Caselet 1

CASE STUDY

The personnel office of Prashant Chemicals limited informed the middle managers through a
circular that a group of consultants would be calling on them later in the week to provide training
on team building. The consultants would be emphasizing on how to develop team work and to
build inter group relationships throughout the Company. The information also contained the
approach to be adopted by the consultants and explained the five-step process of team building:
problem sensing, examining differences, giving and receiving feedback, developing interactive
skills, and follow up actions. The circular also included a note on the utility of team building in
organizational effectiveness. On receiving the circular, middle managers, felt tensed as they
though team building as an exercise involving a lot of hocus-pocus as they experienced in
sensitivity training exercises in which participants used to attack each other and let out their
aggression by heaping abuse on those disliked. Therefore, the managers felt that the consultants
were not needed for team building. One of the managers commented, ‘now that as we understand
what is involved in team building, we can go ahead and conduct session ourselves. All we have
to do is to choose a manager who is liked by everyone and put him in the role of change agent/
consultant. After all, you really do not need high priced consultants to do team building stuff.
You just have a good feel for human factor’. The other managers generally agreed. However, the
corporate personal director turned down their suggestion and proceeded with his original
programme of hiring consultants.

Questions

1. Why did middle managers show resistance to team building approach of organization

development?

2. Do you think the managers had accurate view of team building concept and role of external
consultant in that?

3. Did corporate personnel office sell the concept of team building and its usefulness properly to
middle managers? What actions should the department have taken?
CASE STUDY 2

Read carefully the following two episodes:

Episode 1

We were observing the work of one of the industrial engineers and a production operator who
had been assigned to work together to assemble and test a product that the engineer was
developing. The engineer and the operator were in daily contact with each other. It was common
for the engineer to suggest some modification in the product, discuss it with the operator and
then ask her to try it out to see how it worked. It was also common for the operator to get an idea
as she worked and to pass it on to the engineer, who would then consider it and at times ask the
operator to try it and see if it proved useful.

Episode 2

One day we noticed another engineer approaching the same production operator. We knew that
this particular engineer had no previous contact with the production operator. He had been asked
to take a look at one specific problem of the new product because of his special technical
qualifications. He had decided to make a change in one of the parts of the product to eliminate
the problem, and he had prepared some of these parts using his new method. Here is what
happened

He walked up to the production operator with the new parts in his hand and indicated to her by a
gesture that he wanted her to try assembling some units using his new part. The operator picked
up one of the parts and proceeded to assemble it. We noticed that she did not handle the part with
her usual care. After she had assembled the product, she turned to the new engineer and with a
triumphant air, said, ‘It does not work’. The new engineer indicated that she should try another
part. She did so, and again it did not work. She then proceeded to assemble units using all of the
new parts that were available. She handled each of them in an unusually rough manner. None of
them worked. Again she turned to the engineer and said that the new product did not work. The
engineer left and later the operator, with evident satisfaction commented to the original engineer
that new engineer’s idea was just no good

Questions

1. What does these two episodes indicate?

2. Discuss the above case in the lights of Change management and HRM
Case Study 3

Changing General Motors

As Japanese auto producers continue to take more and more sales away from General Motors,
the world’s largest automaker has realized that a major change within the company is essential if
it is to successfully meet the Japanese competition. Such change at General Motors (BM) must
begin with new relations with its union, the United Automobile Workers (UAW). In the past, the
relationship has been adversarial, and GM recognized that the relationship must be changed to
one of trust and cooperation.

General Motors and the UAW agreed to mutually fund and support a Human Resources Centre
dedicated to task of maximizing their human resources while creating a new spirit of
cooperation. The Human Resource Centre hopes to meet its change challenge through eight
ongoing programs:

1. Health and Safety Program – a five-day program of both classroom and hands-on workshops
aimed at eliminating job-related injuries and deaths.

2. Quality of Work Life Program-A program designed to “democratize” the workplace by

encouraging all employees to participate in the decision making process.

3. Attendance Procedure Program-A program designed to reduce absenteeism through a process

of awarding bonuses for good attendance.

4. Tuition Assistance Plan-a plan providing from $50 to $5.000 for workers who wish to go to
school to improve their skills.

5. Paid Education Leave-a plan to pay union leaders who take leave to study the problems facing
the auto industry.

6. Preretirement Program-a program to aid workers deal with the problems of retirement
planning.

7. Joint Skill Development and Training-a plan that charges committees at the plant level with
the task of developing comprehensive training programs based on the actual needs of the
workforce.

8. Area Centres for Skill Development and Training-provides needed training for the workforce.

The funding level contributed by both GM and the UAW and the personal support given to
individual programs indicate that the overall plan is off to a good start with both sides predicting
a new era of mutual cooperation. (Source: UAW-G Human Resource Center Booklet, 1986).

Discuss the above case in detail.

Exercise: Forces for Change

The purpose of this exercise is to help the reader gain a better understanding of the forces of
change. This exercise may be completed by a single reader, but greater insight may be gained by
completing the exercise as part of a group.

Time Required – 45 Minutes

Step 1: Individual activity (completed prior to exercise)

Step 2: Small-group activity (completed prior to exercise)

Step 3: Discussion-45 minutes

Procedure Step 1: Study the forces for Change Outline, which follows:

The Forces for Change Outline One of the frameworks for analyzing change requires identifying
two different kinds of forces. First are the Driving Forces, or those forces that are instrumental in
causing the change. Second are the Restraining Forces, or those forces that tend to maintain the
status quo. Thus, change is generally seen as a slow process in which the Driving Forces
overcome the Restraining Forces. At any point in time. The situation may seem to be somewhat
stable with the two types of forces opposing each other in an unsteady balance, as follows:

Present Situation

Driving forces Restraining forces

______________________________ _________________________

______________________________ _________________________

Efforts to manage the change process come down to the following actions:

1. Promoting the change by facilitating the Driving Forces.

2. Promoting the change by weakening or eliminating the Restraining Forces.

3. Resisting the change by weakening or eliminating the Driving Forces.

4. Resisting the change by facilitating the Restraining Forces.

5. Redirecting the change by manipulating the forces.

Step 2: Each small group should analyze one of the following business changes, by completing
The Change Analysis Sheet.

1. Increased use of robotics.

2. Concern for the quality of work.

3. More women in the workplace.

4. Shortage of skilled labour.

5. Loss of the work ethic.

6. Poor workmanship in the workplace.

7. Continued competition from the Japanese and the four Tigers of Asia

Step 3: A representative from each group will present the group’s findings for discussion.

The Change Analysis Sheet (Part One)

1. Assigned Change for Analysis:

_____________________________________________________________________
2. Driving forces:
_____________________________________________________________________
3. Restraining Forces:
_____________________________________________________________________

The Change Analysis Sheet (Part Two)

1. Promote change by facilitating the Driving Forces:___________________________
2. Promote change by weakening or eliminating Restraining Forces______________
3. Resist the change by weakening or eliminating the Driving Forces:______________
4. Resist the change by facilitating the Restraining forces:_______________________
5. Redirect the change by manipulating the Forces:___________