1.Identify the key drivers for change. These are forces outside and within the organisation, for example, the growing strength of competitors (external) or health and safety issues within the organisation (internal). Corus employees were encouraged to understand what was happening in the business (the "As Is") and identify any flaws in the existing way of working. 2.Identify the barriers to change. This often involves people"s attitudes. They may want to continue to work as before or cannot see the need for change. 3.Create and implement a plan for change. This focuses on winning the commitment of all employees, identifying specific solutions to problem areas (for example, cutting staff or investing in new systems) and setting out ways of measuring improvement. Employees were encouraged to envision what the "To Be" position for CSP UK looked like and make plans to bring it about. 4.Measure the effectiveness of the change. CSP UK is prepared to make further changes based on the outcomes of the actions. Examples of internal drivers for change (inefficiencies within the business) at CSP UK included: Poor delivery - rather than delivering steel to customers on time there were delays, leading to loss of business. Competitiveness - steel produced in the UK could be more expensive than from some other countries. High wastage - failing to make products right first time meant that they had to be reworked or scrapped. Low staff morale employees were committed but were not motivated by the environment in which they were carrying out their jobs. External drivers (pressures for change outside the business) came from: New competitors low cost producers in Eastern Europe and the Far East were taking business. This could lead to reduced demand with higher costs. Changing customer requirements for example, the fall in demand for steel for the automotive industry meant that Corus needed to find different types of customers or develop different products. New technology meant customers expected higher specifications. Perceptions of the steelmaking industry within the community tended to be negative for example, the industry was seen as having a poor record on environmental issues.4 Total Quality Management (TQM) initiatives had previously been implemented to great effect at CSP UK to improve productivity and improve competitiveness. CSP UK had also previously reduced manpower for the same purpose. However, Corus Strip Products is a business with deeply committed people and a relatively low staff turnover. Total payroll costs are low compared with its other costs such as energy and raw materials. Labour costs at CSP UK account for around only 13% of total costs. This is considerably less than, for example, an assembly line process where they might be around 40-50% of total costs. It therefore made better sense to enable employees to work more efficiently rather than cut the number of staff. On successfully completing this module, students should be able to: 1) Critically evaluate the relevance, credibility and imitations of current conceptualizations of leadership when managing people in organizational settings Assignment: Review the following statement and answer the questions that follow. "Clearly, leadership matters. Successful companies and individuals within companies exhibit leadership depth. The McKinsey study called "War for Talent" found that firms with leadership depth were much more profitable than those without it. Despite this, the gap between required and available leadership talent is widening. When executives are asked how confident they are about their organization's bench strength, they most often respond with increasing negativity." Source: Ulrich, D., Zenger, J., & Smallwood, N. (2013). Results-based leadership. Harvard Business Press. Question 1: Critically evaluate the meaning of "leadership depth" and how do you think "leadership depth" differentiates successful from unsuccessful companies using contemporary management theories to support your answer? (30 marks) 1. Candidates need to review the strategic management process to suggest why good leadership is important. Reference should be made to stakeholders and their needs. 2. Refer to "leadership equation" and the steps in achieving greater leadership capabilities. Candidates should define what they understand as "leadership depth" using appropriate references and be able to associate this with the "leadership equation". 3. Candidate should show critical thinking skills in suggesting how the lack of leadership depth has affected stakeholders' needs and the limitations of leadership talent, as the question requires that an evaluation be made. Candidate should also have defined their understanding of what benchmark strength is. (A good answer would show understanding of what is considered good leadership, how it affects stakeholders as well as limitations to leadership talent and associate theory to their facts. APA references are also evident) ~ 450 word2 Question 2: With reference to 2 specific leaders that you have read or know about, critically assess the reasons why the gap between required and available leadership talent is widening. Then compare their leadership styles against any one of the leadership styles proposed by the likes of Goleman, McGregor, Blake and Mouton etc.? (30 marks) 1. Candidates are expected to describe how two leaders (living or dead) that they have researched (with appropriate APA references) have been able to demonstrate good leadership. Then assess or form an opinion as to why their successors could not have achieved the same level of success. ~225 words 2. Candidates need at a minimum to review Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard business review, 78(2), 78-93.), on leadership styles. It is important that candidates describe each unique trait, which distinguishes that theory from other theories. Candidates are expected to review the leadership styles of the two leaders and suggest why theory expresses that style most appropriately. ~225 words (A good answer would show understanding of why different leadership styles can lead to success, the limitations to emulating good leadership styles and the different aspects of what good leadership is. APA references are also evident) Question 3: Review the trends that are affecting the benchmark strength or strategic capabilities of organizations headed by the 2 specific leaders that you have researched (20 marks) and critically assess how their leadership styles are/were able to successfully countered the negative impact of these trends (20 marks). (Total 40 marks) 1. Candidates need at a minimum to review the "leadership equation". From the "leadership equation" candidates should define all terms and describe all the steps necessary to develop good leadership capabilities. Candidates should also have defined what they consider to be benchmark strengths. ~300 words 2. Candidate should then suggest how the processes and practices can improve job performance and discuss any limitations. Candidates should show critical thinking in assessing what trends were negatively affecting those companies and what was or is being done to negate those trends.