USA: +1(669)289-8683 
Sign in
Coursework Brief 1
Summary information
Type of assessment:
Written Report – Case Study Analysis
Individual
or group:
Individual
Identify a leader of change and the main change challenge they are addressing. Drawing on the change leadership and change management literature, analyse how they are currently leading and managing change in relation to an identified change challenge. Evaluate how effective they have been in leading change. In your evaluation, consider what has stood out as being of particular significance and why; identify what remains to be addressed and what we can learn from the case about change management/leadership.
You are asked to choose one of the following leaders and the challenge identified:
Rishi Sunak, UK Prime Minister and “stopping the boats”, one of his
5 priorities for 2023
(now 2024)
Elon Musk and his leadership of X, formerly known as Twitter –
his advocacy for free speech
Linda
Yaccarino
, CEO of Twitter and her leadership of X – focus on one of
her main change challenges
Sir Mark Rowley
, Metropolitan Police Commissioner – changing the culture of the Metropolitan Police Force
Rationale – choice of case study
The case studies have been chosen for the following reasons:
?All leaders have to lead and manage change so it makes sense to identify a leader and to identify the major change challenges they are addressing
?There is a lot of media information on them which will allow you to understand the change challenges and how they are addressing them
?Often in “case study” analysis, we are reviewing a historic case where the lessons learned are obvious in retrospect. Change is about the present and working with uncertainty – we don’t know if the leader will or will not be successful or what events might occur which we have not predicted
?Case studies often take an organisational focus but we never see what really happens. We find ‘data’ (e.g., financial reports, information on the launch of a new business, media reports provided by others) but we never see what a leader of change actually does – how they lead and manage change. By identifying someone very much in the public eye, we can follow their very attempts to make change happen and the challenges they face in doing so
?By giving you a real live case study, you need to apply theory and tools to the case in order to understand conceptually what the leader is doing and why they are succeeding/ failing in their attempts to lead change. No one else has done this for you so you have the opportunity to show independent thinking, which is what a leader of change also has to do
We have identified 4 leaders because they are in the pubic eye, because they are working in a breadth of areas of change and by focusing on 4 leaders, we will be able to support you throughout the module in making references to their challenges and how they are addressing them. We won’t give you all the answers but we will share some useful insights as “entry points” into your own analysis and evaluation
Addressing Assignment 1
We ask you to provide an individual “written report”. What we mean by this is that you have to conduct your own review, analysis and evaluation of your chosen case (one of the 4 leaders identified and the challenge they are currently addressing as highlighted) and draw some conclusions. You don’t need to provide a summary or to numerate your text. You will be required to use sub-headings however and expected to use tables and/or figures in your analysis.
The change literature includes many frameworks (e.g., 2X2 matrices or which show forces to the left pushing against forces to the right; system diagrams, etc). The literature also includes step-by-step approaches for leading and managing change (e.g.,
Kotter’s 8 steps
). There are many models of Executive leadership (e.g.,
transformational leadership
, colour print-thinking, etc). These models are often about “change” because this is what a senior leader does. The change management literature also has lots of theories published in peer-reviewed journals and change texts. We refer to the frameworks, models, principles and theories as “theories and tools”.
You can either construct a more theoretical report or you are free to include lots of models and diagrams. In principle, you can attract just as many marks if you don’t include diagrams and tables; that is, you just include theories or you write about the models in a free-flowing narrative. However, your report is likely to be stronger with the use of diagrams and tables as well as the application of theories alone.
The assignment is addressed using a basic framework for addressing an investigation which is the focus of a report:
The Facts (Criterion 1) (10%)
Analysis of the change challenges (Criterion 2) (25%)
Analysis of the actions taken (Criterion 3) (25%)
Evaluation and Recommendations (Criterion 4) (30%)
Structure and
Refer
encing (Criterion 5) (10%)
The Rubric below provides details
Each criterion will be discussed in turn.
The Facts (Criterion 1) (10%)
You will need to review media reports on your chosen leader and the organisational or political issues you want to understand (e.g., newspapers, television documentaries) and/or speeches given by leaders or commentators. There may be other sources of information.
This review will provide you with the “facts” about what the challenges are, what is problematic about the challenges. what the leaders are actually doing to address the challenges, reports of the obstacles they are facing, how successful they are being, etc.
You are not advised to provide a separate summary of this but to apply your understanding in your analysis and evaluation of the case (i.e., the criteria which follow).
We will not be providing you with a case summary – this is for you to do. We will make a few relevant comments in class to help you about all 4 cases.
Analysis of the change challenges (Criterion 2) (25%)
You will have the facts from your review of the media (for a good example of the facts, see the challenges for Yaccarino). But now you need to relate these facts to the literature, that is, the “theories and tools”. A theory might be “
resistance to change
” which suggests an explanation of why change is difficult. A tool could be a
set of principles
about what is important in change management (e.g., “getting organisational buy-in”). Some of these principles are articulated in a model of change such as Kotter’s 8 steps. There are
other models of change
.
Some models of change are particularly useful in analysing change challenges. If you want to understand the challenges Rishi Sunak’s task is facing for example in relation to his attempts to stop illegal immigration, you could use a
PEST analysis
to illustrate this. Or you could use a
forcefield analysis
to identify the changes for and against the change.
In the case of Mark Rowley, you might produce a cultural web analysis (see for example
this source
or this source) to analyse the challenges he is facing. Or, you might consider the wide range of stakeholders he has to keep satisfied (e.g., UK Government, citizens of London, the general media, his own staff, etc). You could produce a
stakeholder map
to highlight the challenges the different stakeholders pose.
In short, by “analysis”, we mean applying theories and/or tools used in the change management or change leadership literature to understand the challenges these leaders are facing conceptually. They themselves probably won’t use these models. They might say, “Oh, it’s that lot kicking up a fuss again” rather than use a stakeholder map to analyse who the “troublemakers” are likely to be. Similarly, a change leader might get a sense of something stopping progress but won’t typically make sense of this drawing on theories like “resistance to change”. This is however your task as someone who is learning about change management from an academic perspective and who will be in position to understand the language of change management when you encounter it in the workplace.
We have suggested a clear change focus for your assignment. If you try to cover more than one major change, your analysis is likely to be superficial in a 2000-word report and you will be overwhelmed with the workload. Focus provides insight.
You will need to think about how many “theories and tools” to use. If you were analysing culture change in the Metropolitan Police, you might just use a culture Web analysis but do this very thoroughly. However, this is may not be enough because the Metropolitan Police faces a major challenge in managing such a breadth of stakeholder groups so you probably need to map those stakeholders – they will have different perceptions and expectations of a need for culture change, for example. Similarly, resistance to change is a major issue in culture change so it is difficult to see how you would not consider this as part of your analysis. There are also often systemic challenges which suggest the relevance of understanding
systems thinking
or a force-field analysis to make sense of culture change.
Your task is to identify relevant theories and tools to analyse the case – a culture map might be relevant for the Metropolitan Police but this tool might not be relevant in understanding immigration (or another change challenge) for Rishi Sunak for example.
Don’t describe the models – you don’t have the space. Your understanding of the models will be evident in the way you apply them. Just make clear the sources so that the marker can look them up as necessary.
Analysis of the actions taken (Criterion 3) (25%)
Now you need to apply theories of leadership to understand how the leader is leading change. Relevant theories might include transformational leadership, Kotter’s 8 steps,
colour print thinking
,
emotionally intelligent leadership
. You might review the actions you have identified (what the leader is actually doing or has done). Are they demonstrating these models of leadership? What is their approach? You might notice that Sunak is doing some of Kotter’s 8 steps but not all of them. You might identify steps done and steps not being done.
You might equally look more closely at the models you might have used to analyse the change challenge. If you used a stakeholder map, are the stakeholders being managed according to what you would expect theoretically? For example, stakeholders who are high power, high interest need to be closely managed. Is the leader of change doing this? Similarly, if a culture web analysis suggests that “control systems” are problematic, is the change leader addressing them? If the problem in your analysis of a “force-field” analysis suggest that a major force is the activities of the ‘people traffickers”, is Rishi Sunak taking measures to reduce this influence? Similarly, if you used
Lewin’s model of resistance to change
in analysing the change challenges, you might now consider if the leader is addressing the change according to the model.
Some of you might want to address this part of the assignment using just one model (e.g., Kotter’s model of change or Colour Print thinking). If you do this well, this should attract a pass mark (“good”). To get a “very good” mark, you will need to do this very thoroughly (see marking criteria) drawing on the broader literature of Kotter (not just using a simple internet based model of change). This will be evident in the way you describe the challenges. You are at risk though of a very limited analysis which focuses more on facts than theories.
For high marks, you will likely need to show that you understand Kotter, for example, in relation to transformational leadership or colour print thinking. There will be an emerging synthesis/integration. Don’t describe the models – you don’t have the space. Your understanding of the models of leadership used will be evident in the way you apply them. Just make clear the sources so that the marker can look them up as necessary.
Evaluation and Recommendations (Criterion 4) (30%)
Now you are in a position to make an evaluation of how well the change leader is leading change. There are 4 key questions to address here as outlined below:
Critical Evaluation of how effective the leader has been in leading/ managing change and lessons learned (30%)
How effective has the leader been?
What has stood out as being of particular significance and why?
What remains to address the challenge?
What can we learn from the case about change management/ leadership?
In light of your analysis of the facts, you should have a clear idea about how effective they have been. What do the media commentators have to say for example?
Expand your evaluation by considering if they have led well in some ways but not in others. For example, a change leader might have managed some stakeholders well but not others. They might have shown transformational leadership in relation to some of their actions but not others. They might have done some of Kotter’s steps well but not all of them. Have they overplayed blue-print thinking when they needed to use more yellow print thinking? Did the situation demand more white-print thinking? Did they lack emotional intelligence in how they addressed a situation?
2.What has stood out as being of particular significance and why?
This is where you need to show independent thinking in particular. You might argue for example that the literature on Kotter suggests that you have to do all steps in order and not miss any out. If this is the case and you believe the leader has missed a key step, you might highlight this because it might call into question the likely success of their change effort. Support your points with references to the literature.
You might as another example argue that what the case shows is that change can’t be managed – we can only adapt to it. You might then draw on literature which illustrates these points and you support your argument with reference to that literature and the case
3.What remains to address the challenge(s)?
Now you focus on what is still outstanding. It is “taking stock”. You might argue that the leader needs to change focus, give more time to particular stakeholders, see more complexities/ become more of a white print thinker, learn to show more awareness of systemic influences, etc
4.What can we learn from the case about change management/ leadership?
Finally, you draw your overall conclusion…change is complex because…, change is difficult but manageable…it shows the importance of a clear plan…what really counts are key stakeholders… This is again a requirement for independent thinking
Structure and Referencing (10%)
You can write your report as you wish. We will mark to however and wherever you address the criteria. But, here are some suggested guidelines:
Introduction (50 words)
Outline what case you are going to work on and why (e.g., what makes the case worthwhile conceptually). Explain what you intend to illustrate and how.
Analysis of the change challenges (650 words)
Analysis of the actions taken (650 words)
Evaluation and Recommendation (650 words)
Tips
?Integrate your understanding of the facts within your overall report
?Don’t describe the theories and models – just use them: “Figure X shows a cultural web analysis (Johnson and…, 1600). The “rituals” are working 24/7 or Figure Y” or “Figure Z shows a stakeholder map (Marinopoulos, 1066). Key is to this framework is to manage the stakeholders in the top-right quadrant
?If you do think there is a benefit in providing some explanation (because this helps you build your conceptual argument) try to be brief. For example, “According to X, change is complex system and this means…” According to Y, stakeholders need to be managed carefully, therefore…
?Don’t provide an additional conclusion – this is your Evaluation and Recommendation
?Work towards building an argument. Your evaluation should clearly follow from your analysis
?Note that marks for “analysis” simply requires you to show that you can apply the “theories and tools” to the case; evaluation and recommendations are about your insights in light of your analysis
?Be realistic. If you find that you just don’t have the space to cover as many “theories and tools” as you might wish, then justify at the outset of your report why you are using only a small number of “tools and techniques”. Just make sure that you are not filling the report with too many facts or not making good use of your diagrams
?
Good
use of diagrams can be for example “Figure X shows a detailed stakeholder analysis. Of note is Group 4 where the leader needs to ensure that the key players agree with the proposed change (Smith 1214). Or, Figure Y shows a cultural web analysis. The area where the leaders appears to have focused his efforts is in relation to control systems. The Times reported for example that the leader has been doing x, y and z
?The more you show a good understanding of how to analyse the facts using the change management/leadership literature, the more you will be heading towards a good mark
?The more you can grasp the complexity and the sheer difficulty of leading and managing change and the more you can show a level of sophistication in your choice of “theories and tools,” and depth of analysis, wide reading of the literature, the more you will be heading towards a very good mark
What counts in the final analysis will be to read your report and have a sense of your having researched a case, understood the change challenges from a theoretical perspective, analysed the actions of a leader in relation to the change literature and made some evaluations in relation to how effective they have been. You will have identified what stood out in the case and why, what still needs to be addressed and what we can learn from the case
Some Closing Comments
Some models of change are quite basic. They outline normative practices of what you need to do to manage change. They often simplify what started out as academic debate in the literature or they are based on popular models proposed by consultants (Kotter is a prime example). These models are widely used in business which is very pragmatic and change management tools are very popular. Note that I have given you a few hyperlinks just to give you an “entry point” into the concepts. You will be expected to use theoretical sources but some of the hyperlinks do describe the models well – be selective in what you use. I will also introduce more challenging models early on in the module.
Leading and managing change is however very complex. Some texts (available in electronic library) such as the one shown below highlight the complexities:
Burnes, B. (2017) Managing change. Seventh edn. Harlow, England: Pearson.
There is also a wealth of literature on change management and leadership (which is usually about change – what else does a senior leader do?) going beyond normative prescriptions of how to manage change.
In one of the two main readers, Beech and Macintosh (2012) also highlight degrees of complexity in how you might manage change including models of how to manage stakeholders and they refer to the role of the leader in managing sensemaking. They refer to how organisations can be understood from a framework of transactional analysis. They refer to Weick’s notion of organisations always being in a sense of flux. There is a theoretical depth also to colour print-thinking if you consult the main text on this which is in the Reading List.
To get a distinction grade in your assignments, you are expected to show an understanding of these complexities and to show a level of analysis which goes beyond basic models.
Good luck!
Assessment criteria rubric assessment 1
Assessment Criteria
Outstanding
85-100%
Excellent
70-84%
Very Good
60-69%
Good
50-59%
Threshold Pass
40-49%
Marginal Refer
30-39%
Refer
0-29%
Understanding of the facts of the case (10%)
The student has demonstrated an outstanding knowledge of the facts case using a breadth of referenced media sources
The student has demonstrated an excellent knowledge of the facts of the case using a breadth of referenced media sources
The student has thoroughly researched the case with appropriate media references
The student has identified important facts relating to the case with appropriate media references
The student has identified some important facts relating to the case with appropriate media references
Important facts relating to the case are missing or there are no or few media references
There is no substantive evidence of understanding of the facts of the case
Analysis of the change challenge an agreed leader of change is addressing making use of the change management literature (25%)
Out-of-the box thinking and/or demonstration of an outstanding in-depth conceptual analysis.
The student will make clear the ambiguities and complexities conceptually (e.g., paradoxes, contradictions, conceptual uncertainties)
“This is really conceptually complex and the student makes this clear”
Demonstration of an exceptional level of analysis including awareness of complexities
The student might apply appropriately an extension of an existing basic framework for example rather than a more conventional one or introduce a change framework that enables a level of analysis not provided in a more basic tool.
The use of theory will be strong (e.g., the student will refer to a range of literature on resistance to change if using this theory); wide reading of literature.
There will be a strong sense of theoretical integration/ synthesis in the “theories and tools” used
As per “Good” criterion but the tools & theories used will demonstrate depth or breadth of analysis in relation to the case (e.g., good range of models; appropriately and well populated diagrams or a good theoretical understanding indicative of some wider reading – e.g., of resistance to change with appropriate references)
“You can articulate the change challenges very well drawing on the literature”
The tools/theories used work, but depth of analysis will be relatively brief (e.g., some important stakeholders might be missing from a stakeholder map; some important forces for change might be absent in a forcefield analysis, a culture map will be very basic highlighting few or only superficial elements); there will be reference to a theory (e.g., resistance to change) but not a strong conceptual argument of its relevance
“You can articular the change challenges drawing on the literature”
Demonstration of some command of conventional “theories and/or tools” frequently used in change management), applied appropriately to analyse the change challenge
The application of theories and tools might lack depth (e.g., very sparsely populated models, very few models or models used inappropriately
The assignment might focus on facts rather than tools. But, there will still be a reasonable attempt to introduce some tools and/or theories
“You can convey a sense of some change challenges using the literature”
Demonstration of an insufficient command of the change management literature in analysing the case
There is an attempt to analyse the case drawing on frameworks, models, etc which can attract some marks
The assignment might be a summary of events rather than an analysis drawing on the change literature
“You are beginning to grasp the challenges using the literature”
Demonstration of no substantive command of the change management literature in analysing the case
“You need to give this a lot more thought”
Analysis of how an agreed leader of change is addressing one of more change challenge(s) making use of the change management literature (25%)
Out-of-the box thinking and/or demonstration of an outstanding in-depth conceptual analysis.
This may be similar to the “exceptional criteria” but the integration/ synthesis will be effectively achieved and there will be a noticeable density of academic references well used to justify the arguments made
As per the “very good” criterion but demonstration of an exceptional level of analysis including awareness of complexities
The student will show what different “theories and tools” add to their analysis – there will be a range of examples of integration (e.g., the student will see how some analytical tools and theories of leadership complement one another and can be integrated into the same analysis)
The student might for example, use one main model to integrate their analysis (e.g., Kotter or colour print thinking or transformational leadership) but will interweave / integrate other models of change leadership into their analysis
There will be evidence of wide reading of the literature
As per “Good” criterion but the tools & theories used will demonstrate depth or breadth of analysis in relation to the actions of the leader
There will be some justified reasoning for the “theories and tools” used
The student might use one framework to analyse the case (e.g., Kotter’s 8 steps) but does this exceptionally well, showing a strong understanding of the model (e.g., debates on the model in the literature)
There may be a sense of “this is one model, this is another” rather than a sense of integration if a range of “theories and tools” are used
. However, the depth or breadth of analysis will be strong
Or, “this is the one model I used…” and the student will demonstrate an in-depthunderstanding of the model” applied to analyse the actions of the leader – this will be strongly theoretical rather than facts based
Demonstration of one or more “theories and tools” used frequently in change management/ leadership), applied appropriately to analyse the actions of the leader
The tools/theories used will be applied appropriately but the depth of analysis will be relatively brief
There may be a sense of “this is one model, this is another” rather than a sense of integration if a range of “theories and tools” are used
Or, “this is the one model I used…” and the student will demonstrate an essentialunderstanding of the model” applied to analyse the actions of the leader
As per “Good” criterion but the “theories and tools” used are used superficially – there is evidence of a concerted attempt with a reasonable understanding
The analysis shows a basic awareness of one or more “theories and tools” applied to some degree to understand the actions of the leader in a meaningful way
There is no evidence of a meaningful understanding of the “theories and tools” used, if used at all
