- Pages: 6
- Word count: 1301
- Category: College Example
A limited time offer! Get a custom sample essay written according to your requirements urgent 3h delivery guaranteedOrder Now
The case study tells about the Credit Rating Agency Limited (CRA) and Construction Development Board (CDB) which makes an agreement that the CRA would provide grading services for the construction entities and analyses the financial statements. CDB would provide technical person to know about the operational analysis of the construction. Continent Construction Limited (CCL) is the construction company which has many project sites, constructs roads and bridges in India. The CRA and CDB have got a new project to grade the company based on all construction entities. CCL projects are located at Nashik and Jalgaon site in which Prashant Lakhera and Gagan Vedi are appointed for the project as the financial analysts from CRA and Deepak Ghoshis as the project lead from CDB. They should work on a report that has to be submitted within the few days. From the starting day of the project, they didn’t spent time to know each other.
Rather most of the time was spent for explaining the CRAs rating methodology. When they visited the Nashik project site, Ghosh communicated native language with the workers and when Prashant and Gagan intervened for explanation he says that it is all under his control. Since Ghosh has experience in construction sector so the team relied on him for the information. Since Ghosh is a government employee he thinks that he has more knowledge than private employees. The same procedure is repeated for the other site (Jalgaon). Ghosh made individual visits to sites without informing the team. Prashant and Vedi constrained themselves from asking pertinent questions. Ghosh gave update about the status of the project to his Boss without involving Prashant and Vedi. Prashant and Vedi missed the opportunity talking to Boss and also working as team with Ghosh.
They never discussed the deadline of project completion. Later they stopped meeting and discussing about project, which allowed frustration to buildup. For Dinner with the client, Ghosh arrived late and also he didn’t greet other team members. Vedi and Prashant complete their report but when Prashant asked Ghosh for his contribution to the report, Ghosh showed his rudeness and walked away from the team. So Prashant has to decide what to do to complete the report within the deadline. Personality Traits
MBTI Personality Model
Personality| Deepak Ghosh| Prashant Lakhera|
Extravert/Introvert| He is an extravert person and involves in the discussions.| He is an introvert person and does not want to speak openly.| Sensing/Intuitive| | |
Thinking/Feeling| | |
Judging/Perceiving| | |
Big Five Personality Model
Personality| Deepak Ghosh| Prashant Lakhera|
Extraversion| He is an extravert and interacts with the people (local workers and site engineer).| He tries to intervene in the matters. He tries to participate in all meetings and discussions.| Agreeableness| He is not so cooperative and responsive.| He is cooperative and friendly with the team.| Conscientiousness| He does not complete his task and does not work with the team.| He is responsible and completes his work on time and well organised.| Emotional Stability| He is not so flexible and reacted to the situations violently.| He tries to be calm and can handle the situations.| Openness to experience| He is not so adjustable in any team and shows interest in his work.| He is adjustable to part of any environment.|
1. Understanding the Ghosh personality so that Prashant can make the relevant changes. 2. To make Ghosh realise that completion of the report to the client within the timeline is priority. 3. To enable Prashant as a decision maker about getting the information from the site rather than being passive analyst. 4. To develop and maintain one to one relationship so that it can result in successful interaction and completion of the project.
1. Ghosh did not complete his operational analysis report when the Prashant and Vedi completed their part and this may lead to delay in the submission. 2. Ghosh irregular behaviour and his over confidence made the team to react and apologise the client. 3. Prashant and Vedi became calm and did not show interest in the construction site due to Ghosh, who did not respond properly to questions asked by them.
1. Team/Group Dynamics: Since Ghosh is doing the task without involving the team so by focusing him on team building exercises knows about his team members each other better. It also results in a productive work and they can submit the report on timeline.
* Pros: The team spirit increases and improves one to one relationship with his team members. He might feel good to be with his colleagues in an informal way and have better terms with them formally too. * Cons: He might get to open up with them and become more rude and straight forward.
2. Prashant should be proactive: When Prashant and Vedi asked Ghosh for the inspection details in the construction, Ghosh did not inform anything about the status. By intervening Ghosh many times he did not respond properly so they became passive analysts. Prashant should take the initiative by asking the details from site engineer so that the job might get done faster.
* Pros: The proactive attitude of Prashant will improve his working strengths and will help in understanding the analysis of the operation site. * Cons: Since Prashant is taking the control of the project; Ghosh thinks he is not given respect so this will lead to his resignation.
3. Check point/Status Calls: Ghosh and other team members should go for the check point conference calls on the status of the work and progress of the project for every two days with all team members and including their boss, so that can improve transference of the team work and status of the project. Also they can plan for the next action items and issues that were reported in previous calls.
* Pros: Ghosh will share the status and the knowledge on the construction filed. So there is a chance that other team members also will become skilled at construction field. * Cons: Ghosh is asymmetrical and he might not attend the checkpoint calls for every two days and share the status with other team members.
4. Report to the higher official about Ghosh: Ghosh takes his individual decisions without consulting the team and refuses to give information to others. So Prashant can report to his manager Amol Phadnis about the status, he can resolve the issue by speaking to him indirectly or make Ghosh realise about the importance of the project.
* Pros: Ghosh will work and coordinate with the team. He might complete the report on time. * Cons: Since Ghosh is obsessed of himself so he will quit the job.
5. Intimating to Ghosh’s Supervisor: Lakhera’s boss Amol Phadnis can call up Ghosh’s boss Pavneet Arora and tell the incident which happened during meeting. As Ghosh use to inform about daily report to his boss, Amol can request Arora for details of those information. He can also request to help him out by sending brief report or he can request Ghosh’s boss to come down to office along with Ghosh so that both of them can complete the work in given time.
* Pros: By doing this way, they can submit the report to the grading committee in time.
BEST PROPOSED SOLUTION
RELATIONSHIP WITH THEORITICAL CONCEPTS
MANEGERIAL LEARINGS FROM THE CASE STUDY
* To understand how to manage and work effectively in a team. *
Improving Ethical Behaviour: To know how to behave with the higher officials in the work place and to identify the right and wrong conduct. * To actively take the initiative or challenge to improve the circumstances based on the situation. * To understand the importance of the employee and ability to open up communication channels with others.