Change Management in Co A And Co B

ANALYSIS

The previous report also recommended that business can slowly transform itself to symbiosis position (Andriopoulos and Lewis, 2010). 

It can be said that Co B believes that Co A as a strategic investment able to achieve shortened  goals and objectives. For an example, the process of acquisition is referred by group directors as buying a group of different people. In respect to this, it can be analysed that Co A vision of global expansion can be affected by limited control of business and management on operational leadership and strategic management in both global and local operations effectively. As an evident, it can be said that it is a limited contingency 'twee Co A and Co B. Hence, hapless structure fit, even in the post-integration government (Angeline, 2011). The workers are planning and leaving the firm which one can adopt that business fitting is minor even in this enormous stage. These are the benefit for Co B in both financial and strategic terms. Co A may not able to take any profit from acquiring and will continue in the future. Here are some tactics and strategies provided below in order to achieve a successful integration in the process even if it is not possible to reach a symbiosis stage.

1. Contemporary approaches to leadership

It can be said that contemporary approach to leadership is one of the most sought-after areas under studies of leadership effectively. There are many approaches in this associated with transactional and transformational leadership, leader member exchange model (Van de Meene, Brown and Farrelly, 2011). The leadership style of leaders at Co A has transformed to autocratic leadership style following the integration and acquisition. In addition to this, on that point is a limited data about leading mode pre-integration phase. It is be said that the activity style was less toward transformational sides and it is indicated by idealized causing, collaborative work and support guided by ideology and strong vision efficiently. Thus, an autocratic leader is not bad for business.

You may also like:
Various Types of Ventures - Uber
Behaviour Impact of Tesco Workers

According to Askarany, Yazdifar and Askary, 2010, an autocratic leadership is an ideal formula for business with change in transformation that helps to accomplish goals and objections. It is very effective in the stage, where business has less time to make turnaround strategies as the centralised concentration of control and power as well as micromanagement behaviour helps to accomplish goals in a specific or projected time period. Such strategies work where the leader has more power over workers at workplace effectively. Possibly, this problem can be viewed from two sides. First, workers are motivated to work under dictating type of leadership or not like the executive’s power supply and feel less secure.

            In this case, if the business continues to face employee turnover issues at current rate, it will affect firm’s ability to perform well . Thus, it is important for both; leadership and management to communicate towards an ideal vision which business likes to achieve while performing the role of a leader (Bason,  2010).

2. Organisational culture

Now, it can be said that the business is facing current issues which are the results of UN-announced and unprepared changes by following the acquisition. It should be argued that such a drastic change is not acceptable for business. For an example: the case study provides information on how opportunistic views are shared by senior management about business future financial and potential growth. The present scenario is that the firm is in an intensive attention as the integrating was also not designed (Nixon and Burns, 2012). The business culture is a phenomenon of behaviours, shared values and attitudes which helps to determine joint behaviour of activities, people and procedure within firm. This report used cultural web mo