1. This case study has been developed in the context of an organization that is operating in the automobile ancillary industry. It has annual turnover of $14 million with a little over 4,000 employees. The company is professionally well managed. The management team is headed by a dynamic Managing Director. He expects performance of high order at every level. It is more so at the Supervisory and Management levels. Normally the people of high caliber are selected through open advertisements to meet the human resource requirements at higher levels. However, junior-level vacancies are filled in by different types of trainees who undergo training in the company. The company offers a one-year training scheme for fresh engineering graduates. During the first six months of the training, the trainees are exposed to different functional areas, which are considered to be the core training for this category of trainees. By then, the trainees are identified for placement against the available or projected vacancies. Their further training in the next quarter is planned according to individual placement requirements. During the last quarter, the training will be on-the job. The trainee is required to perform the jobs expected of him after he is placed there. The training scheme is broadly structured mainly keeping in mind the training requirements of mechanical engineering graduates. Mr. William Smith joined the company right after his BSc in Paint Technology from a reputed institute. He was hired as a trainee against a projected vacancy in the paints application department of the organization. It is important to note that the areas of interest for a trainee in Paint Technology are few. Hence, Mr. Smiths core training was planned for the first 3 months only. Thereafter, Mr. Smith was put for on-the-job training in the paints application department. He took interest and showed enthusiasm in his work there. The report from the shop manager was quite satisfactory. The performance of the trainee is normally reviewed once at the end of every quarter. The Training Manager personally talks to the trainee about his progress, strengths and shortcomings. At the end of the second quarter, the Training Manager called Mr. Smith for his performance review. He appreciated his good performance and told him to keep it up. A month later Mr. Smith met the Manager and requested that his training period be curtailed to 7 months only and to absorb him as an Engineer. He argued that he had been performing like a regular employee in the department for the last one-quarter. As such, there was no justification for him to be put on training anymore. Further, he indicated that by doing so, he could be more effective in the department as a regular engineer. He would also gain seniority as well as some monetary benefits as the trainees were eligible for a stipend only. The regular employees were eligible for many allowances like conveyance, dearness, house rent, education, etc. which was a substantial amount as compared to the stipend paid to a trainee. The Training Manager turned down his request and informed him that it was not a practice of the company to do so. He told MR. Smith that any good performance or contribution made by the trainees during the training period would be duly rewarded at the time of placement on completion of one year of training. Further, he told him that it would set a wrong precedence. Thereafter, Mr. Smiths behavior in the department became different. His changed attitude did not receive any attention in the initial period. However, by the end of the third quarter, his behavior had become erratic and unacceptable. When he was asked by the Department Manager to attend to a particular task, he replied that he was still on training and such task shouldnt be assigned to a trainee. According to him, those jobs were meant to be attended by full-time employees and not by trainees. The Paintshop Manager complained to the Training Manager about Mr. Smiths behavior and he was summoned by the Training Manager. During the discussions, Mr. Smith complained that while all the remaining trainees were having a comfortable time as trainees, he was the only one who was put to a lot of stress and strain; the department was expecting too much from him. He felt that he should be duly rewarded for much hard work; otherwise, it was not appropriate to expect similar work output from him. The Training Manager tried to convince Mr. Smith that he shouldnt rush into the rewards as he was a trainee; his sole concern should be to learn as much as possible and to improve his abilities. He should have a long-term perspective rather than such a narrow-minded approach. The manager also informed that Mr. Smiths good performance would be taken into account when the right occasion arises. Furthermore, the Manager warned Mr. Smith because he was exhibiting negative attitude for which he would be viewed seriously. Mr. Smiths demand for earlier placement was illogical and he should forget it as he had already completed 8 months and had to wait only for 4 months. The Manager advised Mr. Smith that the career of an individual had to be seen on a long-time perspective and that he should not resort to such childish behavior as it would affect his own career and image in the company. Mr. Smith apparently seemed to have been convinced by the assurance given by the Training Manager and remained passive for some time. However, when the feedback was sought after a month, the report stated that he had become more perverted. He was called again for a counseling session and was given two weeks time to show improvement. At the end of those two weeks, the Training Manager met the Department Manager, to have a discussion about Mr. Smith. It was found that there was absolutely no reason for Mr. Smith to nurture a grievance on poor rewards. It was decided that he should be given a warning letter as per the practice of the company and, accordingly, he was issued a warning letter. This further aggravated the situation rather than bringing about any improvement. Mr. Smith felt offended and retaliated by thoroughly disobeying any instruction given to him. This deteriorated the situation more and the relationship between the manager of the department and the trainee was seriously affected. In cases of rupture of relationship, normally the practice was to shift the trainee from the department where he was not getting along well so that he would be tried out in some other department, where he could have another lease for striking better rapport. However, unfortunately, in the case of Mr. Smith, there was no other department to which he could be transferred to, since that was the only department where his specialization could have been of proper use. By the time, he completed his training, he turned out to be one who was not at all acceptable in the department for placement. His behavior and involvement were lacking. In view of this, the Department Manager recommended that he be taken out of the department. When Mr. Smith was informed about it, he was thoroughly depressed. One of the primary objectives of the Training Department is to recruit fresh graduates who have good potential and train them to be effective persons, in different departments. They are taken after a rigorous selection process which includes a written test, a preliminary and a final interview. During the training period, their aptitudes, strengths and weaknesses are identified. Their placement in departments is decided primarily on the basis of their overall effectiveness there. Here is a case where the person happened to be hard-working in the beginning but turned out to be a failure in the end. The Training Manager was conscious of this serious lapse and was not inclined to recommend Smiths termination. But at the same time, it was difficult to retain a person whose track record was not satisfactory. He still felt that a fresh look be given into this case but he was unable to find a way out. He was now faced with the dilemma whether to terminate or not to terminate Mr. William Smith. 5*4=20

a. What factors are responsible for the poor outcome of training effort in the case organization? Explain. b. What options are open for the Training Manager other than termination of Mr. Smith? Explain. c. Assume, the Compensation Manager, who is part of the HR team, is interested in redesigning the reward system for the trainees to drive their performance and motivation. As an HR consultant, explain the connection between the reward systems and motivational theories to the Compensation Manager and help him design the new reward system for the organization. d. Assume, the organization is interested in redesigning its performance appraisal systems as well for the trainees. What new approach would you suggest to it? Explain.