View IGNOU MBA Ms01 MMPC-001 last 3 year exam question paper. You can also get solved assignments of MS-01 Management Functions and Organisational Processes and sample paper for exam.
View important link
- IGNOU Course details and sample paper link
- Sample paper of ignou for exam
- Solved Assignments of IGNOU courses
Also available Management Functions and Organisational Processes MCQs with Answer
Dec 2021 IGNOU Exam Paper with solution
- Discuss the dynamics of group formation and various types of groups. Explain their influence on organisational function.
- Briefly discuss different channels of communication and their impact on organisations.
- Explain types of Managerial Decisions and describe any two models of decision-making and their relevance in the present day context.
- Describe and discuss various tasks a manager has to perform to manage the organisation.
- Write short notes on any three of the following :
(i) Delegation (ii) Organisational culture (iii) Interpersonal relations (iv) Organisational conflicts (v) Managerial ethos
Section–B
Read carefully the case and answer the questions given at the end : Sarvodaya Structurals Limited was engaged in the fabrication of heavy structurals. The company had six shops besides engineering, accounts, personnel, sales and administrative departments. It employed 7000 men. The chief executive of the company was the General Manager.
In one of the shops employing 1000 men, 900 tons of structurals were fabricated every month. The day-to-day management of the shop was entrusted to the Manager, who was assisted by the Senior Foreman. The three main sections of the shop were Preparation, Marking and Finishing.
In the Marking and Finishing Sections, the work was supervised by two Foremen each. The Preparation Section was under the direct supervision of the Senior Foreman, who, in addition, planned and coordinated the work of all the three sections. The Preparation Section was responsible for the collection and classification of works orders, for reading intricate machine and structural, drawings, determination of priorities of execution orders, checking bills of materials and processing raw materials for fabrication. This section had 200 men on the rolls.
In 1981, the shop started receiving heavy orders, and as the work-load increased considerably, the Senior Foreman was unable to cope with it. On the Manager’s recommendation, the General Manager sanctioned two new posts of Foremen for the Preparation Section. Two Progress Incharges attached to the Senior Foreman were thus rendered surplus and their principal work, namely reporting progress of work in the shop, was transferred to the Production Planning Department. This action of the General Manager had the concurrence of the Manager.
The Incharges themselves were not transferred to the Production Planning Department, as this had its own departmental men to take care of this work. They continued on the rolls of the shop, awaiting orders for transfer to vacancies of equivalent grade in other shops.
The minimum qualifications for the recently created posts of Foremen, prescribed by a Joint Committee, were a diploma in engineering and five years’ experience in structural shop. The posts were advertised for in the organisation but none of the applicants was found suitable for appointment. The Incharges concerned who were non-matriculates, did not apply, as they did not possess the prescribed qualifications.
The posts were therefore advertised in the press. Three outside candidates applied. Only one appeared for the interview and he was not considered suitable for appointment.
The case of the two surplus Incharges did not come within the purview of the grievance procedure in operation, in the company, as it involved a change in the minimum qualifications prescribed for the post of Foreman. As, however, they were powerful members of the Union Executive, the Secretary of the recognized trade union took up their case for appointment as foreman with the General Manager. The Union Secretary argued that they had been doing part of the foreman’s job before the posts were created and in the absence of suitable candidates they should be preferred for promotion.
The General Manager maintained that the men concerned were not qualified for the posts and did not possess the technical background required to perform the Foreman’s duties. The written job-descriptions of the posts of Progress Incharge and Foreman prepared by the Joint Committee indicated that the job content of the former was only about 25% of that of a Foreman, and only, on the administrative side. They did not supervise the work of the Preparation Section in any way, where there were mistries in line for promotion. The latter, though good in their own area, could not be promoted as they were not technically qualified to hold the higher position.
After prolonged discussion, the General Manager conceded that in the circumstances, the Incharges would be given an opportunity to prove their fitness for the job. It was also agreed that in the first place, test specifications for the posts of Foreman would be worked out by a Joint Committee and given to the men concerned. If they wished, they would also be given guidance for a period of three months, to learn the job. They would then be subjected to a test by the Training Officer, and if they passed the test, they would be promoted to Foremen.
The Manager communicated this decision to the Senior Foreman in the presence of the two men. He readily agreed to give them the necessary guidance whenever they requested it. However, they maintained that the decision was not only to give them guidance when asked for, but fulltime training and guidance in order to enable them to pass the test. On hearing this, the Senior Foreman remarked : ‘I have no one to spare primarily for the purpose of training them to pass the test’.
Questions :
(i) Discuss the significant issues in the case.
(ii) Identify and discuss the stage and action required to tackle the problem.
(iii) Critically evaluate the grievance and the follow-up action.
June 2021 IGNOU Exam paper
- “There can be no control without a plan and plans cannot be successfully implemented in the absence of controls.” Discuss with examples.
- Describe and discuss the dimensions and determinants of organisational culture.
- Briefly discuss the reasons for the changes to be undertaken by the organisation. Cite suitable examples.
- What is Delegation? Explain the problems encountered in delegation and the prerequisites to be considered for effective delegation.
- Write short notes on any three of the following:
(a) Effective Communication
(b) Management by Objectives
(c) Johari Window
(d) Coercive Power
(e) Decision-making
IGNOU Case Study
Robert, one of the field sales managers of Major Tools Ltd., had been promoted to his first headquarters assignment as an assistant product manager for a group of products with which he was relatively unfamiliar. Shortly after he had taken over this new assignment, one of the company’s Vice Presidents, Smith, called for a meeting of product managers and other staff to plan marketing strategies. Robert’s superior (the product manager) was unable to attend, so the director of marketing, Reynolds, invited Robert to the meeting to help and orient him to his new job.
Because of the large gathering, Reynolds was rather brief in introducing Robert to Smith. After the meeting began, Smith — a crusty veteran with a reputation for bluntness — began asking a series of probing questions, which most of the product managers were unable to answer in detail. Suddenly, he turned to Robert and questioned him quite closely about his group of products. Somewhat confused, Robert confessed that he really did not know the answers.
It was immediately apparent to Reynolds that Smith had forgotten or had failed to understand that Robert was new to the job and was attending the meeting more for his own orientation than to contribute to it. He was about to offer a discreet explanation when Smith, visibly annoyed with what he took to be Robert’s lack of preparation, snapped, “Gentlemen, you have just seen an example of sloppy staff work, and there is no excuse for it.”
Reynolds had to make a quick decision. He could interrupt Smith and point out that he had judged Robert unfairly, but that might embarrass both his superior and his subordinate. Alternatively, he could wait until after the meeting and offer an explanation in private. As Smith quickly became engrossed in another conversation, Reynolds followed the second approach. Glancing at Robert, Reynolds noted that his expression was one of mixed anger and dismay. After catching his eye, Reynolds winked at Robert as a discreet reassurance that he understood and that the damage could be repaired. After an hour, Smith,
evidently dissatisfied with what he termed the ‘inadequate planning’ of the marketing department in general, abruptly declared the meeting over. As he did so, he turned to Reynolds and asked him to remain behind for a moment. To Reynolds’ surprise, Smith immediately raised the question of Robert himself. In fact, it turned out to have been his main reason for asking Reynolds to remain behind. “Look,” he said, “I want you to tell me frankly, do you think I was too rough with that kid ?” Relieved, Reynolds said “Yes, you were. I was going to speak to you about it.”
Smith explained to Reynolds, that Robert was new to his job had not registered in his mind adequately when they had been introduced, and that it was only some time after his own outburst that the nagging thought began to occur to him that what he had done was inappropriate and unfair. “How well do you know him ?” he asked. “Do you think I hurt him ?”
For a moment Reynolds took the measure of his superior. Then he replied evenly, “I do not know him very well yet, but yes, I think you hurt him.”
“Damn, that is unforgivable,” said Smith. He then telephoned his secretary to call Robert and ask him to report to his office immediately. A few moments later, Robert returned, looking perplexed and uneasy. As he entered, Smith came out from behind his desk and met him in the middle of the office. Standing face to face with Robert, who was 20 years and four organization levels his junior, he said, “Look, I have done something stupid and I want to apologize. I had no right to treat you like that. I should have remembered that you were new to your job but I did not. I am sorry.”
Robert was somewhat flustered. He muttered his thanks for the apology. “As long as you are here, young man,” Smith continued, “I want to make a few things clear to you in the presence of your boss’s boss. Your job is to make sure that people like myself do not make stupid decisions. Obviously, we think you are qualified for your job or we would not have brought you in here. But it takes time to learn any job. Three months from now I will expect you to know the answers to any questions about products. Until then,” he said, thrusting out his hand for the younger man to shake, “You have my complete confidence. And thank you for letting me correct a mistake.”
Questions:
(a) Discuss the impact of Smith’s outburst on the organizational members. get ignou assignment solution
(b) What do you think the apology meant to Robert ?
(c) What is the most important aspect of the relations between management levels in this company?
Dec 2020 IGNOU Exam paper
- Briefly describe the importance of communication in an organisation. Discuss various Channels of Communication and their relevance, giving few examples.
- “In the Management Process Control is a facilitating function aiding the organisation to accomplish the set objectives.” Elucidate the statement. Briefly discuss the strategies of control.
- Discuss successful vs. effective leader. Describe and discuss any two theories of leadership styles and their merits and demerits.
- Briefly discuss techniques use in different steps involved in decision-making. Describe how to overcome barriers to effective decision-making, citing examples.
- Write short notes on any three of the following:
(i) Conflict Management
(ii) Line and Staff Relationships
(iii) Approaches to Co-ordination
(iv) Formal and Informal Organisation
(v) Network Structure - Read the following case and answer the questions given at the end:
Vishal Industries Ltd., is a medium sized engineering factory employing 250 employees.
The Factory Manager advised the Personnel Manager of the company to select a right man to fill up the vacancy of a “Time-Keeper”. The Personnel Manager inserted an advertisement for this post in prominent local newspapers and received a large number of applications although specific job description and job requirements were embodied in the advertisement. After preliminary screening of applications, the Personnel Manager selected only 6 applications out of 197 and sent them “Application Bank” for collecting their detailed information. On receipt of Applications and on further scrutiny, it was observed that two candidates were age-barred, although they had a good experience at their credit and one candidate had a suspicious personal life. The Personnel Manager therefore selected only 3 candidates and sent them call-letters for a personal interview on a stipulated date.
Only two candidates out of three appeared for the interview before the Interview Panel consisting of three interviewers. The panel had therefore to take a decision on selection, either of Mr. Tukaram Patil or Mr. Girish Mahajan. The personal traits and merits of these two candidates are as follows:
Mr. Tukaram Patil, a young man of 30 years, has worked for a year in the Time Office of a reputed company. He is an exceptionally sociable, amicable individual who enjoys mixing with employees. His verbal skills are average, hut he has a good degree of hardness. He can sit late in office and prepare payrolls of employees and complete the checking of pay- sheets a day before the actual date of payment. He does not demand extra remuneration or over-time for sitting late hours in office. He is a good sportsman also and has worked as a secretary of a sports club. A glaring weakness as revealed during the interview is that Mr. Patil’s memory is not strong and he may forget a task assigned to him. But he is straight-forward and frankly accepts his limitations.
Mr. Girish Mahajan, is also a youth, aged 25, and has a good personality, above average communication skills, but at times is “rough” in dealing with people. His clerical and computational skills are excellent. He does not on his own mix with people or take part in extra curricular activities. He joined a textile mill as a clerk in the Time Office and was promoted to the post of Assistant Time Keeper within a period of 5 years. He is against the principle of sitting late in office. His sense of time keeping, punctuality is good and regular. He feels that attendance of employees must be posted in the regular register on the same day and paysheets must be kept ready on 1st of every month and sent to A/c Department, for checking before 3rd inst. Similarly, he prepares PF/ESI statements and returns in time and submits the same to respective Government authorities in time. However, Mr. Girish Mahajan is short tempered and at times he also had heated arguments with managerial executives. He limits his existence to his working table and if anybody unconnected with the time-office work comes near his table, he loses his temper.
Questions:
(a) In terms or overall capabilities and job requirements, whom will you recommend out of the two candidates, in your capacity as a Personnel Manager?
(b) In case the other two members of the Interview Panel differ from your decision, how will you convince them?
(c) As a Manager HR, what will you do to improve the interpersonal relations in the organization?
June 2020 IGNOU Exam paper
- Briefly discuss the various responsibilities of a Professional Manager and their relevance in the present day context. Cite examples.
- Describe the importance of Decision-Making and explain the three phases in Decision Making Process. Discuss any two Models of Decision-Making Process and their advantages and limitations.
- Briefly discuss the Antecedents of Organizational Change and the various strategies to cope with change by citing examples.
- “Interpersonally Competent Managers allow their subordinates to challenge their views and to question the organization’s norms, policies, rules and objective.” Substantiate this statement with relevant examples.
- Write short notes on any three of the following:
(a) Bathers to Effective Communication
(b) Managerial Ethos
(c) Decentralization
(d) Types of Power
(e) Process of Strategy Formulation
Section B
- Read the following case and answer the questions given at the end:
Major Mohanty, a retired man from the army, joined as MD in Sunrise Limited, when the company was passing through a very bad period with declining production and productivity, heavy losses and low morale of the employees. Major Mohanty, after having made in-depth, logical and strategic studies of the situation, immediately flagged on what he called ‘operation rejuvenation’, with exclusive thrust on production and productivity related issues. People related matters were of no consequence for him, for he believed that people, by and large, are dull, lazy, shirkers and non-starters and as such work should be extracted from them only through constant watch, close supervision, complete and rigorous command and control. His style of functioning did yield some results, but before any impact could be seen, he abruptly left the organization, having got a better assignment in the United States of America.
Major Mohanty was immediately succeeded by Mr. Soni, a man who had made a name for his balanced approach to people and production through participative style of management in his immediate position as the Deputy MD of a large organization in a similar product line. He was, in fact, commended for his maximum concern for both people and production, and for bringing about an ideal integration and harmony between the needs of the employees and those of production.
In the present company also, Mr. Soni continued his policies of participative management with equal concern for both production and people. With a view to reviving the company back to health, he instituted some major changes. First of all, he decentralized the organization so that the subordinates could exercise their discretion and initiative in decision-making, as also their imagination and creativity in performing other managerial functions. Further he empowered the junior managers to incur expenditure upto an approved limit without seeking prior approval of the higher management. The communication system was also improved to facilitate free flow of upward and downward communication.
Mr. Soni also adopted several measures to reduce costs and wasteful expenditure. He banned donations to charitable institutions, but increased the amount being spent on the welfare activities of the employees. Will Mr. Soni’s managerial style prove to be effective in ensuring a bright future of the company ? Some employees are of the view that a lot of things are being done, but they might not be effective in the long-run. Others disagree with them, and say, ‘Okay, we will give it a trial’.
Questions:
(a) Was Major Mohanty a theory ‘X’ or a theory Manager ? Explain with reasons.
(b) Is Mr. Soni a theory ‘X’ or a theory ‘Y’ Manager ? Weill you advise Mr. Soni to change his presumptions about the nature of people at work ? Give reasons in support of your advice.
(c) How do you describe Mr. Soni’s mangerial style in the light of ‘Managerial Grid’ of Blake and Mouton ? Can it be regarded as the best style of management ? Support your answer with arguments.
(d) Identify the possible problems that can arise from Mr. Soni’s way of institutionalizing the changes in rules and regulations.
