was it possible to apply kotter

[king]

In the last question no you didn't have to use it

though! its not going to make you loose marks if you did, if anything it'll show your broader knowledge on change management

you needed to list these things though to get the top marks (this is what i said anyway)

Restraining forces
- organisation doesn't welcome change
- Insecurities
- procrastination
- financial

Driving forces
- Organisation welcomes change
- employee's trust leadership of management
- positive and capable management
- organisation has financial reserves

[accaz]

in addition;

driving forces- benefiting its competitors, shareholders seeing the benefits of an improved return on investments, increased market share

restraining forces- employees don't want to change, shareholders believing it is not in their best interest

[Kotza]

could you say the government is a driving force?

(Mine is Woolworths expanding into the hardware industry.)

Government would want it and push for it as it provides employment (less govt spending on welfare) in creases infrastructure and expands our industrial base. This is something the government would want.

Would that be cool?

In retrospect though, i dont know why i wrote that when i had so many other easier options

[goldsgym]

I do not think it was possibly to apply Kotter's theory to gain marks. The question was relating to the driving and restraining forces and did not specifically addresses Kotter's theory. So essentially you had to put down at least 2-3 driving & restraining forces to gain the bulk of the marks. I put down.

Organisational Change definition (1 mark)

Globalisation definition and explanation of how it affects LSO's (1 mark)

Pacific Brands case study background history then explained how it related to Globalisation (2 marks)

3 Driving forces (3 marks)

3 Restraining Forces (3 marks)

Hopefully those marks turn out like I'm predicting.

[goldsgym]

could you say the government is a driving force?

(Mine is Woolworths expanding into the hardware industry.)

Government would want it and push for it as it provides employment (less govt spending on welfare) in creases infrastructure and expands our industrial base. This is something the government would want.

Would that be cool?

In retrospect though, i dont know why i wrote that when i had so many other easier options

The government can be both a restraining and driving force. Like costs.

In my change issue, they were a restraining force because Pacific Brands were relocating from Australia to China, so they wouldn't want that because of lost jobs in Australia and negative contribution to the Economy.

But for your issue sounds like your spot on the money.

[Kotza]

Define globalistion? I didnt even see the relevance of glob. in the question :|
perhaps i skipped it, i only defined change and driving and restricting forces, then listed 2 each as i did not have enough time for more.

[Kotza]

@ goldsgym thanks dude!

[jsher098]

Na, the way to answer the question was to begin discussing the general...
When considering organisational change organisations are faced with both driving and restraining forces.
- Define driving force give generic examples
-Define restraining force give generic examples
Then say managers need to manage the forces to ensure the number of driving outnumber the restraining to allow for a smooth and effective change process.

Then you introduce the issue...
-Define acquisitions... Kraft's acquisition of Cadbury in early 2010 is an example...
Kraft was faced with both driving and restraining forces...
Gave a few examples of each and basically said that the number of driving forces was greater than  restraining allowing for a smooth change process.
Ended off by saying the change has been succesful and has lead to Kraft acheiving financial stability and dominating market share.

YOU HAD TO DISCUSS GENERAL FIRST.
Read the question again.... and if you just discussed the case study you would only get half marks... my teacher is an examiner...

[Kotza]

and VCAA assumes that kids are meant to know something so ambiguous and unclear?

never ever EVER would i have though: "i have to state whether the change process is successful and if driving outweighs restraining."

That is absolute bullshit. (Not what you said, but the nature of the qustion.)

[_avO]

Discuss (and analyse) questions always asks you to weigh up the positives (driving) and negatives (restraining) and evaluate whether the result (change process) was successful or not

[luken93]

Grrr that question is annoying me so much!!!
Overall though, I don't think highlighting on Kotter's theory is going to harm you much, however if you only did that, you weren't actually answering the question.

I would've said that the only way it could've been used is after you have defined your driving/restraining forces, then when you are summarising as to the outcome of the change, you could state that Kotter's was used to minimise thee effects on the restraining forces or something along those lines...

However, I doub't you'd get much if you simply did the 8 steps and how the business used them, but then again, it's VCAA, hence anything is possible...

[Kotza]

Whatever, im over this now whats done is done. If i know i missed out on 20 marks or i dont know i missed out on 20 marks, shit aint gunna change.

hope all goes well.

[jsher098]

Discuss (and analyse) questions always asks you to weigh up the positives (driving) and negatives (restraining) and evaluate whether the result (change process) was successful or not

exactly correct. you had to make a conclusion as to the case study... as to whether or not the change process was succesful- basically if the organisation was able to control the restraining forces...

[jsher098]

Grrr that question is annoying me so much!!!
Overall though, I don't think highlighting on Kotter's theory is going to harm you much, however if you only did that, you weren't actually answering the question.

I would've said that the only way it could've been used is after you have defined your driving/restraining forces, then when you are summarising as to the outcome of the change, you could state that Kotter's was used to minimise thee effects on the restraining forces or something along those lines...

However, I doub't you'd get much if you simply did the 8 steps and how the business used them, but then again, it's VCAA, hence anything is possible...

The only place to use Kotter's would be when discussing restraining... possibly could've said management could use the theory to control restraining forces... but if you discussed the 8 step theory... I don't think you would get more than 1 out of 10... you can't not answer the question    

[burbs]

Grrr that question is annoying me so much!!!
Overall though, I don't think highlighting on Kotter's theory is going to harm you much, however if you only did that, you weren't actually answering the question.

I would've said that the only way it could've been used is after you have defined your driving/restraining forces, then when you are summarising as to the outcome of the change, you could state that Kotter's was used to minimise thee effects on the restraining forces or something along those lines...

However, I doub't you'd get much if you simply did the 8 steps and how the business used them, but then again, it's VCAA, hence anything is possible...

The only place to use Kotter's would be when discussing restraining... possibly could've said management could use the theory to control restraining forces... but if you discussed the 8 step theory... I don't think you would get more than 1 out of 10... you can't not answer the question    

Yep. The way I put Kotter in at the end was just saying some of the steps that can reduce resistance to the specific factors I outlined.