Publication database

The “drawbridge” is the short story of a baroness who, despite orders by her husband not to leave the castle, pays a servant so that she can leave the castle to visit a lover overnight. On her way back to the castle, she is killed by a madman after she unsuccessfully tried to get help from her lover, a boatman, and a friend. The half-page story has been circulating for more than three decades and is widely used for educational purposes throughout the world. Even though it is a classic, it has not been used as a case study in the context of management and leadership classes. It is available as a text version or comic strip.

There is an increasing interest in “responsible leadership” and “responsible business.” This case is an ideal opening for such topics. It may also be used as an introduction to leadership or general management programs, as an illustration of case work (different perspectives, no right and wrong answers, participants “doing” the work, discussion rather than lecture), as an illustration of the fuzziness of language, which we deal with in many (management) contexts (e.g. guilt vs. accountability vs. responsibility vs. fault), and/or as an illustration of how people look at the same context or phenomenon, but reach very different interpretations and judgments.

Jim Robertson was on his way to London on January 6, 2003 to start his new assignment. At 33, he was to be the new player in the London management team of Wisant, a technology-consulting firm that thirteen years after its foundation already looked back on a lively and uneven history. This former New Economy star was now fighting for survival in a market that had dramatically changed between 2000 and 2002. Wisant's CEO James Watson had send Jim to London to realign the managerial system of the UK subsidiary, which had experienced a significant drop in revenue over the previous 12 months.

This three-part case-study illustrates key concepts and lessons about leading adaptive change in organizations in the context of turning around Deutsche Telekom, one of the world's largest telecommunication companies. The case portrays some of the efforts undertaken by Deutsche Telekom under the leadership of René Obermann after his ascent to the CEO position in that organization. The case illustrates the challenges associated with resistance to adaptive change, management of expectations of organizational members from their leaders, and the psychological challenges of leading necessary, but unpopular, change efforts under the conditions of pressure from organizational stakeholders, who consciously or unconsciously attempt to divert the change-oriented leader from pushing the organization forward. The case serves as fruitful ground for exploration of the theory of adaptive change as put forward by Heifetz & Linsky (2002), Heifetz, Grashow, & Linsky (2009a, 2009b), discussion of the dangers of leading (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002), and psychological challenges of leading (Kets de Vries, Korotov, & Florent-Treacy, 2007).

This three-part case-study illustrates key concepts and lessons about leading adaptive change in organizations in the context of turning around Deutsche Telekom, one of the world's largest telecommunication companies. The case portrays some of the efforts undertaken by Deutsche Telekom under the leadership of René Obermann after his ascent to the CEO position in that organization. The case illustrates the challenges associated with resistance to adaptive change, management of expectations of organizational members from their leaders, and the psychological challenges of leading necessary, but unpopular, change efforts under the conditions of pressure from organizational stakeholders, who consciously or unconsciously attempt to divert the change-oriented leader from pushing the organization forward. The case serves as fruitful ground for exploration of the theory of adaptive change as put forward by Heifetz & Linsky (2002), Heifetz, Grashow, & Linsky (2009a, 2009b), discussion of the dangers of leading (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002), and psychological challenges of leading (Kets de Vries, Korotov, & Florent-Treacy, 2007).

This three-part case-study illustrates key concepts and lessons about leading adaptive change in organizations in the context of turning around Deutsche Telekom, one of the world's largest telecommunication companies. The case portrays some of the efforts undertaken by Deutsche Telekom under the leadership of René Obermann after his ascent to the CEO position in that organization. The case illustrates the challenges associated with resistance to adaptive change, management of expectations of organizational members from their leaders, and the psychological challenges of leading necessary, but unpopular, change efforts under the conditions of pressure from organizational stakeholders, who consciously or unconsciously attempt to divert the change-oriented leader from pushing the organization forward. The case serves as fruitful ground for exploration of the theory of adaptive change as put forward by Heifetz & Linsky (2002), Heifetz, Grashow, & Linsky (2009a, 2009b), discussion of the dangers of leading (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002), and psychological challenges of leading (Kets de Vries, Korotov, & Florent-Treacy, 2007).

Voith Paper, one of the two big international suppliers of premium, technically complex machines for paper production, has to improve its profitability. This also affects Mr. Kohl, senior sales executive of the product division with the highest turnover. He, however, does not want to save the additional millions through cost or personnel reduction. Instead, he plans to sell the consulting services of his sales engineers and thus meet the financial target.

During the last two weeks of December 2005, the four founding partners of the Rare Find, based in Cape Town, South Africa, were all on the road following up business ideas. Nearly all of these ideas had resulted from a well-placed magazine article in one of the South Africa's leading real estate publications several months earlier.

The Christmas break had provided some badly needed time for the four partners to check some of their initial assumptions and conclusions about how to realize the Lifestyle Portfolio opportunity. While still committed to the basic directions set earlier, they had nevertheless agreed to check the financial implications of some key alternatives.

In early January 2006, the four partners knew that if any changes were made in the approach they had been taking in the months before Christmas (see The Rare Find A), they would also have to make some changes in the December draft of their marketing brochure.

The conversations the four partners had in early January about the Lifestyle Portfolio Project had highlighted the essence of the trade-offs between potential benefits and rewards to fractional owners, financial investors, if there were to be any, and themselves.