CH-9-10 Organization Development and Sense-Making Approaches – Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach : Book Guide

This Document Contains Chapters 9 to 10 Chapter 9 Organization Development and Sense-Making Approaches Learning Objectives On completion of this chapter you should be able to: • Appreciate more clearly the organizational change approaches underpinning the coach and interpreter images of managing change. • Understand the organization development (OD) approach to change. • Be aware of extensions of the OD approach such as appreciative inquiry, positive organizational scholarship, and dialogic OD. • Understand the sense-making approach to change. Chapter Summary In this chapter, the following approaches to implementing change are discussed. Organization Development Organization Development (OD) has been the fundamental basis of the field for a number of years. It has been modified over time but the underlying assumptions of the approach remain the same. The classic OD approach focuses on change that is planned, incremental and participative. Its outcomes are geared towards the improved effectiveness of the organization and it has a long-term focus to achieve its action-orientated goals. The primary conduits used in change are groups or teams, and this approach focuses on changing the attitudes and behaviors of employees. The chapter discusses debates about the current relevance of OD and the whether its ideas are universally applicable. Appreciative Inquiry The appreciative inquiry approach is a large-scale or large-group intervention technique. It seeks to identify what is currently working best and to build on this knowledge to help develop and design what might be achieved in the future. Four techniques are outlines as key steps in this process: • Discovering or appreciating the best of what is currently practiced. • Building on this knowledge to help envision (or dream) about what the future could be. • Designing or co-constructing (through collective dialogue) what should be. • Sustaining the organization’s destiny or future. Positive Organizational Scholarship Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) emerged in the early 2000s to encompass approaches such as appreciative inquiry and others including positive psychology and community psychology. It moves away from the previous focus on negative outcomes and centres on the positive aspects of organizational life. POS can be considered a coaching method to assist organizations in identifying their “best plays,” to understand the behaviors and dynamics underlying them, and then to work out how to spread them to other parts of their “game” (the organization). Dialogic Organization Development Dialogic OD has arisen just in the last few years and seeks to contrast itself with traditional OD through an emphasis on ‘generative conversations’ rather than persuasion based on the collection of ‘facts.’ Real change is seen as only occurring if there has been a change of mindset, a change of what participants see as the reality of a situation. The move from traditional OD to dialogic OD may also be seen as a move from the change manager as coach to a stronger sense of the change manager as interpreter. Sense-Making Approach The sense-making approach made famous by Karl Weick challenges three key assumptions of other change approaches: 1) inertia, 2) the need for a standardized change program, and 3) unfreezing. Inertia assumes that organizations reach a point in which there is a gap between environmental change and organizational adaptation. Weick argues instead that organizations are in a constant state of flux and are constantly undergoing changes to better fit the environment. Weick also claims that standardized change programs do not trigger the drivers for change and are therefore ineffective. These drivers for change are animation, direction, paying attention and updating and respectful, candid interaction. The third assumption that the sense-making approach challenges is unfreezing. This follows on from the assumption of inertia. If an organization is inert, then in order to change, it must unfreeze. If the concept of inertia is challenged, so is the need to unfreeze. Weick claims that an organization must first be frozen to assess change, rebalanced, and then unfrozen. This is a fundamental challenge to common change management thinking. The sense-making approach to change is most in line with the interpreter image of change, as it alerts managers to the different influence that interpretations of change can have. Sidebars in the Text The following table provides a brief summary of the key points in each sidebar. Sidebar Page OD and the Challenge of Managing Covert Processes • Explains that one of the greatest challenges for an OD consultant are those processes which affect how an organization operates but which remain unseen, unspoken or unacknowledged (part of which has received attention recently through the now much cited concept of ‘the elephant in the room’ 284 OD Values • Presents key arguments for and against the current relevance of OD 285 World Café • Provides a concise description of the World Café form of large-group OD intervention. 288 Large-Scale Interventions: “Listening to the City”… • Hearing the desires of a large number of people is difficult, but not impossible. The New York meeting after 9/11 is an excellent example of how the agenda of leaders was not what the people wanted - in this case the choice of six designs for World Trade Square was rejected for more open space, improved infrastructure and more affordable housing. • In change management it is important to give participants a voice for what they want, and not make the selection of choices for them. 289 World Café on a Small Scale – the Museum of Science and Industry • Describes the use of the World Café approach in other than the usual – large scale – setting and notes some of the contrasting responses from participants. 290 Appreciative Inquiry at Roadway Express • Provides a brief description of the application of Appreciative Inquiry ideas 293 From the Originators of Dialogic OD • In correspondence to the textbook’s authors, Gervase Bushe and Bob Marshak, give an insight into their development of the concept of Dialogic OD. 295-296 Michael Beer on What OD Must Do to be Influential • A leader in the field of organizational change provides his view on what OD needs to do to increase its influence. 297 OD in Different Settings • Provides sources for those who might want to follow-up on the application of OD in one or more of a number of different settings: the Army, non-profit organizations, a military hospital, a private company, a media organizations, mergers and acquisitions, and big data. 297 Exercises and Answers EXERCISE 9.1 (p.304) OD Reports from the Front Line Purpose The purpose of this exercise is to gain a perspective of how organizational development (OD) approach relates to change management. Now that students have some understanding of the factors affecting change management in addition to the ability to identify the six images of changes as well as their own assumptions, an interview with OD practitioners will broaden their understanding of change. Options/Techniques/Requirements Format: • Small groups of two to three students are preferable. • Break the exercise into Part A: the actual answers given by the OD practitioner, and then Part B: the relevant supplementary notes from the text that answer the questions in the exercise. Materials: • Use Table 9.1 Evolution of Organizational Development (p.281), Table 9.2 Classic OD Change Intervention Processes (p.283), and Table 9.3 Is OD Change Culture-Bound? (p.287). Time Required: Finding OD practitioners to interview may take a while for some students, especially if they do not have any work experience or have only a few business contacts. Expected time for the interview is approximately 20 minutes. Analyzing the information from the OD manager (either individually or in a group) can be expected to take 1-2 hours for each interview or story. More time needs to be allowed if students are to formally submit their work for assessment. Undergraduate: Students may have difficulty finding OD practitioners to interview. The instructor could facilitate the exercise by having four or five OD practitioners come to the lecture to talk about how they go about their work. The students could then individually or in groups of two to three complete the questions as a discussion in class time or as a project. MBA/Executive: Students with professional experience will probably have business contacts who know or are OD practitioners. It may be good to direct students towards different industries or organizations so that they can compare and contrast the responses to the questions. Potential Problems and Helpful Hints • During the interview, it is important for students to listen to the story the OD practitioner is telling and note the language they use, especially any new terminology. Debriefing A helpful approach is to summarize each group’s general conclusions from the interviews with the OD practitioners. Then revisit the six images framework and mental models for approaching change. Guidelines for Answers to Questions The answers to the questions in the exercises will need to be assessed according to the experience and education level of the students. This exercise requires you to interview two organization development practitioners about how they go about doing their work. Compare and contrast them in terms of the following issues: • Their background. This will be more of a personal description of the OD practitioners’ educational background and professional experience. • The values they espouse. The values held by the OD practitioners will be in terms of what is important to them, and any information that indicates the “lens” they use for viewing situations will help uncover the values of the OD practitioner. A good answer will relate the answers to the content of the section Traditional OD Approach: Fundamental Values (pp.281-282). • The steps that they say they use in approaching a consulting assignment. The student’s description of the OD practitioner’s approach should clearly identify the process used by the practitioner as their framework for consulting on change. A good answer will draw connections with the information found in The OD Practitioner section (pp.282-283) and would extend into issues raised in the sections on large-scale change (pp.287-291), Appreciative Inquiry (pp. 291-293), Positive Organizational Scholarship (pp. 293-295) and Dialogic OD (295-297). • The tensions they identify in working as an OD practitioner. The tensions identified by the OD practitioner can be related to the discussion found on p.283-287. • Their perceptions of the way the OD field has changed and likely changes into the future. Comments are likely to cover some of the wide range of criticisms and developments discussed on p.283-297. • What general conclusions do you draw about the practice of OD? The answer to this question would involve the interpretation of the information the students gathered from the interviews and from reading the chapter (especially, p.280-297). EXERCISE 9.2 (p.304) Designing a Large-Scale Change Intervention Purpose The purpose of this exercise is to enable students to understand the value and limitations of the large-scale approach to change. Options/Techniques/Requirements Format: • Individual, pairs, or small groups of three to four students Materials: • Flip chart/easel and paper for group work. • A helpful approach would be to talk to each student or group (depending on how the exercise is structured) and make sure they have an appropriate “current issue” for their project. Time Required: Finding the current issue may take a while for some students (see below). Consideration of the issues takes at least 30 minutes (for a very brief coverage) through to several hours if a detailed report is required. This exercise makes a good assignment for individuals and, in particular, groups. Undergraduate: Students may need some time to decide on the current issue in the neighbourhood. To help facilitate this process the instructor could provide some examples of topics. Examples of these could be such things as community action against high-rise development in their neighbourhood MBA/Executive: Students with professional experience would probably be more aware of large-scale efforts in the community than undergraduate students. The intervention examples they select for the exercise and their answers to the questions should be more sophisticated than those submitted by the undergraduate groups. Potential Problems and Helpful Hints • Students could be directed to look at local lobby groups or associations that have a focus on one area in the community to get some ideas. Debriefing One useful way to run this session is to start by asking students to identify similarities and differences in the approaches described. Reviewing OD and the approaches to intervention is a helpful way to complete this topic. Guidelines for Answers to Questions The answers to the questions in the exercises will need to be assessed according to the experience and education level of the students. Choose a current issue in your local neighbourhood. This exercise gets you to figure out how you would design a large-scale change intervention program in relation to this issue. Give consideration to the following issues: • How many people would it make sense to involve? Answer: The answers to this question would need to be considered according to the type of project and the size of the neighbourhood. Care would need to be taken to identify the “real” neighbourhood that is affected, interested or involved. The definition of a suburb on a map may not match the real grouping of dwellings or area that is the target of the intervention. Students need to consider those who have an interest in the area even if they do not live there, e.g., is the old shopkeeper who has run his business in the area going to be informed and included in the intervention, even though he lives two suburbs away (and out of the area)? But then, is it relevant to include him? The type of activity could affect others outside the targeted area: for example the diversion of the through traffic in a suburb to a main road may increase the level of traffic at the pedestrian crossing near a school. The power of designing an intervention is in considering all those involved and being willing to be flexible to re-define who is actually affected and should be included. • Where and when would you hold it? Answer: The final choice of where the intervention is held should be made after considering factors such as the location of the neighbourhood, facilities available in the area, the climate (could it be open air or only inside?) and what people think of the venue(s) that are available (what is the message being sent by the location?). In regard to location, it should send a positive message. An example of the problems that can arise in this type of situation is given by the experience of a group working to assist a large number of refugees who had arrived in a suburb. The group had organised voluntary language programs, free child-care and play groups for mothers with preschool children, a youth club, local health nurse, a special resource library of books in their own language, advice for job seekers and interpreters. However, although the location chosen for these support services was in the local area, the refugees would not go to the place. The problem was that it was adjacent to the local police station. The refugees had come from a country where the local police had been very corrupt and had persecuted this particular tribal group. The refugees were afraid of the police and would not go to the support service. When this was realized, the support services were moved to what was considered to be a less convenient place (and away from the police station). The people started coming to the support service, and the place was busy. • How would you ensure that you have a representative cross sample of relevant people in the room at the same time? What data sources would you need to achieve this? Answer: Ensuring that representative cross-samples of the relevant community are present entails the students considering their methods of identifying all the groups involved and making sure all the groups are contacted. The issue also needs to be explained to the target groups in terms that ensure the issue is seen as relevant – after all, the intervention will only be successful if it gains the support of the majority of the people in the community. • Who are the key decision makers in relation to this issue? What arguments will you use to get them to attend the meeting? Answer: The answer to this question would need to relate to the representatives that were identified by the students in answering the previous question. Key Decision Makers: 1. Executive Leadership: CEOs, CFOs, and other top executives who have the authority to approve or influence major changes. 2. Department Heads: Managers and leaders of departments directly affected by the change. 3. Change Management Team: Specialists responsible for planning and implementing the change. 4. Stakeholders: Representatives of groups impacted by the change, such as employee unions or client liaisons. Arguments to Encourage Attendance: 1. Impact on Organizational Success: Emphasize how their participation is crucial for the successful implementation and overall success of the change. 2. Influence and Input: Highlight the opportunity for them to provide valuable input and shape the direction of the change to align with their strategic goals. 3. Risk Management: Point out that attending will help in identifying potential risks and developing mitigation strategies early on. 4. Collaboration and Alignment: Stress the importance of their involvement in ensuring that all parts of the organization are aligned and working collaboratively towards the change objectives. • How will you structure the agenda of the meeting? What would be the best way of doing this so that people who attend on that day have appropriate buy-in to it? Answer: The answer to this would need to link the type of issue that the large-scale intervention program is addressing with the priorities of the different stakeholders. Awareness would need to be shown by the student(s) of how these groups may want different resolutions to the issue. Agenda Structure: 1. Welcome and Introductions (5 minutes) • Briefly introduce participants and outline the purpose of the meeting. 2. Overview of the Change (10 minutes) • Provide a concise summary of the change, its objectives, and the anticipated impact. 3. Rationale and Benefits (10 minutes) • Explain why the change is necessary, including expected benefits for the organization and stakeholders. 4. Detailed Plan and Timeline (15 minutes) • Present the proposed plan for implementing the change, including key milestones and deadlines. 5. Roles and Responsibilities (10 minutes) • Clarify the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders and decision-makers in the change process. 6. Open Discussion and Feedback (20 minutes) • Allow time for attendees to ask questions, provide feedback, and express concerns. 7. Next Steps and Action Items (10 minutes) • Summarize the key takeaways, outline immediate next steps, and assign action items. 8. Closing Remarks (5 minutes) • Recap the meeting’s objectives and reinforce the importance of collaborative effort. Best Practices for Buy-In: 1. Early Engagement: Involve key decision-makers in setting the agenda to ensure their concerns and priorities are addressed. 2. Clear Communication: Use clear and concise language to explain the change, avoiding jargon and ensuring that everyone understands the purpose and benefits. 3. Interactive Elements: Incorporate opportunities for discussion and feedback to make attendees feel heard and valued. 4. Action-Oriented Focus: Clearly outline how their involvement will impact the success of the change and what specific actions are required from them. 5. Follow-Up: Send a summary of the meeting along with action items and deadlines to reinforce commitments and maintain momentum. • How would you run the actual meeting? Answer: This would involve a description of the agenda and order of points of information that are to be presented to the meeting, and who will speak of these issues. There may be a place for the key decision makers to speak at the meeting but this would need to be supported by reasons why the students elect to include them in the program. • What technology would you need to make it work well? Answer: Students need to identify relevant technologies, e.g., a public address system, video relays, an Internet link-up, etc. The appropriate type and level of technology will also depend on the expectations of the community. Technology Needs: 1. Presentation Software: Tools like PowerPoint or Google Slides for visual aids and agenda display. 2. Video Conferencing: Platforms like Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or Google Meet for remote participants. 3. Collaboration Tools: Shared documents or whiteboards (e.g., Miro, Google Docs) for real-time collaboration and note-taking. 4. Survey or Polling Tools: Applications like Slido or Mentimeter for gathering instant feedback and questions. 5. Audio Equipment: Quality microphones and speakers to ensure clear communication. • What would people take away from the meeting? Answer: People should at least take home with them an understanding of the issues involved, and the consequences if the project is successful, fails, or what will happen if they do nothing. This would be best supported by a handout, and information on who to contact if they have more questions, how to contact them, and where to find more information. • What follow-up actions would you plan to ensure that actions and decisions flowed from it? Answer: This would involve feedback from the participants, reports for the participants so they are up-to-date with what is happening, flyers, handouts, a web page, email broadcasts, household letter, newspapers adds etc. Most of all it would involve contacting those involved, talking with people, having a stand at the local shopping centre, posters in shop windows etc. The aim is to have a presence in the community where the intervention is proposed and for the people in that community to feel a sense of ownership in order to improve the probability of success. • What possible funding sources might you draw on to finance the meeting? Answer: State or local council (unlikely for the initial stage of the intervention), community groups or associations hosting the meeting (although this may send the wrong message), donations from individuals who believe that the change is necessary, community fund raising, donations “in-kind” from businesses for equipment or the venue, sponsorship for some of the activities. • As a result of considering such questions, what new issues emerge for you, as a large-scale change intervention agent, to consider? What specific skills would you need to make such an event work well? Which of these skills would you need to develop more? Answer: This will need to be personal assessment of the “new issues” that arose from the exercise and specific skills needed for the event to run smoothly. Lastly, the student would need to assess what skills they need for this to be completed successfully. New Issues to Consider: • Ensuring comprehensive stakeholder engagement • Managing diverse perspectives and conflicts Skills Needed: • Facilitation: To guide discussions effectively • Technology Proficiency: For smooth operation of tools • Communication: To clearly convey messages and updates Skills to Develop More: • Conflict Resolution: To address and mediate differing views • Advanced Technology Skills: For managing sophisticated tech setups EXERCISE 9.3 (p.304) Making Sense of Sense-Making Purpose The sense-making framework is one of the methods of implementing change. This exercise is for the purpose of familiarising the student with this approach. Options/Techniques/Requirements Format: • Preferably in small groups of two to four students. Materials: • Table 9.7 Eight Features of a Sense-Making Framework (p.300). • Flip chart/easel and paper for group work. Time Required: Time for the class exercise is approximately 1hour. The exercise could be stopped after the students have completed the assessment of the eight elements of the sense-making framework have been assessed. At this point students could be required to make informal group presentation to the class, followed by a short class discussion of the issues so far. This would help with the debriefing at the end of the exercise, and ensure the students understand the framework correctly. This could then be followed up in groups to answer the last section of questions concerning the control and implications for adopting the sense-making approach to organizational change. Undergraduate: Students may need some help in identifying current change in an organization due to their limited exposure to organizations. The identification of a current public issue may need to be guided by the instructor; students could then be given examples or could be required to submit their proposed topic to the instructor for approval before they start the project. MBA/Executive: Students with professional experience would probably be more aware of current change occurring in an organization. They may decide to choose to use a current public issue about which “something must be done,” rather than a business example. One way to challenge this group is for them to be required to nominate a sense-making project for a business change and for a current public issue, although only one of the issues need be the focus for answering the questions. Potential Problems and Helpful Hints • Identification of the appropriate current public issue may be more difficult and some examples may need to be suggested by the instructor. Debriefing A helpful approach would be to review with the class the eight sense-making elements. Guidelines for Answers to Questions The answers to the questions in the exercises will need to be assessed according to the experience and education level of the students. Identify a current change in an organization with which you are familiar. Alternatively, identify a current public issue about which “something must be done.” In relation to the change issue, think about what sense-making changes might need to be enacted and how you would go about doing this. Answer: Students will need to describe the issue in enough detail so that the proposed sense-making changes can be broken down into specific actions for change. Assess this in terms of the eight elements of the sense-making framework suggested by Helms Mills and as set out in Table 9.7: • Identity construction • Social sense-making • Extracted cues • Ongoing sense-making • Retrospection • Plausibility • Enactment • Projection Students will need to demonstrate an understanding of the eight elements listed in relationship with the issues they have selected for a sense-making change. All comments will need to be relevant to the issue they selected (business or public). Change Issue: Organizational Restructuring Sense-Making Changes and Actions: 1. Frame the Change: Clearly define the purpose and benefits of the restructuring to all stakeholders. 2. Communicate Continuously: Use regular updates and multiple channels to keep everyone informed. 3. Engage Stakeholders: Involve key individuals in the planning and decision-making process. 4. Address Concerns: Provide forums for feedback and address worries transparently. 5. Adapt Strategies: Be flexible and adjust plans based on feedback and emerging issues. 6. Promote Understanding: Use training and support to help employees adapt to new roles and processes. 7. Monitor Impact: Track progress and make adjustments as needed to ensure the change is effective. 8. Celebrate Milestones: Recognize and reward achievements and progress to maintain morale. Implementation: • Kick-off Meeting: Announce the change, outline the plan, and address initial questions. • Regular Updates: Provide ongoing communication through meetings, emails, and reports. • Feedback Mechanisms: Set up channels for employees to voice concerns and suggestions. What ones did you feel that you might have most/least control over? Why? Answer: The answer to this question will indicate the student’s ability to assess the level of control they believe they would have over the elements in relation to the issue they selected. Most Control Over: • Frame the Change: You can clearly define and communicate the purpose and benefits, as you control the messaging and initial strategy. Least Control Over: • Adapt Strategies: Adjusting plans based on feedback and emerging issues can be challenging as it depends on external factors and responses from stakeholders. What implications does this have for adopting a sense-making approach to organizational change? Answer: The implications for the sensing-making approach will need to tie together the eight elements with the assessment of the ones over which students believe they have the most/least control. Next they would have to assess how this would affect the project. EXERCISE 9.4 (p.305) Interpreting the Interpreter: Change at Target 1. What do you see as the symbolism associated with the Target CEO Brian Cornell’s actions? Answer: Based on the proposition that managers’ actions carry symbolic significance, the following comments could be made about the CEO Brian Cornell’s actions: • He values what’s good for the business over pomp, deference and the usual trappings of seniority. For example, his impromptu store visits showed that he was not interested in actions that were rituals without real benefit for the business. Store visits were to be done in a way that made it likely that he would get authentic information not just well-rehearsed, specially chosen responses. • Similarly, his desire to be in the most effective location for access to key data on the business rather than in the CEO suite, reinforced his message that decisions should be made on the basis of what was ‘best for the business.’ • The change to on-line shipping policy signaled two things: (i) we are an a company that is an aggressive competitor and (ii) decisions should be made with speed, not caught up in time-consuming internal processes. • The relaxed dress code and his eating habits signal a desire to have a more egalitarian culture where status differentials are reduced and communication improved. • The changed recruitment policy could signal a receptiveness to fresh ideas and a willingness to try new things. Note: While not everyone in a particular organization will make the same interpretation of the actions of a manager, there will often be a common view held by the majority of people. The views of students when interpreting Cornell’s actions could provide an interesting natural experiment: do they largely agree about the symbolism they feel is likely to be associated with his actions? 2. If you were a Target employee, what might you conclude about the nature of the change happening in Target? Answer: Conclusions might vary given that employees may have a range of different views on the virtues of Target in its pre-Cornell form. Some people are likely to warmly welcome Cornell as a breath of fresh air who is bringing overdue changes to Target. Others, more attached to Target’s established practices, might be less welcoming of the changes. Either way, both groups would be likely to conclude that a change was underway and that the new CEO was a man who “put his money where his mouth is’ rather than someone who talked about change but failed to deliver. Views might also differ amongst employees on the sustainability of the change in approach. In such a situation, a lot can depend on the organization’s performance under the new CEO; adverse financial performance can – fairly or not – influence perceptions of the wisdom of the changes (and a possible threat to the new CEO’s tenure). However, the wise move for most employees would be to see Cornell’s actions as a form of communication – a message about the sort of organization he wants Target to be and the sort of behaviors he expects of Target employees. As a Target employee, you might conclude that the nature of the change is likely focused on enhancing efficiency, modernizing operations, and improving customer experience. You may also see it as an effort to stay competitive in the retail market and adapt to evolving consumer preferences. EXERCISE 9.5 (p306) Case Study Analysis: Change at Dupont 1. To what extent are the following approaches to change embedded in the Dupont story (justify your answer, providing specific examples): Answer: a.Organizational Development At Dupont, change was “planned and executed just like any project”. This action-orientated culture can be attributed to the organization development approach to change. The aim of management is to improve the effectiveness of the plant through planned changes. The planned changes focused on “getting rid of one operation and installing another.” The reason for the narrator of the story’s presence, the change consultant, is to help increase the capabilities of the organization is to address their desire to “continuously improve.” b. Appreciative Inquiry Following the AI and POS approaches, Dupont showed evidence of implementing large scale changes to build on what was currently working for them by increasing their capabilities. Dupont management worked together to create a joint vision of the future, and they looked to the academic world to help provide new direction. Their model for teamwork, similar to the NASCAR metaphor, gave the employees a ways to work together and accomplishing change. The Leadership Core team was instructed to introduce change as an experiment, to watch and assess change as it was implemented and stop the process if unsuccessful. This shows how the organization worked as a team to implement large scale change when building the capabilities of the organization. c. Sense-making The experiments that were implemented at Dupont introduced a variety of ways that change could be framed and made sense of by the employees and management. By using a sense-making approach and suggesting possible outcomes of these experiments, the management team at Dupont is able to plan for unintended outcomes of change programs and build internal systems to pre-empt these change. The sense-making approach was also encouraged by the change consultant brought in. He interviewed workers and managers at the plant to pull together an idea of the knowledge and capabilities held within the organization. 2. In your opinion, how compatible are these approaches? Why? What evidence is there in the Dupont story for your answer? As a change manager, to what extent could you utilize insights from each approach? Answer: Although these approaches have differing views of change outcomes, they are compatible in their focus on organizational capabilities as the key to managing change. The different approaches show the different sides of the change at Dupont and allow the change manager to come at the change from many angles. In the case we read how all the approaches to change give the managers an instrument and a language with which change can be introduced. Students may have different views on how these insights can be utilize in approaching change. Broadly these issues are: • Organization Development: Being participative can increase the chance of achieving planned change. • Appreciative Inquiry/Positive Organizational Scholarship: Building on what is positive about existing ways of doing things (“what works”) can help to diffuse the change and increases its impact and possibility of success. • Sense-Making: There are different ways that change can be framed and viewed; understanding employees’ sense-making provides an additional basis for managing change processes. The approaches in the Dupont story are generally compatible, as they often complement each other in driving organizational change. For example, Dupont’s focus on both innovation and operational efficiency reflects a balance between strategic and tactical change management approaches. Evidence in the Dupont Story: • Dupont’s commitment to innovation is evident in its investment in research and development and its development of new products. • Operational efficiency is demonstrated through its lean manufacturing processes and continuous improvement initiatives. Utilizing Insights as a Change Manager: • Strategic Change: Use insights from innovation to foster a culture of creativity and adaptability. • Operational Change: Apply efficiency practices to streamline processes and reduce waste. Combining these approaches can help manage change comprehensively, addressing both long-term goals and immediate operational improvements. 3. Imagine you are an OD practitioner brought into Dupont at the time of the Orlon manufacturing operation closure. Describe the steps that you would take to help manage this change based upon action research. Answer: As an OD practitioner students should follow the common steps used to manage change. These key steps are: 1. Problem identification 2. Consultation with an OD practitioner 3. Data gathering and problem diagnosis 4. Feedback 5. Joint problem diagnosis 6. Joint action planning 7. Change actions 8. Further data gathering In groups the students can use these steps to describe the changes at Dupont and then assess what is missing from this analysis that can be gained from using either of the other two approaches in this chapter or approaches in Chapter 8. 4. As a class, decide on a fictional large scale change that could affect Dupont. Divide the class into three groups (and role-play the situation in two acts). In Act 1, one group will take a problem solving approach and introduce the change with the second group (Dupont staff affected by the change). In Act 2 a third group (the appreciative inquiry group) will introduce the change with the second group (Dupont staff affected by the change). After the exercise, compare and contrast the steps taken in each approach. From the point of view of group two (Dupont staff), which approach seemed to work best? Why? From the point of view of groups one and two, how easy/difficult was it adopting this approach? What broad conclusions can be drawn? Answer: This exercise is designed to simulate the impact of the two differing approaches: problem-solving approach versus building on what works well. Before beginning, the groups should go through material in the chapter and select four or five issues that they should focus on, e.g., including a large variety of participants from across the organization in the process. At the end of the exercise the class should debrief together. The following points and questions may be relevant: • Group 2 became central because they had experience of each approach. • What would motivate them best? • How credible was each approach? • How did they feel about the “deal”? • How convincing was each approach? • Could any of the other approaches to change (from the following chapter or from personal experience) have been more useful? Chapter 10 Change Management, Processual and Contingency Approaches Learning Objectives On completion of this chapter you should be able to: • Understand and identify the factors that can cause change to fail. • Assess the strengths and limitations of checklist for managing change effectively. • Appreciate more clearly the organizational change approaches underpinning the director and navigator images of managing change. • Evaluate the advantages of stage models of change management • Assess the theoretical and practical value of processual perspectives on change. • Understand and apply contingency approaches to change management. Chapter Summary The chapter begins by addressing various explanations given for the failure of organization change initiatives, then moves to a description and discussion of three further approaches to managing change: “change management”, “processual” and “contingency approaches.” Change Management Change management approaches focus on strategic, planned and usually large-scale organizational change. They are usually developed by consulting firms or change consultants. Some take the form of a checklist of “things to be sure to do”, and may be presented as a series of steps (hence, “stage models”) to be undertaken to enhance the prospects of success. A common assumption is that intentional change outcomes can be achieved through a series of planned steps, although the approaches vary in terms of the number and types of steps they outline. Perhaps the most famous of these models is Kotter’s Eight-Step Change Management Model outlined below. Step Actions 1. Establish the need of urgency • Analyse the competitive environment • Identify problems/crises and opportunities 2. Form a powerful change guiding coalition • Assemble a group with power to drive the change • Ensure this group works as a team 3. Create a vision • Develop a vision that provides a focus for the change and strategies to achieve the vision 4. Communicate the vision • Role model the behaviour implied by the vision • Use multiple channels to constantly communicate the vision 5. Empower others to act on the vision • Remove organizational policies and structures that inhibit achievement of the vision • Encourage risk taking 6. Plan for and create short-term wins • Wins help support need for change • Rewarding wins helps to provide motivation 7. Consolidate gains • Continue to remove organizational policies and processes that inhibit change • Reward those who engage positively with the change • Maintain momentum: establish new, related change projects 8. Institutionalise new approaches • Link change to organizational success Stage models are usually easy to understand and may give managers a comforting feeling as they provide a guide to action, but they have their limitations. For example, (i) they ignore the legacy effects of past changes and how that may impact on how people act, (ii) the treatment of sustaining change is rather limited, and (iii) the advice is generic with little advice on how specific context can be taken into account. Expanding on these three points, there are some related issues with stage models that could be discussed with students: • The steps may not be sequenced appropriately for the specific situation • There may be too many steps or too few steps for the specific situation • The time spent on each step may vary greatly between organizations. • The resources, both physical and human, necessary at each step is not considered in the models. • That there may be more than one change being managed in an organization at any one time is not addressed in the step models. • That steps should sometimes be revisited after a certain point in the change process is not part of step models. The rise of change management approaches has led to a debate between its proponents and proponents of Organizational Development approaches. While change management is criticized as being “faddish” and focusing only on the needs of management rather than on more humanistic organizational values, OD is criticized as lacking relevance, especially in relation to strategic, large-scale change. This debate is still being played out. Process Perspectives The processual approach views change as a continuous, often political, process. The way change unfolds is contextual and its outcomes are the result of a complex interplay of different interests, both internal and external to the organization. A key use of this approach is in providing, often retrospectively, a detailed analysis and understanding of change - not as a prescriptive model of change. Contingency Approaches Contingency approaches represent another variant of change management approaches. Drawing on the director image they maintain that successful organizational change outcomes can be achieved, but the approach for achieving them will vary, depending upon the change context, in particular the scale of the change and the receptivity of organizational members for engaging in the change. Managers need to adopt different change management styles depending on these circumstances. However, contingency approaches remain less common than change management approaches. They are more complex conceptually, require a lot of contextual knowledge and require managers to be able to change their behavior as context changes. By comparison, checklist and stage models have a simplicity that is attractive to many managers. Sidebars in the Text The following table provides a brief summary of the content of each sidebar. Exercises and Answers EXERCISE 10.1 (p. 341) Develop Your Own Change Model Purpose This exercise is designed for students to create an approach to managing change that draws on the approaches presented in this chapter but also allows for the inclusion of other ideas. This exercise also Options/Techniques/Requirements Format: • Preferably in groups of three to four students for the creation of the model Materials: • Flip chart/easel and paper for group work. • Chapter 10 approaches to managing change Time Required Time for the class exercise is approximately 45 minutes to discuss the different approaches to managing change, consider new ideas, and create the group’s composite model. Discussion of key management skills adds another 20-30 minutes. Another 30 minutes will be needed if groups are to present their models to the class. Undergraduate: Students who have limited professional experience will have less to draw upon but can still at this stage of the course be expected to have formed some views on what approach to managing change they would advocate. MBA/Executive: Students with professional experience should have a good understanding of the issues which they can bring to discussions. Potential Problems and Helpful Hints • Lack of work experience will make questions 5 and 6 difficult to answer. Debriefing In the debriefing the instructor should lead a class discussion of groups’ constructed change models Students should be challenged to think of their strongest skills and be aware that their strength could become a weakness if out of balance with their other skills. They can also be challenged to invest some time in improving their management skills where they perceive themselves to be comparatively weaker. Guidelines for Answers to Questions The answers to the questions in the exercises will need to be assessed according to the experience and education level of the students. The answers given here are only a guide. In this chapter, we have explored five change checklists, four stage models of implementation, the processual approach to change, and four contingency frameworks. These approaches are similar in some respects and different in others. Can they be combined? Try the following experiment: 1. Bring the advice from these different models into a single list, omitting the overlaps Answer: Students should show evidence of reviewing the different approaches before arriving at their list. Consolidated List of Advice from Different Change Models: 1. Define Clear Vision and Objectives: Establish what the change aims to achieve. 2. Develop a Communication Strategy: Plan how to effectively share information about the change. 3. Engage Stakeholders: Involve those affected by the change early and continuously. 4. Assess Organizational Readiness and Culture: Evaluate if the organization is prepared for the change. 5. Allocate Resources: Ensure necessary resources are available for the change. 6. Implement Training and Development: Provide training to equip employees with required skills. 7. Monitor and Measure Progress: Track the progress of change implementation. 8. Adapt and Be Flexible: Adjust plans based on feedback and changing conditions. 9. Address and Resolve Conflicts: Handle resistance and conflicts that arise. 10. Evaluate and Refine: Continuously assess the effectiveness of the change and make improvements. 2. Reflecting on your own experience and knowledge of organizational change, consider what issues and steps are missing from these guidelines; add these to your master list. Now create your own composite model; if possible, do this as a group activity. Answer: Expect students to be able to explain the rationale for inclusion of new items. Additional Issues and Steps for Change Management: 1. Build Change Leadership: Identify and develop leaders who will champion the change. 2. Create a Change Coalition: Form a group of influential supporters to drive and sustain change. 3. Foster a Change-Ready Culture: Cultivate an organizational culture that embraces change. 4. Ensure Alignment with Strategic Goals: Align change initiatives with overall business strategy. 5. Develop a Risk Management Plan: Identify potential risks and develop strategies to mitigate them. 6. Plan for Change Sustainability: Establish mechanisms to ensure the change is maintained over time. Composite Change Management Model: 1. Define Clear Vision and Objectives: Establish goals and communicate them clearly. 2. Develop a Communication Strategy: Create a plan for how information will be shared. 3. Engage Stakeholders: Involve affected parties and gather input. 4. Assess Organizational Readiness and Culture: Evaluate preparedness and cultural fit. 5. Build Change Leadership: Develop leaders to support and drive the change. 6. Create a Change Coalition: Form a group of influential supporters. 7. Allocate Resources: Ensure necessary resources are in place. 8. Implement Training and Development: Provide training for new skills. 9. Monitor and Measure Progress: Track progress and performance. 10. Adapt and Be Flexible: Make adjustments based on feedback. 11. Address and Resolve Conflicts: Manage resistance and conflicts. 12. Evaluate and Refine: Continuously assess and improve. 13. Ensure Alignment with Strategic Goals: Align change with business strategy. 14. Develop a Risk Management Plan: Identify and address potential risks. 15. Plan for Change Sustainability: Ensure long-term maintenance of the change. This model incorporates a comprehensive approach to managing change by integrating key elements from various models and adding critical considerations based on personal experience and knowledge. 3. Can you prioritise this advice? What items are more important, and which are less important? Taking a contingency approach, in which organizational contexts do particular items become more or less significant? Answer: Look for the application of contingency thinking in the answers. Prioritized Advice: 1. Define Clear Vision and Objectives: Most crucial for guiding the change. 2. Develop a Communication Strategy: Essential for keeping stakeholders informed. 3. Engage Stakeholders: Important for buy-in and support. 4. Build Change Leadership: Key for driving and sustaining change. 5. Monitor and Measure Progress: Vital for assessing effectiveness and making adjustments. In high-stakes or rapidly evolving contexts, clear vision and stakeholder engagement become more significant. In stable environments, risk management and sustainability planning gain importance. 4. Can you identify a preferred sequence of change implementation steps? And can you explain and justify this recommendation? Answer: Students will realize that different models not only involve different steps but present them in different order or sequence. Ask students whether there is a logical sequence of steps then ask whether one step must be completed before the next (a sequential model) or whether subsequent steps can be started before previous one are completed (a model allowing some concurrent action). Preferred Sequence of Change Implementation Steps: 1. Define Vision and Objectives: Establish clear goals and the desired outcomes of the change. 2. Develop Communication Strategy: Plan how to inform and engage stakeholders effectively. 3. Engage Stakeholders: Involve key stakeholders early to build support and address concerns. 4. Build Change Leadership: Appoint leaders who will champion and guide the change. 5. Implement Change: Execute the change plan while maintaining flexibility for adjustments. 6. Monitor and Measure Progress: Track progress against objectives and gather feedback. 7. Adjust and Refine: Make necessary adjustments based on feedback and performance metrics. 8. Sustain and Embed Change: Reinforce the change and integrate it into organizational culture. Justification: This sequence starts with establishing a clear vision to guide all subsequent actions. Effective communication and stakeholder engagement are crucial for gaining support. Building strong leadership ensures the change is driven effectively. Implementing the change and monitoring progress help in making real-time adjustments. Finally, sustaining the change ensures long-term success and integration. 4. Looking at your composite change management model, identify three management skills associated with each of the elements. Use this as the basis of a personal assessment; what are your strongest and your weakest change management skills? Answer: Identifying the key management skills will demonstrate theoretical knowledge of change models and an understanding of the practical “actions/skills” need for implementation. The second part of the question will be a personal assessment. 5. Looking at the elements in your composite change management model, and reflecting on your own experience of organizational change, which elements are usually handled well, and which are often handled badly? Why do you think this is the case? Answer: This question provides an opportunity to see whether any specific skills are regularly cited as underdeveloped amongst managers. Handled Well: 1. Defining Vision and Objectives: Clear vision often sets a strong foundation for change. 2. Engaging Stakeholders: Successful engagement typically builds support and reduces resistance. Handled Badly: 1. Communication Strategy: Poor communication can lead to misunderstandings and resistance. 2. Adjusting and Refining: Inadequate feedback mechanisms can result in missed opportunities for improvement. Reason: Defining vision and engaging stakeholders are often prioritized and well-executed, while communication and adjustment processes can suffer due to lack of focus or resources, leading to ineffective implementation and resistance. EXERCISE 10.2 (p. 342-4) The British Airways Swipe Card Debacle 1. With reference to John Kotter’s eight stage model of change, what mistakes did BA make in this instance, and what aspects of the change management process did they handle well? Answer: Mistakes: • Failed to establish a sense of urgency • Lacked sufficiently powerful group to guide the change (but see comment below) • Lacked consistent vision • Communication of vision was not effective Well Handled: • It’s hard to identify anything that was well handled, however it is possible that the group formed to guide the change was strong enough but failed because of their inaction in regard to the factors noted above. 2. How can the union’s response to the introduction of swipe cards for check-in staff be explained from a processual perspective? If those who were managing this change had adopted a processual perspective, what particular issues would have appeared to be more important, and how would they have addressed those issues? Answer: The processual approach views change as a continuous process, and it is a useful way of analyzing change retrospectively. The CEO states that, using this approach, the new system was not the right move at the time. Retrospective reflection offers interesting insight into the strike. The swipe cards were introduced at the start of one of BA’s busiest periods – not necessarily the most opportune moment. The staff was not committed to the change – they had voiced their objections but the system was forced on them irrespective of their objections. What the union viewed as a “history of broken agreements” would have been a key contextual factor. The management team, in a view put to the CEO – and with which he did not disagree - was guilty of “crass stupidity.” While no approach could have guaranteed a different outcome, more clarity on intention and the likely effect, coupled with better timing of the action may have brought about a rather different outcome. 3. Choose one of the contingency frameworks that was introduced in this chapter and carry out a similar assessment. Which aspects of the organizational context of this change were addressed in an appropriate and effective manner? Which context factors were overlooked? Answer: Contingency approaches challenge the view that there is “one best way” and argue that the style of change will depend upon the scale of the change and the receptivity of organizational members for engaging in the change. From a Stace-Dunphy contingency perspective it could be argued that management used an incorrect change management style (coercive) given that in terms of two of the key contextual factors, the focus of the change was neither a survival matter nor did the change have to be made with such speed as to rule out consultation. Management appeared to be caught up in their change program that embodied a “one best way” approach to restructuring BA. 4. Is there one change perspective, or a combination of change perspectives, that provides the best way of understanding the swipe card issue? Why? Answer: Students should be encouraged to analyze the swipe card issue by using a combination of change perspectives. Each approach can be useful. The processual approach is effective as a model for the retrospective analysis of change and can be insightful in understanding the way past changes at BA are likely to affect future ones and what the key issues are likely to be in the BA context. The change management approach highlights the intended outcomes of change and what was hoped to be achieved – and the inattention to following a variety of necessary change steps. The contingency approach (checklist/stage) highlights the need to modify the change management style to the context of the change. Together these approaches give a multi-faceted view of change at BA. Note: at this point, the opportunity exists to link back to the approaches to managing change discussed in chapter 9 – organizational development (OD) and its various derivatives, and sensemaking. If this link is used organization development can be cited as alerting change managers to the importance of recognizing strategies of involving staff in change decisions that affect them in order for them to be more accepting of the introduction of change. Similarly, sense-making opens up the analysis to multiple interpretations of change and the need to listen to multiple voices. Telling a persuasive story about the change and getting BA staff to accept this version could be an important aspect of managing the change. The contingency perspective combined with the processual approach best explains the swipe card issue. The contingency perspective addresses how different organizational contexts and complexities influence the effectiveness of change, while the processual approach highlights the importance of ongoing adjustments and stakeholder involvement. This combination allows for a nuanced understanding of the issue by considering both the specific context of the swipe card implementation and the evolving nature of the change process. 5. You are a change management consultant hired to advise top BA management on how to avoid a situation like this happening in the future. What advice will you offer, and on which change implementation perspectives will your advice be based? Answer: There are many defensible answers to this question as there are often a number of different ways/philosophies/approaches that if implanted well will improve a situation. Sometimes, putting together a mix of actions drawn from different approaches can work as long as the actions are mutually supporting and not undermining/contradicting each other. Debrief In the debriefing, some general issues are likely to emerge such as: • Ignoring the concerns of staff will not make the change successful • Timing of change is important • Trying to understand why staff are concerned, i.e. family commitments and constraints, can give insight into change issues that will arise • Ineffective management of customers can damage the reputation of the organization • It is important to acknowledge growing resistance to change. At BA this resistance began when jobs were cut. • Management should clearly communicate the change and allow for feedback to be heard Students can draw the following broad conclusions from this analysis: • A combination of approaches to change can help to provide a more rounded analysis and understanding of what needs to be addressed in a change process. • Multiple perspectives play an important role in understanding change as they each shed light on different elements of the process. • Change managers should be open to the use of multiple perspectives and should understand the inherent problems in applying only one perspective. I would advise BA management to focus on contingency planning and processual change management. Ensure thorough stakeholder analysis and engagement throughout the change process, and adapt strategies to fit the specific context and challenges of each change initiative. Implement regular feedback loops and flexible adjustments to address issues as they arise, preventing similar problems in the future. This approach will help in aligning change strategies with organizational needs and managing evolving complexities effectively. EXERCISE 10.3 (p.344-345) Case Analysis: The Italian Job 1. Refer to the change kaleidoscope, and identify the contextual constraints and enablers affecting the changes that Erick Thohir and his management team want to implement. Answer: The eight dimensions of the kaleidoscope, and their roles as constraints or enablers, are: time enabler change is urgent: the club is heavily in debt, the team is performing poorly, fans are angry, UEFA is investigating financial irregularities, facilities are ageing and unsuitable scope constraint scope of changes is broad: Thohir wants to develop a new business model, based on US experience, to generate revenue, targeting Asian markets, involves changing the organization culture preservation constraint Inter Milan is a strong brand with 280 million fans (some ‘hardcore’), and an ‘Italo-centric’ culture; management team, sports media, and fans questioned aspects of the planned changes diversity constraint Thohir and new top management appointments support radical change; hardcore fans will resist, other fans are sceptical, management and sports media question the new top team’s actions capability enabler new senior management recruits - chief executive, marketing director, chief finance officer, global partnership specialist - bring relevant skills and new ideas capacity constraint limited previous change experience; no past experience of operating the business model that Thohir wanted to develop readiness constraint mixed and uncertain support for proposed changes; management questioned the recruitment of a well-known Manchester United player; ‘hardcore’ fans wanted an all-Italian team power enabler a sports fan, Thohir owned a 70 percent share in the club; track record included setting up the Indonesian basketball association, and investment in US basketball and major league soccer 2. Based on your analysis of the context, what advice can you give to Erick Thohir and his team about the change implementation design options that they should consider? Answer: The six aspects of implementation design where options should be considered are: Design Options Advice type pace the changes in priority order; first deal with the regulatory investigation, then focus on players and team performance, while developing the new product development and marketing strategy, along with the sponsorship and tours deals (which take longer to set up); when finances are ‘fixed’, focus on new facilities start point get the support of a significant proportion of the club’s fans, not all of whom are ‘hardcore’, and also of the team’s players, for the proposed changes; ‘sell the benefits’ to these groups first, not in terms of financial performance, but in terms of improving the team’s performance on the football pitch style with major pockets of resistance, this should be a mix of autocratic (‘this is what we want to achieve’) and participative (‘how do you think we can do this?’) target the main focus must be on improving team performance, because only then will the new business model (product merchandising, sponsorship deals) work; the secondary target is of course financial, but a change programme which is ‘all about the money’ is less likely to succeed in this context interventions the new recruits to the top team signal the need for and nature of the forthcoming changes; can the leaders of fan clubs/groups be persuaded to support the changes openly?; can the club be open with the sports media with regard to the club’s true financial situation?; organize training for club staff and players on product merchandising and sponsorship; ask top team new recruits from US and UK to hold master classes on how their clubs became profitable roles the new recruits to the top team must each be allowed to develop their own remit - in collaboration with each other; involve staff and players in focused project teams to drive different aspects of the change programme; if possible recruit fans as advisers to those change teams; set up a steering group chaired by Thohir with oversight and review responsibilities (but not day-to-day operational control) 3. Also based on your context analysis, what major mistakes would you advise them to avoid when implementing their proposed changes? Answer: Design Options Advice type do not try to address all of the dimensions of this change agenda at the same time start point do not overlook the views of the team’s players and fans style do not dictate these changes; stakeholder support is essential target do not prioritize the new business model at the expense of team performance interventions do not ‘tell and sell’, overlooking other communication and involvement tactics roles do not expect the small top management team to implement change on their own OPTIONAL EXERCISE (p.324) Will Heinz Swallow the 3G Capital Recipe? Note: “Will Heinz Swallow the 3G Capital Recipe?” is included in the textbook as a sidebar (p324) but it can also serve as an exercise. The sidebar contains the following questions. 1. What do you think would be the elements in a checklist if one was used to introduce change in Heinz? Answer:. Checklist Elements for Introducing Change in Heinz: • Stakeholder Analysis: Identify key stakeholders and their concerns. • Communication Plan: Develop a clear communication strategy. • Change Objectives: Define clear, measurable goals. • Resource Allocation: Ensure adequate resources and support. • Training Programs: Implement training for new systems or processes. • Feedback Mechanisms: Set up channels for ongoing feedback and adjustments. • Implementation Timeline: Create a detailed timeline with milestones. • Risk Management: Identify potential risks and mitigation strategies. 2. What in you assessment are the strengths and limitations of the 3G change checklist? Answer: Strengths and Limitations of the 3G Change Checklist: • Strengths: Emphasizes rigorous cost control and operational efficiency, provides a structured approach for change implementation. • Limitations: May overlook cultural aspects and employee morale, can be too focused on financial metrics at the expense of holistic change management. Purpose This exercise is designed for students to gain some practice in identifying the application of a checklist in the context of organizational change. “The 3G Way” can be seen as a form of checklist that determines how 3G managers go about managing change in acquired companies. Options/Techniques/Requirements Format: • Preferably in groups of three to five students. Materials: • Change by Checklist (p. 319-325) • Flip chart/easels and paper. Time Required: 15-20 minutes for the group discussion plus 5mins/group to report their analysis (verbally to class as a whole). Undergraduate: Students should find this a reasonably easy exercise because all the information they need is in the exercise details and the associated pages of the chapter. MBA/Executive: Students with professional experience will probably be able to complete this exercise very quickly. Their task may be assisted by some of them having experience of, or knowing of, the application of similar checklists in organizations. Potential Problems and Helpful Hints • No problems expected. Debriefing Focus on similarities and differences in the reporting of group analyses. MBA/Executive students classes may include those with strong opinions one way or the other about checklist-driven change and this can provide a useful basis for in-class debate about the being checklist-driven (sometimes thought of as “template-driven”) vs. variation (in change approach) by context. Guidelines for Answers to Questions 1. What do you think would be the elements in a checklist if one was used to introduce change in Heinz? Answer: • The 3G Way acts as a change checklist because it specifies particular practices that should be applied by 3G managers when having to implement change • The 3G Way is not explicitly provided in this case description but from the instances of action taken one might deduce that elements of a #G Checklist would include: • Move swiftly (once in a position to do so) • Replace existing senior staff (with those culturally attuned to how 3G want the business to be run) • Sell assets and ditch practices not consistent with running a lean business (e.g. corporate aircraft, individual offices, expensive hotel rooms) • Slash any costs deemed “non-strategic” • Micromanage use of resources (e.g. printer usage) • Expect longer work hours • Treat human capital as not a key component of corporate success • Assume that people are driven by economic incentives, not any sense of purpose or mission; provide finance incentives for meeting performance targets (e.g. stock options, bonuses) 2. What in your assessment are the strengths and limitations of the 3G change checklist? Answer: • The potential strength of the 3G checklist is that it had proven effective for 3G in previous takeover situations. If so, its template-like quality means that the managers given the change task don’t have to have much skill in analysing what approach would work best in a given context because their job is more to faithfully follow the checklist. • The potential limitations of the 3G change checklist are that they may be too generic and insufficiently adaptable to specific contextual conditions. For example, the two business journalists quoted in the case raise the question of whether what they call “the cult of cost cutting” is consistent with running a business that competes in part through innovation. Solution Manual for Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach Ian Palmer, Richard Dunford, David A. Buchanan 9780073530536, 9780073404998