INSTRUCTIONS:
1. The case study for this exam is: Steckler N (2011) Charlotte Beers at Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide (A). In Jick TD and Peiperl MA (eds) Managing change: cases and concepts. New York, Mc-Graw Hill/ Irwin.
2. The frameworks referred to in the examination questions are contained in the textbook or have been discussed in the lectures.
3. Answers MUST conform to the word limit set. Students are expected to include the word count at the end of each answer. Markers will ONLY read until the specified word count and will NOT consider information past this limit.
4. While you are expected to refer to the appropriate theoretical frameworks to answer the questions set, DO NOT describe them: it will NOT give you any points and it will waste your word limit.
QUESTION ONE:
1. a) Analyse the organisational culture at Ogilvy & Mather (400 words max).
2. b) Based on your cultural analysis, explain the reasons for resistance to Brand Stewardship and present the most appropriate method to overcome it (400 words max).
Justify your analysis by drawing on evidence from the case study.
QUESTION TWO:
1. a) Using Stace and Dunphy’s (2001) contingency model of change, map the scale of change at Ogilvy and Mather to the way that the leadership team managed Brand Stewardship. Evaluate the suitability of their approach by drawing on evidence from the case study. (500 words max)
2. b) ‘A change process […] requires awareness of, if not action in, the political processes of the organizations’ (Pettigrew, A. 2000, ‘Linking Change Processes to Outcomes: A commentary on Ghoshal, Bartlett and Weick, in Breaking the Code of Change, eds. M. Beer and N. Nohria, Harvard Business School Press, pp 243-266)
Critically discuss this statement in relation to the case study. (500 words max)