| B1.3 |
Determination when managing difficult situations. |
M5-Assignment Workbook Unit 705 V3-DA.docx, relevant sections |
As-Is Meetings Analysis Report V0.1.2: sensitive leadership capacity data. Anti-racism forum (Executive Summary). |
- As-Is: presented sensitive leadership capacity data to Director without softening the findings
- Anti-racism forum: sustained advocacy for policy development despite waning institutional interest
- SWANN: managed 31 outstanding referrals (27 May), no SLA, TBC strategic owner; reduced to 13 (Shropshire Mental Health) by 2 June; mailbox encryption fix in place; did not stall
- £121m financial emergency: maintained focus on project delivery under systemic pressure
|
| B2.2 |
Seeks views of others; values diversity. |
M4-Assignment Workbook V3 reSubmission.docx, relevant sections |
M2-360 Feedback.pdf, Q1, Q6, Q14. M4-Development Dashboard. |
- 360 Feedback: Q1, Q6, Q14: seeking others' views and valuing diversity
- SWANN requirements workshop: user stories confirmed with full team, not imposed
- As-Is: crowd-sourced data from 73+ staff; incorporated AD's anomaly feedback before wider release
|
| B3.3 |
Positive and adaptable; responds well to feedback and need for change. |
M5-Assignment Workbook Unit 705 V3-DA.docx, relevant sections |
M5-Development Dashboard: B3.3 examples. |
- Deprioritised EHM Mapping pragmatically when capacity required elsewhere; not defensive
- Sprint approach adapted to council context: phased delivery over rigid waterfall
- Natasha's anomaly feedback: responded constructively, updated analysis before wider release
- DISTINCTION: Justify adaptability: sprint chosen specifically because council context required visible early wins to maintain stakeholder confidence
|
| K6.1 |
Stakeholder and supplier relationship management; negotiation; influencing; networking. |
M7-Assignment Workbook Unit 706 V3.docx, p.10, para 1.1 |
FFP Comms Update (Evidence 9): influencing Director, AD and PM without line authority. |
- Model: Mendelow's power/interest matrix. Used to differentiate engagement by stakeholder
- Influenced Director Shaw to commit to reviewing his own meeting attendance
- No line authority over Director, AD (Natasha Moody) or Programme Manager (Charlotte Saywell)
- HWBB adoption: influenced Louisa Jones cross-organisationally
- DISTINCTION: Evaluate the theory: Mendelow useful but doesn't capture emotional resistance; supplemented with trust-building first
|
| K6.2 |
Collaborative working; delivery through others; sharing best practice. |
M7-Assignment Workbook Unit 706 V3.docx, p.11, para 1.2 |
FFP Comms Update (Evidence 9): methodology adopted by HWBB. CLT recommendations. |
- Four CLT recommendations emerged from collaborative analysis with AD Natasha Moody
- HWBB: As-Is methodology shared and applied cross-organisationally
- SWANN requirements workshop (2 June): user stories confirmed collaboratively with team
- Good practice shared externally. HWBB, CLT. Not kept within PMO.
|
| K6.3 |
Manage conflict at all levels. |
M7-Assignment Workbook Unit 706 V3.docx, p.19 |
As-Is Meetings Analysis Report V0.1.2, Section 2.3: sensitive findings; 6 decisions flagged for Director sign-off. |
- As-Is: six decisions with political sensitivity flagged for Director sign-off (not avoided)
- As-Is: names anonymised below Service Manager level; ethical conflict prevention
- SWANN: Jim Ford's Phase 1 concern addressed proactively in Phase 2 design
- Provider response format incompatibility resolved through engagement not mandate
|
| K7.1 |
Interpersonal skills; forms of communication; verbal, written, non-verbal, digital. |
L7-Mod 2-Assignment Workbook V5.2.docx, pp.11 to 12 |
M2-360 Feedback.pdf, Q37, Q38, Q40, Q44. |
- Adapted communication for each audience: Director (strategic framing), operational staff (practical impact), providers (format compatibility)
- Written: As-Is Report, SWANN proposal, cost avoidance model, ToR
- Verbal: SWANN partnership presentation, requirements workshops, provider meetings
- 360 Feedback: communication style rated positively across all modes
|
| S6.1 |
Build trust; effective negotiation and influencing; manage conflict. |
M7-Assignment Workbook Unit 706 V3.docx, relevant sections |
FFP Comms Update (Evidence 9): Director committed to reviewing own meeting attendance. |
- Director Shaw publicly committed to reviewing own meeting attendance. Trust earned through evidence not authority
- Jim Ford: Phase 1 concern (low referrer uptake) acknowledged and designed into Phase 2 solution
- ICE Creates: provider format incompatibility resolved by adjusting Phase 2 portal design
- Lisa Middleton "manage closely": trust built through regular check-ins and co-design
|
| S6.2 |
Identify and share good practice; collaborate inside and outside organisation. |
M7-Assignment Workbook Unit 706 V3.docx, relevant sections |
FFP Comms Update (Evidence 9) : HWBB adoption. M4-Development Dashboard: West Midlands Coaching Pool. |
- HWBB: As-Is methodology shared with Louisa Jones for cross-organisational application
- West Midlands Coaching Pool: sharing coaching practice externally as volunteer
- CLT recommendations: good practice findings escalated to Corporate Leadership Team
- SWANN: requirements workshop outcomes shared across SWANN partnership
|
| S7.2 |
Chair meetings and present using a range of media. |
M7-Assignment Workbook Unit 706 V3.docx, relevant sections |
M7-Development Dashboard: meeting facilitation examples. |
- 27 May: chaired SWANN partnership meeting, presented Phase 2 overview
- 2 June: facilitated first Phase 2 requirements workshop (D_007 in decision log): user stories agreed, field list finalised, build sequence set. 10 June: facilitated second, deeper requirements workshop: signposting list categorised into themes with Co-pilot analysis, failure demand principle applied to mandatory field discussion, acceptance criteria framework agreed for electronic referral form and provider portal. This workshop took place after EPA submission on 5 June and provides additional post-submission evidence of structured requirements elicitation leadership.
- FFP: presented As-Is findings to Director, AD and Programme Manager using infographic + report
- EPA presentation: 20-minute structured delivery with slides, notes and RAID data
|
| S7.3 |
Active listening; challenge and give constructive feedback. |
M4-Assignment Workbook V3 reSubmission.docx, p.12; Context Statement |
M2-360 Feedback.pdf, Q14, Q43. M4-Development Dashboard. |
- 360 Feedback Q14, Q43: listening and feedback specifically cited
- Coaching practice: active listening as core competency: 15 coachees, measurable outcomes
- SWANN: provider concerns heard, incorporated into design (format incompatibility resolved)
- Natasha Moody's anomaly feedback (18 Feb): responded constructively, worked through points
|