You are on page 1of 11

Group 1 Manish Satija ± Roll no 17 Ravi Srinivasan ± Roll No 22 Raja Das ± Roll No 24 Ajit Bisoi ± Roll no 04

Factory on Bombay¶s outskirts & regional offices throughout India producing bulk drugs &formulations Strong internal trade union organizing 600 workers in factory, head office staff, medical representatives across India & believing Conflict as route to prosperity. MD wanted culture of cooperation through employee involvement hence wanted work stations and shop councils. Union though not interested first was fascinated by the idea of workstations consisting of small group of employees putting pressure on managers & union¶s participation in policy formulation. Middle managers resisted change but were left with no choice    



Work station could take self decisions by consensus over quality, productivity, safety issues within their purview & were assigned 20 % of the division¶s budget for implementation Shop councils consisted of equal number of nominees from union & management.




A typical work station 

Analysis of the situation on a neutral front- how a nobel intention of MD , of merging a democratic organization in an unilateral conception. Critical reasoning for conceptual error of lack in employee involvement by top management- Top management not seeking opinion of employees and supervisors Convincing justification for lack of responsibility and willingness to drive the nobel intention by management- casual approach by management not monitoring the implementation of the concept Miscalculation of reading the IR feeling among the union and there workers- MD could not convincingly make them understand the real implication of his vision leading to creation of lot of conflicting interests among the union. Correctly pinpointing the misinterpretation of MD vision of ³Participation´- complete failure in understanding the meaning of information sharing , joint decision making by employees, workers and middle & senior management     

A holistic global picture of employee development by EI- MD¶s idea of µculture of cooperation¶ through employee involvement by creating a work station to promote team sprit and sense of belongingness. Relating to the causality of the basic reason for MD vision- keeping in view the future global competition & understanding the importance of labour flexibility, MD had a vision of work station as a EI device. Reasoning for MD¶s negotiating with union to establish the work station- a balancing act to eliminate what could have been a threat to this system by giving them a dignified position of shop council. Comprehensive analysis of MD leadership failure- lack of proper foundation for the nobel vision, guidance to the downstream admistration and inability to build the cultural change in management. Articulate explanation for the worker agreeing to the concept of work station-helping workers to take decision without the intervention of union. Logical reasoning for lack of interest of middle managers- lose of authority due to empowerment to workers and increasing accountability. Creating reasoning to create a phoenix for company by vision of¶ change agents¶ ± MD should reorganize the administration and HR should perform the role of strategic partner and bring cultural change to march to new vision.`       

Critical analysis of the situation- pointing out the happiness in the workers in the decision of work station as they had something to say on their own now Hawk eye view to the issue of VRS- pointing out about the importance of communication of the decision of VRS not know at what level it was communicated to the union. Root cause identified -As stakeholders lack of participation and lack of involvement Underutilization of HR function- Overall functioning of the work and the system together would have worked better if some monitoring was done  

Discussant 1¶s analysis

‡ Stakeholders and their spheres of influence were not discussed in detail ‡ Indicates the results of the failure while the actual causality was not analyzed in detail ‡ Responsibility of change agents was not mentioned

Discussant 2¶s analysis

‡ Stakeholders and their spheres of influence were not discussed in detail

Discussant 3¶s analysis :

‡ Non identification of the personal ambitions of managers, union leaders while pushing for culture change ‡ Failure is viewed as leadership failure but not as a total environment failure in implementation ‡ Responsibility of workers in causing the failure and the enhancement of their involvement through proper mechanism has not been discussed in detail

Every important event occurrence has been articulated with logical and technical reasoning      

Relating the situation of the factory with the global employee practice and a view to what should be the current approach these days. Importance of IE &WPM and how MD¶s tried to relate these HR practice with his vision of future competition. An unbiased root cause analysis of the MD¶s failure along with the mention of the reasons for his decisions. Optimistic approach to how even a dead factory could have a vision of a prosperous running body. New vision of change agents and strategy partner very logical administrative model to motivate the employees and create a cultural change and elevating their morale. Only discussant who indicated bringing in outside/additional work force for changing the current environ 

Failure in understanding the motive behind the behavior of individuals at each level. Unable to correlate the MD¶S vision with the employees opinion and problems in implementing them. Failure is attributed to leadership but not to the entire system inclusive of management , employees and the union. Neglecting the critical role of HR in the events resulting to the debacle.   

Major category of involvement- escalator model 
In the scenario of globalization industrial relations are vital to be understood and interpreted. Main objective in industrial relation is to reduce hostility of labour , collectivism and generating importance of employee. This can be done by imparting humility in an organization comprehensively by doing EI, employee involvement. The case tries to relate to this EI model by implementing Work station which comes 2nd highest in the escalator model. We also learn about the effect of direct involvement and financial participation. Employee control Co-determination (WORK STATION) consultation Communication No involvement