Acharya Nagarjuna University (ANU) 2006 M.B.A Business Administration - II - MANAGING CHANGE IN ORGANISATIONS - Question Paper

M.B.A.(Third) DEGREE EXAMINATION, MAY 2006
(C- HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT)
PAPER - II - MANAGING change IN ORGANISATIONS

Time: 3 hours Maximum: 75 marks

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

1. (a) Concept of organisational change.
(b) Culture
(c) Diagnostic methodology.
(d) Process consultation.
(e) change agent.
(f) Work Redesign Model.

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

2. define the key process in organisational change.
3. discuss how orgnisations manage resistance to change?
4. Differentiate ranging from Qualitative and Quantitative diagnostic methods.
5. Elucidate the valuation of organisational change programmes.
6. discuss the skills needed to be as an agent of change.
7. Examine the process of organisational development in an NGO.

part C - (15 marks)

8. Case Study:

Damned if you do; Damned if you don’t.

Fran Gilson has spent 15 years with the Thompson Grocery Company. Starting out as a part-time cashier while attending college, Fran has risen up through the ranks of this 50-store grocery store chain. Today, at the age of 34, she is a regional manager, overseeing 7 stores and earning approximately $95,000 a year. Fran also thinks she’s ready to take on more responsibility. About 5 weeks ago, she was contacted by an executive-search recruiter inquiring about her interest in the position of vice president and regional manager for a national drugstore chain. She would be responsible for more than 100 stores in 5 states. She agreed to meet with the recruiter. This led to 2 meetings with top executives at the drugstore chain. The recruiter called Fran 2 days ago to tell her she was 1 of the 2 finalists for the job.


The only person at Thompson who knows Fran is looking at this other job is her good friend and colleague, Ken Hamilton. Ken is director of finance for the grocery chain. “It is a dream job” Fran told Ken. “It’s a lot more responsibility and it’s a good company to work for. The regional office is just 20 miles from here so I wouldn’t have to move and the pay is 1st rate. With the performance bonus, I could make nearly $200,000 a year. But best of all, the job provides terrific visibility. I’d be their only female vice president. The job would allow me to be a more visible role model for young women and provide me a bigger voice in opening up doors for women and ethnic minorities in retailing management”.

Since Fran considered Ken a close friend and wanted to keep the fact that she was looking at a different job secret, she asked Ken last week if she could use his name as a reference. stated Ken, “Of course” I’ll provide you a great recommendation. We’d hate to lose you here, but you’ve got a lot of talent. They’d be lucky to get someone with your experience and energy.. Fran passed Ken’s name on to the executive recruiter as her only reference at Thompson. She made it very clear to the recruiter that Ken was the only person at Thompson who knew she was considering a different job. Thompson’s top management is conservative and places a high value on loyalty. If anyone heard she was talking to a different company, it might seriously jeopardize her chances for promotion. But she trusted Ken completely. It’s against this backdrop that this morning’s incident became more than just a ques. of sexual harassment. It became a full-blown ethical and political dilemma for Fran.

Jennifer Chung has been a financial analyst in Ken’s department for 5 months. Fran met Jennifer through Ken. The 3 have chatted together on a number of occasions in the coffee room. Fran’s impression of Jennifer is quite positive. In many ways, Jennifer strikes Fran as a lot like she was ten years ago. This morning, Fran came to work around six : 30 A.M. as she usually does. It allows her to get a lot accomplished before .the troops. roll in at eight A.M. At about six : 45, Jennifer came into Fran’s office. It was immediately evident that something was wrong. Jennifer was very nervous and uncomfortable, which was most unlike her. She asked Fran if they could talk.. Fran sat her down and listened to her story.

What Fran heard was hard to believe, but she had no cause to think Jennifer was lying. Jennifer stated that Ken began making off-color comments to her when they were alone within a month after Jennifer joined Thompson. From there it got progressively worse. Ken would leer at her. He put his arm over her shoulder when they were reviewing reports. He patted her rear. Every time 1 of these occurrences happened, Jennifer would ask him to stop and not do it again, but it fell on deaf ears. yesterday, Ken reminded Jennifer that her six-month probationary review was coming up. “He told me that if I didn’t sleep with him that I couldn’t expect a very favourable evaluation”. She told Fran that all she could do was go to the ladies. room and cry.

Jennifer stated that she had come to Fran because she didn’t know what to do or whom to turn to. “I came to you, Fran, because you’re a friend of Ken’s and the highest ranking woman here. Will you help me?”. Fran had never heard anything like this about Ken before. About all she knew regarding his personal life was that he was in his late 30s, single and involved in a long-term relationship.

Questions:
(a) Analyze Fran’s situation in a purely legalistic sense. You might want to talk to friends or relatives who are in management or the legal profession for advice in this analysis.
(b) Analyze Fran’s dilemma in political terms.

Earning:   Approval pending.