1.

Write down what aspects of Organisation Development (OD) may have been deployed in the case?

Change in organization structure and processes Creating readiness for change Diagnosing organizational systems Feeding back diagnostic information Evaluating and institutionalizing change OD interventions - Technostructural and strategic interventions 2. What to you was the problem or issue that needed attention? Write a statement of no

more than 20 words to describe it The problem here is to remove disconnect between the traditional MBA curriculum and the modern management. The mission of the institute is to churn out leaders and not technocrats. 3. What values / principles of OD do you think was at play in the case? What led to it being

upheld or violated?

4.

At what levels do you see the system of the organization in this case? Validate your

responses with facts from the case. Four levels of the organization are as follows: Individual, group, organization and transorganization. Also in this case strategic interventions are required which affect the organizational level, hence we can say that the system of the organization is at level 3. In addition, there are four levels of organizational change: a. shaping and anticipating the future (level 1) b. defining what business(es) to be in and their "core competencies (level 2)

c. reengineering processes (level 3) d. incrementally improving processes (level 4) Here in this case we can say that the organization is at level 3 of change as level three focuses on fundamentally changing how work is accomplished. Rather than focus on modest improvements, reengineering focuses on making major structural changes to everyday with the goal of substantially improving productivity, efficiency, quality or customer satisfaction. 5. For what reasons would you not term this as a case of OD intervention?

6.

If you were the OD interventionist, what outcomes reported in the case would you be

delighted by? a. Increasing application rates post the curriculum reforms b. Increasing alumni donations c. Positive feedback from recruiters d. Buy in from the faculty members e. Good feedback from the students 7. What were the sources of data? How may such data have been used in the diagnosis? What

ways could the diagnosis be fed back to the organization? How would you prepare for feedback? Sources of data: a. General perceptions that there was a growing disconnect between the traditional MBA curriculum and the demands of management and leadership in organizations (Observations) b. Advice of Executives on how to bring the MBA curriculum into alignment with modern management (Interviews) c. Strong desire of the faculty to establish SOM as a role model in management education

d. Committee Chair Thomas which interviewed faculty members, students, alumni and recruiters and which analyzed the curriculum of 11 other B Schools in the U.S. (Interviews) Feeding back diagnostic information a. Provide the results of Committee Chair Thomas in a series of meetings with the faculty members b. Discuss the data, draw relevant conclusions and devise preliminary action plans c. Develop a shared diagnosis about the meaning of the data d. Have problem solving discussions I would follow the bottom up approach for the feedback process. The data for specific groups will be fed back and action items would be proposed. The group will address problems and issues within its control and report the ones which are beyond its authority. Hence it moves up the hierarchy.