In the article, Greiner talks about the tendency of holding onto the organizational structure as that is seen as a source

of their power, even the same can be attributed for the limited growth of BIL. There are clear indications of flaws in the organizational structure and the increasing need for the revamping of the organization. Despite of enormous potential, BIL has restricted itself to two states and has virtually no presence on an all India basis; this is due to the control centric nature of Mr Rao. The organization has been in its evolution period for very long now and grown decently, but now to explore the full potential, there is the need for turbulence, turmoil and revolution. As the consultant pointed out the past strengths of Basic Industries do not seem to be sufficient in the emerging business environment, there is a dire need for change, revolutionary change and not an incremental change that the organization is accustomed to. In reference to the five phases of growth of the organization, BIL has a long way to cover; it is still struggling with the second stage. Mr Rao must let go of his urge to be at the centre, must consider decentralization, delegation, coordination and collaboration. As mentioned in article, each revolutionary period is characterized by dominant management problem that must be solved before growth can continue. The problems in context to BIL are: lack of autonomy, no or little responsiveness to the dynamic environment. There was no need to hire a consultant for the solution, the issues could and should have been identified by Mr Rao and even the solutions to the same lies with Mr Rao. In the case, there is no dearth of talent and potential, the issue lies with the talent management and strategic leadership. There is no focus on learning and training which are crucial for development of the workforce and in turn success of the organization. Attrition was also discussed in the article, it is explained that when the systems are highly centralized, young talent also leaves, which is also a concern for Mr Rao. Mr Rao is not enabling the mangers, instead instructing them. When mangers came up with the SMG and selected the secretary, the Mr Rao thought of him as a perpetual cribber, no data or incident has been provided to substantiate the same. Mr Rao comments My senior managers, including the divisional heads, are what you might call home-grown managers. They lack maturity about management processes. If this is true then the onus once again comes on Mr Rao, he should have cultivated leaders and managers, he should have invested time and efforts to bring a culture that fosters growth and development of the people but Mr Rao didnt pay heed to these aspects and now wants a magical solution by the consultant. Mr Rao should take a collectivistic stance and should encourage participative management style. Another thing to notice here is Mr Rao has ambitious plans of becoming a national player but when it comes to the actions and efforts he is making, he is highly myopic.