1) The document analyzes strategic changes at Rowling Energy between 2014-2016 using three frameworks: the Change Kaleidoscope, Cultural Web, and Kotter's 8 Step Change Model. 2) Under former CEO Samson Steele, Rowling Energy had an autocratic culture with top-down decision making. Steele favored former employees of Bantam Power. New CEO Jay Jameson implemented a collaborative leadership style and bottom-up structure to change the culture. 3) Using Kotter's model, Jameson created a sense of urgency, formed a guiding coalition, and created a vision of innovation and customer focus to transform Rowling Energy's culture.

1. Individual Strategic Change Case Study - Rowling Energy
Strategy: Choice and Change
Lisa Day
Amy Tompkins - 13009750
Word Count - 3100
Page /1 13

2. Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction p. 3
2.0 Change Kaleidoscope (Hailey and Balogun, 2008) p. 3
3.0 Cultural Web (Johnson, 2000) p. 6
4.0 8 Step Change Model (Kotter, 1995) p. 9
5.0 Conclusion p. 11
6.0 References p. 12
Page /2 13

3. List of Tables
Table 1 The Change Kaleidoscope (adapted from Balogun and Hailey, 2008). p. 4
Table 2 The Cultural Web In Reference To Rowling Energy Under Samson Steele (adapted
from Johnson, 2000).
p. 6
Table 3 The Cultural Web In Reference To Rowling Energy Under Jay Jameson (adapted from
Johnson, 2000).
p. 7
Table 4 Kotler’s 8 Step Change Model (adapted from: Kotter, 1995). p. 11
Page /3 13

4. 1.0 Introduction
This report aims to explore the strategic changes which occurred within Rowling Energy between 2014 and
2016. The use of The Change Kaleidoscope (Hailey and Balogun, 2008), Cultural Web (Johnson, 2000) and
Kotter’s 8 Step Change Model (Kotter, 1995) provide an understanding of how strategic change was noticed
and implemented, acknowledging which factors were enabling and which factors were restricting. Finally this
report will draw from the body of discussion to highlight the key findings and future recommendations.
2.0 Change Kaleidoscope
The change kaleidoscope (Hailey and Balogun, 2008) is a strategic tool used to recognise the need for
change within an organisation. To this end, the following chapter of this report uses the change kaleidoscope
(Hailey and Balogun, 2008) to categorise and identify the elements of change within Rowling Energy. Due to
the contextual nature of the change kaleidoscope (Johnson, Whittington and Scholes, 2014) the focus of this
analysis will be with regards to Jameson’s arrival within the organisation.
Table 1. The Change Kaleidoscope (adapted from Hailey and Balogun, 2008).
+ Time
• Short Term (health and safety, training programmes and staff appointment)
• Longer Term (organisational culture and core values)
• No immediate changes needed to amend external perspective
- Scope
• Wide
• Deep
• Whole organisation
- changes in business operations + organisational culture
—> transformational change
- Preservation
• Financial results
• Shareholder investments
- Diversity
The staff of Bantam Power may respond differently to the staff of Goliath
Generation.
Upper level staff may respond differently to lower level staff
- common appointment of Bantam Power staff in upper level positions
Older employees encouraged to take an early retirement leading to a higher
percentage of younger staff.
+ Capability
Jay Jameson has the capability to initiate change.
The workforce have been through the change process previously.
+ Capacity
• No issues financially
• May be some staff implications (able to be overcome)
+ Readiness
Staff feel strongly about Steele’s autocratic management style.
- Jameson’s appointment was welcomed positively
N Power Jay Jameson has the power to initiate change.
Page /4 13

5. At this point, it should be noted that the nature of the organisation will have a direct impact on how change is
handled (Johnson, Whittington and Scholes, 2014). Within Rowling Energy, an organisation created through
the mergence of two independent business entities, the leadership style adopted will have a direct impact on
how contextual features highlighted in Table 1 are managed. After analysis of the case study, it could be
suggested that there are differing time frames for the elements of the business which will undergo a change
programme. The internal issue of health and safety may require a faster, more immediate response leading
to a reactive approach to change and a more direct leadership style (Hailey and Balogun, 2002).
Furthermore, if Jameson is able to achieve these short term goals he will be able to gain the trust of
employees, enabling the process of change in the future. On the other hand, changing the core values and
culture of the organisation provides the possibility to adopt a persuasive or collaborative leadership style
(Moolenburgh, 2015). The latter approach will allow Jameson to build rapport with the colleagues in which he
works and acquires their help in admitting change throughout a longer time frame.
Another area where change is needed in a timely manner could be the process of staff appointment and staff
training programmes. Despite the workforce coming from both Goliath Generation and Bantam Power, the
case study implies a fairly homogenous view of the workforce is that the business practices originally
implemented by Bantam Power are regarded as the “default” for Rowling Energy. In this way, staff morale
has been effected. This may prove difficult to change and direction from a new leader in this situation could
be considered as intrusive.
The scope of the change programme for Rowling Energy is heavy in both terms of breadth and depth. Due to
the size of the organisation, this will require the involvement of a large amount of employees (Johnson,
Whittington and Scholes, 2014). When considering this inline with the effected morale of said employees, it
could be quite challenging to begin initiating change within the organisation. Furthermore, there is no
evidence of concern from external stakeholders implying the need for change is coming from within.
Fundamentally, this leads to a larger overhaul of the current business practise and culture; something that
may require more strategic planning and longer process of smaller continuous changes (Kotter, 1995).
A key objective of Rowling Energy is to maintain high share price and a strong financial position. When
initiating change it is important that these two characteristics of the organisation are preserved. Despite the
case study suggesting Steele had left with the share price and financial position of the organisation stable,
some of the decisions implemented by Steele could cause this to be at risk in the future. Steele’s vast cut
backs and re-employment of previous staff as highly paid consultants is seemingly illogical. Jameson will
now face the challenge of handling this situation by choosing not to renew individuals’ contracts and training
existing staff or making changes to the overall structure of Rowling Energy once again. Both of these options
may inadvertently effect financial success.
The differing levels of experience and skill sets within Rowling Power, an advantage of the merger, may be
perceived as helpful when initiating change. However, Hailey and Balogun (2002) highlight that subcultural
groups within an organisation may hinder the change process. In terms of Rowling Power this could appear
in three forms: departmental groups, those formed by Bantam Power staff and those formed by Goliath
Generation. Naturally, each of these groups will foster views and opinions which may be in contrast to
another. It may be challenging for Jameson to remove these barriers and encourage the workforce to work
as one body to enable change to take place.
Page /5 13

6. When considering the organisation’s capability to manage change, the organisation’s readiness becomes
rather relevant, also. Both of these enabling factors allow the change process to be adopted and
implemented successfully and, theoretically, within the given time frame. The staff of Rowling Energy have
been experiencing an ongoing period of change since Steele’s appointment as CEO in 2014. This could be
helpful in applying the change programme as staff have become accustomed to a working environment in
which things may be altered. When considering this parallel to the readiness of the organisation, we
understand that the staff of Rowling Energy feel quite strongly about Steele’s approach to management and
that it was negatively autocratic. Using this as support, it could be suggested that across the organisation
there is the readiness for change.
Fig. 1: Styles of Change Leadership According To Organisational Capability and Readiness (adapted from, Johnson Whittington and
Scholes, 2014).
Overall, it may not have been too difficult for Jameson to implement change within Rowling Energy as the
change kaleidoscope highlights a number of enabling factors such as the readiness and capacity for change.
Although it is acknowledged that the diversity of the workforce may be restricting, in large part, the
infrastructure of the organisation leans towards the acceptance of change.
3.0 Cultural Web
An alternate contextually sensitive model for strategic change analysis is Kotter’s Cultural Web (1995). The
aim being to identify behavioural, physical and symbolic characteristics within several sections of any given
organisation (Johnson, Whittington and Scholes, 2014). In the case of Rowling Energy, the following chapter
of this report will use the cultural web to analyse the organisation under the power of Samson Steele and
again under the power of Jay Jameson allowing the key differences and similarities to be highlighted.
2014 - CEO Samson Steele
Page /6 13
Participation
Direction =
urgent
Participation
= time
Capability
Persuasion
Collaboration
High
Low
Low HighReadiness
When deciding the overall approach to change,
Johnson, Whittington and Scholes’ matrix (fig. 1)
can be used to determine the change leadership
style which is more appropriate. In the case of
Rowling Energy, this would arguably be
collaborative as both the levels of readiness and
capability are recognised as high.

7. Table 2. The Cultural Web In Reference To Rowling Energy Under Samson Steele (adapted from Johnson, 2000).
Stories
• Good morning overheads
• Marching into offices and removing people’s personal mobile phones”
• Shouting and swearing
• People were fearful of Steele
• Just f’ing doing it”
• Three people leaving… coming back Monday as highly paid
consultants
• Bantam Power’s mode of operating to be considered “the default”
Symbols
• Steele’s top floor office and his secretaries
• Steele’s appointment (a former Bantam Power employee)
Power Structures
• Little care for operational level staff
• Greater appreciation for skilled staff
• A close team at the top of the hierarchy
• Bantam Power’s mode of operating considered “the default”
Organisational Structure
• Hierarchical
• Top | down structure
• Revised staffing template
Control Symstems
• Few formal controls
• Directive / autocratic leadership style
• Staff cuts
• Voluntary redundancy scheme
• Punishments (removal of phones etc..)
• Rules and instructions passed to staff through top management
Rituals + Routines
• Turning a blind eye to H+S concerns
• Cuts made to training (Goliath + Bantam had offered MBA’s + degree
study)
PARADIGM NARROW MINDED AND OLD FASHIONED
2016 - CEO Jay Jameson
Stories
• Jameson regarded as someone who got things done but equally
cared about his workforce
• Staff success stories through either saving the company money or
helping a customer
• Jameson spending one day a week touring the offices and spending
time with lower level staff
• Jameson regarded as a ‘good bloke’
• Jameson wants to be ‘the Google of the energy industry’
Symbols
• Jameson’s ground floor office
• Whiteboard surfaces to allow people to bounce ideas
• “problem solvers” and “coaches”
Power Structures • More collaborative leadership style
Organisational Structure
• Revised staffing template
• Bottom | up structure
Page /7 13

8. Table 3. The Cultural Web In Reference To Rowling Energy Under Jay Jameson (adapted from Johnson, 2000).
The cultural paradigm of Rowling Energy under the power of Steele is old fashioned and quite narrow
minded. However Jameson had entered the organisation and shifted this paradigm to one that focusses on
support, encouraging employees and being innovative. He had accomplished this vast strategic change
through the change levers given in Kotter’s cultural web (1995). Each of the levers had contributed towards
Jameson’s success which is further highlighted by a change in the tone of the stories told my employees of
Rowling Energy.
Steele’s adoption of an autocratic leadership style and top down structure had restricted innovative thinking
(Hoogh, Greer and Hartog, 2015; Lopez and Ensari, 2014) and minimised the workforce’s willingness to
voice their opinions and ideas. The symbolic elements of the cultural web reinforce this, also. The design of
Steele’s office was nothing short of decadent, with a segment of the staffing budget spent on two private full
time secretaries. Although this may not seem too farfetched for a CEO, human resources could have
invested said capital on the training staff require but are not receiving.
In contrast to this, Jameson had taken a different approach to his office. Relocating from the top floor to the
ground and switching wooden paneling for whiteboard walls, Jameson symbolically represented himself as
part of the team - previously referred to as “over heads” by Steele. It comes as no surprise that Jameson has
also taken an entirely different approach to leadership, using a collaborative leadership style where
appropriate. Involvement of staff at varying levels of seniority allows a break down of the barriers Steele had
built between the hierarchical levels of the organisation.
Despite both Bantam Power and Goliath Generation providing training (inclusive of MBA and degree level
study), Rowling Energy under Steele’s power offered no such employee development programme. As
literature suggests, opportunity for individual development within an organisation can be motivational for staff
and encourage them to remain loyal to the organisation (Salie and Schlechter, 2012). For the duration of
time Steele spent as CEO, his priorities had seemingly laid elsewhere, also turning a blind eye to the health
and safety concerns that were arising. On Jameson’s arrival at the organisation these concerns were one of
the initial problems he wanted to amend. A shift in routine to provide training for members of staff and the
implementation of a routine of recording and documenting health and safety incidents had proved a success
after just a few months.
The overall outlook created by the stories in the case study is like that of two entirely different organisations.
Whereas Steele was known for shouting and swearing creating a “just f’ing do it” attitude, Jameson was
regarded as a “good bloke” by his workforce. When we revisit the symbolic aspects in Table 3, Jameson
Control Symstems
• Few control systems
• Reporting systems
—> to benefit staff rather than to punish them
Rituals + Routines
• Training provided
• Recording health and safety incidents
• Managers are encouraged to spend more time with their staff
• Jameson will spend one day a week touring offices
PARADIGM SUPPORTIVE, ENCOURAGING AND INNOVATIVE
Page /8 13

9. implicitly removes the title of ‘management’ and refers to leaders as “problem solvers” and “coaches”. Not
only does this reinforce Jameson’s generally collaborative approach, but is symbolic of the appreciation - and
to some extent, trust - he has within his employees. It is assumed the Steele had little intention to develop
members of the team and used more directive strategies when managing them. This may perhaps be one of
the clearest examples of their differences as CEO and approach to strategic change.
Despite there being few similarities between the CEOs, Jameson and Steele had both made changes to the
staffing of Rowling Energy. Admittedly this was to a different end but nonetheless both had recognised a
need for strategic change in the same area of the organisation. Perhaps Steele’s appointment himself as
CEO and further appointment of former Bantam Power staff at top level coincides with Bantam Power’s
better financial position initially and the ability to inject more capital into the merger. However, from an
objective perspective as Jameson notices, this may not have provided the best distribution of skills across
the organisation. Steele’s approach to cut back on job roles which were no longer necessary after the
realignment of the organisational structure was to be replaced by an approach in which staff were offered
training to better themselves - regardless of which organisation they were originally employed by or who their
friends were.
Overall the differences between the two CEOs much further outweigh the similarities. Upon on analysis of
the case study, an important characteristic of Jameson and Steele would be their background. It could be
argued that Steele’s favouritism towards Bantam Power and the general way of approaching business
operations is as a result of his previous time working for the organisation itself. Jameson on the other hand
had entered the organisation with the ability to create an unbiased evaluation leading to a more open minded
approach. Theory suggests routines within a business may prevent top level management from recognising
the need for change (Kotter, 2007), to this end an explanation of Steele’s continuous autocratic leadership is
provided.
4.0 Kotler’s 8 Step Change Model
In the final stage of analysis for this report, Kotter’s 8 Step Change Model (1995) will be used to explore
Jameson’s overall approach to change.
Sense of urgency Creation of both short and long term goals
Formation of powerful guiding coalition
First 30 days met with the senior management team
Discussion with the executive board
Training programmes available for management
Create a vision
Change the culture and style of working
‘Ideas, innovation, and customer orientation’
Google of the energy world
Communicate the vision
Video of the kick-off event shown to the whole
workforce
Making changes within the first three months
Page /9 13

10. Table 4. Kotler’s 8 Step Change Model (adapted from: Kotter, 1995).
As Kotter implies forming a group of colleagues who will support the endeavour, is one of the initial stages of
implementing change. Upon entering the organisation Jameson had met with the senior management team
in order to acknowledge the depth of change that needed to be undertaken. Jameson had formed a solid
vision with reference to Google claiming he would like to see Rowling Energy as the “Google of the energy
world”. By having a clear vision from the onset of the change programme Jameson is able to communicate
this vision to the workforce. Despite Kotter suggesting that each of the stages of this model are required to
happen in the given order (1995) it should be noted that some may happen simultaneously. In this instance,
the formation of a clear vision along with the formation of a guiding coalition. At this opportunity, the
difference in Jameson and Steele’s approach is highlighted once again.
Furthermore, Jameson’s approach to forming a coalition is extended by the decision to hold a meeting with a
further 120 employees and show a video to all individuals employed by Rowling Energy. Not only can this be
a means to reinforce the new reputation of managers as “coaches” and “problem solvers” but also to engage
the workforce and empower them to act upon the issues that are present. In line with this, Jameson had
made the decision to provide training for management level employees. A criticism of his approach could be
the decision not to provide training opportunities for a wider selection of employees. When considering the
workforce’s view that top managers were favoured under the power of Steele, Jameson’s decision to exclude
the lower level members of staff from this opportunity runs the risk of bringing previous issues to the surface
again.
However, in contrast Jameson has created a culture whereby employees are encouraged to bring their ideas
to the attention of the appropriate manager. It could be suggested that this was a strategic decision on behalf
of Jameson to ensure that the staff remaining feel empowered even though they may not receive a full
training programme.
Empower others to act
Employees are trusted
Training programmes and self development
Managers encouraged to hold more meetings with
their staff
‘Can do’ approach to taking people’s ideas to more
senior members of staff
Plan for + create short term wins
First of the changes would be the approach to H+S
Change of office location + decor
Set priorities with the senior team for the coming
weeks + months
Within three months a range of improvements had
been made
Don’t let up
Once a week touring offices
Communication between different level staff
Performance monitoring schemes
‘Can do’ approach to listening to people’s ideas
Bottom —> up structure
Make change stick
Won an award + short listed for another
Managed to make cultural change
Page /10 13

11. Jameson’s approach to setting goals and targets was particularly efficient with proven success through an
award for their health and safety performance and being shortlisted for “best employer”. By setting
timeframes in which to achieve goals, the weeks and months following his appointment, Jameson was able
to lead the organisation with a clear aim of what he wanted to achieve. This was also strengthened by his
decision to prioritise certain aspects - it is noticed that a large portion of Jameson’s objectives are to occur in
the short term.
Fig. 2: Classification of Change (adapted from Johnson, Whittington and Scholes, 2014, pp. 483).
Literature highlights that the change leader must be persistent in their endeavour to implement change and
not allow the workforce to become complacent with their current achievements (Calgari et al, 2015). It is
further explained that this may be prevented by creating the need for change and communicating it once
again. This may be criticised as there will naturally come an end to the change programme. From the case
study it is evident that Jameson had consistently implemented changes over 24 months from 2014 to 2016 in
various areas of the business. However, now the organisation has experienced the positive outcomes of
these changes there may be little room for further improvement. At this point, it is understood that marketing
and stakeholder communication will continually adapt inline with consumer trends however the issues for
Rowling Energy were internal limiting the need for change from March 2016.
Jameson's approach to maintaining strategic change comes from within the organisational structure of
Rowling Energy. A shift from a strictly top-down structure to a more bottom-up structure allows the
organisation to be accommodating of innovativeness and open mindedness - two key characteristics if
Jameson is to be successful in adopting similar shared values as Google. It is suggested that improved
performance and the development of change leaders may also encourage the change to stick within an
organisation (Kotter, 1995). From the onset, Jameson had created a focus and demonstrated the importance
of the change leaders within Rowling Energy. By encouraging management to hold regular meetings with
their staff and communicate more frequently, Jameson had opened the doors to a more interactive working
relationship. Ultimately this will allow for Jameson and the management level staff to institutionalise change
with trust playing a large role.
Page /11 13
When using the classification of change matrix, it
can be argued that Jameson has created a
revolution within the organisation. While it is
expected that some of his objectives may be
implemented / reinforced over the long term, the
case study in large part implies the change is to
occur quickly.
incremental
Evolution Adaptation
Revolution
Speed of
change
Reconstruction
big bang
realignmentExtent of
change
transformation

12. 5.0 Conclusion
This report began by understanding if there was the need for change within Rowling Energy before moving
on to identify the areas in which change was implemented. Lastly, chapter 4.0 explored how successful
Jameson has been thus far in ensuring change sticks. From this report, it is noted that both CEOs had taken
an entirely different approach to their management of Rowling Energy with a stark difference in their
leadership style. Steele had primarily concentrated on the external reputation and shareholder perspective of
the organisation at the cost of the staff, leaving Jameson in a situation whereby he had to rebuild the
organisation from the inside out.
At a basic level we understand that Jameson has used training and development programmes to motivate
employees and encourage them to remain loyal to Rowling Energy. The symbolic attributes of Steele and
Jameson are again in contrast, Steele’s dominant and superior personality was replaced by a CEO who
wanted to collaborate with staff and build the organisation together. Many of the changes that have taken
place within Rowling Energy are seemingly tangible with a large focus on organisation culture and values.
The use of contextually sensitive models throughout the analysis allowed each model to be applied
accurately to the given situation - whether this be under the power of Samson Steele or Jay Jameson.
Having said this, there are some criticisms in relation to the rigid structure and cyclical nature of Kotter’s 8
Step Change Model (1995) but there is an overall appreciation for the depth of analysis the models enabled,
particularly when combined.
Page /12 13

13. 6.0 References
Calegari, M., Sibley, R. and Turner, M. (2015) ‘A Roadmap For Using Kotter’s Organisational Change
Model To Rebuild Faculty Engagement In Accreditation’, Academy of Engagement In Accreditation,
19(3), pp. 31-34.
Hailey, V. H. & Balogan, J. (2002) ‘Devising Context Sensitive Approaches To Change: The Example of
Glaxo Welcome’, Long Range Planning, 35, pp. 153-178.
Hoogh, D, B. H. A., Greer, L. L. and Hartog, D. N. D. (2015) ‘Diabolical Dictators or Capable
Commanders? An Investigation of the Differential Effects of Autocratic Leadership on Team
Performance’, 26(5), pp. 687–701.
Johnson, G. Whittington, R. and Scholes, K. Angwin, D. and Regner, P. (2013) Exploring Strategy. 10th
Edn. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Kotter, J. (1995) 'Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail’, Harvard Business Review, 73(2), pp.
59-67.
Kotter, J. (2007) ‘Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts, Harvard Business Review, 85(1), pp.
92-107.
Lopez, E. and Ensari, N. (2014) 'The Effects of Leadership Style, Organizational Outcome, and Gender
on Attributional Bias Toward Leaders', Journal Of Leadership Studies, 8(2), pp. 19-37.
Moolenburhg, E. (2015) ‘Collaborative Leadership: Only For The Brave?’ Training and Development,
42(6), pp. 18-19.
Salie, S. and Schlechter, A. (2012) ‘A Formation Evaluation of a Staff Reward and Recognition
Programme’, SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 10(3), pp. 1-11.
Page /13 13