Task 1:

1a. The managers at N-Gineering see lean production as a way to make the company more
efficient and productive, believing it benefits everyone. They assume it will empower workers by
giving them more responsibility and involvement. But for the workers at Northern Plant it feels
like the opposite, they see it as management tightening control, taking away their flexibility, and
making their jobs more repetitive. What was once a good relationship turns into strict rules and
expectations, leaving workers frustrated and resistant. Instead of feeling empowered, they feel
like they’re being pushed into a system that doesn’t consider their needs.

1b. The different groups in the case have very different interests and motivations.

The Shop-floor workers at Northern plant value flexibility, autonomy and a good work
environment where they have some control over their schedules. They are motivated by trust
based agreements with managers that allow them to work efficiently while maintaining morale
and earning extra through overtime. They resist Lean production because they see it as a way
for management to increase control and reduce their freedom.

Managers at Northern plant are focused on maintaining high quality production and meeting
deadlines while keeping a cooperative relationship with workers. From de beginning they trusted
the informal system that allowed workers flexibility but pressure from higher management they
had to implement the lean production. Their motivation is to align with corporate expectations
while keeping operations running smoothly without disrupting workers morale too much.

The senior manager from N-Gineering who came to the UK is primarily motivated by career
ambitions. He sees Lean Production as an exiting challenge and a way to prove himself as
effective. He quickly realizes that implementing the system is far more difficult than expected
due to resistance from workers and a deeply ingrained work culture that doesn't fit the rigid
structure of lean production.

1c. The struggle for power in the case is around control and resistance. Shop-floor workers
push back against lean production to protect their autonomy. Northern plant managers are
caught between corporate pressure and worker trust, struggling to enforce changes without
losing morale. The senior manager from N-Gineering arrives expecting compliance but faces
resistance, growing frustrated as workers refuse to cooperate. Workers fight for flexibility,
managers tro to balance both sides and corporate leadership pushes for efficiency without fully
understanding the workplace dynamics.

1d. It is relevant to view the employees as identity work because their resistance is tied to how
they see themselves in the workplace. The Shop-floor workers took pride in their skills,
autonomy, and informal agreements with managers, which gave them a sense of control. When
lean production was introduced, they saw it as a threat to their established work identity.
1e. In the implementation of lean production in the organization managers framed employee
resistance as irrational and uncooperative, blaming the workers for being ridiculous instead of
acknowledging their concerns about job security, autonomy and working conditions. From a
critical perspective this can be seen as oppression because it delegitimize workers voice,
reinforcing a power imbalance where managerial control is prioritized over employee well-being.
By dismissing resistance instead of engaging with its root causes, managers maintained a
top-down authority that silenced alternative perspectives and denied workers meaningful
participation in decisions affecting their jobs.

Similarly in Alpha Tec, managers labeled employees who opposed change as obstacles to
progress, rather than recognizing their concerns as legitimate. This approach mirrors the
suppression seen at Northern Plant, where dissent was framed as an inconvenience rather than
an opportunity for dialogue.

Task 2

2a. Johnson uses multiple power dimensions to control the CEO selection process. He
exercised power of resources by influencing key decisions and ensuring internal candidates like
Morten and Claude were eliminated early. Through power of process, he structures the selection
process to prevent internal candidates from reaching the board, limiting their chances. He also
applies power of meaning by framing the need for an external CEO as essential for
organizational change, shaping perceptions in his favor.

2b. Johnson uses manipulative tactics to ensure the CEO selection aligns with his vision. He
controls the selection process, limiting internal candidates' changes while favoring external
ones. He builds alliances with key decision makers like McKinley to push preferred outcomes.
By giving false encouragement to Morten and Claude he maintains a professional appearance
while eliminating competition.

2c. If Morten had strategically used his power base, he could have leveraged his strong internal
reputation and the support of key figures like Julie Wilson, the financial director to gain more
influence. By actively rallying internal allies and mobilizing support from board members and
external who valued his leadership, he might have pressured Johnson to reconsider his stance
on hiring externally.

2d. Yes, Johnson is also subjected to power despite his authority. He faces pressure from
external stakeholders, such as the Board and industry expectations, to bring in a dynamic new
CEO rather than promoting from within. Additionally, his decisions are influenced by executive
search consultants like William McKinley, who help shape the selection process. He also needs
to maintain credibility and legitimacy within the organization, meaning he cannot make arbitrary
choices without justification. While he exercises significant control, he must navigate these
influences to secure the outcome he wants.
Task 3:

From a political perspective, the advice in the HBR article shows how CSR managers use their
power to promote sustainability. They rely on expert power (their knowledge of CSR) and
referent power to build strong relationships and influence others. I think referent power is very
important because these leaders can talk to each other and inspire others to make more
sustainable choices. By using their knowledge, negotiation skills, and strategic influence, they
can handle resistance, create engagement, and drive change within organizations.