Cracking The Code Of Change

I started my morning today reading a very nice article that my MBA Human Behavior professor has given me. It was such a nice article about Management deciding what approach he would take to implement a drastic change to save a company that is in delimma. The article is written by a professors of Business Administration at Harvard Business School in Boston. It is written in there the possible ways in implementing changes. One, they called it Theory E or the so called "Hard" approach to change wherein shareholder value is the only legitimate measure of corporate success. This kind of change usually involves heavy use of economic incentives, drastic layoffs, downsizing and restructuring. I have experienced this before and it was bad. My office once hired a japanese analyst 7 yrs ago. His job was to focus immediately on streamlining the "hardware" of the organization - the structures and systems. We call him "THE CHAINSAW" *wink*. It was terrible. The first day of the week when you got into your office and enter your network password, all you got is "ACCESS DENIED" error. And when you try to verify it to your network administrator he would say to approach HR department. And the next thing you will learn is you are included in the list of the employees subject for MRP (Mandatory Retrenchment Program). I have seen lots of shocked faces, crying, in pain stating their sentiments about it. It was just so unfair the way I look at it. After that Retrenchment period, that japanese analyst was gone too. Hmmm.. Very Bad!!! :(

Another theory they called is Theory O or the so called "Soft" approach to change, the goal is to develop corporate culture and human capability through individual and organizational learning the process of changing, obtaining feedback, reflecting and making further changes. Managers and employees were encouraged to collectively reexamine their work practices and behaviors with a goal of increasing productivity and quality. Managers were replaced if they did not conform to the new philosophy, but the overall firing freeze helped to create a culture of trust and commitment. However, this kind of approach also will let the management feel that their loyalty and commitment to their employees can prevent them from making tough decisions. And so the temptation is to postpone the bitter medicine in the hopes that rising prouctivity will improve the business situation. Either Theory, if use alone has its own limitations and disadvantages. That's why the article suggested to use both instead but with careful understanding when to use the method sequentially. Like for instance, it is highly unlikely that Theory E would be successfully follow Theory O because of the sense of betrayal that would involve. So the real question is, How to achieve rapid movements in economic value while simultaneously developing an open, trusting corporate culture? According to the article, it is possible to apply Theories E and O together but it will require great will, skill and wisdom. But because it is more difficult than mere sequencing, the simultaneous use of O and E strategies is more likely to be a source of sustainable competitive advantage. This could be attain by explicitly confront the tension between E and O goals then set direction from top and engage people below.Once these were attained already, focus simultaneously on the hard and soft sides of the organizations plan for spontaneity and let incentives reinforce change, not drive it.

Woaahh.. the article is really nice.. I will surely apply this if given the chance *wink*.