Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

CMI Level 7 Examples

Using the framework how would you define your career anchors? What evidence
would support this? How would this shape any career development planning you
would undertake?
Career Anchor


Shape career development

Interested in
technical content of
work. Like to exercise
technical skills. Will
accept managerial
responsibilities in
their area


In each new job role or

career move there is a
period of frustration for me
between having the
competency to do the job
and becoming an expert.

I invest time and effort to

understand the technical aspects
of any other department/role
which influences my work
I have taken charge of my own
development through job
shadowing these influencing
departments to understand in
detail how they operate
I do not identify with 'Power,
Influence and Control' however I
do enjoy being in a position of
technical excellence, being drawn
upon as the expert in x y or z.

At the same time, I seek out

new challenges and the
'Creativity' anchor gives me
the drive to move into this
period of frustration.

I will use this exercise to

remind myself that the
enjoyment in being a
technical expert and the pull
of a new challenge could be
in conflict at times.

Some - My managerial competence

anchor is interlinked within the other
more specific anchors. I gain great
pleasure in coaching, and currently
although I do not have direct line
management of staff, I am working
with a few colleagues to help their

My previous experience of line

management has been positive and I
am a better person for having learned

Being a manager of people

does not factor heavily as a
career anchor for me and
this would not sway me
towards or away from a
career opportunity.

how to successfully manage teams.

Security and stability

None - I have actively sought and

taken employment which moved me
out of permanent employment and
into fixed term/temporary on the basis
that it gave me more satisfaction.

I have the confidence to

pursue short term roles or
move out of my current
organisations to look for my
next challenge.

The anchors of Creativity

and Variety will outweigh
the prospect of Security in
my career planning.

Creativity: Often feel

the need to build
something new.
Driven by new
projects and an
entrepreneurial spirit.


Autonomy and
independence: have
a desire to be free of
constraints in their
own technical or

I consistently look for new ways of

working to give the maximum
My current role is within a
company which started out in
June 2011 where I was one of 3
initial members of staff, now there
are over 200. I was driven to
apply for the role based upon the
exciting prospect of working for a
new and emerging company in
the North East
My previous roles have been
project based - and I am a
qualified Prince2 Project
Manager. I enjoy the project cycle
and in particular the start up


Throughout my career I have

been very free to work
independently within Public, Third
and Private Sector
I feel the most frustrated when I
am inhibited by organisational

I thrive on new situations

and challenges, therefore I
will avoid any form of
repetitive work.

Project Management and

Programme Management
will give me the best
chance of continued

I will look to roles which

have a high level of
autonomy and allow for the
boundaries of organisation
restraints to be tested.


Basic identity

constraints in areas in which I

know I could perform better
without them


Service to others:
Driven by a need to
help others, often
using interpersonal

I do not feel defined by my job title

or career
I do feel that there are some
areas in which it is helpful to
bolster your identity in a role, for
example, I use MCIPS (Member
of the Chartered Institute of
Purchasing and Supply) at the
end of my name on work related
emails. This is because in my
current role this is a marker of
ability in that sector. It also puts
me on a level field with the
Performance Managers in the
DWP who are my main
My basic identity changes - as
above I currently identify with
MCIPS, in my previous role as a
project manager I identified myself
This links back to
Technical/Functional Competence
- in that I ensure my Basic Identity
is in line with the higher
expectations of technical
competence within the role I am


I cannot thrive in a role which

does not contribute to a wider,
more social or environmental
Previous roles have been working
towards the benefit of those who
are financially or educationally
disadvantaged and excluded from
society. Currently my role

My ongoing development
needs to remain in line with
the higher levels of
expertise required in any
role I take. Therefore I will
take into account my need
for recognised technical
competence when
developing my career

Working in the Third Sector

is very rewarding but these
roles do not always attract
the salary which I would
require. It is for me to think
carefully about the
weighting I give to any
potential career move with
regards to my personal job
satisfaction versus financial

contributes indirectly to the

increased employment
opportunities in the North East.


I do know that I have no

interest in pursuing a career
which does not have some
wider contribution.
Power, influence and

None - I actively look to work in


Variety: Often
relevant for people
with a wide range of
talents. Like flexibility
and could get bored


Working with different people, in

different locations on a variety of
tasks is what I enjoy.

My career choices have been

made based upon the
opportunities to get out of the
office and work in partnership with
different organisations on various

I recognised some time ago

in a job interview that it is
not so much that I get bored
in a job role and move on, it
is that if my ability to learn
something new is taken
away then I start to look
elsewhere for this

I love to learn - I will be

pursuing an opportunity
where there will be ongoing
opportunities to develop as
a person.

This has been a very useful task which focussed my attention on how my past education and
career choices have been influenced by these anchors and how they have developed
throughout my career.
I understand that the major factors in my changing job roles have hinged upon a reduction in
or lack of those anchors which I have identified as most important or most suited to me. In
pursuing my next career challenge I will be using this exercise more mindfully to ensure that
I can make educated and informed decisions on my career development.

Analyse your own change initiative against each of the five factors of the change
equation and consider what you could do to strengthen the weaker elements of D, V, S
and B and to weaken R on the opposite side of the equation.

D = level of dissatisfaction with current state

Although there is an acceptance among the sales team that the current state is far from ideal
in day to day terms the current state is acceptable as it has in effect become the norm for
them. They are continuing to get on with their job and their day to day activities are not
particularly affected and for some the lack of management is almost a bonus as they are left
alone. Having experienced a lot of unsuccessful change they now tend to see close
management as bothersome. In short there is a degree of complacency among some of the
team. In general terms though they would be happy to see things change where there is a
clear benefit for them.
However, the detail of the changes and how they will impact them has yet to be
communicated and there may be a higher level of resistance at the point where that
becomes clear.
The issue is with their level of belief. (See below)
In terms of the admin staff that will be re-deployed, several of them have already undergone
significant periods of change within the company. They are surprisingly resilient but are
pretty happy with the stability resulting from the changes made in August 2013. Therefore
while there is little dissatisfaction with the current state they would probably adapt well to the
planned changes.
However, at senior management level (Board/Chairman) there is a great deal of
dissatisfaction with the current state as it simply is not delivering the numbers so the change
is being forced from above.
In terms of the level of dissatisfaction with the current state among those most affected by
the planned change I would rate it as about 7/10.
In order to further strengthen this rating I think the degree of dissatisfaction at senior
management level with regards to the poor sales figures needs to be very clearly
communicated along with the expected targets and the business need for change in
commercial terms. Given the degree of complacency that has been allowed to develop over
the last 18 months 2 years there needs to be a short sharp shock delivered to instil a
degree of urgency (and concern) within the sales force.

V= Vision and awareness of a better alternative

The two managers responsible for designing and implementing the changes are both
relatively new to the company but have many years of commercial experience in other
organisations (including running their own business)

They are very clear about what needs to change and why and they have a very clear picture
of how things should be done to improve the sales figures.
At this stage that vision has not been communicated to those affected by it because it is yet
to be presented to the Chairman for approval. However, assuming that the changes are
approved then it will be necessary to properly communicate and share that vision to the
sales force. In addition to the short sharp shock mentioned above there is also a large
number of benefits to be sold e.g. training, increased support, more flexibility in working
conditions, concessions on TOIL and so on. These are consistent grumbles among the
sales force and could serve to counteract the relatively low rating under the D value.
Its important to note also that the vision being proposed by the change team tallies with the
experience that some members of the sales team have had in previous companies. This will
make it seem more real and less of an abstract or ideal world scenario and therefore its
more likely to become a shared and accepted vision.
With regards to the Chairman, he clearly accepts that there needs to be change as the
current state is failing the company and he has asked that it be addressed. However the
likelihood of him buying into the vision presented by the change team is impossible to
Assuming that vision of the future is approved and effectively communicated I would rate the
V value as 9/10

S = Steps to achieve the change

In real terms the implementation of the main changes should be straightforward and it largely
amounts to a change in line management in the first instance followed by minor changes to
some administrative processes and the introduction of benefits such as training. However,
from day one it will be important to communicate and reiterate the expectations in terms of
sales figures and productivity.
At this stage everything hinges on approval from the Chairman and there is no clear plan for
the implementation of the changes. While this may drop into place at a later stage at present
this is a weak part of the equation. I would rate the S value at this point as 4/10.
In order to strengthen this value I would step back from the big picture changes and start
looking at the specifics in order to form an implementation plan identify the individual
changes, what are the knock on effects in terms of processes and admin, what are the
timescales, what is the necessary order of events, who needs to be involved?
A clearly defined and realistic plan (even if it changes at a later stage) will build momentum,
direction and structure into the change process and will prevent those that are against the
changes from citing a management void as the precursor to failure.

B = Belief in a positive outcome

In terms of the team charged with planning and implementing the change there is no
shortage of belief in their plans. The lead on the sales side is passionate about the proposed
changes and is very confident in their own ability to make them succeed.
The risk in terms of success comes from the Chairman. Historically we have seen numerous
changes implemented which are not given sufficient time to take hold or which move outside
the Chairmans comfort zone resulting in his reigning in all such activities. Not only does this
result in the failure of the change initiative but it has also had a traumatising effect on the
staff involved and has resulted in a high degree of cynicism. The prevailing belief therefore
is that with the best will in the world and the best, most considered, most sensible plans it
could still fail because the owner of the company wont allow it to happen. Unfortunately this
is a real fear as has been proven in the past.
Combatting this is difficult. However, assuming that the change team can sell the ideas into
the Chairman in commercial terms it will then be a case of highlighting the Chairmans
approval to those affected by the change in order to reassure them. There will also be a
need on an on-going basis for demonstrable results in order to maintain his approval and
allow the process to move forward.
Regular feedback to staff on the Chairmans satisfaction with progress will reassure them
over time and lead to a belief that the changes will become fixed. However, this will take
time and there is no way to ensure belief in the successful outcome at the start of the
process due to the variable that is the Chairman.
It is however, possible to strengthen belief in the theoretical success of the changes as they
are proven to work outside of Norbrook. Providing evidence to staff that the proposed
changes are the norm elsewhere and are proven to motivate, increase retention and lead to
commercial success will add validity to the proposals especially where it is backed up by
individual experience in other companies. Where staff see the benefit to themselves they will
be on board even if they doubt the long-term maintenance of the changes. Its likely that staff
will take the approach that the changes are worth a try.
In short, we can make staff believe in the likely success of whats proposed in theoretical
terms but the doubt surrounding the attitude of the Chairman and the possibility of things
being stopped by him will only be changed with time and will only be firm once the changes
have become the new status quo and they are confident that that will remain.
I would currently rate the B value overall as 5/10.
TOTAL score for left side = 25/40 (63%)

R = Resistance Generated.
Resistance in respect of this change could come from various quarters:
The sales team this is probably the least likely source of resistance due their desire for
things to improve. However, the detail of the change and how it would impact them has yet
to be communicated so this could change when they start to come under pressure to
improve performance.
Should that prove to be the case resistance could be lessened by highlighting the benefits
and concessions which run alongside the increased scrutiny and pressure to perform.
The main cause of resistance among this group could be their lack of belief leading to an
immobilising degree of scepticism. This could be countered by referring back to the
dissatisfaction with the current state expressed by the team at an earlier stage i.e. heres an
opportunity to at least try and improve things dont complain about the status quo if youre
not prepared to try and change it.
Other staff the admin staff affected are unlikely to resist as in real terms their roles and
responsibilities will not change and they already know the individuals which would take over
their line-management. Their new line managers are already members of the GB team and
are known to them so even this will be a minor change.
Head Office In particular the Chairman. If he is reluctant to allow even some of the
proposed changes then the project is likely to fail or at least have very limited success.
Unfortunately this element is very difficult to quantify.
Its possible (as has been seen before) that even if he initially approves the proposed
changes he may, at a later stage; prove resistant to actual material change. The only hope
for this being countered would be a recognisable and prompt increase in sales figures which
can be tied to the changes made. (I.e. prove the worth in commercial terms)