1.   
1. Introduction (a traditional intro,
– a clear articulation of the aims and purpose of the essay, which sets out the
structure, focus and key arguments so that the reader knows what to expect.)
2.   
Critical analysis of organizational
change
• Description of MACL and its
significance (just briefly, not too much words on this)
• Overview of the implementation of
Oracle system for performance appraisal
• Identification of key actors •
Analysis of change process (using Kotter’s 8 steps)
• How employees felt regarding the
change and accepted (using Kubler and ross’s change curve theory.)
3.   
Critical reflection on own leadership practice
and development needs (based on what you learnt and what strategies u think is
important to be a good leader you can talk about developing the skills to
achieve that style. Include references from the learning logs here. Development
needs. building on the earlier argument, combined with insights from your
Personal Learning Log, to demonstrate self-awareness in relation to your
previous experience, current role and/or future development as a leader)
4.   
Conclusion and Recommendation (your own, now
and in the future. YOUR development needs, not the organization’s. factual
elements but be cited from the site or annual reports. Recommendation is for
the entire essay not for each section. should be more on yourself, for your
leadership development perspective, must be linked to leadership analysis in
both section A and B. **Not a
recommendation like the organization shouldn’t have done this or that. ** and don’t recommend organizations should have gone for this
theory, or that theory.)
First part is (Critical analysis of Organizational change)
using models and theories to understand what happened. Like in Kotter for
example it says creating a sense of urgency right so like whether that happened
and if not what could be done to do that like that.. For the reflection (which
is section B) You can say based on what happened some other approach could have
helped or like because this didn’t happen as per the model said it wasn’t
successful or something like that. You can first base it on the leadership
styles in the change event. Ie. if the change event had an autocratic
leadership style u can say if it helped with change event (I mean was implement
faster and efficient or resistant) then you can say if this was done like this
it could have been better implemented with literature. But if it was
implemented well, you can say yeah I can use this approach in similar cases.
Then u can talk about other strategies you learned in classes via logs. Logs
has to be referenced. Like subjective realities which impact resistance, power,
culture, ethics, morals. All that.