ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

Analysis on Organizational Development of Army Institute of Business administration

(AIBA), Sylhet
Ayesha Begum Tasmin (10518008)
Rupomitra Goswami Nandini (10518031)
Ummey Salma Saoda (10518040)
Taznina Nur Muntaha (10518043)
Mahmuda Kabir Keya (10518045)

1
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

Abstract
The paper discusses about the organizational development of Army Institute of Business
administration (AIBA), Sylhet. In this paper have three sections. In the first section, a brief
introduction of the AIBA, conducts individual level diagnosis of an Entry level and a
management level Job in the organization. Also briefly discusses the input, the design
components, output and their alignment and how AIBA can align the design components better.
In the second section, the paper represents the force-field analysis of AIBA. In the last, the paper
is concluded by recommending, how AIBA can deal with the forces to reach a new equilibrium
to become more effective.

2
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

Introduction
Army Institute of Business Administration (AIBA), Sylhet was established on 15 January 2015
at Jalalabad Cantonment, Sylhet. It is affiliated with the Institute of Bangladesh University of
Professionals (BUP). It is one of the prominent public universities of the Bangladesh Army. It
follows the BUP curriculum and it is committed to global standards as reflected in our academic
policies and educations. AIBA, Sylhet is temporarily located on the campus of Jalalabad
Cantonment Public School and College (JCPSC), Sylhet, and it has its own set of features. With
a non-political and friendly academic atmosphere, the institute provides a peaceful, pollution-
free, and secure campus life. The site for its permanent campus has been reserved at the new
location of the upcoming Sylhet Cantonment beside Sylhet. AIBA Sylhet provides services to
students from all walks of life that include military and civilian students as well as youngsters
and professionals seeking a rewarding and exciting career.

The primary focus is on developing student's ability to appreciate both the external and internal
environment in order to make innovative and practical decisions based on well-informed
judgments. AIBA, Sylhet aspires to prepare its graduates to take on challenging responsibilities
in a diverse field of the national and international corporate world.

3
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

Individual Level Diagnosis

Input:
Organizational design: AIBA’s organizational design is “Horizontal Hierarchy” because job
level is small that’s why the span of control is greater. AIBA’s organizational diagram is given
below:

AIBA’s culture is Benevolent Autocratic Leadership. Not only that AIBA’s culture is disciplined
and structure. It has safety environment and provides quality education.
Group Design:
Goal Clarity: Director is the head of the AIBA. Under Director there are 2 leading groups which
are led by Deputy Director (Academic and program) and another is Deputy Director (Admin and
finance).
Team Functioning:
Army Institute of Business Administration follows two types of organizational design models,
Staff Authority and Line Authority. The Staff Authority is that director advises the faculty
deputy director and other office staff on how to work. The Line Authority, the DD Program,
gives both advice and orders to the Faculty and the Assistant Section Officer. DD Finance
directly orders direct office assistants.

4
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

In the above diagram, pink lines are denoted as staff authority and blue lines are denoted as line
authority.
Personal Characteristics
Individual Job Requirements
Director Retired Brigadier General
Deputy Director (Academic & Program) Retired Army Major or Lieutenant Cornel
Deputy Director (Admin & Finance) Retired Army Major or Lieutenant Cornel or
Minimum 12 Years of experience in Teaching or
teaching administration.
Faculty BBA MBA Minimum CGPA 3.5
Office Assistant Graduation
MLSS Minimum SSC pass

Design Component
Skill variety: When an employee uses a variety of skills and talents to do a task, this is referred
to as skill variety.
 Skill variety of managerial level: In AIBA, the skill variety of Director, Deputy Director
is high. Director of AIBA generally requires higher experience, risk management
strategy, negotiation, people management, industry knowledge, and good leadership
skills. A retired Brigadier general is required for that position. On the other hand, Deputy

5
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

Director should be a Retired Major or Lieutenant colonel. So, they are enough skilled to
manage the overall organization. In the case of faculty, they require a BBA and MBA
degree, Minimum 3.5 CGPA, computer skills, excellent written and verbal
communication skills, excellent presentation skills, language proficiency in both Bangla
and English, ability to work well with a range of people, and team work. So, skill variety
is very high at the managerial level.
 Skill variety of entry level: The Assistant Section Officer requires BBA and MBA degree
and 3 years’ experience. Office Assistance educational requirement may vary, according
to department and also need experiences. Entry level of workers has to have good
communication in both verbal and non-verbal, Microsoft office skill, Active on social
media to maintaining official pages. Moreover, entry level employees need to spend more
time in AIBA (Working hour 8am to 5 pm). So, in case of Entry level skill variety is
moderate. But if we consider MLSS, skill variety is comparatively low.

Task identity: To what extent a task is separate from another task. (Norris & Porter, 2021)
 Task identity of managerial level: In case of managerial level task identity is very high.
Every work has its own separate task identity for its own level. For example- Deputy
Director of Academic and Program maintains all academic and program related
responsibility in AIBA. On the other hand, Deputy Director of Admin and Finance
maintains all financial responsibilities. Faculty member’s responsibilities are also
separated.
 Task identity of entry level: Task identity of Office Assistant is high. Because, the works
of office assistant of academic and program and Office Assistant of Finance and Admin
are separate .For example- Office Assistant of academic and program’s responsibility is
academic related like student database, on the other hand Office Assistant of Finance and
Admin’s responsibility is financial related like maintaining the student’s tuition fees, bus
fees and employee’s salary’s database.

Task Significance: how one job is influenced other job. (Norris & Porter, 2021)
 Task Significance of managerial level: Task significance is moderate. Unlike assemble
line; in AIBA every job level doesn’t influence one another. For example, if one faculty
member does not come to AIBA, for him the entire work of AIBA will not stop. On the

6
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

other hand, without the signature of DD (Admin & finance) the salary of every staff of
AIBA will stop.
 Task Significance of entry level: If one day, Assistant section officer or Office assistant
will not come to office, in that case, some of the managerial activities, academic activities
maybe stop. So, task significance is high. But if we consider MLSS, there are so many
stuffs. So if one day, a MLSS will not come to work, in that case, others can do the work.
So in that case task significance is moderate.

Autonomy: The freedom to do a job (Norris & Porter, 2021)

 Autonomy of managerial level: The autonomy of Director, he have the autonomy within
AIBA but to some extent he have to carry out what BUP and Army Welfare Trust say to
do. Deputy Directors have little autonomy than Director. In case of faculty, they have the
autonomy to take lectures. For example: they can arrange the study material by their own
choice. They do not have the autonomy to make questions; they have to follow question
structure to make questions for examination.
 Autonomy of entry level: Office assistants and MLSS hardly have any autonomy. They
must carry out the orders of the Deputy Directors.

Feedback: The degree to which employees can discern how well they are doing based on direct
sensory input from the job itself is referred to as feedback. (Norris & Porter, 2021)
 Feedback of managerial level: In AIBA, Director does not get any feedback as he is the
head of the organization and he does not have superior so he does not provided feedback
by anyone. Director gives feedback to Deputy Directors and faculty and gives
reorganization their work by giving the responsibility to lead any club or any program
within AIBA. Moreover faculty is given additional feedback from students. Deputy
Directors do not get additional feedback.
 Feedback of entry level: Like Deputy Directors, Office Assistants and MLSS are
provided feedback from Director.

Outputs
Managerial level:

7
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

The Director and Deputy Directors are highly satisfied with their job. But, in case of personal
development, Deputy Directors don’t have opportunity to get promotion. Moreover, Faculty
members are highly satisfied with their job but they don’t have any opportunity to develop their
careers. They have dissatisfaction about festival bonuses. Faculty members are more responsible
about their individual job for that reason their absenteeism is comparatively low.
For example- In AIBA maximum positions are stuck because there is little opportunity for
promotion. The faculty members need to access in international online library to research,
international book and other educational activities. But, AIBA does not provide any access in
international library.
Entry level:
According to the survey the entry level employees are highly satisfied with their job because of
that their absenteeism is low. They spend more time in AIBA (Working hour 8am to 5 pm) and
cannot take leave because of their work loads. So, they cannot maintain work life balance due to
job. In AIBA entry level of job position is less for that reason they have no opportunity to get
promotion.
Alignment and suggestions:
In input, culture of AIBA is Benevolent Autocracy Leadership which means that all of
employees don’t have autonomy to take decision but they love to follow the decision of superior.
Also in design component we find from the survey, there is very less autonomy. On the other
hand, from output we find the job satisfaction is high and no scope for personal development.
Because, we know that due to less autonomy no opportunity for career development job
satisfaction should be low. So, this is not perfectly aligned. For example-lecturers cannot choose
the course according to their choice even they cannot make question pattern in proportion to their
course. They have to strictly follow the structured pattern which is given by superior.
Suggestions is that to give flexibility to make question pattern to faculty because some course
has the difficulty to maintain the selected question pattern for which it is quite impossible to
evaluate a student properly. The management level should have more freedom in their work to
openly execute their own ideas and methods and implement their creativity. Create challenging
work facilities.

8
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

Force Field Analysis

Plan & proposal: the plan is to move AIBA from temporary campus to a permanent campus as
soon as possible. Vission is to tranform AIBA into a brand in sylhet. We describe our proposal
and plan elaborately with force field analysis. In order to implement the plan, it is necessary to
equilibrium between the two forces which is driven and ressitant forces.
After the aalysis we find most acquired driving forces are ,
1. identity crisis
2. Student demand and desire
3. Autonomy increased
4. Span of control expanded
5. Job enlargement & enrichment
The university is unable to create its own identity. It is located in a school building. Everyone
think it’s a part of this school for this AIBA loosing its value. This impact on all of employees
and students. All of students are suffering from identity crisis. A university student’s most desire
and demand is an own campus of university where he/she will study. University should give the
opportunities of extra curricullam activities like cultural club, business club, leadership club,
pogramming club, sports club, presentation club, computer club social service club etc. all of
clubs has to separate environment for that a university need a large campus in spite of AIBA
coduct all of activities between two floors of a college building so AIBA cannot fullfil the
student’s demand and desire with their small campus thus the reason this force drive to go for
change. Being a small structured campus AIBA job level design is horzontally arranged for
which span of control is high that all of emplooyes are directly controlled by superior and that
the reason autonomy is low. In new campus their will be more emplooyes and supervisor so that
span of control decceased and autonomy will be increased. While the job level is increased in
new campus their will be huge scope of job enlargement and enrichment which can be motivated
the employees.
Then we find out the resistance forces which are,
1. Late of decision making
2. Maintaining the locally standard education
3. Reward & recognition will not change
4. Increasing working hour

9
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

5. Initial work load increasing

Some of forces interrupting to go on new change like late of decision making there were so many
stakeholders for that its takes a long time to get all stakeholders to agree on a decision. Another
most resistance forces is fear to maintaing the locally standard education. As we know AIBA is
located in Sylhet so sylhet is a conservative city and there has no standard university Like NSU,
Brac for that’s why people of sylhet has a perception that if anybody want to quality and
stantard education he/she has to go to Dhaka. So the AIBA will be first mover of Sylhet as a
brand university its quite defficult to build the trust toward the students and parents. And also
employees are thinking that at new campus their Reward and recognition status will not change
in opposite their working hour and initial work load will be increased because in new campus
more courses will be intrduce so faculty have to work hard to learn about new course and also
other stuff resposibility will increased because they have to maintain more students that
demotivated the employees.

10
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS DIAGRAM

DRIVING FORCES RESISTANCE FORCES

(+) (–)

Late of decision
+ 5 Identity crisis
making process 4 –

Student demand and

+ 4 desire
Maintaining the locally 4 –
standard education

Reward & recognition

+ 2 Autonomy increased Proposed unchanged 2 –
CHANGE

Initial work load

+ 1
Span of management increase 2 –
expanded

Job enlargement &

+ 1 enrichment
Increasing work hour 1 –

+ 13 TOTAL
TOTAL 13 –

11
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

Equilibrium: in order to bring equilibrium, the resistance will be reducing as much as possible
and increasing the driven forces. If we focus on maintaining the locally standard education firstly
AIBA has to build their customer (students) trust by advertising on social media, newspaper and
television. And also have to prove that it’s providing standard education with great environment
and showing the student’s achievement. Increasing reward & recognition system resistance force
can be minimizing. For example if AIBA convert into a brand university then the university’s
lecturer will be motivated. On the other hand, identity crisis and student demand of the driven
forces is much more high which push to change the old environment. But in this chart this is
already has an equilibrium situation.

12
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT of AIBA

References
Individual Level Diagnosis. (n.d.). Retrieved from PDF Coffee: https://pdfcoffee.com/individual-level
diagnosis-pdf-free.html

Norris, S. E., & Porter, T. H. (2021, April). Job Design. Retrieved from Research Gate:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315749013_Job_Design?fbclid=IwAR2CAGXFtyJU0bp
1l5FmQB2bioRxO14ob71T-PqmUQW2igSdE3fbZU2PvG4

13