projectsmba.com

[MPRBA-106/MPCBA-106/MPRHR-106A]

MBA, MBA (CMU) & MHRM Degree Examination

I TRIMESTER

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------SECTION-A

1. Answer any FIVE of the following:

Each answer should not exceed one page. (5x2=10)

a)  Define Management Skills

b)   Scientific Management

c)   Attitude

d)  Decentralization

e)   Virtual Organization

f)  Span of Control

g)  Grid Management

h)  Chain of Command

SECTION-B

Answer the following:

UNIT-I

2.  a)   What is Organizational Behavior? Explain different approaches  to Organizational Behaviour            8

OR

b) Briefly explain the foundations of Indidual behavior     8

3. a)   Explain the biases (or) errors in social perception       8

OR

b)  Critically examine Herzberg’s two factor theory of motivation 8

4. a)  What is Group Decision Making? Explain different types of  Group Decision Making             8

OR

b)  Explain the features and effectiveness Fielder’s Leadership  theory                 8

5. a)  Explain the utility differences between centralization and  decentralization               8

OR

b)  What is Matrix Organisation? Explain its relevance in today’s  business context              8

6. a)  Why people resist change? Explain the Kotter’s plan for  implementing proposed change           8

OR

b)  What is sensitivity training?  Explain the effectiveness of this  model in shaping the behavior of individual       8

                                        SECTION-C

7. Case Study: (Compulsory)            10

As the Chairman of the task force on materials handling, Girish is a  worried  man.   A  month  earlier,  quality  assurance  at  the  large manufacturing company where Girish works, had observed that  a significant  number  of  certain  parts  were  rejected  when  they arrived  at  the  assembly  room.    On  investigation  (Girish  was  a member  of  the  search  team)  it  was  found  that  the  problem  was caused by rough handling of the parts of they were moved around the plant. The team’s solution was to transport the parts in special divider trays. Representatives    of    the    departments involved in the processing and transportation of   the  parts-including   process engineering,  materials  handling,  industrial  engineering, product design, and quality assurance – had been appointed to a task-force responsible for designing the trays. The members, most of whom had been with the company for a decade or more were chosen for their  expertise  and  familiarity  with  these  parts  and  their manufacture.Today  Girish  called  a  meeting  of  the  task  force  and  all  the members promptly came to attend. Girish started the meeting by reviewing  the  history  of  the  problem  and  the  activities  of  the

search team. He stressed that the task force was to come up with a design concept for the special divider traps. He then opened the meeting for comments and suggestions.

Suresh  from  industrial  engineering  spoke  first:  “In  my  opinion, the solution to the  problem is to make sure that the workers are more careful in handling the parts rather than in designing same new contraption for handling parts”  Dinesh from product design

agreed. He urged the task-force to recommend that new handling procedures be written and enforced.Girish  interrupted  the  discussion.   “The  earlier  search  team already  decided,  with  the  approval  of  the  top  management,  that new divider trays would be designed and used”. He knew that the investigating team had considered new handling procedures with better enforcement, but had rejected this solution because of the

extent of the damage and the expense of the parts involved. He told the members and reminded them that the purpose of this taskforce  was  to  design  the  new  dividers,  not  to  question  the investigating team’s solution.

The  task  force  members  then  began  discussing  the  designing  of  the dividers. But the discussion always came back to the issue of  handling procedures and their enforcement. Finally Ramesh from  materials handling spoke up. “I think we ought to do what Dinesh  had suggested earlier. It makes no sense to me to design dividers

when  written  procedures  will  solve  the  problems”.   The  other  members    nodded    their    heads    in    agreement.   Girish    again  reminded    them    of   the    task    force’s    purpose   and    said    that  a  new  recommendation  would  not  be  well  received by the top  management. Nevertheless, the group insisted that Girish should

write  a  memo  to  the  vice-president  of  manufacturing  with  the  recommendation. The meeting was adjourned 15 minutes after it commenced.Girish started to write a memo, but he knew that it would anger several  of  his  bosses.   He  hoped  that  he  would  not  be  held responsible for the actions of the task force, even though he was

its  chairman.   He  wondered  what  had  gone  wrong  and  what  he could have done to prevent it.

Questions:

1. If you were Girish, what would you have done?

2. If you were Girish, what would you do now?

3. What characteristics of group behavior discussed in the chapter can you identify in this case?