Writing this blog entry was at the back of my mind for a few weeks now; however other seemingly more important activities vied for and won over my attention and hence the delay. By now, the comments on the conduct of this year’s CAT – Common Admission Test for the most reputed B schools in the country have ranged from grief, anger, harangues to sober confessions and regrets. What I find remarkable is that the same staff and institutions that offer courses and executive development programs on project management could mismanage a project of such scale and significance! Could this be an example of the classic “shade under the lamp”? Is this a sign to the IIMs and other stakeholders involved to recognize, appreciate and imbibe the true essence of the discipline of project management?

I have very often said that we are surrounded by projects, almost every activity that we take up is a project. But perhaps no other task fits the definition as closely as the conduct of the CAT exam. And like any other project, it includes different process areas that need to be handled appropriately to contribute to the overall success of the event. The authorities and the students alike are pros at the paper based version of the test. However the movement to a new mode of execution is a first for all the parties involved. A Big Bang approach to this transition is a sure shot recipe for disaster. Who is to say what surprises might jump out at the authorities and the students on the D day? Surely, not all of these could be pleasant. As is done in the software and technical world, a project that involves a shift as huge and as basic as the mode of execution itself could have been carried out in a phased manner. There are hundreds of coaching centers of varying sizes across the country where thousands of students train for the exam. Not only would a “test phase” conducted in these centers help uncover hidden problems, but also would have served as a crucial means to win over the support of these stakeholders in this new endeavor.

An initiative as novel and as scrutinized as the administration of the computerized CAT is bound to be fraught with risks. Careful identification, analysis and mitigation of these risks is mandatory; after all, not only are we talking about the futures of 2.4 lakh students, but also the respect and admiration of one of the most significant events in the national academic community. Mitigation strategies, however have been conspicuous by their absence in this case. Glitches that surfaced on day one of the exam continued unabated and affected close to 8,000 students from across the country. This clearly demonstrates that the authorities had no plan in place to manage any eventuality that might take place. While they do concede and regret that exam aspirants have been affected, they are quick to point out that an endeavor this complex was bound to have some teething problems and should be treated as a case study for such initiatives in the future. Sure, this is a case study; but can we really afford such an expensive case study? Individuals who attempt the CAT put in months and years of effort into the process. A setback such as this plays havoc on their minds and spirits. And the lesser said about the dent it causes to the reputation of the best B schools in the country, the better.

The CAT exam or the system that it is administered on may be impersonal, but the administrators can hardly afford to be apathetic to the sentiments of the student and parent community. And just as in any other project, people issues such as communication plays a very significant role here. Even the worst of calamities can be assuaged through timely, open and sympathetic communication. However reports of dropped information regarding exam schedule, cancellation and rescheduling during CAT 2009 reveals a huge hiatus in this area on the part of the authorities. Complaints regarding names missing at the exam center, problems with identification at the time of entering the hall, delays in announcement of cancellation or rescheduling have all been met with silence. Outstation students and their parents had no clue about the confusion that awaited them and hence were rightly miffed over the lack of communication. Some of the students have reported that none of the authorities present at the center addressed them after the cancellation of the exam. A detailed plan taking into account communication needs of outstation aspirants, prompt requirements in the event of a problem could have saved the day here. Also a sympathetic attitude demonstrated during a short address to the students would not only have assuaged the disappointed students but also shown the authorities in a more positive and responsible light.