KLC Exam outline and details:

Exam ques4on:
Provide an analysis of the case (or cases) from the course that you think best exemplifies the
interrelated dynamics of knowledge, leadership, and change that we have discussed. Your
essay should explain and apply concepts from at least three of the theore@cal readings we
have covered in the course and draw connec@ons and/or comparisons with at least one of the
other cases we have analysed in class.

When wri@ng your essay, concentrate on analyzing your topic rather than merely describing
it. Your essay should not exceed 10 pages. In each paragraph, aim to devote the majority of
your content to your analy@cal insights:

1. Outline Your Inten@ons: Start by clearly sta@ng the purpose of your essay. What are you
planning to explore or argue?
2. Demonstrate and Execute: Go beyond sta@ng your inten@ons. Show through your wri@ng
how you are exploring or suppor@ng your thesis. Use evidence and reasoned argument to
make your case compelling.
3. Reflect on Your Conclusions: Conclude with a reflec@on on what you have learned or
proven through your essay. How has your understanding evolved from when you began?

For example, if discussing a concept like leadership, begin by no@ng your ini@al thoughts on
the subject. Then, detail how your understanding has changed or deepened through your
research and analysis. Make each paragraph pointed and focused—introduce its purpose in
the first sentence, then delve into the detailed argument or analysis that supports your main
thesis. This approach ensures you are making the most of your limited space and directly
engaging with your topic.

Cases:
1) Valve:
Overview of Valve's Approach
- Valve's Founding: Founded in 1996 by Gabe Newell and Mike Harrington, ini@ally focusing on
video games. Emphasized a non-hierarchical, self-managing organiza@onal structure.
- Employee Autonomy: Encouraged 100% self-allocated employee @me with physical mobility
in the office, promo@ng a dynamic work environment.

Valve’s Corporate Philosophy

- Organiza@onal Structure: Lack of formal hierarchy or fixed job descrip@ons; decisions and
roles are fluid and based on project needs.
- Cabals: Project teams formed organically based on interest and importance, playing cri@cal
roles in product development.
Recruitment and Reten@on
- T-shaped Skills Model: Employees are expected to have deep knowledge in one area and
broad skills in others, enhancing flexibility and innova@on.
- Employee Engagement: Valve focuses on afrac@ng and retaining talent by involving
employees’ families and offering extensive perks.

Strategic Challenges and Innova@ons

- Sohware to Hardware Transi@on: As the market evolved, Valve considered expanding into
hardware to con@nue growth, facing new strategic challenges.
- Steam Plaiorm Development: Introduced to automate updates and expand digital
distribu@on, eventually suppor@ng a vast array of games and mods.

Culture of Innova@on
- Failure as Opportunity: Valve’s culture encourages risk-taking by viewing failures as learning
opportuni@es.
- Con@nuous Learning and Adapta@on: Employees are expected to update their skills and
knowledge con@nuously, driven by project demands and personal interest.

Hardware Development Considera@ons

- Exploratory Projects: Ini@al ventures into hardware to address limita@ons in sohware
capabili@es without corresponding hardware advancements.
- Community and Ecosystem Integra@on: Valve leveraged its Steam plaiorm to maintain an
open and integrated gaming ecosystem, contrary to the trend towards closed systems.

Future Outlook
- Poten@al Hardware Produc@on: Evalua@ng whether to produce hardware internally or
through partnerships, considering the organiza@onal and strategic fit.
- Sustaining Innova@on and Flexibility: Con@nuing to navigate the balance between innova@ve
flexibility and the structured demands of hardware produc@on.

Key points:

Knowledge Management:
- Employee Skill Development: Valve emphasizes the importance of T-shaped skills,
encouraging employees to deepen their exper@se while broadening their knowledge base.
- Innova@ve Environment: The company fosters a culture where learning from failures is
valued, promo@ng con@nuous learning and knowledge accumula@on.
- Organic Knowledge Sharing: With its flat structure, knowledge flows freely among
employees without the barriers typically imposed by hierarchical layers.

Leadership:
- Decentralized Leadership: Leadership at Valve is fluid, with roles determined by project
needs rather than formal @tles. Employees ohen take leadership based on their exper@se and
project involvement.
- Employee Autonomy and Leadership: Employees are given the freedom to choose projects,
leading to natural leadership roles based on individual ini@a@ves and recogni@on by peers.
- Self-Management: Valve’s structure allows for self-management, which is a cornerstone of
its leadership model, promo@ng ini@a@ve and responsibility among employees.

Change Management:
- Adaptability to Industry Changes: Valve's transi@on from sohware to considering hardware
produc@on illustrates its adaptability to changes in the gaming industry and broader
technological landscape.
- Responsive Organiza@onal Structure: The company’s structure is inherently designed to
manage change efficiently, allowing rapid reconfigura@on around emerging challenges and
opportuni@es.
- Innova@on as a Response to Change: Valve’s introduc@on of the Steam plaiorm and
explora@on into hardware are examples of proac@ve responses to the evolving demands and
opportuni@es of the market.

2) Rema1000:
Background
- REMA 1000: A Norwegian grocery chain that has adopted Workplace, a corporate social
media plaiorm by Facebook, to enhance internal communica@on.
- Ole Robert Reitan: CEO of REMA 1000, announced the shih from tradi@onal email to
Workplace to improve efficiency and decision-making processes.

REMA 1000’s Introduc@on of Workplace

- Ini@al Implementa@on: Launched to improve communica@on across the company's
decentralized opera@ons which include 600 franchises and 11,500 employees.
- Usage: Employees use Workplace for sharing experiences, ideas, and communica@on,
enjoying high engagement rates of about 90%.

Challenges and Considera@ons

- Uncontrolled Prolifera@on: Increase in trivial posts and uncontrolled group forma@ons,
causing distrac@ons rather than enhancing produc@vity.
- Strategic Decisions: Tore Høylie, chief human resources officer, faces decisions on how to
best use Workplace to promote produc@vity without distrac@ons.

Organiza@onal Impact
- Company Culture Strengthening: Direct communica@on from headquarters to franchises has
helped enhance the company culture.
- Efficiency in Communica@on: Workplace allowed quick dissemina@on of cri@cal informa@on,
such as product recalls and marke@ng strategies.

Financial Overview
- Historical Growth: From a single store in 1948, REMA 1000 expanded significantly, inspired
by German discount grocer ALDI, and was among the first in Norway to use franchising in the
grocery sector.
- Current Status: As of 2017, REMA 1000 operated 600 stores in Norway and 284 in Denmark,
with retail sales in Norway amoun@ng to NOK 41 billion.

Market Environment
- Compe@@ve Landscape: Competes primarily with Norgesgruppen and COOP; faced
challenges from foreign compe@tors like Lidl but retained market dominance through
strategic price cuts.

Organiza@onal Structure
- Franchising Model: Nearly all stores are franchised, promo@ng a strong sense of ownership
and decision-making freedom among franchisees.
- Training and Support: Extensive training programs for franchisees, and a structured support
system from regional offices.

Future Direc@ons
- Digital Transforma@on: Aim to enable franchisees to run stores via mobile devices by 2024.
- Workplace Adjustments: Considering how to manage the flow of informa@on on Workplace,
including possible constraints on the number of groups or posts.

Key points:
Knowledge Sharing
- Workplace Plaiorm: Implemented to facilitate effec@ve informa@on exchange across REMA
1000's decentralized structure, allowing for direct communica@on from headquarters to
individual franchises and employees.
- Engagement with Plaiorm: High engagement rates with Workplace, where employees share
experiences, @ps, and seek advice, contribu@ng to collec@ve knowledge building.
- Impact on Opera@ons: Informa@on shared on Workplace, such as innova@ve store
arrangements or sales strategies, ohen gets adopted across other loca@ons, demonstra@ng
prac@cal knowledge transfer.

Leadership
- CEO's Ini@a@ve: Ole Robert Reitan's decision to move from email to Workplace illustrates
proac@ve leadership in leveraging technology to enhance communica@on and decision-
making.
- Franchise Leadership: Franchisees operate almost independently, a model that empowers
them to make decisions within the framework set by REMA 1000, fostering a sense of
ownership and accountability.
- Training Programs: Leadership development is integral, with programs designed to equip
franchisees with the necessary skills in financial and management aspects, reflec@ng the
company's commitment to strong leadership at the franchise level.

Change Management
- Cultural Shih: The shih from email to Workplace was a significant change in the company's
communica@on culture, requiring buy-in from all levels of the organiza@on.
- Managing Transi@on: The introduc@on of Workplace involved careful considera@on of its
structure and usage policies to ensure it supports rather than hinders produc@vity.
- Adapta@on Strategies: Con@nuous assessment of the effec@veness of Workplace in
improving communica@on and sharing prac@ces across the company, with adjustments being
made based on feedback from users.
Strategic Implica@ons
- Long-term Vision: The move towards a mobile-first business strategy, with goals set for
franchisees to manage opera@ons from mobile devices by 2024, demonstrates forward-
thinking leadership and adaptability.
- Evalua@ng Tools: Ongoing evalua@on of digital tools like Workplace, considering both the
benefits and challenges, reflects REMA 1000's strategic approach to change management and
technological adop@on.

3) Apple Backdoor:
Summary of "Building a 'Backdoor' to the iPhone: An Ethical Dilemma"

- Context and Dilemma

- In 2016, the FBI requested Apple's assistance to unlock an iPhone belonging to a terrorist
involved in the San Bernardino afack, posing a significant ethical dilemma for Apple.
- Apple CEO Tim Cook refused to create a backdoor for the iPhone, ci@ng the poten@al threat
to digital privacy and security for all users.

- Historical Background
- Apple was founded by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak in 1976, becoming famous for user-
friendly computers and later, innova@ve products like the iPhone and iPad.
- The iPhone, launched in 2007, significantly contributed to Apple’s status as a highly valuable
brand by 2016.

- Apple’s Privacy and Security Stance

- Unlike compe@tors who mone@ze customer data, Apple’s revenue primarily comes from
product sales, with a strong emphasis on protec@ng user privacy.
- Following the Snowden revela@ons in 2013, Apple strengthened encryp@on and privacy
protec@ons to prevent unauthorized data access, including by the government.

- San Bernardino Incident

- The 2015 afack led to a major inves@ga@on where Apple provided data and assistance but
stopped short of breaking encryp@on on the afacker’s iPhone, as demanded by the FBI.

- Government vs. Apple on Encryp@on

- Historical tensions existed between U.S. government and tech companies over encryp@on
prac@ces, highlighted by the 2013 Snowden disclosures and the ongoing debates about user
privacy versus na@onal security.

- Tim Cook’s Leadership and Principles

- As CEO since 2011, Cook has been vocal about social responsibility, privacy, and corporate
ethics, even when facing poten@al backlash against business interests.
- Cook’s refusal to compromise on encryp@on was part of a broader commitment to human
rights and customer privacy.

- Ethical Frameworks and Decision Making

- The case discusses "the dirty-hands problem," referring to difficult ethical decisions that pit
equally valid principles against each other, such as privacy vs. security.
 - Apple’s decision framed within various ethical ques@ons suggests a commitment to doing
the least harm and protec@ng user rights, despite poten@al legal and social consequences.

Key Considera@ons
- Impact on Apple’s Brand
- Apple’s refusal to create a backdoor was not only a stand for privacy but also a strategic
decision to maintain its brand integrity as a protector of customer data.
- Broader Implica@ons
- The situa@on underscores ongoing challenges and debates in tech regarding data privacy,
government surveillance, and the ethical responsibili@es of global corpora@ons.

Key points:

- Knowledge
- Apple’s development of encryp@on and security measures (iOS updates) reflects its deep
knowledge in sohware innova@on to protect user data against external threats, including
government surveillance.
- The case study highlights the importance of understanding legal and ethical frameworks
when dealing with privacy and na@onal security issues, demonstra@ng how Apple u@lizes its
knowledge of technology and law to navigate complex situa@ons.

- Leadership
- Tim Cook's leadership style is characterized by a strong stance on ethical issues, par@cularly
privacy and security, which contrasts with the government's approach to na@onal security.
- Cook's public refusal to create a backdoor into Apple's iPhone following the San Bernardino
afack serves as an example of leadership that upholds corporate values despite external
pressures, illustra@ng a commitment to ethical leadership.
- Under Cook’s leadership, Apple maintained its innova@ve edge and social responsibility,
emphasizing that leadership involves balancing profit-making with broader social impacts.

- Change Management
- Apple’s shih under Tim Cook from a focus solely on innova@on and profit to a broader
emphasis on social responsibility, including environmental ini@a@ves and employee rights,
demonstrates strategic change management.
- The document discusses Apple’s adapta@on to changing public and legal expecta@ons about
privacy and data security, showcasing how businesses must manage change in response to
external events and pressures.
- Apple's evolving business prac@ces under Cook’s tenure, including increased transparency
and employee engagement in decision-making, highlight effec@ve change management
strategies in a large organiza@on.

Theories:

1) Theories related to the Valve Case study.

a) Holacracy.
 The ar@cle "Beyond the Holacracy Hype" explores the concept of holacracy and
other self-management structures through a balanced lens. It discusses the
emergence of these structures, characterized by team-based self-governance and
distributed leadership, using examples from companies like Zappos and Morning
Star. The authors highlight the challenges and uncertain@es of implemen@ng
holacracy across an en@re organiza@on but suggest that elements of self-
organiza@on can be beneficial in specific scenarios. The ar@cle encourages
blending tradi@onal and new management models to enhance organiza@onal
flexibility and engagement.

Introduction to Holacracy and Self-Managing Organizations

- Context and Emergence: Discuss the rise of self-managing organizations as a response to
the limitations of traditional hierarchical structures, such as rigidity and inertia, which often
lead to quality issues and lack of adaptability (from your presentation).
- Key Features: Introduce the characteristics of holacracy and similar models, such as
distributed leadership, team-based governance, and role adaptability, highlighting their
departure from conventional management structures

Theoretical Framework
- Self-Organizing Principles: Outline the foundational elements of self-managing organizations
like constitutions, team structures (e.g., circles, pods, cabals), and the shifting roles within
these teams (from your presentation).
- Distributed Leadership: Describe how leadership is contextually distributed among roles
rather than held by individuals, allowing for flexible responses to changing organizational
needs

Case Studies and Examples

- Zappos and Morning Star: Analyze examples of companies implementing holacracy. Discuss
the benefits observed, such as increased engagement and flexibility, as well as the challenges
these companies faced during implementation
- Different Management Styles: Include insights from various global perspectives on self-
management, such as participative management in Europe, quality circles in Japan, and
innovation task forces in the U.S. (from your presentation).

Addressing Myths and Misconceptions

- Common Misconceptions: Tackle myths such as the absence of organizational structure, the
non-existence of hierarchy, and consensus-based decision making in self-managing
organizations (from your presentation).
- Reality of Self-Management: Provide evidence and arguments against these myths, showing
that while the structure may differ from traditional models, some form of governance and
decision-making hierarchy still exists

Challenges and Considerations

- Adaptability vs. Standardization: Discuss the balance between adaptability and the need for
some standardization, which is essential for inter-team coordination and minimizing role
fragmentation (from your presentation).
- Practical Challenges: Examine the difficulties in implementing self-management across
different organizational environments, noting that in many cases, blending traditional and
innovative management practices may be more effective

Conclusion
- Future Outlook: Conclude by reflecting on the potential of self-managing organizations to
reshape traditional business practices and the importance of a balanced approach to
adopting such models.
- Critical Perspective: Encourage a critical evaluation of when and where holacracy can be
effectively integrated into organizational structures, advocating for a tailored approach based
on the specific needs and conditions of the organization

b) Anti leaders:

The concept of leaderless organizations gained prominence with movements like

the Arab Spring and Occupy. These movements challenge traditional views that
effective organizing requires clear, hierarchical leadership.

Critical Leadership Studies (CLS)

- Definition & Focus: CLS views leadership as a relational and socially constructed
phenomenon rather than the result of inherent traits in individual leaders.

- Key Insights:

- Leadership is about "management of meaning" rather than exerting authority.

- Empirical studies focus on the absence of formal leaders but presence of

distributed leadership roles and skills.

Mainstream vs. Radical Leadership

- Mainstream Leadership:

- Emphasizes traits, styles, and behaviors of individual leaders.

- Often linked to hierarchical control and top-down influence.

- Radical/Participative-Democratic Alternatives:

- Focus on collective action and distributed leadership responsibilities.

- Reject the necessity of formal leaders, promoting a more horizontal

organizational structure.

Practices in Anarchist SMOs (Social Movement Organizations)

- Organizational Practices:

- Prohibit permanent leadership roles.

- Distribute leadership skills across members.

- Encourage widespread participation in leadership roles.

- Decision Making:

- Utilizes consensus methods to ensure all voices are heard and no single
individual dominates.

- Roles such as facilitators and minute-takers are rotated to prevent power

centralization.

Challenges and Tensions

- Formation of Cliques: Even in horizontal organizations, informal hierarchies can

develop, creating de facto leaders.

- Cultural Capital and Competence: Individuals with specific skills or knowledge

can unintentionally assume leadership roles, influencing the group’s direction
more than others.

- Gender Dynamics: Gendered divisions of labor can also reflect and reinforce
traditional leadership roles, counter to the organization's egalitarian ideals.

Conclusion

- Leaderless but Not Leadershipless: Organizations without formal leaders still

exhibit leadership through collective decision-making and shared responsibilities.

- Continuous Reflection and Adjustment: Regular reassessment of processes and

roles is crucial to maintaining democratic, participative structures and avoiding
the solidification of informal leadership.

Implications for Practice

- Importance of Vigilance: Organizations must remain vigilant against the re-

emergence of traditional leadership dynamics, even in supposedly flat structures.
 - Educational Implications: These findings can inform how leadership and
organizational behavior are taught, particularly in contexts aiming for radical
democracy.

2) Theories related to REMA1000

a) Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective

Abstract
- The paper examines contras@ng views of knowledge in organiza@onal studies,
described as either "s@cky" or "leaky." These descrip@ons, the authors argue, reflect
different perspec@ves on knowledge within organiza@ons.
- They propose using communi@es of prac@ce as a unit of analysis for understanding
knowledge dynamics within firms, arguing that focusing on prac@ce (the
implementa@on and execu@on of knowledge) can befer explain the phenomena of
knowledge being both s@cky and leaky.

Key Concepts
- Knowledge S@ckiness and Leakiness**: Knowledge is described in two seemingly
contradictory ways in literature. S@cky knowledge is hard to transfer within an
organiza@on, while leaky knowledge easily escapes beyond its boundaries.
- Communi@es of Prac@ce**: These are groups within organiza@ons that share a
common prac@ce, shaping how knowledge is developed and shared internally. The
paper argues that examining these communi@es provides insights into knowledge
management.

Main Arguments
Contras@ng Views on Knowledge: Literature ohen presents knowledge as either
difficult to move within organiza@ons or as something that can easily spread outside.
This dichotomy may oversimplify how knowledge actually works within complex
organiza@onal structures.

Community and Prac@ce: Instead of viewing organiza@ons as homogenous en@@es,

the authors suggest focusing on diverse communi@es of prac@ce within them. These
communi@es ohen see knowledge differently, depending on their specific prac@ces.

Role of Prac@ce in Knowledge Dynamics: Prac@ce is essen@al in shaping how

knowledge is created, shared, and maintained within organiza@ons. It influences both
the internal dynamics (s@ckiness) and external rela@onships (leakiness) concerning
knowledge.

Networks of Prac@ce: Beyond individual organiza@ons, networks of prac@ce across

firms can share knowledge due to common prac@ces, explaining how knowledge can
'leak' between firms in the same industry or field.
 Implica@ons for Organiza@ons
- Organiza@ons should focus on dynamically coordina@ng knowledge across different
communi@es of prac@ce to leverage both internal innova@on and external knowledge
exchanges.
- The paper suggests that tradi@onal views on organiza@onal boundaries and
knowledge management might need reevalua@on in light of how communi@es of
prac@ce operate.

Conclusion
- The study concludes that a focus on prac@ce offers a richer, more nuanced view of
how knowledge func@ons within and between organiza@ons. By understanding and
leveraging communi@es of prac@ce, firms can befer manage knowledge to foster
innova@on and protect intellectual assets.

3) Theories related to Apple backdoor.

a) Understandingethicalclosurein organizational settings - the case of media

organizations

1. Introduc@on to Ethics in Business

- Defini@on of Ethics: Study of moral principles that govern a person's behavior or
conduc@ng of an ac@vity.
- Ethical Irra@onality: The conflict of ethical values where no single ra@onal system
can guarantee ethical alignment with business prac@ces.

2. The Ethical Dilemmas in Business Decisions

- Ethical Frameworks: How individuals determine the rightness or wrongness of
ac@ons.
- Contradictory Ethical Frameworks: Good acts do not always lead to good
outcomes, and vice versa.
- Complementary Ethical Frameworks: Ac@ons assessed against the backdrop of
consequences, du@es, community norms, and organiza@onal commitments.

3. Ethical Decision-Making Tests

- Visibility Test: Would I be comfortable if this ac@on were made public?
- Generality Test: Would it be acceptable if everyone did this?
- Legacy Test:How will this ac@on reflect on my or the organiza@on’s legacy?

4. Ethical Closure in Organiza@onal Sewngs

- Ethical Sealing and Bracke@ng: Processes that limit ethical judgment to predefined
areas.
- Double Dehumaniza@on and Commodifica@on of Ethics: Turning ethical issues into
bureaucra@c checklists or marketable products.
 - The impacts of organiza@onal culture and rhythm of work flow on ethical decisions.

5. Danske Bank Case Study

- Analysis of Danske Bank’s ethical principles and dilemmas.
- Corporate Du@es: Transparency, dignity, fairness, and responsiveness principles.
- Ethical Challenges: Balancing global ethical standards with prac@cal business
opera@ons.

6. Prac@cal Applica@ons and Cri@ques

- Strengths and Weaknesses of Ethical Approaches:
- Consequences-based Ethics: May lead to overlooking individual rights for greater
good.
- Duty-based Ethics: Can be rigid, neglec@ng the nuances of specific situa@ons.
- Community-based Ethics: Might ignore personal rights in favor of communal
norms.

7. Concluding Thoughts
- The necessity of ethical flexibility and the poten@al piialls of overly rigid ethical
frameworks.
- Encouragement for con@nuous ethical educa@on and reflec@on within professional
prac@ces.