Q] DESCRIBE THE SILENT CHARACTERISTICS OF AN ENTREPRENEUR. DISCUSS THE ENTREPRENEURIAL SKILLS OF:A) Henry Ford B) Meg Whitman C) Ratan Tata D) Sergyn Brin E) Ray Kroc F) Warren Buffett

Q] STATE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ENTREPRENEUR AND A MANAGER.Characteristic Behavior Characterized by Management Style Entrepreneur Desire for Control One-Man Show Manager Delegation of Authority Management Team Establish and Preserve the Status Quo Strategic Planning Organized Collect Information and Seek Advice In Commercial Terms Measure of Success Avoidance of Risks "Management Culture"

Driving Force

Creativity - Innovation

Organizational Growth Organization Structure Decision-Making Definition of Aims Attitude to Money Attitude to Risk Organizational Culture

Rapid Reaction Informal, Flexible Intuitive In terms of "Vision" A By-Product Calculated Risks "Entrepreneurial Culture"

Q] WHAT IS ANALYTICAL THINKING? DESCRIBE THE STEPS OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TOWARDS PROBLEM SOLVING.Analytical thinking is a powerful thinking tool for understanding the parts of situation.It is defined as:

The ability to scrutinize and break down facts and thoughts into their strengths and weakness. Developing the capacity to think in a thoughtful , discerning way, to solve problem, analyze data, recall and use information.

STEPS OF SCIENTIFIC APPROACH: 1) Defining the Problem: Definition: A problem is a situation that is judged as something that needs to be corrected.

Importance: It is our job to make sure were solving the right problem it may not be the one presented to us by the client. What do we really need to solve?

Basic Concepts: Most of the problems are initially identified by our clients Defining the problem clearly improves focus it drives the analytical process Getting to a clearly defined problem is often discovery driven Start with a conceptual definition and through analysis (root cause, impact analysis, etc.) you shape and redefine the problem in terms of issues

2) Formulating the Hypotheses: Definition: Hypothesis is a tentative explanation for an observation that can be tested (i.e. proved or disapproved) by further investigation

Importance: Start at the end - Figuring out the solution to the problem, i.e. "hypothesizing", before you start will help build a roadmap for approaching the problem

Basic Concepts: Hypotheses can be expressed as possible root causes of the problem Breaking down the problem into key drivers (root causes) can help formulate hypotheses

3) Collecting the Facts:

Definition: Meaningful information (has merit not false) that is qualitative (expert opinions) or quantitative (measurable performance) to your decisions

Importance: Gathering relevant data and information is a critical step in supporting the analyses required for proving or disproving the hypotheses

Basic Concepts: Know where to dig Know how to filter through information Know how to verify Has happened in the past Know how to apply Relates to what you are trying to solve

4) Conducting the Analysis: Definition: The deliberate process of breaking a problem down through the application of knowledge and various analytical techniques

Importance: Analysis of the facts is required to prove or disprove the hypotheses Analysis provides an understanding of issues and drivers behind the problem

Basic Concepts: It is generally better to spend more time analyzing the data and information as opposed to collecting them. The goal is to find the golden nuggets that quickly confirm or deny a hypothesis Root cause analysis, storyboarding, and force field analysis are some of many analytical techniques that can applied

5) Developing the Solution: Definition: Solutions are the final recommendations presented to our clients/superiors based on the outcomes of the hypothesis testing

Importance: Solutions are what our clients pay us for

Basic Concepts:

It is important to ensure the solution fits the client solutions are useless if they cannot be implemented Running an actual example through the solution is an effective way of testing the effectiveness and viability of the solution.

FOR MORE DETAILS REFER PPT OF THIS CHAPTER.

Q] CRITICALLY ANALYZE FOLLOWING:-

A) BCG Matrix.The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Matrix is a simple tool to assess a companys position in terms of its product range. It helps a company think about its products and services and make decisions about which it should keep, which it should let go and which it should invest in further.

Question Marks

Question marks are products that grow rapidly and as a result consume large amounts of cash, but because they have low market shares they dont generate much cash. The result is a large net cash consumption. A question mark has the potential to gain market share and become a star, and eventually a cash cow when the market growth slows. If it doesnt become a market leader it will become a dog

A c

when market growth declines. Question marks need to be analysed carefully to determine if they are worth the investment required to grow market share. Dogs Dogs have a low market share and a low growth rate and neither generate nor consume a large amount of cash. However, dogs are cash traps because of the money tied up in a business that has little potential. Such businesses are candidates for divestiture. Stars Stars generate large sums of cash because of their strong relative market share, but also consume large amounts of cash because of their high growth rate. So the cash being spent and brought in approximately nets out. If a star can maintain its large market share it will become a cash cow when the market growth rate declines. Cash Cows As leaders in a mature market, cash cows exhibit a return on assets that is greater than the market growth rate so they generate more cash than they consume. These units should be milked extracting the profits and investing as little as possible. They provide the cash required to turn question marks into market leaders.

B) Fiedler Contingency theory.Q no. 14

C) Two factor theory.Frederick Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory proposes that intrinsic factors are related to job satisfaction and motivation, whereas extrinsic factors are associated with job dissatisfaction. Believing that an individual's relation to his or her work is a basic one and that his or her attitude toward work determines success or failure, Herzberg investigated the question "What do people want from their jobs?" He asked people for detailed descriptions of situations in which they felt exceptionally good or bad about their jobs. These findings are shown in figure

Herzberg concluded from his analysis of the findings that the replies people gave when they felt good about their jobs were significantly different from the replies they gave when they felt badly. Certain characteristics were consistently related to job satisfaction (factors on the left side of the and others to job dissatisfaction (factors on the right side). Those factors associated with job satisfaction were intrinsic and included things such as achievement, recognition, and responsibility. When people felt good about their work, they tended to attribute these characteristics to themselves. On the other hand, when they were dissatisfied, they tended to cite extrinsic factors such as company policy and administration, supervision, interpersonal relationships, and working conditions. In addition, Herzberg believed that the data suggested that the opposite of satisfaction was not dissatisfaction, as traditionally had been believed. Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job would not necessarily make that job more satisfying (or motivating). As shown in Exhibit Herzberg proposed that his findings indicated the existence of a dual continuum: The opposite of "satisfaction" is "no satisfaction," and the opposite of "dissatisfaction" is "no dissatisfaction."

According to Herzberg, the factors that led to job satisfaction were separate and distinct from those that led to job dissatisfaction. Therefore, managers who sought to eliminate factors that created job dissatisfaction could bring about workplace harmony but not necessarily motivation. Because they don't motivate employees, the extrinsic factors that create job dissatisfaction were called hygiene factors. When these factors are adequate, people will not be dissatisfied, but they will not be satisfied (or motivated) either. To motivate people on their jobs, Herzberg suggested emphasizing motivators, the intrinsic factors that increase job satisfaction. Herzbergs theory enjoyed wide popularity from the mid-1960s to the early 1980s, but criticisms were raised about

his procedures and methodology. Although today we say the theory was too simplistic, it has had a strong influence on how we currently design jobs.

D) Cognitive Evaluation theory.Motivation theorists have generally assumed that intrinsic motivations such as achievement, responsibility, and competence are independent of extrinsic motivators such as high pay, promotions, good supervisor relations, and pleasant working conditions. That is, the stimulation of one would not affect the other. But the cognitive evaluation theory suggests otherwise. It argues that when extrinsic rewards are used by organizations as payoffs for superior performance, the intrinsic rewards, which are derived from individuals doing what they like, are reduced. In other words, when extrinsic rewards are given to someone for performing an interesting task, it causes intrinsic interest in the task itself to decline"

E) Porters five force model.Assessing the Balance of Power in a Business Situation The Porter's 5 Forces tool is a simple but powerful tool for understanding where power lies in a business situation. This is useful, because it helps you understand both the strength of your current competitive position, and the strength of a position you're considering moving into. With a clear understanding of where power lies, you can take fair advantage of a situation of strength, improve a situation of weakness, and avoid taking wrong steps. This makes it an important part of your planning toolkit. Conventionally, the tool is used to identify whether new products, services or businesses have the potential to be profitable. However it can be very illuminating when used to understand the balance of power in other situations. Understanding the Tool: Five Forces Analysis assumes that there are five important forces that determine competitive power in a business situation. These are:

1. Supplier Power: Here you assess how easy it is for suppliers to drive up prices. This is driven by the number of suppliers of each key input, the

uniqueness of their product or service, their strength and control over you, the cost of switching from one to another, and so on. The fewer the supplier choices you have, and the more you need suppliers' help, the more powerful your suppliers are. 2. Buyer Power: Here you ask yourself how easy it is for buyers to drive prices down. Again, this is driven by the number of buyers, the importance of each individual buyer to your business, the cost to them of switching from your products and services to those of someone else, and so on. If you deal with few, powerful buyers, then they are often able to dictate terms to you. 3. Competitive Rivalry: What is important here is the number and capability of your competitors. If you have many competitors, and they offer equally attractive products and services, then you'll most likely have little power in the situation, because suppliers and buyers will go elsewhere if they don't get a good deal from you. On the other hand, if no-one else can do what you do, then you can often have tremendous strength. 4. Threat of Substitution: This is affected by the ability of your customers to find a different way of doing what you do for example, if you supply a unique software product that automates an important process, people may substitute by doing the process manually or by outsourcing it. If substitution is easy and substitution is viable, then this weakens your power. 5. Threat of New Entry: Power is also affected by the ability of people to enter your market. If it costs little in time or money to enter your market and compete effectively, if there are few economies of scale in place, or if you have little protection for your key technologies, then new competitors can quickly enter your market and weaken your position. If you have strong and durable barriers to entry, then you can preserve a favorable position and take fair advantage of it. These forces can be neatly brought together in a diagram like the one below:

F) Situational Leadership TheoryHersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard have developed a leadership theory that has gained a strong following among management development specialists. This model called situational leadership theory (SLT) is a contingency theory that focuses on followers' readiness. Hersey and Blanchard argue that successful leadership is achieved by selecting the right leadership style, which is contingent on the level of the followers' readiness. Before we proceed, there are two points we need to clarify: why a leadership theory focuses on the followers and what is meant by the term readiness. The emphasis on the followers in leadership effectiveness reflects the reality that it is the followers who accept or reject the leader. Regardless of what the leader does, effectiveness depends on the actions of his or her followers. This is an important dimension that has been overlooked or underemphasized in most leadership theories. And readiness, as defined by Hersey and Blanchard, refers to the extent to which people has the ability and willingness to accomplish a specific task.SLT uses the same two leadership dimensions that Fiedler identified: task and relationship behaviors. However, Hersey and Blanchard go a step further by considering each as either high or low and then combining them into four specific leadership styles described as follows:

i.

High task and relationship orientations (high tasklow relationship): The leader defines roles and tells people what, how, when, and where to do various tasks. ii. Monitoring (high taskhigh relationship): The leader provides both directive and supportive behavior. iii. Supportive Participative (low taskhigh relationship): The leader and follower share in decision making; the main role of the leader is facilitating and communicating. iv. Directive (low tasklow relationship): The leader provides little direction or support.

The final component in the model is the four stages of follower readiness: R1: People are both unable and unwilling to take responsibility for doing something. They're neither competent nor confident. R2: People are unable but willing to do the necessary job tasks. They're motivated but currently lack the appropriate skills. R3: People are able but unwilling to do what the leader wants. R4: People are both able and willing to do what is asked of them. SLT essentially views the leader-follower relationship as analogous to that of a parent and a child. Just as a parent needs to relinquish control as a child becomes more mature and responsible, so, too, should leaders. As followers reach high levels of readiness, the leader responds not only by continuing to decrease control over their activities but also by continuing to decrease relationship behavior. The SLT says if followers are unable and unwilling to do a task, the leader needs to give clear and specific directions (telling); if followers are unable and willing, the leader needs to display high task orientation to compensate for the followers' lack of ability and high relationship orientation to get followers to "buy into" the leader's desires (selling); if followers are able and unwilling, the leader needs to use a supportive and participative style (participating); and if employees are both able and willing, the leader doesn't need to do much (delegating).SLT has an intuitive appeal. It acknowledges the importance of followers and builds on the logic that leaders can compensate for ability and motivational limitations in their followers. Yet research efforts to test and support the theory generally have been disappointing.

G) Expectancy theoryThe most comprehensive and widely accepted explanation of employee motivation to date is Victor Vroom's expectancy theory. Although the theory has its critics, most research evidence supports it. Expectancy theory states that an individual tends to act in a certain way based on the expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual. It includes three variables or relationships.

1. Expectancy or effort-performance linkage is the probability perceived by the individual that exerting a given amount of effort will lead to a certain level of performance. 2. Instrumentality or performance-reward linkage is the degree to which the individual believes that performing at a particular level is instrumental in attaining the desired outcome. 3. Valence or attractiveness of reward is the importance that the individual places on the potential outcome or reward that can be achieved on the job. Valence considers both the goals and needs of the individual. This explanation of motivation might sound complex, but it really isn't that difficult to visualize. It can be summed up in the questions: How hard do I have to work to achieve a certain level of performance, and can I actually achieve that level? What reward will performing at that level get me? How attractive is the reward to me, and does it help me achieve my goals? Whether you are motivated to put forth effort (that is, to work) at any given time depends on your particular goals and your perception of whether a certain level of performance is necessary to attain those goals. Let's look at the theory's features and go through an example of how it works. First, what perceived outcomes does the job offer the employee? Outcomes (rewards) may be positivethings such as pay, security, companionship, trust, fringe benefits, a chance to use talents or skills, or congenial relationships. Or the employee may view the outcomes as negativefatigue, boredom, frustration, anxiety, harsh supervision, or threat of dismissal. Keep in mind that reality isn't

relevant here. The critical issue is what the individual perceives the outcomes to be, regardless of whether the perceptions are accurate. Second, how attractive are the outcomes or rewards to employees? Are they valued positively, negatively, or neutrally? This obviously is a personal and internal issue that depends on the individual's needs, attitudes, and personality. A person who finds a particular reward attractivethat is, values it positivelywould rather get it than not get it. Others may find it negative and, therefore, prefer not getting it. Still others may be neutral about the outcome. Third, what kind of behavior must the employee exhibit in order to achieve these rewards? The rewards aren't likely to have any effect on an individual employee's performance unless he or she knows, clearly and unambiguously, what must be done to achieve them. For example, what is "doing well" in terms of performance appraisal? What criteria will be used to judge the employee's performance? Finally, how does the employee view his or her chances of doing what is asked? After an employee has considered his or her own skills and ability to control those variables that lead to success, what's the likelihood that he or she can successfully perform at the necessary level? Let's work through an example of how expectancy theory works by looking at your level of motivation for a particular course. Most students prefer that their instructor tell them what the course expectations are. They want to know what assignments and exams will be like, when they're going to be due or given, and how much weight each carries in determining the final grade. They also like to think that the amount of effort exerted in attending classes, taking notes, completing assignments, and studying outside class will be reasonably related to the grade they'll make.

H) Equity Theory.Equity theory, developed by J. Stacey Adams, proposes that employees perceive what they get from a job situation (outcomes) in relation to what they put into it (inputs) and then compare their inputs-outcomes ratio with the inputsoutcomes ratios of relevant others . If an employee perceives her ratio to be equal to those of relevant others, a state of equity exists. In other words, she perceives that her situation is fairthat justice prevails. However, if the ratio is unequal, inequity exists and she views herself as under rewarded or over rewarded. When inequities occur, employees attempt to do something about it. What will employees do when they perceive an inequity? Let's look more closely at their probable behavioral responses.

Inequity (over rewarded) a Person A is the employee, and person B is a relevant other or referent Equity theory proposes that employees might : 1. Change their inputs (e.g., don't exert as much effort) 2. Change their outcomes (e.g., individuals paid on a piece-rate basis can increase their pay by producing a higher quantity of units of lower quality) 3. Distort perceptions of self (e.g., "I used to think I worked at a moderate pace but now I realize that I work a lot harder than everyone else.") 4. Distort perceptions of others (e.g., "Mike's job isn't as desirable as I previously thought it was.") 5. Choose a different referent (e.g., "I may not make as much as my brother-in-law, but I'm doing a lot better than my Dad did when he was my age.") 6. Leave the field (e.g., quit the job)" A review of the research consistently confirms the equity thesis: Employee motivation is influenced significantly by relative rewards as well as by absolute rewards. Whenever employees perceive inequity, they'll act to correct the situation. The result might be lower or higher productivity improved or reduced quality of output, increased absenteeism, or voluntary resignation. The other aspect we need to examine in equity theory is who these "others" are against who people compare themselves. The referent is an important variable in equity theory. Three referent categories have been defined: other, system, and self. The "other" category includes other individuals with similar jobs in the same organization but also includes friends, neighbors, or professional associates. On the basis of what they hear at work or read about in newspapers or trade journals, employees compare their pay with that of others. The "system" category includes organizational pay policies and procedures and the administration of the system. Whatever precedents have been established by the organization regarding pay

allocation are major elements of this category. The "self" category refers to inputsoutcomes ratios that are unique to the individual. It reflects past personal experiences and contacts and is influenced by criteria such as past jobs or family commitments. The choice of a particular set of referents is related to the information available about the referents as well as to their perceived relevance. However applicable it might be to understanding employee motivation, we shouldn't conclude that equity theory is flawless. The theory leaves some issues unclear. For instance, how do employees define inputs and outcomes? How do they combine and weigh their inputs and outcomes to arrive at totals? When and how do the factors change over time? And how do people choose referents? Despite these problems, equity theory does have an impressive amount of research support and offers us some important insights into employee motivation.

Q] EXPLAIN THE JCM (JOB CHARACTERISTIC MODEL) OF JOB REDESIGNING.Even though many organizations have implemented job enlargement and job enrichment programs and experienced mixed results, neither of these job design approaches provided a conceptual framework for analyzing jobs or for guiding managers in designing motivating jobs. The job characteristics model (JCM) offers such a framework. It identifies five primary job characteristics, their interrelationships, and their impact on employee productivity, motivation, and satisfaction. According to the JCM, any job can be described in terms of five core dimensions, defined as follows: Skill variety, the degree to which a job requires a variety of activities so that an employee can use a number of different skills and talents Task identity, the degree to which a job requires completion of a whole and identifiable piece of work Task significance, the degree to which a job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of other people Autonomy, the degree to which a job provides substantial freedom, independence, and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out. Feedback, the degree to which carrying out work activities required by a job results in the individual's obtaining direct and clear information about the effectiveness of his or her performance

Notice how the first three dimensionsskill variety, task identity, and task significancecombine to create meaningful work. What we mean is that if these three characteristics exist in a job, we can predict that the person will view his or her job as being important, valuable, and worthwhile. Notice, too, that jobs that possess autonomy give the job incumbent a feeling of personal responsibility for the results and that, if a job provides feedback, the employee will know how effectively he or she is performing. With permission of the authors. From a motivational standpoint, the JCM suggests that internal rewards are obtained when an employee learns (knowledge of results through feedback) that he or she personally (experienced responsibility through autonomy of work) has performed well on a task that he or she cares about (experienced meaningfulness through skill variety, task identity, and/or task significance). The more these three conditions characterize a job, the greater the employee's motivation, performance, and satisfaction and the lower his or her absenteeism and likelihood of resigning. As the model shows, the links between the job dimensions and the outcomes are moderated by the strength of the individual's growth need (the person's desire for self-esteem and self-actualization). This means that individuals with a high growth need are more likely to experience the critical psychological states and respond positively when their jobs include the core dimensions than are individuals with a low growth need. This may explain the mixed results with job enrichment: Individuals with low growth need don't tend to achieve high performance or satisfaction by having their jobs enriched. The JCM provides specific guidance to managers for job design. The following suggestions, which are based on the JCM, specify the types of changes in jobs that are most likely to lead to improvement in each of the five core job dimensions. You'll notice that two of these suggestions from the JCM incorporate the earlier job design concepts we discussed

(job enlargement and job enrichment), although the other suggestions also involve more than vertically and horizontally expanding jobs. 1. Combine tasks. Managers should put existing fragmented tasks back together to form a new, larger module of work (job enlargement) to increase skill variety and task identity. 2. Create natural work units. Managers should design tasks that form an identifiable and meaningful whole to increase employee "ownership" of the work and encourage employees to view their work as meaningful and important rather than as irrelevant and boring. 3. Establish client relationships. The client is the external or internal user of the product or service on which the employee works. Whenever possible, managers should establish direct relationships between workers and their clients to increase skill variety, autonomy, and feedback. For instance, at San Francisco's Park Lane Hotels International, guests nominate their favorite staff for awards including Sony televisions and free nights at the hotel. 4. Expand jobs vertically. Vertical expansion (job enrichment) gives employees responsibilities and controls that were formerly reserved for managers. It partially closes the gap between the "doing" and the "controlling" aspects of the job and increases employee autonomy. 5. Open feedback channels. Feedback lets employees know not only how well they are performing their jobs but also whether their job performance is improving, deteriorating, or remaining constant. Ideally, employees should receive performance feedback directly as they do their jobs rather than from managers on an occasional basis. For example, frequent fliers at Continental Airlines bestow Pride in Performance certificates to employees who have been helpful. Employees can then redeem the coupons for valuable merchandise. Q] Describe the strategies to motivate employees through change in the nature of job. Q] What is self efficacy? What are the ways of enhancing the same in a team? Q] A valid implementation plan to implement all the motivational and leadership theories. (Application of theories at workplace. How to implement the theories, in the form of an example)

Q] EXPLAIN THE SEVEN STEPS OF RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS.MEANING: Risk Management is the name given to a logical and systematic method of identifying, analyzing, treating and monitoring the risks involved in any activity or process. Risk Management is a methodology that helps managers makes best use of their available resources. Risk Management is now an integral part of business planning. The Risk Management process steps are a generic guide for any organization, regardless of the type of business, activity or function.

STEPS: 1) Establish the context The strategic and organizational context in which risk management will take place. For example, the nature of your business, the risks inherent in your business and your priorities. 2) Identify the risks Defining types of risk, for instance, Strategic risks to the goals and objectives of the organization. Identifying the stakeholders, (i.e., who is involved or affected). Past events, future developments.

3) Analyze the risks How likely is the risk event to happen? (Probability and frequency?) What would be the impact, cost or consequences of that event occurring? (Economic, political, social?) 4) Evaluate the risks Rank the risks according to management priorities, by risk category and rated by likelihood and possible cost or consequence. Determine inherent levels of risk. 5) Treat the risks Develop and implement a plan with specific counter-measures to address the identified risks. Consider: Priorities (Strategic and operational) Resources (human, financial and technical) Risk acceptance, (i.e., low risks)

6) Monitor and review In identifying, prioritising and treating risks, organisations make assumptions and decisions based on situations that are subject to change, (e.g., the business environment, trading patterns, or government policies).

Risk Managers must monitor activities and processes to determine the accuracy of planning assumptions and the effectiveness of the measures taken to treat the risk. Methods can include data evaluation, audit, compliance measurement.

7) Communicate & consult

Q] LINK THE MOTIVATIONAL THEORIES WITH EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT PROGRAMS."Employee involvement has become a convenient catchall term to cover a variety of techniques. For instance, it encompasses such popular ideas as employee participation or participative management, workplace democracy, empowerment, and employee ownership We define it as a participative process that uses the entire capacity of employees and is designed to encourage increased commitment to the organizations success. The underlying logic is that by involving workers in those decisions that affect them and by increasing their autonomy and control over their work lives, employees will become more motivated, more committed to the organization, more productive, and more satisfied with their jobs"

Q] EXPLAIN ROOT CAUSE ANALYZE TECHNIQUE WITH A PROPER EXAMPLE.REFER TO PPT

Q] EXPLAIN PERFORMANCE = F (A X M X O) WITH A SUITABLE EXAMPLE & MOTIVATING POTENTIAL SCORE.

Q] EXPLAIN MANAGERIAL GRID AND LEADER EMPLOYEE EXCHANGE THEORY.MANAGERIAL GRID

In the 1940s, in an attempt to identify the behavioral characteristics of successful leaders, Blake and Mouton identified two fundamental drivers of managerial behavior: the concern for getting the job done, and the concern for people doing the work. In order to provide a framework for describing management behaviors, the two variables of concern for production and concern for people were plotted on a grid showing nine degrees of concern for each, from 1 indicating a low level of concern, to 9 indicating a high level of concern. Five positions on the grid represent five differing managerial behavior patterns. The concept distinguishes 5 different leadership styles, based on the concern for people and the concern for production: 1. The Impoverished or the Indifferent Style (1, 1) (Low Production / Low People) A delegate-and-disappear management style. A basically lazy approach. The manager shows a low concern for both people and production. He (or she) avoids get-ting into trouble. His main concern is not to be held responsible for any mistakes. Managers use this style to preserve job and job seniority, protecting themselves by avoiding getting into trouble. As a result, disorganization, dissatisfaction and disharmony due to lack of effective leadership are present. 2. Country Club Style (1, 9) (Low Production / High People) One-sided, thoughtful attention to the needs of employees. The relationshiporiented manager has a high concern for people, but a low concern for production. He pays much attention to the security and comfort of the employees. He hopes that this will increase performance. He is almost incapable of employing the more punitive, coercive and legitimate powers. This inability results from fear that using

such powers could jeopardize relationships with the other team members. The organization will end up to be a friendly atmosphere, but not necessarily very productive. 3. Produce, Dictatorial or Perish Style (9, 1) (High Production / Low People) An authoritarian or compliance leader. A task-oriented manager, he has a high concern for production and a low concern for people. He finds employee needs un-important and simply a means to an end. He provides his employees with money and expects performance back. There is little or no allowance for cooperation or collaboration. He pressures his employees through rules and punishments to achieve the company goals. Heavily task-oriented people are very strong on schedules. They are intolerant of what they see as dissent (it may just be someones creativity). This dictatorial style is based on Theory X of Douglas McGregor. It is often applied by companies on the edge of real or perceived failure, such as in Crisis Management. In this case, whilst high output is achievable in the short term, much will be lost through an inevitable high labor turnover. 4. The Middle-of-the-road or the Status-quo Style (5, 5) (Medium Production / Medium People). Balance and compromise. The manager tries to balance between the competing goals of the company and the needs of the workers. The manager gives some concern to both people and production, hoping to achieve acceptable performance. He believes this is the most anyone can do. Consequently, compromises occur where neither the production nor the people needs are fully met. 5. The Team or Sound Style) (9, 9) (High Production / High People). Contribute and commit. It is the ultimate. The manager pays high concern to both people and production. Motivation is high. This soft style is based on the propositions of Theory Y of Douglas McGregor. The manager encourage-ages teamwork and commitment among employees. This style emphasizes making employees feel part of the company-family, and involving them in understanding organizational purpose and determining production needs. This method relies heavily on making employees feel they are constructive parts of the company. And this will result in a team environment organization based on trust and respect, which leads to high satisfaction and motivation and, as a result, high production. As a further refinement to Grid theory, additional managerial styles combining two or more of the basic styles are identified. For example, the paternalistic style, prescribe and guide. This style was added to the grid theory before 1999. It was redefined as 9, 1-1, 9 management where the manager swings between two extremes. There is a need to control and dominate and resistance is met with punishment. At the other extreme compliance is reinforced by recognition and appreciation. Managers using this style praise and support, but discourage challenges to their thinking. LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE (LMX) THEORY. Unlike the other leadership theories mentioned thus far, the LMX theory does not assume that managers treat all workers the same way.

a. Grouping. Because of time pressures, leaders establish a special relationship with a small group of their followers: the in-group. These individuals receive a disproportionate amount of the leaders attention and are more likely to receive special privileges. Out-group members get less of the leaders time, fewer of the preferred rewards and have leader-follower relations based on formal authority interactions. b. Group Selection. While the selection process is unclear, leaders tend to choose in-group members (high LMX) because they have attitude and personality characteristics that are similar to the leader or a higher level of competence than do the out-group members (low LMX). While the leader does the choosing, it is the followers characteristics the drive the leaders categorizing decision. The selections appear to be relatively stable over time. c. Maintaining LMX. Leaders induce LMX by rewarding those employees with whom they want a closer linkage and punishing those with whom they do not. High LMX employees are allowed to communicate frequently with the supervisor, while low LMX employees are discouraged from doing so. d. LMX Theory Summary. Research has been generally supportive and may be tied to the concept of the self-fulfilling prophecy: when leaders expect the best from a set of employees, they tend to get it. In general, research has shown the following: 1) Leaders do differentiate among followers. 2) The in-group and out-group disparities are not random. 3) In-group members will have higher performance ratings, lower turnover intentions, greater satisfaction with their superior, and higher overall satisfaction.

Q] WHAT IS FIEDLER CONTINGENCY MODEL?

One of the first models of this type was developed by Fred Fiedler. It proposes that effective group performance depends on the proper match between the leaders style and the degree to which the situation gives control to the leader. Identifying Leadership Style: - Fiedler created the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) questionnaire, which purports to measure whether a person is task or relationship-oriented. High LPC scores indicate a relationship-oriented leader; low LPC scores indicate a task-oriented leader. Fiedler assumed that an individuals leadership style is fixed. If the situation and style are not optimal, then the situation needs to be modified or the leader needs to be replaced. Defining the Situation: - Fiedler identified three contingency dimensions that defined the key situational factors that will determine the appropriate leadership style. 1) Leader-member relations: The degrees of confidence, trust, and respect members have in their leader. Measured as good or poor. 2) Task structure: the degree to which the job assignments are structured or unstructured. Measured as high or low. 3) Position power: the degree of influence a leader has over hiring, firing, discipline, promotions, and salary increases. Measured as strong or weak.

Eight Potential Situations. The combination of the measurements of these

three dimensions creates eight potential situations (octets) that a leader might face.

FindingsMatching Leaders and Situations.1) Task-oriented leaders tend to perform better in situations that are either very favorable to them or which are very unfavorable (category I, II, III, VII, or VIII). 2) Relationship-oriented leaders perform better in moderately favorable situations (categories IV through VI).

Good

Recently Fiedler has condensed these eight situations down to three based on the degree of control: task-oriented leaders perform best in situations of high and low control while relationship-oriented leaders perform best in moderate control situations.

Q] Explain Situational Leadership Theory with proper example.As above.

Q] EXPLAIN SCAMPER TECHNIQUE WITH PROPER EXAMPLE.Every problem invites a solution and, needless to say, problem-solving techniques are numerous. The SCAMPER technique, for one, uses a set of directed, ideaspurring questions to suggest some addition to, or modication of, something that already exists. It has also received much attention as a learning tool that fosters awareness, drive, uency, exibility, and originality. The stimulus comes from being asked to answer queries that one would not normally pose. The changes that SCAMPER stands for are SSubstitute (e.g., components, materials, people) CCombine (e.g., mix, combine with other assemblies or services, and integrate) AAdapt (e.g., alter, change function, use part of another element) MMagnify/Modify (e.g., increase or reduce in scale, change shape, modify attributes) PPut to other uses EEliminate (e.g., remove elements, simplify, reduce to core functionality) RRearrange/Reverse (e.g., turn inside out or upside down)

Q] EXPLAIN SIX THINKING HATS STRATEGY AND USE IT TO RESOLVE A HYPOTHETICAL WORKPLACE PROBLEM.'Six Thinking Hats' is an important and powerful technique. It is used to look at decisions from a number of important perspectives. This forces you to move outside your habitual thinking style, and helps you to get a more rounded view of a situation. This tool was created by Edward de Bono in his book 'Hats.

Many successful people think from a very rational, positive viewpoint. This is part of the reason that they are successful. Often, though, they may fail to look at a problem from an emotional, intuitive, creative or negative viewpoint. This can mean that they underestimate resistance to plans, fail to make creative leaps and do not make essential contingency plans. Similarly, pessimists may be excessively defensive, and more emotional people may fail to look at decisions calmly and rationally. If you look at a problem with the 'Six Thinking Hats' technique, then you will solve it using all approaches. Your decisions and plans will mix ambition, skill in execution, public sensitivity, creativity and good contingency planning. How to Use the Tool: You can use Six Thinking Hats in meetings or on your own. In meetings it has the benefit of blocking the confrontations that happen when people with different thinking styles discuss the same problem. Each 'Thinking Hat' is a different style of thinking. These are explained below: White Hat: With this thinking hat you focus on the data available. Look at the information you have, and see what you can learn from it. Look for gaps in your knowledge, and either try to fill them or take account of them. This is where you analyze past trends, and try to extrapolate from historical data. Red Hat: 'Wearing' the red hat, you look at problems using intuition, gut reaction, and emotion. Also try to think how other people will react emotionally. Try to understand the responses of people who do not fully know your reasoning. Black Hat: Using black hat thinking, look at all the bad points of the decision. Look at it cautiously and defensively. Try to see why it might not work. This is important because it highlights the weak points in a plan. It allows you to eliminate them, alter them, or prepare contingency plans to counter them. Black Hat thinking helps to make your plans 'tougher' and more resilient. It can also help you to spot fatal flaws and risks before you embark on a course of action. Black Hat thinking is one of the real benefits of this technique, as many successful people get so used to thinking positively that often they cannot see problems in advance. This leaves them under-prepared for difficulties. Yellow Hat: The yellow hat helps you to think positively. It is the optimistic viewpoint that helps you to see all the benefits of the decision and the value in it. Yellow Hat thinking helps you to keep going when everything looks gloomy and difficult. Green Hat: The Green Hat stands for creativity. This is where you can develop creative solutions to a problem. It is a freewheeling way of thinking, in which there is little criticism of ideas. A whole range of creativity tools can help you here. Blue Hat:

The Blue Hat stands for process control. This is the hat worn by people chairing meetings. When running into difficulties because ideas are running dry, they may direct activity into Green Hat thinking. When contingency plans are needed, they will ask for Black Hat thinking, etc. A variant of this technique is to look at problems from the point of view of different professionals (e.g. doctors, architects, sales directors, etc.) or different customers. Example: The directors of a property company are looking at whether they should construct a new office building. The economy is doing well, and the amount of vacant office space is reducing sharply. As part of their decision they decide to use the 6 Thinking Hats technique during a planning meeting. Looking at the problem with the White Hat, they analyze the data they have. They examine the trend in vacant office space, which shows a sharp reduction. They anticipate that by the time the office block would be completed, that there will be a severe shortage of office space. Current government projections show steady economic growth for at least the construction period. With Red Hat thinking, some of the directors think the proposed building looks quite ugly. While it would be highly cost-effective, they worry that people would not like to work in it. When they think with the Black Hat, they worry that government projections may be wrong. The economy may be about to enter a 'cyclical downturn', in which case the office building may be empty for a long time. If the building is not attractive, then companies will choose to work in another better-looking building at the same rent. With the Yellow Hat, however, if the economy holds up and their projections are correct, the company stands to make a great deal of money. If they are lucky, maybe they could sell the building before the next downturn, or rent to tenants on long-term leases that will last through any recession. With Green Hat thinking they consider whether they should change the design to make the building more pleasant. Perhaps they could build prestige offices that people would want to rent in any economic climate. Alternatively, maybe they should invest the money in the short term to buy up property at a low cost when a recession comes. The Blue Hat has been used by the meeting's Chair to move between the different thinking styles. He or she may have needed to keep other members of the team from switching styles, or from criticizing other peoples' points. It is well worth reading Edward de Bono's book 6 Thinking Hats for more information on this technique.