Please rate my Kotters?

[vwinnie8]

Hi guys, I'm kinda new to this forum so please forgive me if I do anything wrong.. I was wondering if you guys were able to see if my Kotter's response is good enough for tomorrow's exam? I have linked it to NAB, and the change issue is corporate social responsibility. Thanks in advance and good luck for tomorrow!!

Please rate out of 10.

 

*********

Social responsibility refers to the way in which an organisation demonstrates some commitment to its community beyond that imposed on it by laws. If an organisation is socially responsible, it can lead to a better reputation and allow the organisation to attract better quality employees and more loyal customers.-----> explaining the issue

National Australia Bank is a LSO that employs many employees and has many branches in Australia. It has a large customer base and is one of the ‘Big Four’ banks. It is planning to introduce a ‘Staff Volunteer Program’ to encourage its staff to be more socially responsible. A general perception of banks are that they are overly focused on profit and do not care about local communities enough, and NAB wishes to overcome this with its new program.-----> linking the issue to the case study/LSO

Managers of NAB would firstly need to create a sense of urgency, by conducting a SWOT analysis to determine the internal strengths and weaknesses of NAB and its external opportunities and threats. This will help spark the initial motivation to get the ‘Staff Volunteer Program’ going.

A powerful group should then be formed in order to convince NAB staff that volunteering is worthwhile and beneficial for everyone. NAB should bring together key people from all areas of NAB to have support and ensure the direction for change is correct.

Then, managers at NAB should create a vision for change, such as building good relationships with community organisations and achieving a certain amount of ‘volunteer days’. This helps everyone understand what he or she is being asked to do, and ensures the ‘change’ makes sense.

The vision should then be communicated to staff at NAB, through channels such as advertising, email, posters, brochures, team meetings, etc. This will outline the advantages of the Staff volunteer program to everyone and ensure they understand the direction that NAB hopes to take.

Obstacles and resistance should then be removed. NAB management should continually check for barriers, such as people resisting the program. NAB management should help them overcome their resistance by hiring OR CREATING Change agents and empowering those who support and encourage the volunteering program.

Short-term wins should then be created so that NAB employees are able to see the success of the new program. Management should create achievable goals, such as, putting in 8 volunteering hours per month, and reward employees who achieve goals. This will be good for morale as employees will feel a sense of pride in their work and will be less likely to resist change.

The change should be continually built on and improved. This means that NAB management should not declare the victory of the Staff Volunteer Program too early, but rather keep trying to identify areas that need to be improved on and fix those areas, so that the success of the Staff Volunteer program can be even greater for NAB.
 
Finally, management should anchor the changes in NAB’s corporate culture. The volunteer program should become part of day-to-day operations, and employees should easily be able to see the connection between the new volunteer program and the increased success of NAB.

If NAB successfully implements the new Staff Volunteer Program with Kotter's theory, it will be seen as more socially responsible and moral and employee resistance will be lowered, ensuring long term success of the change.------> conclusion

edited with suggestions from sajib_mostofa and hellhole and burberry  8-)

burberry helped with ----> explaining the issue + linking

[sajib_mostofa]

Pretty good job mate. Instead of providing info about the organisation, I'd probably briefly talk about the change issue your doing in relation to your LSO (If the Q asks you for it) and relate to why NAB are changing. Then I'd do Kotter as you have done. Other than that, 10/10

[vwinnie8]

Pretty good job mate. Instead of providing info about the organisation, I'd probably briefly talk about the change issue your doing in relation to your LSO (If the Q asks you for it) and relate to why NAB are changing. Then I'd do Kotter as you have done. Other than that, 10/10

Yes!!! That's a great idea.. I nearly forgot.. thankyou so much, I'll keep that in mind for tomorrow and talk about change instead of doing a general introduction. I'd 'give you positive karma' if I had above 50 posts.. thanks GL for tmrw

[sajib_mostofa]

No worries mate. Good luck to you too.

[Hellhole]

Firstly, change agents aren't hired, from what I recall (your "empower" step - step 5). Change agents are the people in your influential group from step 2. So, employing change agents would probably suit better than hired - at least, when you say employed, it doesn't necessarily mean hired but also that they were used to do something.

Secondly, if this were a 10 mark question, you'd probably get 8. For one reason: driving/restraining forces weren't explained - so, a driving force would be that NAB, as a 'big four' bank, has been facing continuous scrutiny leading up to this change and as such, feel that their corporate social responsibility is not up to standard. Whilst a restraining force would be the employee's lack of motivation to "volunteer"? Then, by saying that if Kotter's theory was employed, the restraining forces may have been diminished by the empowering and rewarding of success.

Otherwise, good stuff!

[chelseaFC]

Anybody doing Kotters first? Or going in chronological order?

[sajib_mostofa]

Anybody doing Kotters first? Or going in chronological order?

Depends. If the kotter question asks to use a corporate example in relation to our change issue, then I might do it early on. I'll probably start off by doing all the definition questions.

[Hellhole]

Anybody doing Kotters first? Or going in chronological order?

Depends. If the kotter question asks to use a corporate example in relation to our change issue, then I might do it early on. I'll probably start off by doing all the definition questions.

That is, if there are any. Change of study design, remember?

[vwinnie8]

Firstly, change agents aren't hired, from what I recall (your "empower" step - step 5). Change agents are the people in your influential group from step 2. So, employing change agents would probably suit better than hired - at least, when you say employed, it doesn't necessarily mean hired but also that they were used to do something.

Secondly, if this were a 10 mark question, you'd probably get 8. For one reason: driving/restraining forces weren't explained - so, a driving force would be that NAB, as a 'big four' bank, has been facing continuous scrutiny leading up to this change and as such, feel that their corporate social responsibility is not up to standard. Whilst a restraining force would be the employee's lack of motivation to "volunteer"? Then, by saying that if Kotter's theory was employed, the restraining forces may have been diminished by the empowering and rewarding of success.

Otherwise, good stuff!

thankyou so much. I'll definitely keep that in mind - to mention driving and restraining forces, and I'll change the word 'hire'

[sajib_mostofa]

Anybody doing Kotters first? Or going in chronological order?

Depends. If the kotter question asks to use a corporate example in relation to our change issue, then I might do it early on. I'll probably start off by doing all the definition questions.

That is, if there are any. Change of study design, remember?

They'd certainly have to have one or two definition questions. Its part and parcel of every bisman exam.

[mojomojo]

Firstly, change agents aren't hired, from what I recall (your "empower" step - step 5). Change agents are the people in your influential group from step 2. So, employing change agents would probably suit better than hired - at least, when you say employed, it doesn't necessarily mean hired but also that they were used to do something.

Secondly, if this were a 10 mark question, you'd probably get 8. For one reason: driving/restraining forces weren't explained - so, a driving force would be that NAB, as a 'big four' bank, has been facing continuous scrutiny leading up to this change and as such, feel that their corporate social responsibility is not up to standard. Whilst a restraining force would be the employee's lack of motivation to "volunteer"? Then, by saying that if Kotter's theory was employed, the restraining forces may have been diminished by the empowering and rewarding of success.

Otherwise, good stuff!

It is actually possible to hire a change agent from outside the business.

[burbs]

Yes

[Hellhole]

Firstly, change agents aren't hired, from what I recall (your "empower" step - step 5). Change agents are the people in your influential group from step 2. So, employing change agents would probably suit better than hired - at least, when you say employed, it doesn't necessarily mean hired but also that they were used to do something.

Secondly, if this were a 10 mark question, you'd probably get 8. For one reason: driving/restraining forces weren't explained - so, a driving force would be that NAB, as a 'big four' bank, has been facing continuous scrutiny leading up to this change and as such, feel that their corporate social responsibility is not up to standard. Whilst a restraining force would be the employee's lack of motivation to "volunteer"? Then, by saying that if Kotter's theory was employed, the restraining forces may have been diminished by the empowering and rewarding of success.

Otherwise, good stuff!

It is actually possible to hire a change agent from outside the business.

Of course it is, but if you're going to say "hire a change agent," at least explain in part 2 that they would have hired change agents so that the examiner knows that they're a part of your visionary group.

[burbs]

7/10

You'd lose 2 for not explaining your issue and how it affected NAB before the steps, and one because its slightly off in the ways the others explained.

[vwinnie8]

7/10

You'd lose 2 for not explaining your issue and how it affected NAB before the steps, and one because its slightly off in the ways the others explained.

thanks, I'll keep that in mind to explain why Nab wants to change. Do you mean driving and restraining forces? Also, my answer is slightly off because other people probably used a different textbook to me. This answer I wrote followed the 8 steps from the Key Concepts Textbook.