Words: 1801
We also got to know bout the decision making processes and the thought processes that lead to making decisions. On the way we realized that individuals think in different ways and hence, diverse opinions of diverse individuals in discussions only leads to more introspection and hence, better decisions. While discussing cases we learnt about various problems any organization can face due to its structure and way of functioning. As we discussed cases relating to a variety of organizations we got a wider outlook about how different organizations require different kind of solutions when it comes to their problems.
We also got to know that there is no one way to success when it comes to organizations and different organizations function in different ways to achieve success and even success has different meanings for them. Another very important learning was the importance of keeping personal and professional relationships separate and keeping expectations low. This helps reduce dependence on others and avoid making assumptions. The course gave us an opportunity to learn about various dilemmas a manager can face with respect to an organization’s culture and what different avenues are available in order to solve the name.
We also learnt about the shortcomings in Government organizations & how the mentality and thinking of the employees are negatively affecting their working and effectiveness. Additional benefits also included hardcore knowledge about their working, improvements, etc. Were also a part of the course. Another very important lesson was knowing how internal and external environment actually affects the functioning of businesses and often leads to major changes in the structure/working of the organizations – be it public or private.
If an organization is not able to adapt to hose changes it often leads to weakening and eventual closure of that Organization. Apart from all of the above stated learning we also had fruitful discussions on some general awareness topics and analyzed the reasons for some of the things happening in the country. This helped us in realizing the fact that we must consider arguments to which we may not agree while analyzing and evaluating certain arguments in order to reach a conclusion which is wholesome and hence, correct.
Which aspect of the course generated most of the learning? In our opinion the use of case studies in the course generated most of the learning. This is because: Having read all the cases before coming to lecture we already had our opinions and views about the problems at hand. This lead to discussions which were diverse and fruitful in nature. As mentioned above we learnt that in order to reach a proper conclusion one must consider views which run contrary to our own views as the possibility of error of judgment is always there.
We got to know about a variety of organizations and problems associated with them We learnt how to derive lessons from situations other than business situations and till have expertise to relate them with business situations. Cases provide a very practical learning experience which is more interesting when compared to the plain theoretical way of learning. What were some of the pedagogical methods were you exposed to? Some of the pedagogical methods we were exposed to were: 1 . Case study based method: We were given case studies to read which we had to read prior to the lectures and analysis was done during the lecture. . Discussions based method: Discussions were held on various topics in the lectures which helped us enrich our knowledge on the topics discussed. . Lectures based method: This method was used for topics on which we had little knowledge. Sir threw light on those topics and helped us to start thinking on the same. 4. Readings (Books) based method: Here we were taught by the method of reading a book which had lessons from eminent professors and who’s who of the fields. 5. Presentation based approach: In this case we were asked to give presentations on topics.
This helped us understand the topic better as we had to present everything in a short and crisp manner which requires proper understanding of the bigger picture. . Report/ Executive summary based approach: In this method we had to prepare reports on themes which ranged from abstract to our lives to cases we discussed in the lectures. In what ways has the course allowed the group members to enhance their understanding about each other? We as a study group always divide the work between members.
Now in order to divide the work we needed to know each other’s strengths and weaknesses. At first everyone experimented with all kinds of work but soon this process of dividing work helped know about each other’s strengths and nakedness. This has helped us gel well together, appreciate each other and hence, form a close bond between each other. Another way the course has helped us is that we have developed empathy towards each other. Many a times we have assignments which come with a strict deadline. Doing endless hours of work together helps us identify with one another.
As the topics put forward to us are novel and require insights from diverse backgrounds we have also come to respect opinions and views of each other (as we do come from different backgrounds). In what ways can the roof distinguish between individual members in the group than the group itself? It’s of extreme importance to work as a group in order to produce an output. That can be said even of individuals. The question to be answered become how an individual output transfers to a group output and what difference there is in the kind and quality of output. It boils down to skill or lack thereof.
In our group, there was an ideal mix. Each person offered a facet to the group. While there were overlaps, overall, it became an avenue of utilization of different skills. There was a general reception that while we were a single unit, it was individual effort and contributions that made the group. Another point to discuss was the different levels of understanding we had. There was a mix in terms of background, experience and thought. What helped in bringing different people on the same level was that while the output was at a uniform level inputs were at different levels.
So, rather than disagreeing on others views to bring everyone on the same level, we decided to utilize each level of understanding to give a result that would cover all aspects. Were there differences in the group? In what aspects? Differences in the group were very minimal. The overall dynamics of the group were never affected. We would attribute this to two reasons. The first would be that we trusted each other’s capabilities, ideas and efforts. The second was the number of members in our group that was higher than most other groups. So at any point of time, there were a certain number of members working on any given task.
And the first reason came into play here as the persons who were not present at a particular time, trusted the others with the task. The ones who were working on it would then rife the others. This created a constructive group. The fact that it becomes difficult to recollect instance of differences indicates two things – either we were a tight knit unit or, we haven’t interacted enough. But the time-frame over which this group has worked together would indicate the former because irrespective of what, group members were able to suck in the others to involvement in the group. Personal differences are another aspect to consider.
There were hardly any such differences because each person in the group, rather than pointing out differences in character, need themselves to adapt to each other at different levels. Thus, the of group characteristic was on a single level. How was one group different from the other? We can analyze two groups – group J against other study groups; sub-groups inside group J. Group J, was significantly different from other groups owing to the approach we had to work. A normal group would converge to discuss/work. We would delegate tasks such that at least 3 members would work on any given task (more welcome), so as to not affect the work.
This was only possible because of the number of members n the group. The second point to look at, is the sub-group. Within us, there certainly existed sub-groups. That worked well for us as tasks delegated would see better productivity since a sub-group as a whole would work on a task together most of the time. And as pointed out earlier, that we trusted each other’s capabilities and even more that of a collective sub-group, we were able to form an ‘ideal group’ which though often seen impossible, was one of those odd exceptions.
What understanding about organizations was the most revealing and how did the understanding arrive? The biggest understanding about organizations was that irrespective of the kind of principles, concepts, thoughts or processes organizations follow, the numbers don’t work. That, as numbers go up, it becomes difficult to bring everyone under one umbrella. So the challenge for an organization is to advocate a variety of methods in order to tailor to different situations. Even the best organizations irrespective of their success, continue to face a number of issues.
While this is purely from the behavioral perspective, it is also possible that at times, it’s these differences that sometimes contribute to the performance of the organization or rather, the output. This was evident in a case study discussed on a company ‘Ad-creations’. While the organization did have its issues that go with people management, the company output wasn’t being affected on measurable parameters. An individual concept that we found intriguing was the Prisoner’s Dilemma, where two prisoners go through mental tribulations in order to decide who will get the least amount of punishment.
We found that Reach (from ‘Values in Decision’) faced the name problem, she chose the most feasible option where she’d receive less harm. In an organization while everyone is under one roof, individual consequences are high given each person is highly accountable for his/her actions because it affects the organization directly and indirectly. The understanding of each of these concepts came from disagreeing on them. One of our group members who disagreed with a number of concepts, was a learning path for us. His disagreement help us understand the other side, and the counter-arguments helped us understand the concept better.