This case series allows students to examine the dynamics of an organization-wide operating system change that was implemented over a decade from 2007 to 2017. The change was initially introduced at Fortis Healthcare Limited in a single hospital and later successfully scaled up to multiple locations. The system worked well for some years before it fell victim to gradual degeneration and defocus. At some stage in the journey of change, this degeneration and defocus was noticed, and a fresh effort was made to revive the change at different locations. Thus, the case series gives students the opportunity to examine the different stages of a change journey—the introduction of change; transferring it to multiple locations; sustaining change; possible .degeneration or defocus, leading to ritualization and loss of spirit; and the rejuvenation of change.<br><br>In Implementing Fortis Operating System (A), the president of strategy and organizational development at Fortis Healthcare Limited had to decide on a plan scale up change quickly and effectively.
This case series allows students to examine the dynamics of an organization-wide operating system change that was implemented over a decade from 2007 to 2017. The change was initially introduced at Fortis Healthcare Limited in a single hospital and later successfully scaled up to multiple locations. The system worked well for some years before it fell victim to gradual degeneration and defocus. At some stage in the journey of change, this degeneration and defocus was noticed, and a fresh effort was made to revive the change at different locations. Thus, the case series gives students the opportunity to examine the different stages of a change journey—the introduction of change; transferring it to multiple locations; sustaining change; possible .degeneration or defocus, leading to ritualization and loss of spirit; and the rejuvenation of change.<br><br>In Implementing Fortis Operating System (B), the chief executive officer at Fortis Healthcare Limited had to create a strategy to ensure that standard operating procedures continued to evolve over time.
In September 2013, Sanjit “Bunker” Roy was honoured with an award for his vision and leadership in addressing global problems through his novel organization, Barefoot College (Barefoot). Barefoot’s mission was to improve the lives of impoverished rural residents by upgrading their existing skills with training so the villages and their residents were self-sufficient. When he started the college in the state of Rajasthan, India, in 1972, Roy never dreamed that Barefoot would be able to affect the lives of millions of people in 24 countries. Barefoot’s global footprint was spreading at a rapid pace with requests for even more locations. Roy wondered whether he should freeze the organization in its present state or continue to increase its presence with a centralized headquarters. Alternatively, he could replicate the autonomous model on a smaller scale, still adherent to the beliefs, values, and assumptions that were the foundation of Barefoot College. This case won second prize at the ISB-Ivey Global Case Competition 2016 in the overall category.
An infrastructure conglomerate is facing serious challenges following its construction of a world-class airport. The group's leader possesses unique managerial skills, coherent leadership and clear vision, but the airport must contend with an unstable political and economic environment, both nationally and internationally, as well as a number of delays and bureaucratic hurdles. As a result of these external factors, revenues have been much lower than expected, in spite of the overall success of the group's groundbreaking airport project. The company's leader knows that it will take stringent steps and corrective action to confront these issues effectively.
The case focuses on an agricultural institute, the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT), part of an international agricultural research consortium. Since its inception in 1972, ICRISAT had been a premier agricultural research institute with substiantial international and Indian funding. However, mismanagement and lack of initiative of senior leadership had resulted in multiple crises in organizational functioning and reduced funding by donors. In addition, ICRISAT had to cope with an unfortunate series of leadership changes. In the midst of the decline in staff morale and other daunting challenges, Dr. William Dar joined the institute as the director general. The case describes the various issues faced by Philippine-born Dar when he took over. It also discusses his previous stints in various roles and the style of leadership he displayed during those tenures. The case concludes by presenting the problem of revival of ICRISAT, including reinforcing its research focus.