Conflict Management at Supreme India case study

Supreme India in New Delhi is a software development company and it has a turnover of Rs 2000 crore. It employs 400 persons. The company is professionally managed. A young dynamic managing director heads the management team. He expects performance of a high order at every level and more so at the supervisory and managerial levels.

Different types of trainees who undergo training in the company fill up the junior level vacancies. The company offers a one-year training scheme for fresh computer engineers. During the first six months of training, the trainees are exposed to different functional areas. This is considered to be the core training for this category of trainees. At the end of training
the trainees are identified for placement against available or projected vacancies. Then, further training in the next quarter is planned according to individual placement requirements. During the last quarter, the training is 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 keeping in mind the training requirements of the computer engineering graduates. The company has a reasonably good system of manpower planning. The intake of trainees is generally planned on the basis of projected requirements.

Mr Naresh Jain joined the company in the year 2006 after his B. Tech. degree from a reputed institute. He was taken as a trainee against a projected vacancy in the CAD/CAM Division.

In Supreme, the areas of interest for a trainee in CAD/CAM are few. Moreover, since Mr Naresh Jain specialized in CAD/CAM in his B. Tech., his training was planned for the first three months only. Thereafter, he was put on on-the-job training in the CAD/CAM division. He took interest and showed enthusiasm in his work there. The report from his divisional head was quite satisfactory.

The performance of trainee is normally reviewed once at the end of every quarter. During this review, the training manager personally talks to the trainees about their progress, strengths, and shortcomings.

At the end of second quarter, the training manager called Mr Jain for his performance review. He appreciated his good performance and told him to keep it up. A month later, Mr Jain met the training manager. He requested that his training period be curtailed to Seven months and he may be absorbed as a regular computer engineer. He argued that he had been performing like a regular employee in the department. He would also gain seniority as well as some monetary benefits as the regular employees are eligible for many allowances such as conveyance, dearness, house rent, education, etc. which is substantial amount compared to the stipend paid to him as a trainee.

The training manager turned down his request and informed him that it is not the practice of the company. He told him 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 precedent. Quite often some trainees were put on the job much earlier than the normal period of three quarters for several reasons.

Thereafter, Mr Jain’s behaviour 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 Division Head to attend to a particular task, he replied that he was still on training and such tasks should not been assigned to a trainee. According to him those jobs were meant to be attended by full time employees and not by trainees.

The divisional head of CAD/CAM Division complained to the training manager about Mr Jain’s behavior and the training manager summoned him. During the discussion Mr Jain 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 such hard work or else it was not appropriate to expect such work output from him.

The training manager tried to convince him again that he should not concentrate on rewards, and as a trainee, his sole concern should be to learn as much as possible and improve his abilities. He advised him that he should have a long-term perspective rather than such a narrow-minded approach. He also informed him that his performance would be taken into account when the time was right. He warned him that he was exhibiting a negative attitude. His demand for an earlier placement as illogical and he should forget this as he had already completed eight months and had to wait only for four months. He advised Mr Jain that the career of an individual had to be seen on a long-time perspective and that he should not resort to such child-like behaviour as it would affect his career and image in the company.

Mr Jain 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 troublesome. He was called again for counseling session and was given two week’s time to show improvement. At the end of those two weeks the training manager met the CAD/CAM division head to have discussion about Mr Jain. It was decided that he 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 Jain felt offended and retaliated by thoroughly disobeying any instruction given to him. This deteriorated the situation more and the relationship between the division head of the department and the trainees was seriously affected.

In cases of rupture of relationships, normally the practice was to shift the trainee from the department where he was not getting along well so that he would be tried in some other department where he could have another lease for striking a better rapport. But unfortunately, in the case of Mr Jain, there was no other department to which he could be transferred, since that was the only department where his specialization could have been put to 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, because his behavior and involvement were much below acceptable standards. In view of this, the division head recommended that he be taken out of that department. When Mr Jain 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 workers in the 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 placements in departments are decided primarily on the basis of their overall effectiveness. 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 his 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 to 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 Jain.

Look out the Question and Answers of the case: Conflict Management at Supreme India.