Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Chapter10.pdf - STUDENT SOLUTION USA

Chapter

Change Management

Perspectives

Learning objectives

Bytheendofthischapteryoushou-dbeab-eto:

医さ団園 Understandandidentifythefactorsthatcancausechangetofaiー,

E雨 四墨 塾 Assessthestrengthsandiimitationsofcheck1istsformana9ingchangeeffectively.

「LQ--蟹副 Evaluatetheadvantagesofstage modelsofchange managennent.

匝IE至重軍司 Assessthetheoreticalandpracticaーva-ueoftheprocessPerspectiveonchange.

「Lof輔園Understandandapp-ycontingencyapproachestochange management.

”了hequest′on′sがrw力os

go′ngro/erme/′r’swho

 

′sgomgtostopme.”

AynRand,writerandphilosopher

                                                

319

320

 

ChaPterlO

 

C/7の堰e崩超′mgの??emβのPecr和郎

optionsfor Managing Change

Chnngt,1~ Dim,ptiv,二,一Liv(, with.t - - 一-…

soatoppotyoftheorgazaon.Thisis

not

 

something

 

that

 

can

 

be

 

third

 

orfourth

down

 

in

 

the

 

CEO’s

 

list

 

ofthings

 

he

 

or

 

she

must

 

do.VVe

 

viewthose

 

characteristics

 

as

beingnecessaryco‐travellerstodeliveringa

truetransformationofthecompany・(Bucyetal,,2017a,pp.2-3).

Atruetransformationisdisruptive.ltdoesn’t

justwork withtheexisting9overnance,the

existingprocesses,theexistingbudgetingcy-

cle,theexistingwaysofdoingthings.ltisgo-

ing

 

to

 

disrupt, And

 

it’s

 

going

 

to create

challengeandtensionandfriction

 

intheor-

ganization.Because

 

it

 

is

 

so disruptive,it’s

TheperspeCtivesdiscussedinthischapterinc1udechange managementChecMists,stage

models,andprocessandcontingencytheories,They o掻eradvice on managingchange,butmakeno mentionofthepersonalstylesandpre危rencesofindividualchange manag-

ers.Letusfirst6‐1lthisgap,

The Directorand Navigatorlmages ofChange Management

1iwoofourskimagesofchange managementareparticularlyrelevanttotheapproaches

exploredinthischapter.TheαZreczorimageunderpinsthechangemanagementapproaches

associatedwiththeworkoflargeconsultingcompanies,andalsoofacademicswho work

aschangeconsultantsinthisfield,Those who adoptsuch approachestake astrategic

view,adopting a pragmatic, managerialistapproachto

 

achievinglasting organizational

change. The

 

chec*山sts

 

and

 

stage modelsthat we

 

explore 魚1lintothis

 

category. They

suggestthatchangecanbe managedandcontrolledinapredictable manneraslongas

the

 

correctsteps

 

aretaken,in moreorlessthecorrectsequence, However,giventhe

numberofdi錐erentsetsofrecipesand丘ameworksthatareavailable,itisnotalwaysclear

whichtoadopt,orthecriteriaon whichthechoiceshouldbemade.

 

Contingencyframeworkscanalsobeseenasconsistentwiththeメケecわri血age.Rather

thanclaimingtohavediscovered“theonebestapproach,”however,these丘ameworksargue

that“itdepends“on anumberofcontext 魚ctors,such asthescaleand urgencyofthe

proposedchanges.Fore×ample,oneofthesecont無gencyframeworks,thechangekaleido-

scope(BalogunetaL,2016)doesnoto爺erPrescriptiveadviceonhowtoimplementchange

inparticularcontexts,That丘ameworkinsteadhighlights免rthechange managerthecon-

textualissuesto consider whenreaching aninあrmedjudgmentwithregardto change

implementationdesignoptions,Thisapproachisalsoconsistenttosomeextentwiththe

′7αyZg防げimageofchange management,Changecanbecontrolledinpart,butexternal

魚ctors(contextualenablersandconstraints,competinginterests)can generateemergent

andunintendedoutcomesoverwhichthechange managerhaslittleornoinfluence.

 

The

 

idea

 

ofestablishing“fit” between

 

changeimplementation

 

and organizational

contextisnotconsistentwithaprocessualview ofchange.Processtheoriesseechange

unあldingovertimeina messyanditerative wayandthusrelyontheimageofchange

manageras“の’Zgのor.Here,thechangeoutcomesareshapedbyacombinationoffactors

                                                      

ChaPterlO

 

C方の増ど崩‘”〃”ge′77e用弁eなlpeメルes

 

321

             

includingthepast,present,andfuturecの7rexzinwhichtheorganizationfunctions;the

             

sz心“α打ceofthechange;theimP1ementation〃mcesg刀o/mcq/わeんαvzor,insideand out-

           

side

 

the

 

organization; and

 

the

 

interactions

 

between

 

these

 

魚ctors (Dawson

 

and

           

んDdriopoulos,2017),Theroleofthechange managerisnotto direct,buttoidenti尊

             

options,accumulateresources, monitor progress,andto′mwgqre

 

a paththroughthe

           

complexity.

               

ltistherefbreimportantforchange managerstobeawareof,and perhapson many

             

occasionsto putto

 

one

 

side,theirpre発rredimage

 

ofchange management.ltis

 

also

             

importantthatmanagersarecomあrtablewiththeiractions,withregardtobothpersonal

             

capabilityandhowactionsareperceivedtofitwiththecontext,However,implementation

             

designdecisionsshouldideallybemoreheavilyinfluencedbythecontext魚ctorsthatwe

             

exploreinthischapterthanbypersonalconsiderations.

圏園圏麗 W′hy Change Fails

ルリノの?ew加 加瀞?仰げ mαdeqmな放たe 加s“everかたdのりノ効力7g″gMノ. (A1bertEinstein)

方房雄お『庇方rsrsreprollノqrds蔵/超re. (Homersimpson)

lnthischapter,weexploreapproachestoimLP1ementingorganizationalchangeeがectively,drawing on

 

arangeofchange management,processual,and

 

contingency perspectives.First,however,wewillexplorewhychange態ils,lfweunderstandthecommon mistakes,perhapswecanavoidthem.

 

Askagroup ofmanagerstoreflectontheirexperienceandtoidentifywhattodoto

makeorganizationalchange 魚il.Theirresponseusuallycomesintwostages.First,theylaugh.Second,theygeneratewithoutdifficultyalistofpracticalactionstoguaranteethat

aninitiativewillnotbesuccessful.Tablelo,lillustratesthetypicalresultsofsuchadis‐cussion,Thissuggeststwoconclusions.First,ensurmgthatchange魚ils-shouldonewishtodothat-isnotdi甘icult.Therearemanytoolsatone’sdisposal,involvingacombination

ofactionsandinactions.Second,ifwehavesuch agoodunderstandingofwhatcango

wrong,thengettingitrightshouldbeeasy.justturnthenegativesaround:clearvlslon,

TABLEIO.IHowtoハ4ake

    

chooSethemoStexpenSiVewaytodoit

     

CommitmentWith0utーeaderShipSupp0rt

ChangeFail:A

   

Demotivatethegroup

                

Donotrecognizethepoweroftheteam

ハ4anagement

    

Distortthevision

                    

DivertattentionandresourcesView

        

Don,tbuyintotheprocess

             

Don’tfollowtheprocess

              

トlighlightpastfailures

                

トlighlightthenegatives

           

Lackofhonesty

                     

Nocommunication

           

Politicalgames

                    

Setupsilos

           

下eamupwithothers

                  

下oomanypoliciesandprocedures

322

 

ChaPte「1O

 

C/m′7ge脳久のmgeme′7rReな刀ecr′1’es

           

commitmentandleadershipsupport,honestco]mmLunication,simplicity,breakdoWnthe

           

snos,highlightsuccessesand positives.-andsoon.Sadly,whilethisapproachishelpful,

            

“gettingitright”isnotthiseasy.

         

From hisresearchintooverloocompanies(mostbutnotanAmerican),John Kotter

       

(2007;2012a)arguesthattransあrmationalchangeso貴en 魚ilbecauseofthe mistakesthat

           

areidentifiedintable

 

lo,2.Understandingwhatnotto do, Kotterturnsthese mistakes

           

intoapositivemodelofsuccessfultransit)rmation,Thatinvolvescarefulplanning,Worldng

           

throughtheseissuesmoreorlessinsequence,andnotmissingorrushinganyofthem-

          

whichtakestime,However,giventherapidpaceofcontelnporarychange, many organl-

           

zationsperhapstrytotaketoo manyshortcuts,toputchangeinplacequic]=ly,andgetit

            

wrongasaresult.

         

亙thoughit maybean oversimplificationtoclaim thatsuccessfulchangejustmeans

            

avoidingthese mistakes,theyshouldbeavoidednevertheless,ltisalsoimportanttorec‐

            

ognizethatthereare manyofthese mistakes,andthatinanyparticularsetting,several

            

ofthose 魚ctors maybecombiningtoensurethatthechangeprogram 魚ils.Successor

            

魚ilurecanrarelybeexplainedwithre定rencetoonlyasingle 魚ctor,VVhatarethecosts

           

involvedinavoidingthese mistakes?AI1mostalltheremediesarecost‐neutral,involving

           

changesinleadership

 

and managementstyle

 

andin organizationalpolicies

 

and proce-

           

dures,lnshort,whileensuringthatchangewill魚ilinvolveslittleornocost,mostofthe

            

actionsrequiredto”getitright

’’areaISO 丘ee.

TABLEIO.2W〆hyT1ans節rmationE掻ortsFail☆

Mistakes

             

NatureandRemedy

~ourgency

           

ーfemployeesdon’tseetheneed,thentheyWillnotbemotivatedtoChange;

                               

【nへ【ヘバ^ n〔(h十

 

hh”ぐ+

 

hr′、つ+‘[、q

 

o′r、hごと

 

r、f

 

=r〔とュn′.・′

                 

tocelebrate;managementshouーdcreateandrewardshort‐term wlns.

Premoru「ev′crory

      

Thejobisnotdonewhenimprovementsappear;itisamistaketo“declare

                                                

ChaPte「1O

 

Cメ7の増eル超′70gの77の7rRersPecr印弧

 

323

園園園圃 Change by Checklist

          

勤ereなαcerrq!′?〆効け′′7欲の7gどの’の?豹α!gねZzbe方om 彰〆lollりなeノαs/ 卿ve珍zmdかdye/-

          

/′′?gZ〃”srqge‐の僻ん ”な 堺renqcom脆ァrro靴扉o′7es脚立『/m mメムe虜“なed/′?′?ewp超ces,

                                          

(Washingtonlrving)

         

Thelandscapeofpracticaladviceあrthechange managerisdominatedbysimplecheck

         

lists.Thesehavealsobeendescribedas“〃-steprecipes,” where〃isthenumberofitems

         

onthelist,Thisapproachisopentothecriticismthatitoversim‐plifiesacomplexprocess.

         

Howeversimplified,itisprobablyaccurateto claim that,in mostcases,ifthechange

         

managerdoesnotあ11OW mostoftheadviceinthesechecklists,thenthechangeprogram

         

couldrunintotrouble.

          

Checklistapproachesto change managementassumethattheprocessislogicaland

             

linearandcantherelt)rebecontrolledbyplanningandthen長)1lowingthecorrectsetof

           

steps.This“rationallinear” modelofchangehasbeen widelycriticized,butitremains

            

popularwithpro花ssionalbodiesand managementconsultancies.Thisisprobablybecause

         

thesechecklistsorrecipescodifywhatisusuallya messyanditerativeprocessandthus

           

oぼerthebusy change

 

manager

 

straightfbrward

 

advice

 

on whatto

 

dotoimprovethe

             

chancesofsuccess.lnthissection,wewillconsiderthreetypicalchecklistsandconsider

             

howthechangeagentshouldchoosebetweenthem.

The Boston Consultin9 Group’s D-CE ModeI

D【anagementconsultingcompaniestyPicallydeveloptheirownrecipes,o仕en withamem-orableacronym.TheDICE modeldevelopedbytheBoston ConsultingGroup,食)rexam-

pie,identifies化’ur 魚ctorsthatdetermine whethera changeprogram will“flyordie”:Duration,lntegrity,Commitment,andE鎖ort.These化’ur魚ctorsareoutHnedintableio.3

(Sirkinetai.,2005).

TABLEIO.3

    

pーcEFactor

   

MeaningDICE÷“/aIYour

Changepr。gram

  

DUro”on

      

Thedurationoftimeuntiltheprogramiscompletedifithasashortlife

F・yorDie?

                 

span;ifnotshort,theamountoftimebetweenrevjewsormilestones

        

′〃fegr#y

     

Theprojectteam’sperformanceintegrity;jtsabiーitytocompletethe

                     

initiativeontime,whichdependsonmembers’sk旧sre-ativetothe

                

projecrsrequirements

           

commたmen士

   

Thecommitmentdisplayedbytopmanagementandemployeeswho

                     

areaffected

           

E航or『

        

TheeffortrequiredthatisoVerandabovetheusualdemandson

                

employees

Program

oftimeshort,thea

team’sper

time,whic

quirements

Theprojectt

initiativeont

projecでsreq

BasedonsirkinetaL,2005

 

Changemanagersareadvisedtocalculatescoresあreachofthe DICE 魚ctors.Forexam-

Pie,DurationscoreshighlyiftheoveranPrqect前rilescaleisshortwithfrequentreviewsbut

getsalowscoreifreviewsaremorethaneightmonthsaPart.lntegrityscoreswellifaskiUed

and‐motivatedPrQiectteam hasacaPableandresPectedleaderandscoresbadlyifthose

324

 

ChaPterlO

 

C′70′7ge脳超′mgie′77gmReなz7此方-’es

          

発aturesareabsent.Adethosewhow皿 beal胃ectedbythechangeenthusiasticandsuPPortive

       

(high Co凹面tmentscore),oraretheyconcerned andobstructive(lowscore)?Doesthe

       

prqiectrequireasmaUamountofadditionalwork(highE餓ortscore)oralotofeXtrae掻ort

       

ontopofanalleadyheavyload(lowscore)?ThecombinedscoresreveaIWhetherapr ect

          

ismtheレvZ′7Zの7色thetノげび Zの7色 orthelyoezの7e.Knowing wherethe weaknessesare,

           

managementcandeveloPanactionP1anto movethechange中tothew/′7zの2e,

               

ReducingthetasktoFourdimens1onsprovidesreassurancethat,inspiteoftheuncer-

           

taintiesand untidiness,changecanbecontro11ed and工エーanagede”コective1yina moreor

           

lesslogicalandpredictablemanner.AIIS0,havingtohandlesuchasmallnumberofissues

            

appearstolessenthescaleofthechallengethatthechange managerhasto 魚ce.Success

           

appearstobeprettymuchguaranteed,

Prosci’s ADKAR ModeI

TheADKARchangemodelwasdevelopedbytheconsultingcompanyProsci(Hiatt,2004;2006;Hiattand Creasey,2012),Theacronym isbased onfiveelements: Awareness,Desire,Knowledge,Ability,and Rein貴)rcement,公4anycommentatorshaveobservedthat

organizationschangebychangingonepersonatatime(e,g,,MCFarlandand Goldsworthy,

2013).Followingthatpremise,the あcusoftheADKAR‐modellieswiththeカメZVZメヱ臓声

who Willbeinvolvedinanda]mectedbychange,ln other words,thechange manageris

advisedtoconcentrateonindividuaIAwareness,individuaIDesire,individuaIKnowledge,individuaIAbility,andtheextentto which Rein食)rcementis meaningfulandrelevantto

theindividual,TheA[軽く一ARelementsaredescribedmtable

 

lo.4,

TABLEIO.4

    

ADKARE-ements

       

FactorslnfluencingChangeSuccessADKAR‐Five

E1e】mーents

       

Aworeness

            

lndividualviewsofthecurrentStateandProblems

.nnuencing

     

oftheneedforchange

    

Credibi-ityofthoseSendingtheawarenessmessages

ChangeSuccess

                       

Circulationofrumorsormisinformation

                                    

Contestabilityofthereasonsforchange

           

behaviorS

             

Timeavailabletodeveloptherequiredski”s

                               

Availabiーityofresourcestosupportskillsdevelopment

            

Re′〃fi。rcemenr

          

MeaningfulandspecifictothePersonaffected

           

tosustainthechange

     

LinkWithdemonstrableProgress

                                  

NonegativeconsequenCes

                               

Accountabilitysystemtocontinual-yreinforcethechange

Source:Hiatt,J.2006.

                                  

ChaPte「1O

 

Cメ7α′7ge崩‘”′mgの77emReなPecrかes

 

325

  

ASWith DICE,thechange managercan useAJ)KAR asadiagn○stican‐d p1anningtool,toidentifyareasofPotentialresistance,todeveloPcommunicationandsta茸 devel-

oPment

 

strategies,andto

 

strengthen

 

changeimP1ementation byaddressinggaps

 

and

problems,PayingcloseattentiontoindividuaIPerceptions,strengths,and weaknessesisastrengthoftheAL1)※]ARapproach,Particu1ar1ywithregardtogeneratingenthusiasm,overcom・ngresistance,and

 

develoPing new skills.lnaddition,thisis

 

one

 

ofthe 免wmodelsthatexplicitlyaddresstheissueofsustainingchange(which wewillexploreinchaPterll).However,ADK‐AR payslessattentiontothenatureandilrlplicationsofthewiderorganizationalcontextandtheProcessofchange一触ctorsthatareemPhasizedinother models.

Stouten’s Evidence‐Based Approach

Notingthatthe魚ilurerateofplannedorganizationalchangeishigh,Stoutenetal.(2018)suggestthatmanagersshouldnotusetheavailableresearchevidence when ma]bLngdeci-sionsaboutproposedchangesto organizationalpractices.Theyarguethatan evidence‐

basedapproachismoreapProPriate.Theirreview ofthatevidence,父)cusingonpractical

guidelinesandunderlyingtheory,identifies

 

l0stePsthatthechange managerisadvisedto賃)1loW:

1, Diagnosis(1):Gatherthe魚ctsconcerningthenatureoftheProblem.

2, Diagnosis(2):Assesstheorganization’sreadiness あrchange.

3.ldenti尊solutions:lmplementevidencebasedchangeinterventions.

 

4. DeveloPe爺ectivechangeleadershipthroughouttheorganization.

5. Developandco]mmーunicateaco]mPellingchangev・s1on.

 

6・\yorkwithsocialnetworks,andusetheirinfluence,

 

7. UseenablingPractices一goalsetting,learning,employeeParticipation,andtransitional

 

structures-tosuPportimP1ementationthatshouldalsobe魚irandjust.8.Encouragesmall‐scaleinitiativesandexPerimentation,toallowlocaladjustmentsto

   

broadchangeplans,

 

9. AssesschangeProgressandoutcomesovertime.

10.1nstitutionalizethechangetosustainitse”ヨectiveness.

  

Thisgeneraladvicehastobeadaptedtospecificlocalcircumstances,buttheresearch‐

ersarguethatanaPproachthat貸)1lowstheevidencecarefullyismorelikelytosucceed

than onethatdoesnot.ltisinterestingtonotethatthisapproachisbroadlyconsistent

withotherguidelines,suchas,危rexample,thosefrom Kotter(2012a):Establishtheneed

andreadinessForchange,communicateacompellingvls1on,assessProgress,institution‐

alizeorembedthechange.

Checkingthe Check1ists

Therearemany“howto”checklistsincirculation.Howshouldthechangemanagerchoose

betweenthem?Theircontentsaresimilar,buttheyeachhighlightdifierentissues.DICE

(Sirkinetal.,2005)asksthechange managertocalculatescores 危rthechangetiming,team,commitment,and demandsonsta茸.ADKAR(Hiatt,2006)危cusesonindividual

326

 

CI1aPterlO

 

C′74′7ge脳α′70geme′7『H窃即ec輸’es

perceptions,motivations,andcapabilities.Stoutenetal,(2018)wantthechange manager

to貴)1loWtheresearchevidenceaCross

 

losteps,

  

oneresponseconcerns”云it“;someaPProachesaremoreapproPriatethanotherstoa

givencontext.Thisdependsonthesizeoftheorganization,thenature,scaleandurgency

ofchange,theproblemsto be

 

solved,numbers

 

a畳当ected,the

 

organization’s historyof

change,andso on,lfchangetimingand demands

 

on sta甘 arekeyconcerns,andthe

organizationalculturehasapre舵rence貴)rquantifiedmethods,theDICE modelmaybe

appropriate,TheA”)KuRapproach mayapplyinsituationsWhereindividualconcerns

areseenascentraltothesuccessofchange,Theevidence‐basedapproachofStoutenetal,

(2018) maycontributetothecredibilityofthechange managerinorganizationalcultures

Wherechangesthemselveshavetobeseentobesupportedbyevidence,suchasengineer‐

ing,researchanddevelopment,andhealthcaresettings,

ltmayseem obvioustoarguethatchangesneed

to

 

be

 

adequately

 

resourced,With

 

funds,people,andotherappropriatesupport,iftheyaretohave

any

 

chance

 

of

 

success,Research

 

suggests

 

the

opposite,

 

Weidne「etal.(2017)wereinterestedinthesup-

portprovidedfororganizationalchanges,asinade-

quate 「esourcing

 

 

 

often

 

used

 

to

 

e×plain

 

や「

excuse}fai-ure.Confidenceinandcommitmentto

change,and

 

experimentation

 

with

 

different

 

op-

tions,canbeencouragedbyhavingaccesstothe

rightfinancial

 

and

 

human

 

resources.Experience

shows,however,thatthesuccessofmajorchanges

isnotguaranteedevenwheresignificantresources

aremadeavailable,

  

Theresearchersstudiedlinksbetweenavailable

resourcesandthesuccessofchangeinthreehealth-

caresettingsintheUKNationa-HeaーthService(NHS),These

 

involved

 

hospital

 

services,communitycare,andmenta-healthservices.TheNHShadbeenunder

pressuretocutcosts,whilemaintainingquaーity,ata

time

 

when

 

demand

 

for

 

hea1thca「e

 

was

 

r-s1ng.Changestothehospital

 

and

 

communitycare

 

prac‐

ticeswe「efelttobestrate9icpriorities,sotheywe「e

wellresourced,andtheirchangeagentshada-otof

freedom,-ncontrast,mentalhealthse~iceswe「enot

seen

 

as

 

 

priority,and

 

budget

 

and

 

administrative

supportresourcesfortheseserviceswerecut.The

researchers

 

gathered

 

information

 

overfouryears,

usingacombinationofobservation,inte~iews,anda

widerangeoforganizationaldocuments,

 

W′hich

 

servicesexperiencedthe

 

mostprofound

changes,andwhy?Weidneretal.(2017)found:

 

Despitebeingverywe--resourced,hospitaーand

  

communitycareserviceswerelargelyunchanged

  

overtheperiodofthisstudy.

 

Mentalhealthserviceschangedandimprovedto

 

suchadegreethattheybecamealocalandna-

 

tionalshowpieceforstrategicchangeinitiatives.

 

Thoseworkingin mental

 

healthbenefittedfrom

 

thelackofinterestinwhattheyweredoing,as

  

thisa=owedthemtoimplementchangesquick-y,

 

without

 

becoming

 

involved

 

inlengthy

 

debates

  

andnegotiations.

  

Theinitiativesthatwereprioritizedand we-l

 

re‐

sourced

 

attractedtheattention

 

ofa wide

 

rangeof

powerful

 

stakeho1ders.As

 

 

result,thesechanges

came

 

under

 

more

 

intense

 

scrutinyand

 

challenge.Changeagentshadtodevotemoretimetomanag-

ingtheneedsanddemandsofa‘ltheinterestedpar-

ties

 

and

 

spent

 

less

 

time

 

imp1ementing

 

theactual

changes.

  

Contraryto

 

mostchange

 

managementadvice,this

 

evidence

 

suggeststhat,ifyou wanta

 

depart‐

ment,service,or

 

unitto

 

make

 

dramatic

 

changes,considergivingitinadequateresourcestodoso.

                                                    

ChaPterlO

 

 

t乃の7geル仏α′7αge′77g川野ぞ裕Pedzves

 

327

               

Aぬother

 

answerto “how to

 

choose?” m‐aysimply be-doesit matter? As

 

long

 

as

             

adviceinthisfbrmisused asastructuredstarting point,thenthedetailsandissues

             

thatarerelevanttoaspecificchangeinaparticularorganizationshouldemergeinthe

             

discussion andtheplanning.Afinalresponseis-whychoose? W′hynotworkthrough

             

more

 

than

 

one

 

ofthese

 

approaches

 

and

 

assess

 

their value

 

in

 

use?

 

Two

 

or

 

more

             

approachesappliedtothesamechangeprogram maysuggestsimilar-orwidelydiぼer-

             

ent-implications云orpractice,Thesimilaritiescanbereassuring.Thedifferencesmay

             

trigger

 

further

 

insights

 

and

 

investigation

 

and

 

contribute

 

to better

 

implementation

           

planning.

               

Thesemodelsare”high-level“guides,notdetailed“bestpractice“road maps.Theyare

             

usefulaslong astheyareusedinthatway.Unlikearecipeinyourkitchen cookbook,

             

theseguidelineslisttheingredients withoutexplaininghowto makethedish.Youhave

             

toworkthatoutあryourself.Thiscanbe丑ustratingforchangemanagersseekingconcrete

             

adviceon“whatworksand whatdoesn’t,”Checklistsjustidenti尊 態ctorsthatneedtobe

                   

addressed;thechallengeisto constructachangeimplementation processthatfitsthe

                 

organizationalconte×t.Thatisthehardpart. Changeflom thisperspectiveistosome

                   

extentatechnicalexercise,understandingtheissuestoconsider,butalsorequiresablend

             

oflocalblowledge,in恥rmedjudgment,andcreative”aロ.

rL万国副 Stage Models

          

 

                                

 

                          豹e″z/‘羽/e.占泥ryo′7e/oyes〃?叩か力7gあeg粥川′?≧gsα′?メカαP即ノ釧{霞“gsゴ”Sルs”左g′”/ddをs豹の粥vo/ye 如rdwo戒, (Kanter,2009)

Changecanbeseen,notjustasachecklistofto‐dos,butasaseriesofstagesunあldingovertime,fromillitiation,throughimplementation,to conclusion.Thisstageapproach

doesnotnecessarilydisquali尊thechecklistsandrecipes.However,stage modelssuggest

theactionsthatthechange managerisadvisedtotakewillvaryovertheimplementation

cycle.ThestepsnecessarytoinitiatechangethuswillbediHヨerentfrom thoserequired

duringtheinnーplementationstage,anddi航erentactionsagainwiubenecessarytoconclude

andsustainthechange.Stage modelscanthuscomplementthechecklistapproachbyintroducingthistemporaldin[lenslon.

Lewin’s Three‐Stage Model

oneofthebest‐known modelsofchange wasdevelopedby KurtLewin(1951),who

argued食)rtheneedtoz殉膨ezethecurrentstateofaffairs,to′“。vetoadesirednew

state,andthentor弓かeezeandstabilizethosechanges(Burnes,2020;Cummingset

al.,2016):

Changeattitudesbyma]bLngpeople発eluncom長)rtableaboutthe way

thingsarebecausetheycouldbeimproved,andsoestablishthemotive

tochange・

328

 

ChaPterlO

 

C’7q′7ge崩敵′7αge′77g′7rHersPecr′yes

lmplementthechangeto mーovetothedesirednewstate.

EmbedorinstitutionaUzethenew behaviors,topreventPeoP1e登omdri宣ingbacktopreviouswaysofdoingthings.

Eachofthesestages makesdiがerentdelmlandSonthechange manager.First,convincing

those who willbeinvolvedoftheneedtochange.Second,puttingthechangeinplace.

Third,redesigningroles,systems,andprocedurestodiscourageareturntopastpractice.oneimportant。bservati。nofthism。delisthat,ifpeoplearehappywiththewaythings

are,theywillbereluctanttochange,Thechange manager’sfirsttaskinthisapproach,

therejR)re,istomakepeopleunhappy,Butthisisa“positivedissatis魚ction,

”whichencour-

agespeopletobelievethat“wecandobetter,”

Findonybu方ube,“Unfreezin9ChangeasthreestePs;RethinkingKurtl‐eWin’slegacyforchangemanagement”

(2019,7:36minutes).

 

Lewm’ssecondstage-mo光一caninvoke Kanter’slaW(seethebox”Kanter’sLaW),Which

sEwsthatchange。貴enlooksm(eafa江ureinthemiddle,Sc土田eiderandGoldwasser(1998),whoP1otted

“theclassicchangecurve,”capl旗redthislaw(seeFi罫jrelo.1).加themiddleof

thecurveSitsthe”vaneyofdespa立,“Those whoarea爺ectedstarttorealizethatthiscould

meanlossandpa無 恥rthem.Scr血eiderandGoldwasser(1998,p,42)arg瓢lethatthisispr。ID

ablymevitable,butthatitisusellilt。beawareofthisandto weakentheiIPpactifpossible:

 

A1eaderofchangemustanticipateemployees’reactions,anotherkey魚ctorintheProcess,

 

Asshown[Figurelo.1],thesereactionsoccuralonga”changecurve,“ThebluelinereP‐

 

resentswhatis,unあrtunately,typical,Unrealisticallyhighexpectationsattheoutsetofa

 

programmeleadtoarelativelydeep‘‘valleyofdespair”whenchangedoes口tcomeas

 

quicklyoreasilyasanticipated.overtime,employeesdoseea‘‘lightattheendofthe

 

tunnel”andthechangeeventuallyProducessomepositiveresults.Theredlineillustrates

 

whatispossiblewithe掻ectivechangemanagement:alesstraumaticvisittothevalleyand

 

greaterresultsastheprogrammereachescompletion.Canyouavoidthe”valleyofdespair”

 

altogether?Probablynot.AJ1changeprogrammesinvolvesomeloss,Thebestapproachis

  

toacknowledgethatelmーployeeswillmournthelossofbusinessasusual,muchaspeople

  

experiencestagesofgrievingwhentraumainvadestheirpersonallives.

Kotter’s Eight‐Stage ModeI

Probablythemostwidelycited,andwidelyapp”ed,stagemodelofchangeistheonedeveloped

byiotlnKotter(2007;2012a),mentionedea川erinthischapter,Kotter’Smodelissummarized

mtablelo,5,ltiss。met鱈nespresentedasanothercheck旦St,butthisisatmsrepresentation.rotehow hiseight‐stageapproachtotransit)rmationalchangeopenswith“createasenseof

urgencコメ(un仕eeze),passest虚。ugh“empowerpeopletoact”(move),andendswith“institu-

ti。na比とenewapproaches”(re丘eeze).Lew血’sechocanbeheardinthis model,too.

  

Kotteradvisesthechange managerto workthroughthoseeightstagesmoreorlessin

sequence.rForush ort。 missout。n any。ftheStagesincreasesthechanceof魚ilure,

H[owever, Kotter alsorecognizesthatthiSis

 

an “ideal” perspective,aschangeis

 

o貴en

untidyanditerative.Aswiththechecklists,thismodelcodifiesthestagesofchangeina

clearandeasilyunderstood manner,However,thechange managerstillhastocombine

ChaPterlO

 

C乃α′7ge脳毎′mgemβ′7「Per卸ec”1を.y

 

329

FIGUREIO.ITheC1assicChangeCurve

High

    

〉麗

 

THECLAss1c cHANGECURVE Muchbetter

expectations

 

l謹灘 thanbefore

Realizationof

effortand

ComP1exity

Despalr

       

 

       

 

     

 

     

 

    

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

        

 

〆#

    

Lightatt

       

ofthetu

圃圏麹 Typicalprogram

 

 

圏Effectiveprogram

Source:Schneider,D,~1りandGoldwasser,C,1998,

localknowledgewithcreativethin姫ngtotranslatethisadviceintoPracticalactionsthat

areappropriatetotheorganizationalcontextandtothenatureofthechangesthatare

beingProPosed.Therearemanyways,食)rexamP1e,inwhichto“createasenseofurgency“

orto”commーunicatethevision”orto“institutionalizenewapProaches.”Aswithchecklists,

these

 

stage

 

models

 

are

 

also “high

 

level” guides,ratherthan

 

detailed “best

 

Practice”

丘ameworks.

 

APPelbaum etaL(2012)reviewed the evidence relating tothe e掻ectiveness

 

of

Kotter’s modeland あundsupPort あr mostoftheindividualstePs. However,despite

Kotter’sargumentaboutintegratingtheeightstages,nostudieshadevaluatedtheframe-

workasa whole,ontheotherhand,there wasnoevidencetochallengethePractical

valueoftheaPproach,whichremainsPOPular.Theauthorsarguethat“Kotter’schange

management modelaPPearsto

 

deriveits

 

POPularity more 登om its

 

directand usable

恥rmatthan 登om anyscientificconsensusontheresults”(Appelbaum etal.,2012,P.764).Theyconclude,therefbre,that Kotter’s modelisuse鏡linchangeimplementation

P1anningbutshouldbecomP1ementedbyothertoolsto adaPtthe change processto

localconditions.

 

Kotter(2012b,p,52)subsequentlyrevisedhis丘amework,arguingthatthecomPonents

identifiedintablelo,5shouldbeseenas”changeaccelerators“tospeedupchange,Thenew argumenthasthreeaspects.First, Kotterarguesthattheaccelerators mustoPerate

concurrently,ratherthaninsequence.Second,change mustnotrelyonasmallpowerful

330

 

ChaPterlO

 

 

t770′7ge脳超′mgの77e/7′Re窟¥)ecr′yes

TABLEIO.5 stage

                   

VVhatls1nvolvedKotter’s霊ight‐

                             

ExaminemarketandcompetitiVerealities.Stagewl。del。f

   

l.E繁Qb′′shosenseofurgenCy.

   

,dentifyanddiscusscr-sesandopportunities.TransformーationaI

Change

        

2,Form oPOWer打u/9u′d′n9

       

Assemb-eagrouPWithPoWertoleadthechange,

               

coo〃”on.

                 

Encouradethisclrouptoworktodetherasateam.

                         

thinking.

           

6.P/onfiorqndcreore

          

Pianforvisibleperformance1mprovements.

            

shorr‐te““ w′ns.

            

RewardemP1oyeesinvolvedinimProvements,

                                  

ChaPterlO

 

C力α′?ge羽q′7αge“7e′”βe′1Ped′1ぞs

 

331

that question has been anSWered,the changecan pr○ceedt○the nextStage.ThefiveStagesare:

     

Assess

Arc胡red

   

       

球′heredowewanttogo?

Howreadyare wetog。there?

W〆hatmustwed。togetthere?

Howdowemanagethejourney?

Howdowecontinuetoimprove?

  

Thismodelo爺ersguidelines長)rmanagingboththehardPerlt)rmanceandsofthealthisSues.Thefiveguidelines云or managingperlbrmanceare:

1.Szm肥厚co勿ecz/yes鰹叩かe」,CreateacomPellinglongterm changevlslon,Setmidterm

  

asPirationsalongthepath,andguardagainstbiasesintheProcess.

2.S顔/ムsezre秘密e′“ems 魚ssessノ.Forecastdemand 危rs顔1IS,andunderstandtheirSuPP1y

  

dynamics;thendecidehowtoclosegaPS.

3.βα〃卿鰯eP厄〃 〃効力ecリ.DefinethePort危lioofinitiativesthatwillrealizeyourstra‐

 

tegic o廟ectives,and meetyourskillrequirements;then sequence youractions and

  

reallocateresourcesaccordingly.

4. のり“er嘘字 mode/@cリ.EstabliShstronggovernance,decidehowtoscaleyourchange

 

initiatives, monitor

 

their

 

Progress, and

 

dynamically

 

adjust

 

them

 

throughout

  

implementation.

5.乙e鯖′?!〃g″折口szr肥れぽerodyの7ceノ.lnstitutionalizeProcessesand exPertiseS0thatthe

 

organizationshareSknowledge,constantlyimproves,andcontinuallylearnshowtod。

 

newthings(KellerandSchaninger,2019a,P.8).

The行veguidelinesあrmanaginghealthare:

1. 嵐eの物gm応 超功能ノ.0醇ectivelycheckyourorganization’Shealth,choosewheretobe

 

exceptional,andtargetareaSthatneedimmediateimprovement.

2.MZ〃ぬezsね諺s 彰ssessノ.PinPointhelpingand hinderingbehaviors 危r Priorityhealth

 

areaS,e×P1oretheunderlying mindsetdrivers,and prioritizeacritical 免w “丘om-to”

 

mindsetshi賃s.3.加卵“e〃ce/eyeな にたた!『ecリ.Use危urleverstoreshapetheworkenvir。nment:role mod‐

 

embog,understandmgandconviction,rein危rcementmechamsms,andcon6‐dence-build血g

 

e甜orts.ThenensurethatPerformanceinitiativesareengineeredtopromotetheneces-

 

sary mindsetandbehavioralshi仕s.4. Ge〃eだのZo〃 げe〃e′割ノ@cリ.Mobilizeinfluenceleaders, makethechangepersonal危r

 

emP1oyees,and maintain high‐impact,two‐waycommunication.

5.乙eqde都月彰 〆αceme′”‘”dyの7ceノ.Prioritizeongoingrolesbytheirpotentialto create

 

value, matchthe mostinnPortant。nest。thebesttalent,and makethetalent‐match

 

Processbusinessasusual(KellerandSchaninger,2019a,P,8).

 

EvenifthishighlydetailedprescriPtioniS危1lowedcare鏡1ly,trans危rmation canstilldisaPPoint.AccordingtoN[CKinseyresearch,adoPtinga”

Pipeline”analogy,Problemso賃en

ariSethrough“leakage,

”whichmayexP1ainthe70PercentfailurerateofP1annedchange:

332

 

ChaPterlO

 

C乃α′7ge脳”′?αg1e′77g′7rReri¥)ecr′}’郷

                

lt’sallaboutavoidingleakage.SoattheasPirationstage,長)lksdon’tgo長)rtheir和1IPoten-

               

tial.Theygo化)rsevenoutoftenofit.AねdthenintheP1anningandexecution,theylet

               

somethingss1ide,Theydon’tseesomethingsallthewaythrough.Aねdtheydosevenout

                

oftenofit.Then,finally,theydon’tbuildinthechangesthatarenecessary貴)rtheinitia-

               

tivetobesustained.Theygetitsevenoutoftenright,\Mell,ifyou multiplythattogether,

              

thosesevensoutoftens,youquicl紅ygettoabouta30Percentsuccessrate.That’swhat

               

we’veseen,agamandagain.Youhaveto,ateachstepoftheprocess,goforthe

 

looper‐

                

centandbeabletorealizethefulIPotentialofthebusinessinorder化)rthetransit)rmation

          

tobesuccess位1,(Bucyetal,2o17a,p.3)

         

Bucyetal.(2017b)oぼerthree Piecesofadvice 危rkeepingthePipelineintactand

           

transft)rlnationalchangeontarget,First,berg/e刀″ess,assumingthat mostinitiativesWill

             

deliverlessthantheypromiseatthestart.Aぬdensurethattimeisallocatedtosmaller

             

initiatives,Torein貴)rcethispoint,theyuseaninteresting“boulders,pebbles,andsand”

         

analogy.“Boulders”areinitiativesthatareeachexpectedtocontributeatleast5percent

         

ofthe

 

program’s

 

total

 

value,“Pebbles” are

 

expected

 

to

 

contribute

 

between

 

o.5

 

and

         

5Percent,AJ1initiativesexpectedto contributelessthano.5percentofthetotalvalue

         

are“sand.”N[CKinseyresearchsuggeststhat50percentofthetotalvalueofmanytrans‐

         

あrmationprogramstypicallycomes丘omsand.FocusingefGortontheboulders-thelarge,

         

high‐profileinitiatives-isthere危rerisky.lnaddition,itisusuallyquickerand easierto

         

implementthe”sand,” which mayinvolve 元werlayersofapprovalandlesscumbersome

         

coordination.

                 

second,たα/sresoz/rce品 anddonotexpectyourbestchange managerstorun more

         

thanthreeinitiativesatthesametime,APdcontrolthenumberofmetricsand milestones,

         

manyofwhichareneverusedandbecomeunnecessaryburdens,Third,〃/の7の?ααdqpr;

              

expectsomepr(ガectstobedelayed,and managethiswith week1yactionsforinitiative

             

ovvners,

AppraisingtheStage Models

Stagemodelscomplementthechecklistapproachbyhighlightingthewayinwhichchange

un云oldsovertime.ThisleadstotheM【cKinseyobservationthatchanges 態ilto deliver

theirpromises

 

dueto “leakageinthepipeline“

 

as

 

changeun危lds.As we have noted,

changeislikelyto makedi都erentdemandsonthechange manager-and onthose who

areafiectedbychange-ateach ofthediぼerentstages.AJthough changeisrarelytidy,kllowingtheprobable

 

sequence

 

ofevents,and how that maybe

 

disrupted,allowsthe

change managertoanticipateandprepare 危rpotentialdi賃iculties,

 

Stage modelsareopentothreecriticisms.First,despitetheemphasisoneventsunfold-

ingovertime,these modelsrarelyre免rto whathasgonebeおrethecurrentintervention,

W′hathashappenedinthepast,however,withregardto previouschangeattempts,will

influenceresponsestocurrentproposals,Consider,危rexample,thechange management

actionsthatmayberequiredto“createasenseofurgency”in an organizationthathas

seen manypreviousunsuccessfulchangesthatseniormanagementdrovewith”asenseof

urgency”and wheretopteamcredibilityisnowlow.Contrastthiswiththeorganization

wheretheopportunityorthreatiscleartoallstaぜ members,who,onthebasisofrecent

experienceofchange,placeahighdegreeoftrustinthetopteam,ltmaythuso賃enbe

help鏡ltoextendthetimelinebackwardandtoidenti勾(andifnecessary,tocompensate

fbr)previouseventsandoutcomesthat m卸influencetoday’saction plans,

                                  

Chapterl〇

 

C力α′7ge凡毎′?αge′??e′汀ReなPecr′ves

 

333

  

Second,itローayalsobeheIPfulto e×tendthetimeline化)rward,beyond”consolidate”

and

 

”institutionalize.” Even

 

changes

 

that

 

are

 

successful will

 

eventually decay without

aPProPriateぱlaintenance.Parado樽ically,successfulchangescanalsoinhibittheilnーP1emen-

tationoffurtherinnovation,which maybeseenasnovel,risky,andathreattocurrently

eぼective operations.Theissuesthatarisein managingthesustainability ofChangeare

exploredinchapterll.

  

Finally,as withchange

 

checklists,stage modeIS

 

Oぼerfurther“highlevel“guidance,leavingthechange managertodeterminehowinpracticetoapplythatadviceinagiven

context.Thereisnoclear,unambiguousstatementof“thisiswhattodo.”Thecontingency

approachestochange managementexploredinthenextsection,however,seektoadvise

thechange managerhowtoadjustimplementationstrategiese稀ectiveiytodi節erentcon‐

textsandconditions.

瞳圃圏圃翻The Process Perspective

Change

 

is

 

 

process,and

 

not

 

an

 

event, This

 

is

 

 

straight危rward

 

observation

 

andisreflectedinthestage modelsofchange managementdiscussedintheprevioussection.Processperspectives,however,highlightothersigni賃cantaspectsoforganizationalchange

and drawtheattentionofthechange managertoissuesnotcoveredbyeitherchecklistsorstage models.Aユthoughpotentially makingchangeappeartobe morecomplex,process

thinkingencouragesthe

 

change managerto

 

adopta morecomprehensive approachtodesigning,planning,implementing,andreviewingchangeactivities,

 

oneofthearchitectsoftheprocessualperspective, 山Ddrew Pettigrew(1985;1987),cautionedagainstlookingfbrsinglecausesandsimpleexplanationsあrchange.lnstead,hepointedtothemanyrelated 態ctors-individual,group,organizational,social,politica1一

thatcanaがectthenatureand outcomesofchange.Pettigrew observedthatchange was

acomplexand”untidycocktail”thatincludedrationaldecisions, mixed withcompetingindividualperceptions,o貸enstimulatedbyvisionaryleadership,andspicedwith“

power

plays“torecruitsupportandtobuildcoalitionsbehindparticularideas.

 

lnthisview,theunitofanalysisisnot“thechange“:anew organizationstructure,or

newtechnoloIW,ornew workingpractices.Theumtofanalysisis“theprocessofchangeincontext“:howanewstructurew皿be血lplementedanddevelopedinthisparticularorgam-

zationalsetting.This

 

subtle

 

shi宣in perspectivehastworelatedimplications.First,thismeanspayingattentiontothe”ow ofeventsandnotthinkゴロロgofchangeaseitherstaticor

neatlyt山ie‐boundedwithde行nedbeg山ningandendPoints.Second,t垣salso meanspay血gattentiontothewidercontextinwhichchangeistakingplaceandnotthinkingintermsof

aparticularlocationintimeandgeography(thisnewmachineinthis魚ctorybay).lnshort,processperspectivesarguethat,tounderstandorganizationalchange,onehastounderstand

howthesubstance,context,andprocessinteractovert無letoproducetheoutcomes.

 

Patrick DawsonandConstantine山odriopoulos(2017)hを奴e範rtherdevelopedthispro‐

cessualperspective.They makeitclearthattounderstandchangeweneedtoconsiderthefbllowingissues:

1.Thecomexz-past,present,andfuture-in whichtheorganizationfunctions,including

 

externalandinternal魚ctors,andtheorganization’shistoryaspasteventsshapecurrent

 

responses

334

 

chapterlO

 

C力α′7ge肋名α′mge〃7e′7rRe′1Ped′1ぞs

           

2.Theszのsrm7ceofthechangeanditsscaleandscoPe,Whichcouldbenewtechnology,

              

processredesign,anew paymentsystem,orchangestostructureandculture

            

3.Ther〆α′7s/rZO′?〃rocess,includingtasks,activities,decisions,timing,andsequencing

            

4,Fがなにα

 

activity, Within

 

and

 

outside

 

the

 

organiZation,shaping decisions,securlng

          

support

           

5. TheZ′?Zero”!○′7sbetweenthese 魚ctors,WhichshaPeboththechangeprocessandthe

            

outco]比les

            

This perspectiveincorporatestherole

 

ofpowerand politicsinshaping organizational

            

change,This

 

is

 

a 篤aturethatthe perspectiVes we have

 

examinedso 魚reitherdonot

            

mention ordealwithonlybrieny,Asorganizationsarepoliticalsystems,andaschange

           

isinevitablyapoliticizedprocess,theprocessperspectivearguesthatthechange manager

         

mustbewillingtointerveneinthepoliticsoftheorganization.lnthisrespect,thekey

         

taskistolegitimizechangeproposalsinthe錠ceofcompetingideas,Themanagementof

         

changecanthusbedescribedas“the managementofmeaning,“ whichinvolvessymbolic

         

attemptstoestablishthecredib道tyofparticulardefinitionsofproblemsandsolutions

         

andtogainconsentandcompliance丘om otherorganization members,Partofthistask,

         

thereあre,istodoWith“the wayyoutellit,“or moreaccurately With“the wayyouse//

         

irtoothers,

         

Dawson and Aiodriopoulos(2017)identi~ eightlessonsfrom a process perspective

        

concerningchange managementpractice:

         

1. There

 

are

 

no

 

universal

 

prescriptions

 

or

 

simple

 

recipes

 

For

 

how best

 

to manage

         

change,

         

2. Changeisapoliticalprocess,andchangeleadersneedtobepoliticallysensitiveand

            

astute.

         

3. Time,planning,andflexibilityareessentialinchangingattitudesandbehaviorsandin

          

galn・ngcommitmentForchange.

         

4.Theyadvocate“criticalreflection,”challengingtaken-免r‐grantedassumptions;あrexam-

          

ple,withregardtoresistance,which maybedesi1ableifitsubvertsa weakinitiative.

         

5.ltisimportanttolearnfrombothpositiveandnegativeexperlences.

         

6, Education, training, and

 

development

 

should

 

be

 

aligned

 

With

 

new operating

         

Procedures.

         

7. Communication

 

is

 

fundamentally

 

important

 

in

 

steering

 

processes

 

in desired

          

directions,

         

8,“Contradictionsprovidehealthあodあrcriticalreflection.

” Changerequiresconstant

          

adaptationtocontextualcircumstances,

          

M[ostofthisadviceechoestheguidance丘omchecklistsandstage models,However,

         

Wherethechecklistssay”dothis,

”processaccountsadvise,

“beawareofthis,“notingthat

         

there are no “bestpractice”recipesForchange.The process perspectivedi窟ersinthe

           

emphasis placed

 

ontherole

 

ofpower and politics

 

in

 

shaping

 

change outcomes, one

            

implicationofthisemphasisisthatthechange managermustbepoliticallyskilledandbe

            

wilロngandabletousethoseskills.Thecapabilitiesofthechange managerareexplored

        

inchapter12.

ChaPterlO

 

C方α′7ge崩毎′?αge〃7g′7ZReri¥)ecm’es

 

335

Processtheoryarguesthattheoutcomesofchange

areproduced

 

bytheinteractionsofseveralfactors

overtimeinagivencontext.VVhatdoesthislooklike

inpractice?DondeP1owmanandcolleagues(2007)

giveafascinatingaccountofwhattheyca=“radicaー

changeaccidenta=y′’Theystudiedtheturnaround

ofルグ′ss′on cわurch,afailing

 

or9anization

 

ina

 

large

southwesternU.S.city,

  

The

 

organizational

 

context

 

was

 

unstable.The

church Wasfaced with

 

 

potentia1lyterminal

 

prob-

lem.Seenasatraditional”silkstockings”church,the

organization

 

was

 

asset

 

rich

 

but

 

cash

 

poor.Atten-

danceandmembershipWeredeclining.Therewere

ongoingconflictsinvolvingaKKKplaque,theplay-

ingofiazzinthechurch,andwhethergaysandles‐

biansshouldbeacceptedasmembers.Thepurpose

andidentityofthechurchcreatedfurthertensions,particuーarly with

 

regardto

 

includingthe

 

homeーess

andotherswhoWereexcーuded.Withseveralprevi-

ouschangesinleadership,therehadbeentwopas-

tors

 

in

 

three

 

years,resulting

 

in

 

the

 

controversiaー

appointmentoftwoco‐pastors.

 

Howdidchangebegin?A9roupofyoungsters,whodid

 

not1ikethetraditional

 

church

 

school

 

pro-

gram,hadthe

 

idea

 

ofprovidinghotbreakfastsfor

homeless

 

people

 

on

 

Sunday

 

mornings.Some

 

of

thoseyoungsterswere

 

noteven

 

church

 

members;

theyWeresoonservin9

 

500peopleeverySunday.Thehotbreakfastsideawasneverintendedtopro-

duce

 

radical

 

change.However,P1owman

 

and

 

col-

leaguesarguethatsmaーーactionssuchasthiswere”amplified“bytheunstab-econtext.

  

VVhatweretheoutcomes?Church

 

membership

recovered,invoーvin9aWiderrangeofthelocalpop‐

u-ation

 

including

 

the

 

homeless

 

and

 

minorities.Homelessindividualsjoinedthechurch,sanginthe

choir,and

 

served

 

as

 

ushers.The

 

style

 

ofworship,formalityofdress,andmusicchangedasdidthepro-

fileofthecongregation;thiswas

 

nolongera“silk

stockings”church.The

 

church

 

gotcityfundingto

provideadaycenterforseveralthousandhomeless

andwassoonservin9over20,00omealsayear.ln

additionto

 

breakfasts

 

and

 

clinics,the

 

church

 

pro-

videdーegalassistance,jobtraining,laundryservices,andshowerfacilities.Thechurchmottochangedto

include“justiceintoactionP

  

VVhydidthishappen?The“contextualconfigura‐

tion”thatencouragedongoingchangeincluded:

 

Dissatisfied youngsters

 

came

 

up

 

With

 

the

 

hot

  

breakfastsidea.

 

Adoctorworkingasavolunteerofferedtotreat

  

medical

 

problems

 

instead

 

and soon

 

recruited

  

others,leadingtofull‐scale medical,dental,and

  

eyeclinicsaspartoftheSundayactivity.

 

ThechurchremovedtheKKKplaque-a major

 

symbolicact,

 

Leadersactedas“sense‐9lvers,“providingmean-

  

ingratherthandirectingchanges,andchosethe

  

languagelabe1s:”purgin9P”recovering,””reach-

  

ingouttothemarginaーized.“

 

Affluent

 

members

 

left

 

as

 

the church

 

focused

  

increasinglyonthehomeless,andnew(lessafflu-

  

ent)memberswereattractedbythemessageof

 

inclusivity.

Thefeatures

 

oftheorganizationafcontextencour-

agedaseriesofsmallchangestoemergeandampli-

fiedtheseintoanunplanned,radicaー,andsuccessful

change

 

process,There was

 

notop‐downtransfor-

mation

 

designed

 

byseniorーeaders.Thisisa

 

good

exampleofaprocessualaccountofchangeunfo-d-

ingovertime,illustratinghowfactorsatdifferent1ev-

els

 

ofanaーysis

 

interactto

 

produce

 

the

 

outcomes,P1owmanetaー,(2007)offerthefollowingadvicefor

thechange manager.First,besensitivetocontext,Second,be

 

prepared

 

to

 

be

 

surprised;the

 

emer-

genceofsmall

 

changes

 

isnotan

 

orderlyprocess.Third,viewthosesmaHchangesopportunistically,in

termsofhowtheymightbedeveloped.

Theprocessperspectiveonchangethusappearstohavethreestrengths;

1.ltrecognizesthecompleXityofchange,draw血gattentiontothe立lteractionbetween many

 

魚ctorsatdiflコerentlevels,shapmgthenature,d立ection,andconsequencesofchange.

336

 

ChaPterlO

 

C/?”′7ge崩‘”′mge′77g′7『Re′~梯形cm’es

             

2.ltrecognizeschangeasaprocesswithapast,apresent,andafuture,ratherthanas

               

astaticortilne‐boundedeventordiscreteseriesofevents,

             

3.lthighlightsthepoliticalnatureoforganizationsandchange,e・鮒LPhasizingtheimpor-

              

tanceofpoliticalskilltothechange manager.

However,theprocessperspectivehasthreelimitations:

1,ChangeinthisperspectiVeisindangerofbeingpresentedasoverco理ーp1ex and over-

 

whehDoinglyconfusing,andthusasunmanageable.

2,Thosewhoareinvo1vedinthechangeprocessaresometimesportrayedas minorchar-

 

actersmthebroadsweepofevents,relegatedtotheroleofsense-giversandinterpreters

 

controlled

 

by

 

social

 

and

 

contextual

 

化)rces,rather

 

than

 

as

 

proactive“movers

 

and

 

shakers,“

3,ltdoesnotlenditselfreadilytotheidentificationofspecificguide且nes,云ocusingon

 

awarenessratherthan prescription. Adviceisthuslimitedtothoseissuesto which

  

change managementshouldbesensitive:compleXity,process,context,politicalinflu‐

  

ences,opportunity.

霞園瞳園 ContingenCy APProaches

Dawsonand 山ロdriopoulos(2017)arenotaloneinnotingthattherearenouniversal“one

bestway”

prescriptions食)rmanagingchange,ThishasledtothedeveloPmentofcontin-

gency approaches, which

 

arguethatthe

 

best wayto

 

manage

 

change depends

 

onthecontext.Vi/ewillexplore節urcontingencyapproaches:“〃?eだ め 肺α“?,豹e 豹の?ge尼ααのも

sため 助走sの′”/′7・〃〃′77,Z庇 Srqce‐D”′のたJノの〃『!′増のりノ〃7のr鳶,and 的eああpe息の刺んβ〆昭雄7欲の増eたα/e緩osmのe.

VVhereto Start?

The

 

problem

 

has

 

been

 

diagnosed,and

 

appropriate

 

organizationalchanges

 

have been

agreed. Whatto do next? Wheretobegin? Hope Haileyand Balogun(2002,p,158)discussthisbrieflyintheircontingency model(explainedbelow)arguing,

”Changecan

start丑om‐toP‐down,bottom-up,orsomecombinationofthetwo,orasanotheralternative,bedevelopedfrom pocketsofgoodpractice.Shouldchangebeimplementedthroughout

theorganizationsimultaneously,orcanitbedeliveredgraduallythroughpilotsites?”Thechange manager,

isthus魚cedwitharangeofoptions.

 

Adoptinga novelapproachtothe question ofwheretostart, N1arco

 

Gardinietal,

(2011)arguethatchangeshouldbeginwiththosestaぜ whosecontributionswillhavethe

mostsignificantimpactontheaspectsofper危rmancethatneedtochange,ldentiルingthose”

pivotalroles”isvital,butthisisnotalways obvious.Theyreachedthis“pivotal

roles”conclusion 官om

 

e×Perience with alarge European retailbank.Thisbank,with

6,00obranches,魚cedincreasingcompetition官om more“customer‐丑iendly’localbanks.

To

 

deal

 

withthis

 

threat, management

 

developed

 

 

new

 

organizational model, which

reduced centralsupervls・on and controland gavebranch managers moreautonomyto

tailortheir marketing,promotions,ando節eringstothe立localareas.Thenew modelwas

                                  

ChaPterlO

 

C方の増e虚劣の70gの77emHer撃沈″1ぞs

 

337

communicatedquickly‐toallstaぼ,andthewayinwhichthenew roles would work was

explained.Top managementdidthisthroughroadshows, memos,intranetarticles,and

bypublishingthenew organizationcharts.Everyonereceivedthesameinあrmation,and

thechanges werealltohappenatthesametime.

 

Reviewingprogressa花w monthslater,however,moststa茸 membershadnotchanged

theirworkingpractices.ln particular,thebranch managers werestillusingtheprevious

structureandproceduresbecausethey werea丘aidofmakingmistakesorannoyingmoreseniorstaぜ.Theregionalsupervisorswere meanttoactascoachestothebranch manag-

ers,butmanydidnothavecoachingskills,and manybranch managersdidnothavethe

skillstoruntheirown branchesand maketheirown decisions.Realizingthattheyhad

triedtochangetoo muchatthesametime,top managementdecidedto あcusonthose

whocoulddeliverthechangethe 危stest,Theregionalmanagers,perhaps,orthebranch

supervisors? Neitherofthosegroupsqualified;theyhadnoimpactondailybranchactiv-

ities,couldtherelbrenota爺ectresults,andhadlittlecredibilitywith丘ontlinesta茸.The

branch managersthemselveshadthegreatestinfluenceontheoutcomesoftheplanned

changesbecause:

・ Theirworkhaddirectandsignificantimpactontherevenuestream.

・ Theywereconnectedwithmanyothergroupsacrosstheorganization,

・ Theycoulddecidehow peoplegotthingsdone.

 

lnotherwords,thebranch managerscombinedmanagerialimpactwithlocalcontrol,buttheylackedthe

 

skills

 

and

 

attitudesto

 

drive

 

changequickly.Theimplementation

P1an

 

was

 

redesigned, 免cusinginitially

 

onthe

 

6,00o

 

branch

 

managers. Thetraining

designedespeciallyfbrthem beganwiththeirroleinthenew organizationalmodeland

covered commercialskills,creditand asset managementcapabilities,qualityand cus-

tomer

 

satis鏡ction

 

principles,and

 

other

 

skills

 

such

 

as

 

managing people,communica-

tions,andconflictresolution.onlywhenthebranch managers wereready-six months

later-didthebankstartto work with othersta菖 andsupervisors, with di爺erentpro-

grams

 

designed 危rdifferentroles,Thistimetheresults were much better. Eighteen

monthslater:

・ Thenumberofproductssoldperbranchhadrisenby15percent.

・ Thetimespentmakゴヒロgcreditdecisionshad翫1lenby25percent.

・ Branchrelationship managerswerespending30percentmoretimewithcustomersdue

 

tothestreamlinedprocess.

・ Customerresponsesto marketingcampaignsdoubled,withanationalsurveyshowing

 

a20percentimprovementincustomersatis魚ction,

・ Knowledgesharingand mutualsupportincreased,andthebankbecamemorereceptive

 

toideas丘omfront亘nestaぜ.

 

Gardinietal.(2011)concludethatchangeismorelikelytobesuccess前lifimple

mentationhastwokeycomponents.First,startwiththe‘‘pivotalpeople,

”whosework

isclosesttotheactivitiesthatneedtobeimproved.Second,designacomprehensive

program

 

with

 

clear

 

and

 

meaningful

 

goals,linking

 

those

 

in

 

pivotalroles

 

with

 

the

338

 

ChaPte「1O

 

C乃α′7ge崩必m7αge′77の7rRe郡切に〃1ぞs

           

changesthatthe

 

rest

 

ofthe

 

organization

 

hasto

 

α1ake. This

 

question

 

of“whereto

           

start isnotaddressedexplicitlybythechecklists,stagemodels,orprocessapproaches.

           

This,ofcourse,isnottheonlyContingencya]ぼectingtheappropriate mLodeofchange

            

ilnLple]α1entation,

        

The ChangeLeadershipstyles continuum

           

oneofthe oldestcontingencyapproachesaddressesthe question ofchange manage-

         

茸lentstyle,whichcanrange overacontinuum 丑om autocraticto delnocratic,or,as

          

Tannenbaum and schmidt(1958)describedthis,from leadeトoriented to 貴)1loweト

          

orientedleadership(seeFigurelo.2).Thecultures-or,atleast,the managementtext‐

            

books-of developed

 

western

 

economies

 

have

 

endorsed

 

participative approaches

 

to

          

change management,食)rwhichevidencehaslongestablishedthebenefits(e.g.,Coch

          

andFrench,1948).Thosewhoareinvolvedinthedesignandimplementationofchange

        

are

 

more

 

likelyto

 

contribute

 

to

 

its

 

success

 

than those

 

on whom change

 

has

 

been

        

imposed,However,thechange managershouldbeawareoftherangeofoptionsavail‐

       

ablewithregardtostyleandofthedisadvantagesandadvantagesofthese(seetablelo.6),

        

Forexample,“telling

”people withoutparticipationisquickanddecisive,butitmay

        

causeresentmentand doesnotcapturestaffideas. ontheotherhand,”invitingpar‐

        

ticipation”increasescommitmentandaccesstousefulinformation,butitistimecon‐

        

sumingandinvolvesalossofmanagementcontrol,lnacrisiswherearapidresponse

        

isrequired,“inviting participation

” can bedamaging,ln an organizationthatvalues

        

theknowledgeandCommitmentofits

 

sta賃,theresentmentcausedby“telling”sta賃

        

aboutplannedchangescanalsobedamaging,Choiceofchange managementstylethus

        

needstoreflectthecontext,

The stace‐Dunphy contingency Matrix

Participativeapproachestochange managementhavealsobeenchallengedbythework

oftwoAustralianresearchers,DougStaceand DexterDunphy(Staceand Dunphy,2001),TheirapproaChbeginsbyestablishingascaleofchange,丘om “finetuning

”to“corporate

trans危rmation“(seetablelo,7andFigurel.1,‘Assessing DepthofChange,

“inchapterl).Theythenidentiル 危urstylesofchange(seetablelo,8),

FIGUREIO.2Tallnenbaum-SchmidtLeadershipContinuum

Leadermakesdecisionsthatareopentoreview

ChaPte「1O

 

C乃研7ge粥‘”′mgの’7emβのPeczか弧

 

339

  

  

 

 

      

   

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

  

 

  

   

 

 

 

   

 

 

繍霊

 

  

  

 

 

 

 

    

    

    

 

  

    

 

   

 

 

     

    

    

 

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

  

 

   

~≠

   

   

  

 

 

      

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

   

 

  

 

 

幽図画

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

   

  

   

 

  

  

   

  

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

 

 

  

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 ug

  

rtments

tion,bette

enthighe

eddecisio

nformati

erdecisi

340

 

ChaPterlO

 

C77の7ge崩‘”′?qge′77gm目標功ecr′yes

             

P1ottingscaleofchange againststyleofchangeproducesthe mlatriXinFigure

 

lo,3.

            

Thisidentifies ourstrategies:ParticiPativeevolution,charismatictransFormation,貴)rced

            

evolution,and dictatoria.transft)rlnation.Figure

 

lo,3alsoadvocatestheuseofdiがerent

          

change managementstylesdependingontheattributesofthecontext.Staceand Dunphy

              

(2001)thusarguethatparticipativestrategiesareti・neconsumingastheyexposeconflict-

            

ingviewsthataredifficulttoreconcile,▽vhereorganizationa.survivaldependsonrapid

              

andstrategicchange,dictatorialtransfbrmationisappropriate.StaceandDunphy(2001,

              

p,185)citetheexampleofapolicechiefappointedtostamp outcorruption and mod‐

           

ernizeapolicedepartmentwho,inhisown words,initiallyadopteda managementstyle

            

thatwas“6‐rm,hardandautocratic,andithadtobethatbecausethatiswhattheorga-

            

nizationunderstood,”

             

onceagain,wehaveacontingencyperspectivethatarguesthat,whiiecollaborative-

           

consultativemーodeswillworkwellundersomeconditions,therearecircumstanceswhere

           

directive-coercive modesofchange managementarelikelytobemoreappropriate and

         

e爺ective,lnparticular,where majorchangesarenecessaryfbrsurvival,timeisshort,and

           

thoseaぼectedcannotagreeonthechanges,then dictatoria.trans.brmation maybethe

            

necessarychoiceofstyle.lnvitingparticipation underthoseconditions wouldtaketime

            

andbeunlikelytoproduceanyagreement,

FIGUREIO.3Thestace-DunpllyContingencyApproachtoChangelmplementation

ーncrementalchange

  

strategies

Transformativechange

   

strategies

Port′c′Pot~eevo/Ur′on chor′smor′crrons危rmor′on

 

Collaborative一Consultativemodes

Usewhentheorganization

needsminoradUustmentto

  

meetenvironmental

 

conditions,wheretimeis

 

available,andwherekeyinterestgroupsfavorchange

Usewhentheorganizationneeds

  

majoradjustmentstomeet

environmentalconditions,where

    

thereislittletimefor

participation,andwherethereis

  

supportforradica-change

Forcedevo/〃”on D′Crotor′oだro“s行ormo士′o打

Directive-coerC1ve

   

modes

Usewhenminoradjustments

 

arerequired,wheretimeis

  

available,butwherekeyinterestgroupsopposechange

Usewhenmajoradjustmentsare

necessary,wherethereisnotimeforparticipation,wherethereis

nointernaーsupportforstrategic

   

change,butwherethisis

    

necessaryforsurvival

sco/eofchonge:

Sty/eofchonge:

Source:StaceandDunphy(2001).

ChaPterlO

 

C/zの増e叱函′mgememβセメー字だけかes

 

341

The Hope Hailey‐Balogun Change Kaleidoscope

Veronica Hope HaileyandJuliaBalogun(2002;Balogunetal.,2016)alsoadvocate a

conte×t‐sensitiveaPProachtothedesignandimplementationofchange,Their丘amework

identifiesthecharacteristicsoftheorganizationalcontextthatshouldbetakenintocon‐

sideration when makingchangeimP1ementationdesignchoices.Theydescribethisframe-

workas“TheChange Kaleidoscope,”shownin Figurelo.4(HopeHaileyand Balogun,

2002,p,156),

FIGUREIO.4TheChangeKaleidoscope

  

Theargumentthatchangeimーp1ementationshou1dref1ecttheorganiZationa1contextisnotanovelone,butH[opeHaileyandBalogunarguethatothercontingency models化)cusontoo narrow arange of魚ctorssuch astypeofchange,time 丘alエーe,thePowerofthe

change manager,andthedegreeoforganizationalsuPport食)rchange.Theeightcontext

魚ctorsinthechangekaleidoscoPeare:

万′7だ

Scope

Presery傭わ〃

Dれ形な!ぴ

Reαの〃ess

     

DePend立1gonurgency,whatisthenecessaryspeedofthechange?

Hownarrow orbroadisthescoPeofthechangeagenda?

lsthereaneedto maintainadegreeofcontinuityonsomedimen‐

sions,insomeareas?

ALretheattitudesandvaluesofthosealmectedsimilarorarethere

diversesubcultures?

Dotheindividualsinvolvedhavethenecessaryskillsandknowledge?

Doestheorganization havetheresourcestoilローP1el・lent more

change?

▽vhatdegreeofaccePtanceoforresistancetochangeisthere?

▽Vhatisthepowerofthechange managerrelativetoother

stakeholders?

      

Contextfactors;

  

enablersandconstraints

           

lmplementationoptions

Timin9

Scope

Needforcontinuity

Diversityofattitudes

Capabilityofthoseinvolved

Capacityoftheor9anization

Readinessforchange

powerofthechangemana9er

      

VVhattypeofchangeisrequired?

       

VVhereshouldwestart?

   

VVhatimplementationstyleWi=Weuse?

     

VVhattar9etsareweaimingfor?

VVhatinterventionstrategieswillbeappropriate?

VVhatchangeimplementationrolesareneeded?

342

 

ChaPterlO

 

Cメ7の増ど脳〆”′mge′77gmReなPeα和郎

         

Theseeightcontext錠ctorscanbeeitherconstraints(e,g,,shortageoftime,low caPル

       

bility)orenablers(e,gりbroadagreementonneedforchange,power鏡lchange manager).

            

Thepointisthatthedesignofthechangeimplementationprocessshouldbeinfluenced

       

bythenatureofthosecontext鏡ctors.Hope Haileyand‐Balogun(2002,p.161)identiル

         

thesiXdesign optionssumαーarizedmtablelo,9,

TABLEIO.9ChangeKaleidoscoPel1mP1e1mlenta錠on0Ptions

Designoptions

    

Meaning

方MPe

           

ThesCOPeandsPeedofthePrOPosedchange

 

万αrger

          

FocusonChangingoutputs,behaviors,attitudes,andvalues

′〃fervent′ons

      

Leversand mechanisms:technical,political,cultural,education,communication

              

andinFormedjudgmentarekeytochoosingthecontextuallyappropriatechangedesign

       

丘omthe widerangeofoPtionsavailable,aS HOPe Haileyand Balogun(2002,P.163)

        

explain:

Understandingthecontextualconstraintsandenablersiskeytounderstandingthetypeof

changeanorganizationisabletoundertakeasopposedtothetypeofchangeitneedsto

undertake,andthere長)rewhatsortofchangepathisrequifed.Sinロー旦arly,understandingthe

contextualconstraintsandenablersiscentralto mal圏LngchoicesaboutstartPointandstyle,h産oreparticipativechangeaPproachesrequiregreaterskillsin態cilitation,agreaterreadi-

ness化)rchange丘omthoseparticipating,moretime,andthereIR)re,o貸en,morefunds.Choicesaboutthechangetargetandinterventionsmayobviouslybea爺ectedbythescope

ofchange,butalsoby,丘)rexample,capacity.N1anagementdeveloPmentinterventionscan

beexpensiveandmーaynotbeaccessibletoorganizationswith1imitedfunds,lnrea1ity

choosingtherightoptionsisaboutasldingtherightquestionsandexercisillgchange

judgement.

  

Theargumentthat”thebestapproach”dependsoncontextisanappealingone,Con‐

tingencyapproaches,however,arenotbeyondcriticism.First,theideaof“fitting”change

implementationtoaparticulartypeofchangeinagivencontextmaybeeasiertoexplain

                                                     

ChaPterlO

 

C方の7ge崩‘”′mgの’?emReなPecrか郡

 

343

                 

intheorythantoputintopractice,Asthechangekaleidoscopeimplies,thechangeman-

                  

agerneeds

 

considerabledepthandbreadthofunderstandingofthe change

 

contextto

                    

n[lakein貴)rmedjudgments,Second,contingency approaches are more ambiguous and

                

difficulttoe×plainthanthesilnIP1er“o音theshelf’competition丘omchecklistsandstage

                

models,Third,contingencyapproachesrequireadegreeofbehavioralfle)dbility,especially

             

withregardtostyle,withwhichsomeseniormanagers maybeuncom食)rtableiftheylack

                 

the necessarycapabilities.Fourth,ifmanagers

 

adoptdinerentapproaches

 

at different

                  

timesandindifferentconditions,willthisweakenthe壮credibilitywithstaf胃 Finally,is

            

everythingcontingent?Arethereno“universals”whenitcomestoorganizationalchange?

EXERC聡E

   

1nthischapter,wehaveexploredthreechan9eChecklists,threeStage modelsofimple-

10罰

        

mentation,the processaPProachtochange,andfourcontingencyframeWorks.These

Deyezo夢 箕αグ

 

approachesaresimilarinsomerespectsanddifferentinothers.Cantheybecombined?

ow“C乃α“ge

  

TrythefoHowlngexPeriment:

崩おメメ

     

1. Bringtheadvicefromthesedifferentmodeーsintoasingーelist,omittingtheoverlaps.

          

2一Reflectingonyourownexperienceandknowledgeoforganizationalchange,consider

瀞臓灘園園禦懸轍灘瀦灘翻灘

  

whatissuesandstepsare missingfromtheseguidelines;addthesetoyourmaster

           

list.Now createyourowncompositechange managementmode-;ifpossible,dothis

           

asagroupactivity.

          

3.Canyou

 

prioritizethis

 

advice? 帆′hatitemsare

 

more

 

important,and which

 

are

 

less

            

important?Takingacontingencyapproach,in whichorganizationcontextsdopartic-

           

ularitemsbecome moreorーesssignificant?

          

4.Canyouidentifyapreferredsequenceofchangeimplementationsteps?Andcanyou

            

explainandjustifythisrecommendation?

          

5.Lookingatyourcompositechange managementmodel,identifythree management

           

ski=sassociatedwitheachoftheelements.Usethisasthebasisofapersonaーassess-

           

ment;whatareyourstronqestandyourweakestchanqe manaclementskiーls?

EXERCISE

   

Asyoureadthiscase,considerthefollowin9questions:

10.2

       

,. canorganizationa-cu-turebeb-amedforp-anecrashes? wi=thosecrashespromptGezzZ〃g

      

Boeingtochangeitsculture,orcouldtheybeabarriertocu-turechange?

344

 

ChaPterlO

 

C’?”′7ge脳超′74ge/77e′7!RのPe“′1’es

            

4, Checkyouronline newssourcesand

 

bringthiscase historyupto date.Has David

            

Calhoun

 

been

 

ableto

 

changethe

 

culture

 

atBoeing?

 

Have

 

there been

 

any

 

more

             

accidents?VVhatisyourassessmentofDavid Calhoun’schangeleadership?

            

The American

 

companv Boeinq

 

makesairplanes,rockets,satel-ites,telecommunica-

          

Boeing

 

737

 

Max

 

crashed, killin9 189

 

peop-e. Five

 

months

 

ーater,in March

 

2019,an

          

EthiopianAirlines737Maxcrashed,ki=ing157people,lnvestigatorsfoundthattheplane’s

        

new Maneuvering CharacteristicsAugmentationSystem(MCA automaticallyforcedthe

          

aircrafttostallandnosedive,Thissystem hadbeenomittedfromflightmanualsandcrew

        

training.The U,S,FederaIAviation Authority(FAA)groundedthe737 Max.Boeing’srep‐

          

utation was

 

damaged.Butchiefexecutive

 

Dennis

 

Muilenburg

 

decidedto

 

keep making

          

the737

 

Max,to

 

demonstrate

 

confidence

 

inthe

 

plane,eventhoughtheycould

 

notbe

          

sold.Boeingfired Muilenbu『gattheendof2019,and David CalhountookoverasCEO.

            

下o

 

understand

 

how this

 

cou-d

 

have

 

happened,We

 

haveto

 

go

 

backto

 

l997,when

          

Boein9

 

acquired

 

McDonnelー

 

Douglas,a

 

competitorwith

 

 

”financefirstethos.”Boeing

          

took

 

on

 

many

 

McDonnelI

 

Douglas

 

executives

 

including

 

theirchief

 

executive, Harry

          

Stonecipher,rwho

 

was

 

known

 

for

 

his

 

ag9ressive

 

cost

 

cutting.ln 2001,Boeing’s

 

chief

          

executiveandthen

 

president,PhiI

 

Conditand

 

HarryStonecipher,decidedto

 

putsome

          

distancebetweenthecompany’s500seniormanagementandstaffandtheplane-mak-

          

ersand movedtheheadquartersto Chicago.-2,00o milesfrom Seattle.Theyexplained

          

thatseniormanagementwas

 

being

 

drawn

 

into day-to-day operational

 

decisions when

          

theyweresoclosetothemanufacturingbase.1nalarge,modern,multinationalcompany,

          

theyfeltthatseniorexecutivesshouldnothavesuchcontactwithengineers.Stonecipher

          

said,“仇′henpeop-esaylchangedthecultureofBoeing,thatwastheintent,sothatit’s

          

run

 

likea

 

businessratherthana

 

greatengineeringfirm.ltisagreatengineeringfirm,

        

butpeop-einvestin a company becausethey wantto make moneゾ(Useem,2019).

        

StonecipherbecamechiefexecutiveofBoeingin2003(butwasforcedtoresignin2005

        

fo=owinganimproperrelationship withafemaleexecutive).

            

Thepreviouscloseproximityofmanagersandengineersmeant,however,thatsenior

          

executiveshadagoodunderstandingofengineeringissues.They”spokethelanguage

          

ofengineeringandsafetyasa mothertongue,“andtheycouldseeforthemselveswhat

        

was happening.AS Useem(2019)pointsout,”The present737 Max disastercan be

          

traced backtwodecades.‐tothe momentBoeing’sleadershipdecidedtodivorceitself

         

fromthefirm’sownculture.”WithStonecipheraspresident,thenews10gansbecame”a

                

Signallingtheshifttoa”shareholder-firstcuーture,“

 

between

 

2014and 2019,Boeing

              

spent

 

$43,4

 

billion

 

on

 

stock

 

buybacks, and

 

only

 

$15,7

 

billion

 

on research

 

and

Chapterl〇

 

CZ7ロ“ge脳云の7αge〃?の”βを濁りに『んes

 

345

                                    

qー

 

  

 

  

q-

           

                                                                                                                                                                                                           

 

  

developmentforcommercia-airplanes(Catchpole,2020,p.56).This culture placed

    

short-tenn

 

rewardsto

 

shareholders

 

ahead

 

ofengineering

 

decisions

 

and

 

longer‐term

   

strategy.Boeing’sboardevenapprovedafurther$20billionbuybackinDecember2018,

   

two monthsafterthefirst737Maxcrash(butthatdecision waslaterreversed).

      

Theimmediatecausesofthe737 Maxcrashes weretechnical--fauーtysoftware.But

    

otherfactorshadplayedarole.lntheinterestsofcostandtimeto market,Boeinghad

   

decidedto modi~the737ratherthandesignanewaircraftfrom scratch.下oavoidreg-

    

ulatorydelays,Boeing maintainedthatnoadditionalpiーottraining wasrequiredforthe

   

737 Max.Boeingengineersweresurprisedwhensomesoftwaredevelopmenttasks(not

   

specifictoMCAS)wereoutsourcedtoco=egegraduatesemployedbyanlndiansubcon-

   

tractorinSeattleearning$9anhour.Edpierson,aformerBoeing manage若claimedthat,

    

beforethefatalcrashes,the737Maxhadexperienced morethanadozenothersafety

    

incidents. Pierson

 

said,“Something

 

happened

 

in

 

the

 

translation

 

from,‘let’s

 

build

 

   

high‐qualitysafeproducrto‘ーersgetitdoneontimざ Diss,2020).Therewaspressure

on737englneersandtestpilotsandalsoa

 

lotofpressureon

 

productionemployees.Pierson saw tired vvorkers doingjobsfor whichthey were nottrained,and makingmistakes.Heasked

 

managementtoshutdownthe737factory,buttheyrefused.The

softwarefailureswerethussymptomsofa widermanagementproblem.

 

ln March2020,theHouseTransportationCommittee,oftheU.S.Congress,re-eased

itspreliminaryfindingsfollowingayearofinvestigationintothe737Maxcrashes.Con-

c-udin9thatthesetragicaccidentsweredueto multiplefactors,the Committee’sreport

focusedonfiveissues:

Theimplementationofaggressivecostcuttin9andexcessivepressureonemployees

to maintaintheproductionpressure,duetocompetitionfrom Airbus.

Boeing’sfauーtyassumptionsaboutcriticaltechnologies,andthe MCASsysteminpanic-

u-ar,whichreliedonasinglesensorand wasnotclassedasasafety-criticalsystem.

Boeing’scu-tureofconcealment,withholdingcriticalinformationfromthe FAA,cus-

tomers,andpilots.

Conflicts

 

ofinterestamon9

 

Boeing

 

employees who

 

were

 

authorized

 

to carry out

aviationsafetycertification workonbehalfoftheFAA.

        

・ Boeing’sinfーuenceontheFAパsoversight;FAA managementrejectedsafetyconcerns

           

raisedbytheirownexperts,

         

TheHouse下ransPo性ationComm紙ee(2020,p.13)concluded,”Theseprelimina~inves-

         

tigativefindingsmakeclearthatBoeing mustcreateand maintainane作ectiveandvigorous

         

safetycultureandtheFAAmustdeveーoPamoreaggressivecenificationandoVersightstruc-

         

turetoensuresafeaircra代designsandtoregaintheconfidenceoftheflyingpublic.”The

         

focusonfinancehadchangedtherelationshipsbetween

 

Boeing managementand engi-

        

neers:「twastheabiliWtocomfoitabーyinteractwithanengineerwhointurnfeelscomfon‐

         

ab-etelーingyoutheirrese~ations,versuscallingamanager2,00omilesawaywhoyouknow

         

hasarePutationforwantingtotakeyourpensionaway.lt’save~ d旧erentdynamic.Asa

         

redpefordisempowerーngengineersinpa忙iculallyoucouーdn’tcomeupWithabetterformat”

       

(Useem,2019},Boeings”moralcomPasぎ wasbroken,andthefocuson”makingthenur作

       

berざputquali夢andsafetyatrisk.McNultyandMarcus(2019,P.4)claimthat”Boeingshould

       

engageinadeepcultureredesignProcess茅Edmondson(2019)argues,”Wharsrequiredis

346

 

ChaPterlO

 

Cym′7ge崩乾閉口ge′77g′”ReなPec“・’es

Find on

 

裟ou方ube,”New Boeing CEO David CalhountakesthereinsbydeveloPingfreshstrate9y”

(2020,3:21minutes),

         

cose sourCes

              

Catchoole-D.2020.Boeing’slongdescent-月リアZz′′だIR1r2、:56一5文

           

TheHouseCommitteeonTransportationandln丘astructure,2020.刀ちgBoe′′7g 万7脳履又吻び喝丹′

             

Co廟,come堺′e′7ces, md/esso′7s方々o′77′Zsde霊宮′7,deye/G羽フ7mちα′?〆ce“前mr/o′?.Washmgton.

          

Useem,J.2019,Thelong-あrgottenf旦ghtthatsentBoeingo菖course.上deqs,November20,

         

https://www.theatlantic,com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how‐boeing‐lost‐its‐bearings,

EXERCISE

   

Asyoureadthiscase,considerthefo=owingquestions:

10.3

       

,. whatーsyourassessmentofthestrengthsandlimitationsofthe3Gapproachtochange?D諺五[の〃z

   

2.ーfyou wereadvisingthe board ofKraftHeinzonhowto“invigorate“thecompanyCZZOたeo“ 豹e

   

today,whatchanges wou-d yourecommend,and why? Usethe dimensions ofthe

iGRに夢eP

    

changeka-eidoscopetoframeyouradviceconcerningtiming,scope,needforconti-

                 

nuity,diversityofattitudes,capabilityofthoseinvolved,capacityoftheorganization,

園璽極圏鰍

    

readinessforchange,andpowerofthechange manager.

            

3.VVhatmistakeswouldyouadvisetheboardtoavoidwhenimplementingthechanges

             

thatyouarerecommending(refertotabーeslo.landlo.2)?

              

1n2013,Heinz,theiconicfoodcompany withanannualrevenueof$”.6bil-ion,vvas

        

boughtfor$29bi=ionby Warren BuffetrsBerkshire HathawayandtheBrazilianprivate

           

equityfirm 3G Capital.Thenew owners wastednotime makingchanges.Eーevenofthe

           

twelvemostseniorexecutiveswerereplaced,600staffwereーaidoff,thecorporateplanes

          

ata Holiday-nnhotelandnotattheRitz-Carlton,and muchlongerworkinghours were

          

expected.Micro‐managementlimitedeachstaffmemberto200copiesa month;printer

          

usage wastracked,Executiveswerea=owedonlyloobusinesscardsayear,

            

Heinzemployeesreferredto”aninsularmanagementstyleinwhichonlyasmallinner

          

circleknows whatisrealーygoーng on.” onesaid,

“-t’sa

 

bitlike God-youfee-there’sa

ChaPterlO

 

C乃α′78g虜q′?”ge“7emβe潟夢βα′yes

 

347

           

grandplan,butyouaren’tsure whatitis“{Reingo-dandRoberts,2013,p.189),onthe

          

otherhand,3Ghadayoungteam ofmostlyBrazilianexecutives,who movedasdi「eCted

         

from companytocompanyacrosscountriesandindustries,loyalto3G,notHeinz,and

         

drivento workhardtoreceivebonusesorstockoptions.

           

Thedrivingforcebehindthesechanges Was“The3G い′ay“

 

Which3G hadusedto

          

managechangeinpreviousacquisitionssuchasBurgerKing.Efficiencywaskey,every-

         

thingwasmeasured,andcostswereslashed.lnthisperspective,「eanestand meanest“

         

wins,andhumancapitalwasnotseenasakeycomponentofcorporatesuccess.The

         

assumptionwasthatemployeesweremotivatedbytheeconomicreturnsthatcamefrom

         

owningcompanysharesratherthanbyanysenseofpurposeormission.

           

Thoselikelytobeaffectedbya3Gdealoftensaw a“howto”guide writtenbycon-

          

sultantBobFiferasa“mustread,“becauseithadbeenpopularwiththepartnersat3G

            

(asithadbeen withJack Welch,theiconicchiefexecutiveatGE).Theguide wastitled,“Double ourProfits:78 い′aysto CutCosts,lncrease Sales,and DramaticallylmProve

our

 

Bottom

 

Line

 

in

 

 

Months

 

or

 

l‐ess.” Chaptertitles

 

included“CutCosts

 

First,Ask

QuestionsLater”and“Don’tBeAfraidto Useashotgun,“

  

However,inthe mindsofmanyfood

 

industryexperts,whilesomeof3G’s

 

prevlous

acquisitions wou-d

 

have

 

been

 

primecandidatesfora

 

cost-cutting

 

regimen,Heinz was

not

 

an

 

obvious

 

target

 

for

 

that“hack

 

and

 

slash”approach.The company

 

had

 

been

throughseveralyearsofefficiencyimprovementsFslimmingandtrimming”),anditwas

alreadyare-ative-yーeanandefficientoperation.

  

Summingupthesituation,businessjournaーistsJenniferReingoldand DanieIRoberts

(2013,p.186)specu-atedthat”the experimentnow underway willdetermine whetherHeinz will

 

become

 

 

newly

 

invigorated

 

embodimentofefficiency-orwhether3G will

takethecultofcostcuttingsofarthatitchokesoffHeinz’sabilitytoinnovateand make

theproductsthathave madelta marketleaderforalmostacenturyandahaーf.”

  

ln2015,Heinzandthefoodindust~ giantKra代announceda mergerthatwouldcreate

anentitywithanannualrevenueof$28bi=ion,thethirdlargestfoodcompanyintheUnited

Statesandthefi代hーargestintheworld.Annualcostsavingsof$1.5bilーionweree×pected.

  

The mergerwasfolloWedbymorecostcutting.However,lessattention waspaidto

changingcustomerpreferences,suchasforhealthyorganicfoodinsteadofprocessed

cheeseandーunch meat.Marginswerealsocutbysupermarketpurchasingstrategies(LaMonica,2019).ーnanattempttogrowfurther,KraftHeinz madeanofferof$143bi-lion

forUnileverin2017一buttheofferwasrejected.FurthercostcuttingatKraftHeinzfailed,

 

leadingtofallingsales,falling operating

 

income,andafallingshare

 

price.Unileve

 

in

contrast,wascomparative-ysuccessful.Cox(2019)said,“Howthetableshaveturned.

TheCheezWhizgianthas melteddownslnceofferingtobuyUnilever:itsUS$40bi=ion

marketvalueisnowjustaquarterofitserstwhileprey.Uniーever,meanwhile,hasblos

       

somedinto aUs$155billion behemothぞ By2018,KraftHeinz was makinglosses,the

            

sharepricehadfa=enby60percentinovertwoyears,andthesecuritiesandExchange

          

Commission wasinvestigatingitsaccountingpractices.

 

Findonyou77ube,”VVarrenBuffettonWhatheplanstodowithhisKraftHeinzsharesand3GCaPital”

 

(2019,8:31minutes).

348

 

ChaPterlO

 

C/70′7geルのmge′77emRezspedか弧

         

Cose sou「Ces

         

Carey,D.,Du]maine,B,,andUseem,M,2019,CE0saresuddenlyhavingachangeofheartabout

 

whattheircompaniesshouldstand危r-andthediverging危tesof2 majorcorporationsshow

 

why.β”s′′7ess万難′der,SePtember6,https://www,bus血ess血sider,com.au/ba代-he血斧unilever

 

ceo‐investments‐economy.Co R.2019.Unilevercan’thelpbutmullaKra代Pounce,Rez′定裕,March8,https://www.reuters,

 

com/article/us‐kra貴-heinz‐unileverbrea頭ngview,Kell,j,2017.Big危odisgoingtogetevenbigger,恥mme,March15,175(4):11‐12,La Monica,P,R,2019.Whatwentwrongat]KraftHeinz?C靴wβ“sZ′?盗品February22,httPs://

           

edition,cnn,com/2019/02/22/血vesting/kra作hemz‐stockstrategy/index,htロロ.

        

Reingold,1,and Roberts,D,2013,SqueezingHeinz,恥“”′2e(october28):184-92,https://www.

         

免rbes.com/sites/greatspecuiation/2015/03/30/analysis-ofthe‐虹a作heinz‐merger,

Additiona1

Reading

Balogun,J,,HOPeHailey,v,and Gusta篤son,S,2016,E尤P′のZ′?gszmzegZccあの増a4thed,HarloW,Esse×:Pearson.VVide-rangingtheoreticalandPracticalte×tonchange manage-

ment,advocatingacontingentaPProachthattailorschangeimplementationtothecon‐

text,basedonthe”changekaleidoscope”tool,

1)awson,P,,and 山口drioPoulos,C,2017.み名α打αgZ′7gc力α刀ge,creα”vめノα′7d!′7刀oyのZo′?.3rded,London:SagePublications,AcomPrehensiveandclearlyexplainedaccountofa

processualpersPectiveonchangeandinnovation,theoreticalandpractical,

Kotter,J.P.2012,Accelerate!嵐αryαm β“sZ〃essRel′!鍬 0(11):4 52.ExP1ainshowto

drivestrategic,transfbrmationalchange withoutdisruptingdailyoperations.Thisisa

developmentofKotter’soriginaleight-stage modeloftransft)rInationalchange,

Roundup

DoyoU W0rkwith

 

 

”one

 

SiZefitS

 

ar

aPProachtochange

 

management?下o

what

 

extent

 

do

 

you

 

adapt

 

your

 

ap-

proachtothesca1e

 

andtiming

 

ofthe

change,staffreadiness,yourownrela‐

tivepower,andothercontextfeatures

identifiedinthischapter?

Howcapableareyouinadoptingmore

thanonechangeimage?Areyoumore

comfortablewithatop‐downora

 

bot-

tom-up

 

approach-orsomewhere

 

in

between?Doyouneedtodevelopany

particularskillstoachievegreaterflexi‐

bi-ity(assumingyoubelievethatflexi‐

bi-itywillgiveyouanadvantage)?

lsthere

 

 

dominantchange

 

approach

inyourorganization?lfso,howappro-

priateisit?VVhatwouldyouneedtodo

to

 

modify

 

or

 

replace that

 

dominant

approach?

Howdoyouhandーethemanydifferent

changeinitiativesthatareunfoldingin

ourorganization

 

orbusiness

 

unitata

giventime--whentheseareallatdiffer」

ent

 

stages?

 

ls

 

this

 

 

problem?

 

lf

 

not,whynot?lfitis,whatisyourpreferred

solution?lfpossible,shareanddiscuss

your

 

responses

 

to

 

this

 

question

 

and

the

 

others

 

in

 

this

 

”reflection” with

co=eagues.

                                                     

ChaPterlO

 

C方q′7geル必α′mge′77e′7rReなPeα′、ぞs

 

349

              

HereisashortsummaryofthekeyPointsthatwewouldlikeyoutotake丘omthischaPter,

                 

inrelationtoeachofthelearningoutcomes:

                

             

                     

 

   

 

                                    

 圏国璽欄                              

 

          

 

      N[a頭ngchange魚ilisrelativelyeasy;thereare manythingsthatonecan do,and not

do,to

 

achievethatresult,J‐ohn Kotteridentifies

 

eight main 魚ilure 魚ctors:lack of

urgency,nosupportivecoalition,novlslon,Poorcommunication,obstaclestochange

notremoved,no“wins”orachievementstocelebrate,declaringvictorytoosoon,and

notanchoring orembeddingthe

 

changes. Lackofcommunicationis

 

a Particularly

significantcauseofchange態ilure.

Assess物eszre〃gz超 α〃〆助川『α”の7sげc庇cた猿なお“?mmgZ〃g所α〃解 明先”かのノ.v▽eintroducedthreecheck1istsor”recipes

“おor managingchange:

Boston ConsultingG‐rouP’sDICE modeIProsci’sADKAR modeIStoutedsevidence‐based model

onestrength oftheseapproachesisthattheyprovideclarityandsimP1icityinanarea

thatcanbecomP1exanduntidy.APotherstrengthisthatdi掻erentcheckliststendtoo鎖er

muchthesameadvice,whichisreassuring,onelimitationisthatthesechec虹iststend

tolackanytheoreticalunderp山ning,relyingo賃enonanargumentthatsoundslike,‘‘This

worked あrus,soitshouldwork 危ryou,”From aPractitionerperspective,anotherlim-

itationisthatthesearegeneric“high‐levelguides“andnotdetailed“bestpractice

”road

maPs.Thechange managerisle貴withthechallengingtaskoftranslatingthisguidance

intoachangeimplementationplanthatwinfittheorganizationalcircumstances.Thesechec撞stsdonotsubstitute 危rlocalknowledge,in危rmedjudgment,andcreativity,

 

“/ediscussedthequestionconcerningwhentouseeachofthesechecklists.Astheytendto o都erbroadlysimilaradvice,itmaynot matter. However,theyencouragediE元rent

 

emPhases一DICE

 

ontakingaction based

 

on

 

scoringtheissues,ADKAR on

individualperceptions,and Stouten on 危1lowingtheresearchevidencebase.A more

appropriatequestion,perhaps,ishowtousethesechecklists.Theyshouldbeseenas

high‐levelguidesandnotdetailedroad maPs,andtheywillbehelpfulaslongastheyarenotusedinatightlyprescriptive manner,buttotriggerdiscussion,diagnosis,and

planning.ltmaybeusefulinsomesettingstoapply morethanonemodeltothesamechangeprogram.Thesecommentsconcerning when andhowto usechange manage‐

mentguidelinesaPP1ytoallthe modelsand官ameworksinthischapter.

Ey叫卿だ 功eqdl耽溺αgesqfszqge′??ode!sげ 効α′?gem解明ememv~′eintroducedthreestage modelsofchange management:

Lewidsthree‐stage modeIKotter’seight‐stagemodeI

McKinsey5A modeI

StagemodelscomplementachecklistaPproachbyemphasizinghowchangeun丘)ldsand

developsovertime,ma紅ngchanging demandsonthechange managerand onthose

who are a”ヨected,ateach stage,A”though changerarely developsina neatandtidymanner, aPProaching

 

the

 

process

 

in

 

this

 

way

 

encourages

 

the change

 

manager

 

to

350

 

ChaPterlO

 

C77α′?ge脳叱mqg1e′77g′7rRe若sPeα′1’es

              

anticiPateandPrePare貴)rPossiblefutureProblems.ltalsoencouragesa化)cusonthe

               

”PiPeline

’’ofchange benefits

 

and on‐how ”leakage“

 

duringtheProcesscanleadto

             

disaPPointingoutcomes.ltmayalsobeh‐eIPfultoconsideramoreextendedtimeline,

              

consideringhow pasteVentscou1dinnuencecurrentproPOSa1s,andhow changesWi11

               

besustained,andeventuallydecay,intothe和hire,

翻顧鰹瞳園 Assess物e豹eormcq/鯛〆メαα!m/1’α卿e ザ 街eprocess〃gな〆αれ’eo′?c加〃ge.TheProcesspersPectivearguesthattheoutcomesofchangeareshapedbythecombina-

tion andinteractionofanumberof態ctorsovertmlein agivencontext,Thosefactors

includetheconteぬ andsubstanceofthechange,theinIP1ementationprocess,andalso

theinternalandexternalorganizationpo互tics.onestrengthoftheprocessPerspectiveisthatitemPhasizestheroleoforganizationalpo五tics,w垣chisoftenoverlookedorregarded

as marginalbyotheraPProaches.ThePracticaladvicenowing丘omthisPerspectiveis

s加1江artothatProvidedbychecな誼stsandstage mode1s:P1an,tram,com.numcate,1earn

丑om mdstakes,adaPttocircumstances.However,wheresomechangemanagementadvice

recommends“dothis,“theprocessPersPectiVesays,

“beawareofthis,“leav節gthechange

managerWiththetaskofreach血gin云ormedjudgmentswithregardtoaPpropriateaction・

 

TheProcessPerspectivehigmightsthecomP1exityandPo互ticizednamreofchangeand

seeschangeasaprocesswithaPast,Present,and 鏡ture,ratherthanasastaticort無]e-boundedevent. However,there are dangersinthisPersPective,in Presentingchangeas

overcomP1exandunumanageable,inplacingthefbcusonconteぬattheexPenseof血dividual

andteam contributions,and加the角cusonawarenessratherthancleard江rection.

優麗園園園 う“〆印可mば α“‘〆α姿のか の〃ZZ′7ge′?リノ のPro僻みes『ocあの?ge/”α′?αgemem

V~ZePresented化)urcontingencyaPProaches:

”/heretostart?

Changeleadershipstylescontinuum

Stace‐DunPhycontingency matriX

ChangekaleidoscoPe

ContingencyaPProachesarguethatchangeimplementationshouldtakeinto account

theattributesoftheorganizationalcontextconcerned.However,theseapProachesdif

発rwithregardtothecontingencies-thekey 態ctors-thatthechange managerneeds

toconsider.Forexample,“wheretostart?”arguesthatchangeshouldbeginwiththe

“pivotalroles,

” wherechangeswillhavethebiggestimPactonthebehaviorandPer-

あrmancethatisofconcern.Those“pivotalroles”wilIVary丘om onechangeinitiative

toanother.Thestylescontinuum suggestschoosingachangeleadershipstylebasedon

considerationsofavailabletime,useofavailableexPertise,andstaffcommitment.AdictatorialaPproachto managementingeneral,andtochange managementinpartic-

ular,Probablyrunscounterto most managementbelie危,However,thestace‐Dunphy

contingencyframeworksuggeststhatwherechangeisVital,timeisshort,andconsensus

isunlikely,adictatorialaPProachismorelikelytobeeぼectiveinachievingmanagement

outcomes.ThemostcomP1exofthesemodels,thechangekaleidoscoPe,identi行eseight

setsofcontext魚ctorsands広setsofchangeimplementationdesignoPtions.Thedesign

oPtions,thisaPProachargues,needtoreflectthecontextdiagnosls,

  

lt mayseem obviousto arguethat“the bestaPproach” dePendsonthecontext,

However,thisideaof“fitting”changetothesettingiseasiertoexP1ainintheorythan

351Chapterlo C乃α′?ge崩超″”ge′“e′7rReなPed′yes

toputintopractice.Detaileddiagnosisofthecontexttakestimeandrequiresconsid‐

erablelocalknowledgeandinsight.A contingencyapproach also demandsnLeゴロibilityinstyle官om changeleadersand managerswho mLayinso]meinstancesberequiredto

mーoveoutoftheir”com化)rtzones,”andinconsistentbehaviormayweaken management

credibility.ourtwofinalquestionsare:lsever賃hingcontingentinthisarea?Arethere

nouniversalsinorganizationalchange?

ReferenCes Appelbaum,S.日.,Habashy,S.,N1alo,.-L.,andSha負q,日.2012.BacktotheFuture:

RevisitingKottersl996changemodel.おげ〃〆 〆Mq〃αge′粥川Devdopme〃Z31(8):764‐82

Balogun,J.2006・M[anagingchange:Steeringacoursebetweenintendedstrategiesand

unanticipatedoutcomes.乙o′?gR伽geP/伽可″g39(1):29‐49,

Balogun,.,HopeHailey,v,andGustafsson,S.2016Harlow,Essex:Pearson.

E工z7め““gs〃”Zegに 叱α“ge.4thed.

Buc又 M.,Han,S.,“akola,D.,andDickson,T.2017a.DisruPtion,丘iction,andchange:nコehan血arksofatruetrans危rmation,Podcast,New orkandLondon:NICKinsey&Company

Bucy, 1,Fagan,T.,N【araite,B.,andPiaia,C.NewYorkandLondon:N[cKinsey& Company

2017b.KeepZ〃gzm〃駅o“?筋”o〃s加 加増勘.

Burnes,B.2020.TheoriginsofLewi証sthreostepmodelofchange.靴eおぼれ”/〆4叩/Zedβe加yZord scze力α 56(1):32一59.

Coch,L.,andFrench,j

l:512‐32.

R.P.1948,〇vercomlngresistancetochange.′三五備IQ刀 Re/傭わ刀s

Cummings,S.,Bridgman,T.,andBrown,K.G‐.2016.Un丘eezingchangeasthreesteps:

Rethinking KurtLewin’slegacyあrchangemanagement.劫〃伽〃Re超加〃s69(1):33‐60.

Dawson,P.,andAぬdriopoulos,CLondon:SagePublications.

Gardini,M.,Giuliani,G.,andN[arricchi,M.2011

Romeand 1ilan:N1clくinsey& ComPany.

2017.八名α刀αg殻g豹α刀ge,cだのかなしα“dZ刀′のり窺わ“.3rded.

Hiatt,J. 生.2004,Em1Pわツeelys”仰かq/g頭dezoc左α刀ge,Loveland,Co:ProsciResearch.

Hiatt,i.2006.月PK召尺月 mode/天才 豹α“geZ′?b婚勿ess,govermle“るα〃〆αげ mm′“z卿妙Loveland,Co:Prosci.

Hiatt,J. 1,andCreasey,T.J.2012.Loveland,Co:ProsciLearning Center.

HopeHailey,V.,and Balogun,j.TheexampleofG1axo駅/ellcome

C脳〃gem加α8e′“e〃Z′勤epeop/e“deザ物α〃ge

2002.Devisingcontextsensitiveapproachestochange:

Lo′?gR伽ge“α′7m“g35(2):153 8.

Kanter,R.入江.2009.Changeishardestinthemiddle.自転ryαrd上海瀞刀essRevZewBIOgNetwork,August12,http://blogs.hbr・org/2009/08/change-is-hardest-in-the-middl.

Keller,S.,andSchaninger,B

N1cKinsey& ComPany,

2019a.月berZerwのノ『o/eqd加増e‐scde効の?ge.New York:

352

 

chapterl〇

 

C方の7geAdmmge′77g′打β巳都刀edハ’es

Kene S.,andschaninger,B.2019b.βのノo〃〆ル釈o〃m〃ce2.0′Apm馴 の駆鯛c力わ/md/′?g/α増esm/ecゑα′?ge,Hoboken,N‐J:U′iley.

K二otte J.P,2007,LeadingChange:VVhytransit)rmatione鎖ortsねil.自αかのdB・z‘sZ“ess

Re“のγ85(1):96‐103(firstpublishedl995).

Kotter,J.P,2012a.乙eqdZ″g物α“ge,2nded.Boston,ル A:H[arvard UniversityPress.

Kotter,J.P,2012b.Accelerate!嵐鯖加川β”sZ′7essRevZ掛り90(11):44-52.

Lew血,K.(ed.)1951.霧e雌豹eoり小?socZ”/scZe′?ce′seをαed豹の′mm/Pqpの 毎 舵‘r『乙の~ノ粥

London:℃…wistockPI1b亘cations 頂くeditionpub五shedl952,ed,DorwinCartwright).

ハ【cFarland,VV.,and Goldsworthy,S.2013.C乃oosZ′?gcあの2ge′Zi[のり庇αdeな班740増研2Zzの!○′7s

dr/lie岩巴麗ばZ忘o刀eDeなo打 の α『Zme.New York:△αcGraw Hil1Pro免ssional.

Pettigrew,A,M,1985,Z乃eのりαたe〃!〃gg加川′Cmmm′!か のばcたα〃geZ′7ZCZ,0顧ord:Basn

B1ackwell,

Pettigrew,A.M.1987.Contextandactioninthetrans危rmationofthefむm.おzグ“メ ザMq′m解削釧rsれ‘dだs24(6):649一70.

P1owman,D,A.,Baker,L.T,,Beck,T.E,,Kulkarni,公α.,Solansky,S・T.,andTravis,D,V T.2007.Radicalchangeaccidentally:Theemergenceandalmーplificationofsmall

change,4mde′??]ノグ 賜鯛αgeme′?『ゐ”“7α/50(3):51 43.

Schneider,D,D4.,andGoldwasser,C,1998.Bea modelleaderofchange,凡名α′?αge′”e′?『

Rev/ew87(3):41‐45,

SirldLn,日.J.,Keenan,P,,andJackson, 」,2005.Thehardsideofchange management,白厭かq可 β”sZ′lessRevだ”ノ83(10):108-18,

Stace,D.A,,and Dunphy,D,2001.βリノo′?〆豹eわα〃〆αr!es′乙eαメカ?gのメメe-αeqmzg豹e

sz!cces毒ル′e′7ZeのrZse.2nded,Sydney:McGraw Hill.

Stouten,J,,Rousseau,D. 4.,and DeCremer,D,2018.Successfulorganizational

change:lntegratingthe managementpracticeandscholarlyロteratures,4mde′”〕ノ ダ

賜α′?αgeme“『4“m為12(2):752‐88,

℃annenbaum,R.,andSchmidt,▽v.日.1958,Howtochoosealeadershippattern・品の1柳川 β“sZ′7essRevZew36(2):95‐101.

TheHouse Committeeon Transportationandln丘astructure.2020,77乃eβoe/′?g737

羽は又mmロ魔 Cos嵐 の′7se似e′7ces,α′74/esso〃s÷万物7”ZSαesを′2,αeveため′?だ腸 α′?dce司後の廟7,VVashington,

Vviedner,R.,Barrett, 4,,and 。born,E,2017.Theemergenceofchangeinunexpected

places:Resourcingacrossorganizationalpracticesinstrategicchange,4mde′仰 げ▲‘毎〃-

αge′72e′7Zゐ乙mm/60(3):823一54.

Sourceofopeningquote丘om AynRand:https://blog.hubsPot,com/sales/great-免maloleader‐quotes

Chapteropeningsilhouettecredit:FunKey Factory/Shutterstock

error: Content is protected !!