Case Study ON GROUP BEHAVIOUR
Kamal Negi
Hindustan Lever Research Centre (HLRC) was set up in the year 1967 at
Mumbai. At that time the primary challenge was to find suitable alternatives
to the edible oils and fats that were being used as raw materials for soaps.
Later, import substitution and export obligations directed the focus towards
non-edible oil seeds, infant foods, perfumery chemicals, fine chemicals,
polymers and nickel catalyst. This facilitated creation of new brands which
helped build new businesses.
HUL believes in meritocracy and has a comprehensive performance management
system, which ensures that people are rewarded according to their
performance and abilities. Almost 47% of the entire managerial cadres are
people who have joined us through lateral recruitment.
Over the years many break through innovations have taken place. Hindustan
Lever Research gained eminence within Unilever Global R&D and became
recognized as one of the six global R&D Centers of Unilever with the
creation of Unilever Research India in Bangalore in 1997.
At Bangalore R&D center, a team of 10 scientists were appointed for a
project on shampoo line. Suranjan Sircar heading the team as Principal
Research Scientist with the support of Vikas Pawar, Aparna Damle, Jaideep
Chatterjee, Amitava Pramanik as Research Scientists. Suresh Jayaraman &
Punam Bandyopadhyay were Research Associates.
Vikas Pawar came up with an idea of pet shampoos during brainstorming with
the team. Hey, why don t we target the pet care segment because in India,
pet industry is being seriously looked at as a growing industry. I had been
working on this concept for a few weeks & have done some initial research as
well , said Vikas. I think we should just focus on the dog segment & bring
out a range of shampoos that are breed specific , contributed by Aparna
Damle, who was a new unmarried scientist in the company. Oh that s a really
great idea, a breakthrough said Jaideep & Amitava appreciating Aparna. The
idea given by Aparna got support from both colleagues & head.
Vikas was although not comfortable with his credit being taken away. He also
felt that creating brand specific shampoos would not be a profitable
innovation thus, no point concentrating efforts on that. With this in mind
he put his point forward but couldn t gather consensus.
After the discussion, Jaideep & Amitava being friends to Vikas, consoled
him & showed confidence in his plan & thoughts. We understand what you are
going through. The idea was yours & Aparna took all your credit. Don t worry
we are with you & be careful from next time.
Nevertheless, in the meeting Aparna presented her proposal for the idea
mentioning requirements & chemical details. The meeting began with
motivational speech & plan of action by the head of the team. A lot was
discussed in detail & tasks were allotted along with deadlines.
Immediately after the presentation Jaideep & Amitava approached Aparna &
eulogized her research & proposal reiterating the importance of breed
specific range of shampoos.
Vikas lay aside his ego & went ahead with full dedication & commitment,
however during the tenure of the research he noticed poor attitude of team
members. Punam was not regular with deadlines; she submitted her research on
breeds four days after deadline. Suresh was asked to coordinate with members
looking into chemical research but Vikas observed him most of the times in
the recreation room, so he asked him Hi, so what s the progress in chemical
research so far? Suresh replied that he had done whatever he was asked to
do by senior scientist.
He reported this lack of commitment & proactive attitude to Suranjan Sircir
& asked for an action against them. Hmm I know what s happening in the
team. I have worked for 20 years in this industry & from my experience I
know what to do & when to do , he retorted back.
Finally the project got completed 4 months after deadline. Vikas went back
to the lab; sitting & wondering at the flaws in the group.
Q1 Analyze group behavior of the team. Study the informal & formal groups
In this case.
Q2 Point out flaws in the group & recommend solutions to overcome them.
Prepared By: Nikhil Kapoor (4610)
Tanvi Rohatgi (4606)
BBS 1 A
Group Behavior
Case Study Analysis
The general picture that emerges out of the aforementioned case is that of
confusion, a clear lack of leadership and one that is filled with group
politics. It is worsened by the general negative attitude among the members
and on a whole a lack of clear cut camaraderie among the whole members that
really takes away a good bit of performance among the members.
Some observations:
* With the given information, vikas as a person deserves special
mention for he is the one who seems to have a holistic personality and a
right kind of employee to guide the organization to the next level of
success. He is the one employee who in my opinion seems to have the kind of
constructive thinking for the sake of the organization as well as doing full
justice to his job. He is honest, hardworking and apparently one who is on
the lookout for new ideas as he was the one who came up with one during the
brainstorming session and also he had done some research on his own behalf
regarding the same.
* Aparna as a new member of the team appears to be a very ambitious,
intelligent girl who is also a very opportunist. It is evident from the fact
that when vikas presented before the group one idea that was at the best a
path or a general view of what is to be done it was aparna who was quick to
grab the opportunity and narrow the broad idea into a more narrow and
specific direction .thus she seems to convey a very positive and a strong
urge to perform on the job. Yet it is also clear that she doesn t seem to be
having a regard for her colleagues as it was apparent that almost stole
the vikas s idea and took the full credit to her name even without sharing
the honors with vikas.She seems to be a very high on the Mach scale.
* Jaideep and amitava appears to share good relationship between them
as a good clique. they are very positive minded people, it is clear from the
fact that they really appreciated aparna, a newcomer to the organization and
realizing well before that she was a very ambitious employee wasted no time
in extolling her work as this will appease her desire for support and
recognition among fellow workers, something that is very important.
Among the formal groups it is very clear that there is a proper structure in
the organization with Suranjan Sircar heading the team as Principal Research
Scientist with the support of Vikas Pawar, Aparna Damle, Jaideep Chatterjee,
and Amitava Pramanik as Research Scientists. Suresh Jayaraman & Punam
Bandyopadhyay are Research Associates.
The formal group of research scientists appears to be a very able team as
they are able to resolve and step aside their personal differences and
professional competitiveness to work for the benefit of the organization.
Among the informal groups there appears to be a informal group among vikas,
jaideep and amitava. Though this informal group is against Aparna in taking
away all the credit from Vikas, they never let their dissatisfaction come in
the way of the progress of group.
In the formal group, the group members seem to be working pretty
lethargically; as is seen by the fact that Punam didn t meet her deadlines
and Suresh spent most of his time in recreation.
Moreover, the group leader/ head Suranjan Circar is too haughty to
accept any suggestions from his subordinates.
In the informal group, there is the dissatisfaction among Vikas and his
friends for Vikas credit being snatched away by Aparna.
However, it is highly appreciable of Vikas that he lays aside his ego
and works with full dedication for the better of the group.
The team of research associates of punam and Suresh seems to lack the
urge and capabilities to work at the acceptable standards.
Thus, though there clearly exists an informal group having a grudge against
the formal group, it is observed that the two never really clash. As a
result, the delay in the group s task completion could not attributed to the
existence of an informal group working against it but is fully because of
the wrong attitude of the group members towards their work.
Flaws in the team and their solutions
Lack of seriousness-- The first flaw that one can clearly see in the
group is that its members are somewhat casual towards their work. Although
the work of the team started on a very serious and determined note, it lost
out on them soon after; as could well be seen in the cases of Punam and
Suresh. This can be rectified by having strong authority and controlling
measures in the team and make it the norm to follow.
Lack of commitment-- The members do not seem to be committed enough
towards their work. There could be two reasons for it: either the members
are not adequately motivated or they are not serious enough, i.e., the first
point itself. Here is very important that the leader follow the appropriate
motivational concepts and methods to get his team to perform at their level
best. May be the job at hand may not be challenging enough for some. In that
case the job profile has to be divided with close care and matched with the
ability and needs of the employees.
There is a clear lack of able leadership skills in the team. It is
apparent that the team leader Mr. Suranjan circar doesn t seem to have the
same commitment level or he is having a big ego problem. It is evident from
the fact that when vikas pointed out the flaws in the team and sought an
action against them, the leader circar instead got miffed and retorted
angrily. This clearly was a communication to vikas that as a leader he is
aware of what is to be done and he doesn t need a lesson in that. Clearly in
a marketing research agency you need to have a flexible and participative
form of leadership and Mr. circar needs to change his approach quickly
otherwise the group results will continue to be bad.
In a job like this where the team effort is more important and people
concentrate on synergies of the team effort it is very important for the
leader of the group to make sure that there is enough camaraderie among the
members. Here aparna appears to be too self centered to think about her co
workers which can in the long run lead to difficulties. Thus it is job of
the leader to council aparna and make sure that she understands and
appreciates the advantages of being a good team member.
It is a rarity that there are loyal and hardworking employees like vikas
who have a very good attitude and mindset to do the job. He is being treated
rather shabbily by the management. For employees like vikas the non monetary
incentives are as important as monetary benefits. Therefore recognizing the
talent the management should really appreciate and keep him happy so that
they can get the optimum contribution from him.
PERCEPTION CASE STUDY
Mr. K.P Bakophaid,69, a high profile investor who during his lifetime had
accumulated millions in investments, particularly in the Microsoft shares in
the 80s and then in a repeat of his talent to spot the gold brought Google
shares cheap at $1 a share with now the shares quoting $563\share and his
long time friend Mr. j k sinha,65 just retired CEO of the famed PELIANCE
group had been for a while contemplating for a move to establish a start up
in IT sector as both the gentlemen were very bullish about the sector in
the Indian space.
Their thoughts were put down to work as with favorable developments at the
macro economic level both pledged their funds together to start a IT start
up MACROHARD INDIA LTD, a BPO firm having primary applications in the back
office jobs of banking and investment banking sector of the US and EUROPE.
With this they appointed Mr. Rajiv Negad, 39 an IIM-A pass out. He had till
that time established himself as an expert in system analysis with a prime
acumen of business networks having earlier worked with Goldman sacs in its
Hong Kong division. He jumped at the opportunity to be the CEO of the start
up.
I YEAR LATER
MACROHARD had notched up a reasonable success in its limited space and were
looking like they were heading in the right directions.
In the mean time they hired Ms Neha Kakkar , an attractive 25 year old who
was also like the CEO, a pass out of IIM-A .She was a hard working employee
and a really bright prospect who had the right ideas and confidence. Also
her most important asset was her ability to gel with her colleges well.
Over time there developed good professional repot between Mr. Rajiv and neha
as it was evident with the fact that Mr. Rajiv was really impressed with the
work ethics of his new employee. In the company there also worked adebayour,
a hard working employee. Originally from Nigeria he also was a good
disciplined worker who did his job well. Neha kakkar was really rising
through the ranks of her job fast.
Once neha had this really bright idea of taking the company to the next
level with her idea of venturing into the credit card processing in the US
and also she was quick to spot a potential threat in the form of a
competitor taking away their business and for that she wanted to discuss
with Rajiv, her boss, for which he asked her to come to the canteen to
discuss this issue over a cup of coffee.
Apparently this discussion now happened quite frequently and because the
issue was a bit negative with the news of falling profits and competitors,
Rajiv asked neha not to discuss it now with her coworkers as he felt it
might have negative repercussions.3 weeks into this discussion neha was
again promoted as there was an urgent need to do it .
This wasn t taken well by her co workers who thought that she was rather
using her good looks in making Rajiv do as she wished. This was apparently
being discussed and spread around as rumors by 3 people in particular nitin,
venkat, and karan who were spreading all sorts of rumors around. There was
this further issue that adebayor an equally hard working candidate wasn t
promoted when neha was. In this regard adebayour was apparently miffed and
sought an explanation from rajiv who responded that he didn t had that
charisma and forward looking skills and therefore he will have to wait a
little bit more time for his promotion. But in this regard an argument
ensured between the two, the news of which spread around the workplace.
There was now an open talk that Rajiv was showing favoritism toward neha and
everyone wasn t being treated well. Initially Rajiv ignored this talk. Being
a proud manager who thought that since he was not actually doing anything
wrong, that should be enough people will recognize it. Or since he wasn t
actually guilty, he believed that he just doesn t need to defend himself
further. Lastly, he also thought that since he was the boss people will
anyway come to respect his decisions.
But then in the mean time situations worsened. There was a gradual loss of
productivity. Resentment built quickly with favoritism being suspected.
Resentment quickly become bitterness and bitterness lead to all sorts of
behavior which created problems for company.
Rajiv now really disturbed with the recent developments in the company,
quickly sought advice from his HR manager Mr. Sachin tendulkar to get the
situation back to normal as quickly as possible as In the highly competitive
IT industry he didn t want his company to miss out on potential
opportunities just because of a simple perception problem.
As a HR manager what advice and steps will you follow to solve this problem?
What s a manager to do to avoid the PERCEPTION of favoritism, which can be
just as damaging as actual favoritism?
CASE ANALYSIS
To begin with this is the common problem of Workplace Favoritism. It's a
major topic in HR circles. But regardless of how little formal attention it
gets, this is an important issue that exists in nearly every workplace,
large and small. While it's not something that gets addressed in management
meetings, it can have as much effect on a company as most "high profile"
management topics.
Favoritism is part of human nature. No two people interact similarly to any
other two, so it's impossible for all workplace relationships to be "equal".
It's only natural to gravitate to people that you share common interests
with, and with whom you have an easy rapport. And of course, there's nothing
wrong with any of this, on the surface. The problems surface when one of
three distinct things occurs:
1. When a good rapport and shared interests lead to a PERCEPTION that an
employee is getting favored treatment from a manager
2. When a manager ACTUALLY PROVIDES unfair preferential treatment for one
employee at the expense of others
3. Nepotism.
To begin with, Mr. Rajiv, through there isn t any logical fault on his side;
He commits some silly errors that you would probably expect with a computer
engineer who hasn t exactly probed into the human side of the business.
* Even though neha is in fact a very bright employee and to be frank a
front runner among her colleagues still Rajiv committed the silly error in
being too close to her and apparently not giving enough consideration of its
impact on the psyche of the other employees.
* He was also a bit too rude to deal with adebayor, an employee who
was quite popular in the circles as one of the hardest working employees.
Even though rajiv was quite right in assessing the personality of adebayor
that he wasn t a very daring employee and that there was still time for him
to develop fully into the leadership mode that is required in the highly
competitive IT sector .Instead Rajiv should have commented on the positives
and presented the whole thing in an amicable manner.
* He also ignored the issue in the beginning allowing the rift to
develop.
Clearly there has been a serious perception problem on the part of the
employees in that they had started to wrongly deduce that neha is getting
promoted due to favoritism. This is a big problem but not that big also if
the management decides to follow some simple steps and understand some basic
things about this wrong perception thing.
* There are many people in the workplace who are extremely sensitive,
and are looking around every corner for perceived slights and injustices.
* There are also many under-performers who look at other's
relationships, in an attempt to convince themselves that it's something
other than their own shortcomings that is preventing them from getting
ahead. Like in this example the clique of nitin, valsat, and karan shows a
lot of characteristics of this behavior.
People who perform well should be rewarded. And a single management style
doesn't work equally well with all employees. Some people need more
attention to fulfill their potential, while others excel with less attention
and more autonomy. Also it is the PERCEPTION of favoritism that does the
damage. If there is actual favoritism, you can argue that management is just
getting what they deserve.
Here are some steps to avoid the problem to tackle the problem initially:
An open door policy is the right beginning. Further, communication
channels have to be well-established and two-way flow of information is to
be encouraged and maintained.
A further step in the right direction would be to convey the
reasoning of various managerial decisions through formal and more informal
communication systems for persons at the ground level to appreciate the
managerial constraints and thinking process. That would help employees
strive for right perception even when decisions are unexplained.
By experience, everyone is aware of the perception people have
when a male boss frequently appreciates a particular female staff. One is
keen in such cases to modify behavior and language suitably to avoid wrong
perceptions.
After that the management must take the following measures to ensure that no
such perception problems arise in the future.
1. The management should do everything within their power to insure
that advancement, perks, and compensation are based strictly upon objective
performance measures
2. they must Strive to treat everyone fairly, if not necessarily the
same
3. .they must Create an environment where any employee feels
comfortable discussing a perceived injustice with management this enables
managers to nip misconceptions in the bud
4. they should Practice an open door policy this also contributes to a
culture of trust, which can sooth ruffled feathers before hurt feelings can
fester and turn a situation far sourer
5. .the top management should also learn to Manage potential
perceptions of favoritism proactively it's much easier to prevent the
perception up front, than it is to "put out the fire" once it's raging
While a HR manager need not get bogged down with all possible and
imaginative perceptions of people, his focus should be to establish an open
work environment and exercise control over the information system mechanics.
A well-established and trusted system would induce people to ask for reasons
behind an action or a decision, than to jump to wrong perceptions.
Case study
Vineeth Vijayan
BBS 1 A
Roll no. 4644
Rashid kapoor, 26 was born to Mr. Saurab kapoor, a distinguished lawyer and
Mrs. Savina kapoor, senior bank executive at HDFC. Throughout his childhood
Rashid was trained and brought up by his parents in a manner that would
ensure that Rashid gets groomed to be a successful man. He had a great
academic record, was good at public speaking and a district level tennis
player. He came from a demanding background where unconditional approval was
withheld. Getting 90%, for example did not meet with admiration from
parents. The achievement was typically up with the message you can do
better .
He followed up his good work to get himself enrolled into the prestigious
IIT, Delhi and then after a two year work experience got selected into the
prestigious Harvard business school. After graduating from there with
highest honors he rapidly moved up the corporate ladder at a large
advertising firm, raking up promotions and responsibilities all along the
way. He was recognized by everyone in the firm as one of the talented and
gifted employees. His boss reacted accordingly and paid him a generous pay
package. Here he pushed himself to the limits to ensure that his task has
been completed in the best possible way. He was fiercely ambitious, wildly
capable, and intelligent.
However 2 years into the job the performance levels of Rashid had come down.
It was not a drastic change in quality but it was there for his boss Mr.
Ravikant shukla to see. Despite his veneer of self satisfaction, smugness
and even bluster he was starting to feel a lack of confidence.
He was thus a concerned man and knew something must be done quickly to
restore the performance of his star employee. Also there were also rumors of
Rashid s tiffs with his same level colleges. Also Rashid have secretly
started to look for another job.
Rashid s performance of late and his apparent lack of team spirit had got
people talking that he is going to be fired.
Mr. Ravikant shukla thus was in a big dilemma now. Already in a highly
competitive advertising industry there was an obvious crunch of talented
skilled people and to lose an employee of the caliber of Rashid to the
competitors was not at all a situation he wanted to face. What was he
supposed to do with Rashid to ensure that he remains with his company and
perform to his best of abilities for the success of the firm?
ANALYSIS &SOLUTION
The problem faced by Mr. Ravikant shukla is not a isolated problem but
rather a problem that affects most of the companies in all the sectors.
The good news for bosses coping with complicated a players is that managing
superstars is not that difficult.thebiggest challenge is simply recognizing
that these driven stars have these hidden vulnerabilities. Once you ve
understood their unexpected wasknesses andneeds you can apply some straight
forward guidelines and techniques to help them pvercome their limitations.
Here are certain facts and steps Mr. Ravikant shukla can look into to solve
his problem and turn his high performers into even more effective stars.
These high performers mostly come from very demanding childhood like in the
case of Rashid. These individuals end up with extra ordinarily punishing
superegos. At first the pressure comes from outside authority figures; later
A players impose it on themselves and on others. They end up pushing
themselves to the extremes producing more and better work in every endeavor
they undertake. They also become highly attentive to the language of the
person judging them precisely because they spent their childhoods looking
intently for clues about whether or not they had fulfilled parental
expectations. Thus they even make a distinction between A+ and A++
evaluation.
It is thus the duty of the senior to see that he identifies this trait in
his high performing employees and thus reward and communicate the same to
them in a manner befitting the situation. Only when the boss starts to help
his stars address their inflated senses of superiority can they begin to
deal with underlying issues of poor self worth. As a manager the onus falls
on the boss to personalize the praise if it is to be effective.i.e the boss
must know not only when but what to honor when considering the star s
spectacular performance. You must celebrate the unique competence and
aspirations that the a player values in himself and you must admire him in
away that he can appreciate.
Their career trajectory is such that they are constantly put in business
settings that demand social skills that they may not be prepared to handle.
If they are not able to cope with that for long then they may get
frustrated, as such A players like Rashid should be his boss s second chair
whenever he meets with customers or clients. That will allow him to observe
the manner in which professional deals are taken place and thus he stands to
gain invaluable skills and also develops strong loyalty towards his boss.
These a players also suffer from burnout born of midcareer boredom. It is
because they are used to that rapid rise in thefirm ,pay going up increased
incentives that when it all reaches a slowdown they get frustrated.for a
players accustomed to action,andrewards this long backstretch is fraught
with danger .the only answer to this dilemma is to provide these individuals
with challenges.they will approach such growth opportunities with passion.
One of the biggest problems of a plauers is their inavility to set
boundaries for themselves.these insecure over achievers typically exceed
expectations because they are prepared to operate outside their comfort
zones in their effort to attain perfection and win recognition.
Thus it is the responsibility of the boss to understand this inability of
their star performers and council them. A good way to set boundaries is to
allow you re a players to help you build work groups,structure a project or
tailor a business plan.and then ask them how they would like to be rewarded
for completing those subtasks.
Bosses must create an environment where top performers have to cooperate
with others to achieve their goals. That will certainly mean building the
notion of shared effort into an a player s performance measures.for these
individuals the more effective means of getting them to play alongmay be to
repeatedly highlight the failures of other superstars who failed to
understand the power of team efforts.
Then there is also the method of co-opting followed mostly in football.
Here the boss can ask these A players to mentor the other less successful
employees,in a careful and controlled manner so that there is no ego clashes
among them. The rationale behind this idea is that when the a players are
asked to perform these steps they take it as a signal that they are being
groomed to take up a higher position in the future. This alone acts as a
major ego boost to them and they become more loyal as well as more
supportive to the team goals, further this also offers a opportunity to the
lesser employees to devolep themselves and thus this leds to all round gain
to the organization.
--
Sincerely yours
Kamal Negi
Fortune Institute of International Business