NATIONAL

INSTRUMENTATION
LIMITED
Situation Analysis
National Instrumentation Limited (NIL) is a 70-year-old organisation
in the public sector with around 2500 employees.
The company serves in two different product markets-
1. Communication Equipments like radars, radios, walkie-talkies, etc
which are sold largely to the government buyers.
2. Instrumentation products like small thermostats, inducers which are
sold to process manufacturing and chemical industries.
NIL has been the market leader in communication equipment for the
past four decades.
The market for instrumentation products is highly competitive, and
NIL is one of several new emerging players.
NIL offers twelve separate product lines, with an average of three
models each product line.
The company introduces new items to the market several months
after its rivals.
Situation Analysis
The structure of the organisation is centralised.
The Executive Committee has five members, including the President and Vice
Presidents of Human Resources, Marketing, Manufacturing, and Finance.
Senior management makes decisions, whereas employees below in the
organization's hierarchy follow SOPs.
Customers are crucial to top management, but internal efficiency is of greater
importance.

Problem
Sales growth has been constant for the past four years, and profits have declined
compared to the previous two decades of consistent increase. New rivals from
the private sector have joined the market and are releasing innovative new
goods, threatening NIL's market dominance. Additionally, the government has
deregulated the market for communication equipment, and more private
companies are anticipated to emerge.
The MD has called a team of OD consultants to diagnose the problems and
propose a change strategy(if any).
Diagnostic Analysis
01 THREAT OF NEW ENTRANTS
NIL is facing significant competition from the emerging
private-sector competitors that provide innovative
products and features, eroding the company's market
dominance.

02 BARGAINING POWER OF BUYERS

NIL, along with other public and private sector businesses,
is a significant supplier to the communication and
instrumentation industries, however the purchasers are
restricted to government customers (Defense forces,
Police Departments), Process Manufacturing enterprises,
and Chemical Industries. Therefore, buyer influence is
high.
 03 BARGAINING POWER OF SUPPLIERS
Diagnostic Analysis As NIL sells communication equipment to the
government buyers and instrumentation products is also
a B2B business, hence the suppliers might be fixed in this
situation and the switching cost for the suppliers would
be high. Hence, the bargaining power of suppliers would
also be high.

04 THREATS OF SUBSTITUTES
NIL is under pressure from its rivals, as these up-and-
coming competitors are interested in introducing new
products and features that provide buyers the option to
switch to a more advanced product experience and
alternative.
Diagnostic Analysis
05 RIVALRY AMONGT EXISTING COMPETITORS
With the deregulation of the sector, a large number of
private sector enterprises are anticipated to enter this
market. Several new entrants have entered the
communication industry offering superior products to NIL.
There are already a large number of well-established
companies in the Instrumentation Industry, thus it will
take time for NIL to expand and flourish in this industry.
This demonstrates the fierce competition between NIL
and other public and private sector companies.
Problems Identified
Due to rapid growth in business, it has resulted in loose structure, lack
of coordination and control.
Meddling of staff managers, especially from marketing and HR, into
work which creates a problem for manufacturing team and screws up
the operation later on
GM marketing continually wants product modifications and always
give goofball ideas of a new product
Silos have been created among the departments and weak managerial
competencies exists
Lack of Digitization or sales / marketing using internet
Product Managers are not given the authority to make the decisions
about the product.
Poor training and meeting sessions for the employees at all levels
Changes Proposed
Decentralization of Operations with increased integration and
coordination- MD, VP HR & Marketing
Bringing in Management Information System - MD
Doing business on the internet - MD
Centralized structure with a chief GM - VP Finance & Mfg.
HR trainings should be efficient & compulsory - VP Marketing &
Mfg.
R&D should be brought under marketing department - VP
Marketing
Product managers should be given more authority over product
operations - VP Marketing
Training and development for all levels - VP HR
Setting up basic company rules and then force the GMs to
enforce them - VP Finance
Don't bring change initiative as it is a wasteful expenditure - VP
Finance
Specific Changes
Decentralise the operations by bringing it to one level below the
existing process

Introduction of website to cater the online market which would further

help in keeping the customers updates with delivery info.

Make R&D a different department altogether

L&D of all departments when it comes to developing managerial

competencies

R&D would do the technical management of the website as well for

which training would be provided to them by the HR dept.
 01 COST AND RESOURCE CONSTRAINTS
The immediate cost of the entire change process
can be high and need for additional resources
would also be created majorly due to the
introduction of the website for business.
Challenges in
Implementation 02 OVERLAP OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF R&D
AND MANUFACTURING
As the R&D department will be separated from
manufacturing department, so there might be
some overlap of the responsibilities and job roles
within the two departments.
 03 ACCOUNTABILITY AND AUDITING
Being a PSU, NIL’s performance and results are
also critical to the public, hence the change
intervention and the use of funds are more likely to
demand accountability and will be subjected to
audits and discussions by the government.
Challenges in
Implementation 04 MIXED MOTIVATIONS TO DECENTRALIZATION
While with decentralization, employees enjoy more
autonomy, being used to the bureaucratic
structure, however, they develop a “why bother”
attitude over time, not knowing how to operate in
the reformed structure when entrusted with
decision making power.
 How to overcome these
challenges?
01
The change has been planned in such a way that
the short-term costs incurred will lead to long
term benefits. Along with that the resource
constraint is being managed by training the
R&D employees in the technical competencies
so that they can cater to the website built for
business.
02
The HR department would conduct an elaborate
job analysis where they would define the
organizational structure and job descriptions in
such a way that there is no significant overlap
between the responsibilities iof R&D and
manufacturing.
 How to overcome these
challenges?
03
To overcome this, we plan to adopt a risk-based
approach where we help the elected
representatives, comprehend the root causes of
risks, and the preventative measures we’d take
to to mitigate them. Getting external OD
consultants to assess risks and facilitate the
change, will add more credibility to the process
owing to their specialized knowledge of
handling large scale projects.
04
The decentralization process will be gradual with
the restructuring bringing one more managerial
level under VPs. Next, Training and development
for improving managerial competencies, will
prepare employees for the change intervention,
helping them understand how to delegate and
lead while maintaining autonomy
 Why I agree with the change?
1. One of the major issues which I had recognized regarding the lack of
coordination between the four groups can be resolved through the training

M
MDD
for managerial competencies.
2. The decentralization will also be an effective solution in order to improve the
communication and coordination amongst the employees.
3. Also, I think the introduction of a new R&D department will provide
autonomy to the employees and also might help in the better
communication and fast delivery of the customer products so as to compete
better with our competitors.

Expected Outcomes
1. Even though the short-terms costs will be high, the profit will be higher in the
long term result of this change.
2. The production and manufacturing of products will improve so that we can
compete with the market.
3. The issues regarding the communication gap between the departments
would be resolved and better communication would be possible between
marketing-R&D-manufacturing so as to avoid any delays.
4. Overall communication channel of the organization will improve with the
decentralization.
V
VPP H
HUUM
MAAN
N R
REES
SOOU
URRC
CEES
S
Why I agree with the change?
1. Poor structure, Departmental Silos, Weak managerial competence, Poor
training at all levels were identified as primary issues of present inefficiencies
at NIL.
2. Hence, there is a need to improve coordination among departments, resolve
existing conflicts, better communication among them, encourage a
participative team style and to institute robust training and development
programs for employees at all levels

Expected Outcomes
1. The change intervention process is expected encourage a unified team effort,
encourage more participation, bring conflicts out in the open, improving
communication and coordination
2. A decentralized structure will improve access to decision-making, bringing in
autonomy for employees; even to a small degree, this change is going to
improve institutional effectiveness
3. Although training at all levels is not feasible as of now, focus on managerial
competencies and technical competencies for R&D should suffice and prepare
employees for the change process
V
VPP M
MAAR
RKKE
ETTI
INNG
G
Why I agree with the change?
1. I've identified communication challenges with R&D as the primary cause of
declining sales, which has led to a delay in the introduction of new items.
2. The other worries include the business's centralised structure and lack of an
online presence, which our competitors are already utilising to their
advantage.
3. Since it was difficult to convince the President and other VPs to merge R&D
with marketing, I proposed creating it as a different department that would
accept input from other departments.

Expected Outcomes
1. Since R&D will now have decision-making ability, they will take input from product
managers and, taking into account manufacturing constraints, will develop new
products. Launching the new products would take less time.
2. Due to their online presence, the competitors is already ahead of us. Developing a
website will make it simple for customers to track their orders and for salespeople
to check inventory.
3. As of now, the EC has approved one level of decentralisation. This will aid in the
efficient and timely implementation of the ideas.
V
VPP M
MAAN
NUUF
FAAC
CTTU
URRI
INNG
G
Why I agree with the change?
One of the reasons to agree with the change of decentralizing the structure to
one level down is to match with the rapid growth and also appoint a Chief
General Manager. It is done so as to have a good collaboration between
employees. Also, decided to have a separate R&D department, so as to focus on
manufacturing activities majorly and the R&D department will look after
innovative like-things. And bringing new initiatives like building a website will
boost our sales. To make the employees familiar with the recent changes, the
L&D department should be there to look after these.

Expected Outcomes
If enough modifications would be implemented in the product, then it would
lead to high manufacturing costs. So, it is not possible to continually make
modifications to the products. Also, making a separate R&D department will help
us to clearly focus on the production part and we can deliver or increase the
productivity rate. Also, by digitalizing, it would be easy to know that which
product is more preferred by customers, so that, we can increase the production
for the same.
V
VPP F
FIIN
NAAN
NCCE
E
Why I agree with the change?
The company growth was stagnant for the past 4 years and there were
decreased profits
With more coordination in place the customer service would now be more
efficient and it will lead to generation of more revenue
Internet selling can help in capturing that part of untapped market and
would boost our revenue

Expected Outcomes
The change initiatives will burn more cash of the company and might lead
to lesser profitability in the upcoming quarterly results
Decentralization of the operations could create more chaos and screw up
operations later on
The internet selling has very low probability of becoming successful as it is
highly doubtful that anyone would be willing to buy a radar off the internet
Thankyou!