Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

Case Analysis

NITISH @ SOLUTIONS UNLIMITED

October 21st, 2010

Submitted By:

GROUP-D SECTION A

Abhinav Gogia (2010005)

Abhishek Tomar (2010012)

Aakash Tyagi (2010002)

Anirudh Pandiya (2010040)

Abhishek Chaudhary (2010011)

Alok Paliwal (2010024)


Pradyumna Mohanty (2010259)

INTRODUCTION:

Nitish, who was a B.Tech, graduate from IIT Madras and M.Tech. from the same institute.
Then he worked for two years for Infosys in Bangalore as senior programmer. But as he got
bored of daily programming for endless hours, he decided to do MBA in finance. So he
joined XLRI Jamshedpur, Bihar.

After completion of degree he joined a consultancy firm for a salary of 2 Lakh p.a., which
was less than what he got in Infosys. He had another offer with salary more than this, but he
joined this firm due to his personal issues and also because another company, HCL, was also
offering programming.

He worked in this company for two years. He was perceived as a happy-go-lucky, cheerful
and friendly person by his colleagues. But after two years he thought that his learning has
stopped, and also he was also thinking to move out of Jamshedpur. So he started searching
other jobs.

Arvind, a classmate of Nitish in IIT Madras during B.Tech. , suggested him to join his
company, Solutions Unlimited. Arvind told Nitish that Solutions Unlimited in India had
decided to realign itself from software solutions provider to IT consultancy firm. Mr. Kapoor,
Director Marketing, interviewed Nitish for 45 minutes.

Then Nitish got a call for an on campus interview at Hyderabad. Nitish there had interview
with Venkat, Assistant operations officer-level 4. He then offered him a package of 2.55 LPA
at level of Developer 3. Nitish was not satisfied with this salary and he demanded 4 LPA.
Meena, venkat’s boss, then came and raised the salary to 3.1 LPA. But Nitish refused the
offer again and bluntly replied “NO”.He again after sometime have arguments about
travelling remunerations. Later Mr. Kapoor intervened between two and this hurted self-ego
of Meena.

These all problems lead to and were the base of the interpersonal problems between Nitish
and Meena, which lead to increasing dissatisfaction of Nitish in company. Then Nitish was
also denied projects, which he thought were appropriate according to his profile, because of
Meena.

All this led Nitish to re-think about his decision of joining Solutions Unlimited and look for
other options.
CASE ANALYSIS:-
NITISH`S PERSONALITY:
 Nitish feels that he is an outgoing and friendly person and could not see any reason of
somebody not talking to him if he is present. This makes us conclude that he is a bit
myopic in a sense that he attributes all situations to himself and fails to see the
external factors which affect the situation.

 High self esteem needs: he thought that the work done by him is special and expects
others to appreciate his work. This might be because of his earlier profession as a
consultant in a small consultancy where he was responsible for making business plans
which requires greater degree of responsibility and authority on his part.

MEENA`S PERSONALITY:
 Vulnerable to negative emotions: Meena`s reaction when nitish plainly rejected the
package offered to him by her, and the perception that she got out of it about nitish`s
personality was very negative which gave rise to the domino effect that followed and
the basis of their future relationship.

 Meena, similar to Nitish had a myopic understanding of other people and concluded
as if everything happened because of her, and could not see that external factors might
also be affecting the situation.

 Lack of professionalism.

Internal Issues of the company:


 Key people missing from the hierarchy: The CEO of the company is in contact with
the information of the organization through certain key people under him who
constitute the top management; who are constantly being lost from solutions
unlimited, and if Mr. Kapoor also leave the company, as mentioned in the case, three
out of four key people will be out of the top management, which is certainly not a
good preposition for any company.

 Lack of proper hierarchical mechanism: In addition to the above issue, lack of proper
hierarchy can result in serious effects on the company’s performance and the
information blockage at a certain level can paralyse any company.
 Lack of proper issue-resolution channel: There is no proper issue resolution channel
that takes care of all issues that are raised by employees. Currently Alagu and Meena
have made a haphazard system.

 Lack of Feedback Mechanism: There should be a proper feedback and appraisal


channel which should show the actual mirror to all employees.

 Roles and responsibilities not clearly defined: Meena working under director
operations, taking care of HR; Nitish being hired, does not have clear objective as in
what is he doing there so far.

SOLUTIONS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN:


About Nitish’s discussion with Manish

As per our analysis of the case, we suggest that Nitish should discuss in detail about his
present situation in the organization. As it is implied from the case, Nitish is a sensible person
and would want to continue to work with the organization if the problems are resolved. Also,
he has made no opinion about Meena and wants to resolve the issues with her. Nitish should
discuss about the entire situation how things started, he should admit his mistakes where-ever
he was wrong so as to make the things diaphanous. The other recommended solutions are:

Recommended Solutions
1) Healthy Meeting for sorting out the issues:

Once Nitish will discuss the situation with Manish, Manish should arrange for a meeting
with Meena and Alagu to discuss about their view-point. After this Manish should have
another meeting with Nitish; lastly there should be a common meeting to resolve all the
issues and maintain a healthy working environment.

2) Assigning a reporting manager or mentor for Meena:

As we can see from the organization chart, Meena is the operations office who is taking
care of entire HR related work, but there is no person to whom Meena reports. Thus all
the HR related decisions are taken by her. This means that Meena has got extra control
over things and sometimes she takes decision on prejudice. There should be a reporting
manager to whom Meena should report/ consult before taking any decision so as to avoid
these kind of miscommunications. In this way, she will also have clear picture about her
roles and responsibilities.
3) Institutionalize Proper channel for resolving employee related issues.

4) Pro-activeness required at Nitish’s end:

This point will explain that how Nitish didn’t cross verify about the directions provided
by Meena, also at one point he deleted Venkat’s email. He should cross verify and take
in written about any action plan from HR so as to have an evidence for it in future.