Browse Tag: Organizational Change

Organizational Change related academic materials e.g essays, assignments with sample answers, research papers , journals e.t.c

Leading Organizational Change – Assignment And Sample Solution

Assignment Instructions

Purpose of Assignment

The purpose of this assignment is to provide an opportunity for the student to integrate and apply the individual and organizational leadership learning from this course by developing a plan for organizational change.

Assignment Steps

Review course assignments for Weeks 1-5, including the results of the Mastering Leadership Self-Assessment taken in Week 1.

Select an organizational change in your company or one you know.

Develop a 1,050-word analysis designing the action plan for you, as a leader, to address the organizational change.

Include the following, in any sequence you choose:

  • Identify the organizational change process steps you would take and prioritize the order in which you would take them.
  • Include both individual and organizational leadership actions.
  • Scholarly citations must be given to support your rationale and proposed actions.

Format your assignment consistent with APA guidelines.


Sample Solution – Adopting New Technology in an Organization


Change taking place in this case is transitional change involving the implementation of new technology. The company is adopting technology in dealing with the various work processes such as communication, billing and reporting. The new technology will involve an information system that will help in enhancing the work processes in the organization. The implementation of new technology borders on the change of dealing with business processes and aligning them with technology (Burnes, 2014). Technology as such will be embraced in the carrying out of various processes in the organization and training, and development sessions will be conducted to ensure the employees can deal with changes being implemented. Tasks and skills, in this case, are important and therefore training and preparing the workers on how to deal with and embrace the change is quite remarkable. Selection of systems of the new technological changes further has political inclinations and may be meddled with in the process. People may not readily accept the changes and may find ways to oppose it, and it is therefore important for efficient communication to be in place for the workforce especially about the information system. The organization, therefore, has to decide on systems and their approval through communicating effectively to the workforce and management.

The absorbing of the new technology in the workplace is another important issue. Users should be able to use the new technology quite efficiently. This will arise by the adoption of training and development procedures (Griffins, 2014). Employees are part of the organization and are an important part of the organization especially in executing the daily tasks that help keep the organization running smoothly. Their involvement in the change process is quite important. Not only will the management be involved in the use of the technology but also the employees. Therefore, it will be important to come up with various ways that will help in ensuring that the employees understand and know how to use the new technology.

The new technology will be designed and tested by the respective developers. The developers will work together with the management and staff to ensure that the adoption of the new technology takes place smoothly. The experts implementing the program for the company will implement it especially in accordance to the needs of the organization (Campbell, 2014). The development of the technology especially into the business processes will be done to ensure the new technology fits with the business activities of the company and processes of the organization. Testing the technology will be another important step in ensuring that it fits in with the organizational needs. The IT department will test the program to ensure that it is well adopted in the company. Any bugs found will be dealt with especially by informing the developers.

Investigation of new technology is important before setting it up in the organization. Technology has many benefits, which can improve a company’s performance, and it is important to ensure that the processes are correctly linked to the working activities to provide more efficiency. Identifying various issues and seeking a solution to them will help in ensuring that the change processes takes place smoothly in the organization. The plan will concentrate on dealing with the various businesses processes as much as possible to ensure that disruption to the business processes is minimal. Knowing the technology will give the company enough information that will help in preparing the workforce (Waddell, Cummings & Worley, 2007). The company, in this case, will consider the use of new technology and the effect it has on the workforce and its processes. Therefore, the new technology will follow the various needs that the organization needs to be improved and workers told what to do.

Training and launching will further be done to ensure that the workforce is ready to embrace the new technology. The implementation of the technology will take place to ensure that workers graph the usage of the different systems. The workers will learn through the different pieces of training on how to use the different systems. Launching of the new technology and offering training will further ensure that the employees are not surprised when the company changes the various businesses processes (Moran, 2015). The launch will ensure that the people, in this case, are part of the process as they will be involved in the execution of the new change. The employees will be trained on the skills they need to get and further shown on how the technology will aid them in improving on their daily tasks.  The trainers will have follow-up programs to ensure that each worker understands the use of the technology. The plan will further include the evaluation process to be carried out to ensure that the new technology is effective.

Having change agents in place is important for the implementation of the new technology. Change agents understand more about the technology and will help in guiding their respective departments towards adopting the change. The change agents will be told of the various processes and enlightened to ensure that they educate their fellow colleagues at the workplace to prevent any negatively that may arise due to the adoption of the new technology. Such people will further help in lessening any opposition and reduce the resistance to change (Stanford, 2015). There are many processes that need to be changed in the adoption of the new technology, and therefore it is important to ensure that the worker is taken along systematically to understand them. The collaboration of the worker in the process of introducing the new technology will be important.

Coming up with the new technology, in this case, concerns the adoption of new technology to carry out business processes like communicating and the changes that will affect each worker. Communicating the change process is further going to be used in ensuring that the workforce has more knowledge on the new technology. Since each has different learning styles, the training will follow the various needs to ensure that all workers understand the process easily (Roper et al., 2013). Different kinds of learning materials will show the staff the various ways on using the new technology. The workers, in this case, will have to deal with the various communication processes especially in ensuring that the process is wholly understood by the company. Improving communication channels from the management to the workforce will further help in creating a better environment and boosting the learning process.


The process of dealing with new technology in the workplace is quite challenging. New technology entails changes to work processes that employees have long gotten used to. Therefore, to come up with new technology will involve collaboration between the workforce and the IT department. Collaboration between the departments, developers, and the workforce is important in ensuring that more people understand its use. Dealing with the interface will mean the involvement of the employees together with their feedback to ensure that the system in place is effective and helps in improving the work processes of the organization. The teamwork processes that will ensure the effective working and adoption of the technology will be done through the various interactions with the software and by the IT department.

Organizational Change Initiative

Organizational change is part of the overall strategy for business success. Change is often a byproduct of leaders and managers continually striving to improve operations. When there is a difference between expectations of a change initiative and the reality of the change, productivity can be impacted. Leaders may choose a rational or an emotional approach to change and may have very different results depending on which approach they choose. You have decided that you want to implement a “casual Friday” policy at your place of business. What would you need to do to make this happen if you used a rational versus emotional approach to this organizational change initiative?

Eight Stages of Successful Large-Scale Organizational Change – Assignment And Answer

Sample Answer


Therefore being a change agent Top-Down company needs a lot of restructuring to ensure that the company fits the culture of Bottom-Up Company. The change agent in such a case will use bottom UP strategy in guiding the change process in Top-Down Company to a less bureaucratic company. The change agent will thus focus on creating more flexibility in the company while at the same time creating an atmosphere of goal directedness (Kotter & Cohen, 2012). As such, there will be a propensity to create an environment that will create great necessity of change in the Top-Down company.

Therefore for the change to occur it will be necessary for the company to take measures that will ensure that the employees are educated on the change to be made to ensure that they adopt to exchange process as soon as possible. The change process from a bureaucracy to a more flexible culture that is goal oriented will take some time but as s change agent it is important to consider the various processes to be changed in the company (Todnem, 2005). Therefore, to create a policy the company will have to follow the laid down procedures by Bottom-UP Company to ensure that the various changes made are in accordance with the laws and regulations governing businesses. The policies will be changed to include the different frameworks that are inclusive of the employees and that help the company to change from a bureaucratic organization to a more flexible company.

The eight stages of change in large-scale organizations help businesses pass through the change process in an effective manner. Increase urgency is the first step to bring out the need for change in people whereby they start stating their need for change (Schröter et al., 2005). In addition, the urgency for change focusses on decreasing anger, fear and complacency that hinders change from happening. The second step is building the guiding team. The right people should be acquired who have the necessary characteristics that will help the change process succeed. The team in such case need assistance to be trustworthy and have commitment to each other.

The third step is getting the vision right. It involves the facilitation over the traditional forms of analysis budgets and financial plans. A strong vision is important in directing the company towards succeeding in the change such it involves assisting the guiding team to come up with strategies that are strong and that will help develop a strong vision. The fourth step is communications buy in. involves the conveying of heartfelt, credible and clear messages regarding the direction towards change. Such buy in involves the actions of people. The use of new technologies, deeds and words will help in overcoming distrust and further making communication channels clear. The step helps in preventing distrust and confusion.

The fifth step is to empower action. It involves the removal of barriers that stand in the way of those who want change. The taking of the barriers helps the people to view the change positively. The six step is to create short-term wins. Creating enough wins as quickly as possible to reduce skepticism, pessimism and cynism. Ensuring that all people in the organization in this case the Top-Down company see the successes. The seventh step is not to let up. The company in such an instance will focus on chasing after change and not giving up until the change is established. As such, the process will include passing through the difficulties and the easy times without jumping one stage for the other (Reicher, 2004). Therefore, it involves pursuing the vision until it manifests.

The final step is to make change stick. It involves making sure that people stick to the new ways that follow the changes in the structure and systems of the organization. As such, the company moves from its normal traditional mode of working to the new methods that merge with the vision of the company.

Download full sample paper or order a unique paper at an affordable price.


 Managing Organizational Change

Individual Project 2-3 pages

The planning for the community building session is almost complete. The last details are how to conduct the plenary sessions for sharing information across groups to develop key priorities and themes that will need to be addressed.

There are 2 sessions that need to be planned. One is to review the work done by intact work teams. In this larger session, the goal is to spot patterns and identify themes that can be used to plan actions. These patterns or themes will come from the stop-continue-start charts developed by each functional group. In this way, not only will the changes that need to happen be identified, but aspects of effective work (those things that work well and should be continued) can also be reinforced.

The external consulting team strongly recommended a “cross functional by level grouping” for the first step. Their aim is to promote understanding of priorities and show how different issues at different levels of the organization can be aligned. The internal consulting team is excited about being the primary facilitators for these sessions. Everyone recognizes that a structured approach will be critical (for timing and to control decision-making inputs). The approach called Nominal Group Technique, or NGT, seems to be ideally suited to this task.

You want to prepare yourself for conducting the session. Use the library, Internet, or other resources to research NGT. Because each grouping will be of differing size, you want to tailor the overall steps of NGT to the situation you will facilitate. To do this, you must create a meeting session plan – a 2 – 4-page document that will answer the following questions:

  • What is the goal of the session?
  • How will the nominal group technique be used to achieve this goal?
  • How will the members of the team work together (guidelines for effective participation)?
  • What specific steps and tasks will be involved in achieving the goal?
  • How much time will be allocated to each step or task?
  • What voting mechanism is most appropriate for the size of the group and the specific stage of the process?
  • What will the outcome look like? What will the group present to the other levels?


Discussion Board #1  3-5 paragraphs


Just like many other areas of business, organizational change has been impacted by technology. In your Discussion Board post, address the following:

  • How has the need for organizational change consulting been impacted by technology?
  • How has the process of organizational change been impacted by technology?
  • Do you see these changes as positive or negative? Explain.
  • What specific types of software are used during the organizational-change process?
  • Predict how technology will continue to shape the area of organizational change management.




Discussion Board #2  4-6 paragraphs


Download this background of work redesign done by the internal consulting team. As external consultants, you want to tell them what they did well and what concerns you have about their process and recommended actions.

Include the following information:

  • Create one list to specify the analysis and work redesign strategies used.
  • Create a second list identifying the factors for change that were successfully addressed.
  • Create a third list identifying any factors that deserve more attention. For at least one of these factors, identify how you might have used a different change management practice to handle it.

Remember that no matter how many individual items are raised, feedback should be focused on the top 2 or 3 actions to change. Pay particular attention to issues related to handling resistance because they pertain to creating conditions for effective change. What they did well could be a longer list and does not need to be limited.


The Kurt Lewin’s Change Model’s Organizational Change Stages

The KLCM, which Kurt Lewin formulated, entails three stages: the unfreezing stage, the changing stage and then the unfreezing stage. The model is rather simple and practical, especially in relation to the appreciation of change processes. By and large, the model views change processes as entailing the development of the notions that specific changes are required, then advancing towards the desired and new behaviors, and ultimately affirming, or cementing, the behaviors as desirable norms (Leonard & McGuire, 2007). To date, the model is used widely. It continues serving as the foundation form numerous contemporary change models.

According to the model, the foremost organizational change stage is unfreezing. Prior to a change’s implementation, it is taken as being unfrozen first. Since numerous stakeholders in an organization will resist given changes naturally, the aim in the course of the stage is to make the stakeholders aware of how the extant acceptability and status quos impede the organization from realizing new successes or efficiencies. Old organizational structures, people, processes, and thought processes ought to examined cautiously to maintain or even create competitive advantages for the organization.

The aims ought to be communicated to the stakeholders so that they become aware of the necessity for given changes and their imminent nature (Leonard & McGuire, 2007; Phillips & Gully, 2013). As well, the aims are communicated so that the stakeholders understand the logic informing the changes, and the expected benefits from the changes’ implementation. The more the stakeholders appreciate given changes, the more they view them as urgent and necessary and the more they welcome them.

The changing stage sets in after the stakeholders have accepted the changes as urgent and important. Notably, Lewin viewed changes as processes where given organizations ought to transit to new conditions or states. The changing, or moving, or transitioning, stage is typified by the changes’ implementation. In this stage, the changes are actualized. It is as well, the stage in which many stakeholders struggle with the emerging actualities. The stage is defined by marked fear and uncertainty, which make it the most challenging of the three stages to conquer. When the stage is underway, the stakeholders start learning, as well as adopting, new thought processes, organizational processes, and behaviors.

Stakeholders who are readied for the step adequately complete it easily. Accordingly, time, support, communication and education are essential for the stakeholders as they become increasingly aware of the changes. Notably, to ensure that the changes’ implementation succeeds, the changes ought to be planned, as well as executed, cautiously in the stage. When the stage is underway, the stakeholders ought to be told repeatedly the logic of the changes and the expected attendant benefits (Cummings & Worley, 2015).

The final KLCM stage is the refreezing stage. It entails the reinforcement, stabilization, or solidification, of the resulting states following given changes’ implementation. In the stage, the stakeholders accept and refreeze the people, offerings, aims or organizational processes or structures resulting from the changes’ implementation. They constitute the new status quos or norms. Lewin viewed the refreezing stage as being particularly critical to make certain that individuals do not fall back to their old thought processes or behaviors (Leonard & McGuire, 2007). During the refreezing stage, it is important that the changes are preserved, integrated into the corresponding organizational changes and maintained as desirable norms.

Stories of Change – Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach

Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition

1. Introduction: Stories of Change Chapter1

Introduction: Stories of Change Learning objectives

  • On completion of this chapter you should be able to:
  • Understand why change is both a creative and a rational process.
  • Identify why there are limits on what the manager of change can achieve.
  • Recognize how stories of change can illuminate key issues in managing change.
  • Appreciate the “roadmap” for this book and the multiple “images” approach that underlies it.

Changing organizations is as messy as it is exhilarating, as frustrating as it is satisfying, as muddling-through and creative a process as it is a rational one. This book recognizes these tensions for those involved in managing organizational change. Rather than pretend that they do not exist, it confronts them head on, identifying why they are there, how they can be managed, and the limits they create for what the manager of organizational change can achieve. It shows how the image(s) we hold about how change should be managed, and of what we think our role should be as a manager of change, affects the way we approach change and the outcomes that we think are possible. As a way into these ideas, we commence this chapter by visiting four prominent companies to look at stories of recent changes. The Hewlett-Packard story concerns Carly Fiorina’s attempts to establish and then manage the merger with Compaq Computer; the IBM story shows how change to this organization has occurred both from the staff within as well as from management at the top; the Kodak story shows how pursuing changes to digitalize the company has provoked reactions from both staff and investors; and the McDonald’s story points to the pressures on organizations to change in order to reestablish themselves in the marketplace. The stories contain both similar and different elements about managing organizational change and the broader tensions and choices this entails. In the last part of the chapter, we draw these out, identifying some key lessons that emerge and indicating where they are addressed in the chapters that follow. We also provide a “road map” that indicates the position taken by this book, that our understanding of the issues addressed in subsequent chapters is affected by our underlying images of managing change. Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition 1. Introduction: Stories of Change Text © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2009 2 Chapter 1 Introduction: Stories of Change Stories of Change A Hewlett-Packard Change Story: Managing a Merger Around 7 a.m. on March 19, 2002, Hewlett-Packard’s CEO Carly Fiorina and CFO Bob Wayman were on the phone to Deutsche Bank trying to make one last ditch effort to convince them to vote yes. 1 The vote, scheduled for later that morning, was an important one. It would determine the future of the proposed Hewlett-Packard (HP) and Compaq Computer Corp. merger and the future of HP as a major player in the technology industry. 2 The months preceding the vote had been tumultuous. After the announcement of the proposed merger had taken place in September 2001, Walter Hewlett, the son of the co-founder of HP, had publicly opposed the proposition, which required shareholder approval. 3 Fiorina and her team faced serious and accumulating opposition to the merger, but there was also growing concern for HP’s future if the deal was rejected. A Merrill Lynch portfolio manager said at the time, “If the deal is voted down, I don’t know what I’m left with. I don’t know if the board will stay, if management will walk out the door, or what the strategy will be. Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t.” 4 In the lead up to the vote, HP was confident that a yes vote by Deutsche Bank was a sure thing. Representatives of Deutsche Bank such as George D. Elling had been public supporters of the merger and had reportedly even given HP a $1 million contract to uncover the voting plans of other institutions. 5 Word of a change in Deutsche Bank’s thinking reached Wayman and, despite reassurances from his contacts that the merger would be supported, talk strongly suggested that they had, in fact, reversed their decision. On the morning of the vote, Fiorina and Wayman were given their first and only opportunity to pitch the deal to the investment team at Deutsche Bank. Fiorina, using her innate ability to impress, gave a compelling and persuasive argument questioning the company’s future if the merger did not go ahead. The Deutsche Bank team decided that a failure to continue with the merger would be more disastrous than the merger itself. 6 On March 19, 2002, the merger was approved by a shareholder vote 7 —a result that would have been more difficult had Deutsche Bank not supported the merger. 8 Premerger Back in 1999 when Fiorina joined HP, the company was in serious need of guidance. The personal computer division faced growing competition, the sales force needed better coordination, and the company was losing market share to rivals such as Dell and Sun Microsystems.9 Fiorina joined the organization with aspirations, and external pressures, to change how it functioned. In her view, the culture of HP could be changed by “going back to the roots of the place.” 10 One of the ways she set out to achieve this was by working with a local ad agency and the head of Human Resources to create a set of “Rules from the Garage” that outlined what she hoped the culture at HP would become. “The customer defines a job well done” and “Invent different ways of working” became signifiers of the company’s direction and aspirations. 11 She decided to restructure the company. Customers such as Ford and Boeing were frustrated by the separate sales teams from HP that were constantly marketing individual products to them. They wanted a complete package that addressed the needs they had in their entirety. 12 In light of these uncommunicative operational units within HP, Fiorina reorganized the company into “quadrants,” creating two “front-end” sections that Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition 1. Introduction: Stories of Change Text © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2009 Chapter 1 Introduction: Stories of Change 3 consisted of sales and marketing and two “back-end” functions where manufacturing and research occurred. 13 There was considerable, but subtle, employee resistance to the change. Fiorina’s vision of HP creating a new interface with customers may have been sound, but, as a radical change, it was not widely welcomed by many who were part of the HP “system.” 14 Post-Merger In the aftermath of the merger, and the ensuing lawsuit that opposed the merger and attempted to dissolve it, 15 Fiorina had a huge task ahead of her. The integration of the two corporate cultures was made more difficult by the strained relations Fiorina had with her own staff, many expressing serious concerns regarding the merits of the merger. 16 The transition was made slightly easier by the 65,000 new personnel who became a part of the HP community after the merger. They were more at ease with creating an organization in the way that Fiorina envisioned. According to Fiorina, the necessary cultural adjustment was simplified by this injection of “new DNA.” 17 Following the merger, Fiorina embarked on a series of technological symposiums and “coffee talks” with HP engineers. 18 Although the merger had already been undertaken by HP and Compaq, there were still many employees who were not convinced of the validity of HP’s riskiest move, some of whom faced being victims of the job cuts resulting from the merger. 19 To win over the 147,000 employees worldwide, Fiorina used a range of methods of communicating including the “management by walking around” style that Packard and Hewlett had originally advocated within the organization. A company employee
commented on her style and interaction with all members of the company by saying that her actions and down-to-earth nature “earned her a lot of points” with transferees from Compaq. 20 The company faced challenges in the way of significant competition from both Dell in the PC business and IBM as a service provider. 21Communicating a vision for the future of the company post-merger remained a key issue for Fiorina. 22 Three years later, in February 2005, Fiorina was ousted from HP and replaced by Mark Hurd.23 In one of his first acts as the new CEO, Hurd undid some of the radical changes from his predecessor’s reign. 24 He cut jobs and engaged in a restructure, breaking down the four quadrants into product divisions because they were too “matrix” in design. 25 Some commentators, in referring to “the debacle of the Carly Fiorina years,” argue that many of the changes Hurd has made are “designed to unscramble the forced attempt at synergy attempted by his predecessor, instead handing back clearer responsibility to divisional managers for their own operations.” 26 Greater attention to becoming more efficient and getting better at execution appears to be producing results: in August 2007, Hurd announced HP’s best sales growth for seven years. 27 An IBM Change Story: Transformational Change from Below and Above Change from Below 28 Before using the Internet became as commonplace as watching television, David Grossman and John Patrick took on the mammoth task of convincing their superiors and co-workers at IBM that the Internet was even worth looking at. Their subsequent actions helped to revolutionize Big Blue and drastically change its path into the future. 29Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition 1. Introduction: Stories of Change Text © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2009 4 Chapter 1 Introduction: Stories of Change When David Grossman, a computer programmer, stumbled across a rogue Internet site for the 1994 Winter Olympics in Lillehammer, Norway, he was troubled. IBM had the official broadcast rights to the Games, but Sun Microsystems was taking the raw footage and making it available on the Internet under their logo. Although his position as a programmer did not require him to act on his findings, Grossman was deeply concerned about the implications of the branding of the Internet broadcast and the potential effects on IBM. He pursued the issue by contacting the IBM marketing team for the Olympics. The rogue site was eventually shut down, but the lesson had not been learned. IBM had not even begun to comprehend how the Internet could become an integral part of their business dealings. 30 Grossman’s persistence landed him a meeting with the head of marketing, Abby Kohnstamm, and some of her colleagues. It was here that Grossman was able to give a detailed explanation of the benefits of the Internet. He captivated one member of his audience wholeheartedly. John Patrick, a member of the strategy task force, attended the presentation that day and he immediately became Grossman’s ally in the Internet Revolution and an important link to the world of senior management. 31 As a team, Grossman and Patrick complemented each other. Grossman had the more developed technical know-how. 32 Patrick knew how to make the “boundaryless” culture at IBM work to his advantage. 33 Together they created an underground community of Web fans who shared technical information that ultimately helped IBM into the Internet era, albeit working, for the most part, unofficially. 34The grassroots Web community infiltrated all corners of the company in a way that would have been difficult for an officially sanctioned, top-down group. It was through the advocacy of the lower-level personnel that the Internet message was spread through IBM’s culture. 35 Of course, the downside of being an unofficial part of an organization is the potential lack of financial backing for a group’s projects. However, when it came to finding money for IBM’s first-ever display at an Internet World trade convention in 1995, Patrick was not fazed. By coordinating the funds and the Web technology from various business units and becoming a “relentless campaigner” for the project, he gained support and expertise from multiple parts of the organization. 36By sharing experienced personnel and resources from many departments, Patrick and Grossman were able to provide departments with more expertise and highly trained personnel when they were “returned” to the area from which they came. This strategy reinforced internal support for the change. 37 Over the years, Patrick and Grossman succeeded in creating a system that revolutionized the way in which IBM does business. Coupled with the leadership of Lou Gerstner, the period from 1993 to 2002 was one of reinvention and change. 38 IBM transformed from a computer manufacturer to a global service provider, focusing on e-business and the Internet. By the late 1990s, IBM’s trading in the e-business sector began to reflect in the bottom line, accounting for almost a quarter of its revenue. 39 Change from Above In 2002, Samuel Palmisano, a lifetime IBMer, took over leadership of the company from Gerstner. Palmisano’s focus changed to emphasize teamwork and collaboration. One of his first steps in demonstrating his new management style, to investors and employees alike, was a readjustment in executive compensation. 40 This involved a cut in the controversial Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition 1. Introduction: Stories of Change Text © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2009 Chapter 1 Introduction: Stories of Change 5 CEO bonus that was redistributed within the top management team. Palmisano claimed that in order to function as a team, the gap between the CEO and his team must be reduced. 41 Insiders said that the amount pooled was $3 to $5 million, approximately half Palmisano’s personal bonus. 42 This was an effective way of communicating to the entire organization his intentions and commitment to his vision. In a BusinessWeek e-mail interview, Palmisano wrote that in planning for change, “I kept thinking about an approach that would energize all the good of the past and throw out all the bad: hierarchy and bureaucracy.” 43 To this end, he disbanded the executive management committee and created three teams with which he would work directly. These management teams—in the areas of strategy, technology, and operations—were composed of people from all over the company, not exclusively top management. 44 His aim in restructuring was to make IBM a flatter, more creative organization striving to meet consumer needs. 45 In addition to the restructure, Palmisano saw a lack of skills in IBM around the delivery of global services. In 2002, IBM acquired PwC Consulting as a way of bringing to it highly specific consulting skills and expertise to assist IBM in providing a full range of services to its clients, “from high-end technology consulting to low-end support.” 46 IBM also put in place other techniques to make sure that it listens closely to its people. For example, it introduced the concept of “jams,” which are online brainstorming sessions where any employee can share his or her ideas about management issues or new product development. Palmisano subsequently expanded the use of jams to include clients, consultants, and employees’ family members in order to share ideas and help the company innovate.47 It is as a result of such changes from the top that IBM hopes to meet the challenges of the future. A Kodak Change Story: Provoking Reactions Could this be the beginning of one of the biggest turnarounds in American corporate history or one of the most public and embarrassing busts? After more than a century of producing traditional film cameras, Kodak announced in September 2003 that it would cut this line of production. In Western countries, this involves a complete move away from traditional products within the film industry and a full-scale launch into digital technology. 48
The move is slated “to generate . . . $20 billion by 2010.” 49 At an investor conference, CEO David A. Carp said: We are at the dawning of a new, more competitive Kodak, one that is growing, profitably, that has a more balanced earnings stream, and that will have a dramatically lower cost structure . . . To compete in digital markets, we must have a business model that lets us move even faster to take full advantage of the profitable growth that digital promises. 50 Implementing this change required Kodak to cut their dividend and raise capital for new technology purchases. 51 Further elaboration of this strategy occurred in January 2004 when it was announced that to reach the proposed savings of between $800 million and $1 billion by 2007, Kodak needed to make two physical changes to the organization. 52 First, there would be a reduction in the square footage of Kodak facilities worldwide by consolidating current operations and divesting unnecessary assets. Second, Kodak intended to reduce employment worldwide with up to 15,000 jobs to be cut by 2007. 53Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition 1. Introduction: Stories of Change Text © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2009 6 Chapter 1 Introduction: Stories of Change Investor Reactions The announcement in September 2003 took many external experts by surprise. 54At a series of post-announcement meetings with investor groups, their reactions were not overly supportive,55 particularly to the news that their dividends would be severely cut. 56 They were conscious of promises to increase the company’s revenue that were not realized. 57 It was feared that this would become another “half-hearted transition” 58—as with the $1 billion launch into APS cameras in 1996 that ended in failure. 59 They also pointed to the risk in moving in this direction given the competitive market with rivals such as Hewlett-Packard, Canon Inc., and Seiko Epson Corp., which were already ahead in digital technology research and product development. 60 Carp’s response was to stand firmly by his decision to pursue digitalization of Kodak. 61 Staff Reactions For many of Kodak’s employees, the future looked bleak regardless of the success of the company in moving into digital technology. Employees were rightly concerned about losing their jobs in light of the proposed 20 percent worldwide cutback in employment. 62 Downsizing is not new at Kodak. From 1997 to 2003, the company reduced its workforce by 30,000. 63 As argued in The Wall Street Journal, this type of change “moves parallel [to] those at many companies whose comfortable business models have been threatened by rapid changes in information technology.” 64 As one union representative explained, the stress on workers in one Kodak production plant has been made worse than necessary because “management has not sought to reassure [Kodak employees] that they have got any long term future. When people have families to raise, financial commitments, that’s a very difficult environment to work in.” 65 Hence, along with having to convince investors that the path of change is the right one for Kodak, Carp also had to manage the adverse effects of an ongoing program of downsizing and restructuring. The Next Phase In June 2005, Antonio Perez replaced Carp as CEO. 66 He continued on the path of downsizing and eliminating plants. From 2004 to 2007, Kodak reduced its head count from 63,900 to 30,600 and offloaded a factory that it owned in Xiamen, China. 67 Perez is also engaging in a process of acquisitions in order to grow new businesses—with some concern from the financial community about the amount of debt that the company is accumulating.68 As Guerrera argues, “For now, Kodak’s position illustrates the problems that many companies face mid-turnaround, when the tough choices have been made but the results are still unclear. Management, under intense pressure from investors and buy-out groups, faces a critical test of nerve.” 69 A McDonald’s Change Story: Responding to Pressure Imagine eating nothing but McDonald’s for a month. Morgan Spurlock, independent filmmaker, did just that, restricting his diet with the following limitations: • No food or drink other than McDonald’s menu items. • Meals supersized when given the option. • Every item on the menu had to be eaten at least once. 70Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition 1. Introduction: Stories of Change Text © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2009 Chapter 1 Introduction: Stories of Change 7 Spurlock spent one long month traveling across the United States interviewing various community groups about the implications of eating fast food and using himself as a guinea pig.71 Before embarking on this journey, Spurlock underwent a full medical examination and was deemed to be a physically healthy man. One month later, the diagnosis had changed.72 After three square McDonald’s meals a day for 30 days, Spurlock had gained 25 pounds, his cholesterol level had jumped from 168 to 230, 73 and his liver was in a state that an alcoholic would have envied. 74 The result of this personal experience was a documentary called Super Size Me, an entrant in the 2004 Sundance Film Festival. The aim? Spurlock claims his objective was to uncover the link between foods like McDonald’s and obesity, 75 a correlation that the company had long denied. 76 Nevertheless, the film’s release coincided with the launch of McDonald’s new Happy Meal for adults, comprised of a salad, a bottle of water, and a “stepometer.” Despite valiant attempts by McDonald’s to counteract the claims of the film, Super Size Me became one of the five biggest-grossing documentaries in American history.77 Highlighting health issues related to fast food has only added to other worldwide pressures on McDonald’s operations. Externally these include an epidemic of mad cow disease, foot-and-mouth disease, the SARS epidemic in the Asia-Pacific region, a fall in economies leading to weaker foreign currencies, and high commodity costs. 78 Internally these problems were compounded by McDonald’s aggressive international expansion strategy that made future growth more difficult. 79 As the then-CEO, James Cantalupo, admitted, “we took our eyes off our fries and paid a price.” 80 The problems that the company faced went beyond superficial fluctuations in sales and revenue. The year 1996 was a turning point, with McDonald’s experiencing four consecutive quarters of declining sales and beginning to lose market share to competitors such as Wendy’s and Burger King. 81 Jack Greenberg, the former CEO, implemented the highly unsuccessful “Made for You” kitchens with disastrous results. 82 The result was slower service in contrast to its aim of flexibility with new menu items. 83 Franchisees became frustrated. Take Paul Saber. For 17 years, he was a McDonald’s franchisee, but in 2000 he recognized the lack of fit between the product offerings at McDonald’s and consumer tastes. “The McDonald’s-type fast food isn’t relevant to today’s consumer,”84 he commented as he sold his 14 stores back to the company. Others stuck it out with McDonald’s. Richard Steinig remembers getting a 15 percent profit from the $80,000 sales at his two stores in the 1970s. 85 This was quite a comfortable income given that the minimum wage was less than $2 an hour. By 2003 he was struggling to make ends meet. Even the $1 menus advertised worldwide resulted in a loss for Steinig: as he said at the time, “we have become our own worse enemy.” 86 Getting Back to Basics In 2003 Cantalupo was brought in to rectify the declining state of the organization. 87 He previously held the position of vice chairman and headed McDonald’s international expansion. His vision for the organization’s future was in a “back to basics” 88 approach with organizational changes to refocus the organization on core values of quality and service. However, Cantalupo died in 2004 of a heart attack and his successor, Charlie Bell, left s
oon after (and subsequently died from cancer). In 2004 Jim Skinner took over as CEO. 89Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition 1. Introduction: Stories of Change Text © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2009 8 Chapter 1 Introduction: Stories of Change As part of the new strategy called “Plan to Win,” new store openings were cut back. 90 The aim was to increase sales from existing sites instead of growth through a rapid implementation of new stores. 91 For example, in 2004, 300 new stores were proposed, in comparison to 1995, when 1,100 new restaurants were opened. 92 There was also a complete overhaul of the advertising campaign. By introducing the “I’m lovin’ it” slogan and commercials featuring pop singer Justin Timberlake, 93 the hope was to reinvent the company’s image and connect it with the younger generation. 94 Another part of the revitalization of the McDonald’s business was the introduction of the new salads menu. 95 McDonald’s, in the past, had expressed little concern at the claims that its products are directly linked to obesity, but some critics saw the launch into the “fresh salads” menus as a sign that the unhealthy reputation of fast foods may have been identified internally as a threat to the organization. 96 This new menu has helped to draw in female customers who had previously been reluctant to dine at their restaurants 97 and increase the number of customers during the evening. 98 In the past, McDonald’s had tried creating low-fat menu options for their patrons with the McShaker salads and McLean Deluxe burger, but with limited success. 99 Now, responding to external pressures, customers are given healthier and tastier menu options. 100 One of McDonald’s newer goals is “loved by kids, approved by moms,” focusing their nutritional efforts on these two key customer groups. 101 Franchisees in Colorado, for example, have joined forces to introduce “Smart Meals”—actively promoting meal combinations that meet specific nutritional standards and include two Happy Meal options for children. 102 Other franchisees have revamped their PlayPlace, the traditional children’s play area, by introducing the R Gym, encouraging physical coordination and aerobic activity. 103 McDonald’s also implemented an online training program for all U.S.-based employees to address customer service issues. 104 The aim was to bring the company back on the road to providing the basic, speedy service and quality products that it became famous for so many years ago. Together, these changes reflect the company’s most recent “better, not just bigger” mantra to bring the company back in touch with its customers. 105By 2007 this seemed to be working, with the company declaring some of “its strongest business results in 30 years.” 106 Drawing out the Change Issues and Where They Are Found in the Chapters that Follow As outlined in Table 1.1 , these four stories carry in them a wide variety of lessons and issues relating to managing organizational change. We now highlight the key issues and indicate how they are picked up in the chapters that follow. Images of Managing Change . . . Chapter 2 One of the intriguing features of the IBM story is how David Grossman took on the role of manager of change without a formal mandate to do so. Many in his position would not have seen it as their responsibility to drive change through the organization in this way. They would more likely have experienced change as recipients rather than as initiators of change. Carly Fiorina’s use of persuasion to get Deutsche Bank representatives to vote Palmer−Dunford−Akin: Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, Second Edition 1. Introduction: Stories of Change Text © The McGraw−Hill Companies, 2009 Chapter 1 Introduction: Stories of Change 9 TABLE 1.1 Managing Change: Some Lessons from the Four Stories Hewlett-Packard Change Story • Different interests need to be recognized and addressed during an organizational change • These interests are likely to provoke different reactions to change • Organizational politics and lobbying are likely aspects of an organizational change that will need managing • Negotiation and persuasion are key communication skills • More successful communication strategies are likely to be those that “touch” the people to whom they are addressed • Communicating change often entails providing a vision of the future that is compelling • Pressures to change come from both outside and inside organizations • Restructuring is a common organizational change when confronted with problems • Any organizational change usually involves paying attention to organizational culture IBM Change Story • Innovative changes often emerge from below in organizations • Making change stick requires persistence over time and actions that need to be taken on multiple fronts • Change needs appropriately placed champions to gain support throughout the organization • The informal network of the organization is an important part of mobilizing and communicating organizational change • Change requires marshalling of appropriate resources • Some changes are incremental, others transformational • Some smaller change actions often convey powerful symbolic messages to help reinforce the sincerity and credibility that senior management attaches to the larger change Kodak Change Story • Organizational change involves handling reactions of both internal and external stakeholders • Communication strategies need to be designed for internal and external groups • Reactions to change are likely to be influenced by the success of previous changes and the extent to which there has been delivery on past promises • Change involves risk and uncertainty • The consequences of change cannot always be predicted • Managers of change need to address the question for staff of “How will I be affected?” McDonald’s Change Story • Organizational changes occur in a competitive, international business environment • This means that to prepare for the future, change may need to occur even when things still appear to be going well • Organizations face external pressures to change such as providing socially responsible products and services • Some changes fail to deliver on their intended outcomes • Change in and of itself is not necessarily good for a company; careful assessment is needed of the relevance and likely success of a proposed change

Managing Organizational Change – The Challenger and Columbia Shuttle Disasters Case Study


Organizational change refers to the process by which an organization modifies its activities in order to optimize performance as it strives to achieve the desired goal (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). According to Kotter,and Cohen (2002), organizational change is a very important aspect in modern organizations that are willing to meet market standards. Normally, organizations decide to implement change as a response towards a crisis situation or as a reaction to an increasingly changing environment. The success of organizational change depends on the ability of an organization to make necessary process adjustments, availability of resources, and efficient management capabilities (Palmer and Dunford, 2008). This paper analyzes organizational change management concept using The Challenger and Columbia Shuttle Disasters as the case study. The main issues addressed in the paper include images of managing change, types of change, challenges for change, resistance to change, implementing change, NASA vision and change, and sustaining change with reference to the case study.

Images of Managing Change

The nature of change outcomes are influenced by various images of managing change. According to Palmer, Dunford and Akin (2009), there are six different images of managing change that direct organizations towards a successful change. The six images of managing change include directing, navigating, caretaking, coaching, interpreting, and nurturing. As far as directing image is concerned, it is the responsibility of the change manager to ensure that the required change is achieved by directing the organization towards the right direction (Palmer and Dunford, 2008). In the given case, the required change has not been achieved because the change managers have failed to direct the organization towards the right direction. Navigating image requires an organization to identify those changes that could be achieved immediately as well as those that could take time. NASA’s managers are supposed to navigate towards outcomes and choose those changes that could be achieved with minimum resources (Palmer, Dunford and Akin, 2009).

Under the caretaking image, individual managers at NASA were supposed to take care of both internal and external forces in order to implement change successfully. As far as coaching image is concerned, the change managers at NASA have failed to shape the organization’s capabilities effectively which prevented them from building the right set of skills necessary to fulfill the desired change (Palmer and Dunford, 2008). Interpreting image and nurturing image require change managers to involve other organizational members for the change and facilitate organizational qualities that enhance quality change respectively, which NASA’s change managers have failed to do (Palmer, Dunford and Akin, 2009).

Types of change

According to Weick and Quinn (1999), managers can adopt several types of changes to assist the organization achieved the required change outcomes. Organizational change is classified into two broad types namely; evolutionary change and revolutionary change. Evolutionary change occurs gradually and intermittently and it is meant for continuous improvement. Examples of evolutionary change include management by objective, total quality management, and socio-technical systems theory. On the other hand, revolutionary change is occurs rapidly and dramatically and its purpose is to keep an organization operational. Examples of revolutionary change include innovation, reengineering and restructuring. In the case study, ‘The Challenger and Columbia Shuttle Disasters,’ the space shuttle Challenger has exploded after rising into the sky on January 28, 1986. Comprehensive investigations revealed that there were both physical and management-related causes of the disaster. The events of the given case study show that NASA requires both evolutionary and revolutionary types of change because it needs to make continuous improvements in its operations while at the same time keeping the organization operational (Palmer, Dunford and Akin, 2009).

Challenges for change

For a successful change to occur the leaders of an organization must be prepared to take care of both internal and external forces that are affecting change. This has become the major source of challenges for change (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). Leadership is always the first challenge for change because the leader must possess effective change management skills that will allow proper utilization of capital and capacity in order to achieve the set goals (Weick and Quinn, 1999). In the given case, it is evident that there was a problem with leadership at NASA which contributed to the lack of successful change implementation. The management-related cause of the Challenger disaster is a disagreement between Morton Thiokol and NASA engineers concerning the launch of the Challenger shuttle. Engineers from both NASA and Thiokol had requested for the suspension of the launch of the Challenger shuttle but their request was ignored by the organization’s leaders.

Another challenge for change is lack of focus that prevents the organization’s managers from effectively involving all members in the change process. Due to lack of focus, NASA’s leaders could not collaborate properly with the United States Defense Department in order to prevent similar disasters in future. According to Weick and Quinn (1999), lack of commitment is another challenge for change because it prevents an organization’s leaders from making choices that can lead to a successful change. Lack of commitment by NASA’s managers is demonstrated when they failed to consider opinions from other stakeholder of the organization.

Resistance to change

Resistance to change occurs when there are certain barriers that prevent a given change from being implemented. For example, resistance to change can occur when members of an organization lack willingness to support the proposed change (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). Another resistance to change is forcing members of an organization to support a desired change. Cultural issues can also prevent implementation of the desirable change. In the case study lack of change at NASA is associated with cultural barriers and lack of employee involvement. NASA’s organizational culture is to blame for the physical causes of both the Challenger and Columbia disasters. In addition, NASA’s managers failed to ensure that employee voices were heard (Palmer, Dunford and Akin, 2009).

Implementing change

Implementing change involves putting resource into action in order for the desired change to be realized. In order for a change to be effectively implemented, there must be proper communication between the organization’s management and employees (Van de Ven and Sun, 2011). In addition, managers of the organization must be able to foster a team culture. Again, an organization that wants to successfully implement change must identify and empower champions, provide feedback to the stakeholders of the organization, and provide positive reinforcement for all employees (Choi and Ruona, 2011).

Following the Challenger shuttle disaster, recommendations were made requiring NASA to restructure its management and put control measures in place to ensure shuttle safety in future. Two years later, NASA made an announcement that necessary changes have successfully been implemented and the Safety, Reliability, Management & Quality Assurance programs in the organization have been strengthened. Surprisingly, another space shuttle Columbia exploded as it is just about to land at Kennedy Space Center on February 1, 2003. According to the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB), the Columbia shuttle disaster has been caused by both physical and management-related factors, indicating that a successful change had not been implemented at NASA.

NASA vision and change

The vision of an organization plays a very significant role when it comes to change implementation. NASA’s vision is To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown so that what we do and learn will benefit all humankind.” The organization aspires to improve people’s lives by protecting the planet through qualified explorers. However, the organization does little to promote change as it works towards realization of its vision. The Challenger and Columbia shuttle disasters are associated with NASA’s failure to link its vision with the desired change.

Download full Case Study Analysis or order a plagiarism free paper at an affordable price.

Organizational Change Using Kotter’s 8 Step Approach

Company Overview

Founded in 1898, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company has remained one of the popular tire producers in North Carolina and in the United States as a whole. For more than 100 years now, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company has maintained its global purpose of increasing the value of its brands for everyone. The company has a market-driven innovation, and it struggles to deliver the highest quality tires to its customers around the world (Goodyear Corporate, 2015). The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company has four major objectives including; to attract, develop, motivate and retain the best team of associates; to earn and build a long-term relationship with customers and business partners; to drive an organization that is effectively and efficiently aligned to its objectives; and to create a sustainable business model that operates according to legal and ethical requirements. The shared values that guide the operations of The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company include; quality, respect, integrity, honesty, wellness and safety, environmental sustainability, and a team-based culture. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company has specified the leadership traits that the company’s leaders must possess and apply. The company requires all its leaders to build teams and talents, have effective problem-solving skills, possess effective communication skills, be able to make courageous decisions, and have the ability to deliver the desired results. Over the years, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company has tried its best to achieve its mission, vision, and objectives. Currently, the company earns estimated annual revenue of more than 1 billion United States dollars (Goodyear Corporate, 2015).


Just recently, more than 10,000 employees walked out of the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant in Fayetteville, NC. The workers are resisting the demands for a huge salary cut for newly-recruited employees including the area managers, specialists, and front office personnel on up. Workers at the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant in Fayetteville, NC are also complaining of erosions of medical coverage, pensions, and working conditions. Those employees who are not in agreement with the pay-cuts are subjected to lay-offs (Futch, 2015). According to Futch (2015), the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant in Fayetteville, NC is now eliminating more than 30 salaried jobs from its workforce. However, the company has not issued formal announcements to its workers (Futch, 2015).

Over the years, the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant in Fayetteville, NC has been known for its good human resource practice of reviewing plant operations and making sure that its remains competitive while it continues to meet the needs of customers. In addition, the company frequently reviews staffing needs in order to meet business requirements (Bell and White, 2006). Currently, the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant in Fayetteville, NC employs approximately 2,400 workers and manufactures about 32,000 tires on a daily basis. The pay cut and layoff issues are likely to affect the company’s operations as some workers may choose to leave the company completely (Guerin, 2014). The fact that the company’s employees have not been informed officially bout the pay cuts and layoffs is an indication that there is a problem with communication throughout the plant. According to Bell and White (2006), layoffs and salary cuts are normally effected by companies either when certain positions are no longer needed or when there is a slow-down in the company.

Layoffs and salary cuts are stressful and painful experiences to both the employer and the employee (Guerin, 2014). What is currently happening at the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant in Fayetteville, NC indicates that the process of salary cuts and layoffs have not been carried out effectively by the company’s leaders. In addition, lack of effective communication between leaders and employees in the company is another source of tension throughout the plant (Futch, 2015). Whether there is a slow-down in the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant or the company feels that certain positions are no longer necessary, the company must change the manner in which it handles sensitive issues in the company and how it communicates important information to the workers in order to make the leaving workers feel contented and to boost morale of the remaining workers (Guerin, 2014).

Kotter’s 8 Step Approach

Following a comprehensive analysis of the problems at the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant in Fayetteville, NC, it is clear that the company should change the way it relates with its workers. Appropriate change requires creation of a good plan that can help the company to initiate the change, adapt to the change, control the change, and effect the change. The best change model that can assist the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Plant in Fayetteville, NC to make a long-term change is the Kotter’s 8-step change model.

In 1996, Kotter was concerned about what leaders do to transform their companies. After reviewing what was done by several leaders, Kotter’s decided to organize the whole process into a total of 8- steps. According to Kotter, for leaders to successfully bring about a meaningful change in their organizations, they must strive to change people’s behaviors by speaking to people’s feelings. In this regard, Kotter categorized the 8-steps to a successful change into three groups (Webster, 2015). The first group known as creating a climate for change involves the first three steps namely; increasing urgency, building and guiding team, and getting the right vision in that order. The second category known as engaging and enabling the organization involves step four, five, and six namely; communicate for buy-in, empower action, and creates short-term wins respectively. Kotter’s third category is referred to as implementing and sustaining change and it involves step seven and eight namely; do not let up and make it stick respectively (Webster, 2015).

Kotter’s first step towards managing change, known as creating or increasing urgency, is where companies strike the initial motivation to everyone in the company in order to get things moving. In the first step, the company should not only show people about the poor performance but it also needs to convince people that the existing problem is affecting the company negatively and that there is an urgent need for change (Webster, 2015). In order to spark the initial motivation towards change, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company should involve all employees in developing scenarios to show what could happen if all employees left the company due to layoffs and salary cuts. Additionally, the company should examine opportunities that can be exploited to bring about a positive change. Leaders of the organization need to begin honest discussions with everyone in the company in order to convince them about the importance of eliminating certain positions considering the current status of the company. In case the leaders of the company fail to agree with employees, they should requests for support from the company’s stakeholders to help them strengthen their arguments (Petrescu, 2010).

In the second step towards change management, Kotter calls upon company leaders to convince everyone in the organization that indeed, a change is necessary. This step involves forming a powerful coalition with other people in the organization as a way of leading change. According to Kotter, for leaders to guide change effectively, they must first bring together a team or a coalition to assist with decision making. In this second step, leaders tend to unite the different opinions of every individual member of the team around the need for change. To effectively go through the second step, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company needs to identify the most dedicated leaders and stakeholders in the organization. The company should the request for an emotional commitment from these people and then work together with them to create a functional team. Before moving to the third step, the company must remember to check the weak points of its team member and try to strengthen them to ensure that it has a god mix of people who can help in leading change (Webster, 2015).

Download full paper on organizational change using Kotter’s 8 Step Approach or Order a plagiarism free paper at an affordable price.

Managing Organizational Changes

Individual Project 2-3 pgs

Review the Unit 2 Background document before completing the assignment (this document is used for all three assignments in this unit).

Write a memo to Dr. Babcock to compare using a normative model for the questionnaire items versus the staff meeting force field approach.

Be sure to indicate which of the two processes you recommend the organization use to create the descriptions of the values. The aim of having behavioral endpoints to the questionnaire is twofold: It should provide the best information for improving the organization while meeting the desires of the management group.


The two processes to consider are as follows:

  • Using researched models and best practices from academic literature and OD practitioner case studies. This means providing specific definitions based on research that addresses each factor. The behavioral endpoints would relate to research findings on these factors.
    • Give 2 – 3 advantages to this method and 2 – 3 concerns or potential problems.
  • Consider using the staff meeting and force field analysis approach to identify what to evaluate. While this will not necessarily produce specific “definitions,” it will give specific actions that describe the exact behaviors that contribute to achieving the factor. The best actions would form the positive side of the scale. The hindering items would be used to choose the descriptions for the low performance endpoints on the questions.
    • Give 2 – 3 advantages to this method and 2 – 3 concerns or potential problems.
Be sure your comments take into account issues such as the following:
  • generating valid data
  • the impact on readiness to change
  • adding to the capacity and learning of the organization
  • implementation concerns (resources and time needed)

Finally, be sure to describe in the memo how the questionnaire you want to use would differ from the rough draft created during the management meeting. If there would be no change, please explain why. Download and review the draft questionnaire

Individual Project #2 1 pg

Review the Unit 2 Background document before completing the assignment (This document is used for all three assignments in this unit).

Create a force field analysis to present to your consulting partners that evaluates the idea of holding a large-scale, community-building meeting. You will want to evaluate the forces that will help it be successful and the forces that would hinder such a meeting from being an effective method for change. Include between 5 – 10 helping and 5 – 10 hindering factors. Make sure the hindering factors are not just the opposite quality of a helping factor (or vice-versa for the helping factors). Use this format or one similar to it.




Increased commitment and communication from whole R&D Community




Total Community Meeting



Discussions Board 

You want to talk with your consulting company to check if the concept of using staff meetings might be a good way to involve the organization in creating the questionnaire.

You also want to brainstorm any issues about the facilitation of these meetings. If all agree that this method is the approach to use, who should facilitate the meetings? Should the managers facilitate the meeting? Should you personally facilitate it? Should it be the members of the internal OD staff?

You have put the following on the agenda for the next review meeting:

  • Is statement A below a good way to generate the types of information that could create the behavioral endpoints for a questionnaire?
  • Would there be significant advantages to creating meaningful and lasting change if we used managers or internal OD staff to facilitate the meetings?
  • What organizational factors would make this a “bad” approach or one to avoid?


One idea for generating definitions to the key values was to use staff meetings –  the intent being to use some mechanism such as force field analyses to generate each area’s information and consolidate it across all areas as a starting point. Our firm or the top management team (facilitated by us) would use the consolidated information to create the overall questionnaire for later use.



Organizational Change Plan

Develop Part I of a comprehensive plan to implement an organization change. Choose an issue from your workplace and create a plan for a proposed change to resolve the issue. Note. If you do not have a current workplace, or your workplace is not appropriate for this project, work with the instructor to identify an organization you may use for a change plan. Your change proposal must be something you might actually implement in your workplace. Issues might be related to any of the following: Health care services Long-term care Health care products Information technology in health care Billing in health care Electronic medical records (EMR) implementation Access to care Outcome, process, or structure of care Patient, family, or community experience of care Creation or revision of an educational course or program Any other appropriate faculty approved area Part I of your plan focuses on assessment of the change issue and planning for the proposed change.

Prepare a 1,050- to 1,400-word plan with the following:

Examine the need in the organization for your proposed change.

Examine organizational and individual barriers to your proposed change.

Identify factors that might influence your proposed change.

Summarize factors influencing organizational readiness for your proposed change.

Identify the theoretical model that relates to your proposed change.

Identify internal and external resources available to support your change initiative.

Use the University Library to conduct a search for current peer-reviewed literature that provides data to support your change application. Format your plan consistent with APA guidelines.

Click the Assignment Files tab to submit your assignment