Introduction UK Expansion Diss The UK retail industry was hit hard by the economic recession where businesses were

forced to close; unemployment rose and consumer confidence fell. Today the retail landscape has changed and the competitive environment is fierce. The rise of discount retailers and grocery stores means consumers have greater choice and better value for money. Value-conscious shoppers are informed and making knowledgeable purchases, (Mintel, 2009; Euromonitor, 2010). The British Retail Consortiums view of the high street in the 21st century is one that serves a new role, (BRC.org). The high street must: Satisfy all consumer needs, Provide an attractive public realm, Be managed well by local authorities, Be highly accessible, Be safe and secure, Support regulatory and fiscal regimes. Organisational Culture Diss Understanding the organisational behaviour of a company is one of the first and most important factors that will lead to the successful running of a company. Organisation culture stems from the discipline of organisational behaviour. Having the right organisational culture will influence the effective day-to-day operations of the company and also all the processes and decision-making managers have to carry out. Therefore, in order to manage all the processes within a company effectively, an understanding of organisational culture and also all the factors that contribute to a companys organisational culture is necessary. Bob and Lloyd need to possess a good understanding their companys organisational culture. This report will assist them in evaluating the degree of fit between their current organisational culture and their current business strategy and also highlight the areas that need to be changed in either their strategy or in their culture. Both business strategy and organisational culture are important to the success of the company. Most of the time changing either is costly if not impossible and some even argue that the business strategy should be formed against the organisational culture as it has been suggested that organisational culture is an inherent part of a company. Leadership Diss Most businesses, be they large or small, are compelled to change by the environment that surrounds them. Commercial pressure, market changes, mergers and acquisitions all impact companies and when coupled with evolving technological advances in every facet of the business world it is not surprising how important the management of change has become. Change remains a popular subject amongst management writers and theorists and there is a significant body of literature that describes the nature of change processes and how modern managers should deliver it. The uncomfortable fact, however, is that according to the best estimates about 70% of

change initiatives fail (Beer and Nohria 2000). This is both surprising, given the intellectual and practical effort expended on this issue, and unsettling in that it would tend to suggest that organisations are doing something very wrong. Culture Diss1 Culture influences the formation of peoples logic, individual psychology significantly. Culture is not programmed into peoples genetic structure. People refer to the custom and experience then build up the belief, attitudes and generate the behavior. In other words, culture is learned6. Culture organisation diss In todays business environment, organisations are increasingly looking to expand their business in order to survive and grow within the market. This paper looks to highlight the significance of culture on the banking industry and understand how culture plays a key role in influencing change management. (Kotter 1999) Change management is an important process that banks have to undergo on a regular basis. It is through strategic change that the banks are able to innovate themselves and in doing so, create value. Therefore, change management is an important aspect of its operations and its relationship with culture is underlined through this analysis. Consequently, it is vital that banks gain a sound knowledge of the local culture before implementing change because change initiatives usually backfire when organisations apply a one-size-fit-all approach to change. Important Iranian rest diss Culture is important in terms of entrepreneurship because it determines the approaches of individuals towards the initiation of entrepreneurship. Each of these personal backgrounds can generate the new idea and act as an initial trigger for startup a business. Moreover, the role of the cultural and social changes is vital as an external trigger. The key to initiating the process of entrepreneurship lies within the individual members of society and the degree to which a spirit of enterprise exists or can be started (Fayolle, 2007).

Main Body Organizational design and structure This will help create and encourage efficiencies in cost leadership through a process of standardisation. Practices and functions such as marketing, production and personnel training can all occur centrally when the store network grows. Better organizational design means talent and resource utilisation is maximised, allowing growth and sustained advantages to occur organically over time. Uk Expansion Diss p9-11 The framework surrounding organizational design is not straightforward, but has developed substantially within many large-scale businesses in recent times, (Day, 2001). Drucker (1988) first introduced the idea of information and knowledge-based organizations. He envisioned a new era of organizational design, away from traditional command-and-control practices of the previous 20 years, (p53) where technology would be at the forefront of design. Today there is greater realisation that traditional methods in organizational design cannot prevail due to high inefficiencies. Narrow hierarchies and long chains of command make responding quickly to changes in the external environment challenging and unsustainable, (Morley et al, 1995). Different studies have shown that flexibility is a core characteristic organizations need to enforce and this requires greater utilisation of talent from people, (Grant, 2008 p178; Bryan et al, 2007; Bahrami, 1992). Reigniting the ability of people in a way that is healthy for the long term is essential. This is an effective way for businesses to create sources of significant new wealth at relatively low risk, (Bryan et al, 2007). Furthermore, this approach has wider application, as it is implementable within all business sizes, including those that are well or badly managed. For Bees, these new approaches in organizational design could help set a platform that is competitive against large and traditional designed retailers. Every business relies on people to fulfil set objectives and reach successful outcomes. Traditional concepts and frameworks surrounding how a business should control different processes are becoming more challenging to enforce in light of contemporary thinking. All businesses rely on their people to attain set objectives and other successful outcomes. Traditional organization design that dictates top down control and long chains of command are being challenged in light of more contemporary thinking. Nikolenko and Kleiner (1996) found in a survey that organizational design is valued as one of the four key criteria for business successes in the twenty-first century, (p23). The importance for any business to address their current design cannot be ignored, (Campbell et al, 2009). Trends in the early 1990s centred on horizontal (or flat) organizational structure, enabling quicker decision-making, less complexity and competitive advantage. The development of technology later prompted greater application toward virtual corporations, which in affect led to strategic alliances and

joint ventures with I.T. businesses, (Nikolenko et al, 1996). In the 21st century, outlook for businesses is vastly different and more clearly defined. The traditional ways are being abandoned and new approaches need to prevail. A study by Bryan and Joyce (2007) at McKinsey identify some vital opportunities and methods for establishing wealth creation as the centre of organizational design in the digital age, (p22). They find that leaders need to reignite the abilities of their people in a way that is healthy for the long-term. Create sources of significant new wealth at relatively low risk, (Bryan et al, 2007). Talent utilisation is an approach that can appeal to all business sizes and sees talent, not capital, as the scarce resource in an organization. Maximising returns on people rather than capital is key. Talent viewed as the core driver of revenues and is intangible. Therefore, focusing more on the intangibles of people leads to increases in revenues. This is why; people are assets for such businesses. Organizational designs of the 20th century are not flexible enough to accommodate new thinking of the 21st century. Design was typically based on tangible aspects such as labour, capital and interdependence, rather than intangible assets such as mind-power and talent. This pulls businesses to overhaul themselves, remove unproductive complexity while simultaneously stimulating the effective, efficient creation and exchange of valuable intangibles, (Bryan et al, 2007; Shuman et al, 2010). This approach has largely stemmed from the era of strategic thinking. Organizations must create fit for purpose structures that pool wealth from motivated people and where benefits are shared mutually. For organizations, the following management initiative methodology could assist: Operate as a single profit centre view the company as one-whole rather interdependent departments or teams. Best people make decisions individuals who share knowledge and are able to make decisions for the business need to be assigned. Horizontal expansion create a flat structure where two-way communication is better applied. Give managers flexibility remove barriers that prevent managers performing their best. Give them open access to talent needed to benefit the company. The people that make-it-happen front line members must be able to collaborate effectively with their peers and share knowledge for mutual benefit and better selfperformance. . would need to consider these new methods of organizing talent within the business. Well-positioned individuals who bring value to the process will make better decisions and produce fruitful outcomes for the business. The digital age is assisting such possibilities to become apparent. Talent and knowledge marketplaces are manifesting greater potential from people and creating mutual value for the business and themselves. Teams and team working Fast food diss The contemporary model of organization and management is in full accordance with

the principles of corporate governance and the procedures aimed at creating within Vivartias daily operations. The managers and staff are valued as the single most important element in running a quality operation; the managers need to be all on the same page of operations. It has been discovered that friendly strong managers make friendly strong crew people. From that crew comes the next generation of managers and a quality operation. The customers can see it in the quality of the food, how clean the store is and how friendly and fast they are served. Following the consolidation of the leading food companies under Vivartia, they overhauled their organizational structure, adopting a flexible approach which allows each division the necessary operational and administrative independence, conserving the comparative advantages of the markets in which they operate. Iranian rest diss The initial management team depends mostly on the founders themselves, with little backup. As the business grows, we will take on additional assist in certain key areas. We will not add additional overhead until absolutely necessary. By doing this, we will keep our overhead as low as possible, allowing us to adequately staff our restaurants. Approach to Leadership and management Uk expansion Diss .. need to reorganize the structure of their management team and implement a program to redevelop their organizational design of people. Firstly a new store manager and people director are essential. People are the assets at Bees and a more sustainable method of growing capacity and developing true talents needs to manifest in the program. The business could begin by assessing its current sales team and identifying if such skills and competencies exist within them. A scheme of developing the sales team to encourage them to attain higher positions as assistant store managers can begin. Providing the necessary training is important where nurturing leadership qualities and emphasizing the mutual benefits of knowledge sharing should be culturally woven. This will help create new motivations and aspirations within the workforce to enable greater reward. An operations team that is responsible for important functions such as accounting, warehousing and logistics needs to be created. The managing director is then able to focus efforts to expand and develop the business. Leadership P11 Kotter suggests that this can be achieved by creating what is sometimes called a burning platform, where the whole organisation can see the requirement for undergoing the pain of a change programme. Kotter goes as far as to say that 50% of the companies he has studied fail to create the necessary level of urgency (Kotter 1995). He concludes that there are many possible reasons for this including lack of decisive management leadership, lack of patience to nurture that collective understanding of the severity of the situation and that very often the situation that arises is not acute enough. Financial results that are truly appalling are more likely to motivate people into doing something than results that are just a little bit below expectation.

Leadership Diss p12 According to Dorfman (1996) leadership theory evolution passed through three eras: trait, behaviour and contingency eras. Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) listed six perspectives on the study of leadership: trait-spotting, style counselling, contextfitting, new leadership, dispersing the role and who needs leaders. Van Seters and Field (1990) identified nine phases or eras of leadership models development. The importance of work by Van Seters and Field (1990) was acknowledged in leadership literature as it presented a framework into which various approaches and theories can be fitted (Sadler, 2003). But at the same time, as leadership research is very complex, many approaches cannot be accommodated in the framework either because they are difficult to fit into one of the models, or because they may have characteristics of several of them (Dorfman, 1996; Sadler, 2003). In their first attempts to understand the notion of leadership researchers focused on the study of political figures. This is how The Great Man Theory arose (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2004). It was suggested by this theory that great leaders are born, not made, and that it is possible to become a leader simply by copying great peoples personalities and behaviours (Van Seters and Field, 1990). Some researchers even suggested that leadership qualities are inherited and proposed selective mating to produce individuals with the best combination of leadership qualities (Zaccaro, Kemp and Bader, 2004). It soon became clear, however, that, personalities of various leaders varied significantly (e.g. Ghandi and Hitler) and, as personality is something very difficult to imitate, this theory provided no practical value (Van Seters and Field, 1990). Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) comment that many of traits used in the studies under this approach were vague. Daft (1999, 2002) also notices that leaders with very different personality traits may be successful in their environment. The personality model was developed further, when researchers shifted their focus from specific individuals to general traits that could enhance leadership. But again because traits are very difficult or almost impossible to copy or adopt, this theory was also of no value to practitioners (Van Seters and Field, 1990). As a result trait theory faded. However, in several later studies traits were included as one of the explanatory variables (Van Seters and Field, 1990) and recently there was even a renewed search for personality characteristics of leaders (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2004). Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) notice a paradox that search for leader traits is a contemporary perspective in leadership theory. Leadership theory took a completely new direction, when it was suggested that the reasons underpinning effective leadership should be looked for not in the characteristics of a leader alone but rather in the relationship between individuals. This gave rise to the influence model of leadership, under which researchers tried to explain effectiveness of leaders in terms of the source and amount of power and its utilisation or their skill of persuasion (Van Seters and Field, 1990). But as Buchanan and Huczynski (2004) mention, nowadays leaders who share power with the subordinates strengthen, and not weaken their influence over followers. In contrast to the above mentioned models the behavioural model focused on what leaders did, not what they were or what the sources of their power are (Van Seters and

Field, 1990). Dorfman (1996) notices that emergence of this model was induced by the inability of the traits model to produce satisfactory results and the aim of a new model was to identify which leader behaviours could lead to positive outcomes. Yukl (1998) notices that while some researches studying leadership from this perspective focused on typical behaviour patterns of leaders, others analysed differences in behaviours between effective and ineffective leaders. It was also mentioned by Van Seters and Field (1990) that initially behavioural model served as an extension of the personality model except that, instead of studying personality traits, the emphasis was on developing behaviour traits. However, as Dorfman (1996) notices, situations may often dictate which particular behaviour is able to produce more favourable results in this particular setting. Unlike the models mentioned above the situational model acknowledged the importance of factors beyond the leader and the subordinate (e.g. the nature of the work, the social status of the leader and subordinates, the relative position power of the leader and subordinates, and the wider organisational setting) and suggested that those situational aspects determine the kinds of leader traits, skills, influence and behaviours that are likely to cause effective leadership (Van Seters and Field, 1990). As it was mentioned above among a wide variety of approaches to study leadership the focus of some of them was on traits and behaviours of leaders, but as studies under those approaches provided no empirical evidence or led to the mixed results they were abandoned. In recent years, the studies shifted from leader-centric to follower-centric approach, i.e. the theorists started to concentrate not on objective traits and behaviours that could contribute to the leader effectiveness, but on followers subjective perceptions and expectations of leader traits and behaviours (Kenney, Schwartz-Kenney, and Blascovich, 1996; Lord and Maher, 1993). The central proposition of this approach is that the leadership is defined by the follower, not the leader or the researcher (Mendl, 1995). Some observers point out that thanks to this new perspective search for leader traits experiences revival (Lord and Alliger, 1985) and the approach itself became contemporary in leadership studies (Popper and Druyan, 2001). Organizational culture Organizational Culture Diss p8 11. In the past two decades, the organisational culture or corporate culture became one of the hottest topics within the business field especially for organisations studies globally. This has mainly been due to the increase of interest in corporate governance and about finding effective ways for strategic implementation and the important factors that influence the efficiency of the overall performance. An organisation is a place where groups of individual employees share the same understanding of values and behavioural norms working together to achieve their ultimate goals. Each organisation is built up of numerous subsystems that can be seen in the form of different departments or subsidiaries. These are managed by different kinds of hierarchy structure. The organisational structure is initially influenced by the organisational culture. It is vital for managers to remember that there is a crucial

relationship between organisational strategy and culture. Any plans for change should not only be including changes in organisational structures and operations, but also further changes in organisational culture as well. Individual organisations have their own culture relating to both micro and macro factors. Such factors include the company strategy, political, and social environments in where the firms headquarters is based. In other words, organisational culture can be simply understood as the unique personality of the particular organisation. According to Cameron and Quinn (1999), there are four types of organisational culture, which includes family, hierarchy, adhocracy, and market. Cameron and Quinns definitions are similar to Harrisons (1972) suggestion of categorising individual organisations into four classifications of orientation identified by the following: Power Orientation: The organisation is driven by internal and external competition. Absolute authority is given to management. Indication of a power orientation includes mergers and acquisition activity and high employee turnover. Role Orientation: The organisation is driven by rules and regulations and awarded with rights and privileges where company structure defines authority. There will be predictable behaviour and responsibility and respect are important. Task Orientation: The organisation is driven by tasks/goals with competence based authority. Anything that promotes goal achievement is encouraged such as teamwork. People Orientation: The organisation is driven by personnel growth and development. Authority is based on task competence but consensus decision-making is preferred. Roles are assigned by personal preference. Some argue that organisational culture is difficult to express distinctly, as Scholz (1987, p.80) put it, implicit, invisible and informal consciousness of organization. However, employees, clients, and visitors can sense the culture by observing daily operations, physical appearance, or even they way employees dress and behave at the office. There are dozens of different literature definitions for organisational culture. This has mainly been because the concepts have been defined from a variety of different subjects such as psychology, management science, and organisational behaviour; each with a different perspective on the subject of organisational culture. To classify the definitions of organisational culture, Brown (1995) used a fundamental distinctions philosophy on culture, to show that it can be seen either as a metaphoric or an objective entity. In addition, according to Brown, there are two streams of culture under objective entity: one stream sees organisation as a whole (Pacanowsky & Odonnell-Trujillo 1982) and another stream sees a set of behavioural and cogitative characteristics (Schein 1985). Drennan (1992, p.3) said organisational culture is all about how we do things around here. It is the collective behaviour of people sharing and using common organisational objectives, visions, goals, values, beliefs, habits, systems, and symbols. It is how individuals as well as teams interpret their experiences and how they behave

accordingly (Tunstall 1983; Dobson & Walters 1993). The cultural statement is commonly produced by the head office and is supported and regulated by executives, company policies, and regulatory handbooks. These documents publish the entire company practices including procedures that the firm provides to explain how employees should behave in accordance to the organizational culture. Moreover different individuals can also contribute to organisational culture by bringing to the workplace their own uniqueness, knowledge, and ethnic culture. It follows from this that organisational culture encompasses moral, social, and behavioural norms and is based on agreed common objectives such as values, beliefs, attitudes and priorities of its members. In order to better understand the origins of organisational culture, it is instructive to look at culture from a mental program point of view or as Hofestede (1991) puts it, the software of the mind. He believes that organisational culture may not be inherent but instead taught in a way that is similar to the way in which programmers teach a computer how to handle what information it is given. It may be obvious that the home country of a company strongly influences the company culture. The organisational culture and approach to management will typically depend on the country the organisation is based rather than where it is operating. The organisational culture will also be affected by social environment, company strategy, and company position in the market. Experts argue that organisational culture can also affect the research results collected from questionnaires, as participants may feel uncomfortable expressing their true feelings toward some questions. Understanding this behaviour is critical from an early design stage, through the implementation process, and even during the final execution when defining the organisational culture because it makes it difficult for companies to identify their most appropriate organisational culture.