Professional Documents
Culture Documents
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
Evidence
Technical/functional
competence:
Interested in
technical content of
work. Like to exercise
technical skills. Will
accept managerial
responsibilities in
their area
Much
Much
Autonomy and
independence: have
a desire to be free of
organisational
constraints in their
own technical or
functional
Much
competence
Basic identity
Some
Service to others:
Driven by a need to
help others, often
using interpersonal
competencies
Much
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
further.
reward.
Variety: Often
relevant for people
with a wide range of
talents. Like flexibility
and could get bored
easily
Much
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.
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
predict.
Assuming that vision of the future is approved and effectively communicated I would rate the
V value as 9/10
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)