Skip to content

ACCA Strategic Professional · Strategic Business Leader · Managing strategic change

Corvane Energy is restructuring. Its trade union is powerful, and its members will lose overtime pay under the plan. Management wants to avoid a strike but cannot afford a long delay. Which combination of Lewin's force field analysis insight and Kotter and Schlesinger's approach is most appropriate?

Negotiating compensation with the union to reduce the restraining forces is most appropriate. The union has real power and members face a genuine loss, so negotiation and agreement removes the resistance, whereas threats or communication alone would provoke conflict or fail to offset the loss.

  1. AIncrease driving forces by threatening redundancies, applying explicit coercion
  2. BReduce restraining forces by negotiating compensation with the union, using negotiation and agreementCorrect
  3. CIgnore the restraining forces and rely on a clear vision to unfreeze the workforce
  4. DStrengthen driving forces through staff briefings, using education and communication alone

Explanation

Force field analysis suggests that reducing restraining forces is often more effective than adding pressure, which tends to raise counter-resistance. The union's power plus a clear loss makes negotiation and agreement, such as compensating for lost overtime, the fitting approach. Coercion risks a strike, and communication alone cannot offset a real financial loss.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Managing strategic change shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Managing strategic changeFree diagnostic mock

More Managing strategic change questions