Faculty of Engineering Lahore Leads University

Department of Electrical engineering

8th semester (Session 2016)
Open Book Exam-1
Engineering Management
Total marks: 10 Date/ Time: 7 May 2020 / 10am
Note:
1) Solve the paper in sequence, by boldly writing question no and its part. Put serial number
on each answer sheet.
2) Scan/ convert to pdf in chronological order.
3) Scanned (hand written) copy should be emailed to (mehmood.ahmad@ucest.edu.pk)
before 8th May 2020, 10am followed by a hardcopy by post, addressed to the UCEST
examination branch.
4) Subject of the email should be “UCEST-8th-EM online exam#1-Roll number”.
5) Any ignorance of instructions / late submission will not be considered for grading.

Question (1) CLO-3 Case Study

Robert Harley, manager of the QC division, called Albert Prinz, the group head of electrical
production facility, into his office and told him that there was a new opening for a manager of
project development in the company. For Albert, it would be a promotion to a higher managerial
rank with an appropriate increase in salary. However, the new position is temporary, in that it may
be eliminated in a year. Although Robert hates to lose a very valuable worker like Albert, he wants
to let Albert himself make the decision. The project development division has specifically
requested that this opening be recommended to Albert. After having given it some thought, Albert
decided to take the new position. The next day, Robert Harley and Albert Prinz sit down together
again to name a group head successor. Among the three section heads in the group, Peter is the
most experienced. However, Peter is quiet and does not communicate well. He may have difficulty
in selling services to others. Karl is competent, but has made hasty decisions that have been very
costly to the group. Berghofer is ambitious and aggressive, but has poor interpersonal skills. They
concluded that none could be immediately promoted to take over. Finally, they agreed to rotate
the acting head job among the three, to test out each of them, since there is an outside chance that
Albert may come back to his old position after one year. Shortly thereafter, Robert Harley was
promoted out. Albert decided not to return to take Robert’s position. David Morgen was brought
in to take over Robert Harley’s job as QC division manager. However, before Robert Harley left,
he indicated to Karl that Karl would likely get the job, based on the results of the trial periods.
David found significant rivalry and ill-feeling between the three section heads. The group had low
morale and poor productivity. Under such circumstances, David decided to appoint a new
employee, Jimy Karter, to the electrical QC head position instead of one of the three. Did David
make the right decision? Apparently, the job rotation idea failed. What would have been the right
way for Robert Harley to handle this problem?
Question 1: If the decision made by David was not correct. List down the reasons? (2)
Question 2: Write down possible outcomes of the David’s decision? (2)
Question 3: Evaluate all the 3 candidates (Peter, Karl and Berghofer) giving weightage of personal
traits ranging from 1 to 5 (1 being lowest, 5 being highest). (3)
Question 4: Tabulate a final round of choice with and without improving short comings. (3)