UGC NET Management Previous Year Solved Papers - December 2019
- A
What to products, how to produce, how much to produce, how to determine the price of a product
- B
What to produce, how much to produce, how to produce, how to determine price of the product
- C
How much to produce, what to produce, how to produce, how to determine the price of the product
- D
What to produce, how much to produce, how to determine the price of the product, how to produce
- Option : A
- Explanation : Microeconomics Applied to Operational
Issues
Operational issues are of internal nature.
Internal issues include all those problems
which arise within the business organization
and fall within the purview and control of
the management. Some of the basic internal
issues are:
(i) choice of business and the nature of product, i.e., what to produce;
(ii) choice of size of the firm, i.e., how much to produce;
(iii) choice of technology, i.e., choosing the factor-combination;
(iv) choice of price, i.e., how to price the commodity;
(v) how to promote sales;
(vi) how to face price competition;
(vii) how to decide on new investments;
(viii) how to manage profit and capital;
(ix) how to manage an inventory, i.e., stock of both finished goods and raw materials.
These problems may also figure in forward planning. Microeconomics deals with such questions confronted by managers of business enterprises.
- Option : C
- Explanation : Jidoka: The Toyota Production System the practice of designing processes and empowering workers to shut down a process when an abnormal condition occurs:
sometimes called autonomation.
The Japanese word “joke” is often translated as “autonomation”, which is a contraction of the words “autonomous” and “automation.” Jidoka is sometimes translated as “automation with a human touch (or human mind)”. According to Ohno (1978), the original jidoka device was a loom developed by Sakichi Toyoda (1867-1930), the founder of the Toyota Motor Company. This loom stopped instantly if any one of the threads broke so defective products were not built and so problems could be seen immediately. According to Ohno (1979), Toyota sold the patent for his loom in 1930 to the Platt Brothers in England for $500,000 and then invested this money in automobile research, which later led to the creation of the Toyota Motor Company.
Originally, jidoka focused on automatic methods for stopping a process when an error the condition occurred; however, it is now used to describe both automated and human means for stopping a process when a problem occurs. For example, a process can use limit switches or devices that will automatically shut down the process when the required number of pieces have been made, a part is defective, or the mechanism jams. This same process can be operated with policies that allow the operators to shut down the machine when a warning light goes on.
Quality benefits of jidoka: Jidoka causes work to stop immediately when a problem occurs so defective parts are never created. In other words, Jidoka conducts 100 percent inspection highlights the causes of problems, forces constant process improvement, and results in improved quality. Whereas automation focuses on labour reduction, jidoka (autonomation) focuses on quality improvement. Note that jidoka is closely related to Shigeo Shingo’s concept of poka yoke.
Poka Yoke
An industrial engineer at Toyota Motor Corporation, Mr Shigeo Shingo introduced the concept of Poka Yoke in 1961. Poka The yoke is a concept of mistake-proofing processes to result in zero defects. The initial the term was baka-yoke, which means ‘foolproofing’. In 1963, a worker at Arakawa Body The company refused to use ba ka-yo ke mechanisms in their work area, because of the term’s dishonorable and offensive connotation. Hence, the term was changed to Poka Yoke, which means ‘mistake-proofing’. Poka-Yoke is a quality assurance technique developed to eliminate defects in a product by preventing or correcting mistakes as early as possible. Poka-Yoke has been used most frequently in manufacturing environments. The concept of Poka-Yoke is simple. It is the concept of common sense and common practice. Poka-Yoke depends on creating simple and effective methods to prevent the repetition of mistakes. Shigeo Shingo argued that Poka-Yoke depends on three different types of inspection as:
1. Judgment inspection—Inspecting the acceptable product.
2. Informative inspection—Inspecting self-work.
3. Source inspection—Inspecting production environment.
Principles of Poka Yoke
In general, there are six types of Poka Yoke principles.
Elimination: Eliminates the possibility of errors. So, redesign the process in such a way that the task of Poka Yoke is not required.
2. Replacement: Substitutes a more reliable process for the existing process. This may include the use of robotics or automation that prevents a manual assembly error.
3. Prevention: Modifies the product design so that it is impossible to make a mistake or that a mistake becomes a defect.
4. Facilitation:Adopts such techniques (like color-coding) so that the work becomes easier to perform.
5. Detection: Identifies a mistake before further processing occurs so that the operator can quickly correct it.
6. Mitigation: Minimises the effect of the mistake. This includes mechanisms that reduce the impact of an error. Devices for Poka Yoke
1. Prevention device: The prevention devices are the devices designed in such way that it is impossible to make a mistake at all, e.g. USB or pen drive for computers.
2. Detection device: The detection devices are the devices designed in such way that the alarm blows or the signals start whenever the user makes a mistake. Then it can be quickly corrected.
3. The right sequence in respect of stages of group development is
- Option : A
- Explanation : Theories of group formation
Tuckman’s sequential theory: The way in which people come together in a group can be understood as involving stages. Tuckman (1965) analyzed around 50 studies on group development and concluded that groups generally go through a process of development that can be identified as four stages: Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing. In 1977 Tuckman and Jensen identified a the fifth stage of Adjourning in order to describe the process of ending a group.
Tuckman’s stage (sequence) theory is one of the best known and most quoted theories. Johnson and Johnson (1997) state, ‘Of all the sequential stage theories Tuckman’s emphasis on forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning still seems the most useful and creates the most interest.’
Fig. Tuckman’s four stages of group formation An outline explanation of group development is given in Figure.
Stage 1: Forming: When people first get together there is likely to be an introductory stage. People may be unsure about why they are attending a meeting. The purpose of the group may not be clear. People may have little commitment to the group and there may be no clear value system. Stereotyping and prejudice may be expressed.
Stage 2: Storming: There may be ‘power struggles’ within the group. Different individuals may contest each other for leadership of the group. There may be arguments about how the group should work, who should do tasks, and so on. Groups can fail at this stage and individuals can decide to drop out because they do not feel comfortable with other people in the group. Teams might split into sub-groups who refuse to communicate with each other if they become stuck in the storming stage.
Stage 3–Norming: At this stage group members develop a set of common beliefs and values. People are likely to begin to trust each other and develop clear roles. Norms are shared expectations which group members have of each other. Norms enable people to work together as a group.
Stage 4–Performing: Because people share the same values and norms the group can perform tasks effectively. People may feel that they are comfortable and belong in the group. There may be a sense of high morale.
Stage 5–Adjourning: The group has to conclude de their activities and find an acceptable way for group members to part. The group has to complete and end the existence of the group’s identity.
- Option : B
- Explanation : Mintzberg’s Model: According to Mintzberg,
the modes of strategic decision-making are:
1. Entrepreneurial mode: Formulation of strategy is done by a single person in this mode. The focus is on opportunities. The strategy is guided by the founder’s vision and is characterized by bold decisions. In the Indian set-up, we can cite the case of Wipro Infotech as an example of this model of strategy formulation.
2. Adaptive mode: This mode of decisions aking is referred to as “muddling through”. It is characterized by reactive solutions rather than a proactive search for new opportunities. We can again cite the example of Wipro Infotech introducing the sale of customized Personal Computers in response to Dell Computers entering the Indian market.
3. Planning mode: This mode of decisionmaking involves systematic information gathering for situational analysis, generating alternate strategies and selection of the appropriate strategy. As could be inferred, this mode includes both the proactive mode and reactive solutions to current problems. For example, entry of MNCs into the automotive markets in India has made the lead player Maruti Suzuki to come out with new models and discard/ slow down the production of non-moving and old models.
Sometimes organizations may adopt a fourth mode called the logical instrumentalisation mode. This is a synthesis of all the three modes of strategic decision-making listed above. Quinn describes logical incrementalisation as: “An interactive process in which the organization probes the future, experiments and learns from a series of partial (incremental) com commitments rather than through global formulatio n or total strategies.”
