USHA MARTIN UNIVERSITY, JHARKHAND

(Recognized by UGC under Sec. 2(f) of UGC Act 1956)

Assignment (EVEN 2022)
BCOM SEMESTER II
STUDENT’S NAME
ROLL NO.
COURSE BCOM-II
SUBJECT CODE & NAME Principles Of Management BCOM202
SUBMITTED ON
SUBMITTED TO( FACULTY NAME) Dr. Meenakshi Kumari
MAXIMUM MARKS 15
*Your Assignment should be handwritten. Make a separate POM Assignment Notebook.
Submit it till 20 May 2022.

Question 1: Sanchit, after completing his entrepreneurship course from Sweden returned to
India and started a coffee shop ‘AromaCoffeeCan’ in a famous mall in New Delhi. The
speciality of the coffee ship was the special aroma of coffee and a wide variety of flavours to
choose from. Somehow, the business was neither profitable nor popular. Sanchit was keen to
find out the reason. He appointed Sandhya, an MBA from a reputed college, as a Manager to
find out the causes for the same.
Sandhya took feedback from the clients and found out that though they loved the special
unique aroma of coffee but were not happy with the long waiting time being taken to process
the order. She analysed and found out that there were many unnecessary obstructions in
between which could be eliminated. She fixed a standard time for processing the order.
She also realised that there were some flavours whose demand was not enough. So, she also
decided to stop the sale of such flavours. As a result with in a short period Sandhya was able
to attract the customers.
Identify and explain any two techniques of scientific management used by Sandhya to solve
the problem.
Question 2: Nutan Tiffin Box service was started in Mumbai by the Mumbai Dabbawalas.
The Dabbawalas who are the soul of entire Mumbai aim to provide prompt and efficient
services by providing tasty homemade tiffin to all office goers at the right time and place.
The service is uninterrupted even on the days of bad weather, political unrest and social
disturbances. Recently, they have started online booking system through their website
‘mydabbawala.com’. Owing to their tremendous popularity amongst the happy and satisfied
customers and members, the Dabbawalas were invited as guest lecturer by top business
schools. The Dabbawalas operate in a group of 25-30 people alongwith a group leader. Each
group teams up with other groups in order to deliver the tiffins on time. They are not
transferred on frequent basis as they have to remember the addresses of their customers. They
follow certain rules while doing trade—no alcohol during working hours; no leaves without
permission; wearing white caps and carrying ID cards during business hours.
Recently, on the suggestion of a few self-motivated fellow men, the dabbawalas thought out
and executed a plan of providing food left in tiffins by customers to slum children. They have
instructed their customers to place red sticker if food is left in the tiffin, to be fed to poor
children later.

1. State any one principle of management given by Fayol and one characteristic of
management mentioned in the above case.
2. Give any two values which the Dabbawalas want to communicated to society.

Question 3: Case Study - How an effective manager handles precarious situations “Left or
Right”
Rajinder Kumar was a production worker at Competent Motors Limited (CML), which made
components and accessories for the automotive industry. He had worked at CML for almost
seven years as a welder, along with fifteen other men in the plant.
All had received training in welding both on the job and through company-sponsored external
programmes. They had friendly relations and got along very well with one another. They
played volleyball in the playground regularly before retiring to the
quarters allotted by the company. They ate together in the company canteen, cutting jokes on
each other and making fun of anyone who dared to peep into their privacy during lunch hour.
Most of the fellows had been there for quite some time, except for
two men who had joined the ranks only two months back. Rajinder was generally considered
to be the leader of the group, so it was no surprise that when the foreman of the department
was transferred and his vacancy was announced. Rajinder applied for the job and got it. There
were only four other applicants for the job, two from mechanical section and
two from outside. When there was a formal announcement of the appointment on a Friday
afternoon, everyone in the group congratulated Rajinder. They literally carried him on their
shoulders and bought him snacks and celebrated the even
enthusiastically. On Monday morning, Rajinder joined duty as Foreman. It was company
practice for all foremen to wear blue jacket and a white shirt. Each man‘s coat had his name
badge sewn onto the left side pocket. The company had given two
pairs to Rajinder. He was proud to wear the coat to work on Monday. People who saw him
from a distance went upto him and admired the new blue coat. There was a lot of kidding
around calling Rajinder as ̳Hero‘, ̳Raja Babu‘ and officer‘ etc. One of the guys went back to
his locker and returned with a long brush
and acted as though he were removing dust particles on the new coat. After about five
minutes of horseplay, all of the men went back to work. Rajinder went back to his office to
get more familiar with his new job and environment there. At noon, all the men broke for
lunch and went to the canteen to eat and enjoy fun as usual. Rajinder was busy when they left
but followed after them a
few minutes later. He bought the food coupon, took the snacks and tea and turned to face the
open canteen. Back in the left side corner of the room was his old work group; on the right-
hand side of the canteen sat all the other foreman in the plant – all
observed in their blue coats. At that point of time, silence descended on the canteen.
Suddenly both groups looked
at Rajinder anxiously, waiting to see which group he would eat with.
Questions :
1. Whom do you think Rajinder will eat with ? Why ?
2. If you were one of the other foremen, what could you do to make Rajinder‘s transition
easier ?
3. What would you have done if you were in Rajinder‘s shoes ? Why ?
Question 4: Case Study - Managerial Skills
“Naughty Rule”
Dr. Reddy Instruments is a medium-sized company located in the Industrial Estate on the
outskirts of Hyderabad. The company is basically involved with manufacturing surgical
instruments and supplies for medical professionals and hospitals. About a year ago, Madhuri
aged 23, niece of the firm‘s founder, Dr. Raja Reddy, was hired to replace Ranga Rao quality
control Inspector, who had reached the age of retirement. Madhuri had recently graduated
from the Delhi College of Engineering where she had majored in Industrial Engineering.
Balraj Gupta, aged 52, is the production manager of the prosthesis department, where
artificial devices designed to replace missing parts of the human body are manufactured.
Gupta has worked for Dr. Reddy Instruments for 20 years having previously been a
production line supervisor and, prior to that, a worker on the production line. Gupta, being
the eldest in his family, has taken up the job quite early in life and completed his education
mostly through correspondence courses. From their first meeting, it looked as though Gupta
and Madhuri could not get along together. There seemed to be an underlying animosity
between them, but it was never too clear what the problem was.
Venkat Kumar, age 44, is the plant manager of Dr. Reddy instruments. He has occasionally
observed disagreements between Madhuri and Gupta on the production line. Absenteeism has
risen in Gupta‘s department since Madhuri was hired as quality control inspector. Venkat
secretly decided to issue a circular calling for a meeting of all supervisory personnel in the
production and twelve quality control departments.
The circular was worked thus- Attention : All supervisors Production Quality Control
Departments A meeting is scheduled on Monday, Feb 20 at 10.40 a.m. in room 18. The
purpose is
to sort out misunderstandings and differences that seem to exist between production and QC
personnel.
Sd. Venkat Kumar Plant Manager Venkat started the meeting by explaining why he had
called it and then asked Gupta
for his opinion of the problem. The conversation took the following shape :
Gupta : That Delhi girl you recruited is a ̳fault finding machine‘ in our department.
Until she was hired, we hardly even stopped production. And when we did, it was only
because of a mechanical defect. But Madhuri has been stopping every thing if one‘ defective
part comes down the line. Madhuri : That‘s not true. You have fabricated the story well.
Gupta : Venkat, our quality has not undergone any change in recent times. It‘s still the same,
consistently good quality it was before she came but all she wants to do is to trouble us.
Madhuri : May I clarify my position at this stage ? Mr. Gupta, you have never relished my
presence in the company. I still remember some of the derisive remarks you used to make
behind my back. I did take note of them quite clearly !
Suresh (another quality control supervisor) : I agree with Madhuri Venkat. I think that every
one knows that the rules permit quality control to stop production if rejections exceed three
an hour. This is all Madhuri has been doing.
Gupta : Now listen to me. Madhuri starts counting the hour from the moment she gets the
first reject. Ranga Rao never really worried about absolute reject rule when he was here. She
wants to paint my department in black. Is not that true Riaz Ahmed?
Ahmed (another production supervisor) : It sure is Gupta. Every time Madhuri stops
production, she is virtually putting the company on fire. The production losses would affect
out bonuses as well. How long can we allow this ̳nuisance‘ to continue.
Thirty minutes later Madhuri and Gupta were still lashing out at each other. Venkat decided
that ending the meeting might be appropriate under the circumstances. He promised to clarify
the issue, after discussion with management, sometime next week.
Questions :
1. Should Venkat have called a meeting to sort out this problem ? Why or why not ?
2. What do you say about the rule calling for production to halt if there are more than three
rejects in an hour? Should it have been enforced ? Explain.
3. What do you feel is the major problem in this case ? The solution ?

Question 5: Case Study - Proper coordination between employees and management

In Search of Greener pastures Rohit joined ABC Ltd., a heavy engineering unit, having a
turnover of about Rs. 20 crores, in the junior management cadre as a direct recruit. During his
tenure with the company, Rohit proved to be a dedicated and sincere worked which earned
him quick promotions in the organization. He had made a mark in whichever department he
had worked and his departmental heads were happy with his work. After serving the
company for a period of ten years, Rohit felt that there was no scope for further improvement
in his position and started applying for better jobs commensurate with his experience. He
finally succeeded in getting a job but his new employer wanted
him to join within one month. To this, Rohit pleaded inability, as he was required to give
three months‘ notice to his present employer, as per company rules. However, he said he
would discuss the matter with the personnel manager and try to reduce the period to one
month by paying two month‘s salary in lieu of the required notice. Rohit accordingly,
submitted his resignation to the present employer and requested the departmental head to
recommend his case to the personnel manager, for relieving
him after one month. The departmental head, said that he would discuss the matter with the
personnel manager and try his best to help him. However, the latter turned down Rohit‘s
request stating that the rules require him to give three months‘ notice and that the alternative
suggested by Rohit was not acceptable.
When Rohit learnt about the personnel manager‘s response, he approached his prospective
employer to explain his difficulty, which was beyond his control, and requested them to
extend his joining period to three months. This was accepted by
them, as a special case. The departmental head took up Rohit‘s case with the management
and suggested that in future, the officers who resigned may be permitted to give one month‘s
notice and two months‘ notice if required, so as to ensure against any unnecessary delay in
the work of the department. But, the management refused to accept this proposal, stating
clearly that the company‘s policy cannot be changed.
Questions :
1. Did the management take a correct decision in Rohit‘s case under the circumstances ?
2. What steps should the departmental head take to ensure that officers who resign do not
adopt an indifferent attitude towards their work during the three months‘ notice period ?
3. If you were in the position of the management, how would you have handled the
situation ?