SET 1.

Q.1 “Today managers need to perform various functions”: Elaborate the

statement
Ans. In recent time, management functions have been regrouped into four
categories, since the managerial tasks have become highly challenging a fluid in
nature making distinctions redundant to a certain extend. The four functions are
as follows:
• Planning
• Organizing
• Leading
• Controlling
1. Planning:
It involves the process of defining goals, establishing strategies for achieving
these goals, and developing plans to integrate and coordinate activities. Every
organization needs to plan for change in order to reach its set goal. Effective
planning enables and organization adapt to change by identifying opportunities
and avoiding problems. It provides the direction for the other functions of
management and for effective teamwork. Planning also enhances the decision-
making process. All levels of management engage in planning in their own way
for achieving their preset goals.
Planning in order to be useful must be linked to the strategic intent of an
organization. Therefore, planning is often referred to as strategic in nature and
also termed as strategic planning.
2. Organizing:
It involves designing, structuring, and coordinating the work components to
achieve organizational goal. It is the process of determining what tasks are to be
done, who is to do, how the tasks are to be grouped, who reports to whom, and
where decisions are to be made. A key issue in accomplishing the goals
identified in the planning process is structuring the work of the organization.
Organizations are groups of people, with ideas and resources, working toward
common goals. The purpose of the organizing function is to make the best use
of the organization’s resources to achieve organizational goals. Organizational
structure is the formal decision-making framework by which job tasks are
divided, grouped, and coordinated. Formalization is an important aspect of
structure. It is the extent to which the units of the organization are explicitly
defined and its policies, procedures, and goals are clearly stated. It is the official
organizational structure conceived and built by top management. The formal
organization can be seen and represented in chart form. An organization chart
displays the organizational structure and shows job titles, lines of authority, and
relationships between departments.
The steps in the organizing process include:
• Review plans
• List all tasks to be accomplished
• Divide tasks into groups one person can accomplish – a job
• Group related jobs together in a logical and efficient manner
• Assign work to individuals
• Delegate authority to establish relationships between jobs and groups of
jobs
3. Leading:
An organization has the greatest chance of being successful when all of the
employees work toward achieving its goals. Since leadership involves the
exercise of influence by one person over others, the quality of leadership
exhibited by supervisors is a critical determinant of organizational success.
Supervisors can learn about leadership through research. Leadership studies can
be classified as trait, behavioural, contingency, and transformational. Earliest
theories assumed that the primary source of leadership effectiveness lay in the
personal traits of the leaders themselves. Yet, traits alone cannot explain
leadership effectiveness. Thus, later research focused on what the leader
actually did when dealing with employees. These behavioural theories of
leadership sought to explain the relationship between what the leaders did and
how the employees reacted, both emotionally and behaviourally. Yet, behaviour
can’t always account for leadership in different situations. Thus, contingency
theories of leadership studied leadership style in different environments.
Transactional leaders, such as those identified in contingency theories, clarify
role and task requirements for employees. Yet, contingency can’t account for
the inspiration and innovation that leaders need to compete in today’s global
marketplace. Newer transformational leadership studies have shown that
leaders, who are charismatic and visionary, can inspire followers to transcend
their own self-interest for the good of the organization.

4. Controlling:
It involves monitoring the employees’ behaviour and
organizational processes and take necessary actions to improve them, if needed.
Control is the process through which standards for performance of people and
processes are set, communicated, and applied. Effective control systems use
mechanisms to monitor activities and take corrective action, if necessary.
There are four steps in the control process. They are as follows:
Step 1. Establish Performance Standards. Standards are created when
objectives are set during the planning process. A standard is any guideline
established as the basis for measurement. It is a precise, explicit statement of
expected results from a product, service, machine, individual, or organizational
unit. It is usually expressed numerically and is set for quality, quantity, and
time. Tolerance is permissible deviation from the standard.
Step 2. Measure Actual Performance. Supervisors collect data to measure
actual performance to determine variation from standard. Written data might
include time cards, production tallies, inspection reports, and sales tickets.
Personal observation, statistical reports, oral reports and written reports can be
used to measure performance. Management by walking around, or observation
of employees working, provides unfiltered information, extensive coverage, and
the ability to read between the lines. While providing insight, this method might
be misinterpreted by employees as mistrust. Oral reports allow for fast and
extensive feedback. Computers give supervisors direct access to real time,
unaltered data, and information. On line systems enable supervisors to identify
problems as they occur. Database programs allow supervisors to query, spend
less time gathering facts, and be less dependent on other people.
Step 3. Compare Measured Performance Against Established Standards.
Comparing results with standards determines variation. Some variation can be
expected in all activities and the range of variation – the acceptable variance –
has to be established. Management by exception lets operations continue as long
as they fall within the prescribed control limits. Deviations or differences that
exceed this range would alert the supervisor to a problem.
Step 4. Take Corrective Action. The supervisor must find the cause of
deviation from standard. Then, he or she takes action to remove or minimize the
cause. If the source of variation in work performance is from a deficit in
activity, then a supervisor can take immediate corrective action and get
performance back on track.

Q.2 “Skills are the tool for performance”-Explain various management

skills.
Ans. Management Skills:
 Katz (1974) has identified three essential management
skills: technical, human, and conceptual.
Technical skills:
The ability is to apply specialized knowledge or expertise. All
jobs require some specialized expertise, and many people develop their
technical skills on the job. Vocational and on-the-job training programs can be
used to develop this type of skill.
Human Skill:
This is the ability to work with, understand and motivate other
people (both individually and a group). This requires sensitivity towards others
issues and concerns. People, who are proficient in technical skill, but not with
interpersonal skills, may face difficult to manage their subordinates. To acquire
the Human Skill, it is pertinent to recognize the feelings and sentiments of
others, ability to motivate others even in adverse situation, and communicate
own feelings to others in a positive and inspiring way.
Conceptual Skill:
This is an ability to critically analyze, diagnose a situation
and forward a feasible solution. It requires creative thinking, generating options
and choosing the best available option.
Q.3 What is negotiation? Explain the process of negotiation.
Ans. Negotiation:
Negotiation is a “process in which two or more parties exchange goods or
services and attempt to agree upon the exchange rate for them (Robbins, 2008).
There are two general approaches to negotiation: distributive bargaining and
integrative bargaining.
Distributive bargaining:
When engaged in distributive bargaining, one’s tactics focus on trying to get
one’s opponent to agree to one’s specific target point or to get as close to it as
possible. “Hard” distributive negotiation takes place when each party holds out
to get its own way. The hard approach may lead to a win–lose outcome in which
one party dominates and gains. “Soft” distributive negotiation, takes place
when one party is willing to make concessions to the other to get things over
with. A soft approach leads to accommodation in which one party gives in to
the other, or to compromise in which each party gives up something of value in
order to reach agreement.
Integrative bargaining
This strategy is adopted to create a win-win solution. Integrative bargaining
builds long-term relationships and facilitates collaborative work. Following
conditions are necessary for this type of negotiation to succeed (Robbins, 2003):

• Parties who are open with information and candid about their concerns
• A sensitivity by both parties to the other’s needs
• The ability to trust one another
• A willingness by both parties to maintain flexibility
The Negotiation Process
A model of the negotiation process is as follows:
Preparation and planning:
At this stage, homework needs to be done in regard to the nature, history,
concerned parties of the conflict. Based on the information, a strategy is
developed. Both the parties Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement
(BATNA) needs to be determined. BATNA determines the lowest value
acceptable to you for a negotiated agreement for both the parties.
Definition of ground rules:
At the stage, the venue, the negotiators, time will be decided.
Clarification and justification:
When initial positions have been exchanged, the origin demands of both
the parties need to be explained and justified. Proper documentation is
required at this stage to support each of the parties position.
Bargaining and problem solving:
The essence of the negotiation process is the actual give and take in
trying to hash out an agreement. Concessions will undoubtedly need to be
made by both parties.
Closure and implementation:
This is the final step, where the agreement is formalized and procedures
to implement the agreement will be developed.

Q.4 Explain Classical Conditioning Theory?

Ans: Introduction to Classical Conditioning:-
Classical conditioning is one of the best-
known concepts of behavioural learning theory. Find information on the
elements of classical conditioning. On
http://psychology.about.com/od/behavioralpsychology/a/classcond.htm
What Is Classical Conditioning
Classical conditioning is behaviourism.

Definition of Classical conditioning:

A technique used in behavioural training. A
naturally occurring stimulus is paired with a response.

Ivan Pavlov Discovered Classical Conditioning

The concept of classical conditioning is studied by
every entry-level psychology student, so it may be surprising to learn that the
man who first noted this.

Principles of Classical Conditioning:

In addition to the basic classical conditioning
process, there are a number of phenomena that play a role in classical
conditioning.

Pavlov’s Dogs:
In the early twentieth century, Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov did Nobel
prize-winning work on digestion. While studying the role of saliva in dogs’
digestive processes, he stumbled upon a phenomenon he labelled “psychic
reflexes.” While an accidental discovery, he had the foresight to see the
importance of it. Pavlov’s dogs, restrained in an experimental chamber, were
presented with meat powder and they had their saliva collected via a surgically
implanted tube in their saliva glands. Over time, he noticed that his dogs who
begin salivation before the meat powder was even presented, whether it was by
the presence of the handler or merely by a clicking noise produced by the device
that distributed the meat powder.

Fascinated by this finding, Pavlov paired the meat powder with various stimuli
such as the ringing of a bell. After the meat powder and bell (auditory stimulus)
were presented together several times, the bell was used alone. Pavlov’s dogs,
as predicted, responded by salivating to the sound of the bell (without the food).
The bell began as a neutral stimulus (i.e. the bell itself did not produce the dogs’
salivation). However, by pairing the bell with the stimulus that did produce the
salivation response, the bell was able to acquire the
Ability to trigger the salivation response. Pavlov therefore
Demonstrated how stimulus-response bonds (which some consider as the basic
building blocks of learning) are formed. He dedicated much of the rest of his
career further exploring this finding.
In technical terms, the meat powder is considered an unconditioned stimulus
(UCS) and the dog’s salivation is the unconditioned response (UCR). The bell is
a neutral stimulus until the dog learns to associate the bell with food. Then the
bell becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) which produces the conditioned
response (CR) of salivation after repeated pairings between the bell and food.

Classical Conditioning (Pavlov):

Classical conditioning is a reflexive or
automatic type of learning in which a stimulus acquires the capacity to evoke a
response that was originally evoked by another stimulus.
Originators and Key Contributors: First described by Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936),
Russian physiologist, in 1903, and studied in infants by John B. Watson (1878-
1958).
Keywords: stimulus-response, psychic reflexes, unconditioned stimulus,
conditioned response, respondent conditioning

Classical Conditioning (Ivan Pavlov):

Several types of learning exist. The
most basic form is associative learning, i.e., making a new association between
events in the environment. There are two forms of associative learning: classical
conditioning (made famous by Ivan Pavlov’s experiments with dogs) and
operant conditioning.

John B. Watson: Early Classical Conditioning with Humans

John B. Watson further extended
Pavlov’s work and applied it to human beings. In 1921, Watson studied Albert,
an 11 month old infant child. The goal of the study was to condition Albert to
become afraid of a white rat by pairing the white rat with a very loud, jarring
noise (UCS). At first, Albert showed no sign of fear when he was presented
with rats, but once the rat was repeatedly paired with the loud noise (UCS);
Albert developed a fear of rats. It could be said that the loud noise (UCS)
induced fear (UCR). The implications of Watson’s experiment suggested that
classical conditioning could cause some phobias in humans.

Q.5 How are culture and society responsible to built value system?
Ans. Hofstede (1991) further proposed that each person carries around several
layers of cultural programming. It starts when a child learns basic values: what
is right and wrong, good and bad, logical and illogical, beautiful and ugly.
Culture is about your fundamental assumptions of what it is to be a person and
how you should interact with other persons in your group and with outsiders.
The first level of culture is the deepest, the most difficult to change and will
vary according to the culture in which we grow up. Other layers of culture are
learned or programmed in the course of education, through professional or craft
training and in organization life. Some of the aspects of culture learned later
have to do with conventions and ethics in your profession. These layers are
more of ways of doing things, or practices as opposed to fundamental
assumptions about how things are.
GLOBE Research:
GLOBE project integrates the above –mentioned cultural attributes and
variables with managerial behaviour in organizations. Following are some of
the questions asked in this project to prove that leadership and organizational
processes were directly influenced by cultural variables:
• Are leader behaviours, attributes and organizational practices universally
accepted and effective across cultures?
• Are they influenced by societal and organizational cultures?
• What is the effect of violating cultural norms that are relevant to
leadership and organizational practices?
• Can the universal and culture-specific aspects of leadership behaviour
and organizational practice be explained with the help of a theory
accounting for systematic differences across cultures?
From the above, GLOBE project identified nine cultural dimensions (House,
Javidan, Hanges and Dorfman, 2002: 3-10)
• Uncertainty- avoidance: GLOBE project defined this dimension as the
extent to which a society or an organization tries to avoid uncertainty by
depending heavily on prevalent norms, rituals and bureaucratic practices.
• Power distance: it is the degree to which power is unequally shared in a
society or an organization.
• Collectivism-I i.e. societal collectivism: it is the degree to which society
and organization encourages, and recognizes collective performance.
• Collectivism-II- In-group collectivism: it is the degree to which
individuals take pride, loyalty and cohesiveness in their organizations and
families.
• Gender egalitarianism: GLOBE has defined this as an extent to which a
society or an organization minimizes gender differences and
discrimination.
• Assertiveness: it is the degree to which individuals, both in
organizational and social context are, assertive and confrontational.
 •Future orientation: it is the degree to which individuals are encouraged
in long- term future – orientated behaviours such as planning, investing,
etc.
• Performance orientation: this dimension encourages and rewards group
members for performance improvement.
• Humane orientation: it is the degree to which organizations or society
encourage or reward for being fair, altruistic, friendly, generous and
caring.
Work behaviour across cultures
In every culture, there are different sets of attitudes and values which affect
behaviour. Similarly, every individual has a set of attitudes and beliefs – filters
through which he/she views management situations within organizational
context. Managerial beliefs, attitudes and values can affect organizations
positively or negatively. Managers portray trust and respect in their employees
in different ways in different cultures. This is a function of their own cultural
backgrounds. For example, managers from specific cultures tend to focus only
on the behaviour that takes place at work, in contrast to managers from diffused
cultures who focus on wider range of behaviour including employees’ private
and professional lives. Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1998:86) have
conducted a survey to find out whether the employees believe their companies
should provide housing to the employees. It was found out that most managers
from diffused cultures believed that company should provide such facility
(former Yugoslavia 89%, Hungary 83%, China 82%, Russia 78%), whereas less
than 20% managers from specific cultures such as UK, Australia, Denmark,
France, etc., agreed on the same.
Laurent (1983: 75-96), as a result of his survey with managers from nine
Western European countries, U.S., three Asian countries found distinctly
different patterns for managers in common work situations.
Task and relationship: in response to the statement which states that the main
reason for a hierarchical structure was to communicate the authority-
relationship, most U.S. managers disagreed whereas, most Asian , Latin
American managers strongly agreed. It was quite evident that U.S managers,
having an extremely task- oriented culture, believed more in flatter
organizational structure to become more effective. On the other hand, the
second set of managers was from more relationship- oriented cultures where the
concept of authority is more important. Similarly, in response to the statement
which says that in order to have efficient work relationship it is often necessary
to bypass the hierarchical line, differences were found across cultures.
Managers from Sweden (task- oriented culture) projected least problem with
bypassing since getting the job done is more important than expressing
allegiance to their bosses. In contrast, Italian managers, coming from a
relationship-oriented culture, considered bypassing the authority/boss as an act
of in-subordination. The above- mentioned example is inevitably a caution
signal to the universal management approach, irrespective of culture.
Managers as experts or problem-solvers: in the same study, Laurent asked
managers from various cultures whether it was important for them to have at
hand, precise answers to most questions their subordinates might raise about
their work. French managers believed that they should give precise answers to
the questions in order to maintain their credibility and retain the subordinates’
sense of security. On the contrary, U.S. managers believed that a managers’ role
should be to act as a mentor who would facilitate the employees to solve the
problem. They also believe that providing direct answers to a problem actually
discourages subordinates’ initiative and creativity and ultimately hampers
performance.

Q.6 Short notes on Locus of Control?

Ans: Definition of Locus of control:

Locus of control refers to an
individual's generalized expectations concerning where control over
subsequent events resides. In other words, who or what is responsible for what
happens. It is analogous to, but distinct from attributions.

Locus of Control is considered to be an important aspect of personality. The

concept was developed originally by Julian Rotter in the 1950s.
Locus of Control refers to an individual's perception about the underlying
main causes of events in his/her life.

The full name Rotter gave the construct was Locus of Control of
Reinforcement. In giving this name, Rotter was bridging behavioural and
cognitive psychology. Rotter's view was that behaviour was largely guided
by "reinforcements" (rewards and punishments) and that through
contingencies such as rewards and punishments, individuals come to hold
beliefs about what causes their actions. These beliefs, in turn, guide what
kinds of attitudes and behaviours people adopt. This understanding of Locus
of Control is consistent.
The Philip Zimbardo (a famous psychologist) explains:
A locus of control orientation is a belief about
whether the outcomes of our actions are contingent on what we do (internal
control orientation) or on events outside our personal control (external control
orientation).
External Locus of Control
Individual believes that his/her behaviour is guided by fate, luck, or other
external circumstances.
Internal Locus of Control
Individual believes that his/her behaviour is guided by his/her personal
decisions and efforts.

According to Julian Rotter's original (1966) locus of control formulation

classified generalized beliefs concerning who or what influences things along a
bipolar dimension from internal to external control:
Internal control is the term used to describe the belief that control of future
outcomes resides primarily in oneself while
External control refers to the expectancy that control is outside of oneself, either
in the hands of powerful other people or due to fate/chance.

Development of locus of control: Generally, the development of locus of

control stems from family, culture, and past experiences leading to rewards.
Most internals have been shown to come from families that focused on effort,
education, and responsibility. On the other hand, most externals come from
families of a low socioeconomic status where there is a lack of life control.

Q.6 Short notes on Machiavellianism?

Ans: Machiavellianism has a bad reputation. Being called “Machiavellian”

is never praise. In popular usage, it refers to a someone who is sneaky,
conniving, deceitful, and untrustworthy. A Machiavellian person is often
thought to be indifferent to ethical and moral considerations in the same way
that a sociopath is incapable of sympathy or compassion. Sometimes the
Machiavellian is imagined to be someone who actually prefers double-dealing,
back-stabbing methods to any others.

Definition of Machiavellianism:
The Modern Prince - is a perspective on
human nature, the world, and our places in it. Inspired by what Machiavelli
wrote almost five centuries ago, modern Machiavellianism urges you to think
carefully about the obvious facts and then act meaningfully, in accordance to
your own inner nature.

Machiavelli wrote becomes self-evident as soon as you have read it. As he

was writing a modernized version of his ideas, he had the feeling that he had
always known them and I wondered why he hadn’t realized them sooner. This
is a characteristic of powerful ideas: they seem so obvious - but only after you
first hear about them.

Gravity is a very simple and completely obvious idea. But, if you had lived
before Isaac Newton first thought of it, it would have never occurred to you.
Sophisticated Aztec engineers and architects must have laughed at the
simplicity of the wheel, but only after they saw the wooden wheels on Spanish
carts filled with stolen Aztec gold. Prior to the Spanish Conquest, the wheel was
unknown to the advanced Aztec, Inca, and Maya civilizations of the western
hemisphere. The very brief overview of the modern Machiavellian perspective
you will read below will still need to be fleshed out by your own thinking, so
don’t be reluctant to pause between sentences and give some thought to the
topics of Human Nature, the World and Your Place In It, Human Happiness,
and Learning How To Rule Your World.

Why should you think, then, that the Machiavellian perspective - my version
of it - has any more validity than other descriptions of our species and our
world? You could be reading a description of just one more flawed philosophy
being peddled by yet another author seeking income. Your thoughts may be like
those of my drill sergeant, who explained to me in 1970 that.
“Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one.” He then mused aloud at some
length and in very graphic detail about the similarity of his interests in my
opinion and my asshole, much to the amusement of my fellow draftees.

Machiavellianism is a perspective, not a philosophy or a religion. Its value is

that it enables you to understand your situation and your options in a way that
helps you decide upon the proper course of action for you at that moment. It
does not try to provide a final and complete description of the Truth of Things
or the Meaning of Life. It is a tool, not a creed. Its power is that its assertions
become self-evident after you have thought about them. If they don’t, then
should look elsewhere.