University of Wales



London College of Business and Finance

MBA

Through Resource Development International (RDI)

Managing Change in Organisations

Assignment

[pic]

Report on Change at Little Chef,

Popham, Hampshire

Submitted by:

………………

RDI Student No: ………….

London College of Business and Finance. Student No: …………….

26 January 2010

Words, excluding Bibliography and Annexures, but

including an element of referencing = 4318 words

Report on Organisational Change

at Little Chef, Popham, Hampshire

Index

Page

1 Introduction and Terms of Reference 3

2 Research 3

3 Abbreviations 3

4 Little Chef, the case study 5

4.1 Background 5

4.2 The main objectives of the organisational change 6

5 Forcefield Analysis 7

6 Evaluate of change management effectiveness 16

6.1 Create a sense of urgency 17

6.2 Pull together the guiding team 18

6.3 Develop the change vision and strategy 19

6.4 Communicate for understanding and buy-in 20

6.5 Empower others to act 21

6.6 Produce short term wins 22

6.7 Don’t let up 22

6.8 Create a new Culture 23

7 Assessing change objectives 23

7.1 Balanced Score Card 25

7.1.1 Finance 25

7.1.2 Customers 26

7.1.3. Business 27

7.1.4 Learning and growth 27

7.15 Recommendations 29

Bibliography 30

Annexures 36

Channel 4 Summaries of TV series 41

Managing Change in Organisations

Report on the Business Process Transformation

Of Little Chef, Popham, UK

January 2010

1 Introduction and Terms of Reference

The purpose of this report is to elucidate on the organisational change that has taken place at Little Chef (LC) Popham, UK as a blueprint for revitalising the Little Chef chain of roadside restaurants in the UK during 2008 and 2009. The chain, a private limited company, was acquired by specialist private investment business, RCapital, a Limited Liability Partnership, in 2007.

The objective of the report is to:

• describe the organisational changes that have taken place in Little Chef since it has been under new management, and the purpose of the changes

• analyse the nature of the change

• illustrate how change management models could have been used to identify the drivers of change,

• evaluate the success of the complex change processes and make recommendations regarding further changes required to reach the objectives that were set out by the management of Little Chef.

2 Research

The following research methods were used to inform this report.

1. Channel 4 Television ran a series on the LC transformation process in

their TV programmes “Big Chef takes on Little Chef” and “Did Heston Change Little Chef?” in 2008 and 2009. This assignment is based on the TV programme. This Two Four Productions Limited series of 4 episodes, is available on podcast from ITunes on the Internet. (Itunes, 2009) and is summarised as Annexure 7.

2. Secondary research on the internet and trade media.

3. Personal visits, as a customer and resident in the area of Little Chef, Popham, over a period of three years

3 Abbreviations: When referring to

• The Change Agent – it will refer to the Chief Executive (CE) – Mr Ian Pegler

• The Consultant – Mr Heston Blumenthal

• The Pilot Restaurant or Popham refers to LC Popham Branch, Hampshire on the A303.

The change management team will refer to:

• The Little Chef, Mr Ian Pegler and his team and the Consultant, Mr Heston Blumenthal and his team.

• [pic]

The Change Team Protagonists

To understand the context of this case study it is important to understand the term organisational change. Though there is no agreement among academics on the definition of organisational change an influential definition was given by Carter McNamara (1997). He refers to organisational change, as “the overall nature of activities e.g. their extent and rate that occurs during a project that aims to enhance the overall performance of the organisation. The activities are often led by a change agent or person responsible to guide the overall change effort. The activities are often project orientated (a one time project) and geared to address a current overall problem or goal in an organisation.” (Management Help 1997:21)

4 Little Chef, the case study

[pic]

1mage: Sensitive changes to iconic

Little Chef's "Fat Charlie" brand

from catersearch.co.uk

4.1 Background

Little Chef, a chain of roadside restaurants, was originally created in 1958 to serve British motorists along A roads. The much loved iconic British brand with its “Fat Charlie” logo has undergone many changes of ownership in recent years.

The decline of the chain was however inevitable due to managerial neglect and lack of re-investment from the height of its operational success in February 2003.(Caterer 2009:1)

The case study: Little Chef 2007 – 2010

The premises throughout the chain were shabby, staff morale was low, customer service was poor and the reputation of Little Chef was seriously damaged.

The trading environment had changed drastically since the height of the Little Chef’s success. Motoring trends had changed and healthier food choices are now preferred. The business had reached a low point. (Wachman R 2008:15)

[pic]

Complete neglect

Rescued

The Little Chef chain was rescued from administration in January 2007 when RCapital LLP, a private equity business owned by Messrs. Jamie Constable and Peter Ward, bought 176 Little Chef outlets for less than £10 million. (Caterer, 2009:1)

The scale of change needed to restore Little Chef to its former success and profitability was what Ackerman (1997) would term transformational change, affecting Little Chef’s structure, processes, culture and strategy. (Ackerman, 1997:2)

The change team set about changing LC, albeit amidst great turmoil.

4.2 The main objectives of the organisational change at corporate level in the short term:

To turn the LC Popham restaurants around to profitability within a period of 6 months.

The long term corporate objective:

To create a culture of excellence that will continue to deliver quality and value to its customers, retain valued employees and generate wealth for its investors.

At a functional level: (Tutor2U, n.d.:3)

• To renew the Little Chef brand including the Fat Charlie logo

• To create a new menu to cater to their customers’ changed tastes,

• To improve the food quality, through a business process transformation

• To improve customer service

• To refurbish the Popham restaurant as the blue print for the LC chain, with a budget of £350 000 within a period of 6 months. This report will deal with the short term goals.

• All the above goals were to be achieved within six months on a budget of £350 000. (Wachman 2009:14)

It was agreed that once the model dubbed the “Heston Model” proved to be successful, a further two restaurants would be launched. Thereafter the chain would be incrementally changed throughout the UK. (RCapital, 2007:4)

The change team engineered the first major change, involving all processes and systems, in the 50year-history of the Little Chef chain.

5 Forcefield Analysis for Little Chef’s Planned Transformational Change

(Sachs International, n.d:16)

According to Mullins (2005) in order to promote change it is essential to understand

• the origin of the need to change and

• the nature of any proposed change.

A way to do this would be through a cause and effect approach (Ishikawa’s Fishbone diagram) (12Manage 2009:5) but the author believes that the forcefield analysis models is more closely associated with the Little Chef’s circumstances.

The internal and external forces that were brought to bear on the trading environment of Little Chef can be analysed by Kurt Lewin’s (1982) Forcefield analysis. (12Manage 2009:6) He maintained that conditions are kept in equilibrium by two opposite sets of forces; those that drive for the change, and those that try to maintain the status quo by restraining change. For change to take place the forces that drive change should exceed those that restrain. (Lewin K, 1982)

Forcefield Analysis –The Little Chef

1 Current State: 2 Desired State:

|3. Driving Forces |5. Ways to strengthen |6 Ways to weaken |4.Restraining Forces |

|(Help achieve change) |(Potential Action Plan) |(Potential Action Plan) |(working against change) |

| | | | |

|Internal |

|Skills, Resources Strengths| | |Limitations |

|1a.176 outlets throughout |Transformational Change as |Abated through staff |1 Staff moral was low, staff |

|the UK. Basic |described by Ackerman 1997 whereby|consultation and interaction, |turnover high and resignations |

|infrastructure in place |all processes were was |training and recognition. |were endemic |

|with 11 million customers |required.(Northumbria U 2009:2) |(Kotter&Rathgeber 2006) | |

|(2007) walking through the | | | |

|doors, albeit shabby. | | | |

|1b New owners of LC -equity|Plan for Transformational Change |Arrest further decline through|Declining profits. Stakeholders |

|investors have Referent |if Force Field Analysis proves |planned change |dissatisfied |

|Power (French and Raven |feasible | | |

|1960) and look for a profit|Jarrett 2010 | | |

|( 2009:17) | | | |

|1c LC CE has | | | |

|Reward Power - (French and |Plan for this market sector | | |

|Raven 1960) to motivate |through revised marketing strategy| | |

|staff. |when developing the change vision | | |

|12Manage 2009:17) CE eager |and strategy (Kotter J, 2007:11). | | |

|to market to the “lost | | | |

|generation” who did not | | | |

|know LC previously.(The | | | |

|Guardian 2009:7) | | | |

|1d Change agent eager to |The interests of key stakeholders |Enhanced communication |Misunderstanding and apparent |

|lead the change process to |must be recognised, especially | |lack of shared vision among the |

|successful conclusion, |those who may be positively or | |change team created |

|possibly for |negatively affected. A Stakeholder| |undercurrents of distrust. |

|reward.(Tutor2U 2009: 15) |Analysis would highlight such | |Pettigrew argues that internal |

| |interests. | |politics can restrain |

| |(RDI Notes, Stakeholder Analysis P| |change.(Pettigrew A 2001) |

| |4of 14) | |(Lecturer’s Handouts 2009) |

|1e Consultant seeks success|Stakeholder Analysis | | |

|and to boost celebrity | | | |

|media ratings. (Expert | | | |

|Power) (French and Raven | | | |

|1960:17) | | | |

|Ref: | | | |

|Force rating for change = 9| | |Force rating against change=5 |

|2a LC’s brand loyalty is |Renewing the logo to illustrate |Plan for change |2 Poor service and poor quality |

|strong in the UK. Wachman R|and symbolise a change and new | |products causing damage to brand|

|Guardian 2007:8) |management. The TV series created | |reputation, if not addressed |

| |enormous publicity. | |urgently.(Holbeche 2005) |

| |(Rodgers J Broadcastnow, 2009:13) | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

|2b Owners expressed desire |As above | |2a Proposed buy-out/ acquisition|

|to keep and revive the | | |by competitors (Italy’s Benetton|

|brand. | | |family) threatened to scrap the |

|(Wachman R Guardian | | |brand and keep infrastructure. |

|2007:8) | | |(Wachman R Guardian 2007:8) |

| | | | |

|Force rating for change 8 | | |Force rating against change=3 |

|3a Loyal cost-conscious |Consult stakeholders to ensure |Implement healthy, |3 Entrenched culture of putting |

|clients demand renewal of |their needs are addressed. Collect|cost-effective menu targeted |profit before quality food was |

|all services. |data and analyse it. Communicate |towards consumers needs and |outsourced and came pre-cooked. |

|(Coercive Power) (French |with all stakeholders to show |freshly cooked on location |(Strebel, P 1996) |

|and Raven 1960) (12Manage |their input is valued. |giving choice of service (e.g.| |

|2009:17) |(Kotter J, Rathgeber H 2006, P132)|sit down or fast food | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

|Force rating for change = | | |Force rating against change=5 |

|10 | | | |

|4 Poor quality food |“Business process transformation |Empowerment of Staff through |Staff were reluctant to learn |

| |is the fundamental rethinking and |interactive training. |new catering skills at first as |

| |radical redesign of business | |they faced a culinary clash of |

| |processes” to change the total | |cultures |

| |product on offer; complete with | | |

| |sensory effects. | | |

| |(RDI Study Notes, Managing Change,| | |

| |Unit 3, P5 of 20) | | |

|Force rating for change = 9| | |Force rating against change=5 |

| | |Interactive and hands-on |New service format moved staff |

| | |training with a receptive |out of their comfort zones and |

| | |group of employees that can |caused resignations |

| | |influence fellow workers | |

| | |(Carnall C 1999, P254) | |

|5 Customers demanded | | |Entrenched culture and work |

|service choice; fast food | | |ethic had seen little change in |

|and sit down | | |last 50 years. |

|(Guardian 2008:14) | | | |

|Force rating for change = 9| | |Force rating against change=3 |

|6a Owners eager to |Implement Pilot programme as a |Communication strategy to |Market forces in operation e.g. |

|implement refurbishment |model for successful throughout |target all stakeholders |a small but hard-core of |

|programme |the chain and invest incrementally| |old-faithful Little Chef |

|to act as catalyst to turn |into the revitalising the whole | |customers did not welcome change|

|business to profitability |chain. | | |

| |Renovate and modernise | | |

| |L C Popham as a pilot scheme, | | |

| |complete with multi-sensory | | |

| |effects to encourage sales.e.g. | | |

| |musical toilets, coffee aroma | | |

|6b Investment funds |Prove change is valid through data| | |

|available and owners in |and capital budgeting analysis. | | |

|favour of change | | | |

|Force rating for change = | | |Force rating against change=1 |

|10 | | | |

| External |

|3. Driving Forces |5. Ways to strengthen |6 Ways to weaken |4.Restraining Forces |

|(Help achieve change) | |(Situation if no change is |(working against change) |

| | |made) | |

|People, places, environment| | |People, Things, conditions |

|1 Owners eager to see a |Plan for change | |1 Economy in recession |

|profitable operation | | | |

|2 New competitive brands | |Careful planning of business |2 Porters Five Forces (Porter M |

|had established themselves | |process transformation |1979) describe this market force|

|in the market | | |as new entrants – e.g. Moto, |

| | | |Roadchef, Welcome Break |

| | | |Substitute products, e.g. Costa |

| | | |Coffee competing for the same |

| | | |customers and resources. |

| | | |(QuickMBA2009:18) |

|3 Menu outdated and |Research new trends | | |

|overpriced. | | | |

|3 Globalisation have |Research new trends | |3 Persistent consumer demands |

|changed consumer eating | | |had to be accommodated on new |

|habits e.g. MacDonald’s, | | |menu (e.g. foregoing smoked |

|Burger King, a fast food | | |salmon and serving baked beans |

|culture | | |with breakfast) |

|4 Food excellence | |The Capital Budgeting process |4 Unexpected capital investment |

| | |with realistic cash flow |was required, in turbulent |

| | |forecasts illustrating |economic conditions, to equip |

| | |favourable Net Present Value |kitchens to cook on the |

| | |and IRR, tax rebates and |premises. |

| | |government incentives, could | |

| | |provide the necessary | |

| | |decision-making information | |

| | |for risk- averse investors. | |

| | |(Jarrett, 2010) | |

|5 Research highlighted | | |5 Customer complaints |

|customer preferences on | | | |

|service choices | | | |

|6 Customer complaints and | Address the change process as |Revitalise the LC Popham |Competitors |

|decline in profit |described above. |branch to prove feasibility, |Strengthening their own market |

| | |test technological changes |share as LC posed no |

| | |e.g. Wi-Fi links. Cloud |competition. |

| | |computing installed | |

| | |(Little Chef, 2009:10) | |

Integrating the forces:

In weighing up the forces for and against change, the team should ask whether issues are valid, significant and could the forces be changed. Once it is clearly identified that change is desirable and that most stakeholders are ready for it, the planned transformational change would be feasible. (Carnall C 1999) Please see annexure 1 and 2.

6 To evaluate how effectively the process of change was managed, two frameworks stand out, being the 7-S Model and Kotter's 8 step process of change. The McKinsey’s (1980) 7-S models is centred around shared values and consider business performance around strategy, systems, skills, structure, staff and style. (12Manage 2009:9)

• Kotter’s model is however specifically tailored to manage change in organisations and therefore this model will be used as a guide, as explained in their book “Our Iceberg is Melting”. (Kotter J and Rathgeber H, 2006).

• Strebel’s Resistance to Change guidelines (Strebel P, 1996) is attached as annexure 3 and guides resistance to change.

[pic]

6.1 Create a sense of urgency

Kotter and Rathgeber advocate the importance of dealing with change urgently. They propose that information should be presented logically so that thinking can begin to change, which, in turn, can change behaviour. (Kotter and Rathgeber 2006 P131)

In accordance with this advice the CE addressed 250 LC managers on the LC’s financial and operating status which, after the take-over, was in serious financial trouble.

He gave them assurances that though they may be criticised for the state of the present LC operation, that he valued and respected them and “forgave them for mistakes”. His charisma, enthusiasm and drive won them over and the high staff turnover was arrested. (Bowler S, 2009:7)

Strebel asserts that resistance to change manifests itself when staff consider that

management have reneged on the psychological contract which is the implied mutual

obligations employers and employees have towards each other. Once contravened

staff consider the arrangement to be broken and they have no obligation to cooperate

until they have reviewed their contract. (CIPD 2009:22)

6.2 Pull together the guiding team

[pic]

Kotter and Rathgeber (2006) stress that the team need authority, analytical and leadership skills with excellent communication abilities.

The change agent, an experienced manager in the roadside restaurant field, together with expert food and service consultant, Blumenthal formed a powerful and credible team with both individuals well respected in their own right. (Guardian 2009:8)

There was however conflict between the Change Agent and the Consultant from the beginning. Scenes depicted tension between the Change Agent and the Consultant because the Change Agent had unique situational knowledge, being the inner workings of the business, its workflows and issues and was not willing to share this with the consultant. (Annexure 7 Episode 1, scene 2A and 5)

Change agents and consultants need to be highly sensitive to their environment. A breakdown of these skills are attached as Annexure 4.

Furthermore, these experienced leaders should have recognised that the scale of change pervaded the following spheres, and are likely to cause turmoil.

[pic]

The consultant overcame staff scepticism through his sheer passion for pursuing excellence. He was also willing to compromise on his own high standards.

6.3 Develop the change vision and strategy

Kotter and Rathgeber (2006) stress that it is essential that the change team showed staff what the food-service product future will look like. Senior and middle management were consulted and through trial and error, the ideal menus, brand revival, refurbishment programmes were gelled into the central vision.

Despite this, some disagreement still surfaced (Annexure 7 Episode 2, Scene 6) possibly a play on power (Strebel 1996) which was overcome through negotiation.

Upon evaluation it is clear that the vision should leave no doubt as to what success will look like. The Consultant insisted on quality and the Change Agent insisted on profit. It was therefore essential to secure top management support. Middle management ensures standards are maintained but it is not sustainable if top management is not on board. (RDI Notes: Unit 3 Strategies and Models for Change, Business Process Transformation and Total Quality management P14 of 20)

Please see annex 6 for further evaluation.

[pic]

6.4 Communicate for understanding and buy-in

Kotter and Rathgeber state that as many stakeholders possible should be aware of the changes and promote their buy-in.

To this end, a selection of talented LC grillers were selected to become involved in the new vision for LC and they became the change heroes.

The Consultant demonstrated the essence of good quality food. Staff tasted, was trained and tested to recognise excellence and poorly cooked food.

The authors state that the message of change should be spread widely to get acceptance. It is important to remind the staff how they fit into the organisation. (Kotter and Rathgeber 2006, P130)

In evaluating the success of getting the message out, the change team cannot be faulted. The message of change at LC was most effectively dealt with through the TV series and was viewed by millions. This national interest has led to unprecedented growth for the group.

Unfamiliar procedures, insecurities and fear of failure, can take their toll on sensitive staff members as it did at Popham when staff members walked out.

This self-explanatory change iceberg illustrates that there is a wealth of hidden factors below the surface, in the sea of change. The relatively small area of management issues which break through is literally the tip of the iceberg. (Kruger W, 2008)

[pic]

(12Manage 2009:24)

6.5 Empower others to act

The Consultant removed the barriers that stand in the way of staff who want to embrace the vision. (Kotter J 2006)

A model team was trained to become trainers for other LC outlets. Once mastered, the LC staff team trained other staff in the other two LC outlets in Kettering and York.

The consultant embraced and recognised the staff as the bedrock of the organisation. And enabled their professional growth through learning.

[pic]

6.6 Produce short term wins

In line with Kotter’s advice, staff training and empowerment sessions were quick wins to gain staff confidence.

A substantial landmark was the official relaunch of the first “Heston Model” which generated much publicity and renewed interest in the brand.

The next motivating factor was the announcement that two further restaurants will be launched, based on the Heston Model.

6.7 Don’t let up

The Consultant agreed to supervise progress for three months and then management would decide whether to roll out further outlets.

The author’s visits have proved that standards remained consistently high.

[pic]

Look to the future and anticipate change. (Jarrett 2010)

6.8 Create a new culture

Care in this crucial part of the change process begins to form the basis of the new culture in the organisation. The consultant’s input illustrated his genuine interest in the staff members, their growth and skills development, quickly resolving conflict as it arose.

Conclusions:

The Popham pilot programme was considered a success and the owners plan to launch a further twelve restaurants based on the Popham Model. (Catersearch 2009: 20)

Change Management is a highly skilled job. It is now recognised that more than industry expertise is required to transform complex business problems.

Consultants are expected to have business insights first before being able to generate strategic change.

[pic]

New Look Olympic Breakfast

7 In assessing the extent to which the change at LC was successful in meeting its objectives it is necessary to recall the change objectives as listed in 4.2.

The tangible objectives of the transformational change was highly visible.

• The renewal of the LC Brand and Logo and

The Old but cherished British Logo

(Manchester Evening News 2006)

[pic]

[pic]

New Look

[pic]

• the refurbished premises

• the new menu.

7.1 An appropriate model to assess the change at LC in its strategic entirety would be the Balanced Score Card (Kaplan and Norton, 1992). (12Manage 2009:12) This model places the organisation’s vision and strategy at the heart, which drive the performance of the organisation. The four perspectives are:

• Financial

• Customer

• Business

• Learning and growth

The Little Chef vision is:

Good food on the go

to be the motorist's friend, serving up quality

food and offering great value for money.

The author telephoned the LC Head Office for information on structures, a balance sheet, and staff retention but this request was turned down. In its absence the author will report on secondary research findings.

7.1.1 Finance

Their profit forecasts were widely publicized in the media. As the case study was televised, the public interest was strong. At take-over in 2007 LC was reported to have lost £3 million p.a. However an increase in sales of 250% was announced during the TV series.

The LC website reports that since the Blumenthal intervention their sales are up 500% with a 150% year on year increase. (Little Chef 2009:10)

Further reports announced that the group had “bounced back, stronger than ever” and had forecasted a profit of £3million for the year till December 2009. (Catersearch 2009:29)

The financial aspects of the Balanced Scorecard suggest that organisations also have intangible values that are not reported on in Financial Results. The Scorecard makes provision for branding and other intangible assets to be monitored.

The owners of Little Chef have stated that their long term objective is to build up the brand and then sell it. R Capital bought LC for £10million, but it was previously sold for £52m when it changed hands. Their strategy to build up the brand is to increase its value and therefore the transformational change was a crucial step in its recovery of profits. Jarrett 2010. (Shares Magazine 2009:19)

7.1.2 Customers

Media reports stated that LC, despite its decline, still had 11 million customers(2007). In assessing the success of achieving an improved service objective, it is reported that LC has more than 20 million customers walking through its doors since the changes were brought about at the Pilot Restaurant. This figure will undoubtedly be increasing as sales increase.

Personal visits to the Little Chef have proved to be an enjoyable, value for money experience, true to its vision statement.

7.1.3. Business

LC underwent a transformational business process transformation as can be seen from the preceding parts of this report. The organisation is now fully geared to base their business model on quality food and service, (Annexure 7, 4/5) Because of the scale of the business the Consultant negotiated supplies from local suppliers. This will be generating a great deal of goodwill in the local areas around the 176 outlets. Change has stimulated the business profitability and growth objectives.

7.1.4 Learning and growth

The growth of the business is evident in further media reports that the Consultant will be opening a further 12 LC outlets in 2010 (Catersearch, 09:30)

[pic]

Camaraderie in learning

Undoubtedly structures were altered to cope with the business process transformation. This was unfortunately not obtainable. A change in structure is known to change the culture of the organisation as well, as management often become more accessible in flatter structures that are more responsive to their customers. As the organisation changes the culture changes to keep abreast of its environment and staff do not get stagnant. (RDI notes Unit 1 Lesson-Drivers for change P 13 of 15 Drivers for change)

M.Jarrett 2010. personal experience.

A further development is apparent in evaluating the change process. Ackerman (1997) states that a transitional change takes place within the scope and context of the transformational change. From this change LC has emerged as a learning organisation.

The Consultant‘s transfer of knowledge and skills has changed the staff’s perception and approach to their end product. The skills they had gained through exposure to improved processes, represents a source of power and pride in the staff. (HRPlatform 2009:23)

[pic]

Organizational level change does not follow a linear pattern that can be duplicated and applied restaurant after restaurant. Each one will have their own unique character and a crucial emergent element. It is therefore necessary to capture the leaning experience gained to be applied and refined where needed. Such actions will lead to the LC becoming a learning organisation and one of excellence as the change team becomes more skilled. (RDI Notes Module Managing Change in Organisations Drivers for Change P13)

In conclusion, it can be stated that LC had achieved the objectivises they set themselves to change.

Business Process Transformation is not a panacea for an ailing business and needs ongoing refinement making the company agile in meeting the constant changes occurring in the business environment.

(RDI Notes Business Process Transformation and Total Quality Management Top Tips P9 of 20)

Throughout the analysis of the LC case study the author observed that no direct input was given to staff except to interact and train them for the new job descriptions. Little Chef, could be well advised to deal with staff issues more sensitively by implementing Human Resource policies that support staff through the enormous changes that lie ahead for the LC staff.

The change earned them much sought-after recognition in British Good Food Guide. The change has not just affected the processes and systems but the staff had changed in the process of adapting to change. The stakeholders of Little Chef face an optimistic future.

7.1.5 It is therefore RECOMMENDED that:

1. Human Resources Policies be developed to deal with the human process when Little Chef

2. Those e-learning opportunities be created for staff who are eager to embrace the vision and open themselves up for professional growth, personal development and career opportunities within the group.

Jarrett 2010.

Bibliography

Books and e-Books

Beitler M, 2009 Strategic Organizational Change (Second Edition) The strategy driven approach Chapter 1 E-book [Online] available from

Carnall C 1999, Managing Change in Organisations Forcefield Analysis, Europe, Prentice Hall,

Holbeche L, 2005 Understanding Change, Theory, Implementation and Success

Imprint: Butterworth Heinemann Paperback, 432 pages, publication date: OCT-2005 , ISBN-13: 978-0-7506-6341-0 ISBN-10: 0-7506-6341-3

Kotter, J & Rathgeber, H (2006) Our Iceberg is Melting, London UK, MacMillan

Mullins, L (2005) Management and Organisational Behaviour 7th edition Pearson Education Limited

Journal

Strebel, P. (1996, May/Jun). Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business Review 86-92. Strebel, P. (1998) Why Do Employees Resist Change? In Harvard Business Review on Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing, pp. 139-157. (originally published in May/June, 1996 issue of Harvard Business Review)

Podcasts:

TV Programmes, Big Chef takes on Little Chef and Did Heston change Little Chef: available from: itunes.co.uk/TVProgrammes/Non-Fiction, Two Four productions Limited, 4 episodes,

Internet:

1 Corporate Author, 2009 Companies: Little Chef, Article, Caterer [Online] available from [accessed 20 November 2009]

2 Ackerman (1997) Northumbria University for JISC, Change Management Types of change article

3 Corporate Author n.d. Tutor2u Strategic planning setting objectives [Online] available from accessed 8 Jan 2010

4 Unknown, n.d. Growth Finance RCapital website [Online] available from



5 Iskikawas K Fishbone or Cause and Effect Diagram [Online] available from accessed 14 January 2010

6 Lewin K, 1982 Forcefield Analysis available from [online]



7 Bowler S, 2009 The Guardian The Friday Interview 16 January 2009 Faith, hope and fast food. The big chief getting Little Chef motoring - Ian Pegler, visionary with evangelical determination to drag his roadside diner chain back from the brink. [Online] available from accessed 3 Oct 09

8 Wachman R 2007 The Observer, Guardian.co.uk Business Little Chef makes a stand over logo Sunday 8 July 2007 edition

9 Peter T & Waterman R, 1978 7-S Framework (McKinsey) [Online] available from accessed 12 January 2010.

10 Corporate Author 2009, Little Chef Home Page Did Heston change Little Chef? [Online] available from accessed 20 January 2010

11 Kotter J 2007 Change step Cards, Step 3 Develop the Change Strategy and v

vision available from accessed 3 January 2010

12 Kaplan and Norton, 1992 The Balanced Score Card [Online] available from accessed 13 Jan 2010

13 Rogers J 2009, C4's Big Chef attracts a tasty 3.1m 20 January, Article [Online] available from acessed 12 December 2009.

14 Wachman R, 2008 Guardian.co.uk The Observer Little Chef’s healthier recipe [Online] available from Accessed 13 Nov 2009

15 Corporate Author, n.d Tutor2U, Principal agent problem website [Online] accessed 12 December 2009

16 Corporate Author, n.d. Sachs International Forcefield Analysis Template [Online] available from accessed 11 December 2009

17 French and Rave (1960) maintain that societies hold unseen “Bases of Social Power “ that are all pervasive [Online] available from

18 Porter M 1979 QuickMBA strategic management Porters Five Forces theory [Internet} available from accessed 2 Jan 2010

19 Corporate author, April 23, 2009, Shares Magazine, Bouncing back Article [Online] available from [accessed 29 October 09]

20 Corporate Author 09, Catersearch Heston Blumenthal to overhaul 12 more Little Chefs article [Online] available from



blumenthal-to-overhaul-12-more-little-chefs.html accessed 15 January 2010

21 McNamara C, 1997. Handout: Mr Ian Norman, Lecturer, Blakehall College, London, UK, Management Library, [Online] accessed on 25 September 2009

22 No author 2009, CIPD, Psychological contract Guidelines, [Online]

23 Corporate Author, n.d. articles HR Platform, What is meant by change?[Online] available from

24 Kruger, W 1980 Change Management Iceberg, [Online]

Available from

Accessed 10 January 2010

Annexure 1

Charles Carnall 1999 contends that Increasing the strengths of driving forces runs the danger of ignoring those stakeholders who are apprehensive about what the changes will lead to. The changes undergone by Little Chef have been drastic and therefore the turmoil this will cause during the human process interventions such as conflict management, team building, management development, organisational learning and communication will require perceptive and insightful management. The technical processes such as operational issues, food production, marketing, finance, logistics and technology processes will require skilled attention as this enormous scale of change will affect all these aspects.(Beitler M, 2009)

Annexure 2

An alternate way to analyse L C’s drivers for change could be the application of

Hamel and Prahalad’s Core Competence model applied to establish competitive

advantage. These could be used to build on LC’s internal strengths as opposed

to being based on internal and external forces that drive change. Hamel and

Prahalad’s Core Competence model theorises that competiveness emerges from

the strengths of the core competences of a business. Building on these strengths is a cost-effective way of building the business’s capacity.

Little Chef have core competencies which meet the criteria of the theory. They are:

• Having access to a wide variety of markets

• Contribute significantly to the end product benefits

• Be difficult for competitors to imitate

Prahalad and Hamel 1990, Core Competence Model QuickMBA 2 Jan 09

Little Chef infrastructure and intangible assets include:

1. 176 trading premises throughout the UK where planning permission for similar projects would no longer be granted by local Councils. Competitors would not be able to imitate this.

2. L C are co-located with several Travelodge Hotels and Burger King franchise holders, thereby contributing to end-product benefits.The British iconic Little Chef brand with its The Fat Charlie logo, which provides competitively priced food into the heart of the the UK road network reaches a wide variety of markets.

Corporate author, 2009 Bouncing Back, article in the Shares Magazine, April 23,

2009 edition, [internet] available from

accessed on 2 November 2009.

Though Hamel and Prahalad applied their theory to using core competence which would feed into various end-products it could be argued that Little Chef’s core competencies meet their theoretical criteria.

Their Core Competences being a network of 175 Established co-located trading

Outlets could therefore be a Driver for change

Prahalad and Hamel 1990, Core Competence Model QuickMBA 2 Jan 09

Annexure 3

Strebel’s Resistance to change model

In assessing resistance to change

Look for:

• Closed attitudes

• Entrenched cultures

• Inflexible arrangements and methods and procedures (like e.g.cutting quality of food)

• Clashing attitudes towards change efforts or goals

• Look at re resistance to change for forces that may be correlated with each other

• Describing the resistance threshold in terms of power and resources needed to deal with the resistance (Strebel P, 1996)

Lecturer’s Handout , Mr Ian Norman, Blakehall College, obtained from ln.edu.hk/mgt/staff /change EMBA Lecturer’s Handouts 2009 Mr Ian Norman, BHC, Leading Change, from slides of Barbara Senior Organisational Change Lecturers Guide 2002, available from

accessed September 2009.

Annexure 4

Change consultants should possess the following competencies:

• Excellent rapport among all stakeholders, and should have especially good collaboration within the change team,

• have the ability to manage change,

• data collection,

• problems solving and

• reporting to clients.

RDI Notes, 2009 Unit 2, Identifying, Understanding and Involving others in Change, P2 and P8 of 19 Understanding Change through Consulting.

Once the nature of the change has been identified the change team should possess and be suitably equipped to:

• Recognise the emotional response to change, even in management ranks, to ensure the commitment to and acceptance the change.

• Demonstrate top management ‘s visible and active support for the changes

• Listen and communicate consistently with those involved to build commitment

• Provide the required support for the processes in terms of new skills and resources that may be required.

RDI Notes Unit 1 Change Management :The Business Context, Organisational Development and Change P12 of 15

Furthermore, the change team should possess project management skills, a thorough understanding and agreeing on the change objectives, then the skills to orchestrate people, processes and systems. In studying the case study it became apparent that the communication among the change agent and consultant was sorely lacking.

RDI Notes Managing the Change Programme P 1 of 16

Kotter J and Rathgeber (H 2006) P 130

Annexure 5

Furthermore, if the Pennington’s Proposed change matrix below had been applied to LC, it would have been clear that the proposed changes would cause high disturbance and was high risk. The changes were radical, especially at the core of the business. Staff who had been preparing food out of packets for years were called on the cook and serve food of a high standard from quality raw ingredients, in a very short period of time and expected to perform under duress.

Own Illustration on Proposed Change.

Pennington theorizes that if the character of the planned change could be plotted on the graph, the change agent would sense how the change may affect the organisation. This radical changes brought about in LC were substantial. (Northumbria University 2009 :23)

Annexure 6

The Consultant insisted on the best quality of food to hang his strategy onto and the change agent kept looking at using cheaper ingredients to satisfy the profit motive. This could be ascribed to the principal/agent problem whereby the change agent and consult do not share a common goal and their goals are not known to the owners. (Tutor2U,n.d:)

In evaluating the team’s effectiveness their persistence, which to the casual TV viewer may appear to be petulant behaviour, became clear. The Consultant was adamant that for business process transformation to be established the quality of the food was crucial to the success of the new model.

-----------------------

1 Profit making operation

2 Branding retained and Logo renewed

3 Modern, healthy cost-effective menu

4 High quality food, cooked on the premises

5 Excellent service

6 Refurbished and modernised premises

1 Loss making operation

2 Brand name tarnished

3 Menu outdated

4 Poor quality food –all precooked and outsourced

5 Poor service

6 Trading premises shabby

1

2

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Pull together the guiding team

Create a sense of

Urgency

Get the desired change vision and

Strategy

Communi-cate for understan-ding and buy-in

Empower

Others to act

Create short- term wins

Do not let up

Create a new culture/

Make it stick

RDI Notes Drivers of change linked to



Set the stage

Decide what to do and make it happen

Make it stick

Kotter and Rathgeber’s 8-Step process of

successful change for

LC

Supplier contracts had to be negotiated with local suppliers. New procurement systems had to be put in place.

Kitchens had to be equipped and financed, Chef’s training, restaurant and fast food services training, amidst unsettling circumstances.

Systems

Processes

People and Culture

Organisation

Markets and Customers

Regulatory

Strategy

New Health and Safety regulations e.g. food recycling,

Staff needed re-assurance during unfamiliar training and trading conditions

LC customers had become more health and cost-conscious, living a fast- lane, cost-conscious lifestyle. Market research was done to ensure the new menus would satisfy customers’ preferred consumer tastes. . The “lost generation” had to be reached through new marketing campaigns.

The spheres of influence on LC during Change Management

RDI Notes Organisational Development and change P9 of 15

Radical

Peripheral

Core

Incremental

High Disturbance

High Risk

Moderate Disturbance

Lowish Risk

Low Disturbance

Low Risk

Moderate Disturbance

Moderate Risk

Proposed Change

Pennington (2003)

85% Comments from examiner stated that the Forcefield Analysis was too long – 1 page would have been sufficient.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download