(Solution) ICS Learn CIPD_5CO01_25_01 5C001

Solution

AC 1.1: Evaluation of Organisational Structures under Different Ownerships

Flat non-hierarchical structure

Calmere House had a non-hierarchical structure in the flat organisation of Kirsten, and it suited a small individualistic care home. It was an organisation in which open communication, involvement of staff and prompt decision making was made easy. Kirsten was also comfortable with this style as her form of participations was mostly one to one meetings and staff forums where she could listen to opinions and respect the views of her staff. The involvement of employees in making management decisions created an unwavering feeling of ownership, confidence, and responsibility and led to a committed and collaborate workforce (CIPD, 2020). This enhanced high staff retention rates, personalised care, and unified culture on the grounds of initial principles of the home.

Advantages:

Stressed employee empowerment, communication and autonomy – Reduced hierarchy ensured that the employees were more involved in the process of decision making and were made to feel empowered to work resulting in ownership and cooperation.
Its values and organisational culture were person-centred and fostered great organisational culture – The structure promoted open communication and policy of inclusiveness creating a trust and commitment to quality and personalised care (Taylor and Woodhams, 2022).

Disadvantages:

Too reliant on a single leader, which was not sustainable, the fact that all the workers were reporting to Kirsten meant that the operations were highly reliant on her and her leadership (Robbins & Judge, 2024)
The absence of clear division of roles, as this would reduce the efficiency of operations as the company grew in scale, because the structure was not official, duplicated efforts led to a deteriorated execution of responsibilities

Hierarchical bureaucratic

Chaffinch Group did not implement a hierarchical bureaucratic structure, which is a characteristic of large-scale organisations, when they bought Calmere House. Such a model encompasses several levels of management, well-identified positions, and top management control. Though this type of system may introduce consistency, alignment of policies, and cost-effectiveness, it conflicts with the culture of relational and individualised care that Calmere House was reputed to have (Stuckenbruck, 1979). Together with an autocratic leadership style, the new structure restricted the input of the staff and emotional attachment to the organisation. Consequently, workers were excluded, disengaged, and high turnover came along with absenteeism and deteriorated the quality of care (Taylor and Woodhams, 2022).

Advantages:

Offers effective lines of command and standardisation- Employees know their roles and responsibilities, which contribute to the preservation of order and consistency in operations (AIHR, 2024).
Enforces compliance and cost control in multiple locations – The centralised processes enable easier enforcement of the policies and more cost effective budgeting throughout the organisation.

Disadvantages:

Obstructs autonomy and employee agency- The high level of decision making reduces the input of personnel hence resulting in disengagement and frustration.
Desensitises to individualised care and leads to disengagement – The inflexible structure will not consider individual needs, and this will undermine the morale of the staff and impact the quality of care

Reasoned Judgment

The flat structure of Calmere House by Kirsten was appropriate because it promoted person-centred care, open communication, and empowering the staff. The hierarchical model promoted by Chaffinch emphasises control and standardisation at the expense of engagement and individualised care and could not fit in a more inclusive and trust-based culture like the one Calmere House has.

AC 1.2: Rational Approach to Strategy Formulation at Chaffinch Group

Identifying an Area for Service Improvement

Calmere House has traditionally been known as a person-centred high-quality care. Nevertheless, with Chaffinch Group, residents and employees complain of less satisfaction because of strict procedures and less focus on a person. Service improvement can therefore be focused on such an area as improving the personalisation of care planning, i.e. the tailoring of activities, meals, and care schedules based on the preferences of the residents (CIPD, 2019).

Using a Rational Approach to Address the Issue

The scientific methodology will allow Chaffinch to use the tools based on data, e.g., SWOT and PESTLE, to determine the internal weaknesses (e.g. high turnover, loss of reputation) and external threats (e.g. ageing populations, cost of living). The analysis will give a systematised basis to redesign the care planning of Calmere House to fulfil customer expectations better.

Analysis tools

SWOT and PESTLE Issue Analysis

Strengths include Chaffinch’s funding assistance and trained workers, weaknesses include bureaucratic decision-making processes, opportunities include care planning through technological innovation, and threats include higher operational cost (CIPD, 2025). PESTLE depicts demographic shifts and rule changes, enabling Chaffinch to position services to get ahead of the resident needs rather than fall behind.

Establishing Goals to Develop Clear Goals

Based on the analysis, Chaffinch can set SMART goals such as increasing the resident satisfaction scores by 15% over the next 12 months and reducing complaints for inflexibility of care plans by 20% over the same period. Specific, measurable goals focus resources in the right direction and allow progress to be tracked, which in turn allows transparency and accountability throughout the organisation.

Generating a range of Ideas and Solutions

Based on data and stakeholder feedback, Chaffinch could create a suite of solutions consisting of introducing digital care-planning software with resident choice, creating small “care pods” with settled staff teams to improve care continuity, and flexing mealtime and activity times (CIPD,2024). These solutions must be created with frontline staff and residents to encourage buy-in, foster creativity, and make sure that emotional and cultural factors are merged with evidence-based decision-making.

Evaluation of the Generated Solutions

With the application of cost-benefit analysis and feasibility scoring, Chaffinch is able to balance each solution’s impact on residents’ welfare, staff workload, and cost implications. This rational evaluation avoids choice by convention or intuition, prevent instances of costly mistakes, and align actions with evidence.

Choosing Best Ones – Decision Making

After evaluation, Chaffinch must select the best evidenced options with most support for success, for example, trialling electronic care planning and introducing care pods. Decisions should be transparent and by agreed criteria (impact, feasibility, stakeholder acceptance), with open communication to all to build ownership.

How Will You Implement the Strategy? (Horizontal/Vertical)

Implementation needs to blend vertical alignment—leadership support, finance, policy, and KPIs—with horizontal integration—training front-line staff, interdepartmental working, and provision of channels of feedback. For example, the introduction of electronic care plans could begin with a pilot for rollout. This ensures strategic objectives flow from top management but also allow ground staff to customize processes to suit residents’ needs.

AC 1.3: External Factors Affecting the Residential Care Industry

The residential care industry in the UK is sensitive to external environmental factors that impact the provision of care service, financial sustainability and labour sustainability (Dunkerley, 2022). We can analyse them using PESTLE framework. The two external factors are observed today in a negative and positive manner.

Negative Factor – Rising Operational Costs

The increase in the operating costs particularly the utilities and wages is one of the important external factors that have negatively affected the residential care industry. Inflation and energy price increases have increased care homes cost by a colossal percentage and made profits thin and caused providers to be in a cash crunch (Oner, 2025) . In the meantime, the production costs are on the rise because the countrywide minimum level of wage increase and competitive labour market. This hurts the profitability and homes struggle to make investments in the training, development and quality improvement programmes. This also influences recruitment since many care homes are not able to compete with the salary being paid in other industries. The next point we can observe at the Calmere House is that rising costs led to hiring agency workers that may still deteriorate the quality and stability of services due to the absence of familiarity with the residents or organisational values.

Positive Factor – Technological Innovation in Care Delivery

Alternatively, the industry is positively gaining through the adaptation of assistive and digital technologies. Devices such as digital care planning systems, fall detectors, and telecare monitoring sources are improving the efficiency of the residents and enhancing their safety (CIPD, 2013). The technologies enable the reduction of the administrative pressure on the staff, improving the communication and the outcomes of care. Long-term, they can bring about cost-saving through reduced hospitalisation, medication control. This translates to the workforce front that the younger more tech savvy workforce is increasingly becoming more attracted to tech enhanced work environments which translates to better recruitment and retention (Oner, 2025). Also, technology will help facilitate more individualised and active care that will increase the satisfaction of residents and bring new customers, which will have a positive impact on the occupancy rate and revenues. In the example of the providers, like the Chaffinch Group, the appropriate usage of technology may be the key factor in preventing the downward tendency in the number of residents in Calmere House.

AC 1.4: Assessing the Use of Technology at Calmere House

Please click the following link to access this assessment in full