Ajit Mishra | Arul Sood | Ekta Sikarwar | Kishan B K | Pramod Kumar

Galipalli | Vinod Kumar G | Yogesh Garbyal

Ineffective group structure

 Sales team enjoyed advantage and are

backed by senior management
 Absence of key stakeholders for key meetings
 Personal objectives overruled common cause
 No consensus due to lack of proper analysis
 Formation of internal group among
departments pertaining to price rise
 Weaknesses in the Decision
making process
 Design and development team were denied
additional time that they had asked for
 Underestimated Posthaste’s BirdsI. There by
failed to respond in time
 Decision to start Project Aerial after losing
sizeable market share to competitor with
high pricing
 Conflicting departmental
objectives
 Sales : Worried on their compensation. Hence
they were inflexible towards marketing the
product at higher price
 Design and development : Engrossed with other
technically gratifying projects. Couldn’t give
enough time for Project Aerial
 Production : Past experience made them act
more defensive
 Finance : More concerned on his own objective.
Actually wanted to price USD 500
 Conflicting individual
objectives
 Allen Roth: Wanted to show his leadership by working on
a new product development
 Ed Pryor: His objective was to meet the sales’ team
targets; which in turn affect their compensation
 Tony Barren: Worried on Quality. Hence reluctant to
bring down the production cost
 Harold Whistler: Partially engaged with the daily
organizational duties; as he is awaiting his retirement
 Alice Gorga: Not ready to give up performance & design
of the hardware – as per the initial specifications.
 Becky Timmons: Concerned about margin– by having
sufficient cushion to accommodate the rising fuel prices