Lewins Force Field & Environmental Analysis Tools Mini Case Analysis Paper Mini Case Analysis Due: Jun 7, 2019 at 12:59 AM Select one of the three Cases

Lewins Force Field & Environmental Analysis Tools Mini Case Analysis Paper Mini Case Analysis

Due: Jun 7, 2019 at 12:59 AM

Select one of the three Cases from the document “Mini Cases” provided in your References File;
Review/Evaluate the case you selected from the perspective of Lewin’s Force Field Analysis:
Define the problem;
Define the change objective;
Identify the driving forces;
Identify the restraining forces; and
Development of a comprehensive change strategy.
Determine what you think the issues areand a way that you think an Org Development Manager or Consultant should begin to look at the issues;
Find no less than three sources of researchon the subject matter using Webster’s Library, Harvard Business Review, or Google Scholar.
Your paper should be written in MS Word and APA, and consist of:
A Cover page;
At lease 1-1/2 pages of narrative;
Reference Page.

P.S. your textbook reading from last we will also support this assignment.

Thoughts on Conducting Research

Due: Jun , 2019 at 8:59 AM

Please share the following:

What was your experience like in finding the necessary three references for your paper;
What sources where easy/difficult, and why;
Which case did you select, and briefly state what you identified as their underly problem;
Did you find Lewin’s Theory enough to use for analyzing the case, or did you use any of the four environmental analysis tools?……if so, why?

Also share one reference article that you found to be a very good source. Regular and consistent assessment and evaluation is needed for every organization or firm,
regardless of size, industry, market share, brand reputation, or age. The below mini cases
provide examples of how businesses are very rarely static, or able to stay on cruise control.
1. TYLENOL’S 1982 SCANDAL
In 1982, seven people in Chicago died after taking Tylenol due to an unknown suspect
lacing the capsules with cyanide after the products reached the shelves. In the
immediate aftermath, Tylenol’s commanding 37% market share dropped to just 7%
nationwide, despite the problem being contained to the Chicago area. Tylenol was not
responsible for the tampering of the product, but to maintain the product’s reputation,
Johnson & Johnson pulled all of the Tylenol from the shelves, absorbing a loss of more
than $100 million dollars. Tylenol was successfully reintroduced with tamper resistant
packaging, discounts, and sales presentations to the medical community. The brand
survived due to swift action and effective public relations from Johnson & Johnson.
Thirty-six years later in 2018, Johnson & Johnson has come under great scrutiny
again. This time for their personal powder products being deemed as a direct
cause of cervical cancer among women who used the product. Additionally,
documents have been leaked to reveal that company officials were aware of the
cancer causing link in their product for over a decade.
2. A STARBUCKS ON EVERY CORNER
In 2008, Starbucks announced that they would be closing 600 US stores. Up to that
point, Starbucks stores had added new offerings, including wi-fi and music for sale, but
started to lose its warm “neighborhood store” feeling in favor of a chain store persona.
Harvard Business Review points out that in this situation, “Starbucks is a mass brand
attempting to command a premium price for an experience that is no longer special.”
Meaning, in order to keep up, Starbucks would either have to cut prices, or cut down on
stores to restore its brand exclusivity. HBR’s case study shares three problems with the
growth of Starbucks: alienating early adopters, too broad of an appeal, and superficial
growth through new stores and products. Harvard recommends that Starbucks should
have stayed private, growing at a controlled pace to maintain its status as a premium
brand. Starbuck was successful in recapturing their loyal customer base by bringing
back more specialty brews, introduction of organic products and direct mass appeal to
customers. Then, in 2018, Starbucks was seemingly blindsided by the handling of
customers at a Philadelphia location, which led to two Black/male customers
being escorted out of the store for staying too long. National racialized protests
erupted and Starbucks began to take on huge brand erosion.
3. MALDEN MILLS
Sometimes, doing the right thing is more important than profits, a lesson that Malden
Mills learned firsthand. When the factory burned down in 1995 just two weeks before
Christmas, production halted and employees assumed they’d be out of work until the
factory was rebuilt. But CEO Aaron Feuerstein extended the employees 90 days at full
pay, as well as 180 days with benefits at a cost of $25 million to Malden Mills. After the
factory was rebuilt and all of the displaced workers were rehired, cooperation and
productivity reached a new high, with 40% more business, 95% customer and
employee retention, and a production increase from 130,000 to 200,000 yards per
week. However, since then, Malden Mills has been to bankruptcy court three times,
with much of the debt tied to the rebuild of the factory. Feuerstein made employees
happy, to be sure, but business students should study this case to consider whether
bold philanthropic actions will pay off in the end.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment