Case Study Please read the case given below and answer the questions given at the end. One afternoon in June 1972, Rao, industrial engineer of P.M.A. company, was called to the office of his immediate superior V.R. Naik, the production manager. Naik said, “Rao, I want to discuss a situation in the production department. A lot of people feel that Govindan is not the right man for the Assistant Superintendent’s position. The President and others have decided that I have got to fire Govindan or at least move him out of production. Everyone wants to fire Govindan, but I won’t do it to him. I was talking with Bhadra this morning, and we decided that you might be able to make use of Govindan in your department.” Rao was surprised by both the information, and the proposal. Naik concluded his comments with, “Rao, I am asking you to take Govindan. You can say ‘No’. But then he gets fired. I have told Govindan this. Also, Govindan knows that if he goes with you he will take a pay cut. However, I think you can make use of him both to your own and his satisfaction. You are, anyway, carrying out an in-process quality control, and you might be able to make good use of Govindan in view of his long technical experience of production work. Think it over, and let me know by tomorrow.” Rao thought over the matter. PMA company had been a successful enterprise until March 1972 at which time it suffered a sharp decline of profits : sales had fallen off, and production costs had risen. The President adopted three measures which he hoped would improve the condition. First, by creating an Industrial Engineering Department for establishing work standards on all production operations, to determine which manufacturing costs were out of line and where remedial action should be taken. Rao, 28 years old, who had been with the company for two years in the Purchasing department, was selected. Rao had B.E. and MBA degrees to his credit. What he lacked in his business experience he made up by his eagerness to learn. He was ambitious and liked by his associates. He wanted a transfer from Purchasing to Production for better opportunities for advancement. Secondly, he consulted a Management Consultation firm to make a study of the Production Department. They pointed out that the chain of command was too long from Production Manager through Plant Superintendent through Assistant Superintendent to Foremen. They recommended the elimination of the position of Assistant Superintendent. Thirdly, he engaged an Industrial Psychologist to appraise all the Supervisory Personnel. Govindan had been with the company for 20 years since its founding and during this period had worked on every production operation, and his last 11 years had been in supervisory capacity. His manners were rough and aggressive, he had little formal education. The industrial Psychologist’s report about Govindan contained the following points: (i) Evaluation for the position of Assistant Superintendent : Not good enough. (ii) Capacity for good human relations in supervision : Will have friction frequently. (iii) Need for development counseling: Counseling greatly needed. (iv) General evaluation: Govindan had a good ability profile. He suffers from a sense of inferiority. He does not like the responsibility of making decisions. His supervision is that of Autocratic type. Though he has the ability, as far as his personality make-up is concerned, he is out of place in the present position. Questions: 1. What is the problem in the case? Explain. 2. Explain Govindan’s behavior and work experience vis-à- vis the psychologist’s report. 3. How do you see Naik’s suggestion to Rao? Give reasons. 4. What are Rao’s considerations in taking a decision? What should he do? Explain.