You are on page 1of 5


(TERM-I SESSION-2012-2014)

An Analysis Of The case study on

Prashant Lakhera: Senior Analyst

Submitted To:
Dr. Saleena Khan

Submitted By:

Asst. Professor (OB) IMT Nagpur

Aditya Kapoor (2012020) Aman Tyagi (2012033) Amit Gupta (2012037) Anirudh Singhal (2012044) Ankit Chaudhary (2012047) Anuj Job Mathew (2012057) Anuradha Chatterjee (2012058) Anusha Lakshmi (2012060)

The case is regarding the credit rating being carried out for a construction company by the name CCL by the joint collaboration between CDB (Construction Development Board CRA (Credit Rating Agency). The assignment for grading was carried between Prashant Lakhera and Gagan Vedi from CRA and Mr. Deepak Ghosh from CDB. The case revolves around the communication gap and personality related issues of both Mr. Deepak Ghosh and Prashant Lakhera which affects the coordination and team work resulting in difficulty to meet with the deadline for completion of the report for grading. In the end Prashant Lakhera reflects on as to what could have been done to have avoided coming across such a situation and also what could be his further course of action in completion of the project.

To analyze what could have been the different ways to effectively handle a situation which is being faced. Understanding interpersonal and group dynamics.

Credit Rating Agency (CRA) is a leading provider of investment information and credit rating services in India. It has collaborated with Construction Development Board (CBD) to grade the construction projects. Grading Assessment process includes collection of information like financial statements, past records etc from the firm and then a team of analysts will prepare a report highlighting its business and financial risks. A new project for this collaboration is to rate Continent Construction Company (CCL) who is a market leader in construction industry. CCL these days is working on construction of a bridge in Nashik and a connecting road near Jalgaon. Prashant Lakhera and Gagan Vedi are appointed as analysts from CRA. They both are MBAs from the premier B-schools in India and have been working with CRA since last few years. Deepak Ghosh, Project Manager of CDB is being assigned this task to grade this project of CCL. He has some two decades of experience in this construction industry

Since the beginning of project, personal interaction between Mr. Deepak Ghosh and Mr. Prashant Lakhera and his colleague was lacking. Although they did meet but that was on formal level. They spent majority of time explaining CRA grading methodology instead which could have been spent in knowing each other. Moreover, Mr. Ghost has a non agreeable type of personality wherein he defers with others in a team. During the client dinner hosted by the CCL, Ghosh showed up late and didnt even acknowledge his team mates. This was due to the fact that there was a lack of coordination between his team. In Mumbai meeting he sat quietly, but later he couldnt take it and raised a sensitive matter of bribery which shocked all but was suppressed by his other team mates. This was the Last straw to break the Camels back. Later that evening when Lakhera asked Ghosh for his part of operational analysis for grading report, he acted outrageously and left the meeting. 1. What has happened so far in CRA-CDB project? Has Lakhera missed the opportunity to manage Ghosh? What could Lakhera have done? CRA- CDB was in collaboration to grade some of the construction industries among which CCL-(Continent Construction Limited), one of the leading construction companies agreed to be graded by them. ). The assignment for grading was carried between Prashant Lakhera and Gagan Vedi from CRA and Mr. Deepak Ghosh from CDB. Because of the communication gap and personality related issues of both Mr. Deepak Ghosh and Prashant Lakhera, the coordination and the team work was affected resulting in difficulty to meet with the deadline for completion of the report for grading. Yes Mr. Lakhera has missed the opportunity to manage Mr. Ghosh for the following reasons Other than professional interaction, before embarking on the assignment there should have been an informal meeting where in the heads and the team should have met and introduced to be more familiar. Second would have been that once having got to know each other, decide on the deadline mutually feasible for both, their plan of action in executing the project.

Some of the options that Prashant Lakhera would have are Being apologetic of their behaviour towards Mr. Ghosh, whether it may have been the misunderstanding between them during the meet with the finance manager or their failure to initiate any kind of talk other than work with Mr Ghosh. Mr. Lakhera may have to delay the assignment report and talk with his boss regarding the failure to be able to submit the report within the deadline because of the noncooperation from Mr. Ghoshs side. 2. Evaluating Lakheras options: As mentioned above about the options available with Mr. Prashant Lakhera By being apologetic, there is a possibility if Mr. Ghosh complies to the apology then they can go forward to completing the report for CCL within the deadline set. Another option would be in case if Mr. Ghosh fails to comply with the apology, then he would have an option to request higher authorities of CDB to ask Mr. Ghosh to comply in completing the report to maintain the reputation of the company in meeting the deadlines. If Mr. Ghosh fails to comply with the apology, Mr. Lakhera could request CCL to extend the deadline so that they could complete the grading report. 3. What would you do if you were in Lakheras shoes? Mr. Ghosh may have been a realistic kind of guy as per Holland s typology of personality and congruent occupations and with his growth in the organization there might have been less change in his personality traits suiting to the position he has, hence causing increased confusion in interacting with his associates who are much more learned. Understanding the personality traits would help in getting to know the person and accordingly the approach to situation can be handled effectively. Having done with execution planning both should keep a daily report of the assignment and reporting to both the directors in case of any constraints or issues been faced.

During the assignment instead of being passive analysts we would have got in touch with the workers there, got somebody who could understand our language, and try to understand some of the things from which we could be able to make the report to some extent.

Individual differences and organizational constraints affects decision making. Various personality dimensions such as conscientiousness and agreeableness are highlighted. From the case we can infer that Deepak Ghosh is an individual who is disorganized and unreliable hence scoring low on the conscientiousness factor and Prashant Lakhera seems to have a high agreeableness quotient since he is cooperative and trusting.

Factors such as job demands, the degree of required interaction with others, and the organization's culture determine the personality-job relationship, these are situational variables.

The case presents the problems organizations deal with regarding personality job relationships, the increased communication required in carrying out organizational activities , effective follow up and handling of the activities which is essential to get the assigned work done and also getting along with people engaged in the same.