Organizational Behavior Case 1.1
Join now to read essay Organizational Behavior Case 1.1
Case 2.1 Assume that Mike Wilson was trying to change Consolidated Life. Briefly discuss how Mike Wilson committed any or all of the eight types of transformation errors discussed in Leading Change.
As discussed in “Leading Change”, Mike Wilson committed the following transformation errors:
Error #2: Failing to create a sufficiently powerful guiding coalition. Mike Wilson failed to adapt to the changes that had occurred in his old division. The unit morale had suffered; a new task oriented management style had been implemented by the new division vice president. According to John P. Kotter, major change is often impossible unless the head of the organization is an active supporter. Although successful, he failed to get support for his initiatives from his manager and division vice president.
Error #7: Declaring victory too soon. According to Kotter, until changes sink down deeply into the culture, new approaches are fragile and subject to regression. Upon leaving, Mike felt he was successful in his division. He was able to increase productivity and enhance morale. However, everything he was able to accomplish faded away when he left the division. Mike’s management style was in conflict with the corporate culture, and was crushed upon the appointment of the new division vice president, Jack Greely.
Error #8: Neglecting to anchor changes firmly in the corporate culture. In his first job as a supervisor, Mike was allowed to use a loose, people-oriented management style. This was in conflict with the organization’s norms and values, but was only tolerated because it produced positive results. When Mike left to another division, the changes he made evaporated when the Jack Greely, took over as the new division vice president. According to Kotter, anchoring change requires sufficient time be taken to ensure that the next generation of management personifies the new approach. Mike did not ensure that his methods and procedures become part of the corporate culture. One reason was that as a supervisor, he had limited scope in effecting