(1) Mr. Swami from CITPR Ltd. recruited 25 students from TTC College based on an uncertain future contract lead without proper verification, causing the students' career prospects to be stuck. (2) There was a lack of communication between levels in both organizations. (3) Mr. Ganesh from CITPR Ltd. could have verified details with Mr. Swami and informed the college to help students pursue other opportunities to avoid embarrassment. (4) Both Mr. Swami and the college placement officer Mr. Sampat were punished appropriately for their mistakes that impacted students.

1. H U M A N R E S O U R C E
M A N A G E M E N T
Case Study :
Recruitment Fiasco

2. OVERVIEW
About CITPR Ltd.
• IT and Consultancy co. with over 10,000 employees
• Known for Best Employer, Best Place to work with
• Best HR Practitioner in the industry and core recruiter of TTC College
About TTC College
• One of the best engineering college in India
• Shares a good relation with CITPR Ltd.

3. KEY CHARACTERS
TTC College of Engineering and Management
• Mr. Ravi Sampat – Placement Officer
• Prof. Parag Thakur – Director
• 25 Students, who were selected by CITPR Ltd.
CITPR Ltd.
• Mr. Shyamji Bapna – Chairman and Managing Director
• Mr. T Pujary – CEO
• Mr. Gopal Dixit – COO
• Mr. D Ganesh – HR Director
• Mr. V N Swami – Recruitment Manager
• Mr. Ramesh Kapoor – VP, Product Development

4. WHAT HAPPENED
• CITPR Ltd. recruited 25 students from TTC College but did not provide
offer letter.
• Reason was MR. Swami’s verbal communication with Mr. Ramesh
Kapoor on an uncertain deal
• Lack of HR Planning and HR Communication
• Also, the career of 25 students got stuck due MR. Swami and Mr.
Sampat mistakes
• Later on, the offer letter was denied by CITPR Ltd.

5. MAJOR ISSUES HIGHLIGHTED IN THE CASE
STUDY

6. • Mr. Ravi Sampat had contacted Mr. VN Swami, to visit their college for placements .
• Once the selection process was over, Mr Sampat informed the selected students that they
were out of the placement process without them actually receiving an offer letter.
• Another key issue was that Mr Sampat waited for more than a month for the offer letter
and only after that did he inform the director what was going on .
• Mr. Swami in an informal chat with Mr. Ramesh Kapoor of CITPR came to know that there
would be a huge requirement of .net professionals in 2-3 months with huge business
expected from an overseas client.
• On getting to know this he decided to approach TTC college inspite of the fact that the
news wasn’t confirmed.
• He had discussed this with Mr D Ganesh . Mr Ganesh trusted him blindly and didn’t check
up on what he was upto.
• The business expected actually went into a competitors’ hand.
• In reality ,there wasn’t any job vacancy at CITPR.
• There was a lot of communication gap between the different levels of hierarchy in both the
organizations.
• There wasn’t a clear cut assignment of role along with rules and regulations to be followed.

7. MEASURES TAKEN BY MR. D GANESH TO AVOID
THE SITUATION AND EMBARRASAMENT TO
CITPR LTD.

8. Mr. D Ganesh could have taken the following measures to avoid the
embarrassment caused to the Company:
Firstly he should not have trusted Mr. Swami blindly and should have
asked him to wait for the demand to be ascertained. This would have
delayed the recruitment process but would have definitely saved the
Company from embarrassment and the College from the phase of
uncertainty and fear for the careers of its students.
After the fiasco, Mr. Ganesh could have stabilized the situation by
informing the College about the shortage and the mishaps that happened
ny the Company so that the college could have asked its students to try
for other companies.

9. OMISSIONS COMMITTED BY MR.
SWAMI FOR RECRUITMENT AT TTC

10. • Mr. Swami, had projected that there will be a huge requirement for net
professionals, as CITPR was expecting to win a huge overseas contract for a
project.
• He had conveyed this message to Mr. Ramesh Kapoor, VP Product
Development in an informal meet, without any further research Mr. Kapoor
had approved this.
• Because of his short-sightedness Mr. Swami had wrongly anticipated for more
net professionals, but in reality there was no vacancy.
• To add to their pain, the contract was won by their competitor.
• Mr. Swami was aware of his shortcomings as he tried to meet Mr. Kapoor, but
couldn’t. So he went ahead and shortlisted more candidates for the job.
• He should have discussed the matter with other senior officers.
• Then there was a communication gap between Mr. Swami and Mr. Ganesh.
• Mr. Swami in his communication with Mr. Ganesh should have mentioned
about the uncertainty of the recruitment process.

11. ACTIONS TAKEN AGAINST MR. SWAMI
AND MR. SAMPAT

12. • Appropriate actions against Mr. Swami and Mr. Sampat
• Mr. Swami was punished appropriately for the betterment of
CITPR Ltd.
• Also, Mr. Swami, being an experienced person, should not have
committed such a mistake.
• Mr. Sampat was denied increment for 12 months
• His mistake hampers the future of the students selected for CITPR
Ltd.
• The actions were appropriate against both the persons as per the
need.

13. THANK YOU