Search results

Identify, compare and contrast current and aspirational organisational cultures. Describe desired leadership capacities and how these contribute to building a culture and strategy. Describe ways to align culture with strategy including building an ambidextrous organisation.

Growth remained flat for Tech SA towards the end of 2016. As a subsidiary of a global information technology services firm, Tech SA was under pressure to meet its growth plan. With this in mind, a new culture and values framework to be more innovative, collaborative and responsive had been adopted. This was to match the demands of the volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous world the company finds itself in. While the organisation had a tradition of serving long-standing clients and contracts to high standards, it was not used to working with radical change and disruptive innovation. To achieve this, significant changes in leadership behaviours were required. The organisation had recognised the need for these changes and a leadership development programme was devised to enable 200 of its top leaders to make the required cultural and behavioural shifts to lead in these times. Although the leadership programme was well into its second year, the targets of the growth plan had not been achieved and the leadership behaviours had not yet been instilled across the business. If the growth plan was not achieved, John would need to consider cost-cutting and retrenching. This was the last thing John wanted to do as he had worked alongside his colleagues for 12 years. What else could John do and say to the leaders to make the required changes urgently needed as a matter of survival? What would it take to deliver to existing clients and explore new products and markets?

Masters, Masters of Business Administration (MBA), Executive MBA and Executive leadership.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS 7: Management Science.

This case applies a stakeholder analysis to examine the trade-offs between the firm’s strategy and the interests of different stakeholder groups. A PESTEL analysis supports an evaluation of the firm’s situation. Consumer behavior theories on psychological ownership and territoriality offer a framework for analyzing the conflicts that arise from the inhabitants’ protests.

This case relies on secondary sources, including news reports, social media sites and company websites. This case has been classroom tested with undergraduate students in a strategic management course in January 2019 at the University of Cologne, Germany.

In November 2016, Google announced its intentions to rent a building in the Kreuzberg district of Berlin to open a Google Campus, a business incubator for tech start-ups that would offer entrepreneurs support, workshops and access to networks. Following the announcement, dissatisfied local communities organized protests, in which leaders complained that “It is extremely violent and arrogant of this mega-corporation, whose business model is based on mass surveillance and which speculates like crazy, to set up shop here” (Business Times, 2018). Berlin’s Government supported the Google Campus plan; inhabitants rejected it with fierce and persistent protests. In face of this challenge, was it still possible for Google to continue its plans in Berlin?

This case qualifies for use in strategic management classes at undergraduate and MBA levels. Its focus aligns well with stakeholder analyses, PESTEL analyses and business strategy. In addition, for courses on organizational communications or public relations, this case provides a way to explore the relationship between Google and its stakeholders, especially protesters, in detail. Moreover, this case is well suited for consumer research and public policy courses (e.g., transformative consumer research) centered on discussions of territoriality.