College of Banking and Financial Studies Assignment Brief – BTEC Higher National Diploma in Business (Level 5) Fall 2018- 19 - Assignment 2 ST0: Student Name /ID Number Unit Number and Title 17 – Understanding and Leading Change – A/508/0529 Academic Year Fall 2018-19 - Semester -3 Unit Assessor Mr. Saji Luka/ Ms Aysha Al Mandhiri I. V. Name MR.H.H Siddique Assignment Title Determine how barriers to change influence leadership decisionmaking And apply a range of leadership approaches to a change initiative. Issue Date 05-12-2018 Formative Feedback Date Final Submission Date 05-01-2019 Submission Format: 1. The submission is in the form of a 15-minute individual PowerPoint presentation and 5 minutes allocated for questions. 2. The presentation slides and speaker notes should be submitted as one copy and uploaded to turnitin. 3. You are required to make effective use of PowerPoint headings, bullet points and subsections as appropriate. 4. Your research should be referenced using the Harvard referencing system. Please also provide a bibliography using the Harvard referencing system. 5. The recommended word limit is 1,500 to 2,000 words, including speaker notes, although you will not be penalised for exceeding the total word limit. 6. The file must be saved in the format: student ID-ULC-Formative-A2, for formative submission and student ID-ULC-Summative-A2, for summative assignment. 7. In case of extenuating situations, the relevant college policies apply Unit Learning Outcomes: LO3. Determine how barriers to change influence leadership decision-making LO 4. Apply a range of leadership approaches to a change initiative. 1 Assignment Brief and Guidance: With reference to the case studies given below “Change Management @ ICICI” [case study 2 presented in Assignment -1], you are required to prepare and present a power point presentation and a viva on: a. Critically evaluate the use of force field analysis in the context of meeting organizational goals at ICICI given the facts provided in the case study and by performing appropriate additional research AND b. Critically evaluate the effectiveness of leadership approaches and models of change management at ICICI. Using a variety of change management theories and models (situational leadership, change initiation, Kotter’s 8-Step model, Lewin’s change management model), different leadership approaches to dealing with the change at ICIC. The individual PowerPoint presentation and slides can be sectioned as follows: 1. Introduction to the case study organization. 2. Force field analysis to determine opposition and support for change. 3. Different barriers to change and their influence in decision making and leadership. 4. Accomplishment of change and its success. 5. Advantages and disadvantages of different leadership approaches to dealing with change, illustrated by application to a range of examples. 6. Critical evaluation summary. CASE STUDY : CHANGE MANAGEMENT @ICICI THE CHANGE LEADER In May 1996, K.V. Kamath (Kamath) replaced Narayan Vaghul (Vaghul), CEO of India's leading financial services company Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India (ICICI). Immediately after taking charge, Kamath introduced massive changes in the organizational structure and the emphasis of the organization changed - from a development bank mode to that of a market-driven financial conglomerate. Kamath's moves were prompted by his decision to create new divisions to tap new markets and to introduce flexibility in the organization to increase its ability to respond to market changes. Necessitated because of the organization's new-found aim of becoming a financial powerhouse, the large-scale changes caused enormous tension within the organization. The systems within the company soon were in a state of stress. Employees were finding the changes unacceptable as learning new skills and adapting to the process orientation was proving difficult. The changes also brought in a lot of confusion among the employees, with media reports frequently carrying quotes from disgruntled ICICI employees. According to analysts, a large section of employees began feeling alienated. BACKGROUND NOTE ICICI was established by the Government of India in 1955 as a public limited company to promote industrial development in India. The major institutional shareholders were the Unit Trust of India (UTI), the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) and the General Insurance Corporation of India (GIC) and its subsidiaries. The equity of the corporation was supplemented by borrowings from the Government of 2 India, the World Bank, the Development Loan Fund (now merged with the Agency for International Development), Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (an agency of the Government of Germany), the UK government and the Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI). The basic objectives of the ICICI were to: • Assist in creation, expansion and modernization of enterprises • Encourage and promote the participation of private capital, both internal and external • Take up the ownership of industrial investment; and • Expand the investment markets. Since the mid-1980s, ICICI diversified rapidly into areas like merchant banking and retailing. In 1987, ICICI co-promoted India's first credit rating agency, Credit Rating and Information Services of India Limited (CRISIL), to rate debt obligations of Indian companies. In 1988, ICICI promoted India's first venture capital company - Technology Development and Information Company of India Limited (TDICI) - to provide venture capital for indigenous technology-oriented ventures. In the 1990s, ICICI diversified into different forms of asset financing such as leasing, asset credit and deferred credit, as well as financing for non-project activities. In 1991, ICICI and the Unit Trust of India set up India's first screen-based securities market, the over-the-counter Exchange of India (OCTEI). In 1992 ICICI tied up with J P Morgan of the US to form an investment banking company, ICICI Securities Limited. In line with its vision of becoming a universal bank, ICICI restructured its business based on the recommendations of consultants McKinsey & Co in 1998. In the late 1990s, ICICI concentrated on building up its retail business through acquisitions and mergers. It took over ITC Classic, Anagram Finance and merged the Shipping Credit Investment Corporation of India (SCICI) with itself. ICICI also entered the insurance business with Prudential plc of UK. ICICI was reported to be one of the few Indian companies known for its quick responsiveness to the changing circumstances. While its development bank counterpart IDBI was reportedly not doing very well in late 2001, ICICI had major plans of expanding on the anvil. This was expected to bring with it further challenges as well as potential change management issues. However, the organization did not seem too much perturb by this, considering that it had successfully managed to handle the employee unrest following Kamath's appointment. CHANGE CHALLENGES: ICICI had to face change resistance once again in December 2000, when ICICI Bank was merged with Bank of Madura (BoM)[1] . Though ICICI Bank was nearly three times the size of BoM, its staff strength was only 1,400 as against BoM's 2,500. Half of BoM's personnel were clerks and around 350 were subordinate staff. There were large differences in profiles, grades, designations and salaries of personnel in the two entities. It was also reported that there was uneasiness among the staff of BoM as they felt that ICICI would push up the productivity per employee, to match the levels of ICICI [2]. BoM employees feared that their positions would come in for a closer scrutiny. They were not sure whether the rural branches would continue or not as ICICI's business was largely urban-oriented. The apprehensions of the BoM employees seemed to be justified as the working culture at ICICI and BoM were quite different and the emphasis of the respective management was also different. While BoM 3 management concentrated on the overall profitability of the Bank, ICICI management turned all its departments into individual profit centers and bonus for employees was given on the performance of individual profit center rather than profits of whole organization. ICICI not only put in place a host of measures to technologically upgrade the BoM branches to ICICI's standards, but also paid special attention to facilitate a smooth cultural integration. The company appointed consultants Hewitt Associates [3] to help in working out a uniform compensation and work culture and to take care of any change management problems. ICICI conducted an employee behavioral pattern study to assess the various fears and apprehensions that employees typically went through during a merger. (Refer Table I). TABLE I: 'POST-MERGER' EMPLOYEE BEHAVIORAL PATTERN PERIOD EMPLOYEE BEHAVIOR Day 1 Denial, fear, no improvement After a month Sadness, slight improvement After a Year Acceptance, significant improvement After 2 Years Relief, liking, enjoyment, business development activities Source:www.sibm.edu Based on the above findings, ICICI established systems to take care of the employee resistance with action rather than words. The 'fear of the unknown' was tackled with adept communication and the 'fear of inability to function' was addressed by adequate training. The company also formulated a 'HR blue print' to ensure smooth integration of the human resources. (Refer Table II). TABLE II: MANAGING HR DURING THE ICICI-BoM MERGER AREAS OF HR INTEGRATION FOCUSSED ON THE HR BLUEPRINT • A data base of the entire HR structure • Road map of career • Determining the blue print of HR moves • Communication of milestones • IT Integration - People Integration Business Integration. • Employee communication • Cultural integration • Organization structuring • Recruitment & Compensation • Performance management • Training • Employee relations Source: www.hrindya.com/wp-content/ uploads/.../CHANGE-MANAGEMENT@ICICI.doc 4 Grading Criteria Learning Outcome Pass Merit Distinction LO3 & 4 LO3 Determine how barriers to change influence leadership decision-making P4 Explain different barriers for change and determine how they influence leadership decisionmaking in a given organisational context. M3 Use force field analysis to analyse the driving and resisting forces and show how they influence decisionmaking. D2 Critically evaluate the use of force field analysis in the context of meeting organisational objectives. LO 4. Apply a range of leadership approaches to a change initiative. P5 Apply different leadership approaches to dealing with change in a range of organisational contexts. M4 Evaluate the extent to which leadership approaches can deliver organisational change effectively applying appropriate models and frameworks. 5 D3 Critically evaluate the effectiveness of leadership approaches and models of change management. LEARNER ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION AND DECLARATION When submitting evidence for assessment, each learner must sign a declaration confirming that the work is their own. Please list the evidence submitted for each task. Indicate the page numbers where the evidence can be found or describe the nature of the evidence (e.g. video, illustration). LO Evidence submitted Page numbers or Description LO3 LO4 Additional comments to the Assessor: Learner declaration I certify that the work submitted for this assignment is my own. I have clearly referenced any sources used in the work. I understand that false declaration is a form of malpractice. Learner signature: Date: 6 ASSESSMENT RECORD SHEET – FORMATIVE FEEDBACK Programme BTEC HND BUSINESS LEVEL 5 Learner name Determine how barriers to change influence leadership Assignment decision-making and apply Assessor name title a range of leadership approaches to a change initiative. 17/ Understanding and Targeted learning Unit no. and leading change aims/assessment title criteria First Submission Deadline Targeted criteria LO3 and LO4 Date submitted Criteria achieved Assessment comments LO 3 LO 4 General comments Assessor declaration I certify that the evidence submitted for this assignment is the learner’s own. The learner has clearly referenced any sources used in the work. I understand that false declaration is a form of malpractice. Assessor signature Date Date of feedback to learner Resubmission authorisation by Lead Date Internal Verifier* * All resubmissions must be authorised by the Lead Internal Verifier. Only one resubmission is possible per assignment, providing: ● The learner has met initial deadlines set in the assignment, or has met an agreed deadline extension. 7 ● The tutor considers that the learner will be able to provide improved evidence without further guidance. ● Evidence submitted for assessment has been authenticated and accompanied by a signed and dated declaration of authenticity by the learner. **Any resubmission evidence must be submitted within 15 working days of receipt of results of assessment. ASSESSMENT RECORD SHEET - RESUBMISSION – SUMMATIVE FEEDBACK Deadline Date submitted Targeted criteria P4 P5 M3 M4 D2 D3 Criteria achieved Assessment comments General comments Learner Declaration I certify that the evidence submitted for this assignment is my own. I have clearly referenced any sources used in the work. I understand that false declaration is a form of malpractice. Learner signature Assessor declaration Date I certify that the evidence submitted for this assignment is the learner’s own. The learner has clearly referenced any sources used in the work. I understand that false declaration is a form of malpractice. Assessor signature Date Date of feedback to learner 8 9 
Purchase answer to see full attachment