The Management of Strategy - Case Study Example

? Introduction Organizational change is an important element in business management and is basically to meet the objectives ofany organization effectively. It is allowed so that any firm can achieve great results more easily and at a lower cost ensuring service delivery. This paper explores such changes as reported in the Helensburgh Advertiser on 29, April 2010, with regard to Faslane. It explores the structural and organizational changes at Faslane a Naval Base Clyde, which forms the home to nuclear submarines that carry Trident weapon system. Despite the fact that it is an installation by the Ministry of Defense, it is managed by Babcock Marine which is a part of Babcock International. The paper uses various theories and models to identify changes and differences between earlier management and current outsourced management. It also presents an analytical report on the case study about the leadership styles, the organizational structure and the processes of change as demonstrated in the study. The major objective is to show the changes that took place at Faslane before and after 2002, the drivers and resistors to the change, the organizational structure and the leadership styles with the use of various model and theories formulated as a guide. Faslane Case Analysis Qn. 1 The strategic change context in 2002 at the start of the change process at Faslane can be identified by the use of the change kaleidoscope by Balogun and Hope Hailey and the analysis on factors of change by Lewin Forcefield (David 2005). The strategy involves keys issues on change management which include strategy matters, context matters, inertia and resistance and leadership matters. Strategy matters identify need for change, context matter define the right approach to change as determined by circumstance, inertia identifies the existing ways of doing things that results to resisting change and leadership matters portray good leadership at all levels of an organization(David 2005). In diagnosing the change context, the types of change, the context of change is given as well as the Forcefield analysis is given. Strategic change context in Faslane identified four types of change including adaptation, reconstruction, revolution and evolution. The revolution changes involved a clear strategic direction, combining symbolic levers, various styles of managing change, monitoring and working with different aspect of existing culture. On the other side, evolution changes which were both transformational and incremental involved clear strategic vision, continuous change and commitment, identifying targets, winning minds and sustained management attitudes(Sadler, 2003). The change kaleidoscope designed by Balogun and Hope Hailey identifies the factors that necessitate change and the contextual features of change. In application to the case study of Faslane, this model is essential in describing the strategic change in 2002. Firstly, Faslane was originally run by the Ministry of Defense and the Royal Navy who decided that they needed to cut their management costs as well as improve their operational effectiveness. As a result, they established partnering arrangements with industrial firm Babcock Marine in 2002, which was then under John Howie. This brings out the need for the change and the contextual feature of time. The scope of the change at Faslane was highly transformational based on the changes in the working personnel, the human resources allocations of time, cultural influences and gradual nature of implementation (Wickham & Wickham, 2008). Secondly, the firm had to shift and obtain different management at the beginning who were conversant with organizational structure change from both marine and navy sides as well as do extensive research and study. The diversity had to be altered and the attitude of the employees towards change was influenced when they noted that it was for the best in the long run. Other factors that were considered included the capability of the management to effect change, the capacity to change based on the resources available, the readiness to accept change and the power to effect change (Wickham & Wickham, 2008). It is evident that Babcock Marine was prepared to effect change through the plan and target that had been implemented. Besides, the commodore was willing to provide the support by providing staff to the marines who had experience in organizational change as managers portraying readiness and capacity. Forcefield analysis in the context of Faslane has identified the possible forces that act as levers to help change as well, as the blockages to change. The levers that enabled the effectiveness of the change in Faslane with regard to improvement of operational efficiency and cost reduction related to hard work by the management, commitment and trust by the employees and flexibility of change (Sadler, 2003). Moreover, change levers included job knowhow, support of the change by top management and stakeholders, increased staff diversity, development of skills, participation in the change process, encouragement and a clear articulation of future vision (Saloner & Andrea, 2001). The resisting forces included time bureaucracies, political interferences, homogenous staff, traditional ways of working, conservativeness, control style of management and attitude towards past experience on change that nothing really worked. Qn. 2 Up to 2001 The cultural web by Johnson shows the behavioral, physical and symbolic manifestations of a culture that inform or are informed by a paradigm of an organization. Paradigms are built on common experience and inform what people do and influence the response to change by organizations(Grant, 2010). The cultural web analyses organizational culture and helps analyze elements that require changes in future. The Seven S framework by McKinsey is used to assess the weaknesses, strengths and capabilities of an organization both before and after change (Grant & Jordan, 2012).The cultural web and Seven S hard elements are represented in tables below. McKinsey 7 S –Hard Elements Strategy Is it clear and credible? Is it too rigid or emergent? Structure Does the structure support the strategy, is it flat or hierarchical? System Do the processes and procedures support the strategy of the firm? Are the control and flexibility sufficient? Skills Are the skills sufficient to succeed? Are extra competences needed? Style Is the leadership style aligned to the objectives of the organization? Is the style too transactional or transformational? Staff Is the staff number right and are the reward systems aligned to the strategy? Shared Values Is the organizational structure aligned to the strategy? The cultural web Paradigm Stories Symbols Power structures Organizational structures Control systems Rituals and routines During the period when the organization was run by the MOD and Royal Navy it was characterized by high operational costs and inefficiencies. The customer support system was ineffective and not customer oriented in that buildings and infrastructure were considered to be more important than the navy. There was rigidity by the civilians who had already established empires. The public sector management had no incentive to cut costs because they operated on large budgets without shares on the benefits. There was political interference in the management in decision making and most of the civil servants were conservative. Decisions made were quantitative not qualitative and most decisions were made fast without considering the repercussions. The staff composed of people who were not willing to change and did want to accommodate it. There was no perception of the need to save money and any minimal change was documented and passed through a series of review processes which had time bureaucracies. 2002-2010 The internal features of the organization during this period were quite different from the period before Babcock took over. It was characterized by organizational change depicted by a different team of management mix. The strategy was clear, emergent and flexible and was aligned to cover the objective which was to reduce costs and improve operational efficiency. Organizational change was made easier by the commodore in charge who was willing to change what his predecessors had not. The team was a mix of people who believed in change and were willing to give it a shot. There was no perception of the need to save money and the staff was aligned to the change. There was more focus on customer delivery during this period under Babcock Marine management (Johnson, Scholes &Whittington, 2009). Processes and structures were scrutinized carefully to see how they worked and what change could be done to them to improve delivery. Previously, changes were documented and passed through a series of review points which took 14 days to process at 4each stage. When Babcock took over, there was process re-engineering and the review process took only 2 days to avoid bureaucracies. The leadership was aligned to the objectives of the firm and had experience on organizational change as well as necessary skills (Johnson, Whittington & Scholes, 2011). The management structure that was made up of seven layers was reduced to four layers and the firm learned new ways of implementing transformational changes using different set of skills and extra competencies. Qn. 3 The Five Elements of Successful and Effective Strategic Leadership model by Lynch relates to: sustaining competitive advantage over time, developing and communicating the purposes of an organization, managing human resources and organizational decisions, setting ethical standards and defining and delivering to stakeholders (Lynch, 2008). In critically analyzing Faslane, the five types of organizational behaviors are evaluated carefully with particular pointers to determine their effectiveness. The prime task of a leader is to determine the purpose of an organization and then communicate this task to the team (Ireland, Hoskisson & Hitt, 2009). John Howie recognizes the objective of the marine and assigns tasks to the team. His efforts were coordinated with the management of the navy and his staff so as to be able to reduce costs by 20% in five years and save up to 38.2% in ten years. He concludes that at the time of his leadership, there was better communication, better attitude and better responsiveness. A strategic leader is required to select, nurture and develop talent in employees as well as motivate and reward them (Lynch, 2008). During the period between 2002 and 2010, John did not only shape the culture of the organization and structure the reporting relationships that bound the organization together, but also, he rewarded and motivated his employees well. There was rotation of employees and interactions with management were set. Ethical standard and corporate social responsibilities were set that led to less council meeting with local society to administer issues of concern. Delivering to stakeholder such as the customers, the navy, the ministry and the shareholder were critical of John Howie as the managing director of Faslane. This demanded that he manage the resources in the company and his time properly. This was achieved by being able to balance the interactions of two great institutions relating to the Babcock Marines and the Navy. He achieved a transcendent leadership through self –leadership, leadership of others and leadership of the organization. It is through the strategic leadership that the firm expanded to become a home base, not only for the submarines, but for the entire UK submarines fleet. Strategic leadership is demonstrated in the ability by Howie to shape the decisions of the organization and delivering high value over time, not only personally but also by inspiring others in the firm. Organizational change was achieved and the culture was changed. People began to have belief on themselves and faith in the organization. In 2009, the firm was producing jointly with the customer as Clyde and not as MOD business or Babcock Marine business. In 2010, the organization was expanded to cover the whole UK submarine fleet leading to more employment opportunities all as a result of strategic management. Conclusion In conclusion, we can note that organizational change was achieved in Faslane under the Babcock Marines management through strategic leadership evidenced under various theories and models. A strategic leader is required to possess various skills and attributes. Firstly, they should challenge the status quo of a situation which necessitates change(Grant, 2010). Developing the ability to challenge requires a focus on the root causes of a problem and not the symptoms. Secondly, leaders need to interpret results correctly (Grant & Jordan, 2012). This involves synthesis of inputs, recognition of patterns and formulations of hypothesis which should be tested and conclusions need to be drawn. Thirdly, leaders need to decide appropriately through splitting big decisions into smaller units (Ireland, Hoskisson & Hitt, 2009). Trade- off are involved in decision making and the leaders need to have confidence in the decisions made. Strategic leaders also align needs with the objective of the firm and those of the stakeholders (Lynch, 2008). They find common ground through active communication, frequent engagement and trust building so as to align their purpose with those of the stakeholders. Besides this, they are the focal point for organizational learning. They develop a culture of inquiry for both successful and unsuccessful outcomes in an open and constructive way that promotes learning(Ireland, Hoskisson & Hitt, 2009). Organizational change can therefore be challenging for many managers if the proper tools are not learned and implemented. Reference David, F.R (2005) Strategic management : concepts and causes, 10th Ed, person Prentice Hall Grant R (2010), Contemporary Strategy Analysis: concepts, techniques, applications Ed 7. Blackwell. Grant R and Jordan J (2012 forthcoming), Foundations of Strategy, Wiley Ireland, R., Hoskisson, R, and Hitt, M (2009) , The Management of Strategy: Concepts and Cases, 8th Ed. Cengage Learning Johnson G, Scholes K and Whittington R (2009), Fundamentals of Strategy, Prentice Hall. Johnson, G. Whittington, R. & Scholes. K (2011) ‘Exploring Strategy’, 9th Edition, Prentice Hall Lynch, R. (2008) ‘Strategic Management’, 5th Edition, Prentice Hall, pp 619 Sadler, P (2003) Strategic management, 2nd Ed, Kogan page Saloner, G & Andrea, S (2001) Strategic management, John Wiley Wickham, P and Wickham. L (2008) Management Consulting: Delivering an Effective Project, Ed 3. Prentice Hall Read More