IIBMS QUESTION PAPER

Subject Organizational Behavior

Marks - 100

Note: Solve any 4 Cases

 CASE: I Pushing Paper Can Be Fun

A large city government was putting on a number of seminars for managers of various
departments throughout the city. At one of these sessions the topic discussed was
motivationhow to motivate public servants to do a good job. The plight of a police
captain became the central focus of the discussion:
Ive got a real problem with my officers. They come on the force as young,
inexperienced rookies, and we send them out on the street, either in cars or on a
beat. They seem to like the contact they have with the public, the action involved in
crime prevention, and the apprehension of criminals. They also like helping people
out at fires, accidents, and other emergencies.
The problem occurs when they get back to the station. They hate to do the
paperwork, and because they dislike it, the job is frequently put off or done
inadequately. This lack of attention hurts us later on when we get to court. We need
clear, factual reports. They must be highly detailed and unambiguous. As soon as
one part of a report is shown to be inadequate or incorrect, the rest of the report is
suspect. Poor reporting probably causes us to lose more cases than any other
factor.
I just dont know how to motivate them to do a better job. Were in a budget
crunch, and I have absolutely no financial rewards at my disposal. In fact, well
probably have to lay some people off in the near future. Its hard for me to make the
 job interesting and challenging because it isnt-its boring, routine paperwork, and
there isnt much you can do about it.
Finally, I cant say to them that their promotions will hinge on the excellence of
their paperwork. First at all, they know its not true. If their performance is adequate,
most are more likely to get promoted just by staying on the force a certain number
of years than for some specific outstanding act. Second, they were trained to do the
job they do out in the streets, not to fill out forms. All through their careers the
arrests and interventions are what get noticed.
Some people have suggested a number of things, like using conviction
records as a performance criterion. However, we know thats not fairtoo many
other things are involved. Bad paperwork increases the chance that you lose in
court, but good paperwork doesnt necessarily mean youll win. We tried setting up
the team competitions based on the excellence of the reports, but the officers
caught on to that pretty quickly. No one was getting any type of reward for winning
the competition, and they figured why should they bust a gut when there was on
payoff.
I just dont know what to do.

Question:

1. What performance problems is the captain trying to correct?

Ans: The Performance problems the captain is trying to correct are:
a) Poor Police reporting of incidents either it is done inadequately or it is delayed.
b) Lost cases in court which is believed to be due to poor reporting.

Individual Characteristics MARS Model

Situational
Factors
Motivation
Values

Personality

Perceptions Ability Behavior &

Results
Emotions &

Attitudes Role
Perceptions
Stress
a. Motivation
From the case, it can be seen that lack of motivation among police officers in the department has resulted in poor
paperwork due to several factors:
1) Police officers main motivation to enter the police force is to work with the public and catch criminals, not to do
office paperwork. Therefore, paperwork task does not fulfill their needs for career and personal growth.
2) Outside activities offer social rewards (Praise or recognition) rather than paperwork.
3) Police officers are not encouraged by financial rewards for doing paperwork since promotions are based on
seniority. Staying with the force is what motivates police offices, not paperwork. The captain has tried
competitions but it did not work either.
b. Ability
From the report competition organized by the captain, it is suggested that there are at least some officers
who can do well in paperwork. The rest may or may not have the ability to perform. However, what we
 can observe is, they obviously did not receive any form of training in this area. Hence, their ability is
questionable.
c. Role Perceptions
It is not clear whether the emphasis on paperwork was given during the induction training when rookies entered the
police force. . But over time naturally and coupled with emphasis by the captain, the role became clear to police
officers that there's a need to complete quality paperwork as evident by its relationship to lost court cases.

d. Situational Factors

From the case, there's no supporting evidence to conclude that there's a situational actor hindering or preventing
police officers from performing their role in report writing. However, time, exhaustion. & tiredness could possibly
affect their performance as the outside environment is very much different from the office environment. Coming
back from the field exhausted, can have a negative impact on the mood where good report writing needs a fresh
mind.

2. Has the captain considered all possible solutions to the problem? If not, what else might be
done?
Ans: No. To conclude that the captain has considered all possible solutions is inaccurate. Nevertheless, the captain
has looked at variety of solutions to motivate the officers to complete the paperwork e.g. rewards for team
competition and conviction records as a performance index but didn't see how these could help
Here's what can be done:
a. Conduct an assessment of report writing competency among police officers. Those with low scores must be put
through a proper training.
b. Publicly recognize officers who excel in report writing by the top police chief. Even though financial reward may not
be necessary. A token of appreciation e.g. medal, certificate, plaque, etc. is highly recommended
c. Train the captain along with other personnel in supervisory positions for motivation skills upgrade. This will help
them to become better coaches and motivators.
d. Provide police officers with necessary tools & technologies e.g. computers. Internet, database of previous cases and
reports for referencing.
e. The police department can also consider making good report writing mandatory as well as including it as one of the
criteria in the promotion evaluation exercise.

CASE: III The Shipping Industry Accounting Team

For the past five years I have been working at McKay, Sanderson, and Smith
Associates, a mid-sized accounting firm in Boston that specializes in commercial
accounting and audits. My particular specialty in accounting practices for shipping
companies, ranging from small fishing fleets to a couple of the big firms with ships
along the East Coast.
About 18 months ago McKay, Sanderson, and Smith Associates became part of
a large merger involving two other accounting firms. These firms have offices in
Miami, Seattle, Baton Rouge, and Los Angeles. Although the other two accounting
firms were much larger than McKay, all three firms agreed to avoid centralizing the
business around one office in Los Angeles. Instead the new firmcalled Goldberg,
Choo, and McKay Associateswould rely on teams across the country to leverage
the synergies of our collective knowledge (an often-cited statement from the
managing partner soon after the merger).
The merger affected me a year ago when my boss (a senior partner and vice
president of the merger) announced that I would be working more closely with three
people from the other two firms to become the firms new shipping industry
accounting team. The other team members were Elias in Miami, Susan in Seattle,
and Brad in Los Angeles. I had met Elias briefly at a meeting in New York City
during the merger but had never met Susan or Brad, although I knew that they were
shipping accounting professionals at the other firms.
 Initially the shipping team activities involved e-mailing each other about new
contracts and prospective clients. Later we were asked to submit joint monthly
reports on accounting statements and issues. Normally I submitted my own monthly
reports to summarize activities involving my own clients. Coordinating the monthly
report with three other people took much more time, particularly because different
accounting documentation procedures across the three firms were still being
resolved. It took numerous e-mail messages an a few telephone calls to work out a
reasonable monthly report style.
During this aggravating process it became apparentto me at leastthat this
team business was costing me more time than it was worth. Moreover, Brad in Los
Angeles didnt have a clue about how to communicate with the rest of us. He rarely
replied to e-mail. Instead he often used the telephone tag. Brad arrived at work at
9:30 a.m. in Los Angeles (and was often late), which is early afternoon in Boston. I
typically have a flexible work schedule from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. so I can
chauffeur my kids after school to sports and music lessons. So Brad and I have a
window of less than three hours to share information.
The biggest nuisance with the shipping specialist accounting team started two
weeks ago when the firm asked the four of us to develop a new strategy for
attracting more shipping firm business. This new strategic plan is a messy
business. Somehow we have to share our thoughts on various approaches, agree
on a new plan, and write a unified submission to the managing partner. Already the
 project is taking most of my time just writing and responding to e-mail and talking in
conference calls (which none of us did much before the team formed).
Susan and Brad have already had two or three misunderstandings via e-mail
about their different perspectives on delicate matters in the strategic plan. The
worst of these disagreements required a conference call with all of us to resolve.
Except for the most basic matters, it seems that we cant understand each other, let
alone agree on key issues. I have come to the conclusion that I would never want
Brad to work in my Boston office (thanks goodness hes on the other side of the
country). Although Elias and I seem to agree on most points, the overall team cant
form a common vision or strategy. I dont know how Elias, Susan, or Brad feel, but I
would be quite happy to work somewhere that did not require any of these long-
distance team headaches.

Question:
1. What type of team was formed here? Was it necessary, in your opinion?
 A team was formed, more like a virtual team in this situation. This was a necessity because the new company,
Goldberg, had huge number of offices and branches all over the nation. The reason for the virtual team was so it could
bring employees of the same expertise (shipping accountants) together. These employees could then work together
to achieve a common goal. Relocation and the hassle and stress were also a major reason why the virtual team was
formed.

2. Use the team effectiveness model in Chapter 9 and related information in this chapter to identify the strengths and
weaknesses of this teams environment, design, and processes.

a. Strengths:
Team Design: Team members possess the same expertise, training and background to complete the assigned tasks in
achieving the company's objectives. The number of members per team was manageable. There were 4 members for
each team and the task characteristics (accounting practice) were related to the team member's background and
experience.

b. Weaknesses:
Team Environment: some team members were lacking on communication skills which posed a communication barrier
amongst the team members. Differences of the location of the team members and the time were a major factor.
Thus, affected the team's effectiveness. Some team members took more time than others to share information
 with other members. This meant sacrificing personal time for some team members. The timing difference affected
some employees' work-life balance.

Team Processes: There is very little cohesion in the team because some members disagree on strategic and important
issues. There is little understanding of each other and key issues. Hence, he lack of trust in team members. There is
also lack of corporation among the team members.

c. Assuming that these four people must continue to work as a team, recommend ways to improve the teams
effectiveness.

Ways to improve team effectiveness include team building in which activities are focused at improving the
development and effective functioning of the team. Activities to include in the team building program should
include improving communication skills; clarification of team's performance goals; putting more effort on
improving problem-solving skills; improvement of relations among team members; and activities to help team
members to learn more about each other, tolerate each other, trust each other, and find ways to manage conflict
within the team. Another way to improve team effectiveness is to validate and reinforce team members' roles in
the team. The team should also establish criteria or rules and regulations to regulate team members' behavior.
Most importantly, team members should work on cohesiveness, which comes with understanding, tolerance, and
respect for each other.
 CASE: IV Conflict In Close Quarters
A team of psychologists at Moscows Institute for Biomedical Problems (IBMP) wanted
to learn more about the dynamics of long-term isolation in space. This knowledge
would be applied to the International Space Station, a joint project of several
countries that would send people into space for more than six months. It would
eventually include a trip to Mars taking up to three years.
IBMP set up a replica of the Mir space station in Moscow. They then arranged
for three international researchers from Japan, Canada, and Austria 110 days
isolated in a chamber the size of a train car. This chamber joined a smaller
chamber where four Russian cosmonauts had already completed half of their 240
days of isolation. This was the first time an international crew was involved in the
studies. None of the participants spoke English as their first language, yet they
communicated throughout their stay in English at varying levels of proficiency.
Judith Lapierre, a French-Canadian, was the only female in the experiment.
Along with obtaining a PhD in public health and social medicine, Lapierre had
studied space sociology at the International Space University in France and
conducted isolation research in the Antarctic. This was her fourth trip to Russia,
where she had learned the language. The mission was supposed to have a second
 female participant from the Japanese space program, but she was not selected by
IBMP.
The Japanese and Austrian participants viewed the participation of a woman as
a favorable factor, says Lapierre. For example, to make the surroundings more
comfortable, they rearranged the furniture, hung posters on the walls, and put a
tablecloth on the kitchen table. We adapted our environment, whereas Russians
just viewed it as something to be endured, she explains. We decorated for
Christmas because Im the kind of person who likes to host people.

New Years Eve Turmoil

Ironically, it was at one of those social events, the New Years Eve party, that
events took a turn for the worse. After drinking vodka (allowed by the Russian
space agency), two of the Russian cosmonauts got into a fistfight that left blood
splattered on the chamber walls. At one point a colleague hid the knives in the
stations kitchen because of fears that the two Russians were about to stab each
other. The two cosmonauts, who generally did not get along, had to be restrained
by other men. Soon after that brawl, the Russian commander grabbed Lapierre,
dragged her out of view of the television monitoring cameras, and kissed her
aggressivelytwice. Lapierre fought him off, but the message didnt register. He
tried to kiss her again the next morning.
 The next day the international crew complained to IBMP about the behavior of
the Russian cosmonauts. The Russian institute apparently took no against the
aggressors. Instead the institutes psychologists replied that the incidents were part
of the experiment. They wanted crew members to solve their personal problems
with mature discussion without asking for outside help. You have to understand
that Mir is an autonomous object, far away from anything, Vadim Gushin, the IBMP
psychologist in charge of project, explained after the experiment had ended in
March. If the crew cant solve problems among themselves, they cant work
together.
Following IBMPs response, the international crew wrote a scathing letter to the
Russian institute and the space agencies involved in the experiment. We had
never expected such events to take place in a highly controlled scientific
experiment where individuals go through a multistep selection process, they wrote.
If we had known we would not have joined it as subjects. The letter also
complained about IBMPs response to their concerns.
Informed about the New Years Eve incident, the Japanese space program
convened an emergency meeting on January 2 to address the incidents. Soon after
the Japanese team member quit, apparently shocked by IBMPs inaction. He was
replaced with a Russian researcher on the international team. Ten days after the
fighta little over the month the international team began the missionthe doors
between the Russian and international crews chambers were barred at the request
of the international research team. Lapierre later emphasized that this action was
taken because of concerns about violence, not the incident involving her.

A Stolen Kiss or Sexual Harassment

By the end of experiment in March, news of the fistfight between the cosmonauts
and the commanders attempts to kiss Lapierre had reached the public. Russian
scientists attempted to play down the kissing incident by saying that it was one
fleeting kiss, a clash of cultures, and a female participant who was too emotional.
In the West, some kinds of kissing are regarded as sexual harassment. In our
culture its nothing, said Russian scientist Vadim Gushin in one interview. In
another interview he explained, The problem of sexual harassment is given a lot of
attention in North America but less in Europe. In Russia it is even less of an issue,
not because we are more or less moral than the rest of the world; we just have
different priorities.
Judith Lapierre says the kissing incident was tolerable compared to this reaction
from the Russian scientists who conducted the experiment. They dont get it at all,
she complains. They dont think anything is wrong. Im more frustrated than ever.
The worst thing is that they dont realize it was wrong.
Norbert Kraft, the Austrian scientist on the international team, also disagreed
with the Russian interpretation of events. Theyre trying to protect themselves, he
 says. Theyre trying to put the fault on others. But this is not a cultural issue. If a
woman doesnt want to be kissed, it is not acceptable.

Question:

1. Identify the different conflict episodes that exist in this case. Who was in conflict with whom?

There are various conflicts that exist in the case. Conflict basically exists when one party or individual
recognizes that its interests are disparate from other individuals interests and that a clash of interests has
occurred. The conflict process occurs when the sources of conflict i.e. conflicting goals, views, lack of
resources, poor communication etc translate themselves into conflicting perceptions and emotions which
eventually manifest conflict through overt behaviors and decisions. Similar to our definition, we can
identify four conflicts that exist in the case.

Firstly, the conflict arises in the fact that since all the participants are from different countries i.e. Japan,
Austria and Canada there spoken languages were different and that the lack of proficiency in English meant
that communication would have several hindrances amongst the participants.
 The second conflict that existed was the New Years event when two of the Russian cosmonauts got into a
bloody fistfight. The same day, another conflict occurred between the Russian commander and the French-
Canadian female Ms. Lapierre. Soon after the brawl, the commander took Ms. Lapierre away from the
surveillance camera range and attempted to kiss her. The last conflict was between the international team
and the IBMP itself. When the team complained about the incidents, the IBMP took no action, stating that
such incidents were part of the experiment, the statement disappointed the international team and the
Japanese team member even quit because of the lack of concern from IBMP.

2. What are the sources of conflict for these conflict incidents?

Manifest conflicts are those that arise because of conflicting emotions and perceptions between
individuals. This has a direct impact on the decisions and behavior of certain individuals towards others.
Such manifestations can be in either subtle or aggressive form.

However, in the case above the two events of manifest conflict i.e. the fight between the cosmonauts and
the Ms. Lapierre incident had overt behavior and extreme aggression. In the first incident where the two
 cosmonauts got into a fistfight, the source was by no doubt the fact that they did not get along. This could
be due to different beliefs and values, perceptions and conflicting goals. Even in the second case, the
sources of conflict can be attributed to different values and beliefs. Clearly, according to the case, the
commander believed that in his culture, kissing was not regarded as sexual harassment and because of the
different belief he took such a decision (Peter Condliffe, 2008).

3. What conflict management style(s) did Lapierre, the international team, and Gushin use to
resolve these conflicts? What style(s) would have worked best in the situation?x

The conflict management style adopted by Ms. Lapierre was an interpersonal conflict management style
called Competing. In this style, an individual tries to win the conflict at the expense of the other. In this
case, she defended herself using force to push away the Russian commander and fought him off. This style
is used when cooperativeness is not an option; rather, assertiveness is an option.

The international team on the other hand also adopted an interpersonal conflict management style called
Avoiding. In this style, situations that may result in conflicts are avoided all together and that is exactly
what the international team did when they asked the IBMP to close the doors between their chamber and
the Russian chamber so as to avoid any conflict altogether. Gushin used an accommodating approach
towards conflict management when he stated that if the crew cant solve their problems amongst
themselves, they cant work together. This implied that there were clear rules and procedures, the fact that
the space object will be out in the space and that resolutions should be obtained in a mature and practical
manner amongst the individuals themselves. In other words, that the IBMP was justified for what it said and
that it was none of their business (Paul M. Terry, 1996). The style that would have worked best in these
situations would have been through negotiation. Negotiation is the most powerful tool to conflict resolution
and attains a fair solution for every party involved. That is when discussion is used to obtain a more
satisfactory solution rather than aggression or ignorance altogether. Moreover, collaboration can also be
used; in this the problem is defined and a mutually beneficial solution is obtained through problem solving.