GSP6064 Leadership & Change Management
GSP6064 Leadership & Change Management Gulf College
FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT STUDIES UNDERGRADUATE BUSINESS PROGRAMME ACADEMIC YEAR 2020-2021, 2ND SEMESTER
|Programme Title: BMS|
|Module Title: Leadership & Change Management|
|Module Code: GSP6064|
|Assessment Method: Coursework|
|Level: 6||Block: 1|
|Module Credits: 20||Weighting: 100%|
|Due Date:||Word Count: 4,000 words equivalent|
|Examiner(s): Mr. Ahmad Shariah|
Pg. 1 Version 1
Gulf College – Faculty of Business and Management Studies – In academic Affiliation with CARDIFF SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
A. Written work
- A signed declaration that the work is your own (apart from otherwise referenced acknowledgements) must be included after the reference page of your assignment
- Each page must be numbered.
- Where appropriate, a contents page, a list of tables/figures and a list of abbreviations should precede your work.
- All referencing must adhere to School/Institutional requirements.
- A word count must be stated at the end of your work.
- Appendices should be kept to the minimum and be of direct relevance to the content of your work.
- All tables and figures must be correctly numbered and labelled.
B. Other types of coursework/assignments
- Where coursework involves oral presentations, discussions, poster presentations, etc., specific instructions will be provided by your module leader/team.
Rewrite below part just after the References of your assignment.
I, [Name of Student], hereby declare that the uploaded Coursework through Turnitin is my own work. I affirm that this has been researched and completed in accordance with the college rules and regulations on plagiarism.
I acknowledge the advice given by the module tutors on proper referencing to avoid plagiarism and the rules on the academic unfair practice.
I acknowledge that I read and understand the plagiarism guide written at the end of this assessment. Any academic misconduct will be handled according to the rules and regulations of the university.
[Name of Student]
Coursework must be submitted online through Turnitin before due date. An acknowledgement will be given to you by your teacher upon presentation of the finance clearance. This is your receipt, keep it.
The only circumstance in which assignments can be uploaded late via Turnitin is if a Mitigating Circumstances (MC) form is submitted at the same time. In these circumstances work may be submitted within five (5) working days. Make sure to secure MC form and submit the same to the concerned staff.
Write the number of words used, excluding references, at the end of your assignment. Provide the list of sources you used at the last page of your assignment with proper label ‘References’. You may include diagrams, figures etc. without word penalty. The number of words will be + or – 10% of the total words allowed.
Apply Harvard style of referencing for at least 15 references not older than 2013 from varied sources. Reliable sources must be reflected in the introduction and content and analysis sections of the assignment paper. Each source is significant component of the allocated marks.
A work declaration must be included just after the reference page of your assignment. This ensures that you prepare your work in good faith. Any form of collusion and/or academic unfair practice will be dealt with according to the pertinent rules and regulations of the partner university. Please carefully read the plagiarism guide.
This Coursework comprises 100% of the total assessment’s marks. It contains a critical analysis and evaluation of leadership and change management theories applicable to the case under investigation. These will develop the following skills:
- Writing skills: Through the case, students will use their prior knowledge and current level of communication skills in order to match them to a task that is relevant and appropriate to their aptitudes.
- Critical and analytical thinking: The assignment enables the students to analyses and evaluate the different leadership styles and theories and change management theories and activities. This skill will eventually help them evaluate options necessary to make decisions in the workplace.
In addition, the assessment will test the following learning outcomes:
- Critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of a range of leadership theories
- Evaluate alternative models of change and identify barriers to change and its implementation
- Identify and evaluate a range of strategies and methods to ensure that change is successfully implemented and is sustainable.
- Identify appropriate tools and techniques to aid the planning, implementing and evaluation of change.
- Identify cultural and gender issues associated with the leadership and change process
Read very carefully the following case. You have to produce a 4000-word individual assignment that is related to change management, leadership theories, traits and competencies that were exhibited in the case. Assess and evaluate the change, leadership theories and traits that were used by the management of Douglas Refinery, as written by Hayes (2018), to remain competitive in the marketplace. Answer the requirements that follows. Answer the listed requirements below the article. Apply Harvard style of referencing for at least 15 references not older than 2013 to present from varied sources. Reliable sources must be reflected in the introduction and content and analysis sections of the assignment paper. Each source is significant component of the allocated marks.
Managing change at the Douglas Refinery
by Hayes (2018)
This case centres on the Douglas refinery. Located in the Republic of Ireland, it had been originally commissioned in 1959 and was one of four refineries owned by McPherson Oil. The Douglas refinery is the smallest of these four refineries, employing 150 staff, and producing transport fuels such as diesel, petrol, and jet fuel.
McPherson Oil was acquired in 2009 by Prosper, a private equity company. The new owners invested new capital, recruited a new CEO and other key managers, and tasked the new Prosper management team to restructure and reposition the business in order to enhance profitability.
Over the next three years, two new refineries were acquired and three of the existing refineries were expanded, but there was little new investment in the Douglas refinery. While the Douglas refinery was making a small profit the new management team did not (and still does not) see it as a core asset. Members of the Prosper management team and a group of consultants undertook a strategic review that explored possibilities for transforming and expanding the Douglas refinery. The refinery manager was informed of the review and asked to provide answers to specific questions about the operation of the site, but she was not a member of the review team. She was instructed not to inform any employees at the Douglas refinery about the review. The review process was completed in the
autumn of 2011 and concluded that, because there were only limited opportunities for transforming and expanding the Douglas refinery, it should be sold.
The refinery manager was informed of this decision but instructed not to tell other employees, including members of the Douglas refinery management team, until after possible buyers had been approached. The Prosper management team decided on this course of action in order to prevent staff on the Douglas site feeling insecure about their future. They believe that any feelings of insecurity could trigger actions that might interrupt operations and/or encourage staff to look for alternative employment. They feared that any disruption would make it more difficult to secure a sale. The Prosper management team was particularly concerned about the possibility of losing staff because, despite the recent downturn in the Irish economy, a chemical company was expanding its facilities on an adjacent site and was seeking to recruit process workers, some supervisors and at least one manager.
Four weeks after the decision to sell the Douglas refinery, a local newspaper published an article reporting rumours of a pending sale. Employees were shocked and angered by this ‘announcement’ and confronted their managers who, until the article had been published, knew nothing about it.
The refinery manager immediately contacted the CEO at Prosper HQ in Switzerland and was told to deny the rumour until a consultant (who was a co-opted member of the strategic review team) had visited the site and assessed the situation.
Despite this instruction the refinery manager decided to take the site HR manager into her confidence and inform him about the strategic review and the decision to sell off the refinery. She did this because she felt that the Prosper management team’s approach to managing change was creating problems that were very difficult for her to manage and she felt a need to discuss the situation with somebody she could trust.
They both recognised that the other members of the refinery management team would be very upset when they found out that they had not been kept informed about the strategic review and the decision to sell the refinery. Even so, they felt they had no option other than to follow instructions from the CEO and deny any knowledge of the decision to sell the refinery. However, they did inform other members of the Douglas refinery management team that a representative of the Prosper management team (the consultant) would be on-site within 24 hours to help clarify the situation.
Source: Hayes, J., 2018. The theory and practice of change management. Palgrave.
- Write a summary of the case by identifying and explaining the main problems faced Douglas Refinery (10 marks)
- Content and Analysis
- Discuss the lessons learned from the case based on change and leadership point of view (10 marks)
- Critically analyse and evaluate the challenges faced by the leaders in Douglas Refinery (10 marks)
- Evaluate Prosper’s management team approach to managing the change. (15 marks)
- Evaluate the communication strategy that was implemented by the management team and recommend a communication strategy that would use to smooth the change. Analyse how the strategy could be implemented (25 marks).
- Discuss your own point of view on how change can be implemented and how leadership can support the implementation of the change process. Relate your critical analysis to any of the theoretical models of change and leadership (20 marks)
- Conclusion and Recommendation – Draw the conclusion from your analyses. (5 marks). Write at least 5 relevant recommendations based on your conclusion (5 marks).
***END OF ASSIGNMENT TASK***
GSP6064 – Leadership & Change Management AY: 2020-2021 / 2ND SEMESTER
|Task No.||Description||Marks Allocated|
|1.||Introduction a. Identification and explanation of the main problems faced Douglas Refinery (10 marks).||10|
|2.||Content and Analysis Discussion of the lessons learned from the case based on change and leadership point of view (10 marks).Critical analysis and evaluation of the challenges faced by the leaders in Douglas Refinery (10 mark).Evaluation of Prosper’s management team approach to managing the change (15 marks).Evaluation of the communication strategy that was implemented by the management team and recommendation of a communication strategy that would use to smooth the change. Analysis of how the strategy could be implemented (25 marks).Discussion of how change can be implemented and how leadership can support the implementation of the change process. (20 mark).||80|
|3.||Conclusion and Recommendations Summary of the key points are clearly identified. (5 marks)Recommendations ( 5 marks)||10|
- Plagiarism, which can be defined as using without acknowledgement another person’s words or ideas and submitting them for assessment as though it were one’s own work, for instance by copying, translating from one language to another or unacknowledged paraphrasing. Further examples of plagiarism are given below:
Use of any quotation(s) from the published or unpublished work of other persons, whether published in textbooks, articles, the Web, or in any other format, which quotations have not been clearly identified as such by being placed in quotation marks and acknowledged.
Use of another person’s words or ideas that have been slightly changed or paraphrased to make it look different from the original.
Summarising another person’s ideas, judgments, diagrams, figures, or computer programmes without reference to that person in the text and the source in a bibliography or reference list.
Use of services of essay banks and/or any other agencies.
Use of unacknowledged material downloaded from the Internet.
Re-use of one’s own material except as authorised by the department.
- Collusion, which can be defined as when work that has been undertaken by or with others is submitted and passed off as solely as the work of one person. This also applies where the work of one candidate is submitted in the name of another. Where this is done with the knowledge of the originator both parties can be considered to be at fault.
- Fabrication of data, making false claims to have carried out experiments, observations, interviews or other forms of data collection and analysis, or acting dishonestly in any other way.
Plagiarism Detection Software (PDS)
As part of its commitment to quality and the maintenance of academic standards, the University reserves the right to use Plagiarism Detection Software (PDS), including Turnitin. Such software makes no judgment as to whether a piece of work has been plagiarised; it simply highlights sections of text that have been found in other sources.
The use of plagiarism detection software fulfills two functions. The first is to enhance student learning (i.e. as a developmental tool); the second is to guard against and identify unfair practice in assessment.
Further information and guidance can be found in the University’s policy on the Use of Plagiarism Detection Software.