Acharya Nagarjuna University (ANU) 2006 M.B.A Business Administration - III - ORGANISATIONAL DYNAMICS - Question Paper

M.B.A.(Third) DEGREE EXAMINATION, MAY 2006
(C- HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT)
PAPER - III - ORGANISATIONAL DYNAMICS

Time: 3 hours Maximum: 75 marks

part A - (3 X five = 15 marks)
ans any 3 ques.

1. (a) elaborate informal groups?
(b) Conformity.
(c) Social responsibility
(d) Cross cultural dynamics
(e) Transformational leadership
(f) Role flexibility

part B - (3 X 15 = 45 marks)
ans any 3 ques.

2. discuss the process of formation of groups.
3. discuss the concept of decentralisation is an organisation.
4. How are organisational ethics and values relevant to an organisation?
5. discuss the bases of power in an organisation.
6. elaborate strategic alliances? discuss the relevance.
7. discuss the importance of learning organisations to organisational dynamics.

part C - (15 marks)

8. Case Study:

Trying to Do the impossible at GM?

Few companies have had a rougher time adapting to a changing environment than General Motors. The company is actually a textbook example of corporate entrenchment. As far back as the 1960s, the writing was on the wall that GM’s way of operating-slow, deliberate decision making; layer-upon-layer of hierarchy; focus on cost-cutting rather than on new product design; and management-by-committee - was failing. From a U.S. automobile market share of nearly 50 percent in the late 1950s, the company was down to under 30 percent by the year 2000. GM’s rigid and insular culture, driven by financial considerations, allowed both foreign and domestic competitors to steal away customers with new products-like fuel-efficient compacts, minivans, SUVs and eye catching roadsters.

A good part of GM’s culture can be discussed by the company’s historic selection and promotion policies. It hired its future executives fresh out of school. They then shaped these recruits into the GM mentality. The company resisted ideas and innovations that were “not developed here”. Executives firmly believed, to the point of arrogance, that the GM system was superior to all others. Promotions favoured financial and engineering kinds and individuals with these backgrounds rose to fill the company’s top spots. GM rarely hired senior executives from outside the company ranks. In addition, GM encouraged its executives to socialize off the job with other GM people. This further insulated top executives and resulted in a senior management team that saw the world through similar lenses.

In the fall of 2001, GM Chief Executive Richard Wagoner hired former Chrysler executive Robert Lutz as vice chairman. His primary task? To change GM’s organizational culture. Wagoner acknowledged that GM’s culture - dominated by finance - types, engineers and manufacturing personnel-was content to turn out unimaginative cars. The committee system (stacked to favor the company’s accounting mentality) further hindered creative endeavors. For instance, whenever designers and engineers would disagree about a design, the engineers (and their obsession with cost minimization) would always win. This largely discussed why the company’s cars looked boxy and so similar. Wagoner has essentially provided Lutz a free hand to do whatever he needs to change tradition-bound GM.

Lutz faces a formidable task. This is a huge company. Sales are $180 billion a year. It employs 363,000 people. This is also the place where the “GM nod” is endemic: GM lifers usually just nod at the new guy and go on doing things as they were. But Lutz has the advantage of coming to GM with a sterling reputation. He is a actual “car guy”, who single-handedly pushed through exciting new products at Chrysler like the Viper, the Prowler and the PT Cruiser.

Lutz has chosen an incremental strategy for implementing change. He isn’t chopping heads and bringing in loyalists. Rather, he is relying on the identical designers and engineers who have been turning out duds for years. But he’s giving more clout to the designers and marketing people. He’s overseen a reorganization that has engineering and design divisions now reporting to just 1 person. He’s encouraging people to ques. past practices, to speak out on problems and challenge company doctrine. And GM brass is now spending more time driving competitors. cars than their own-while Lutz points out how most of them best GM.

Questions:
(a) define the “old” GM culture.
(b) What specific forces created this culture?
(c) define the new culture that Lutz is trying to create.

Earning:   Approval pending.