Knowledge in Organisational Behavior
Ross Abernathy And Frontier Bank Case
A struggling bank and a tough choice of forming a team, how does the team leader decide to go forth , keeping in mind different organisational behaviours? Ross abernathy and the case solution.
Hirok Kalita
Ross Abernathy Case
A story of struggling bank pacing to find it's way through the various options available to it.
Anukriti Goel
Frontier bank case
Case study of Ross abernathy
Executive Summary of Frontier bank
Executive summary and situation analysis of Frontier case
Sparsha Panda
management thought
management thought
Hindol Hazra
emotions
ppt on emotions
OB_case National Instruments Limited
Organisational Behaviour Case analysis of National Instruments Limited.
Hariprasad Balu
OB_Case Analysis_Data Vision company
Case Analysis_Data Vision company
Kajal Modi
About Coaching After Losing the Ability to speak
I was diagnosed with ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease) in 2001. By 2003 I could no longer speak intelligibly or walk, and any muscle control became more difficult as the disease progressed. I knew I couldn’t keep facilitating team meetings and giving strategy presentations — staples of the consulting services I had provided for many years. But I still loved my work and needed to stay active, and my clients were open to trying a new approach, so I began managing my coaching relationships exclusively through written dialogue in instant messages, emails, and other electronic documents. This started out as a tentative experiment. My clients and I were skeptical at best about how it would go. We assumed that the lack of in-person interaction would get in the way of open dialogue. But that hasn’t been the case — at all. In fact, we’ve discovered several unexpected advantages. I’ll describe those and share some practical guidelines so that others can reap them in a variety of coaching contexts — from leadership development to organizational consulting to professional mentoring — even if they aren’t similarly constrained by a handicap. Why Do It? As you’d imagine, the written communication enhances accessibility, because people can fire off an email and then schedule a follow-up chat session if one is needed. The gains are both tangible (quicker feedback and action for time-sensitive problem solving) and intangible (the increased confidence and peace of mind that come with feeling immediately heard and validated). But there are some surprising benefits, too. For one, coaching through writing can increase psychological safety, which leads to greater disclosure and builds trust. Before my ALS diagnosis, it often took two to three months of meetings and phone calls to establish a close connection. Now clients open up more quickly. In coaching various managing directors’ teams at a large investment bank, for example, I found that people shared personal stories (some funny, some embarrassing, some gut-wrenching), discussed thorny problems they were having with their managers (often my senior clients), and raised sensitive career management questions — all within a month of weekly instant-message sessions. Clients consistently tell me that written dialogue makes it easier to be candid about what they’re grappling with. Without someone looking at them, they feel freer to express themselves and less concerned about criticism. Communicating entirely through writing also inhibits stereotyping on the basis of physical attractiveness, how people speak and present themselves, their body language, and so on. Even when I am told that a new client is unlikable or unapproachable or downright negative, I can build a strong connection. I attribute this largely to limited interpersonal noise. Instant messaging (IM) approaches 100% content (though emojis and writing styles try to approximate body language and vocal inflection). All around, there’s less “packaging” to skew your or your client’s perception of the messages exchanged. Though we do judge others on how they write, a casual medium like IM can mitigate this. We make allowances for people in informal written interaction. In my experience, coaching through writing can help people manage highly charged emotions. Take, for instance, my IM exchanges with a technology manager at a financial services firm. He wanted to advance in his career, but he thought his stormy relationship with his boss was holding him back. We needed to develop a strategy for how he could better engage with his manager and highlight the value of his contributions. But to get into a constructive frame of mind, he had to vent first, and IM turned out to be a great tool for that. The act of writing his frustrations down and looking at the words on the screen seemed to help him move past them. It was almost like a journaling exercise: I read and acknowledged how he felt, but without judging it. (“Listening” in writing also enabled more patience on my part than if we had met in person.) When he finished unloading, he was ready to get to work.And many of us do a better job of listening in writing (as long as we’re making an effort), both in real time and upon reflection. Without the visual or auditory distractions — or the pressure — of having the other person in the room, we can better focus on what’s being said. I initially expected that instant messaging might be too slow. But clients say they like having more time to listen, absorb, think, and respond during a conversation, even in cultures that prize speed and urgency. It makes the communication more precise, which prevents confusion and misunderstandings later on and speeds up alignment for effective problem solving. Of course, both the coach and the client must be comfortable with responses like “hmm, am thinking” and “can you clarify?” during IM sessions, but that comes with practice as mutual respect and trust grow. Finally, there’s the impact on accountability: Research shows that we’re more likely to achieve our goals when we write them down. The power of written declaration may seem fleeting in instant messaging, but the notes reflect present “objective truth” and make it harder to later forget or distort what was said. Clients tell me they actually welcome these conversations that feel more on the record, because they want to make progress on their goals, and the “record” can help measure that. Every conversation is automatically documented, so details are more easily recalled without the kind of follow-up, “just to recap” notes that can make people feel misunderstood or criticized. In addition, as clients have pointed out, the written record also holds me accountable for any ground rules we’ve established and follow-up commitments I’ve made. How to Do It Whether you simply want to increase the amount of coaching you do through writing to reap these benefits or you’ve decided to go all-in because of life circumstances, as I’ve done, here are some principles I’ve gleaned over the past 14 years. Though these basic guidelines can be applied to all business relationships, they’ve especially helped me in my remote work with clients. Signal open access and flexibility. On the front end of any coaching relationship, it is essential to convey credible commitment and caring. I do this in various ways: Before a first session, I send out my bio and a proposed agenda, and then allow plenty of time for a new client to ask about my background, my perspective on coaching, and my experience in using IM. I invite people to ask personal questions, too. Next, I say that I am available anytime, to signal my commitment to a needs-driven (versus schedule-driven) arrangement that enables timely feedback, problem solving, action commitments, and learning. Coaching through writing makes it easier to deliver on that promise, and making myself always available provides peace of mind for the client. The main message I’m sending is “Hey, I am here for you and totally committed to you.” I always want to know if a client needs me (or thinks they do) beyond our scheduled meeting times. If a pattern of problematic dependence on me were to emerge (it never has), IM and other written communication would help me identify that pattern and address it. Manage confidentiality. I’ve observed that clients worry less about confidentiality issues when they’re coached through written exchanges, and I think that has a lot to do with setting clear expectations. I never make a blanket promise to keep mum. Rather, at the beginning of an engagement I ask the client to trust my judgment to share anything that I see as a potential win for them. But I also say that if the client wants something specific to be kept between us, I’ll honor that request. You might think people would feel vulnerable in an arrangement like that, but most say they are comfortable giving me latitude to make judgment calls, and they become more and more so as the relationship develops. They know it’s up to them to flag anything that isn’t meant to be shared, and they do so. Manage the feedback flow. As both a team consultant and a coach to individual team members, I help people build strong interpersonal and work relationships. In the process, I learn what they think about one another. So from the outset, I make it clear that part of my role is to improve feedback flow within the group, because that will allow for more team cohesion and individual growth and development. Since much of what people share with me is sensitive, however, I’m very careful about what I convey and to whom. Issues can be politically hot and even explosive if mishandled. When colleagues write positive things about one another, I pass that feedback along verbatim, because the emotional impact is stronger that way. When the comments are negative, my interventions can be quite different. Sometimes I keep information to myself as important context, especially for dealing with conflicts that may come up later. And sometimes I “translate” emotionally evocative criticisms, framing them more constructively in order to diminish potential defensiveness and maximize learning. If the culture is one where people view their teammates negatively and are reluctant to speak up on their own, I may try to serve as a catalyst for “discussing the undiscussable,” to use organizational behavior theorist Chris Argyris’s phrase, by urging the critical team member to have a direct discussion with the other party. I may even offer to facilitate an exchange through three-way instant messaging. Hone your written voice. Informal language in writing can build camaraderie, but only if it feels natural. Imagine in your head how the words will sound to the receiver, and then write how you would speak them. It takes time to develop this skill and to do the extra thinking, but it forces you to empathize with people, and they’ll pick up on that. Spelling and mechanics don’t matter much in instant messaging, because such mistakes are easily forgiven and forgotten in real-time chats — but in emails and other formal documents, attending to those details is essential for credibility. In the early stages of a coaching engagement, I usually stick with descriptive (rather than evaluative) language. New clients are generally more receptive to “This is what I see happening” than to “This is what I think you should be doing differently,” and it shows them, by example, how to think less judgmentally and more objectively. Once you’ve built a stronger relationship, you’ll have more latitude in offering constructive criticism; people will be less likely to perceive it as an attack. Still, ask permission first, and perhaps frame it as “If I were in your shoes, I might…” Written criticism can linger in misunderstanding; once it is typed, it is harder to take back than a spoken comment. The communications discipline will be well worth the effort. Get comfortable with personal disclosure. This may be the most important part of developing and maintaining an open, trusting relationship. We know from social exchange theory and studies on interpersonal communication that if an individual openly discloses thoughts and feelings to others, the other party is more likely to open up too. As I mentioned earlier, the perceived distance of coaching through writing doesn’t put up walls; it actually allows for freer dialogue, with fewer boundaries — which further promotes trust. The coach and client may engage in a broader, more robust search for root causes of problems, for example, or they may communicate more candidly about what the client needs to do. Plus, a productive relationship of disclosure requires authenticity — on both sides. If you model that as a coach, and it’s reciprocated, clients can then transfer what they have learned from you to all kinds of situations and relationships, both business and personal.
Akansha Misra
As Your Company Evolves, What Happens to Employees
When my company was young, we worked with two contractors who played key roles in client services. As we grew and defined our core values — singling out accountability as our top priority — it became clear that these contractors did not meet our newly defined standards. They were often difficult to catch on the phone, noncommittal about deadlines, and understandably had more of an individual, not team-based, approach to their work. Because they were such strong performers and clients liked working with them, I tolerated their behavior. However, when other team members pointed out the double standard in expectations, I realized that I had let the situation go on for too long, inadvertently placing our managers in a no-win situation. Ultimately, we decided to cut ties with the contractors — not because their work wasn’t strong, but because they weren’t aligned with our values. When companies evolve at a rapid pace, often people cannot keep up. Some individuals who fit our company in its infancy became a weaker fit over time. They may have had difficulty keeping up with our company’s growth rate and the requirements of their evolving roles. Often, I doubled down on an untenable position to keep an employee on because I didn’t understand how much harm the wrong fit could cause — especially when a person had been with us for so long. How We Define “Fit” Companies turn down talented people every day when the fit isn’t right. According to the Jobvite Recruiter Nation Report 2016, 60% of recruiters say culture fit is of utmost importance in hiring decisions. The wrong fit can be disastrous, but when the employee fits the role perfectly, the whole team benefits. Much of the dialogue around company fit assumes that it’s a concrete concept: Round pegs go in round holes and, once they’ve found the right spot, stay there. Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. What if a round peg develops sharp corners, or a round hole expands over time? People and the needs they fulfill evolve constantly, especially in small companies that grow very quickly. A good fit isn’t just about putting the right person in the right seat, but about putting them there at the right time. One of the things that separates good leaders from great ones is the ability to recognize when those three factors are out of alignment and to act upon that information, particularly in the case of a loyal, long-term employee. How to Take Control of Fit You don’t have to sit on the sidelines and watch your company’s culture evolve away from your best employees. With the right processes in place to hire and develop talent, you can retain your high performers without sacrificing your culture. These three strategies can help you create a positive environment and develop employees who prosper within it. Implement personality tests to discover purpose. No test reveals everything about a person, but learning about what drives someone can help you see where they would fit best in your company. One of the tests we use at Acceleration Partners is designed to find a person’s “why” — their primary purpose in business and life. When we first started giving these personality tests, we discovered one manager had hired an entire team of people with purposes identical to her own. Unintentional bias in the hiring process had created a team with overlapping strengths and weaknesses, and at the root of this was a reliance on trust over a holistic view of the person’s ability to execute in a specific role. To avoid this situation, we now exercise caution when teammates advocate for candidates who score alike on personality tests. While there are no right or wrong types, having too many people with similar personalities tends to lead to problems and groupthink. Distributing different personality types across hiring committees is a good way to glean more-accurate assessments of candidates and limit the influence of personal bias. Rethink employee development and exits. Losing an employee is rarely positive, but the exit process can be respectful and open. Rather than feeling personally slighted by a departure, recognize that the best employees are not uniquely capable individuals — just the right people in the right seats at the right time. This situation occurs frequently in professional sports. The structure of a team shifts, and a longtime player no longer fits the mold of the new organization or the system of a new coach. Both the player and the coaches recognize the change in fit, the player leaves for a new team, the organization moves in a different direction, and everyone is amicable about the changes. Instead of treating employee departures as taboo, we embrace a concept we call mindful transition. We encourage employees to discuss their goals and plans for the future openly with their managers, even if those plans don’t mesh with their current roles or don’t involve staying with the company. Most employees leave because they feel their opportunities for growth are limited, according to iCIMS. So encouraging honest conversations helps us identify areas of opportunity we would have otherwise missed and plan for the future if an employee doesn’t intend to stay over the long term. Dealing with departures using our mindful transition process also spreads our company’s influence to other industries. When a longtime employee wanted to take on a role we didn’t have at the time, we helped him transition to a different company that we knew could use his skills. If we had tried to force him to continue with us, he would have been bored and unmotivated. Facilitating his departure not only left everyone feeling positive but also set up an ambassador for our culture at another company and added to a strong pool of alumni advocating for us in the marketplace. Recognize that experience doesn’t equal fit. According to Mark Murphy, founder and CEO of Leadership IQ, 89% of new hire failures are due to attitude, while just 11% are due to a lack of skill. All candidates need a baseline of technical skills to succeed, but the best candidates are well-rounded people whose intrinsic characteristics align organically with your company’s values. One of our core values is “excel and improve,” so we seek out candidates who embrace continual improvement and have demonstrated a commitment to lifelong learning. If they are self-aware and can demonstrate that they love learning new things, we can train them tactically on the ins and outs of the job. Many companies want to hire candidates who can come in and immediately do the job. The appeal is understandable: Experienced hires come in with the relevant knowledge and experience for the position you need filled now. But although they typically start in their positions with the necessary skills, they don’t have much growth potential. Eventually, as the company and demands grow, the needs of the positions overtake them. In contrast, less-experienced but high-aptitude hires may need more training feel and may be a bit overwhelmed in the beginning, but they have the raw ability and desire to grow with your company and adapt to the needs of the position. In my experience, the people who personify our core values outperform the ones who possess more experience but lack the right raw ability or makeup. Moreover, candidates who align with our core values actually have a higher ceiling when it comes to professional growth. Although other candidates may show up with strong experience in our industry, they don’t necessarily share our values. Leaving interviews solely up to managers who may feel pressure to get positions filled fast doesn’t always produce good results. In our organization, we take this responsibility out of their hands with a cross-functional hiring committee that helps decide what’s best for the company rather than the specific department or manager. We assign people who are comfortable challenging each other’s assumptions to hiring committees, and we always include someone who doesn’t have a stake in the outcome. Interviews revolve around the specific job requirements, in addition to the candidate’s personality. Focus too heavily on one or the other, and you may end up with someone who you really like but who can’t do the job, or someone who executes tasks well but doesn’t contribute to your culture or develop as time goes on. Fit between employee and company is not a one-time check on a list of hiring criteria; it’s a constantly evolving relationship that changes to meet the needs of the time. Don’t leave your company culture and employee fit to chance. Embrace the challenge: Seek out candidates who embody your values, and learn to let go when a fit that once was good begins to create problems.
Ananda Das
Impact of MBO on employee productivity
Methodology,analysis and challenges of MBO, MBO is widely used management system un both private and public sector settings.MBO would have a greater effect when top management commitment is high.#nmims
Rhythm Agarwalla
Freudian theory
Individual analysis according to Freud.It includes the psychoanalytic theory of personlaity by discussing components of personlaty and defence mechanisms. #nmims