CASE ANALYSIS

RECRUITMENT FIASCO AT CITPR LTD.

DONE BY: NIHAL AHMED KUNIYIL (19DM124)

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Question 1 ) Discuss the major issues highlighted in the case study.

Answer 1) Lack of Proper communication with Mr Ramesh Kapoor, VP- Product

Development, led Mr. VN Swami, to believe that there would be a huge requirement

of net professionals, instead of waiting for the demand to be ascertained, he

impulsively went ahead in recruiting more employees for a job, the existence of which

was under question.

Mr. D. Ganesh, who had an experience of more than 25 years, did not even stop Mr.

VN Swami, from recruiting professionals even before, the job opportunities were

created. This is against the Human Resource practices to recruit a person for a job

that is not even existing at the time of appointment.

Mr. Ravi Sampat, after taking feedback from Mr. VN Swami about the students that

got selected by the CITPR Ltd., disallowed students to sit in the selection process of

other companies without them even receiving a formal communication about the same

from the company.

Mr. VN Swami on getting a clear understanding of the unavailability of the job profiles

still did not inform the college authorities about the same, this too shows the lack in

proper professional behavior on the part of the employees of CITPR Ltd.

Question 2) In your opinion could Mr. D Ganesh have taken some

measures to avoid the embarrassment caused to CITPR? Justify your

opinion with relevant arguments.

Answer 2) Mr. D Ganesh was the Director of HR department. Mr Sampat

mailed him the query, and still he didn’t replied. This was a highly irresponsible

behavior with respect to his position.

What could he have done was he should have replied to Mr. Sampat’s

query which he made on mail. Since he is the director, issues will come to him

only in the case of urgency and this time it was urgent.

Going in line with Mr. Swami was a wrong choice as when you are working

in any organization you are not an individual but a representative of the whole

organization and when you are a pioneered as a Best employer and Best place

to work with, one should keep this in mind in each step you take forward.

Mr. Ganesh should have taken the matter personally as it the case of

students career and this is the place where you get a brand for your

organization.

Question 3) Elucidate the serious omissions by Mr. Swami related to

campus recruitment drive at TTC college. Also list down the lapses

committed by Mr Sampat.

Answer 3) Mr. VN Swami, Recruitment Manager at CITPR Ltd. had been

visiting the campus regularly for the last four years and had a good rapport with
most of the employees of TTC College of Engineering and Management,

however there were certain things that he did wrong during the current campus

recruitment drive at TTC College of Engineering and Management, they were

as follows:

He did not make a full computation of overall job requirement and hastily took

the decision to visit the college first, before any other company. He selected 25

students, instead of 15 students that he selected last time, without ascertaining

the number of job vacancy they had within the company.

He disclosed the name of the students so selected to the faculty member which

was against the professional code of conduct. He did not inform the college

about the unavailability of the jobs within his company in time which highlighted

on their unprofessional behaviour.

Lapses on the part of Mr. Sampat were as follows: Mr. Sampat disallowed his

students who got selected by CITPR Ltd from sitting into the interview process

for other companies even before receiving an official selection letter from the

company. Mr. Sampat took more than one month, to wait for the company to

respond, which was a very long time period considering it was the student’s

career that was at stake.

Question 4) Do you think the action taken against Mr. swami and Mr.

Sampat were justified? Substantiate your stance with reasons.

Answer 4) According to case, the result of the issue was that Mr. Swami was
terminated from his activity and Mr. D. Ganesh was reprimanded in executive
gathering. Likewise Mr. Sampat was not given any augmentation for the year for his
misstep of not enabling understudies to sit during the time spent meeting with no
official correspondence.

As per me, Mr. Sampat was properly rebuffed for the misstep done my him. This will
avoid him just as others to not to rehash this mix-up, on the grounds that this in a
roundabout way rots the school's picture and an off-base verbal exchange outside
the school by the understudy of his parent may affect many coming understudies in
future. Arrangement in itself is an extremely touchy and basic issue for any
understudy just as for any school. This is the fundamental explanation behind the an
understudy to think about in school and pay huge charges. On the off chance that
this won't be considered appropriately, at that point I surmise the organization isn't its
activity appropriately.

Mr. Swami was terminated from CITPR, which appears for present moment however
there can be a significant explanation due to which he did this deferral. Association,
before terminating any individual ought to have seen into issue profoundly and
sending Mr. Swami for the enrollment procedure was his own choice as well as the
authoritative choice. On the off chance that they needed a hierarchical rebuild, they
ought to have hung tight for some additional time. In a rush they themselves made
an off-base showing. The misstep that Mr. Swami did didn't merited a lay off with
respect to any association its imperative to see the consequence of laying off a
worker that too on a high position. Procuring new one for the equivalent may require
extra cost, it might set aside effort for the individual to adjust with the association and
furthermore it is a likelihood that another would perform bring down the that more
seasoned one.
Analysis to Mr. D ganesh was fine and was required. Chief is a decent position and
he ought to consistently be demonstrated his errors with the goal that he don't
rehash them in future.