Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Question 1:
Comment on the approach followed by the management in creating additional positions to meet the demands of additional workload
CASE 1
1.
Unsystematic approach
Multiple managerial levels were created with an idea not to evenly distribute work, but merely for the sake of introducing hierarchy
Job Descriptions of Manager and Asst. Manager clearly indicate: Redundancy, overlap of duties, mismatched and unsystematic allocation of duties (with regard to crucial versus daily tasks) Scope of work more or less the same Lacks comparison of Seniority and Merit Lack of devising a new compensation strategy aligned to new organizational structure (leading to issues of frustration and biasness)
Question 2:
Suggest suitable steps to remove the dissatisfaction among the managerial staff.
Reorganizing roles and responsibility in Job Description Differentiating the Work areas at every Managerial level, such as:
Strategic areas and review comes under the purview of manager (with direct accountability to the management) Regular accounting tasks under Asst. Manger Red denotes interchanged Responsibility on next slide
Asst. Manager
Manager
Cash Management Cash Forecast- Monthly/ quarterly (Strategic) Monitor payments Monthly/ quarterly reports to bank Liaison with banks (relationship building) Excise Supervising filling returnsmonthly Day to day routine problems (Supervisory role) Sales Tax (same) Insurance (Only work the amount of cover to be taken) Materials Department (all- quality adherence) Accounts Sales (same- as important for revenue generation) Purchase (approve payments) General (removed) MIS (Budgets and reviews)
General Accounts & MIS (Same) Ledgers Recording of vouchers (Regular wok) Fund Flow (in continuation with cash flow) Banking Bank Dealings Submission of required info. Excise Follow up pending cases with authorities, submission of required info. (Same) Insurance (Same) Follow up insurance claims Purchase Accounts (same)
Question 3:
What different methods would you follow to streamline the compensation disparities among the managerial staff?
3.
Question 1
Do you agree with the approach decided by the Consultant to be followed in this case? Discuss.
CASE 2
1.
Some suggested aspects are relative in nature (Example: No. of subordinates level) & cannot be considered as such
Question 2
If you were a member of the committee formed by the management, what would you be your views with regard to the factors decided by the consultant?
2.
Question 3
Would you allocate Weightage to different factors? Give reasons in support of your answer.
3.
Allocating Weightage
Majority of weightage in case of fresh candidates needs to be given to the Education background 40% Whereas in case of experienced candidates, Education Background can not be given a weightage of more than 10% Assuming a leadership role and strategic contribution in the organization matters, hence evaluation on varied aspects
For Fresher's
Education Qualification : 40% General Managerial Ability (time management, output per time ratio etc) : 20%
Skill set (example presentation skills for a marketing executive, specific technical skill for laborer): 20%
Level of Value addition : 10% Ability to meet challenges/ Complexity in Job: 10%
For Experienced
Education : 10% Experience : 15% Stability: 15% Roles and Tasks Managed: 10% Workforce handled (Span of control): 10% Managerial Level (Position): 10% Value Addition to Organization : 15% Agility and ability to influence others: 5% Multi tasking/ Acquisition of varied skill sets: 10%
Question 1:
The Chairman suggested replacement of Job Grades. Can you suggest some of the modern approaches to wage determination?
CASE 3
1. Some of the common approaches to wage determination are: Time Wage Piece Wage
Skill based
Knowledge based
Credential based
Feedback based Competency based
Hay Plan
Know how Problem Solving Accountability
MBOs (Management by Objectives: Mutual goal & accountability setting and wage determination) Directly aligned with new business objective achievement (Google+ )
2.
Yes, it is possible for employees to have control over their pay, to the extent of:
Organizational Policies that incentivize individual contribution: Compensation structure as proportion of fixed and variable (Variable is directly related to individual performance/ potential) Organizational enablers: High performance culture and systems that facilitate individual performance via regular feedback, mentoring/ coaching, training etc. Negotiation/ Bargaining power of Employee: Depends on the unique skills he brings on the table, contribution to the business he/she makes and the ability to negotiate an aligned pay (directly depends on substitute labour availability and associated costs)
Competency Framework
1.
2. 3. 4.
5.
Dynamic Customer Focus Active Learning and Agility Co-operative Teamwork Enduring Commitment and Initiative Drive for Excellence
Followed by quarterly Performance Review meeting and individual IDP plan to facilitate performance and enable employees to have more control on their compensation The entire process must necessarily be communicated and discussed with employees (to gain positive perception and acceptance of the new Compensation structure)
Enduring Commitment
(Consistent performance)
Co-operative Teamwork
COMPETENCY
Drive for excellence Taking the case in point, assumingly the total gross is Rs 12,000 for manufacturing laborers. Wage will be determined on Fixed Piece Rate by which the average fixed wage would amount to Rs 7200 (that is 60%) Standard performance: One piece/ unit of output can be produced in an hour Piece Wage: is Rs 100 per unit produced Time: Hours worked is the factor to be multiplied with the number of pieces produced
Standard production by a worker should be 9 units in 8 hours and total wage will be 9*100*8= 7200
A below average employee produces 6 units in 8 hours. He will get 6*100*8= 4800
Dynamic Customer Focus (quality and process improvements, service) upto 15% (of Rs 12,000 for laborers) Enduring (Consistent) Performance Monthly bonus: upto 10%
Co-operative teamwork and Active Learning & Agility (Based on qualitative observation of supervisor and/or feedback of co workers) Upto 7.5% each
The competencies will remain the same at all levels only parameters/ KRAs to evaluate these changes (For instance customer focus for a laborer would be adherence to quality processes (defect ratio etc), whereas for a marketing executive would be client loyalty and servicing)