Question

Read the following caselet and answer the question that follows.

Mr. Rajiv Singhal, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Loha India Ltd. (a steel manufacturing company), had just been visited by several other directors of the company. The directors were upset with the recent actions of the company president, Mr. Ganesh Thakur. They demanded that the board consider firing the president.

Mr. Thakur, recently appointed as president, had undertaken to solve some of the management-employee problems by dealing directly with individuals as often as possible. The company did not have a history of strikes or any other form of collective action and was considered to have a good work culture. However, Mr. Thakur felt that by dealing directly with individuals, he could show the management's concern for the employees. An important step Mr. Thakur took was to negotiate the wages of the supervisors with each supervisor one on one. In these negotiation meetings he did not involve anyone else, including the Personnel Department which reported to him, so that he could take an unbiased decision. After negotiation, a wage contract was drawn up for each supervisor. He felt this would recognise and reward the better performers. Mr. Thakur carried out this process for most of the supervisors, except those working the night shift. For them he drew up the contracts on his own, benchmarking the night shift supervisors' wages against the day shift supervisors' wages.

For several days, Ram Lal, a night shift supervisor, had been trying to get an appointment with Mr. Thakur about his wages. He was upset, not only because he could not see the president, but also because there had been no discussion about his wage contract before it was put into effect. As a family man with six dependents, he felt his weekly wage should be higher than what he had been given.

Last Thursday afternoon, Ram Lal stopped by the president's office and tried to see him. Mr. Thakur's secretary refused his request on the grounds that Mr. Thakur was busy. Angry, Ram Lal walked into the president's office and confronted the startled Mr. Thakur with his demand for a better wage. Mr. Thakur stood up and told Ram Lal to get out of his office and raise his grievance through the official channel. Ram Lal took a swing at the president, who in turn punched Ram Lal on the jaw and knocked him unconscious.

The most important causal factor for this entire episode could be:

• A. Trying to follow a divide-and-rule policy in his dealings with the supervisors.
• B. A paternalistic approach towards mature individuals in the organisation.
• C. A legalistic approach to employee problems.
• D. Inconsistent dealings of Mr. Thakur with the supervisors.

Hint:

Ask which option explains the difference in how day shift and night shift supervisors were treated.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Understanding the Question.
We must find the root cause of the whole episode, from the wage negotiations to Ram Lal's outburst, not just of one small part of it.

Step 2: Key idea.
A root cause should explain the entire chain of events: why Ram Lal felt singled out, why he could not get his contract discussed, and why the confrontation happened.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation.
Mr. Thakur successfully negotiated one on one with most supervisors but handled the night shift supervisors differently, drawing up their contracts on his own instead of negotiating. This difference in treatment, applying one method to most supervisors and a different, unilateral method to the night shift, is what left Ram Lal without a voice in his own wage contract. That is an inconsistency in how Mr. Thakur dealt with his supervisors as a group.
Divide-and-rule would mean Mr. Thakur deliberately split supervisors to weaken them as a group, but the caselet gives no sign this was his intent, his stated aim was recognising good performers.
A paternalistic approach means treating employees as if they cannot make their own decisions; the caselet does not show this attitude, Mr. Thakur's dealings were about wage contracts, not about overriding employees' personal choices.
A legalistic approach means sticking rigidly to rules and procedure; instead, Mr. Thakur skipped the Personnel Department and acted informally, which is the opposite of legalistic.
So the one factor that explains why the night shift supervisors, and Ram Lal in particular, were left without proper negotiation is the inconsistency in Mr. Thakur's dealings with different groups of supervisors.

Step 4: Final Answer.
The most important causal factor for the entire episode is the inconsistent dealings of Mr. Thakur with the supervisors.