We accept

A RESEARCH STUDY of Organizational Habit: Discord Management

To create a footprint in the telecommunication Business & Procedure Support System (BSS and OSS) a favorite lot of money 500 company, Olite (name evolved), acquired a respected software company in the billing and revenue management sector called PTL (name evolved) in the year 2004. Olite is a multinational company with its head office in USA.

This acquisition was consolidated at Olite, under the Telecommunication Business Unit (TBU). To make use of the cost benefits and the technological expertise, Olite started out its TBU department activities at the India development middle (IDC). Olite also managed a group (here after referred to as HQ team) at its headquarters, which centered on R & D activities as well as for helping a few key customers. A lot of the employees who were part of TBU department came from PTL software. The main obligations of the IDC group were to provide support to the prevailing customers and offer minor development to the existing product.

This research study discusses the progress of the TBU's executive division at IDC and the obstacles it experienced while coping with the needs of the employees, aspirations of its leaders and the effects and problems it created to the group at its HQ division and the HQ group mind reaction to it.

As part of the case study we will attempt to focus and understand following aspects:

Personality type

Conflict between individuals

Organizational politics -Separate and Conquer

Description of the Case:

This is a research study of the Engineering (Product Development) band of the TBU section. The TBU's executive group was organized in a straightforward hierarchical structure as shown in Physique 1.

Michel (VP)

Suraj (Director)

Ashok (Director)

Mahesh (Senior Director)

Figure 1: TBU team hierarchy

The entire executive section at IDC was lead by the directors, Ashok and Suraj. Mahesh was leading the R & D group at HQ. Both Ashok and Suraj acquired independent groups. Ashok and Suraj's teams worked on customer support activities and were in charge of addressing product issues and utilizing minor enhancements of the product. Under their control, these groups provided many customer success experiences and created a good impression and were viewed as a secured asset to the business. Both directors were leading the client support activities. As the IDC group achieved increasingly more success, the aspiration of the directors started to change. Both directors started demonstrating purpose to lead the complete IDC engineering section. Ashok was very hostile and ambitious. He was action-oriented and front thinking. While Suraj kept to his obligations and centered on your day to day customer issues, however, he also exhibited intention to lead the section.

As the team in IDC efficiently managed the customer support activity, a few of their key engineers also expressed a desire to work on R & D activities. They wished an escape from the regular work. Ashok encouraged the team to express their views on the kind of work they would like to do in the foreseeable future and guaranteed to explore the feasibility of these ideas.

During this time around, the entire customer care activity was shifted to the IDC centre and the team in HQ targeted only on R& D activities. As the IDC company grew (in conditions of domain skills, strength, and excellence), there were matter from the HQ section (Mahesh's team) about their role and future. In the mean time, the recession in USA had also impacted the IT job market and job security was a major worrying factor for the HQ team.

Creating new group:

To take the IDC business on a further growth way, during one of the Staff meeting, Ashok proposed to create a focused group(comprising key engineers from Ashok and Suraj's group) within the business (under his leadership) to work on new product development and also to collaborate with the R& D section in HQ. This proposal stunned Suraj as Ashok possessed never discussed this idea with him and he experienced let down. Suraj opposed this notion. On reading the proposal from Ashok, Mahesh started fretting about the R & D team located at HQ. The HQ team indicated the matter that they may lose their careers after the R & D work is offloaded to IDC. He also started out fretting about his position in the organization as he knew Ashok was an extremely aggressive leader and had a good rapport within organization. Michel guaranteed to consider this notion and promised to provide his views on it soon. Michel relied on Mahesh's inputs to make decisions related to the executive department, as he was a fresh to the section.

Game Changes-Divide and Conquer:

In the in the meantime, problems started cropping up between your groups headed by Ashok and Suraj. Ashok tried to persuade Suraj about the great things about new group but Suraj has different ideas. Suraj suggested that, rather than developing new group (comprising key engineers from Ashok and Suraj's group), we ought to utilize part of every engineers time to do the R & D activity. Discusses starting a concentration group became a conflicting point between Ashok and Suraj. Even on common issues, that they had different views. This difference became quite public during team meetings. This started impacting on the team morale and the day to day activities of the IDC group.

Michel kept on delaying your choice (on suggestion from Mahesh) on the new group development at IDC. This doubt about the new group development and the variations between the IDC directors was taking toll on the productivity of the clubs and eventually on customer satisfaction. He always took care and attention of his associates very well. Combined with the development of the new group, he previously proposed better benefits and overall flexibility to his associates to encourage them.

Ashok frequently reminded the higher management about the new group formation and the down sides he was having in co-coordinating with Suraj. The management kept on delaying your choice and finally Ashok resigned from the business. As Suraj's performance had not been up to the mark, top of the management made a decision to terminate his work. The unexpected departure of both directors created huge difference in the authority of the IDC group. A lot of the team started worrying about the continuing future of the group plus some of the experienced engineers remaining the company.

During this era, Mahesh reached away to some key engineers at IDC and promised them job opportunities at HQ's R& D team. The attrition level went up to 60% at IDC centre. This affected the client support activity. Sensing an opportunity, Mahesh made a pitch to the bigger management that, with current capacity and expertise at IDC, the department can no longer take care of the support activities and the HQ team must pitch directly into complete this work. Finally, the upper management arranged and the critical customer support activity was changed to the HQ department. The job security concern of the HQ department vanished as they started playing an integral role in support as well as in R & D activities. At the end of all this, the IDC section was functioning in a smaller role and experienced hired a new management team.


Let's analyze the above mentioned case in conditions of discord, OB politics and Personality type.


Conflict can occur between individuals or groupings and across organizations as people compete. Some principal factors behind conflicts are:

Communication failure

Personality conflict

Value differences

Goal differences

Methodological differences

Substandard performance

Insufficient cooperation

Differences regarding authority

Differences regarding responsibility

Competition over resources

Non-compliance with rules

Here in the above case, the discord between Ashok and Suraj can be categorized as interpersonal conflicts. Interpersonal conflicts can arise due to personality clashes, different set of values, lack of trust, organizational change, and threat to status.

The major reason for this conflict was the changes advised to the organization (Organizational change) by Ashok. Suraj experienced different views on the organizational framework changes, the routes to use and their likely success, the resources to be used, and the probable outcomes.

Scarcity of resources can also result in turmoil, as all managers within an organization seek to secure for themselves the scarce resources required for survival. Each administrator operates out of do it yourself interest. To be able to secure these scarce resources, an organization may obstruct another group's usage of the resources.

Also, individuals give importance with their social position in an organization. When an individual's social position is threatened, face saving becomes a powerful driving push as the individual struggles to keep up the desired image. Conflict may arise between the threatened individual and the individual who created a threat to the status.

Every continuing relationship requires some degree of trust-the capacity to depend on each other's expression and actions. Trust opens up restrictions, provides opportunities in which to act; and enriches the entire social fabric of an group. Here Suraj was astonished by the abrupt proposal of Ashok about creating a new group and he lost trust in Ashok.

Organizational politics -Divide and Conquer

Organizational politics serves as a self-serving and manipulative habit of individuals and groups to market their self passions at the trouble of others, and some times even organizational goals as well. Organizational politics in a firm manifests itself through the have difficulty for resources, personal issues, competition for electric power and command and tactical affect executed by individuals and communities to attain vitality, building personal stature, managing usage of information, not uncovering real intents, building coalitions etc.

While most market leaders make an effort to achieve organizational unity, some do use divisive methods to maintain control, or to raise performance by fostering competition. According to Rick Brenner's article (Devious Political Techniques: Separate and Conquer), the market leaders use following methods /varieties to divide-and-conquer at the work place.

The three-legged race

Some supervisors assign responsibility jointly to two people who are already at odds. This tactic can be considered a simple error, or even a misguided try to "give them a chance to work things out, " but often its goal is to keep carefully the warriors in conflict, to protect the supervisor.

Delaying the decision

When subordinates contend for the same promotion or for a few other desirable project, some supervisors postpone their decisions, on the theory that competition creates superior performance.

Although performance might improve before the decision, this tactic can damage human relationships permanently. And that could depress the performance permanently following the decision - for the victor, for the loser, and then for the whole group.

Delegating for conflict

Delegating expert generally enhances effectiveness, but some professionals delegate to produce issue by delegating different tasks to two people, so that they must cooperate to succeed. Since neither some may be fully accountable, the delegator is free to play one from the other.

This tactic damages connections and depresses organizational performance. Costs are high and vehicle repairs difficult, because they entail both reorganization and replacing people


One method of dividing an alliance, or to keeping trouble alive, is to inform lies to 1 or both celebrations. Lays - either of omission or payment - can create the impression that certain get together threatens the other.

Maintaining differences

When managers have promised to sustain employees in mergers or acquisitions, keeping organizational elements intact can be considered a divide-and-conquer tactic. Managers can then systematically discriminate in allocating resources and opportunities. An average goal might be to operate a vehicle up voluntary turnover in attained units.

Indirect subversion of the offer to keep employees continues to be subversion. This tactic is unethical, and for that reason risky. When the promise to maintain was honest, subverting it could subvert a key strategy of the blend.

In this case study, to safeguard his home interest and interest of his group, Mahesh inspired Michel to work with "Delaying the decision" practices. As your choice was deferred, it added to the irritation of Ashok and finally he had taken the extreme step and resigned from company. Although, Mahesh was successful in his goals, his strategy is doubtful.

The leader-member exchange (LMX) theory argues that, because of their time and pressure, head establishes a particular romantic relationship with small band of their followers. These individuals make up the in-group; they may be trusted, get a disproportionate amount of the leader's attention and will receive more privileges. Here Michel's patterns complies with this theory as he relied on Mahesh's advice to make the decision. In our view, this may not be good for an organization in the permanent as it does not provide fair opportunities to the out-group as the leader's have only a formal connection with the out-group.

Personality types

In this section we talk about different personality types:

MBTI Types:

Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung developed a theory early in the 20th century to describe basic individual tastes and similarities and distinctions between people. Main postulate of the theory is that folks have inborn behavioral tendencies and tastes.

Jung's theory is important but inaccessible to the general human population. Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs (mother-daughter team) expanded on Jung's work by producing a musical instrument to help people identify their tastes.

The MBTI tool can be an indication of the personality type (i. e. innate preferences) that has proven to be extremely reliable and valid. It symbolizes the consequence of over 50 years of research and is employed globally in both education and corporate settings.

Extraversion - Introversion

E - I Dichotomy

Where do you prefer to focus your attention - and make your energy?

Sensing - Intuition

S - N Dichotomy

How do you prefer to take in information?

Thinking - Feeling

T - F Dichotomy

How does one make decisions?

Judging - Perceiving

J - P Dichotomy

How will you package with the outside world?

In the aforementioned case, Ashok was a natural leader and business builder. He conceptualizes and theorizes quickly and translates alternatives into plans to accomplish long-term objectives. He's a tactical visionary and adept at planning for the future needs of the individuals and firm. But he made decisions prematurely without understanding the alternatives or discovering other prospects. This action may be viewed as dictatorial. He failed to element in to his ideas the needs of others for support. He can be categorized as ENTJ Personality Type.

While Suraj revealed strong sense of responsibility and great devotion to the business, he generally functioned alone and proved willingness to work in a team whenever it was necessary. The team seen him as quiet, serious, and of a reserved personality. However, when creating a group was suggested, he became rigid and critical about others and rushed into premature view without considering others view items. He is able to be categorizes as ISFJ Personality Type.

Author's take on the research study:

Based on the description of the case, inside our view, Ashok possessed following aims when he suggested creating the new group:

Provide chance to his associates to participate in R& D activities.

Strengthen the contribution of the IDC department to the TBU, to get started on playing a substantial role in the R & D activity, and start driving the executive decisions from IDC.

Use this opportunity to strengthen his understanding on the organization and eventually lead the complete IDC section.

And Suraj compared this idea, as he was skeptical about:

Creating a concentrated group may lead to a division between the groups. So that R & D is the preferred activity (than customer support/maintenance), engineers who'll not be part of R & D group may get de-motivated.

Also, he was concerned about losing his key associates to R & D group and finally, his grasp on the team. His team's success was mainly based mostly after these key participants.

Experienced engineers were needed to support the customer issues.

Also, he thought that Ashok leading the whole division will affect his position in the group.

In mention of the Mintzberg's managerial work assignments classification, mangers jobs are labeled into 3 communities:





Monitor, Disseminator,


Seek and receive information, making sure progress as prepared, providing required information to decision-makers, Spokesperson





representing the group to outsiders, providing route/purpose, 'linking-pin' between groups



Disturbance handler

Resource allocator


seizing new opportunities, deciding which projects or activities to support, fixing deviations from strategies/expectations, securing favorable terms for the group

In our view, as a older member of the team, Ashok & Suraj exhibited the Screen, Figurehead functions but failed to play Liaison and Negotiator role.

In our view, Ashok would have taken Suraj into self confidence before proposing the new group and reassured him that his group activities will never be damaged. Also, Ashok's recommendation to delay the decision was clear exemplory case of firm politics. Although Ashok succeeded in safeguarding the eye of his group, for this reason, TBU as an organization lost some of the main element engineers and also cost benefits.

In our view, as a choice maker of the group, Michel should have played decisional role and solved the conflict between Suraj and Ashok. He must have created different progress avenue for both of them which could have helped to solve the conflict.

Key lesson learned:

We have learned that the idea of individual distinctions is important to organizational habit. Each and every one pursues problems diversely and acts in different ways. Employees need to accept, respect, and learn how to make use of these dissimilarities when they come up.

When you can find scarcity of resources, each group within the business seeks to secure for itself the scarce resources it needs for its survival.

Based on the number of articles we read during finding your way through this assignment we had a wide view why conflicts and business politics happens in the commercial world.

A leader must keep carefully the interest of the organizational interest foremost and act consequently to grow the business. It is important to build a consensus within the group and have the determination from group before taking any important decision.

Organizational politics is unavoidable. It's important to exhibit authentic political skills along with knowledge and ability.

More than 7 000 students trust us to do their work
90% of customers place more than 5 orders with us
Special price $5 /page
Check the price
for your assignment