not ? (c) What should Ram Kumar do now ?
12. Discuss the importance of Social and Organisational cultures in bringing about change, with suitable examples.
13. Describe survey feedback as an intervention in bringing about change and its advantages and disadvantages, citing suitable examples.
14. Describe the method of role efficiency to bring about change in an organisation and discuss its significance in emphasizing the relatlonship of employee and employer.
15. Discuss the key roles inolved in managing change. How are the interactions within the organization facilitated ?
16. Write short notes on any three of the following : (i) External vs. Internal consultant (ii) Manager as agent of change (iii) Process consultation (iv) Transformational change (v) A model of implementation of change in an organisation
17. Discuss the process of Leveraging Structure in bringing change in organisations. Explain with suitable examples.
18. Evaluate critically the importance of Weisbord Six-Box Model for diagnosis in an organisation.
19. Discuss the concept of Total Quality Management and its relevance in bringing change in an organisation.
20. Discuss how cultural change can be brought in an organisation. Explain with examples.
21. Write short notes on any three of the following : (i) Managing transition (ii) Managing resistance to change (iii) Transactional vs. Transformational leader (iv) Types of change (v) Behaviour modelling as an intervention
22. Read the following case carefully and answer the questions given at the end : 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 centres around the world and consolidated them into only five - four in Dearborn, Michigan, and one in Europe. The one in Europe was responsible for creating one basic design for small cars for the world market and then making minor modifications for local markets. For example, the same template will be used in Europe, South America, and Asia. The four design centres in Dearborn will do the same for large front-wheel-drive cars, rear-wheel-drive cars, pick-up trucks, and commercial vehicles. The consolidation effort requires that more than twenty-five thousand salaried 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 operations around the world and revolutionise 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 are reduced duplication of effort, increase volume purchasing, save more than $4 billion per year, and double profitability. All this for a company that 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 percent 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 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 percent, 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 new 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. Managers 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 homogeneous 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 a 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 result this time because of the consolidation of the design centres, the new organisation structure, and because advances in technology have made the inner working of cars so similar that only the outer, visible portions of the cars need to be different to satisfy regional tastes. By mid 1996, however, the reorganisation was not going so well. The transition 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 reorganisation ! Trotman now plans to reduce the number of design centres from five to three. People are moving and reporting relationships are changing once again. Group Vice President Jacques A. Nasser, who may succeed Trotman by 1998 or so, has promised $11 billion in savings under the new system. Some have claimed that the "new" reorganisation really puts things back the way they were before the first reorganisation. However, three design centres is a lot fewer than the dozens that existed before. But this second reorganisation, 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 answered or disputes resolved. All they get on the phone is voice mail, since everyone is in meetings trying to work out the new reorganisation. Top management claims that these problems are inherent trying to turn around such a big organisation that has been relatively successful through the years. They say that the organisation needs to evolve to meet their ambitious goals and the competition. Questions: (a) Describe the changes in structure that Ford expects from the Ford 2000. (b) How do you explain the continuing problem that employees are having with adapting to the new structure of Ford 2000 ? (c) Is a matrix structure the proper structure for Ford 2000 ?

Return to question paper search

Fresher Jobs

Resources

Colleges

2005 Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) Post Graduate Diploma HR Management MANAGING CHANGE IN ORGANISATION Question paper

Next Question Paper: EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS

Previous Question Paper: HUMAN RESOURCE PLANNING

Related Question Papers:

Categories