Market Movers

Market Movers CAST STUDY  solution

Read the following case carefully and answer the questions given at the end :

For over a year now, Sandeep, the CEO of consulting firm Market Movers (MM) had been trying to inculcate a deep involvement with the customer as a way of life at MM. But no matter what, their involvement seemed to only skim the surface. Of course, the teams worked very diligently, but Sandeep always felt that there was something missing in their approach. He had tried many models and methods; but after a grand start full of enthusiasm and effectiveness, somehow the momentum would be lost. The incidents kept coming to his mind as if to remind him to find the elusive 'something'. What had triggered his thinking today was an angry exchange between him and Vinay Chabra the previous evening over what Sandeep felt was inability to look beyond the nose. Keya Sircar, his associate director, had been surprised over what she called 'loss of decorum'. "A little loss of decorum is good," Sandeep had said later. "It allows you to go beyond the ordinary. And I don't want the ordinary ! We are working with minds and the mind is such that it can create just as well as it can destroy as it can go into a state of inactivity. But because the mind controls when  you are not in control, I admonish to demand commitment to their innate creativity. It's a reminder of what they truly are - passionate people who must control the mind's meanderings from the focus." Sandeep was aware of the potential creativity of his team. But what nullified his efforts was the gap between ideas and execution. When they brainstormed, bright ideas emerged. But after this, there was a virtual paralysis : the ideas did not lead to performance. Rather, the passion in the performance did not match the passion in the ideas, so was there a breach opening up between inspiration and motivation. At MM, there was no performance bonus. Sandeep's view was : "Perform we will; that's what we are here for. If I give you rewards for performing, you will only perform. But we will reward creative observation." Sandeep did not believe in motivation. It led to performance - doing an act which had to be done - but not to creativity. This then was the substance of his appeal for passion. Motivation presumed the existence of knowledge that had to be turned into action, execution and application. So he said : "knowledge + motivation = activity or event". But the event itself was a tried and tested one. Therefore, motivation was only a means to deliver the desired results. But the business they were in could not operate from known past outcomes anymore. Today's businesses demanded all - new, outstanding outcomes. That originality and uniqueness was possible only if there was passion to go beyond known 'knowledge' and trained abilities. What  P.T.O. he called passion for creativity, not mere productivity. "Anyone can produce based on another's template and ideas. But to be the template generator, that's originality." Keya said : "This radical approach is not conducive for our kind of timeframes !" Sandeep said : "In consulting, the cutting edge is innovation. The tried and tested consulting model of doing process reviews and model - building will wither away because the faith in models is dying. Innovation can happen only if the people involved have a passion for it. The key differentiator between businesses that succeed and those that fail is passion. The moment there is a mismatch between personal passion and the product line, it fails to work."

 Questions

 (a) Does motivation help in raising performance or it also inspires creativity and  innovativeness among employees ?

(b) Why is Sandeep's approach of motivation not suitable ?

(c) Does Organisation need a team of highly motivated employees to succeed ? Give reasons.