CIPS Exam Report for Learner Community:

Qualification:
Unit:
Exam series:

Professional diploma in procurement and supply

PD1 - Leadership in P&S
May 2016

Each element of a question carries equal weighting unless otherwise stated.

Question 1 Learning Outcome 1

Mark

Alan Hartley achieved a significant turnaround over a three year period at the 25 Marks
Urenco group, which suggests that he was a very effective leader.
Explain FIVE traits or skills of an effective leader, illustrating your answers with
examples from the case study.
Learning outcome addressed 1.3
Command word explanation: Explain give reasons for or account for something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Stronger answers provided an array of traits and skills such as being charismatic, visionary, interpersonal skills
etc. Better answers listed various traits and/or skills with good explanations provided. A number of answers
just focused on skills alone such as communication, project management, analytical ability and emotional
intelligence. Most of these answers were also contextualised and provided some evidence relating to the
case study such as involves the analysis of data, the challenging of budgets etc. Pass grade and above
answers were likely to include the following content to varying degrees (but not limited to):
Bernard Bass argues that transformational leaders motivate followers to higher than expected performance
levels by: creating awareness of the significance of the task
influencing followers to think beyond their own self interest
activating followers higher order motivational needs
Bass and Bruce Avolio identify: Idealised influence
Inspirational motivation
Intellectual stimulation
Individualised consideration
Cook, Macauley and Caldicott say that effective transformational managers need to be innovative, adaptable
and flexible and get the best from people by: letting go and allowing others to take the initiative
understanding and involving people at an emotional level and effectively managing their own emotions
and stress levels
being visionary, passionate and inspiring
developing creativity and cooperation for the common good

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

1/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

being more flexible in their behaviour

Mullins argues that transformational leadership is identified by: charismatic, visionary or inspirational leadership
providing a strong sense of vision or mission
arousing strong identification with the leader
David Taylor talks of having breadth of vision involving:Painting a picture of a compelling future for all people and departments and cultivating a wide perspective
Bert Nanus talks of: attracting commitment and energising people, giving work meaning and significance
establishing standards and values for excellence
focussing on the future
Candidates may also refer to characteristics of an effective change manager in achieving transformational
leadership:
Interpersonal skills; extensive interpersonal communication and skills in areas such as articulating goals
and values, in order to motivate change; influencing, persuading and negotiating,
Personal flexibility: Change managers must themselves be open to challenge, uncertainty, risk and
continuous learning, in order to set an example and convince others of the benefits of change.
Being positive, committed, having perseverance and stamina are required to maintain focus/momentum.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Answers that were marked as a MERIT PASS and above displayed more in-depth explanation and provided a
cross-section of named authors such as Mullins, Bass and transformational leadership skills etc. These
answers were also well structured providing in a list five easy to understand/read explanations of each
trait/skill. These explanations were well contextualised and related to the case study giving examples such as
He inspired others to become ambitious under Inspirational and, this requires us to be strong
communicator and marketer to position of procurement under Communicators Skills etc.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Weaker answers which failed to make the pass grade did not identify any traits/skills of an effective leader but
instead made reference to leadership styles. Many of these answers also provided a lengthy introduction.
These answers provided no relevance to the ask of the question. Some candidates listed more than five
traits/skills with very little explanation. Needless to say only five were marked but in these cases also the
evidence provided lacked depth of explanation and understanding to warrant a pass.
Concluding comment:
A good question to test the candidates knowledge/understanding of a leaders characteristics/personality to
be effective. A number of candidates insisted in providing an introduction such as a description of leadership
styles which did not fully support the question as asked. However, in these instances some marks were
awarded provided the introduction made reference to leadership traits/skills. Candidates can ill afford to use
time providing inappropriate introductions which attracts little or no marks. Most of the candidates
answered this question well and were awarded with a better than a bare pass grade in most instances.

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

2/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

Question 2 Learning Outcome 2

Mark

Question:
(a) Outline the concept of managing in four directions, and demonstrate how Alan
Hartley used this concept to engage with a range of stakeholders.

9 Marks

(b) Using a recognised model, explain how Alan Hartley may have used FOUR
different influencing styles or tactics with stakeholders to achieve his vision of
improvements in procurement and supply.

16 Marks

(a)
Learning outcome addressed 2.1
Command word explanation: Outline give the main features, facts or the general idea of something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Candidates were required to summarise and demonstrate the understanding of Buchanans and Boddy
managing in four directions framework but within the context of the case study. The question directly
related to the application of this theoretical framework which required the candidate to demonstrate how
Alan Hartley used this concept to engage with the various stakeholders. This engagement would also require
the candidates to recognise that stakeholders with different powers and interests would require different
communication and influencing strategies. Examples of important stakeholders engaged in each direction
were:
Managing Upwards Senior Decision Makers
Managing across supply chain
Managing across - colleagues
Managing down - direct reports and teams
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Candidates who provided strong answers worthy of a MERIT PASS or above provided more than just an
explanation of managing in different directions. Although not asked for these answers would include the
authors of this framework alias Buchanans and Boddy. These answers would also be supported by the
relevant Leading and Managing in four direction diagram. Many of these were also labelled with the
appropriate job holder such as Managing Upwards included Alan Hartley line manager, the Managing
Director. Good depth of explanation was given for each direction including the communication/influencing
strategy making the answer a much more rounded response to the question.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
A small number of candidates used Mendelows matrix as the main focus in answering this question. Some
marks were awarded if the answer supported and related to the understanding of the concept of managing in
four directions - power/interest of the stakeholder and the appropriateness of the communication strategy.
A number of candidates just listed the directions with little explanation, no contextualisation to the case study

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

3/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

and no diagram.
Concluding comment:
Most candidates were able to fully articulate each direction of the model. Better responses went further to
discuss how this model might be applied in general and in particular how Alan Hartley could practically apply
the theory in his procurement leadership role. A high number of answers provided well rounded responses
combining theory with practice. On the whole this question was well understood and well answered by most
candidates.
(b)
Learning outcome addressed 2.1
Command word explanation: Explain give reasons for or account for something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Most candidates provided good answers and listed four different influencing styles/tactics, providing good
explanations. The choice varied but most were based on Yukis model of nine proactive influencing tactics.
However, there were a small number of candidates who used other influencing tactic/styles such as
negotiations, logical persuasion etc. In most instances these answers gave a reasonable account of how Alan
Hartley used the influencing styles/tactics. Typically, pass grade answers included similar content to the
following examples of nine Influencing tactics:
Rational and persuasive communicator - there is evidence that Hartley was persuasive in influencing
upwards, for example in gaining support for future-proof strategies.
Coalition - the managing director of the Urenco Groups operating companies stated that Harley had
positioned himself as a true business partner and had changed the culture of our business suggesting
that the influence was approached as a collective rather than to bolster the individuals position.
Personal appeal Harley understood the importance of investment in networking and relationshipbuilding.
Rational persuasion and consultation Hartley has capitalised on the potential for expert power,
information sharing and co-operation.
Exchange: Hartley identifies the value in sharing best practice and new thinking.
Legitimating the case refers to procurement as having positioned itself as a true business partner in
supporting delivery and the capital investment programme.
Inspirational appeal Hartley inspired others to become ambitious leaders and three of his team have
won internal company awards.
Rational persuasion the case states that Harley had the ability to analyse the data, challenge budgets,
and develop future-proof strategies
Consultation Hartley developed his team to be high performing business partners and encouraged the
team to challenge conventional thinking.

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

4/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:

These strong answers provided a comprehensive description of four influencing styles/tactics together with
excellent practical examples of how Alan Hartley potentially could have implemented them within the case
study scenario. The theoretical and practical connection was made on each of the four influencing
styles/tactics
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
A small number of candidates just listed the influencing styles/tactics with little or no practical examples of
how they would be implemented. Some of these answers provided more than four influencing styles/tactics
with some not providing the correct understanding. A small number of candidates answered this question by
providing leadership style theory such as Tell, Sell etc. These answers did not attract a pass grade.
Concluding comment:
Most candidates were awarded with better than a BARE PASS. Many failed to provide the practical application
of using influencing styles/tactics as related to the case study. In a small number of answers, candidates did
not appreciate that Yukis influencing styles/tactics is a model.

Question 3 Learning Outcome 3

Mark

Question:
(a) Explain each of the following sources of power and suggest how Alan
Hartley may have applied them to transform the Urenco Group
procurement function.
i. Legitimate (or positional) power
ii. Expert power
iii. Connection power
18 Marks
(b) Explain the potential reasons why Alan Hartley may tend to avoid the
use of coercive power in his role.
7 Marks
(a)
Learning outcome addressed 3.1
Command word explanation: Explain give reasons for or account for something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Most candidates provided adequate answers to warrant a pass in this question. Listing each of the power
sources with an explanation of how they could be applied in the context of the case study provided an
excellent evidence based structure of understanding. Although in most instances explanation of the power
sources were adequate but in others they lacked depth of explanation to warrant more than a PASS grade.

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

5/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

Application of each of the power sources were provided but in no great depth. As an example a typical
answer to Legitimate Power source was limited and included power is based on job role and position within
the organisation. However, better answers included such statements as Hartley could use this power to
facilitate change to provide a fuller answer to the question. Although there was no depth of explanation
there was sufficient evidence of understanding provided to warrant a PASS. Typically, pass grade answers
included similar content to the following examples provided of Legitimate Power, Expert power and
Connection Power:
Legitimate power this form of power is based on Hartleys role and position in the organisation. Hartley can
influence based on this form of power, because of the legitimacy of his authority as group head of
procurement and as a chief operating officer.
Hartley may use this type of power in negotiations to insist, based on his position that stakeholders behave in
a particular way e.g. suppliers accepting terms and conditions of contract.
Expert power this form of power is based on Hartleys expertise and knowledge this has to be in an area
that is recognised and valued by followers. In this example Hartley has clear expertise having worked across
nine different industry sectors during his career, achieving senior level.
Hartley may use this form of power to persuade stakeholders to follow his objectives and adopt the changes
that he is suggesting. If the stakeholders believe that he has expert power then they are likely to agree.
Connection power power resulting from personal or professional access to key influencers, networks of
influence and sources of information.
The case refers to extensive external networks, knowledge of best practice, cumulative knowledge and
connectivity. The case further states that this enables us to challenge conventional thinking and in doing so,
not just reshape the mindset of our own function, but that of other functional leaders and the business at
large.
Providing extensive evidence of understanding as demonstrated above endorses a good comprehensive
knowledge of the subject matter.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Answers that warranted a MERIT PASS and above provided a more rounded and in-depth explanation of each
of the power sources as well as suggested ways of how Alan Hartley applied them to transform the Urencos
procurement function. Many of these answers included similar content in varying degrees to the above
examples. These answers would typically include an exhaustive meaning of each of the powers and how Alan
Hartley may have applied them to transform the Urenco Group procurement function. A cursory explanation
would not have provided a MERIT PASS grade or above.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Listing the answer with little or no explanation of the power sources or potential applications would not
provide sufficient evidence of understanding to warrant a PASS. Sparse answers did not provided
confirmation of the candidates understanding of the three power sources.

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

6/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

(b)
Learning outcome addressed 3.1
Command word explanation: Explain give reasons for or account for something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Candidates needed to provide a good explanation of what was meant by coercive power. The question also
required the candidates to provide more than one reason (the ask of the question was plural) why Alan
Hartley would avoid using this source of power. Again a cursory explanation of coercive power and the
negativity of using such a power would not attract high marks. Typical explanation of coercive power might
include an expanded view of the following (but not limited to):
Threat or sanction
Punishment
Intimidation
Bullying
Non compliance
compliance
Typical negative repercussions that could be included (but not limited to):
It is exploitative and intimidatory an abuse of position
Could be classed as bullying
It could be a demotivator and affect performance
It may seriously damage internal and external relationships
It does not bring about a sustained change of attitude or commitment
It may cause resentment
It may cause retaliation
It may result in litigation or very poor public relations consequences
The demarcation between a PASS grade and a MERIT grade was one of quality of response in terms of the
explanation of coercive power and the number of potential negative repercussions.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
A good solid explanation of coercive power which included a greater depth of details such as the ability to
influence someone's decision making by taking something away as punishment or threatening punishment if
the person does not follow instructions. It can be a severe way to get staff members to follow along with a
company plan, but it can be necessary in some cases. The answers required a comprehensive description of
coercive power covering most of the explanation above and also a number of the above negative
repercussion to warrant a MERIT PASS or above.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Again a small number of candidates only listed without extending to an explanation of what is coercive power.
Some these candidates also failed to address the negative repercussions of using coercive power. A number
of candidates provided positive attributes of coercive power. This was not an ask of the question.

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

7/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

Concluding comment:
Very few candidates failed this question as a whole. However, it should have been expected that most would
have achieved higher marks. Candidates must read the question carefully and address what has been asked.
In this instance the negative aspects and NOT positive attributes.

Question 4 Learning Outcome 4

Mark

Question:
(a) A planned approach to change should ensure that changes, such as
those implemented by Alan Hartley in the case study, are successful.
Explain the main components that should be included in a planned
approach to change management.

10 Marks

(b) Outline the main characteristics of incremental change and

transformational change and, using examples, categorise the nature of
the changes described in the case study.

15 Marks

(a)
Learning outcome addressed 4.1
Command word explanation: Explain give reasons for or account for something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
This question provided many different answers and to varying standards. Those answers that were deemed a
PASS included a number of main components of a planned approach such as, defining the reason why the
project, stakeholder involvement and responsibilities etc., with clear sequencing and
independent/interdependent stages. Other candidates used Lewins and or Kotters 8 Step model with again
varying degrees of supportive explanations. The answers lacked depth but sufficient evidence of
understanding to warrant a PASS. Typical components of a planned approach could have included the
following examples:
The components of a planned approach to organisational change will include the following:
Initial problem identification
Obtaining data
Problem diagnosis
Action planning
Implementation
Follow-up and stabilisation
Assessment of consequences

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

8/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

 Learning from the process

Most candidates did not identify all of the above; however candidates needed to have identified a significant
proportion of the above sequences - this being based on the work of French et al.
Other candidates use a simpler classification based on the Lewin model:
Unfreeze existing behaviours
Change attitudes and behaviours
Refreeze adoption of new behaviours and norms
An alternative model that was applied was John Kotters 8 step model for successful transformational change
such as: 1. Establishing a sense of urgency, 2. Failing to build coalition of stakeholders etc.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Answers which warranted a MERIT PASS and above provided much of the sequencing which were in the main
aligned to the case study. The structure of these answers provided appropriate sequential headings and a
clear understanding of what constituted planned approach for change management. Those candidates that
chose to use other models such as Lewins, Kotter etc. also provided an in-depth explanation of the stages or
steps of these models as indicated above.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Again listing without explanation is a problem. Even though some relevant stages were identified there was
insufficient evidence presented to warrant a PASS. This was regarded as superficial. Candidates who used the
models such as Lewin and Kotter, but did not provide an explanation of the various stages again did not
provide sufficient evidence of understanding to warrant a PASS. A small number of candidates used
inappropriately Lewins Force Field Analysis and also models to overcome resistance to change as the main
theme of the answer. The question specifically asked for the main components that should be included in a
planned approach.
(b)
Learning outcome addressed 4.1
Command word explanation: Outline give the main features, facts or the general idea of something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Most candidates answered this question well and again the marks awarded were related to the depth of
explanation and the contextualisation to the case study. Explanations provided focused around the following
examples:
Incremental (or evolutionary) change is often used as a proactive approach, building on the existing
improvement strategies such as Kaizen (continuous improvement) and total quality management. Because it
requires only realistic, small operational improvements and elimination of wastes, it can be implemented
from the bottom up, involving employees through suggestion schemes, quality circles and self-improvement
plans.

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

9/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

Transformational (or revolutionary) change is often a reactive approach, responding to disruptive change,
crisis or the need for a completely new paradigm. It seeks to overthrow the status quo and introduce radical
transformation in a relatively short period of time. Because it requires discontinuous and sweeping change
across organisational structures and systems, it can only be implemented from the top-down with top
management vision and leadership. Although it requires heavy investment, and some risk, it can achieve
transformative improvements.
Many candidates again listed some main characteristics of both of the change processes and also provided a
brief explanation. Identifying and categorising the nature of the changes within the case study were nonexistent or extremely brief in some of the answers. However these answers were still worthy of a BARE PASS.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Answers that warranted a MERIT PASS and above provided much more detail of the characteristics of an
Incremental and transformational change (as included in the above examples). Answers also needed to
identify and classify the changes evident in the case study such as three year turnaround and cost
awareness etc.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
A small number of answers included wrong explanations of what incremental and transformation changes
meant. Some candidates mixed up the explanation and provided answers wrong way around. Again a small
number of candidates just listed the characteristics with no explanation. These answers provided only one or
two characteristics. No examples were provided of any changes described in the case study. Insufficient
evidence provided to warrant a PASS.
Concluding comment:
It was surprising to see that some candidates struggled with both part (a) and (b) to provide sufficient
evidence of understanding to warrant a good PASS in this question. As this was Question 4 and potentially
the last question to answer, candidates may have run out of time, hence some of the sparse answers
encountered. However, this also indicates that the candidates should improve on managing their exam time.

MAY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

10/10

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply