Example Exam: XYZ Pharmaceuticals
XYZ Pharmaceuticals, a global leader in the pharmaceutical industry, has been at the forefront of medical
research and drug development for several decades. In the early 2020s, societal attitudes towards
diversity and inclusion began to shift, prompting companies across various sectors, including
pharmaceuticals, to embrace more inclusive practices. XYZ Pharmaceuticals, however, found itself
lagging behind in this aspect, a realization they made after noticing an increasing number of diversity-
and discrimination-related incidents in the workplace and complaints by employees as well as higher
employee turnover rates.
While the company acknowledged the importance of diversity and inclusion in its corporate social
responsibility statements, the actual HR practices remained largely outdated and exclusive (= STRATEGY!)
The company decided that external assistance was needed and engaged an Organizational Development
(OD) team, in the hope they would realize a quick fix of this issue. The OD team undertook an extensive
diagnosis focusing on employee surveys and the HR policy of XYZ Pharmaceuticals. This diagnostic
process yielded highly valuable insights, leading the OD team to identify the following challenges as top
priorities:
The recruitment process at XYZ Pharmaceuticals heavily favored candidates with a traditional
background in pharmaceutical research. This limited the company's ability to attract diverse
talent, including women, minorities, and individuals from non-traditional backgrounds.
o = HR SYSTEMS (organization level) ✅
The promotion and advancement policies favored employees who had been with the company
for many years, creating a glass ceiling for new and diverse talent. Employees from
underrepresented groups often felt excluded from leadership positions.
o = HR SYSTEMS: process related to compensating the employees!
o >< underrepresented groups felt excluded from leadership positions ✅
The company's workplace culture did not promote inclusion
o There was a lack of awareness and understanding of diversity and inclusion issues,
leading to microaggressions and a sense of alienation among certain employees.
o = CULTURE: we versus them culture
Employees disclosed that this issue was especially prevalent in the upper echelons of the firm,
including supervisors, managers, and top executives.
The company did not involve its employees in the process of addressing these issues, resulting in
a disconnect between leadership and the workforce.
o = MANAGEMENT PROCESSES: decision making structures within an organization are top
-down here: no involvement of the employees.
o
The OD team proposed the following interventions:
Revise promotion and advancement policies to include performance-based criteria rather than
solely relying on tenure
o A transparent promotion process should then be established to eliminate favoritism.
Set up partnerships with universities to attract diverse talent.
Implement a mandatory diversity and inclusion training program for all employees, including
leadership.
o This program will raise awareness of unconscious bias and promote a more inclusive
workplace.
Encourage the formation of employee resource groups (ERGs) for various underrepresented
communities, allowing employees to support one another and provide feedback to management.
XYZ Pharmaceuticals, constrained by a limited budget, opted to proceed with the first two interventions:
They revised their promotion policies, diminishing the emphasis on tenure as the dominant
determinant
1
, Established partnerships with three local universities boasting diverse student populations to
enhance diversity.
The company communicated these actions to all present employees during the New Year’s reception.
A few months after implementing these interventions, the OD team assessed their progress and impact,
and the feedback was predominantly negative.
Employee surveys revealed that employees were unaware of the company’s efforts toward
greater diversity and inclusion.
o Most employees from minoritized subgroups did not feel more included at all, and
majority members did not understand the need for a change in the promotion system.
Turnover statistics indicated an increase in voluntary turnover.
Additionally, recruitment and hiring statistics revealed that while there was more diversity in the
pool of applicants (many candidates were from the partner universities), the actual degree of
diversity among those who were hired remained unchanged.
Possible exam questions about this example case, to give you an idea of the type of questions
Please note that you will receive only 3 of such questions
(1) Identify and articulate any misalignments you observe in this case. In your response, use the
diagnostic framework, explicitly highlighting which elements of the framework are misaligned
and provide a rationale for each misalignment.
A good answer:
- Is explicit on the elements of the diagnostic framework that misalign
Explains how each element looks like in the company and why they misalign
- Shows two elements per misalignment
- Does not include the output as one of the elements of misalignment
don’t say that the lack of interdisciplinary teamwork misaligns with focus on patient care, but say that
the structure (which is traditional and departmental and therefore creates a lack of interdisciplinary
teamwork) misaligns with the strategy (which is focused on patient care and medical excellence)
Misalignment 1 between HR systems and strategy
HR Systems: The recruitment and promotion policies favor traditional backgrounds and tenure,
limiting diversity in talent acquisition and advancement.
o The actual HR practices remain outdated and exclusive.
Strategy: While the company acknowledges the importance of diversity and inclusion in its CSR
statements
Explanation: There is a misalignment between HR systems and organizational strategy. The strategy
emphasizes diversity and inclusion, but the HR systems, particularly in recruitment and promotion, do not
align with these goals. The policies hinder the implementation of the diversity and inclusion strategy.
Misalignment 2 between strategy and culture
Strategy: the company acknowledges the importance of diversity and inclusion in its CSR
statements
Culture: the company's workplace culture did not promote inclusion since here was a lack of
awareness and understanding of diversity and inclusion issues, leading to microaggressions and a
sense of alienation among certain employees.
Rationale: The misalignment between strategy and culture suggests that while the company has
articulated a strategic commitment to diversity and inclusion, this commitment has not been effectively
translated into the everyday behaviors, attitudes, and practices within the organization. A supportive
culture is crucial for the successful implementation of the stated strategy, and the disconnect observed in
the case indicates a need for alignment between the two
Misalignment 3 between general environment and culture
2
, General environment: The case doesn't explicitly provide details about the general environment,
but it mentions a shift in societal attitudes towards diversity and inclusion, a trend observed in
the broader external context.
Culture: If the broader societal environment is undergoing changes that favor more inclusive
practices, there is a potential misalignment with the observed cultural issues within XYZ
Pharmaceuticals. The organization's culture, marked by microaggressions and employee
alienation, may not be keeping pace with the evolving external expectations for diverse and
inclusive workplaces.
Explanation: In a rapidly changing general environment, organizations are expected to adapt to societal
shifts, especially concerning diversity and inclusion. If the cultural dynamics within XYZ Pharmaceuticals
do not align with the external expectations and changing attitudes, there is a risk of misalignment. The
organization may find itself out of sync with societal trends, potentially leading to challenges in attracting
and retaining talent, as well as potential reputational risks.
(2) Adopting a systems perspective in analyzing this case, do you believe that the two interventions
were adequate to tackle the issues outlined at the outset of the case?
What do you think? What would you propose if you were the OD manager in this case? Explain.
No, the two interventions (revising promotion policies and establishing partnerships with universities)
may address specific aspects, but a comprehensive approach is crucial for sustainable change.
As an OD manager, I would propose additional strategies to address the multifaceted issues highlighted
in the case:
Human Resources management intervention: comprehensive diversity and inclusion training:
o Implement a more comprehensive diversity and inclusion training program for all
employees, including leadership. This program should go beyond basic awareness and
cover topics such as unconscious bias, cultural competence, and fostering an inclusive
workplace culture.
o A holistic training approach ensures that employees at all levels understand the
importance of diversity and inclusion, fostering a culture of awareness and respect.
This addresses the reported lack of awareness and understanding of diversity issues.
Human Resources management interventions: cultural competency training for leadership
o Provide specialized training for supervisors, managers, and top executives to enhance
their cultural competence.
This should include skills for leading diverse teams, addressing
microaggressions, and creating an inclusive leadership style
o Leadership plays a pivotal role in shaping organizational culture. By equipping leaders
with cultural competency skills, the organization can foster a more inclusive
environment, reducing microaggressions and promoting diversity at all levels.
Technostructural interventions: strengthening employee resource groups (ERGs)
o Encourage the formation and active participation of Employee Resource Groups (ERGs)
for various underrepresented communities.
Provide these groups with resources and support to drive positive change within
the organization.
o ERGs create a platform for employees to support one another, share experiences, and
provide valuable insights to management. This grassroots approach contributes to a
more inclusive culture and helps bridge the gap between leadership and employees.
(3) Related to the previous question: Can you think of another intervention that would benefit this
firm? Explain.
3
XYZ Pharmaceuticals, a global leader in the pharmaceutical industry, has been at the forefront of medical
research and drug development for several decades. In the early 2020s, societal attitudes towards
diversity and inclusion began to shift, prompting companies across various sectors, including
pharmaceuticals, to embrace more inclusive practices. XYZ Pharmaceuticals, however, found itself
lagging behind in this aspect, a realization they made after noticing an increasing number of diversity-
and discrimination-related incidents in the workplace and complaints by employees as well as higher
employee turnover rates.
While the company acknowledged the importance of diversity and inclusion in its corporate social
responsibility statements, the actual HR practices remained largely outdated and exclusive (= STRATEGY!)
The company decided that external assistance was needed and engaged an Organizational Development
(OD) team, in the hope they would realize a quick fix of this issue. The OD team undertook an extensive
diagnosis focusing on employee surveys and the HR policy of XYZ Pharmaceuticals. This diagnostic
process yielded highly valuable insights, leading the OD team to identify the following challenges as top
priorities:
The recruitment process at XYZ Pharmaceuticals heavily favored candidates with a traditional
background in pharmaceutical research. This limited the company's ability to attract diverse
talent, including women, minorities, and individuals from non-traditional backgrounds.
o = HR SYSTEMS (organization level) ✅
The promotion and advancement policies favored employees who had been with the company
for many years, creating a glass ceiling for new and diverse talent. Employees from
underrepresented groups often felt excluded from leadership positions.
o = HR SYSTEMS: process related to compensating the employees!
o >< underrepresented groups felt excluded from leadership positions ✅
The company's workplace culture did not promote inclusion
o There was a lack of awareness and understanding of diversity and inclusion issues,
leading to microaggressions and a sense of alienation among certain employees.
o = CULTURE: we versus them culture
Employees disclosed that this issue was especially prevalent in the upper echelons of the firm,
including supervisors, managers, and top executives.
The company did not involve its employees in the process of addressing these issues, resulting in
a disconnect between leadership and the workforce.
o = MANAGEMENT PROCESSES: decision making structures within an organization are top
-down here: no involvement of the employees.
o
The OD team proposed the following interventions:
Revise promotion and advancement policies to include performance-based criteria rather than
solely relying on tenure
o A transparent promotion process should then be established to eliminate favoritism.
Set up partnerships with universities to attract diverse talent.
Implement a mandatory diversity and inclusion training program for all employees, including
leadership.
o This program will raise awareness of unconscious bias and promote a more inclusive
workplace.
Encourage the formation of employee resource groups (ERGs) for various underrepresented
communities, allowing employees to support one another and provide feedback to management.
XYZ Pharmaceuticals, constrained by a limited budget, opted to proceed with the first two interventions:
They revised their promotion policies, diminishing the emphasis on tenure as the dominant
determinant
1
, Established partnerships with three local universities boasting diverse student populations to
enhance diversity.
The company communicated these actions to all present employees during the New Year’s reception.
A few months after implementing these interventions, the OD team assessed their progress and impact,
and the feedback was predominantly negative.
Employee surveys revealed that employees were unaware of the company’s efforts toward
greater diversity and inclusion.
o Most employees from minoritized subgroups did not feel more included at all, and
majority members did not understand the need for a change in the promotion system.
Turnover statistics indicated an increase in voluntary turnover.
Additionally, recruitment and hiring statistics revealed that while there was more diversity in the
pool of applicants (many candidates were from the partner universities), the actual degree of
diversity among those who were hired remained unchanged.
Possible exam questions about this example case, to give you an idea of the type of questions
Please note that you will receive only 3 of such questions
(1) Identify and articulate any misalignments you observe in this case. In your response, use the
diagnostic framework, explicitly highlighting which elements of the framework are misaligned
and provide a rationale for each misalignment.
A good answer:
- Is explicit on the elements of the diagnostic framework that misalign
Explains how each element looks like in the company and why they misalign
- Shows two elements per misalignment
- Does not include the output as one of the elements of misalignment
don’t say that the lack of interdisciplinary teamwork misaligns with focus on patient care, but say that
the structure (which is traditional and departmental and therefore creates a lack of interdisciplinary
teamwork) misaligns with the strategy (which is focused on patient care and medical excellence)
Misalignment 1 between HR systems and strategy
HR Systems: The recruitment and promotion policies favor traditional backgrounds and tenure,
limiting diversity in talent acquisition and advancement.
o The actual HR practices remain outdated and exclusive.
Strategy: While the company acknowledges the importance of diversity and inclusion in its CSR
statements
Explanation: There is a misalignment between HR systems and organizational strategy. The strategy
emphasizes diversity and inclusion, but the HR systems, particularly in recruitment and promotion, do not
align with these goals. The policies hinder the implementation of the diversity and inclusion strategy.
Misalignment 2 between strategy and culture
Strategy: the company acknowledges the importance of diversity and inclusion in its CSR
statements
Culture: the company's workplace culture did not promote inclusion since here was a lack of
awareness and understanding of diversity and inclusion issues, leading to microaggressions and a
sense of alienation among certain employees.
Rationale: The misalignment between strategy and culture suggests that while the company has
articulated a strategic commitment to diversity and inclusion, this commitment has not been effectively
translated into the everyday behaviors, attitudes, and practices within the organization. A supportive
culture is crucial for the successful implementation of the stated strategy, and the disconnect observed in
the case indicates a need for alignment between the two
Misalignment 3 between general environment and culture
2
, General environment: The case doesn't explicitly provide details about the general environment,
but it mentions a shift in societal attitudes towards diversity and inclusion, a trend observed in
the broader external context.
Culture: If the broader societal environment is undergoing changes that favor more inclusive
practices, there is a potential misalignment with the observed cultural issues within XYZ
Pharmaceuticals. The organization's culture, marked by microaggressions and employee
alienation, may not be keeping pace with the evolving external expectations for diverse and
inclusive workplaces.
Explanation: In a rapidly changing general environment, organizations are expected to adapt to societal
shifts, especially concerning diversity and inclusion. If the cultural dynamics within XYZ Pharmaceuticals
do not align with the external expectations and changing attitudes, there is a risk of misalignment. The
organization may find itself out of sync with societal trends, potentially leading to challenges in attracting
and retaining talent, as well as potential reputational risks.
(2) Adopting a systems perspective in analyzing this case, do you believe that the two interventions
were adequate to tackle the issues outlined at the outset of the case?
What do you think? What would you propose if you were the OD manager in this case? Explain.
No, the two interventions (revising promotion policies and establishing partnerships with universities)
may address specific aspects, but a comprehensive approach is crucial for sustainable change.
As an OD manager, I would propose additional strategies to address the multifaceted issues highlighted
in the case:
Human Resources management intervention: comprehensive diversity and inclusion training:
o Implement a more comprehensive diversity and inclusion training program for all
employees, including leadership. This program should go beyond basic awareness and
cover topics such as unconscious bias, cultural competence, and fostering an inclusive
workplace culture.
o A holistic training approach ensures that employees at all levels understand the
importance of diversity and inclusion, fostering a culture of awareness and respect.
This addresses the reported lack of awareness and understanding of diversity issues.
Human Resources management interventions: cultural competency training for leadership
o Provide specialized training for supervisors, managers, and top executives to enhance
their cultural competence.
This should include skills for leading diverse teams, addressing
microaggressions, and creating an inclusive leadership style
o Leadership plays a pivotal role in shaping organizational culture. By equipping leaders
with cultural competency skills, the organization can foster a more inclusive
environment, reducing microaggressions and promoting diversity at all levels.
Technostructural interventions: strengthening employee resource groups (ERGs)
o Encourage the formation and active participation of Employee Resource Groups (ERGs)
for various underrepresented communities.
Provide these groups with resources and support to drive positive change within
the organization.
o ERGs create a platform for employees to support one another, share experiences, and
provide valuable insights to management. This grassroots approach contributes to a
more inclusive culture and helps bridge the gap between leadership and employees.
(3) Related to the previous question: Can you think of another intervention that would benefit this
firm? Explain.
3
