Postgraduate Diploma in Management (PGDM): 2021-23 Max Marks: 35

Term 2 | End-Term Examination (January, 2022) Duration: 2.5 hrs

Organizational Behaviour II (OB2) No. of Sides: 3

Name: Roll No.:

Case 1
Raman Gupta stormed out of Dinesh Kumar Mehta’s office sensing that he had failed again. Mehta, the
department head, had just dismissed his progress report on the apex project with no justification. Gupta had
painstakingly structured the report, describing in minute details every meeting and design aspect that had been
undertaken since the week before. Gupta had been particularly thorough with it, hoping to finally impress
Mehta. Now he felt that he might as well have spared the effort. A short while later, seated in his office. Gupta
filed away the unappreciated report and wondered why he repeatedly angered Mehta. He pondered over
today's incident, which was one among many such over the past six-month period since he became Mehta's
assistant manager. Gupta appraised the morning scene in Mehta's office. “Damn it, Gupta. Get to the big
picture,” Mehta had demanded impatiently, “I don't want all this detailed crap. I can't waste time reading about
every bloody meeting and specialization approval. I need a summary of the major problems. That is why I gave
you this job. Don't you get that?”

“But you can't talk about major problems unless you know the details," Gupta had tried to argue, “You can't get
to the step C by skipping over steps A and B.”
"In this project you can,” Mehta had snapped angrily.
"But you did ask for a detailed progress report. Am I wrong?"
"It certainly looks that way.”
And that was it. The meeting was adjourned as usual.

Gupta lamented that there was no mention of his hard work over the week. Gupta recalled that meetings been
very different with Vikram Singh, his former boss. Singh had always liked his reports and had recommended him
for promotion as Mehta's assistant manager. Gupta had seen the glowing performance reviews Singh written
about him: "thorough, dedicated, task-oriented, a very good performer, who meets deadlines.” His ten years of
experience in scheduling and production control not only impressed Singh but Gupta had received laudatory
performance reviews from others as well for his careful planning and attention to details.

Gupta opened his briefcase and slid a stack of memos inside. He admitted to himself that there was also some
criticism of him in the past: something about not working cooperatively with other departments-unyielding
perfectionism, meeting his goals at the expense of others, poor team spirit, and not building bridges. But he had
built a satisfactory team within his own group, and he believed that was what actually counted. His feeling was
that he needed to deal only with his problems and his group and that he had nothing to do with the other
groups. He competed with others. Normally, he stayed late at work and belittled his colleagues who left early.
But today he was in no mood to give the company even an extra minute of overtime. He took his briefcase and
locked the office. “Project Staff Coordinator," read the title on the door. The designation looked good six months
ago, when he had thought about the wonderful opportunity to work for Mehta. Now he wished the promotion
had never happened and he headed hurriedly for the parking lot. It was a long commute from Gurgaon to South
Delhi. As he drove, he continued to think about his boss. He found it funny that he had admired Mehta before he
worked for him. He had liked his demanding, take-charge attitude. Gupta felt that Mehta had been forceful and

authoritative just as a manager should be in meetings Other staff had warned him that Mehta was sometimes
abrupt, but Gupta had thought he could handle that. He was just as achievement-oriented as Mehta was. Mehta
did not give credit to anyone and didn't care how he came across. He thought he could get away with being
arrogant because he had such terrific insights. A brilliant strategist someone had called him, but with all his
intuition Gupta was certain that Mehta couldn't prepare a report half as good as the one Gupta gave him today.
Gupta wondered why persons like Mehta ever got promoted.

By the time Gupta reached the last stretch of his journey, some of his anger had abated. He had an idea. He
could talk with Harish Mathur tomorrow. Mathur was a project manager for another project and had reported to
Mehta for the past five years. Many of his responsibilities were similar to Gupta's. Mathur and Mehta got along
well. In fact, Mathur seemed able to get along well with everyone: bosses, colleagues, and subordinates. Mathur
was a good listener and a warm-talker. He had built a reputation as an effective problem solver. Gupta thought
that he could get some insights about Mehta from Mathur. Gupta decided to meet him over the lunch the next
day.

Due to work pressure it had been two weeks before Mathur could schedule lunch with Gupta. During
that interval, Gupta began to have mixed feelings about discussing his problem with him. He observed that
Mathur was something of a pretender who faked his way through responsibilities. Mathur would go to weekly
meetings with brief summaries or progress reports and talk his way around Mehta's questions. He seemed
content with making less than the full effort. In spite of his shallow reports, Mathur seemed to have Mehta's
confidence respect. Gupta could not understand why. He suspected that Mehta favored Mathur because they
had been to the same IIT for their B.Tech course. But Gupta guessed it was more than that. He had noticed that
Mathur would listen to Mehta and build on the nuances implied in his question. He seemed unperturbed by
Mehta's critical inquisitions. Gupta was not optimistic about what he might learn from Mathur when he finally
met him for lunch at a hotel not far from the office.

Mathur listened intently to Gupta, occasionally he murmured, “I know what you mean,” or “I can see why you
would feel that way.” Gupta was encouraged by his genuine concern. Then it was Mathur's turn to talk.
Company relationships fascinated him and he stretched on the subject. Soon he was talking about the value of
building networks and getting to know what made each person tick. He talked about looking at global
concepts and broad possibilities instead of focusing on details.
The "The nitty-gritty facts slow you down, Raman," Mathur said. "It's boring. Sure the facts are important, but
they are not everything, Mr. Mehta has no patience for details.” “But somebody has to pay attention to
the facts," objected Gupta. “You can't just discuss in the air. I have to do things my way. If Mr. Mehta hates
details he should at least appreciate that I take of them.”

As lunch went on, Gupta felt Mathur’s sympathy for him changing into a subtle criticism. He interpreted his
comments as personal attacks on his way of doing things. They both skipped dessert and headed back to
work. Their parting was cool.

That afternoon, Gupta was more certain than ever that his approach to the progress reports was correct. Any
less thorough job would compromise his professional competence and dedication. He wrote a memo to Mehta
arguing that his progress reports should be the standard for reporting out to superiors.

The next meeting between Mehta and Gupta was disaster. Mehta listened to Gupta's justification for his
approach to the progress reports and said nothing. The meeting got adjourned with Gupta feeling even more
stubborn. The following week, Mehta transferred Gupta off the apex project and gave him the task of updating
the management information system-an assignment for which he would report to a different manager.

Q1. Why do you think Raman Gupta repeatedly failed to communicate to his superior? (Marks: 5) [1,2,5]
Q2. What kind of leadership style does Mehta prefer? (two-three words only) (Marks: 4) [2,4a,4]
Q3. Do you feel that Mehta is a good leader? (Marks: 3) [2,4a,3]
Q4. What kind of conflict were both Gupta and Mehta were facing? (two words only) (Marks: 3) [2,4a,3]
Q5. How can the knowledge of OB help Gupta and Mehta reduce unproductive interpersonal and intra
organizational conflict? (Marks: 10) [3,1,10]
Q6. Why do you think Mathur failed to create a desired and response in Gupta? If you were in Mathur's place,
what guidelines would you follow in giving feedback to Gupta to effect desired changes? (Marks: 5) [3,1,5]
Contd.. on pg3
 Case 2
For more than half a century, Walmart has prided itself on providing value to customers by being a low-price
leader. For the consumer mind-set is changing. Now "value" also means convenience, ease of finding what you
want, and the ability to get exactly what you want when you want it
Nationwide dollar-store chains often have lower prices than Walmart, so that point of competitive advantage is
fading. And thanks to Amazon.com and other online retailers, consumers can shop from home whenever they
like, compare prices, and know immediately what is available.

Contrast this with the experience many Walmart shoppers previously had when they entered a store —low
inventory- disorganized aisles, unhelpful staff, and an overall
depressing atmosphere. The company's online presence was about the same. The site was difficult to navigate,
and attempts to search for products were frustrating at best and more often fruitless.
Named Walmart's CEO in 2014, Doug McMillon set out to change this situation. “What people think about the
company is important,” he noted. And at the moment, people weren't thinking about value and low prices when
they thought about Walmart. McMillon enacted a number of changes. First, the company had earned a
reputation of treating its store employees poorly-low wages, few benefits—while profits were in the billions of
dollars, so Walmart announced it would increase its minimum wage.
Second, the company asked for and paid more attention to employee feedback. Recurring issues included dress
code, store music, and even store temperatures.

So clothing rules were relaxed, more variety in music was introduced, and thermostats were adjusted. The
company hopes improving employee morale will translate into a better experience for customers, thereby
changing some of the negative images,
Walmart's Web presence was another target for big changes. Amazon is the store's biggest competitor, and
McMillon wanted to offer customers more items, pickup
options, and ways to meet their needs and demands for example, an online grocery ordering service. This means
a new way of thinking about marketing and inventory across the board.

McMillon was able to see how consumers have changed not only what they want but also the way they want it—
whether from the hands of happy employees or with the simple click of a mouse. The question remains. Will his
actions be enough to change the way consumers see Walmart?

Q7. What acted as the key change agent and how? (Marks: 3) [4,5,3]
Q8. Was the change agent external or internal? (Marks: 2) [4,5,2]

---------------------------------------------------------------End of Question Paper-------------------------------------------------