Impact of leadership on organizational outcomes.

Scenario
You are the VP of HR in a professional services organization. Your organization recently merged with another firm to expand operations on a global scale. Before the merger, your organization had a culture that reinforced aggressive sales of consultancy services, with a focus on short-term financial gains. The organization with which yours merged had a different culture, one that supported building deep relationships with repeat customers with a focus on the long-term revenues, even when that might incur a short-term financial loss.
As a result of this merger, a new organizational culture needs to be established so that everyone from both of the previously separate organizations will work and act as one team. The CEO has stated that the new culture should be one that reflects the longer-term perspective rather than short-term financial gains. The CEO recognizes this effort must be planned and will take time and has instructed you to lead the change initiative. The CEO instructs you to assemble a change management implementation plan to prepare the organization for culture change.
Instructions
Prepare a change management plan that:

Provides organization’s new strategic direction and goals.
Compares key characteristics of the two merging cultures and make recommendations for the new culture of the organization.
Provides the structured methodology you will use to plan the change initiative.
Discusses the communication plan that will be used during the change initiative.
Details the approach to be used to manage resistance to the change initiative.
Illustrates how change adoption will be measured.
Provides attribution for credible sources used in the plan.

Sample Solution

basis of the immense public importance of the case and the critical impact that the Tribunal’s decision will have on environmental and other public welfare law-making in the NAFTA region. It was also contended that the interpretation of Chapter 11 of NAFTA should reflect legal principles underlying the concept of sustainable development; and that the Institute could assist the Tribunal in this respect. A further point was made that participation of an amicus would allay public disquiet as to the closed nature of arbitration proceedings under Chapter 11 of NAFTA. As to jurisdiction, it was argued that the Tribunal could grant the Petition under its general procedural powers contained in Article 1 S of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, and that there was nothing in Chapter 11 to prevent the granting of the permission requested by the Institute. Reference was also made to the practice of the WTO Appellate Body and courts in Canada and the United States.

Mexico stressed that Chapter 11 of NAFTA did not provide for the involvement of persons other than the Disputing Parties and NAFT A Parties on questions of the interpretation of NAFTA pursuant to Article 1128. It contended that if amicus curiae submissions were allowed, the amici would have greater rights than the NAFTA parties themselves because of the limited scope of Article 1128 submission. Canada also stated that it would be asking its NAFTA partners to work together on the issue of amicus curiae’s participation as a matter of urgency in order to provide guidance to arbitration tribunals under Chapter 11.

Like Mexico, the Claimant also argued that reliance on the practice relating to amici in the domestic courts of certain jurisdictions was inappropriate to these arbitration proceedings. Amicus briefs were not permitted in one of the NAFTA States, namely Mexico. The court processes of one NAFTA State should not be preferred over Mother; and the international rules governing foreign investment should not be made to give way to domestic practices. The Claimant also considered that WTO practice was irrelevant and should be disregarded by the Tribuna

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.