Learning Diary Questions

Q1. Identify a conflict you lost miserably from the past. You have taken a stand
for the benefit of the firm, still failed to get enough support to implement it.
Based on the learnings from the class, identify
a. Identifying stakeholders
b. Thorough analysis
c. Conflict analysis
d. A strategic response based on analysis
Q2. Reflect on the multiple partnership your organization has or having right
now. Do they need any modification? Explain with reason. Did the partnerships
change?
Q3. What kind of combination would help firm to minimize cost (outsourcing,
Keiretsu)?
Q4. Try to evaluate yourself in your previous organization based on 3 informal
networks which was discussed in the class.
Q5. Present the structure of your organization and name the structure at
different levels. Don't consider very large firms in its entirety. (Approx. 1 page)
Q6. Explain the relationship between contingency factors and the structure
presented in Q5. Also, incorporate the details about the environment in which
they operate (culture, goals & strategy, technology, size etc.)

Response to Learning Diary Questions - 1

Background and Analysis: There was an incident while I was working for of my
client a leading private bank of South Africa. My client was looking to upgrade
their system that were more than a decade old and were no longer supported by
their vendor. There was no written information about the working of the system. I
was required to figure out how the system works, and create a fresh conceptual
design of a new replacement system. As I went about my study of the old system
and legal and financial landscape of South African economy, I realized, the old
system is very much reliant on its user to provide it each and every bit of
information by manually typing it on its interface. However, the same
information is readily available from Johannesburg stock exchange, and thus the
work of acquiring information can be done away with. I, also, realized that using
the South African financial regulatory standards, the system can be further
automated to do all necessary calculations that are currently being done
manually by the Chartered Accountants.
Conflict: I, took, my design to Chartered Accountants, who liked the amount of
automation that I am proposing in their regular work. However, when I took the
same design to their head, he was not much convinced, and asked for an exact
replica of the old system, which their department has got used to working for
over a decade.
Stakeholders: South African Bank, Chartered Accountants, Head of Chartered
Accountants, Business Consultant (Myself), System Developers.
Conflict Analysis: Head of department had two chief worries 1. New system
may not work, 2. Learning curve would be very high, 3. Some of his staff my
loose relevance. However, for a bank (and myself being owner for change) more
automation is better, as 1. It reduces the system response time, 2. Eliminate
human errors, 3. Reduce dependencies on manual effort to fill in information.
South African society works largely on personnel relations, and the same is true
for the professional life. As such, I need to honour the Head view in design the
solution.
Strategic Solutions: Against my original desire, I could not do away with the
older system. I have put lot of effort in understanding South African legal and
financial landscape. After some negotiation with the Head, I had to make
comprise, by building the new system with manually feeding functionality of the
older system. I negotiated with Head of department, that I will also add the

automated calculation functionality to the system. The system calculated values

would be shown to the Chartered Accountant alongside the manual entry
placeholder, thus, allowing them choice to use system derived information or to
use their own calculation.

Response to Learning Diary Questions 2

My current organization is a big player in information technology world. It
essentially have two kinds of partnership 1. Strategic Alliance here it markets
the strategic partner product, 2. Solution Partners here it partners with other
technology

firms

to

co-create

solutions

for

market.

These

are

fruitful

partnerships, and company spend lot of time and resource in maintaining and
developing these partnerships.
Modifications required The solutions partnerships are mutually beneficial
from long term perspective. Raw material that an IT consulting firm draws from
its environment is information, or skilled employees. Applying Resource
Dependency Theory, if more strategic partners could be converted into solution
partners, company would be do good in gathering relevant technology insight,
developing core skills, preference in future partnership needs of the from these
current strategic partners, and attract other firms to form more strategic
partnerships.

Response to Learning Diary Questions 3

As a global technology player, the firms follows global division of labour. This
allows firm to take advantage of the local expertise and global outreach.
However, as firms moves forward it will need to keep tap of the moving
technology landscape. More and more clients with technology requirements are
turning tech savvy. Its no longer possible to keep them satisfied with the existing
or proven technology. Clients can see the benefits of new but unproven
technologies. Clients are no longer looking to wait, as they want to be the first
mover in the fast changing business landscapes. The nature of doing business is
changing. Clients are looking for more automated solutions, with less human
interventions. This has potential to save the millions of dollars for the clients.
This means the technology players, who up to the current time have invested
heavily in building human backed economy, would be left with employees that
have skillsets that are no longer relevant. The salaries cost might become a big
burden, until the technology firms act now, re-design their business, re-train their
employees to meet the future demands. This means that employees would need
to have niche skills, and as all good things cost money, the salaries are bound to
go up. Considering the retraining, and re-vitalization needs, the global strategy
would need to be relooked at. With higher automation, client may prefer just
handful of people helping them at their sites. There is another change in the
regulatory arena, that require the all-important information within the bounds of
the originating country. These said reforms means, technology firms just can
continue to source labour, innovation, and manage their finance from cheapest
global locations, which they traditionally have been doing. The transnational
globalization strategy with market division structure will allow them to cater to
the specific market needs. Here, not meeting regulatory requirement will be a
very costly exercise leading to financial, market, and reputational losses. These
losses would be irreparable for a long term health of the firms.

Response to Learning Diary Questions 4

Advisory Network My immediate senior management level 1, level 2 and
level 3 above me formed my advisory network. I would look up to them for
advice relating to career, and other professional stuff. We share the same
organization goals, and my number of goals were linked to their goals. Thus we
formed a relationship, where we feed on each other success. It made an obvious
choice for me to take advice from them, and it was in their interest that provide

me with honest and factually correct advice and vice versa. The role reverse
while I deal with those reporting to me.
Trust Network I belong to business consultant group, this was a sub-group
within the project formed as we all shared the same skillset and have often
required to co-ordinate our activities, or rely on each other while working on our
individual assignments. We also act as a backup for each other while one is away
on leave. We often formally meet once a week, and informally on need basis, or
just to strength our ties. We trust each other and leverage on each other
knowledge while caring out our work. We feed on each other success, as such
take initiatives to share knowledge beyond the immediate work needs.
Like the group, that I belong, there were many other formal groups such as
management, architects, quality advisors who formed similar groups beyond
their own sub-projects and continue to be dedicated to those group by spending
more time together both inside and outside the work environments.
Communication Network Unlike the earlier two groups, I was part of informal
groups formed just with passage of time, as we all tend to gel well. The group
members were for various other projects. We shared anecdotes both from
personal, and professional lives. This apart from helping us distressing for
alternative channels to get a bird eye view of organization from different point of
views.

Response to Learning Diary Questions 5

Structure Type: Functional Structure

Project Sponsor

Project
Director 3Project Director 2
Project Director
1

Project
3
Manager 2
Project Manager
1 Manager Project

Functional
Testing LeadBusiness Lead

Solution

Test

System

Business
Consulta
nt

Business
Consultan
t

Liaison

Response to Learning Diary Questions 6

Contingency factors:
1. Regulatory Changes Regulatory regime is very dynamic especially after
2007-2008 economy meltdown in US that impacted various world
economies. The regulators are very careful of what happened and what
transpired the meltdown. They are constantly debating and updating the
regulations. This essentially means the technology solution for business
firms need to be constantly updated. They may even became obsolete
without any prior warning. For a technology firms, it becomes essentially
to keep a tap on the business and regulatory sign, and plan accordingly.
2. Technology Changes The technology chosen often is culturally driven.
While picking up a technology for building a business solution, the
technology firms often go with the functional manager view, who in turn
take their feedbacks from the project teams. There is always a danger that
thee technology proposed by the teams or functional managers is based
on the pure hunches, or personal preference. The choice may turn out to
be real bad in future, limiting the scope to further continue with the
project.
3. Business Priority (The structure is for Technology firm catering to external
Business needs) Business at times gives requirement for pilot trial basis,
however, this not always told to the project team for fear of them losing
some interest. In addition, the business may change its priority based on
the signs from regulatory regime. Either way, technology team may face
budget cuts, or project scrap, if worst scenario turns out to be true.
4. Vendor Issues Vendor and not be culturally aligned in the same way as
the firm hiring its services. This may lead to lot of issues, especially if
vendor team (or the hiring firm) is not flexible to accommodate and
respect the cultural difference.