Assigment-4

Group Assignment
Case Study: Kodak

Eastman Kodak is changing dramatically to compete in a world of new technologies,

emerging markets, and global customers. As a result, Kodak’s efforts in executive education
have pushed the limits to create innovative “learning events” for senior management.
According to June Delano, Kodak’s director of Executive Education and Development, these
learning events are designed to be as dynamic and future oriented as the company’s business
environment.

In the past, the highly successful Kodak enjoyed market dominance, worldwide brand
recognition, extraordinary customer loyalty, and enviable profits. Understandably, few
employees (or managers) wanted to do anything to upset the status quo as most of them
looked forward to a lifetime of employment and security.

Then things changed. The company restructured in order to go head to head with competitors
in a much tougher digital marketplace, and in the process, there has been a one third
reduction in executive positions. These events have driven complacency far from the
environs of Rochester, New York, and Kodak’s headquarters city. Agility has replaced
stability as the watchword of the future.

As a consequence of Kodak’s transformation- not to mention the personnel changes- the

majority of senior managers have been in their positions for less than three years. Executive
education is viewed as a critical tool for improving the managerial ranks. But Delano
believed that the development programs needed to be as active, innovative, and future
oriented as the company. Off the shelf materials were out, as were case studies, lectures and
other passive learning approaches. A new approach meant inventing from scratch, letting go
of control, and taking monumental risks. Skills in anticipating the business, pushing the
culture, and networking were demanded. Delano wanted executive education to optimize
opportunities to think collectively and to experiment and explore implications as a team.
These objectives led to the creation of three new programs for the senior management team.

 The Kodak Prosperity Game-This program was developed in partnership with the
Prosperity Institute and was conducted in June 1996 using staff drawn from industry
and academia. Focusing on the imaging industry, the program innovatively teamed
fifty Kodak executives with twenty five peer executives from other companies. These
“reality-based” teams worked on meaningful, implementable strategies, alliances, and
deals.

 The Digital Executive- This program consisted of a “scavenger hunt” exploring

Kodak’s digital present and future. Using digital products and the Internet, small
teams researched digital competitors and interacted with a consumer focus group via
videoconferencing. One innovative feature of this program was the upward mentoring
of the participants by technology “whiz kids.”
  The Future of the Company- This was a two-part program, developed in a partnership
with the Global Business Network and focused on Learning about possible futures for
the industry and the company. Part I was a two day “conversation” about Kodak and
its environment in the coming years. Industry scenarios for the growth were
developed in small team discussions involving Kodak executives and customers,
alliance partners, and futurists. The resulting scenarios launches part II, in which
additional outsiders and provocative thinkers mixed ideas with the participants. The
outcomes were a set of new ideas and potential strategies for the Kodak business.

So far, the program seems to be working for the company that invented consumer
photography more than a century ago. After Kodak’s executives committed to an all out
digital strategy, the company’s revenues climbed. In 2004, Kodak surpassed Sony, the market
leader, in the number of digital cameras shipped in the United States.

Questions

a. What can you tell about how Kodak did needs assessment for executive education?
What recommendations would you give June Delano for improving this analysis?

b. From what you read, what principle of learning do you believe are embedded in the
three new programs?

c. How would you go about evaluating the effectiveness of these educational

experiences? Do you believe that company profitability should be used as a criterion?

Instructions:

 See the members assigned to each group. The members belong to each group are free to
appoint their group leader

 Maximum two pages excluding the cover page

 All members should sign(e-signature)

 The assignment should be submitted by 26th January 2021

 No late submission is entertained.

 The assignment should be uploaded onto LMS and Copied to [email protected]

 Group
Reg.No. Title Fullname
Se.
No.
1 2016/BAD/081 MR. JAGANATHAN DABARERA JUTHITH JAGANATH
2 2017/BAD/013 MISS ALAKESAN ANULEKKA
3 2017/BAD/017 MR. JEYAKUMAR ARAVINTH
4 2017/BAD/020 MISS PATHIRAGE FATHIMA ASKIYA
5 2017/BAD/021 MISS SITHY RINOSA ADAM ABDUL AZEEZ
6 2017/BAD/023 MISS HARAGALE GEDARA THASHMI SHANILKA DIWYANJALE BANDARA Group - 01
MADDUMA BANDARAGE KAVINDHYA THATHSARANI MADDUMA
7 2017/BAD/026 MISS
BANDARA
8 2017/BAD/028 MR. MUHAJARIN ABDHUL BASITH
9 2017/BAD/031 MISS CHARLES JOHNSON CHALINI
10 2017/BAD/043 MISS ASARAPPULLIGE METHUSELA NAPTHALI AKARSHANI DE SILVA
11 2017/BAD/047 MR. SIVABALAN DILAKSHAN
12 2017/BAD/050 MISS DISANAYAKA MUDIYANSELAGE SASIKALA MALKI DISANAYAKA
DISSANAYAKA MUDIYANSELAGE CHASHANI UDAYASHANTHI
13 2017/BAD/051 MISS
DISSANAYAKA
14 2017/BAD/066 MISS ANOSHA GOWRIRAJAN
15 2017/BAD/073 MISS HEENATIGALA KANKANAMLAGE YASODA SUBHANI HEENATIGALA
Group - 02
16 2017/BAD/081 MR. SIVALOGITHAN JATHURSHAN
17 2017/BAD/085 MISS DAVID MINMINI JELUKA
18 2017/BAD/091 MISS JEYAKUMAR KAJAVATHANA
19 2017/BAD/092 MR. THEVARASA KAJENTHIRAN
20 2017/BAD/093 MISS KAKULANDARA MUDIYANSELAGE HANSIKA KAVINDI KAKULANDARA
21 2017/BAD/100 MISS SAJITHTHA KANTHAVANAM
22 2017/BAD/111 MISS YOGANATHAN KIRUSHA
23 2017/BAD/114 MISS MADHUSHI NAVODYA KODIKARA
24 2017/BAD/115 MISS KODITHUWAKKU ARACHCHIGE GAYATHRI PRARTHANA KODITHUWAKKU
25 2017/BAD/117 MR. VIMALATHAS KUBERAN
26 2017/BAD/127 MR. GEORGE NAVARATNARAJAH JEEN LUXMAN Group - 03

27 2017/BAD/128 MISS RASALINGAM LUXMY

28 2017/BAD/136 MISS RAJAPAKSHA UDAGEDARA DILSHA MADHUWANTHI
29 2017/BAD/142 MISS SIVARAJAH MANJULA
30 2017/BAD/143 MISS POUSTEENA MARIYAN
31 2017/BAD/144 MISS KUGANESAN MATHUSHIYA
32 2017/BAD/145 MR. ANTON MELANIYOOS JANU MAXIMAS
33 2017/BAD/147 MISS SABARATNAM METHINA
34 2017/BAD/155 MR. KRISHNAKUMAR NANDHAKRISHNAN
35 2017/BAD/170 MISS VETHARANIYAM NITHARSINI
36 2017/BAD/174 MISS ARANI PATHMANATHAN Group - 04

37 2017/BAD/175 MISS RAJENTHIRAN PAVITHA

38 2017/BAD/181 MR. SAHAYASEELAN JENOFAR PERIES
39 2017/BAD/186 MISS PUVITHA POOVENDRAN
40 2017/BAD/189 MISS PREMASIRIGE NISHANI MADHUSHIKA PREMASIRI
41 2017/BAD/190 MISS YAKABE WAGAPEDI GEDARA HASHINI MADHUSHIKA PREMATHILAKA
42 2017/BAD/201 MR. RAVICHCHANTHIRAN RAJINTHAN
43 2017/BAD/207 MISS ANUSHIYA THAYALINI RANJITHKUMAR
44 2017/BAD/220 MISS RISWAN SABNAM
45 2017/BAD/223 MISS MOHAMED ASHRAF FATHIMA SAHRANA
46 2017/BAD/225 MISS KUNASEKARAN SAKITHYA
Group - 05
47 2017/BAD/229 MR. NADESAN SANOJAN
48 2017/BAD/231 MISS JEYAVEERASINGAM SARANYA
49 2017/BAD/246 MISS JEGANATHAN SHARMILEE
50 2017/BAD/247 MISS MANOKARAN SHATHANA
51 2017/BAD/252 MISS PAIRAVI SIVAKUMAR
52 2017/BAD/267 MISS MARIYA PRATHASKUMAR MARY SUKINTHA
53 2017/BAD/273 MISS SELVAKKUMARAN THADSHAGINI
54 2017/BAD/275 MISS KANESAMOORTHY THANSHAKA
55 2017/BAD/292 MR. SIVANANTHARASA THIMILAN Group - 06
56 2017/BAD/295 MR. BALASUBRAMANIYAM THIRUSENTHOORAN
57 2017/BAD/296 MISS KULISINGAM THULASIKA
58 2017/BAD/297 MISS MINSHIYA THULASINATHAN
59 2017/BAD/301 MISS RAJAGOPALAN USHANA
60 2017/BAD/302 MR. VETHAMANIKAM KINGSLY BERNARD GAVIN VIDUSHAN
61 2017/BAD/306 MR GNANARADNAM VIJIKARAN
62 2017/BAD/308 MISS SANKAVI VIKNESWARAN
63 2017/BAD/309 MR. PACKIYALINGAM VINOJAN
64 2017/BAD/310 MISS AROKIYASEELAN VINUJA Group - 07
65 2017/BAD/318 MISS HURATHAL PELIGE SHAMILA SUVIMALEE WIJETHUNGA
66 2017/BAD/319 MISS REDISKA WILFRED
67 2017/BAD/320 MISS HEWAGE NIPUNI DILSHARA WIMALARATHNE
68 2017/BAD/325 MR. PUVANESVARARASA YUVAYATHURSAN