i have submitted the fees on friday evening,,,, but still havent got any confirmation mail from college side ,,,i have the e reciept from sbi as well confirming that i have made the payment.....
when i login into my account it still asks me to the payment and redirects it to the sbi page ....
please help,, what to do.......
Called AO of IIM L and asked about buffer calls in Gen category . The person on the phone categorically denied giving any buffer calls unlike previous years and said calls given = no. of seats only. Can anyone confirm this as this will have huge impact !!
After having a disastrous experience with CAT 14, im gonna sit for CAT 15
what i wanted to know was that does FMS put a lot of weightage to acads...i mean i know you need to score 99.5 + to stand a fair chance, but like the IIMs is it going to punish me for what i did during my teenage years ( 79/74/6.8gpa)
If the waitlist moves, will we be given an updated waitlist number?
Has Any one applied to educational loan?
Seniors...If u have taken the loan please suggest banks.
30th April is the last date for refund at LBSIM but according to aicte norms any aspirant can apply for refund before the session starts that is 12 June. Every other college is following the AICTE norms but LBSIM. Can any one help I am waiting for UBS Chandigarh shortlist .
Box A has x number of balls where as box B has y number of balls, x and y both are odd numbers and x>y. The smallest number of balls which would have to be moved from box A to box B so that Box B has more balls than box A is ..?
b ) (x-y-2)/2
Have a doubt ppl,...
What will be the Remainder of (N/125) where N is a 150 digit number (12345...101112.....).
Please solve it for me...
***** A SINCERE REQUEST *****
Where are all the IM People. Please fill the tracker. We have just 26 entries out of 60 :(
MainList and WaitList Tracker for SPJIMR Batch of 2015-2017
Puys, how do you go about solving AIMCAT PJ's ? It bounces off, when i see the lengthy statements :(. Thereafter i don't get a clue to solve ;(
When people react to their experiences with particular authorities, those authorities and the organizations or institutions that they represent often benefit if the people involved begin with high levels of commitment to the organization or institution represented by the authorities. First, in his studies of people’s attitudes toward political and legal institutions, Tyler found that attitudes after an experience with the institution were strongly affected by prior attitudes. Single experiences influence postexperience loyalty but certainly do not overwhelm the relationship between pre-experience and postexperience loyalty. Thus, the best predictor of loyalty after an experience is usually loyalty before that experience. Second, people with prior loyalty to the organization or institution judge their dealings with the organization’s or institution’s authorities to be fairer than do those with less prior loyalty, either because they are more fairly treated or because they interpret equivalent treatment as fairer. Although high levels of prior organizational or institutional commitment are generally beneficial to the organization or institution, under certain conditions high levels of prior commitment may actually sow the seeds of reduced commitment. When previously committed individuals feel that they were treated unfavourably or unfairly during some experience with the organization or institution, they may show an especially sharp decline in commitment. Two studies were designed to test this hypothesis, which, if confirmed, would suggest that organizational or institutional commitment has risks, as well as benefits. At least three psychological models offer predictions of how individuals’ reactions may vary as a function of (1) their prior level of commitment and (2) the favorability of the encounter with the organization or institution. Favorability of the encounter is determined by the outcome of the encounter and the fairness or appropriateness of the procedures used to allocate outcomes during the encounter. First, the instrumental prediction is that because people are mainly concerned with receiving desired outcomes from their encounters with organizations, changes in their level of commitment will depend primarily on the favorability of the encounter. Second, the assimilation prediction is that individuals’ prior attitudes predispose them to react in a way that is consistent with their prior attitudes. The third prediction, derived from the group-value model of justice, pertains to how people with high prior commitment will react when they feel that they have been treated unfavorably or unfairly during some encounter with the organization or institution. Fair treatment by the other party symbolizes to people that they are being dealt with in a dignified and respectful way, thereby bolstering their sense of self-identity and self-worth. However, people will become quite distressed and react quite negatively if they feel that they have been treated unfairly by the other party to the relationship. The group-value model suggests that people value the information they receive that helps them to define themselves and to view themselves favorably. According to the instrumental viewpoint, people are primarily concerned with the more material or tangible resources received from the relationship. Empirical support for the group-value model has implications for a variety of important issues, including the determinants of commitment, satisfaction, organizational citizenship, and rule following. Determinants of procedural fairness include structural or interpersonal factors. For example, structural determinants refer to such things as whether decisions were made by neutral, fact-finding authorities who used legitimate decision-making criteria. The primary purpose of the study was to examine the interactive effect of individuals (1) commitment to an organization or institution prior to some encounter and (2) perceptions of how fairly they were treated during the encounter, on the change in their level of commitment. A basic assumption of the group-value model is that people generally value their relationships with people, groups, organizations, and institutions and therefore value fair treatment from the other party to the relationship. Specifically, highly committed members should have especially negative reactions to feeling that they were treated unfairly, more so than (1) lesscommitted group members or (2) highly committed members who felt that they were fairly treated. The prediction that people will react especially negatively when they previously felt highly committed but felt that they were treated unfairly also is consistent with the literature on psychological contracts. Rousseau suggested that, over time, the members of work organizations develop feelings of entitlement, i.e., perceived obligations that their employers have toward them. Those who are highly committed to the organization believe that they are fulfilling their contract obligations. However, if the organization acted unfairly, then highly committed individuals are likely to believe that the organization did not live up to its end of the bargain.
For summarizing the passage, which of the following is most appropriate:
Puys, how many waiting desperateley for NITIE and Indore?
Cracku Mock 3
QA - 83 (32C/13W)
VA - 28 (12C/8W)
OA - 111 (44C/21W)
overall the paper was moderate........ have to think of strategies to improve VA accuracy
guys i've got a call from IMT-N for PGDM. I'm a bit confused what's the difference if you get PGDM finance or PGDM marketing or just PGDM. Is it good to join IMTN for PGDM as far as placements and ROI are concerned? Please suggest.
Complete IMS 12 books set.
Ping me if you're interested.