Lessons learnt: 1. Success of any event/exercise is not merely ensured by the reputation of the players involved; 2. There is a strong need for the established players to be more alert to even minor details without falling prey to the 'sense of complacency'. (Remember, here, an organization with an excellent reputation backed by 18 years of conducting exams is involved and contract awarded by IIM); 3. Rethinking in terms of involving a lesser known organization for such exercises in an effort to encourage, promote, and lift secondary players. Perhaps, they will be more enthused and may be driven to a higher level of performance with a strong desire to prove themselves.(Q 3 and Q 5 may raise some doubts in the minds of candidates regarding the process of assignation)
Candidates may even be right to expect a statement from IIM as to whether (a) Demo was performed well; No indication of virus infection and system problems (Q&A 1); (b)status reports, daily meetings to assess performance and specific areas of focus for next day (Q&A 2); and (c) working tirelessly to rectify problems and many candidates rescheduled (Q&A 3).
Monitoring, supervision and ensuring quality of preparations do come under the purview, perspective and process of assignation.
Re: To reminisce and recount -PartII
by Swatantra Jananayaga on Dec 11, 2009 09:25 AM
Good analysis but I doubt if anybody will notice this and try any newfangled approach combining the suggestions even in a small/medium set-up. Keep posting such analytical pieces for the benefit of enthusiasts.
Some points are brought to ponder about: the positives first: 1. The interview is timely and possibly could help assuage the emotional turmoil that the candidates have gone through.(Tackling psychological/mental disturbances affecting the performance in the rescheduled exams are theirs' for sure) 2. Prometric's commitment to resolve the technical problems and ensure that everybody gets an opportunity to take part in the exams by rescheduling and OFFERING them. (the ball is now in the court of the candidates). 3. A clear reinforcement of the learning process through their conduct of 100s of exams in the last 18 years(Q&A 9); admission of students' disadvantages (Q&A 3); and regretting negative experiences and inconveniences to the candidates (Q&A4). The big question now is whether this is enough to neutralize the disgruntlement of the candidates who value and rate this exam as fulfilling their aspirations.Affected students numbering about 5,000 as claimed may just be 2%, but empirical outcomes do not always represent realism fairly. It is imperative that the admission process should not deny any legitimate student - capable of entering the portals of IIM - a fair, just and equitable chance for no fault on his/her part. Else, a mechanism needs to be devised and put in place for such cases. Edison spent $2 million for an invention that proved of little value. Ford forgot to put a reverse gear in his car.But they did not affect any other aspiring individual. But this, yes.
What every1 is forgetting is the standard of paper,I mean there were many people in my batch who had attempted more than 50 out of 60 questions.And the standard of the paper was below par.
