Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TEAM DYNAMICS AT WORK SCHOOL OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
C.SUPRIYA AGI, Hyderabad
DECEMBER 2019
2
Course File Index
S.No. Item Description Page
Number
1. Course Information Sheet 3
2. Syllabus 4
3. Text Books, Reference Book, Web/Other Resources 4
4. Programme Educational Objectives(PEO‘s) 5
5. Programme Outcomes(PO‘s) 5
6. Bloom‘s Taxonomy 6
7. Course Outcomes(CO‘s), Mapping & Articulation Matrix 8
8. Course Schedule 9
9. Lecture Plan 10 & 11
10. Minutes of Course Review Meeting 12
11. Unit Wise Questions 20
12. Activities and Case Study 24
13. Tutorial Sheet 25
14. Course Assessment Report 29
15. Direct Assessment Sheet 31
16. CSP Rubric Name & Number 33
17. Indirect Course Assessment Sheet 34
18. Add-ons , PPT‘s & Lecture Notes 35
3
ANURAG GROUP OF INSTITUTIONS
SCHOOL OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
Course Name : Team Dynamics at Work
Course Number : A93005/B Course Designation : Open Elective
Credits : 3
Prerequisites : Yes
II MBA – I Semester
(2018-20)
Name of Faculty Academic
Year/Regulation
Version No
Mrs.C.Supriya R18 1
Course Coordinator
Mrs C.Supriya
Assistant professor
4
SYLLABUS
References
1. Levi, Daniel. (2014). Group Dynamics for Teams, 5th Edition, SAGE Publications.
2.Simon Hartley, Stronger Together: How Great Teams Work , Little, Brown Book Group UK
3.Greg L stewart,Charles C manz,Team Work and Group Dynamics,John Wiley and Sons,
Unit-I
Team composition, formation of teams and development-Team Performance and
Motivation-Team Conflict and Leadership-Team Decision Making, Group
dynamics, Dynamics of teams and Team building
Unit – II
Leadership-Team Decision Making, Discovering the interpersonal orientation
through, training needs analysis, FIRO-B, Experiential learning methodologies-T-
group sensitivity training, encounter groups
Unit – III
Introduction to Groups, Nature of groups,stages of group development,Encounter
groups, appreciative enquiry, Discovering facets of interpersonal trust through
Johari window, communication skills.
Unit – IV
Introduction to Negotiation, Negotiation skills and strategies for team building,
team morale,team building strategies at work place.
Unit – V
Nature of conflict, theories of conflict, work place conflict, Conflict resolution in
teams, competitive vs collaborative behavior, developing collaboration .work stress
and stress management
5
Program Learning Outcomes:
1. To explain the dynamics of Team & Team Building.
2. To describe the different learning methodologies in team decision-making.
3. To analyze the different stages of group and its development.
4. To evaluate the team building and Negotiation strategies.
5. To apply conflict resolution & stress management strategies.
Program Educational objectives
1. To impart the fundamentals of the key elements of a business organization.
2. To provide a critical perspective on theoretical knowledge and practical approach to
various functional areas of management and decision making.
3. To develop analytical skills to identify the link between the management practices in the
functional areas of an organization and business environment.
4. To establish and realize a creative research culture among the student community.
5. To provide insights into latest technology, business communication, management
concepts and to build team work and leadership skills among them.
6. To inculcate the habit of inquisitiveness and creativeness aimed at self actualization and
realization of ethical practices.
6
Blooms Taxonomy
Definitions I.Remembering II. Understanding III. Applying IV. Analyzing V. Evaluating VI. Creating
Bloom’
s
Definiti
on
Exhibit memory
of previously
learned material
by recalling facts,
terms, basic
concepts, and
answers.
Demonstrate
understanding of
facts and ideas
by organizing,
comparing,
translating,
interpreting,
giving
descriptions, and
stating main
ideas.
Solve
problems to
new
situations by
applying
acquired
knowledge,
facts,
techniques
and rules in
a different
way.
Examine and
break
information
into parts by
identifying
motives or
causes. Make
inferences and
find evidence
to support
generalization
s.
Present and
defend
opinions by
making
judgments
about
information,
validity of
ideas, or
quality of
work based on
a set of
criteria.
Compile
information
together in
a different
way by
combining
elements in
a new
pattern or
proposing
alternative
solutions.
7
Verbs • Choose
• Define
• Find
• How
• Label
• List
• Match
• Name
• Omit
• Recall
• Relate
• Select
• Show
• Spell
• Tell
• What
• When
• Where
• Which
• Who
• Why
• Classify
• Compare
• Contrast
• Demonstrate
• Explain
• Extend
• Illustrate
• Infer
• Interpret
• Outline
• Relate
• Rephrase
• Show
• Summarize
• Translate
• Apply
• Build
• Choose
• Construct
• Develop
• Experime
nt with
• Identify
• Interview
• Make use
of
• Model
• Organize
• Plan
• Select
• Solve
• Utilize
• Analyze
• Assume
• Categorize
• Classify
• Compare
• Conclusion
• Contrast
• Discover
• Dissect
• Distinguis
h
• Divide
• Examine
• Function
• Inference
• Inspect
• List
• Motive
• Relationshi
ps
• Simplify
• Survey
• Take part
in
• Test for
• Theme
• Agree
• Appraise
• Assess
• Award
• Choose
• Compare
• Conclude
• Criteria
• Criticize
• Decide
• Deduct
• Defend
• Determine
• Disprove
• Estimate
• Evaluate
• Explain
• Importance
• Influence
• Interpret
• Judge
• Justify
• Mark
• Measure
• Opinion
• Perceive
• Prioritize
• Prove
• Rate
• Recommen
d
• Rule on
• Select
• Support
• Value
• Adapt
• Build
• Change
• Choose
• Combine
• Compile
• Compose
• Construct
• Create
• Delete
• Design
• Develop
• Discuss
• Elaborate
• Estimate
• Formulate
• Happen
• Imagine
• Improve
• Invent
• Make up
• Maximize
• Minimize
• Modify
• Original
• Originate
• Plan
• Predict
• Propose
• Solution
• Solve
• Suppose
• Test
• Theory
8
Learning Outcomes
Students will be able to
Course Outcomes: At the end of the Course students will be able to
1. Explain the concepts and contributors to employee relations
2. Explain the recent trends and Industrial Relations and collective bargaining
3. Analyze different mechanisms to handle grievances and code of discipline in the
organization
4. Apply different industrial acts related to industrial relations management
5. Analyze the role of different labor organizations and their role in Industrial relations
MAPPING OF COURSE OUT COMES WITH PO’s & PEO’s
Course
Outcomes PO’s PEO’s
CO1 1,4,5,6, 1,2,3
CO2 2,4,5, 1,2,3,5
CO3 2,4,5,6, 1,2,4,5
CO4 1,4,5,6, 1,2,5,6
CO5 3,4,5,6, 1,4,5,6
Articulation matrix of Course outcomes with PO’s & PEO’s
Program Outcomes Program Educational objectives
PO
1 PO 2
PO
3
PO
4
PO
5
PO
6
PEO
1
PEO
2
PE
O 3
PEO
4
PEO
5
PEO
6
CO1 1 3
2
3 2 2
CO2 2 3 3 2 2 2
CO3 2 3
2
3 2 1 2
CO4 1 2 3
3 2 1 2
CO5 2 3 2
2
2 2 1 2
9
Course Schedule
Distribution of Hours in Unit – Wise
Unit
Topic
Total No. of Hours
I Introduction to Teams 13
II Leadership & Training 11
III Group Development 9
IV Negotiation Skills 7
V Conflict Management 9
Total No of Classes 49
10
Lecture Plan:Team dynamics at work
S. No. Topic
No of
Lecture
Hours
Teaching Learning
Process
UNIT-1
1 Team composition 1 Chalk and Board
2 Formation of Teams and Development 1 PPT
3 Team Formation Activity 2 Activity
4 Team Performance and Motivation 2 Chalk and Board
5 Team conflict and Leadership 2 Chalk and Board
6 Team Decision making 1 PPT
7 Group Dynamics
1
Activity
8 Dynamics of Team and Team Building 2 PPT
9 Team Building activity 1 Activity
Unit -2
1 Leadership 1 PPT
2 Leadership Game Activity 1 Activity
3 Discovering the interpersonal
Orientation& Training Need Analysis
2 Chalk and Board
4 FIRO-B and Activity 2 Activity
5 Experiential Training Methodologies 2 Case Study
6 T- Group sensitivity training, 2 Role Play
7 Encounter groups 1 PPT
UNIT-3
1 Introduction to Groups, 1 Chalk and Board
2 Nature of groups 1 Activity
3 Stages of Group development 1 PPT
4 Appreciative enquiry, 2 Chalk and Board
5 Discovering facets of interpersonal trust
through Johari window
2 PPT
6 Communication skills. 1 Activity
11
Unit-4
1 Introduction to Negotiation 1 Chalk and Board
2 Negotiation skills and strategies for team
building,
2 PPT
3 Team morale 2 Chalk and Board
4 Team building strategies at work place. 2 PPT
UNIT-5
1 Nature of conflict 1 Chalk and Board
2 Theories of conflict 2 PPT
3 Work place conflict 1 Role Play
4 Conflict resolution in Teams 1 PPT
5 Competitive vs collaborative behavior 1 Chalk and Board
6 Developing collaboration 1 Activity
7 Work stress and stress management 2 PPT
Total contact classes for Syllabus coverage : 49
12
Minutes of Course Review Meeting
Details of Meeting No -
Date of Meeting
Member‘s Present
Signature of Member‘s
Remarks
Details of Meeting No -
Date of Meeting
Member‘s Present
Signature of Member‘s
Remarks
Details of Meeting No -
Date of Meeting
Member‘s Present
Signature of Member‘s
Remarks
13
Unit Wise PPT’s & Lecture Notes
Unit I
Short Answer Questions:
1. State any two characteristics of group.(CO1-L1)
2. Explain the difference between Team Vs Group(CO1-L2)
3. List any two reasons for group formation.(CO1-L2)
4. Explain the terms team decision making (CO1-L2)
5. Explain the term Group Dynamics?(CO1-L2)
6. Discuss the terms Team Conflict?(CO1-L3)
1.List out the steps in Formation Of Teams at work place( CO1-L3)
2.Expalin the importance of Group Dynamics at work(CO1-L2)
3.Explain the term Decision Making and explain about the role of teams in organization Decision
making?( CO1-L3)
4. Explain the decision making function of groups in an organization. ( CO1-L3)
5.What happens to be the main focus of members during the performing stage of group
formation? ( CO1-L3)
6. ‗In effective teams the spirit of we-ness exists‘- explain. ( CO1-L3)
7.Dicuss the need and importance of team performance and motivation in organization
development? ( CO1-L3)
Unit II
1. Short Answer Questions:
2. Describe group Norms?(CO2-L1)
3. Understand the need for training need analysis? (CO2-L1)
4. Explain the term FIRO-B(CO2-L1)
5. Experiential training signifies? (CO2-L1)
6. T-Group Sensitivity training? (CO2-L1)
7. Meaning of Encounter groups. (CO2-L1)
14
Essay Questions;
1. What is the importance of communication in team building? (CO2-L1)
2. Explain the stages of group development and their implications on group development? (CO2-
L1)
3. List out the various types of Leadership. (CO2-L1)
4. Explain the Traits approach to leadership. Do you believe that traits of a leader influence the
leadership effectiveness? (CO2-L1)
5. Elaborate the concept of FIRO-B? (CO2-L1)
6. Explain in detail about experiential learning and its utility in the organization? (CO2-L1)
Unit III:
Short Answer Questions:
1. Define group(CO3-L1)
2. Write short note on Appreciative enquiry?(CO3-L3)
3. What is the importance of Johari window in personality Development?(CO3-L2)
4. Distinguish between Team Vs Groups(CO3-L3)
Essay Questions:
1. What are the stages of group development?(CO3-L1)
2. How are groups different from teams?(CO3-L2)
3. Explain the need and importance of formal and informal groups in an organization?(CO3-L2)
3. Explain Appreciative enquiry its role in organization effectiveness?(CO3-L2)
4. Developing deeper relationships at work place with the Johari window?(CO3-L5)
5. Discovering facets of interpersonal trust through Johari window ? in detail(CO3-L5)
Unit IV
Short Answer questions
1. Define Negotiation(CO4-L3)
2. Explain the Team Morale(CO4-L2)
3. List the various types of negotiation strategies?(CO4-L4)
Essay questions:
1. Explain the need and purpose of Negotiation?(CO4-L2)
15
2. Elaborate the need and importance of Negotiation skills and strategies for team
building?(CO4-L4)
3. Illustrate the Team building strategies at work place.(CO4-L4)
4. Understand the role of communication in effective Team Building?(CO4-L2)
Unit V:
Short Answer questions
1. Meaning of conflict (CO5-L2)
2. Define Work place conflict (CO5-L3)
3. Difference between Competitive vs collaborative behavior (CO5-l3)
4. Explain Conflict resolution in Teams (CO5-L2)
5. List out the Theories of conflict (CO5-L3)
Essay questions:
1.‖conflict brings out a communication gap among employees ― Explain? (CO5-L2)
2. List the various conflict resolution strategies? (CO5-L3)
3. Outline the theories of conflict in detail. (CO5-L4)
4. Work place conflict brings out organizational unrest? Explain? (CO5-L2)
5.How does organization handle work stress and work pressure among its employees(CO5-L2)
16
ANURAG GROUP OF INSTITUTIONS Autonomous
(School of Business Management)
MODEL PAPER
SUBJECT: Team Dynamics at Work
SECTION A: 5*5=25
1.List any two reasons for group formation.(CO1-L2
2 Experiential training signifies? (CO2-L1)
3.Write short note on Appreciative enquiry?(CO3-L3)
4. Explain the Team Morale(CO4-L2)
5. . List out the Theories of conflict (CO5-L3)
SECTION B:
5*10=50
6. A) .Explain the term Decision Making and explain about the role of teams in organization
Decision making?( CO1-L3)
OR
6 .B) Dicuss the need and importance of team performance and motivation in organization
development? ( CO1-L3)
7. A) Explain the Traits approach to leadership. Do you believe that traits of a leader influence
the leadership effectiveness? (CO2-L1)
OR
7.B) Elaborate the concept of FIRO-B? (CO2-L1)
8. A) Explain Appreciative enquiry its role in organization effectiveness?(CO3-L2)
17
8. B) . Developing deeper relationships at work place with the Johari window? (CO3-L5)
9. A) Elaborate the need and importance of Negotiation skills and strategies for team
building?(CO4-L4)
OR
9. B). Illustrate the Team building strategies at work place.(CO4-L4)
10. A).‖Conflict brings out a communication gap among employees ―Explain? (CO5-L2)
OR
10.B) List the various conflict resolution strategies? (CO5-L3)
18
UNIT I
Activities;
Team Building excercises :Scavenger Hunt
This classic team building exercise encourages teamwork and creative thinking. Put together a
list of items for your team members to find. This can be done individually or in small groups.
The first to collect all of the items and bring them to you, wins!
For an extra layer of difficulty and problem-solving, instead of writing it the items themselves,
write clues, simple descriptions or riddles.
Unit II
Team jigsaw (Cohen, 2017)
Two teams have to complete a jigsaw puzzle within a 20 – 30-minute time limit. Give each team
a box containing a puzzle. At first, A body will assume that their task is to complete the puzzle.
As they work on it, however, teams will realize that the puzzle is missing some of its pieces and
has some additional pieces that do not fit their puzzle.
Teams then have the task to communicate with one another, and they will eventually realize that
they need to work together to complete the puzzle. Teams are only allowed to exchange pieces of
the puzzle one at a time.
Unit III
Johari Window Exercise
This is an example of an exercise you can do with the Johari Window in a group or team. The
purpose is to share more information and reduce blind spots. The key steps are:
The subject is given a list of 55 adjectives and you pick 5 or 6 that they think describes
their personality.
Peers are given the same list and they each pick 5 or 6 adjectives they think describe the
subject.
You arrange the adjectives on the Johari Window based on awareness.
Here‘s a summary of how to place the adjectives::
Arena – Adjectives selective by participant and peers are placed in Arena.
Facade – Adjectives selected by participant only are placed in Facade.
19
Blind Spot – Adjectives selected by peers only are placed in Blind Spot.
Unknown – Adjectives not selected by anybody are placed in unknown.
Adjectives
Here‘s a list of the positive adjectives commonly used in the Johari Window exercise (of course
there are negative ones as well):
Able Accepting Adaptable Bold Brave Calm Caring Cheerful Clever Complex Confident Dependable Dignified Energetic Extroverted Friendly Giving Happy Helpful Idealistic
Independent Ingenious Intelligent Introverted Kind Knowledgeable Logical Loving Mature Modest Nervous Observant Organized Patient Powerful Proud Quiet Reflective Relaxed Religious
Responsive Searching Self-assertive Self-Conscious Sensible Sentimental Shy Silly Spontaneous Sympathetic Tense Trustworthy Warm Wise Witty
Unit IV
The Two Dollar Game Prof. Mary Rowe, MIT The Two Dollar Game is the opening game in
Negotiation and Conflict Management. It was developed in order to illustrate some basic tools of
negotiation theory, in the simplest possible game. Major topics include: • The nature of
competition—―distributive‖ or ―win-lose‖ bargaining—in which the gain of one person is the
loss of another. This kind of bargaining is contrasted with collaborative (also known as
―integrative‖ or ―win-win‖) bargaining in which both parties win. In real life it can be difficult to
illustrate pure win-lose bargaining, because true win-lose situations and pure win-win situations
are relatively rare. (Most negotiations are actually ―mixed motive‖ bargaining, including both
distributive and integrative elements. Pure win-lose bargaining is rare in part because intangible
elements like ―relationship‖ enter into most negotiations. Pure win-win is rare because resources
are scarce). The Two Dollar game therefore illustrates all three strategies in negotiations. The
game initially appears to be pure win-lose. But because of secret instructions, and the nature of
repeat negotiations with the same person, the game will become a mixed motive game, or even
integrative, in the last two rounds, if players trade money for intangible benefits. • The concept
of a ―bargaining range‖ which can be negative, if there is no room for settlement—or positive, if
there is room for settlement. It also introduces the idea of a Resistance Point or a ―Reservation
20
Point‖ (RP—the point at which a person will either stop bargaining, or move their RP to achieve
a settlement. The idea of the RP also introduces the idea of a fallback position or BATNA—the
Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement, since this best alternative usually defines where the
RP will be. And it introduces the idea of a ―target‖—the amount that a person wishes to get in
the process of bargaining.
• Major strategies that people adopt in negotiations: Competition, Collaboration, Avoidance,
Compromise, Accommodation, and Revenge. These strategies are the same as those we teach in
the negotiation theory model, and the first five are also in the Thomas Kilman Questionnaire. •
How a player might be able to ―diagnose‖ his or her ownnatural strategies in negotiation
(strengths in strategic play and also strategic weaknesses). People who instinctively love the
game (and many students do love this game) usually have strong Competitive skills. Some
players easily Compromise ---in fact they will do this even if they are told not to. Those who
instinctively hate the game may have high Avoidance or Accommodation scores in the Thomas
Kilman Questionnaire. People who ―escape‖ the game and break the rules in order to create side
deals often have Collaborative skills. And people who are vengeful on the third round begin to
understand the Revenge strategy. One can also possibly learn something about the natural
strategies of the other player by observing how they play this game. The game is, thus, a quick
diagnostic, in conjunction with the Thomas Kilman Questionnaire, for neophytes to learn their
natural skills and vulnerabilities. • An understanding of why ―splitting the difference‖ is not the
only way to divide what is on the table, and why it may or may not be the best way, in real life. •
The importance of intangibles (such as relationship, trust, friendly feelings) as well as tangibles
(in this case money) as sources of value in a negotiation. • The huge importance, in real life, of
repeated interactions with the same person—in building or losing a good relationship. (We do
not usually bargain just once with the same person. We often interact with the same person more
than once. This means that even a simple game of dividing two dollars, in what is supposed to be
a win-lose game, is not in fact purely competitive. Because of the effect of successive
interactions, positive and negative feelings become part of the intangibles that are won or lost in
the interaction.) • The fact that one‘s strategy is not the same as one‘s style and demeanor. (One
can be very competitive and very charming, or collaborative and aggressive, or competitive and
aggressive, etc.) • The importance of ethics in negotiations --- how comfortable am I with
making up a story, and how do I feel about a negotiations partner who lies or threatens?
*********** Here is how it works. The class is divided into pairs. Every pair has a General
Instruction, to divide $2 between the two players in the pair. They are instructed that the game is
pure win-lose—no side deals or subterfuges are allowed. Although the players do not know this
at the beginning, they will play the game three times. The first and second time they change
partners. But the third time they are suddenly told they will play again with the same partner.
Players naturally first think, ―This is easy, we will just divide the two dollars in half. But each
also has a Secret Instruction. The Secret Instructions tilt each player toward competition,
accommodation, or compromise. The Secret Instructions deal with intangibles (my reputation)
and tangibles (the amount of money that the player must win). Some Secret Instructions also deal
with style and demeanor. (In addition, some students, although breaking the rules, will come up
with collaborative side deals). Debriefing the game after the first round: In some pairs there is a
negative bargaining range because the players have each been told to get more than $1. In some
pairs there is a positive bargaining range because the ―targets‖ add up to less than $2. This
situation illustrates the idea of bargaining ranges, reservation points (their BATNAs) and targets,
and the reactions of the students will also help them diagnose their natural strategies, as spelled
out above. After the second round: The second round deals with intangibles. Here the Secret
21
Instructions deal with style, and intangible values such as one‘s reputation or distrust of the
Other. This round also introduces the idea of common tactics associated with common strategies.
For example one instruction requires the player to speak almost not at all—a very competitive
tactic. After the third round: The third round is a reprise of both tangible and intangible factors in
negotiation. It also serves to show the importance of a previous interaction with the same person.
In some pairs a player will deal kindly with an Other who dealt kindly in Round Two. In some
pairs there will be an impulse towards revenge.
The Two Dollar Game thus efficiently introduces some major elements of negotiation theory. It
is debriefed in a journal written by each player (later read and commented upon by the
professor). The player is instructed to notice what can be learned about oneself, and also about
others. Players are regularly surprised to find that some people love the game (or hate it), as
distinguished from their own reactions, and are regularly surprised that that are several available
negotiation strategies. (Most neophytes are familiar with only one or two strategies). People are
regularly surprised at the importance of a previous negotiation. Many students are surprised at
the amount of emotion engendered by an obviously simplistic game. This last is an important
point because of the real-life importance of emotions in negotiation. The game is easily debriefed
a second time, later on, in terms of Sources of Power, a set of theoretical ideas introduced in the
following class. For example, rewards, sanctions, force and the threat of force, relationship,
BATNA, moral authority, and commitment power can all play a role in the Two Dollar Game.
Students also regularly and instinctively ―invent‖ legitimate authority, expertise and information
power to bolster their stories.
UNIT V:
Knot or No Knot
I use a problem solving initiative called ―knot or no knot‖. If facilitated correctly it‘s a very
powerful exercise. Out of sight of the group place a length of rope on the ground in a pile. My
rope is about 20′ long. I use a two colored rope to make it a little more difficult. The object is for
the group to decide whether, when the pull the ends of the rope will there be a knot or no knot.
Before I allow them to closely examine the rope I ask them to come up with a consequence that
the whole group must do if they guess wrong. Also the decision of the group must be unanimous.
Then the fun begins. Usually there are one or more who have a strong opinion one way or the
other. Those are the ones I focus on. I‘ve had the group get a unanimous decision by vote and
then ask someone who caved why they changed. If questioned I have actually had the entire
group turn their decision around. I will also ask that person who went against their strong
opinion what they would do if I made them leader of the group and their decision was the final
one.
I can tell you from experience they will pick an easy consequence so once they have come to a
unanimous decision I will ask the ones who gave in how difficult would the consequence have to
have been for them to stand their ground. Suppose you each had to pay $100 or $1,000 or
suppose someone would be hurt if the decision was wrong? There is a lot y ou can do with this
but it‘s a very telling exercise when it comes to conflict resolution. Posted online by Larry Riggs
Case studies
Unit I
Cross functional teams at kodak
22
Kodak has always recognized the importance of teams and effective teamwork in its
organization. It believes that teams help an organization gain customer focus, improve work
efficiency, achieve successful restructuring and reengineering of work processes, and foster
a spirit of cooperation and collaboration within the organization.
Forming cross-functional teams was just another effort on the part of Kodak's management
to improve the overall efficiency of the organization. In Kodak's cross-functional teams,
people from departments across the organization pooled their ideas to improve the various
work processes and operational flows in the organizational structure. By forming such
teams, Kodak brought together the skills and ideas of employees working in different
departments of the organization. This enhanced the ability of the organization to solve
problems and led to better decision-making.
The cross functional teams established at Kodak were successful:
• In building a shared vision, and developing shared values and principles
• In creating a focus on customers
• In restructuring and re-engineering work practices
• In identifying the best ways of operating
• In reducing operational costs
• In assessing business risks and opportunities
• In dealing with issues in accounting and administration and
• In solving problems i
Unit II
Leadership and Management Case Study
Laura is the associate director of a nonprofit agency that provides assistance to children and
families. She is the head of a department that focuses on evaluating the skill-building programs
the agency provides to families. She reports directly to the agency leadership. As a whole, the
agency has been cautious in hiring this year because of increased competition for federal grant
funding. However, they have also suffered high staff turnover. Two directors, three key research
staff, and one staff person from the finance department have left.
Laura has a demanding schedule that requires frequent travel; however, she supervises two
managers who in turn are responsible for five staff members each. Both managers have been
appointed within the last six months.
Manager 1: Kelly has a specific background in research. She manages staff who provide
research support to another department that delivers behavioral health services to youth.
Kelly supports her staff and is very organized; however, she often takes a very black and
white view of issues. Upper level leadership values Kelly‘s latest research on the
therapeutic division‘s services. Kelly is very motivated and driven and expects the same
from her staff.
Manager 2: Linda has a strong background in social science research and evaluation. She
manages staff that work on different projects within the agency. She is known as a
problem solver and is extremely supportive of her staff. She is very organized and has a
23
wealth of experience in evaluation of family services. Linda is very capable and can
sometimes take on too much.
The managers are sensing that staff are becoming overworked as everyone takes on increased
responsibilities due to high staff turnover. Staff have also mentioned that Laura‘s "glass half-
empty" conversation style leaves them feeling dejected. In addition, Laura has not shared
budgets with her managers, so they are having difficulty appropriately allocating work to staff.
Laura said she has not received sufficient information from the finance department to complete
the budgets. The finance department said they have sent her all the information they have
available.
As staff become distressed, the managers are becoming frustrated. They feel like they are unable
to advocate for their staff or solve problems without key information like the departmental
budget.
Discussion Questions:
How can Laura most effectively use both management and leadership skills in her role as
associate director? What combination of the two do you think would work best in this setting?
Click here to see our suggestions
What steps could be taken to build staff confidence?
What advice would you give Laura on improving her leadership skills and to the managers on
improving their management skills?
Which leadership style do you think a leader would need to be effective in this situation
Unit III
Case Study - Cascading Team and Leadership Development
When Pharmacia was purchased by Pfizer the manufacturing site in Kalamazoo, Michigan
became the largest manufacturing facility of the largest drug maker in the world. A
changing organization and changing company structures created the opportunity for the
development of many new leadership teams throughout the site. The Director of Injectable
Operations for Pfizer Global Manufacturing, Kalamazoo site had the challenge of
assembling a new leadership team and creating an organization that would be successful
given the new business context.
24
The Solution - The Director started from scratch, hand picking the managers that would be
members of her new leadership team paying special attention to skill sets and team
chemistry and less on experience in leading within the "old organization." Because of her
belief in the enhanced effectiveness of high performing teams and her passion around the
development of others she was committed to her leadership team functioning like a true
team.
Crux Move Consulting was enlisted to partner with her to design and deliver a process that
would meet the following objectives:
Define and embed a culture of teaming within the leadership team, the Injectable
Operations organization and in their collaboration with key enabling functions
(specifically with the Quality organization)
Assist the leadership team in fully understanding, owning and sharing the responsibility to
lead the entire organization.
Assist the managers in really utilizing each other as trusted sources of support in their
ongoing development as team members and leaders.
Provide periodic support to ensure that cultural norms are maintained.
Crux Move led the team through their multi-phase team development process high lighted
below. Key to the process is the relationship and alignment between Crux Move and the
team leader.
Team Leader Coaching
Pre-program Assessments, Meetings and Interviews
Shared Exploration & Experiential Training Session (3 days offsite)
Follow Up - integrating learning into the work and the culture
Team Leader Post Program Consultation and Support
The Results - Upon completion of the leadership team's development process results were
evaluated by comparing pre and post assessments of team values, thinking and behaviors
along with open team interviews regarding the changes members were seeing and
feeling. The results were overwhelmingly positive and the changes were being embedded
as part of the foundation of the ongoing culture. With the strength of the initial results
support was made available for each of the 8 managers, if they chose, to take their own
teams through Crux Move's multi-phase team development process. All managers chose
to complete the process with their teams showing similar positive pre and post comparison
results.
In addition it was noted that as each leader went through their own process of development
with their team it continued to have an upward positive impact on the teaming at the
25
leadership team level as well as impacting the relationships across team boundaries
throughout the organization. Crux Move Consulting's partnership with the leadership of
the Injectable Operations for over 3 ½ years has included support at key developmental
times, partnering with the managers in developing their teams, leadership coaching and
vision work, and ongoing team self assessment against benchmarked data.
Unit IV
Negotiating With Walmart Buyers
Summary
Analyzes a series of successful deal-making strategies that can be useful when negotiating with a
powerful buyer.
Walmart, the world‘s largest retailer, sold $482.1 billion worth of goods in 2016. With its single-
minded focus on ―EDLP‖ (everyday low prices) and the power to make or break, a partnership
with Walmart is either the Holy Grail or the kiss of death, depending on the perspective.
There are numerous media accounts of the corporate monolith running its suppliers into the
ground. What about those who manage to survive, and thrive, while dealing with the classic
hardball negotiator?
26
Sarah Talley And Tom Muccio
In ―Sarah Talley and Frey Farms Produce: Negotiating with Walmart‖ and ―Tom Muccio:
Negotiating the P&G Relationship with Walmart,‖ HBS professor Jim Sebenius and Research
Associate Ellen Knebel show two very different organizations both undertaking negotiations
with Walmart. The cases are part of a series that involve hard bargaining situations.
―The concept of win-win bargaining is a good and powerful message,‖ Sebenius says, ―but a lot
of our students and executives face negotiation counterparts who aren‘t interested in playing by
those rules. So, what happens when you encounter someone with a great deal of power, like
Walmart, who is also the ultimate non-negotiable partner?‖
One case details how P&G executive Tom Muccio pioneers a new supplier-retailer partnership
between P&G and Walmart. The new relationship was built on proximity (Muccio relocated to
Walmart‘s turf in Arkansas) and growing trust (both sides eventually eliminated elaborate legal
contracts in favor of Letters of Intent).
The relationship was focused on establishing a joint vision and problem-solving process. This
included information sharing and generally moving away from the ―lowest common
denominator‖ pricing issues that had defined their interactions previously. From 1987, when
Muccio initiated the changes, to 2003, shortly before his retirement, P&G‘s sales to Walmart
grew from $350 million to $7.8 billion.
―There are obvious differences between P&G and a much smaller entity like Frey Farms,‖
Sebenius notes. ―Walmart could clearly live without Frey Farms, but it‘s pretty hard to live
without Tide and Pampers.‖
Sarah Meets Goliath
Sarah Talley was 19 in 1997 when she first began negotiating with Walmart‘s buyers for her
family farm‘s pumpkins and watermelons. Like Muccio, Talley confronted some of the same
hardball price challenges. Also like Muccio, she acquired a deep understanding of the Walmart
culture while finding ―new money‖ in the supply chain through innovative tactics.
27
For example, Frey Farms used school buses ($1,500 each) instead of tractors ($12,000 each) as a
cheaper and faster way to transport melons to the warehouse.
Talley also was skillful at negotiating a coveted co-management supplier agreement with
Walmart. She showed how Frey Farms could share the responsibility of managing inventory
levels and sales. This would ultimately save customers money while improving their own
margins.
―Two sides in this sort of negotiation will always differ on price,‖ Sebenius observes. ―However,
if that conflict is the centerpiece of their interaction, then it‘s a bad situation. If they‘re trying to
develop the customer, the relationship, and sales, the price piece will be one of many
points, most of which they‘re aligned on.‖
Research Associate Knebel points out that while Tom Muccio‘s approach to Walmart was
pioneering for its time, many other companies have since followed P&G‘s lead. These
companies have enjoyed their own versions of success with the mega-retailer. Getting a ground-
level view of how two companies achieved those positive outcomes illustrates the story-within-a-
story of implementing corporate change.
―Achieving that is where macro concepts, micro imperatives, and managerial skill really come
together,‖ says Sebenius. The payoffs—as Muccio and Talley discover—are well worth the
effort.
Sarah Talley‘s Key Negotiation Principles
When you have a problem, when there‘s something you engage in with Walmart that requires
agreement so that it becomes a negotiation, the first advice is to think in partnership terms.
Really focus on a common goal—for example, getting costs out. Ask questions. Don‘t make
demands or statements. Rather, ask if you can improve on anything. If the relationship with
Walmart is truly a partnership, negotiating to resolve differences should focus on long-term
mutual partnership gains.
28
Don‘t spend time griping. Be problem solvers instead. Approach Walmart by saying, ―Let‘s
work together and drive costs down and produce it so much cheaper you don‘t have to replace
me because if you work with me, I could do it better.‖
Learn from and lobby with people and their partners who have credibility, and with people
having problems in the field.
Don‘t ignore small issues or let things fester.
Try not to let Walmart become more than 20% of your company‘s business.
It‘s hard to negotiate with well-trained buyers who know that their company could put your
company out of business.
Never go into a meeting without a clear negotiation agenda. Make good use of the buyers‘ face
time. Leave with answers. Don‘t make small talk. Get to the point; their time is valuable. Bring
underlying issues to the surface. Attack issues head-on and find resolution face to face.
Trying to bluff Walmart buyers is never a good idea. There is usually someone willing to
undercut you to gain the business. Treat the relationship as a marriage. Communication
and negotiated compromises are key.
Don‘t take for granted that just because the buyer is young that the buyer doesn‘t know what
they are talking about. Don‘t assume that there will be an easy sell. Most young buyers are very
ambitious to move up within the company. Young buyers can be some of the toughest, most
educated buyers you will encounter. Know your product all the way from the production
standpoint to the end use. Chances are your buyer will, and your buyer will likely expect you to
be even more knowledgeable.
Unit V
Case Study #1 Julia just finished a certification appointment for Maria, a participant who has
cerebral palsy. Maria has some difficulty speaking and uses a wheelchair for mobility.As they
head toward the door, Maria says something to Julia. Julia replies, ―I‘m sorry, I didn‘t
understand what you said.‖ Maria repeats her comment. Julia looks confused and says, ―One
more time please?‖ Maria repeats her comment in a louder voice. Looking a bit flustered, Julia
says, ―Okay, well, maybe we can talk about that next time.‖ Julia reaches for the door and says,
―Let me get that for you.‖ Maria, at the same moment, angrily pushes the button for the
29
automatic door and rolls away. Julia walks back to her office feeling embarrassed and that she is
no good at working with disabled participants.
Questions to consider:
1. What could Julia have done differently to avoid or minimize this conflict? What
Julialearn from this experience? (Hint – try using a Creative Response)
1. Write the dialogue for the next time Julia sees Maria at the clinic. Julia says What
might work better? ―I‘m sorry, I didn‘t understand what you said.‖ Julia looks
confused and says, ―One more time please?‖
2. Case Studies for Conflict Resolution: A key element in civil rights training Wisconsin
WIC 2 Julia says What might work better? Looking a bit flustered, Julia says, ―Okay,
well, maybe we can talk about that next time.‖ Julia reaches for the door and says,
―Let me g
Mrs. Ortiz checks in to the WIC clinic for her appointment. She is Spanish-speaking. Mrs.
Ortiz has brought her children with her to the clinic. While in the waiting room before the
session begins, the children are noisy and begin running through the waiting area. Rebecca
is trying to work at the front desk and is getting frustrated. She begins speaking in English
to another WIC employee, loudly enough so that some people in the waiting room can hear
what she is saying. She is overheard saying, ―These people (referring to Mrs. Ortiz) don‘t
know how to control their kids.‖ Rebecca tells the participant, ―If you don‘t get control of
your children, you‘ll have to reschedule your appointment for another day and get your
checks then.‖ Mrs. Ortiz leaves the clinic without getting her checks. Mrs. Ortiz later calls
the state WIC office and states that she was discriminated against and was denied WIC
services. Mrs. Ortiz says that Rebecca thought she couldn‘t understand English, but in fact
she heard what Rebecca was saying about her family.
Questions to consider: 1. What are some assumptions that people make about WIC
participants? Can you think of other examples where these assumptions could lead to
conflict?
2. Write a new statement for Rebecca to use when talking with Mrs. Ortiz about her
children
30
Course Assessment Report
Batch: 2018-20
Academic Year/Sem: 2019
Course Name:
Course Number:
Course Attainment (75% of Direct + 25% of Indirect) on a scale of 1 to 3.
Remarks and suggestions:
Course Coordinator
31
Direct Course Assessment Sheet (As per IonCudos)
a) Internal Examination
Course assessment sheet Ass1
Hall Ticket No S1 S2 TOT
1
2
3
Course assessment sheet Mid1
Hall
Ticket
No
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 TOT
1
2
3
Course assessment sheet Ass2
Hall Ticket No S1 S2 TOT
1
2
3
Course assessment sheet Mid2
Hall
Ticket
No
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 TOT
1
2
32
3
b) External Examination
Hall Ticket No Total Marks
CSP Rubric
CSP Rubric
33
S.No. Criteria LEVEL ( Level: 3-Excellent Level: 2-Good Level: 1-Poor)
1 O
ral
Com
mu
nic
ati
on
3 Student speaks in phase with the given topic confidently using Audio-
Visual aids. Vocabulary is good
2 Student speaking without proper planning, fair usage of Audio-Visual
aids. Vocabulary is not good
1 Student speaks vaguely not in phase with the given topic. No
synchronization among the talk and Visual Aids
2
Wri
tin
g S
kil
ls
3
Proper structuring of the document with relevant subtitles, readability of
document is high with correct use of grammar. Work is genuine and not
published anywhere else
2 Information is gathered without continuity of topic, sentences were not
framed properly. Few topics are copied from other documents
1 Information gathered was not relevant to the given task, vague
collection of sentences. Content is copied from other documents
3
Soci
al
an
d
Eth
ical
Aw
are
nes
s
3 Student identifies most potential ethical or societal issues and tries to
provide solutions for them discussing with peers
2 Student identifies the societal and ethical issues but fails to provide any
solutions discussing with peers
1 Student makes no attempt in identifying the societal and ethical issues
4
Con
ten
t
Kn
ow
led
g
e
3 Student uses appropriate methods, techniques to model and solve the
problem accurately
2 Student tries to model the problem but fails to solve the problem
1 Student fails to model the problem and also fails to solve the problem
5
Stu
den
t
Part
icip
ati
o
n
3 Listens carefully to the class and tries to answer questions confidently
2 Listens carefully to the lecture but doesn‘t attempt to answer the
questions
1 Student neither listens to the class nor attempts to answer the questions
6
Tec
hn
ical
an
d
an
aly
tica
l
Sk
ills
3
The program structure is well organized with appropriate use of
technologies and methodology. Code is easy to read and well
documented. Student is able to implement the algorithm producing
accurate results
2
Program structure is well organized with appropriate use of
technologies and methodology. Code is quite difficult to read and not
properly documented. Student is able to implement the algorithm
providing accurate results.
1
Program structure is not well organized with mistakes in usage of
appropriate technologies and methodology. Code is difficult to read and
student is not able to execute the program
7
Pra
ctic
al
Kn
ow
l
edg
e
3 Independently able to write programs to strengthen the concepts
covered in theory
34
2 Independently able to write programs but not able to strengthen the
concepts learned in theory
1 Not able to write programs and not able to strengthen the concepts
learned in theory
8
Un
der
stan
din
g
of
Man
an
gem
ent 3
Student uses appropriate methods, techniques to model and solve the
problem accurately in the context of multidisciplinary projects
2 Student tries to model the problem but fails to solve the problem in the
context of multidisciplinary projects
1 Student fails to model the problem and also fails to solve the problem in
the context of multidisciplinary projects
35
Indirect Course Assessment Sheet
Tools:
a) Case Study
S.No. Hall Ticket Number Rubric Assessment
1
2
3
b) Course End Survey Report
36
Add-on (Guest Lecture/Video Lecture/Certification/Training Program/Poster Presentation….
etc.)
3. Poster Presentation
4. Rank Sheet Certification