Ob : All the Wrong Moves

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR-I CASE ANALYSIS all(prenominal) the Wrong Moves Submitted to Dr. Saleena Khan Asst. Professor, OB & HRM eye socket IMT, Nagpur Submitted By GROUP-1, SECTION-A Aakanksha Garg 2012001 Abhinav Aggarwal 2012007 Abhishek Gupta 2012013 Abinash Dash 2012015 Aditya Mohan 2012022 Akash Agrawal 2012029 Anant Kr Ajmera 2012040 Ankita Pandey 2012051 ingress This effort is intimately a attach to Nutrorim which was founded in 1986 by an organic granger and his wife.Nutrorim manufactures various lines of vitamins and nutritional supplements. The suit of c fatehes is ab give away the f laws in finish fashioning ferment of the familiarity. Don Rifkin is the chief(prenominal) character of the case who tries to correct the decisivenesss pick out by the club at the time of crisis or otherwisewise. The employees of the corporation give mixed and different reviews everyplace the same tidingss. Don the chief executive officer of the come with tried to find out t he feedbacks with the do of consultants. While going by dint of the case we tried to find out the main reasons for poor finish making of the companion and tried to find the solutions for the same.Background Nutrorim which was founded in 1986 by an organic farmer and his wife had been at the devolve of its field. Nutrorim s overlaps had gained national perplexity and the confederacys organic, performance-enhancing supplement pulverize Charge Up had g star through the roof due to an endorsement by a famous Olympic athlete. This authorize the Nutrorim to hire hundreds of new employees, expand its overlapion facilities and acquire two vitamin firms. Nutrorim went reality in the year 1997 and by 2002 Changeup was the silk hat-selling performance-enhancing sports powder on the market.Don Rifkin who joined Nutrorim as CEO in 1989 had tried hard to rear a happy, participatory, democratic culture at Nutrorim. Steve Ford was the head of the R&D section of Nutrorim. But during t he away sensation year, Nutrorim had suffered from a spate of bad decisions. A consultant was hired to review the gilds decision making answeres that had idiosyncratic interviews with senior conductors. Objectives * Understanding the importance of target sphere of influence analysis and oversight at strategical level decision making in an organisation Necessity to feel a firm and clear hierarchy in spite of appearance an organisation for strong decision making in face of crisis. * Understand emergency for a Leader to identify the expertness that his subordinates gravel and couching them responsibilities accordingly for political campaign an organisation effectively. * Understanding the ineffectiveness arising out of decision making change in an organisation if it is too democratic at strategic level. Analysis The said phoner was presented with an accusation that their product was making lot sick.The companys options were to keep the potentially dangerous product on the shelves, which could turn into a law suit, or to accept the costs and do a recall. In encounter of the top managers there were huge disagreements on who should hold the most power in the decision-making process and there was little organized discussion and non all the voices were being heard. there was a lack of centralized leaders that was able to weigh all the voices and crop a more discerning decision. The delegacy members were not unified on what should in truth be through with(p).Employees in positions of power did not ask the right headers to make sophisticated decision. The decision to recall Charge Up was made under a lot of uncertainty and was the facts were not analyzed exhaustively originally taking decision. The company knew the consequences of recalling or leaving the product on the shelves. This decision was a non-programmed decision that should be made by top managers. The situation was brought to a local radio station and the company began to panic that the information would go public ruining the companys reputation. there are too many race giving their inputs and many took the accusations in someone which limited objective, productive discussions on what was the best action for the company to take. The company postulate to prepare a person or a small group of people that are able to take deposit in propagation of crisis in exhibition to manage discussions better and make the supreme decision. The leadership should be able to question or conduct research of cases touch their dilemma. The Leadership here wasnt effective in identifying the expertise of its members which at times created conflicts within the team.Solutions * Nutrorim lacked a definite project for taking actions when decisions are to be taken especially when a time was a constraint. * Don was correct when he wished to view a little democratic attack to taking decisions but relying completely on consensus resulted in beating around the chaparral too o ften and wasting a lot of time. Taking duplex perspectives of expression at a problem and purpose its solution can be done systematically by the process of one by one feedback but the last decision must rest on the C. E.O and the concerning department head as a decision taken by a majority vote may not be correct as the plain expertise of employees participating in the meeting shall be vivid (It depends on the area where the problem is arising). * In this case when Nutrorim was accuse of causing gastric problems to its customers a apropos action was imperative as the name of the brand was at stake. Calling multiple meetings was a waste of time and actions should have been taken by Don as a leader himself after sense of hearing to every ones views. He should have instructed PR Director to immediately revert to the calls she got from the media person (radio station) to let the public know that since much(prenominal) an investigation is taking place the company gives maximum pr iority to its customers health and it shall even consider a recall till the time the investigations were stainless by the health department. This action would make the public aware that the company was not trying to hide something under the carpeting and it was cooperating with the health department. A decision has to be taken with all the facts and perspectives in brain and not just taken because its to every ones taste. Ones the rationale is clear stinker the plan of action for addressing the problem at hand, the chair shall immediately ensure its timely execution. * Corporate culture was not sound. Steves behaviour towards Nora was inappropriate and his behaviour should have been condemned and sorted out by Don. Its very essential for employees to work heartily for healthy functioning of an organisation. Presence of a Knowledge department in the company keeps a record of effective fly the coop of actions taken by other companies at the time of similar crisis in the past he lps to take timely measures effectively. Learning from others helps in decision making. Theoretical Relations * leap rationality He could perceive that recalling the product is the only plan of action. He didnt explore other options. * Rational decision making He measured the options, took feedbacks from the other employees, and did a thorough study before taking a decision. Pro-active personality He takes initiatives, has decision making abilities. * Employee engagement He engages all the employees of the company in decision making process. * Workforce diversity thither is diverse workforce in the company. managerial learning * A manger should take skills of each team member and assign them responsibilities according to their areas of expertise. * Controlling power A manager should have firm look over the decision making process in the organization and should also be an effective team leader. Coordination A manager should be able to establish coordination among the employees. Th ere should not be conflicts among the employees if any indeed manager should intervene and resolve the same. * relaxation between democratic and dictatorial accession A manager should not be too democratic as strong as dictatorial in decision making. REFERENCES United States Edition , entitled organisational Behavior, 14th Edition, ISBN 9780136124016 by Robbins, Stephen P. , Judge, Timothy A. , publish by Pearson Education Inc. , publishing as Prentice Hall 2011