You are here:

Human Resources/My MBA Human Resource Management Assignment Questions


Dear Sir, please help me to solve the below Assignment questions. This Answer helpful to all annamalai university MBA Student.

Thank You :))

Question 1. Interviewing unqualified applicants can be a frustrating experience and a waste of time for managers, peers or who ever is responsible for interviewing. How can the HR department minimize or eliminate this problem?  

Question 2.Why do employees not take suggestion systems seriously in some companies? What can management do to improve the credibility of its employee's suggestion system?

Question 1. Interviewing unqualified applicants can be a frustrating experience and a waste of time for managers, peers or who ever is responsible for interviewing. How can the HR department minimize or eliminate this problem?

Interviewing unqualified applicants can be a frustrating experience and a waste of time for managers, peers, or whoever is responsible for interviewing.
How can the HR department minimize or eliminate this problem.
Interviewing unqualified applicants can easily be frustrating to whomever unfortunate enough to be in that position. However, interviewing is and will still be a key process in hiring new employees.
Thus it falls to the HR department to eliminate or at least minimize the problem. Below will be two methods, which can be of help.

The first method is simply to have a stricter filtering process. Basically, before applicants are referred to interviewer, they should be test thoroughly to make sure that they are acceptable. Adding more level in the filtering process can also do this. Instead of just basic qualifications, applicants should be tested on skills and knowledge directly relevant to the position they are applying to. More sophisticated, effective (and expensive) tests are needed. This, of course, necessitates the introduction of an evaluation board of sort to test the applicants. In this case, the company simply has to commit to the task if they want to avoid unqualified interviewees.

The second method is to try to plan the company’s hiring beforehand. Instead of advertising vacant positions to the whole supply of labor, the company can choose to hire from more “elite” sources. For example, the company can choose applicants exclusively from internal employees or referrals from current employees. In the former case the company already knows the applicants’ abilities; and in the latter case since current employees know first-hand what is needed in applicants their referrals will be at least better than average. Certainly there are some minor problems that needed to be solved but similar to the first method, the company just needs to weight the pros and cons.






[COPY/MEDIA PLAN]          except  for senior positions [ head hunting]


EXTERNAL APPLICANT          except for tech [ outsourcing ]
ONLINE APPLICANT          and senior positions [ head hunting]  


Question 2.Why do employees not take suggestion systems seriously in some companies? What can management do to improve the credibility of its employee's suggestion system?

A model with
1.person variables
(initiative at work, higher order need strength, control aspirations, and interest in work innovation), characteristics
(control and complexity),
(better work, reward),
4.self-ecacy, and system factors
(system inhibitors, system responsiveness, and supervisor support)
was developed and tested.

They are related to the three
process variables, deemed to be important in making a suggestion: having ideas, sub-
mitting suggestions and quality of the suggestions. A path analysis revealed that the
most important factors related to these process variables were initiative at work,
higher order need strength, self- ecacy, expected improvements in work and suggestion
inhibitors (negatively).

Central parameters of making a suggestion are
to have ideas, to work them into a suggestion which can be submitted to the suggestion scheme
and which is then rewarded depending on the quality of the suggestion. Without the idea, one
cannot submit a suggestion, without submitting a suggestion, the company cannot appraise its
quality. This central process of ideas, submitting, and evaluating the quality can be influenced by
several variables. In the following we concentrate on the factors that have an influence on having
ideas and on writing and submitting a suggestion.
Making suggestions is a specific action and a specific performance variable.

Performance is a function of desirability and feasibility . Key aspects of desirability are valences, motives, and needs.
Important aspects of feasibility are whether it is possible to do something and whether one is able
to do it.
There are different desirability and feasibility predictors for the phases  having ideas and
submitting suggestions. Submitting should be primarily related to whether or not it makes sense
and whether it is possible to submit something. One feasibility issue is related to whether the
suggestion system is seen to respond adequately to a submission (system responsiveness). System
responsiveness is of obvious importance; a person will be more likely to submit a suggestion if
she or he believes that the organization treats suggestions adequately, fairly, and understands
and implements the suggestions where possible. Another feasibility issue is whether there are
hindrances to submitting an idea (suggestion inhibitors). These inhibitors can be negative
organizational barriers or it may be easier to put an innovation into effect by oneself rather than
submitting a suggestion and having to wait for the response. A third factor is supervisor support.
Theories of innovation have suggested that the supportiveness and safety of a system are
important determinants of innovation . One of the most important factors of
support (and impediment) is the supervisor .

Organizational support is important for innovative behavior at work and that supervisors have an influence in two ways. On the one hand, they can influence the climate that supports or hinders innovativeness
On the other hand, direct expectations by the supervisors will have an influence on the worker because they encourage the worker to hand in suggestions  and in the sense of a self-fulfulling
prophesy .

Thus, the three factors of system responsiveness, suggestion inhibitors, and supervisor support should influence writing and submitting a suggestion. These three factors
should not influence a person in `having ideas'. Aworker can have ideas regardless of whether or
not the external environment is conducive but he or she will not submit them if the environment
is not seen as supportive.

We now turn to those factors and  self-ecacy and motives that should influence both the
central concepts in Figure 1Ðhaving ideas and submitting them. These factors are internal in
contrast to the external factors of system responsiveness, suggestion inhibitors, and supervisor
support, discussed earlier. An important feasibility factor is self-ecacy, which is defined as
`people's judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to

One has to believe in one's
ability to produce suggestions and to put them on paper in order to actually attempt to develop
suggestions and to write them down. Moreover, producing new ideas often leads to uncertainties,
and in uncertain situations self-ecacy is particularly important . Thus,
self-ecacy produces a feeling of safety to bring forward innovation .
Desirability implies that one gets some positive results i.e., pay-off  from submitting suggestions . People are motivated to develop and submit suggestions when they
think they can improve their work situation in terms of making it easier or safer to work.
Approved suggestions carry monetary rewards in many companies and this may be an important
motive .
In addition, classic job content factors and person factors may also play a role. Because they
are general variables they will not be as in¯uential on a specific act of writing and submitting a
suggestion  as they are on having ideas. In European research, two of
the most important job content factors have traditionally been control and complexity we think of them as feasibility factors. Since control implies that one is able to experiment in the work place,
it should be related to the number of ideas . A high
degree of complexity of work implies that one is able to use and further develop one's skills and
that work is more challenging. Thus, more learning takes place and this makes it more likely that
one will also think of new ideas to improve the production .
Self-ecacy should also be influenced by control and complexity. In a longitudinal study of
initiative , the impact of control and complexity on self-ecacy was
shown. Theoretically, control and complexity provide the room to have mastery experiences and
should, therefore, be related to the expectations of self-ecacy .
The exogenous person variables of Figure 1 are restricted to occupational orientations. At least
four variables subjective initiative, higher order need strength, control aspirations, and interest
in innovations are important here. Since these are general orientations, they cannot be neatly
grouped into feasibility and desirability, although they are most likely to be interpreted as
desirability variables. Subjective initiative implies proactivity and thus people should be more
actively involved in their work  and should, therefore, be more prone
to actually think of ideas to change things that bother them (either because it is not efficient or
because removing them improves the work place). Further, a proactive attitude should lead to
more mastery experiences which in turn may help to increase self-ecacy .
Similarly, higher order need strength  should be related to involvement in work and to occupation with not just the bare necessities of production but with ideas that go beyond it. Creativity and persistence in blending a solution are related to intrinsic motivation to work . Thus, higher order need strength should lead to
ideas and suggestions and may also lead to mastery experiences.
Control aspirations should be related to having ideas. People with high control aspirations take
charge and actively seek information in various situations (for example in a job entry situation.
Similarly, they should also be more motivated to develop ideas to change the work situation. Interest in innovation is related to having ideas because one wants to change things for the better. Therefore, people with high interest in innovation look out for new ideas and produce more ideas and suggestions . A desire for mastery is probably
underlying both control aspirations and interest in innovation and, therefore, we suggest that
they should be correlated with self-ecacy as well.
The relationship between submitting and rewarded suggestions should be relatively high for
the following reasons. First, those people who develop many ideas are also likely to have more
good ideas - reported the correlation between quantity and quality of
ideas to be 0.82). Second, people do two kinds of screening before they actually submit an idea.
They ask themselves whether it is actually good enough to get a reward. Additionally, they may
ask the supervisor or their colleagues what they think of an idea. Thus, these two processes ensure
that good ideas are more often submitted than bad ones, leading to a high correlation between
the two. Finally, there is a learning process, and only if people are successful will they attempt to
submit again, while those that are not successful will give up.

The following approaches:

1: There are three central variables: having ideas, writing and submitting, and
rewarded suggestions that should be most strongly correlated with each other.

2: Having ideas should be positively related to the three motives, self-ecacy,
occupational orientations, and job content. It should not be related to system responsiveness,
suggestions inhibitors, and support by supervisor.

3: Writing and submitting suggestions should be affected most strongly by having
ideas and more weakly by system responsiveness, suggestions inhibitors, and support by
supervisor as well as by the two motives and self-ecacy.

4: Occupational orientations should be related to motives and self-ecacy, and, in
addition, job content should be related to self-ecacy.

5: Rewarded suggestions should be directly related only to writing and submitting suggestions.


Markets demand greater innovation. Customers have rising expectations. Your competitors are more nimble than ever before. You need to learn how to change company culture to boost your effectiveness.

You need new ideas, efficient processes, innovative products, valuable services, and more effective ways to build a strong future together. Where are you going to get them? Learn how to change company culture and you’ll find ideas by harnessing the power of your in-house talent.

Organizations can’t survive if managers must provide all the answers. Companies need a steady flow of ideas and solutions from those who are closest to the processes and the customers.You must learn how to change company culture and develop an atmosphere that actively solicits input from every level of your staff.

Fortunately, managers are more receptive to this approach than ever before. But how can you learn how to change company culture and transform the mindset of staff who were trained to “keep their mouths shut, lie low and just follow orders?” How can you encourage everyone on your team to share their best new ideas?

One technique is the “staff suggestion system,” a time-honored process with pre-printed forms for staff to write their ideas and with wooden boxes on the wall where they submit those ideas for consideration.

Many companies have tried this, but few can report real satisfaction with the number, consistency or quality of contributions. Even fewer can report widespread enthusiasm for their “suggestion” schemes at all. This is because they didn’t learn how to change company culture.

Here are six ideas MANAGERS  can implement immediately to make THEIR  approach to learning how to change company culture more effective:

1. Respond immediately to suggestions.

Be candid. When you are, your staff will realize you are serious in efforts to learn how to change company culture. If the answer to a suggestion is no, say no. If the answer is yes, state when staff will see implementation. If the answer is maybe, explain the issues and give a reliable date for reply.

One exception: Do not reply to obscene or abusive suggestions. A strong company culture has no place for such destructive “input.”

2. Respond to suggestions for all to see.

When one person makes a suggestion, she says what is on the minds of many. Reply to suggestions on a bulletin board, in a meeting, or by e-mail to all concerned. Thank the writer for making the contribution. This will demonstrate to staff you are working on learning how to change company culture for more openness.

3. Give prizes for the best suggestions – right away.

Many suggestion programs involve a multi-step process. Suggestions are collected. A committee sorts for “realistic” submissions. Managers appraise the cost savings and anticipated revenue from each. “Senior management” decides on the reward to be given. The “prize” is finally awarded.

The cycle-time for this process is often four weeks or more. In some cases the review is only once a quarter. Would you be inspired if you had to wait that long? This is not the way to learn how to change company culture.

Try this approach: Dedicate $1,200 to the project. Give away $100 every month for one year. Each month, give $50 to the best idea, $20 to the second best idea, and $10 each to the next three best suggestions.

In the first month, only a handful of staff may participate. Give out the money anyway. When employees realize you are serious about learning how to change company culture, their suggestions will get serious.

4. Establish categories for awards.

Categories help staff generate new ideas. Try these: ideas that can be implemented immediately, ideas for getting closer to customers, suggestions for cost savings or increasing revenue, ideas focusing on a specific theme, ideas that most dramatically challenge the current way of thinking, recommendations for the future of the business.

5. Prizes deserve publicity.

Make a big event when you give awards. One company uses “dollar bills” for each winning suggestion. In the center is the staff member who contributed. In the corners is the amount of money the suggestion earned. Surrounding the portrait is a description of the suggestion itself.

These “dollar bills” line the walls of the staff lounge and company cafeteria. The result is recognition for winners and a “culture-building” impact that keeps the suggestion system going strong all year long.

At the end of each year, total the number of suggestions received, acknowledge the winners rewarded and highlight the positive results. Then challenge your team to double the volume of suggestions in the coming year. While you’re at it, double the volume of rewards. This will demonstrate commitment to learning how to change company culture.

6. Most important, implement suggestions quickly.

Act on what your staff suggests. Nothing demonstrates your commitment to this approach better than a staff suggestion recognized, rewarded and immediately put to work. Are there even more good ways to improve your company’s suggestion program? Sure there are. Got a suggestion? Learn how to change company culture and ideas will flow freely.

Key Learning Point To Learn How To Change Company Culture

It’s vital for any company to be continually infused with new ideas. Get your new ideas from those who are front-and-center. And reap the rewards of inspired employees and innovation! Learn how to change company culture and everyone will benefit.

Action Steps To Learn How To Change Company Culture

Attune your staff to a new way of thinking by learning how to change company culture. Develop a strategy that works in your company. Maybe someone has a suggestion. If so, grab it and go! Ignite employee participation and you will learn how to change company culture.

Human Resources

All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts


Leo Lingham


human resource management, human resource planning, strategic planning in resource, management development, training, business coaching, management training, coaching, counseling, recruitment, selection, performance management.


18 years of managerial working exercise which covers business planning , strategic planning, marketing, sales management,
management service, organization development


24 years of management consulting which includes business planning, corporate planning, strategic planning, business development, product management, human resource management/ development,training,
business coaching, etc

Principal---BESTBUSICON Pty Ltd



©2017 All rights reserved.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]