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