Management Case Study: Diagnosis and Feedback at Adhikar

Learning Case Analyses

It is time for us to apply what we have learned in this course to some real-life managerial situations. The cases we have selected provide you with examples of organizational problems that you probably have not had the opportunity to experience firsthand. In a relatively short period of time, you will have the chance to appreciate and analyze the problems faced by many different organizations and to understand how managers have tried to deal with them.

When you analyze these cases, you are expected to use the fundamental knowledge you have learned. The theory and concepts covered in this course help reveal problems in the organizations being studied and allow you to evaluate the solutions. You are also expected to intensely engage in a discussion with your classmates and gain experience in presenting your ideas to others. Your classmates may have analyzed the issues differently from you, and they will want to argue with your points before they will accept your conclusions, so be prepared for debate. This is how decisions are made in the actual organizational world.

“Diagnosis and Feedback at Adhikar”

This week, we focus on the “Diagnosis and Feedback at Adhikar”

The case provides an opportunity for us to understand some aspects of the public organizations when an unfolding drama of a city manager who falsified his credentials when he applied for the position 18 years earlier. Is that long-ago action relevant to his qualifications for office now?

First, you need to analyze the case individually. Then, post your case analysis in the case discussion at the end of this module by the end of the first week. Finally, discuss further with the entire class during the second week. I will suggest that you analyze the case by addressing the following five items:

1. Key Issues: Briefly describe the leading issues in this case using the data presented in the case description.
2. Diagnosis: Define the nature of the problem as social (e.g., related to goals, values, culture, or psychological climate) or technical (e.g., related to technological, structural, or managerial work processes). Some cases will present a successful story rather than a problem. For these cases, you need to define the nature of success as social or technical.
3. Levels: Define the level or levels of the problems/success factors. Are they individual, interpersonal, and/or organizational?
4. Processes: Define the process problems in the case. Do they result from poor communication, missing leadership, muddled decision-making, incomplete problem solving, ineffective group norms and rules, inadequate conflict resolution strategies—or some other reason? For some cases, you need to define the process factors that contribute to the success.
5. Redesign: Describe the steps you would take to redesign this situation to resolve the problems presented in the case. If the case study presented an example of success, how would you further improve the situation, or can you identify reasons for the success? That is, you will propose four to six concise recommendations for people, technology, and structure changes at the individual, interpersonal, and/or organizational levels.

Some Observations

Please note that there is no standard case analysis, which is unfortunately the reality of any “soft” social science. However, some responses are better than others, which is how I will grade the case summaries. “Better” in this case means more logical, more in-depth, more consistent internally, more critical, and more clearly written. In the grading, I will also take into consideration your comments on other students’ case analyses and how you respond to any questions, concerns, or comments made by other students on your case analysis. If you successfully finish these three tasks, you could get up to eight points for this case.