Sourabh Srivastava

IIMASMPB2/VCNOW/000029
Noida Center
smp18.sourabhs@iima.ac.in

Assignment Module : Organisation Behaviour

Assignment Context : Given any organizational structure, how does it affect the exercise of influence
and interpersonal dynamics among different people? Illustrate your answer using appropriate
examples from any one or more of the following cases:

 Appex Corporation
 Donna Dubinsky and Apple Computer (A)
 Dr Shekhawat

Submission :
My understanding of Organisation Structure and how it affects INFLUENCE and INERPERSONAL
DYNAMICS is based on some extracts from Dr. Shekhawat Case.(Functional Structure)
The Influence perspective ( Subordinate to Superior) is in 2 ways - One In Communicating & Other In
Reception .Since the supervisor has the authority to evaluate a subordinates performance so the
influence exercise is very delicate from the communication perspective from the subordinate .Similar
manner reception from the Superior can either be simply to understand the point of view or can be to
analyze and judge the Superior opinion. This is basically governed by the type of decision making
that a particular Organisation defines as per its Organisation structure.
1. When the Decision Making Is Centralized then :
1A: Subordinates usually try to use obvious attempts to influence but do not disclose the
expectations/outcomes.
1B: Subordinates listen carefully but rather than understanding the intend they start being no
appreciating.

Considering the Case Study -Dr. Shekhawat - Here the Organisation structure as functional and the
decision making authority is communicated as to be centralized with Dr. Shekhawat. The case says
that since all the decisions were centralized to him and even though he communicated clearly DKH
vision "excellence in patient care and academics" yet many consultants and young doctors posed a
high turnover in last 3-4 yrs .

The Sr Consultants in Urology reported feeling Intimidated/Less Motivated/partiality at times , they

reported In-flexibility in carrying out procedures independently , it seemed self presentation from Sr
consultant over their experience counter being set to zero also not well assimilated, exposure limited
for complex surgeries and overall the inclusion or readiness for a Sr consultant to perform surgery
was solely Dr. Shekhawat prerogative. Also upgrading skills discussion with Dr. Shekhawat yielded no
result and was communicated demotivating . There are some extracts also expressing the inability of
Sr consultants to gain incentive over performing surgeries as maximum load was already on Dr.
Shekhawat .The overall attempts were expressed in various forms but the expectation/outcomes
was not clearly set , some concessions like work life balance ,work stress and rigidity in hospitals
cultural comparison was communicated to express the expectations.
From the reception side although the excellence in patient care and academics thru quality in service
and new academic center development was clear from Dr. Shekhawat but the above influenced the
Sr Consultants and led the to work for a short period inspite they all acknowledging the potential in
this hospital even though being charitable.

The Interpersonal dynamics ( between Dr. Shekhawat & Sr Consultants) deals with exchanges
between then on following perspectives:
1. Self-concept( Once own Identity) & Needs(Achievement & Affiliation) .
As evident from the case the self-identity was not clearly assimilated , the skill upgrade , the multi
surgery exposure are few evidences that lowered the interpersonal dynamics.
2. Emotions(event based)
Non value of personal discussions and non-flexibility in appreciating views over hospital culture are
events that pitched emotional disconnect.
3. Balancing Personal & Professional Life
The typical work profile and schedule of resident doctors/Sr consultants enveloped receiving patient
progress reports , preparation for scheduled surgery , duties in OPD , some were in charge at patient
wards. To add to this there were hospital rounds although well scheduled but occasionally was also
taken by Dr. Shekhawat which were at very late evening and their frequency was also not set .The
part at the end waiting for Dr. Shekhawat to decide the day end basically led to reporting of work life
imbalance
4. Finally -"VLE" behavior Attribute
The growing disconnect was to some extend held by citizenship behaviors , it started with
VOICE( some discussion the dis-satisfaction with fraternity ) , then LOYALTY( some discussions over
the best and high value machines for surgery and exposure thereby being loyal to the higher goal )
but finally it was leading to EXIT( neglect and move out ) .
This i rest my illustration basis the Dr. Shekhawat case starting from the Centralized Decision making
Organisation structure and how it had affected the Organisation influence and interpersonal
dynamics.

Thanks For Your Time & Patience

Sourabh Srivastava