MBA 699 Module 2 Milestone One Guiding Coalition example

Milestone One: Forming the Guiding Coalition for Prairieview Life Sciences' Exit Strategy

[Student Name]

Southern New Hampshire University

MBA 699: Strategic Opportunity Management

Module Two Milestone One

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The organization, setting and figures below are a composite written as a model document. No real employer, client, colleague or patient is described.

Milestone One: Forming the Guiding Coalition for Prairieview Life Sciences' Exit Strategy

Purpose

Prairieview Life Sciences, the composite company in this capstone, makes biologic drugs under contract for pharmaceutical clients from its Indianapolis plants, employs roughly 1,480 people and books close to 640 million dollars in revenue a year. The family that founded it, together with its outside investors, wants the board to propose a way to exit within two years, and the vice president of strategy has asked me, as business development manager, to propose the group that will guide the work. A sale is usually treated as a financial transaction, but for the people inside the company it is one of the largest changes they will experience. Kotter (1995) found that transformations falter when no group with enough power and credibility leads them, and the same is true here: the analysis, the buyer conversations and the eventual transition all need a small group that can act together and be trusted.

Selection Criteria

Kotter (1996) described four qualities a guiding coalition needs across its members: position power, so that decisions are not blocked by those left out; expertise, so that relevant perspectives inform choices; credibility, so that the group's conclusions are taken seriously; and leadership, so that the group can drive the process rather than only manage it. For an exit, I added two requirements. Members must be able to keep confidential information, and the group must include people who understand what buyers will examine most closely at Prairieview, which is the stability of its manufacturing workforce and the strength of its regulatory record.

Proposed Members

Table 1 lists the nine proposed members, what each brings and what each will own.

Table 1

Guiding Coalition Members and Responsibilities

Note. Composite roles. An independent board director attends monthly as liaison but is not a member.

Why These Members

The group combines the position power of the chief executive and three senior vice presidents with the expertise that buyers will test. The chief operating officer and the vice president of quality and regulatory are included because a contract manufacturer is valued largely on its capacity, its inspection record and the reliability of its production, and no buyer will proceed without confidence in all three. The vice president of human resources is included because Prairieview's turnover in manufacturing roles is higher than peers', and our attrition analysis will be central to how buyers assess risk. The director of process development is the one member chosen mainly for credibility rather than rank: scientists and technicians trust her, and their confidence will matter if a sale is announced.

Several people were considered and left out. Plant supervisors and site managers have credibility but would face an impossible position keeping the process from their teams. Sales leadership will be consulted on customer contracts through the general counsel rather than joining, because sales staff talk to customers daily and a leak to a major customer could prompt contract renegotiation. Stakeholder analysis research suggests leaders should decide deliberately who participates and in what way, rather than defaulting to seniority (Bryson, 2004).

Confidentiality

Every member will sign a confidentiality agreement, and the project will use a code name in all documents and calendars. Information will be shared on a need-to-know basis, with a log of who has access to the data room. A leak would do its damage long before any buyer arrived, through resignations of the very people whose retention makes Prairieview valuable. If rumors begin despite these steps, the chief executive will address them with a prepared statement confirming that the board regularly reviews strategic options and that no decision has been made, rather than denying the process.

Conflicts of Interest

Some coalition members will be personally affected by a sale. Executives may hold change-of-control agreements or equity that pays out on a sale, and some may expect to lose their roles under a strategic buyer. These interests can bias judgments about which buyer to prefer. Graebner and Eisenhardt (2004) found that in entrepreneurial firms the decision to sell was shared among executives, board members and investors, which they described as a syndicate, and that this shared governance balanced individual interests. The coalition will follow the same principle: members will disclose any personal financial interest in a transaction to the independent director, and the final recommendation will be reviewed by the full board, where owner and investor interests are represented.

How the Coalition Will Work

The coalition will meet every two weeks, with a monthly session including the board liaison. Decisions about the process, such as which buyers to approach and when, will be made by consensus where possible, with the chief executive deciding when consensus fails. Each meeting will review a single tracking sheet showing the status of each workstream, open risks and decisions needed.

The first ninety days have four deliverables: an employee attrition analysis identifying where turnover threatens value, research on the industry and on potential buyers, a first valuation range and a recommendation on whether to engage an investment bank. Each of these will be reviewed by the full coalition before going to the board, so that the recommendation that eventually reaches the owners reflects operations, people, quality and finance together rather than finance alone.

Judging Whether the Coalition Is Working

The coalition should hold itself to a few simple tests. Are its workstreams delivering on the dates set at the first meeting? Has any confidential information reached people outside the access log? Are disagreements, for example between finance's view of value and operations' view of risk, being raised in the room rather than settled privately between two members? At the end of the first ninety days, the vice president of strategy will ask each member and the board liaison to answer these questions anonymously, and the coalition will adjust its membership or methods if the answers show gaps. A coalition that cannot work together candidly in private is unlikely to guide the company well once the process becomes public.

References

Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do when stakeholders matter: Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030410001675722

Graebner, M. E., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2004). The seller's side of the story: Acquisition as courtship and governance as syndicate in entrepreneurial firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(3), 366-403. https://doi.org/10.2307/4131440

Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59-67.

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.