qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui

opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
Individual Case Study 2
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer
Business Studies Assignment
tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
Prepared by Real Assignment Writing
For

[University of Southern Queensland]

[Mahveen Khan]
[u1017503]

Table of Contents
1.

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3

2.

Intervention # 1: Ladder of Inferences .................................................................................... 3

3.

Intervention # 2: Team Building Process Intervention ............................................................ 6

4.

Intervention # 3: Integrated Strategic Change Intervention .................................................... 8

5.

Team Building Survey: Justification for Survey Variable Selection ................................... 10

6. Theoretical and Practical Foundation for Interventions: Justification of Selection of

Interventions ................................................................................................................................. 13
7.

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 16

References ..................................................................................................................................... 18

1. Introduction
The paper presents a detailed analysis of the chosen change intervention models for resolving
the range of issues highlighted in VRD Company.

2. Intervention # 1: Ladder of Inferences

Ladder of inferences proposed by Argyris, (1993) could be the vital intervention for VRD in
motivating individuals towards the examination of assumptions possessed by them and others
in their organization.VRD management must understand that in order to move in the practical
world, categorization of inferences is quite necessary. However, the effectiveness of this
intervention can be undermined if people forget treating inferences as inferences (Waddell et
al., 2014). The model suggests five-step based ladder that can be used for all leadership, team
working, creative thinking and innovation issues (Schwarz et al., 2011).

Figure 1: The Ladder of Inferences (Schwarz et al., 2011, p.63)

The working of intervention for VRD is given below:
a. Directly Observable Data
From the case study, directly observable data of VRD indicates issues in context of
leadership. It points out that new CEO, Lee Bineesh although is a highly qualified but an
aggressive leader (Schwarz et al., 2011). Centralization of the strategic business units is
also an important observation i.e. same industrial complex for automotive parts,
infotainment and electrical and energy. Apart from central location, resources shared are
also centralized. Moreover, changing the stable business environment led by former
leadership of Frank Delacy was highly crucial. New leader did not have long-term
relationships at Detroit that pressurized him (Lee). Key information about issues further

include staff reduction, change in collaborative leading style, communication problems,

falling morale, falling sale and increasing conflict (Waddell et al., 2014).
b. Observe and Select Data
The company needs to pay its tattention towards change only, however a sudden agile
change will bring disastoroous ending (Waddell et al., 2014). It can be relaised that most
important area company needs to focus in its first priority is realted with the change
acceptance. It is assumed that once VRD professional accept the change all the other
issues will idrectly be solved (Schwarz et al., 2011). The behaviours of managers and
divisional units must be key point of observation as according to Murray et al., (2002;
P.556) acceptance might constrain low versus high self-esteem people's capacity to
protect their relationships in the face of difficulties. Such defensive mechanism towards
protection of job status is assumed to lead conflicts.
c. Translate and Label
Accusations used during conflicts may be the employees and managers startgey to save
themselves form the after effects of the new culture, which threatens them towards job
loss (Schwarz et al., 2011). The correct translation of their words and communication
would be helpful in functioning with the social construction of realities (Murray et al.,
2002).
d. Evaluate and Casually Explain
Through this adder, VRD can approach towards a flexible behaviour. It can be examined
from case study that company face complex issues in different organizational dimensions.

It is assumed that lot of directly observable data, in resolving the issues, can be used by
the management (Schwarz et al., 2011). However, it can be analyzed that this analogy of
observable data will be helpful in moving away from the solid ground in order to draw
conclusions based on the beliefs and adopt such beliefs (Argyris, 1993).
e. Decide Whether and Have to Respond
VRD can use the inference that social interaction can resolve its organisational conflicts
as Espedal, (2008) emphasized on the fact that in order to bridge the gap between the
lower and higher end learning individuals in the organisation social interaction in
informal organisational settings.

3. Intervention # 2: Team Building Process Intervention

Team-building process intervention is another intervention, which can be used by VRD in
order to assist the work groups in effective accomplishment of their task towards bringing the
change (Murray & Millett, 2011).
Individual

Motivation behaviour, problem solving skills, self-assessment

Group

Task performance and group process behaviours, risk taking skills,

members commitment and communication improvement

Organisational

Diagnostics skills, development of alternative action plan

Individual Level
In this aspect, VRD must identify the personal style and motivation used by different levels
of individuals including SBU divisional managers and their teams and between each SBU.

This examination can be carried out using the assessment instruments and interview data.
With the help of diagnostic interviews, individuals will be able to identify their personal
motivations. Hence, by doing so individual can offer his or her degree of involvement and
commitment towards the organisations (Waddell et al., 2014). Organisation will also be able
to offer coaching support in order to boost problem-solving skills. Murray & Millett, (2011)
within their literature have also confirmed the fact that most of the organisational issues can
be solved by enabling learning behaviours among the individuals. It can help the team in
responding better to the critical uncertainties, and ultimately bring improvements in the team
adaptability level. This can also offer individual sense of protection from loss of job threat in
order to build necessary team building skills.
Group Level
On the other hand, in context of the group level, team-building intervention can help in
achieving the groups process and functioning. In pursuing this strategic approach, it is
assumed that all the group members are self-motivated towards the change and agree to work
in collaboration (Waddell et al., 2014). For effective task performance within a group, it is
considered highly necessary that role clarification, goal clarity, risk taking, members
commitment and communication improvement areas are taken into account. A team building
process meeting will also help in this aspect when all the members will be given chance to
give their opinions about the strategic leaderships change decisions. They will be able to
present whether or not they agree with it, the choices given by Lee for change and benefits
and risks associated with the work (Kirkman & Rosen, 2001).

Organisational Level
Thirdly, on the organisational level, team-building intervention can help in resolving
intergroup conflicts and specify the need for large group interventions. It will help in
development of the diagnostic skills among the people so that they are able to examine
alternative action plans when they face intergroup tensions and avoid the further expansion
of conflicts among the centralised units. Teams within different SBUs at VRD will be able to
analyse their position in the larger organisational context in the new change situation and will
try to contribute (Waddell et al., 2014).
However, it is necessary to examine the effectiveness of team building is based on the
consistency with the other interventions like goal setting. The results of the field experiment
from 53 hard-rock miners in an underground metal mine conducted by Buller & Bell, (1986)
in their study confirmed that improvements through goal setting intervention are more
probable to occur as compared to the team building intervention. VRD must also take into
account that for resolving the problem of conflict, the company should give focus primarily
on the objective criteria (goal setting) for performance rather than the subjective one (team
building).

4. Intervention # 3: Integrated Strategic Change Intervention

The third intervention chosen for VRD problem is the integrated strategic change
intervention. Cummings & Worley, (2014, p.548) define it as an organizational development
(OD) intervention that broadens conventional OD processes into the content-oriented
discipline of strategic management. One of the key issues faced VRD is the change
management. According to Greiner & Bhambri, (1989), most of the business corporations

confront with the problem with the new CEO as he or she often attempts to introduce a
strategic change. Authors further added that by using only the comprehensive or
collaborative approach, new CEO could succeed in bringing the strategic change. Before
introducing the change, Lee should also develop a rational synoptic plan and use of emergent
political behaviours smartly (Greiner & Bhambri, 1989). Such approach can help the new
CEO in bringing a productive change within an unpredictable environment.
Waddell et al., (2014) within their research state that in order to implement a change led by
the major disruption i.e. arrival of new CEO from outside the organization, company needs to
concentrate on dual aspects of improvement including companys connectivity to its
environment as well as creation of a fit between technical, political and cultural systems.
By using this intervention, company can keep its focus on the outcomes while placing
continuous concentration on the processes, structure and strategies. VRD must take into
account that integrated strategic change is all about integration between these three elements
therefore, it would be beneficial for the organization to transfer their leadership to middle
managers rather than following the authoritative style. Involvement of middle managers will
result in releasing talent and energy (Waddell et al., 2014). Furthermore, an improved system
of motivation can be employed for assuring the uniformity in work behaviours. Leadership
grid provided by Greiner & Bhambri, (1989) in their research can be used to give relative
importance to both the decision-making as well as strategic scope dimensions of the grid.
Through this focus, major changes can be brought within the business environment like
decentralization of authority, allocation of financial and non-financial resources for each
SBU, replacement of outdated machinery, changes in staff practices and policies as well as
efficient communication process (Waddell et al., 2014).

10

The intervention can help the teammates and groups in diagnosis of their group processes and
devising solutions towards the complex issues each at individual level, group level and
organisational level (Waddell et al., 2014). Team skills and behaviours identified in previous
parts could be used in the VRD in categorising between individual based behaviours or
group-based behaviours. Moreover, VRD and its new CEO can look into account the success
factors considered worldwide in bringing a successful change. These include strategy,
structure, work design, human resources practices and management processes. Information
processing, on the other hand must be transparent and involve employees. Performance based
pay and rewards will help in resolving the internal conflicts and in creation of self-managed
teams (Cummings, 2008).

5. Team Building Survey: Justification for Survey Variable Selection

Team building survey for VRD is designed using the Likert Scale.
Neither
S.
Strongly
No

Survey Variables

Agree
Agree

Agree

Nor

.
Disagree
1

I give value to my individual

personal style of working as
necessary to work within teams
and for successful
accomplishment of given task
with innovative thinking.

Strongly
Disagree
Disagree

11

I need coaching and training

opportunities to fill my gap so
that sense of ownership to the
task can be developed

Team members prefer

collaborative approach of
working rather than the
competitive approach

We want to eliminate the line

of isolation and difference
created among the leaders and
members.

There should be informal

channels of communication
along with formal to exchange
critical information held by the
lower class team members.

Learning opportunities can

help in increasing adaptability
and in alleviating the threat of
job loss among the members.

When the immediate manager

clarifies my role as well as

12

overall goal, I can achieve my

task effectively.
8

Discussion on critical and

uncertain issues within team is
necessary for lessening the
level of risk accepted within
the teams.

Teams must exchange their

opinions for searching out a
range of alternative action
plans.

10

Effective and aligned goal

setting can assist in bringing
productive outcomes,
ultimately supporting the team
building process.

From the above survey designed for team building in VRD, it can be analysed that range of
factors would be like to see within the teams. These include innovative thinking (Cummings,
2008), learning development (Murray & Millett, 2011), clarification of roles (Murray et al.,
2002), goals setting (Buller & Bell, 1986), risk acceptance, informal communication and
exchange of information to develop variety of alternative course of actions (Waddell et al.,
2014). Reason behind choosing innovative thinking in the survey is that most of the academic

13

literature requires organisational improvement by envisioning creativity among the individuals

on personal level as well as group level. Moreover, innovation is also one of the key components
of the organic organisation design generally followed within the contemporary organisations
(Cummings & Worley, 2014). On the other hand, Murray & Millett, (2011) focus on fact that
better learning behaviours in semi-autonomous teams improve the level of team adaptability and
performance, encouraged the focus on learning behaviour. Similarly, risk taking is also an
important component of the business; therefore, VRD can also not undermine its presence among
the team performances and practices (Waddell et al., 2014). Additionally, influence of personal
styles and individual cultures place influence on the teams success and positive performance
(Kirkman & Rosen, 2001).
After examining the team building survey and justifying the reason for selection of survey
variables, the next part of the paper focuses on the linkage between theories and practices in
showing how three chosen interventions can lead to productive outcomes and resolution of
complex and multifaceted issues faced by VRD.

6. Theoretical and Practical Foundation for Interventions: Justification of Selection of

Interventions
A wide range of academic and professional literature supports the use of three intervention
chosen for the resolution of issues at VRD. These include ladder of inferences, team building
development process, and integrated change intervention process (Waddell et al., 2014).
According to Cummings & Worley, (2014), ladder of inferences is a great tool for the
organisational teams to discover their mental models and theories. Reason & Bradbury,
(2007) have also substantiated the use of ladder of inferences in the change management.

14

According to them, through this intervention, business is able to protect itself from the
undifferentiated buzzing, blooming confusions. The authors also stated the practices
associated with the ladder of inferences. The business organisations survey consultants in
creating a slow motion analysis often use Haneys uncritical inference test. The implicit
Association Test is also another practical example of use of this inference.
Additionally, Schwarz et al., (2011) also identify the important aspects of this intervention in
specifying its importance. According to authors, the tool is helpful in resolving complex
issues because it does not only identify the observable data but also points out on the nonverbal behaviours of team members. On the other hand, Waddell et al., (2014) note diagnosis
as an important aspect of the data collection process in order to bring effective organisational
change. Authors Johnson (1993, cited in (Brown & Harvey, 2006, p.128) further observed
the importance of various characteristics needed to be present in a business organisation for
bringing fruitful results. These include simplicity, visibility, involvement, primary factors,
straightforward measures and sense of urgency. Reason behind choosing ladder of inferences
was also the fact that it possesses almost all the identified attributes.
Like the importance of ladder of inferences, both theories and practice also spots out the
significance of team building process intervention in resolution of complex issues and
problems. According to Brown & Harvey, (2006), team building OD intervention is helpful
in increasing the communication, cooperation and cohesiveness of different strategic
business units, ultimately helping in the productive and effective outcomes. The need for
team development was emphasised by the authors by giving the examples of the Cisco and
Starbucks. At VRD too, it can help in assuring the effective distribution of degree of power
and control in order to help the groups work with more independence. Moreover, with the

15

help of uniformity, it also becomes possible for the business to opt for high quality decisions.
Group thinking may result in vulnerability, threat of loss of position, direct pressure, and
shared stereotypes, however with effective goal setting intervention; a business is able to
overcome all these linked issues (Espedal, 2008). Practically, organisations with agile change
approach need to go for time saving and cost effective solutions. Virtual platforms are highly
effective for this purpose. Team building can help in the increasing the level of
understanding and awareness for emerging communication technologies and their usage for
staying competitive with the competitors. Shared portals, informal connectivity and
interpersonal closeness offered to the team members can result in the resolution of internal
conflicts among the members (Cummings & Worley, 2014; Murray & Millett, 2011).
Team building is also important because it can assist the team managers in developing their
roles, which are highly crucial for the performance of a successful team (Buller & Bell,
1986). Team bundling in real life organisations in almost all parts of the world is also
encouraged to help the individual gain in-depth understanding about the different cultures f
different individuals, their managers as well as their CEO and try to exchange their opinions
for the development of the alternative course of actions (Michels, 2001; Waddell et al.,
2014).
Additionally, integrated strategic change was identified as highly necessary for the business
organisation operating under the leadership of new CEO (Waddell et al., 2014). ISC can help
organisations in management of conflicts between departments, in improving the slow
production process, dealing with emerging competitors, bringing improvement within
workers attitude and responsibility along with the low participative management. It can also
be realised that ISC is used by the real life organisations in planning and implementing the

16

change in a structured and pre-defined way (Waddell et al., 2014; Schwarz et al., 2011).
Organisations are able to develop new system of motivation for their employees, which is
consistent with their work behaviours. Through this intervention, new leaders are able to
align their leadership practices, decision styles and overall strategic scope in consistent with
the employees and subordinates expectations. Literature also spots out on the phases that can
be used by the organisations in applying the change including diagnosis of current OD,
creation of strategic choices, designing interventions and implementation of such
interventions (Pattanayak, 2005). Cummings & Worley, (2014) have further added that most
of the business corporations adopt this intervention with an aim to integrate and synthesize
strategies in order to deal with their internal as well as external interferences. In other words,
ISC helps the business in bridging up a path through which they can transform their present
position and OD into a more comprehensive and expected strategic outlook for the coming
time. It means that under this process, real life companies deal strategic orientation as a key
and separate concept. Linearity and compartmentaliztaion of the traditional strategic planning
approach are replaced by overlapping and iterative (Cummings & Worley, 2014). Thus, both
theoretical studies as well as practical world emphasise on using the selected three
interventions for change management and improvement.

7. Conclusion
Thus, in the end it can be concluded that VRD can use all these three interventions and team
building survey for bringing a productive change planned by Lee. However, new leader must
also take account for various factors and adopt a collaborative approach rather than agile
because change is an ongoing process and cannot be implemented abruptly. Moreover, it can
also be examined that new leader in order to resolve variety of highlighted issues and for

17

successfully implementing the change must consider about integrating structure with
strategies and people at their first instance.

18

References
1. Argyris, C., 1993. Education for Leading-Learning. Organizational Dynamics, pp.5-17.
2. Brown, D.R. & Harvey, D., 2006. An Experiential Approach to Organization
Development. Pearson Education India.
3. Buller, P.F. & Bell, C.H., 1986. Effects of Team Building and Goal Setting on
Productivity: A Field Experiment. The Academy of Management Journal , 29(2), pp.30528.
4. Cummings, T.G., 2008. Reflections on the Field and Beyond: An Interview with Warren
Bennis. In Handbook of Organization Development. Cummings, T. ed. Newbury Park:
Sage Publications.
5. Cummings, T. & Worley, C., 2014. Organization Development and Change. 10th ed.
Stamford: Cengage Learning.
6. Espedal, B., 2008. In the Pursuit of Understanding How to Balance Lower and Higher
Order Learning in Organizations. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 44, pp.36590.
7. Greiner, L.E. & Bhambri, A., 1989. New CEO intervention and dynamics of deliberate
strategic change. Strategic Management Journal: Special Issue: Strategic Leaders and
Leadership, 10(S1), pp.67- 86.
8. Kirkman, B. & Rosen, B., 2001. The Impact of Team Members Cultural Values on
Productivity, Cooperation, and Empowerment in Self-Managing Work Teams. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology , 32, pp.597-617.
9. Michels, R., 2001. Team Building: The Road to Success. Reedswain.
10. Murray, P.A. & Millett, B., 2011. The influence of learning behaviour on team
adaptability. Int. J. Learning and Change, 5(3/4), pp.257-70.
11. Murray, S. et al., 2002. When rejection stings: how self-esteem constrains relationshipenhancement processes. J Pers Soc PsychoLOGY, 83(3), pp.556-73.
12. Pattanayak, B., 2005. HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.
13. Reason, P. & Bradbury, H., 2007. The SAGE Handbook of Action Research:
Participative Inquiry and Practice. SAGE.
14. Schwarz, R., Davidson, A., Carlson, P. & McKinney, S., 2011. The Skilled Facilitator
Fieldbook: Tips, Tools, and Tested Methods for Consultants, Facilitators, Managers,
Trainers, and Coaches. San Fransisco: John Wiley & Sons.

19

15. Waddell, D., Cummings, T.G. & Worley, C.G., 2014. Organisational Change:
Development and Transformation. Cengage Learning Australia.