I enjoyed watching the videos and considering the different
approaches to change outlined in each. In the case of Gallery Furniture, the
company was on the verge of going under due to outside forces beyond their
control. The company was forced to take drastic measures to stay alive in the
economy at the time. This approach included involving an outside practitioner.
In my opinion, when radical change is needed, having an outsider step in to
facilitate is a good idea. I relate this situation to having trouble with your
children. I cannot tell you how many parents I had conferences with who told me
that their child was rude and distant at home; but in the classroom, I did not
see any of these behaviors. In fact, I was often able to communicate with their
children more effectively about school related issues than their parents were
at times. In a corporation, the manager is like the parent. The information
they have to share about the need for change may be easier to hear from an
outsider. The manager still needs to be actively involved but bad news might be
better received from someone outside the company. When employees know that
there is going to be radical change, they are often no longer trusting of
management…especially if layoffs are involved. An outside practitioner has no
emotional attachment to the management or employees and is able to deal with
conflict in a different manner than those experiencing the change. It is still
vital that the leader of the organization head the overall change movement and
that employees understand he/she is invested in making the organization
successful.
In the case of Gallery furniture, their main strategy was to
change the culture. Cultural change can be risky. According to Brown (2011),
Terrence Deal and Allan Kennedy have identified one of the reasons for
mitigating large-scale change as “mediocre or worse” performance of the
organization (p. 409). Brown (2011) asserts that, “An organization. . .may need
to change its culture in order to adapt to a changing environment or to perform
at higher levels of effectiveness” (p. 409). In a culture where customers were able to walk out and it
was okay, it was difficult to encourage employees to move away from that behavior
and begin to follow up by phone or email with their customers. However, their
old practices were not very effective and needed to change and through the
efforts of management and the outside practitioner, employees began to see
that. More changes to the culture involved an effort to help employees be
healthier, the addition of incentive pay for performance, and displaying sales
statistics. All of these efforts encouraged employees to adapt to the new norms.
By instituting a wellness program, the organization was communicating to the
employees that their health and wellbeing was important.
On the other hand, Stanley McChrystal comes from a totally
different environment. In his position in the military, he was the individual
that people looked to for guidance. Most of these people are not empowered to
make drastic decisions on their own and the commander does not have the luxury
of bringing in an outside practitioner to redesign anything. He struck me as a
very self-aware and humble leader who understands that sometimes, the answers
are not available outside the organization but rather from your subordinates.
He relied on those around him to be lead him through
change. He refers to the challenges of keeping up with changes in technology
and leading people who are doing things you have never done. McChrystal
describes a strong culture in the military and Brown (2011) refers to many
aspects of culture that apply to the one McChrystal was dealing with. Even
though soldiers are unable to make their own strategic decisions, individual
autonomy is still possible in the heat of battle. He and his direct reports
were understanding of the needs of one another through the constant rapid
changes they were experiencing and he was able to manage around the
organizational culture (Brown, 2011). The geographic distance of his troops required
methods of communication that he was not necessarily familiar with but that
those around him were able to help him learn. The ability to quickly and easily
communicate with the troops that were thousands of miles away from him
encouraged open communication in his battalion (Brown, 2011).
McChrystal touts the importance of having a shared purpose
despite different life experiences. As a leader, he understands that it is his
job to create that common vision. According to Brown’s relative strength of corporate
culture (2011), the military falls into the quadrant where members have a
strong commitment to values and a high number of members sharing those values.
The vision shared by McChrystal is a catalyst for the values shared by his
soldiers.
Brown , D. (2011). An experiential approach to
organizational development. (8th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
No comments:
Post a Comment