The organisations said that they found the following "welcome changes" in the executives when the latter returned after the OYP: a broader outlook, a greater self-confidence, better and more polite in communication, more methodical in their approach to tasks, and more enthusiastic in general.
The "unwelcome changes" reported were: higher expectations (salary raise and promotion) from the organisation; lower acceptance of colleagues; use of jargons; and a tendency to apply for jobs outside.
How do these organisations utilise the oyp executives? Six of the ten organisations say they had a plan of action in store for them and four out of these six also say that they have implemented the plan. How are the executives rehabilitated on their return from the OYP in those organisations which either failed to implement the plan or had no plan of action at all? In three out of six such organisations, the oyp executives were "just asked to resume their earlier job"; in one organisation, the "specialisation" in OYP was considered; the remaining two organisations did it by "considering the (then) prevailing priorities of the organisation." Some "administrative problems" were mentioned by two organisations as a factor hindering proper placement of the oyp executives.
In response to whether they would like to send their executives to the OYP in the future, all the ten responding organisations said "yes". Five of them, however, said they would require financial assistance in terms of a subsidy of at least 50 per cent of the salaries involved.
4.2 The first three days: A vast majority of the applicants (77 per cent of the respondents) do prepare for the admissions test. The most frequently consulted material for the purpose is the GMAT books. Some of the respondents have suggested that IRMA provide the aspirants with a guide, for effective preparation. While this test anxiety seems to have been widely acquiesced and may even have breathed an aura of significance and desirability about it, greater anxieties of dysfunctional proportions ("mortal fear of grades") are reported to pervade the oyp entrants, during their first few days at the Institute. The alumni's suggestion in this regard is that IRMA underplay the fear of grades and conduct a series of group discussions, in lieu of classes, during the first three days of the programme.
4.3 The mission: Most of the participants (73 per cent of the respondents) take the OYP to acquire a management qualification or to "have a break"; only 27 per cent of the respondents said that they had taken the programme to upgrade their managerial skills. The latter purpose may not be any nobler than the former in intent, but the nature of concern could matter to what happens during the programme.
4.4 The course content: The 85 different courses, offered to the three batches in all, were categorised in this analysis into four sets, on the basis of their reported utility on the job. Forty-one courses have been identified as quite useful, by and large; twenty-one as somewhat useful; fourteen as hardly useful and nine as very useful (see Tables 3.2 to 3.5). If this a posteriori report of utility could be taken as a reflection of the content validity of the courses, an examination of the contents of the various courses we offer would indeed be warranted to the degree, indicated by the reported utility.
Such an examination might show that the set of 41 courses (Table 3.4) would only need minor modifications in their contents and the set of 21 courses (Table 3.5) would require more work. The set of 14 (Table 3.3) courses would demand almost a total reconstruction, in which process, if and when undertaken, one might find entirely new courses emerging, possibly warranting their inclusion; or replicas of existing courses might show up, necessitating mergers. Even now, there have been suggestions for merging certain courses.
The nine courses in Table 3.2, though scoring very high on content validity as of now, would do well to continue their contact with the field, lest they miss out on the silent changes that might occur out there.
4.5 Rehabilitation: The post-oyp utilisation of the executives seems to be unsatisfactory in a large number of cases. Typically, the executives are asked to resume their earlier job, fill in some vacancy or take up ad hoc assignments. Would it be within IRMA's purview to avert under-utilisation of the alumni? Could the institute consider offering a "placement service" to the sponsoring organisations, whereby the latter could make a more effective use of the executives who complete the OYP?
4.6 Authenticity: There seems to be a fairly wide-spread impression among the oyp alumni that the programme is given a raw deal, a step-motherly treatment or a not-so-important status by IRMA itself. Evidences cited include "liberality in selection" and "comments by faculty in and out of class". It would be worth examining the impression and its sources so as to deal with the issue squarely.
4.7 Commitment: The rate of return of the questionnaire, particularly by the sponsoring organisations, may have a message. Despite the verified fact that IRMA's database of alumni addresses was not up-to-date, 47% of the alumni returned the questionnaire -- duly filled. The rate of return by the organisations, whose addresses were certainly accurate, was only 26% -- over a much longer period of time than could be judged necessary. One wonders if the participation by these organisations in the OYP is only an ostensible sign of obedience to their financial benefactor, the NDDB.
4.8 The baseline: If the silence by 74 per cent of the sponsors were taken as a good index of their perceived stakes in the OYP (or, perhaps, even in their own organisation), one would not have to search for an additional reason to explain the under-utilisation of the oyp executives that has been reported by so many of the alumni. How does one increase the stakes of the sponsors and yet maintain takers for the OYP?