CIPS Exam Report for Learner Community:

Qualification:
Unit:
Exam series:

Professional diploma in procurement and supply

PD1 - Leadership in P&S
July 2016

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

Question 1 Learning Outcome 1

Mark

The case study states that Jay has a consultative and democratic leadership
style.
Outline, using appropriate theory, the characteristics of this approach to
leadership, and evaluate whether this style of leadership is appropriate for
the situation that AEL faces, as described in the case study.
Learning outcome addressed 1.2

25 marks

Command word explanation: Outline give the main features, facts or the general idea of something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Good answers included an overview of the characteristics of a consultative and democratic approach. These
answers also aligned to appropriate Leadership Style theories such as:
Blake Mouton Grid in this approach leaders either have a concern for production or a concern for people.
The people based approach would be more consultative, engaging members of staff in decision making.
Lewin, Lippett & White describe a democratic style as having de-centralised decision making which is
shared amongst team members as part of a participative process and there is a great deal of group
interaction. The manager or leader takes on a facilitative role within the team.
Ashridge Management Group this includes a style which is referred to as consults which recognises that
the leader will take into account the views of the members of the group.
Tannenbaum & Schmidt this has a consulting category where the problem is put to the group by the leader
and their input is valued.
The evaluation of whether this form of leadership is appropriate requires further discussion considering the
benefits and problems of its application such as (included but not limited to):

It will motivate the team to engage with resolving the problems.

This approach will also ensure that the solution is owned by the group.

The quality of the decision should be improved due to the involvement of a wider group.

This approach also encourages vertical and lateral communication.

Some problems associated with this style of leadership, particularly in the circumstances of AEL, include:

The time taken to reach decisions, particularly if a consensus is required, is likely to be longer.

The consultation may be superficial as decisions may have already been taken in terms of solving the
problem but a consultation has to be seen to have occurred.
Candidates should have provided the main features of the style of leadership and examples of its benefits and
problems and also stated whether the chosen style of leadership approach was appropriate.

JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

1/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

However, there was no prescriptive answer as other styles may have been suitable such Hersey and Blanchard
etc. One opposite approach to the democratic and consultative style would have been an autocratic approach
where Jay dictates and orders what is to occur as time is limited and the situation is critical. However,
whichever option was selected it must have been suitably justified based on the characteristics outlined
above and as related to Jay and the AEL situation.
Candidates were rewarded for reaching a suitably justified conclusion in their evaluation.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Answers that were marked as a MERIT and above displayed more in-depth explanation and provided a crosssection of named authors such as Blake Moulton Grid, Lewin, Lippett and White etc., explaining the relevance
of these theories and approaches for the situation that AEL faces. These answers were also well structured
and provided good sound justifiable reasons based on the characteristics of the theory applied e.g. the
appropriateness of a democratic/consultative leadership style versus the time factor involving others and
making decisions.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Most of these answers applied more than one theory even though the ask of the question was for an
appropriate theory singular. In-depth explanations of the theories used were provided with very little
contextualisation to the case study. These answers also lacked explanations of consultative and democratic
style of leadership. The main focus was purely on theory explanation with little or no evaluation or relevance
to the appropriateness of the leadership style for the AEL situation. Again, a number of these candidates
provided an introduction that did not support an appropriate answer to this question such as an explanation
of leadership, the difference between leadership and management.
Concluding comment:
Most of the candidates provided answers that warranted better than a BARE PASS with quite a few achieving
a MERIT and above. A straightforward question testing the candidates knowledge and understanding of how
to apply appropriate leadership styles. A number of candidates provided an introduction such as a description
of what is leadership which did not fully support the question asked. This is time wasting and furthermore
these answer do not attract any marks. These answers tended to be brief for a 25 mark question.
Question 2 Learning Outcome 2
(a)
Identify FOUR stakeholders with whom Jay must engage,
analysing for each stakeholder their power, interest and their likely
objectives.
(b)
The issues, described in the case study, have caused a flood of
emails both internally and with AELs customers.
Explain
how Jay could use a range of electronic communications as part of a
communications plan to take control of the current situation.
(a)

Mark
16 marks
9 marks

Learning outcome addressed 2.3

Command word explanation: Identify mention items separately

JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

2/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:

Most candidates provided a reasonable answer for this part of the question to warrant a PASS.
Candidates could have begun by giving the main features or summarising the terms used in the question
such as power and interest as related to the four quadrants of Mendelows matrix stakeholder mapping.
Candidates needed to include a discussion on the likely objectives of the stakeholders in each case.
These could have been drawn from the case study. However, candidates had some flexibility in
suggesting what they may be. Stakeholders that were specifically identified in the case study include the
following:

The managing directors of AEL and of JTG these represent the senior management on both
sides of this scenario.

Other functional departments at AEL including R & D, Assembly and Software Development.

Engineers from AELs suppliers.

AELs customers.

Procurement Director from JTG.

There will be many other stakeholders such as the other functions at AEL and JTG, the general public, the
shareholders of the companies, professional bodies and institutions. These were not specifically
mentioned in the case study but were credible stakeholders within the scenario. For each of the
stakeholders candidates should have provided an assessment of their power and interest, and their likely
objectives.
One example of this is outlined below:
AELs MD who would have a great deal of power in terms of hiring/firing the project team, setting its
objectives, allocating resources, and signing off on any solution agreed. The MD will also have very high
interest in having the problem resolved. The likely objectives of the MD will be to resolve the problem as
quickly as possible, at minimal disruption and cost to the organisation, and without harm to AELs
corporate reputation.
Candidates should have provided similar analysis for other stakeholders.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
These answers provided good clear explanation of power and interest of each of the FOUR identified
stakeholders, providing reasons of why the power and why the interest. Likely objectives were also
identified giving good strong justification of again why they needed to be achieved. These answers were
well- rounded and provided a justifiable analysis.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Many of these answers just provided an explanation of the Mendelow matrix without contextualising or
aligning to any stakeholders. Although there was a good description of the four quadrants of Mendelow
matrix, these answers did not address the question as asked and align and analyse the power and
interest to four stakeholders. In these instances it was unlikely that the candidate would achieve a PASS
grade. However, there were some candidates who did appropriately address the question as asked but
omitted some of the analysis, either not addressing the power and/or interest and/or likely objective
analysis. In these instances most candidates achieved a PASS.
Concluding comment:

JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

3/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

An excellent question to test the candidates knowledge and application of the importance of
stakeholders. Candidates who did well in this question provided a well-structured approach aligning
each stakeholder to the power, interest and likely objectives. Some candidates were did not
provide/omitted the analysis for all three of the asks of this question. Candidates who did not achieve a
PASS had potentially not revised sufficiently or possibly did not understand the requirements of this
question.
(b)

Learning outcome addressed 2.3

Command word explanation: Describe Give a full account of something

Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Candidates were expected to provide a brief summary of the various electronic communication
technology tools that Jay could use as part of a communications plan to address the problems at AEL.
These include (but not limited to):

Web conferencing and pod casting

Virtual meetings

Shared access on-line databases

Email

Social media

Corporate websites intranet and internet

Other internet based electronic communication tools e.g. Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram and other
communication methods were also acceptable.
Jay can actively utilise all of the above methods to enable a communication plan which presents the
position at AEL in a controlled and managed way. Each of the methods above may be explained by
candidates related to the case study, an example of which is shown below.
Web conferencing and pod casting - Jay will be able to use this technology to communicate across the
whole organisation simultaneously. The communication can be seen in all parts of the organisation
regardless of their physical geographical location.
The message will be capable of being tightly controlled as the event can be planned and rehearsed prior
to taking place. Jay will also be able to manage the agenda of the conference and control the content of
the pod casts. All of this suggests that this method would be a very useful tool as part of the overall
communication message.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Answers provided were well articulated with excellent explanations and strong examples of each of a
wide range of electronic communication methods that Jay could utilise. It was expected that answers in
this pass grade would analyse a minimum of three electronic communication methods with an in-depth
explanation of the communication and their uses.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Some answers missed the ask of this question and only provided information on a communication plan
with little or no reference to electronic methods. Some candidates who addressed the question correctly

JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

4/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

only provided one or two explanations or just listed out the various methods with little or no
explanation.
Concluding comment:
A straightforward question with an excellent opportunity for the candidates to gain high marks in this
question. Candidates who did not achieve a PASS grade in this question either did not read the question
correctly or did not understand what constitutes electronic communications.
Question 3 Learning Outcome 3
a)
Explain each of the following influencing tactics and evaluate its
potential use by Jay as an approach for exerting influence in the situation
described in the case study.
i. Rational persuasion
ii. Inspirational appeal
iii. Exchange
iv. Pressure

Mark
20 marks

b)
The managing director of AEL has nominated Jay for the important role
of leading the team to investigate the quality problems described in the case
study and working with JTG to resolve them.
Outline one
source of power that Jay will possess as a result of his nomination and
appointment.
(a)
Learning outcome addressed 3.2

5 marks

Command word explanation: Explain give reasons for or account for something
Evaluate calculate or judge the value of something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Candidates needed to explain each of the four influencing tactics and evaluate their uses by Jay as an
approach to exerting influence in the situation described in the case study. Examples of a good answer
should have included (but not limited to) the following explanations:
Rational persuasion this method uses logical argument and evidence, including facts and figures to
demonstrate credibility in the implementation of a plan. The advantages of this approach would have
engaged a range of people and foster discussion and agreement between them. A problem with using this
method is that it only works where there is a valid case to be made e.g. have AEL done all they can to
prevent quality issues arising? A further problem relates to the time that the persuasion may take to reach
a conclusion. The situation for AEL is critical and speedy action is required.
Inspirational appeal this is where Jay needed to use his personal characteristics and charisma to influence
the ideas and beliefs of the team. Jay would be required to demonstrate confidence and enthusiasm and
persuade the group to accept his view. The advantage of this approach is that individuals, once convinced,
are likely to continue to follow the requirements of the leader. A problem with the inspirational appeal
approach is that Jay may not possess the necessary personal characteristics to achieve this approach. It may
also be regarded as shallow and manipulative.
Exchange Jays use of this approach would involve a rationale of give and take in order to achieve his
objectives. The advantage of this approach is that having exchanged currencies to achieve his objectives,
the other party is also committed. The problem with this approach is that there may be an imbalance as
JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

5/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

Jay may simply have very little to offer in exchange.

Pressure this is where Jay makes threats or suggests that sanctions could be applied in order to achieve
compliance. The advantage of this approach in resolving the problems at AEL is that it is quick to implement
and may achieve short term results. The problem of this approach is that it may lead to resentment and, in
the longer term, results may not be achieved.
Candidates may also make reference to Yukl and Falbes (1990) work concerning managerial preferences in
the context of managing down.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Candidates who provided a good in-depth explanation of each of the influencing tactics as well as their
potential use by Jay in the context of the case study were awarded high marks. These explanations also
included advantages and disadvantages of using the four approaches for exerting influence in the context of
the case study. The majority of these candidates also made the connection with the authors Yuki and Falbe.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Many struggled providing the correct explanation of each of the four influencing tactics particularly Rational
Persuasion and Inspirational Appeal. Poor answers provided incorrect explanations of these two influencing
tactics including the application. In most of these instances the responses were weak for a Level 6 standard.
Concluding comment:
What would appear to have been a straightforward question was not so. Many candidates lost vital marks
due to their inability to provide a correct explanation and application of the four influencing tactics. A number
of candidates did provide a reasonable explanation for the Exchange and Pressure tactics but lost out on
providing a correct explanation for Rational Persuasion and Inspirational Appeal. Most of these candidates
did not achieve a pass grade.
(b)

Learning outcome addressed 3.1

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 expected to outline one source of power that Jay will have as a result of his nomination and
appointment. The most likely form of power, based on the French & Raven model, that Jay possesses,
following his nomination and appointment, was legitimate or positional power. This form of power is based
on formally conferred authority related to a position or role within the organisation. The ability to exert
power is based on the position and the role but not on the personal characteristics of the individual.
Candidates may have also suggested other forms of power. However these would have needed to be justified.
Based on the case study scenario, expert power, reward power, connection power may be appropriate. It
should be noted that the question asks specifically for the power based on the appointment and therefore
examples such as referent power (personal power) were not appropriate.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Strong answer provided more than an outline of the source of power. Explanations also included examples of
the practicalities of the chosen power by providing examples of how it looked in the workplace e.g. Position
Power provided Jay with the ability to take an autocratic decision without the input of the team, effectively

JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

6/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

telling the team.

Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Weaker answers provided an inappropriate power source such as Referent Power. Also poorer answer only
provided the correct power source without an explanation to support this answer. These answers lost marks
and as a result did not achieve a pass grade in this question. The question does ask to OUTLINE the power
source meaning give the main features, facts.
Concluding comment:
Again an opportunity to have gained maximum marks. Most answers provided did warrant better than a BARE
PASS. Few failed this part of the question.
Question 4 Learning Outcome 4
(a)
The case study states that the team disagreed strongly about the
potential issues.
Critically assess the potential conflict handling styles that Jay could use to
resolve this situation.

Mark

(b)
Based on the difficult situations and conflicts described in the case
study, explain what a positive win-win outcome could be for AEL and its
customer JTG.

9 marks

(a)

16 marks

Learning outcome addressed 4.2

Command word explanation: Assess evaluate or judge the importance of something

Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
The question asked candidates to critically assess the potential conflict handling style that could be used to
resolve the situation at AEL. The case study stated that the AEL team disagreed strongly about the
potential issues. The potential conflict handling style that Jay could have used and one which was favoured
more by the candidates was Thomas-Kilmann. However, there were other conflict handling styles that
could have been considered to resolve this situation such as Robbins, Mullins and Cornelius and Faire (but
not limited to). Any one of these systems could have been used to effectively answer this question. Details
as follows:
Thomas-Kilmann Methodology:
Forcing/competing this is where a solution is imposed. This breaks down any inflexibility and disregards
concerns. This approach is suitable for use in a crisis, which is what AEL is facing.
Collaborating this is where everyone works together to find an outcome that meets the needs of all
parties. This approach assumes that both parties have some valid arguments and at the end of the process
both parties will be committed to a positive outcome.
Avoiding this is where one or both parties withdraw from the conflict or attempt to sweep it under the
carpet. This is not addressing the conflict; it is rather ignoring it and hoping that it will be resolved on its
own. This may lead to long term frustration and resentment.
Accommodating this is where the issue is conceded by one party without a fight to preserve harmony.
This avoids upsetting people and it may be appropriate where maintaining the relationship is more
important than the issue. This may unfortunately lead to repetition where one party persistently takes

JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

7/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

advantage of the other party.

Compromising this is where both parties trade some concessions for some gains. An agreement is
reached which both parties can accept but it may not be ideal. The solution, in fact, may not meet the
needs of either party.
The above conflict handling styles are based on the work of Thomas-Kilmann. Alternative approaches would
have be accepted where they are suitably justified and explained such as:

Robbins nine possible strategies for resolving problems such as Problem Solving, Superordinate
Goals etc.

Mullins nine possible strategies for resolving problems such as Clarification of Goals, Resource
Distribution etc.

Cornelius and Faire three possible strategies for resolving problems such as win-win, win-lose
etc.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
Answers that were regarded as MERIT and above were well articulated and provided an in-depth explanation
of the strategies presented supported by a practical application of use. Candidates using the Thomas-Kilmann
conflict handling styles also in most instances included a well labelled diagram. Most answers in this grade
were also supported by other conflict handling authors thus reinforcing the candidates knowledge and
understanding. It was also good to see that most of these answers were contextualised to the case study.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
Some of the weaker answers did not provide a comprehensive critical assessment of a conflict handling
system. Even though some candidates had identified the appropriate theory these answers tended to be
spars and just provided a list of what styles or actions were taken such as avoidance, smoothing or win-win
scenario. In these instances the evidence provided was regarded as superficial and therefore did not attract a
pass grade. Other candidates provided evidence which was more appropriate to a change management
scenario such as Kotter and Schlesinger Educate and Communicate, Facilitation and Support or Participate
and Involvement etc. However, some of the explanations given aligned to part conflict handling and did
attract some marks such as Educate and Communicate but insufficient to warrant a pass in this question.
Concluding comment:
Most candidates achieved a pass in the question. However, a small number of candidates tried to fit change
management principles to address this question. These answers did not provide sufficient evidence of
understanding to warrant a pass grade. It was pleasing to see that quite a few candidates provided a more
rounded answer by sighting other authors and not just relying on Thomas-Kilmann styles of conflict handling.
(b)

Learning outcome addressed 4.2

Command word explanation: Explain give reasons for or account for something
Examples of good content/good approaches in answers:
Candidates needed to explain what a positive 'win-win' outcome could be for AEL and its customer JTG. (A
win-win outcome is one of the 3 basic ways in which a conflict can be resolved according to Cornelius and
Faire). Also identifying that a win-win outcome is one in which both parties get close to what they require.

JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

8/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply

This may have also resulted in more open communication, enhanced co-operation and well developed
working relationships. The outcome may in fact be more than either party were expecting due to these
positive approaches. In the case study a win-win outcome would be for AEL to be recognised as a positively
responsive supplier who takes the concerns of its customers seriously and addresses them. A positive
outcome for JTG would be that the problem was completely resolved and their reputation with its
customers is enhanced by the positive, professional approach which was adopted to resolving potential
issues.
Examples of content for merit/distinction grade answers:
It was expected that answers in this pass grade would have required a more in depth explanation of what is a
win-win scenario and how this would have been applied to the difficult situations between AEL and its
customers. Examples were necessary to demonstrate a complete understanding of what a win-win outcome
looked like between the organisations and AEL.
Examples of poorer content/ poorer approaches in answers:
A number of these answers provided a complete overview of this type of conflict resolution which included
win-lose and lose-lose. Candidates purely described this methodology from a win-lose to a win-win, the
three basic ways of how conflict can be worked out. This was not the ask of the question. The consequence
of this was very little explanation of a win-win scenario. A number of candidates neither provided an
explanation of a win-win scenario. In these instances marks were lost.
Concluding comment:
Excellent opportunity to pick up good marks. Candidates must read the question and answer accordingly.

JULY 2016_PD1_EXAM REPORT _LEARNER_COMMUNITY_FV

9/9

Leading global excellence in procurement and supply