Globalization and Change

some would say that the world is now flat, based on the fact that lighting fast communications have created a global economy. Friedman (2005) stated that technology and geo-economics is fundamentally reshaping our lives much more quickly than many people realize (Friedman, 2005). Faster communication means that people on opposite sides of the world can now collaborate in real time. This process of a virtually shrinking world with interconnected economies is referred to as globalization. Globalization was greatly sped up by the internet beginning around the year 2000. Suddenly it was possible for the whole world to be interconnected as countries began to develop the infrastructure to connect to the internet and the World Wide Web (WWW). However the WWW was not the first time globalization occurred. So far it has taken place in three main phases. Globalization 1.0 (1492 to 1800) shrank the world from large to medium via international trade of resources and imperial conquests. Globalization 2.0 (1800 to 2000) shrank the world even more to a small size. This was spearheaded by companies globalizing markets and using international labor. Around 2000, Globalization 3.0 began shrinking the world even more to a tiny sized world that seems to be virtually flat. Globalization 3.0 is different from 1.0 and 2.0 because it uses advanced communication technology to shrink the world and empower individuals. Most of these empowered individuals are diverse and are usually non-Western and nonwhite (Friedman, 2005). Friedman (2005) also writes that it is now possible for more people than ever to collaborate and compete in real time with more people in different corners of the planet and on a more equal footing than at any previous time in the history of the world (Friedman, 2005). And why not? Sauve (2007) stated that time after time it has been proven that a large group of peers is more adept at solving complex problems than a small group of experts (Sauve, 2007). All of this globalization ultimately means there is a greater level of diversity in teams. It is not unusual these days for many people in the United States (US) to have co-workers in other countries. In the US, many businesses that remain based here have also taken a queue from globalization and teamed up employees from difference states. In order to make these diverse teams work, leaders and co-workers must practice inclusion. Inclusion is the practice where everyone is treated and informed equally with no bias based on race or geographical location. Young (2007) wrote that you must create an inclusive environment by changing the organization culture. Young goes on to say that a truly diverse organization has employees that actually have the freedom to stand apart, bring in different ideas and challenge what is entrenched. Above all, these employees bring their passion to their work and build a sustainable future for the business (Young, 2007). Globalization also leads to outsourcing and off-shoring, perhaps the two most obvious examples of major changes that affect almost every large organization (Anderson, 2003). Outsourcing and off-shoring are terms used to describe how jobs and manufacturing are moved outside the US using cheap labor and cheap raw materials. This has led to many job losses in the US. For those in the US that have been displaced, globalization can create personnel issues within an organization. This makes inclusion training for employees even more important. Globalization, diversity and technology advances can lead to challenging issues when creating training programs for today’s organizational teams. One possible answer to this, as posited by Sauve (2007), is where organizations tap into the expertise of the learners themselves by empowering them to teach each other (Sauve, 2007). Instructional design graduate students need to take globalization, diversity and technology advances into consideration when creating training programs. How to develop and present curriculum to a global audience full of diverse technologically savvy means having to be ready for just about anything. Designers should brush up on their diverse team member’s cultural “do’s” and “don’ts”. Instructional designers also need to adapt to new technology and become proficient at it. Additionally designers need to remember that the learner remains at the center of the instructional design process. What the learner needs to know, when, and how are essential in delivering information and instruction in the real world (Anonymous, 2010). Many organizations today also use process improvement based on Six Sigma methodology. This in itself can actually lead to off-shoring and outsourcing. As reported by Chakravorty (2010), Six Sigma aims to remove all processes that don't add value to the final product or service. However, many of the organizations that have implemented Six Sigma have discovered that nearly 60% of all corporate Six Sigma initiatives fail to yield the desire results (Chakravorty, 2010). In this light, not only does the instructional designer have to be aware of globalization, diversity and inclusion, but they also have to deal with a resistant to change culture which has been in "change overload" for some time. Diversity is very important. Learning about the culture of others. Being professional. As instructional designers we would take that into consideration. Diversity brings tolerance. It might help make the world a better place.

Innovation and Change

In an ever changing world, an organization needs to respond to innovation. To continue to be successful and to ensure its survival, the organization must realize “the importance of encouraging innovative thinking and the necessity of becoming a learning organization” (Dr. Bligh). To institute change successfully, there are three important steps the organization needs to take : 1) it needs to create an environment where making mistakes is seen to be part of the learning process (Padgaonkar, 2007). 2) It needs to create a unique and winning culture (Rogers & Meehan, 2007). 3) People in the organization need to continue learning (Harper& Glew, 2008) and so they acquire knowledge that helps them to implement a successful organizational design that allows them to survive in a competitive environment (Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn, 2008). In an innovative environment, members of the organization must feel comfortable making mistakes without the fear of punishment as “experimentation will lead to errors and that errors are learning experiences” (Padgaonkar, 2007, 15). History bears witness to how mistakes have led to greater inventions. A classic example to illustrate this point is the invention of the Post- It notes. Spencer Silver’s experimentation to produce stronger glue failed; instead he was left with something that was much weaker. Silver didn’t throw the glue away and so a few years later Arthur Fry needed something to keep his hymn markers in place. He remembered the glue and used some on his markers, which lead to the birth of the Post- It note. Fry continued to experiment and the Post- It note went through a process of trial and error to make it marketable (Smithsonian). Had 3m not encouraged errors, Silver would not have shared this information with anyone and would have discarded the glue. The result would have been that we would have been left without a wonderful invention. This case also illustrates that organizations “need to instigate learning by making deliberate mistakes” (Padgaonkar, 2007, 15). Sometimes errors can lead to other inventions and sometimes they are needed to improve existing products. For an organization to have the competitive edge it needs to build a winning culture. This is the symbolic glue that holds the organization together and it “inspires loyalty in employees and makes them want to be part of a team” (Rogers & Meehan, 2007, 254). For an organization to create a winning culture it must put its members first. An example of this is the U.K. based IT solutions company Softcat. When the company initially started the Softcat chairman, Peter Kelly, stated clearly that his staff’s happiness was his greatest priority. On the company’s webpage, where each member is introduced, the caption under Kelly’s photograph states “passionate about staff happiness” (http://www.softcat.com/who-we-are/meet-the-people). The captions under each team member starts of with “passionate about”. Clearly Softcat has built a culture around passion. Whether is a passion for the staff or the work they do, Softcat members are part of a unified culture which believes in being passionate. Part of the winning culture is communication with members (Rogers & Meehan, 2007) and “Kelly instilled a democratic ethos from the start, involving staff in company-wide decisions and communicating everything that goes on in the business to employees” (Director, 2011, n.d). Celebration is also an important aspect of the winning culture (Rogers & Meehan, 2007) and so Kelly treats his top performing staff to U.Ks best restaurants and incentive trips (Director, 2011, n.d.). Due to the amazing winning culture of Softcat and Kelly, “This year his 300-employee company is on track to turn over £200m” (Director, 2011, n.d). Sofcats’ case illustrates that creating a winning culture can have a huge impact on the company’s performance. Culture has a huge part in innovation and in an organizational culture “where employees are always listened to, their ideas taken on board, and they are encouraged to do a certain amount of autonomous working” (Director, 2011, n.d) success is imminent. Another important aspect of a successful organization is its belief in learning as “the primary responsibility business leaders have is to develop firms that will be more successful tomorrow than today” (Harper & Glew, 2008, 27). The only way this can be achieved is if the organization encourages innovative thinking. Members would have to assess internal and external factors and then use that knowledge to implement a successful strategy to help the organization survive (Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn, 2008). The Amway Corporation is a good example of this. When Amway started in the early 1950s, it only sold one product. Over the decades it added more products that would satisfy customer demands and with new technologies emerging, it started to rely on research to make its products better (Amway, 2011, n.d) . Amway started off as a door to door business, but with the emergence of e-business, it quickly went online as it realized it “must be able to offer products and services that give them a competitive edge” (Harper& Glew, 2008, 27). Like Amazon.com Amway redesigned its structure to reflect “the importance of innovation and the ability to learn from advanced IT”(Schermerhorn, Hunt, & Osborn, 2008, 430). With the progression of IT and its capability to connect markets globally, Amway expanded its business to 80 countries. Now individuals who join Amway can own businesses in multiple countries. Had Amway not reorganized its structure and strategy and adopted the innovative technology, it would still be a company operating in just the U.S. Even though Amway reorganized to reflect the technology, it still emphasizes its original vision from the 1950s as it declares on its website “The world may change but our values and vision remains the same” (Amway, 2011, n.d). Organizations, for the sake of survival, must ensure that they continue to foster new and innovative ideas. During this process managers need to accept mistakes as part of the learning process and sometimes for innovation to take off, they may have to encourage mistakes. Additionally, leaders and members need to continue to scan the internal and external environment to gain knowledge. They must then use this knowledge to restructure or reorganize and adopt innovation to compete in a global market. Part of this process has to be creating a winning culture that focuses on relationships and actively celebrates success. Without these steps, the organization may find itself to be out of date and soon extinct. Organizational Behavior (10th ed.) by Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. Copyright 2008 by John Wiley & Sons Inc. Harper, S. C., & Glew, D. J. (2008). Is your organization learning-impaired? Industrial Management, 50(2), 26–30. Rogers, P., & Meehan, P. (2007). Building a winning culture. Business Strategy Series, 8(4), 254–261. Video Program “Fostering Innovation” Dr. Michelle Bligh http://invention.smithsonian.org/centerpieces/iap/inventors_fry2.html http://www.softcat.com/who-we-are/meet-the-people http://www.director.co.uk/MAGAZINE/2011/3_march/culture_64_07.html http://www.amway.com/about-amway/our-company/heritage?aid=About+Amway-Our+Company-Heritage

Responsibilities of Change Leaders

If change is to become part of the culture of an organization, then change leaders must take the necessary steps to ensure success. Without these steps change may not be lasting and end up being a fad. Schools are actively changing organizations. There are so many internal and external factors that affect it that there is always some change that is taking place. I would like to discuss such a change that took place in my school. I will look at the six responsibilities of leaders (Beach, 2006) to evaluate the change process.

Assessment

The purpose of any school is to provide a quality education and its prime responsibility is to ensure that students have opportunities to learn. If there are factors that are affecting the learning process then they need to be dealt with. For the past three years, our school has been exploring brain based learning. As the brain in seventy eight percent water dehydration impairs “attention, critical thinking, learning and memory” (Jensen,2007, 73,).  It was decided by the administration that students needed to drink water to increase student performance. The brain based approach emphasizes much on water and there are many studies to support this. The administration used this “to create a sense of rational for the change process (Dr. Bligh)

Culture

The school believes that students need to stay in class to learn. There has been a system in place for many years that allows students to leave class, in emergency situations, with a green hall pass.  This system is part of the schools culture and every teacher follows this system. New staff members are also made aware of this. This has also been built into our teacher appraisal system i.e. when an evaluator is present, they will watch how many students leave the classroom and why.  With new initiative, some changes would need to be made to the culture.

Vision

There were many meetings and professional development sessions associated with brain based learning and each one reinforced the same idea: a dehydrated brain performs poorly. The majority of teachers all understood and accepted the need for change.  There were some that were skeptical of the whole idea but played along as administrators created minor levels of anxiety by saying that they would note this during walk through evaluations. (Hitt, Miller & Colella, 2009)  

Plan

With the new knowledge, the administration knew it had to make changes to the hall pass system. Teachers were told that if students needed to drink water then they should be issued with a hall pass to allow them to do that. Hall monitors and Assistant Principals would monitor students to ensure discipline. Water bottles would be provided by the Principal on state test days. The library, cafeteria and vending machines would sell bottled water to the students.

Implementation

At first, things went smoothly. It seemed the change was a success. Teachers were issuing hall passes to students who wanted or needed water. Hall monitors and APs were making sure that discipline was kept at all times. The administrators walked through classrooms to make sure teachers allowed students to access water during the period. 

The problems first started with business classes. Normally these classes did not any liquid into their classes as spillage on the equipment would be problematic. With the new vision in place, they were told to follow suit. Students started bringing water bottles into the classes and within the first week water spillage had caused damage to some equipment. In other parts of the school, water bottles and lids were littering hallways and classrooms. Teachers were complaining that they were spending a lot of time picking up bottles and lids. Some students were constantly keeping them in their mouths like feeding bottles, which was becoming a distraction. Teachers felt that they spent more time writing passes than teaching. The other major problem was that some students would ask for a hall pass to go to the water fountain and instead meet up with friends in the hallway. Increase water consumption also increased restroom breaks. Due to these physical altercations between students increased, especially in restrooms where APs and hall monitors were not present.

Institutionalizing

The change never reached this point. Within a few weeks, administrators made the announcement that hall passes would again be kept to a minimum; students would not be allowed out of the classroom unless it was an emergency. Although, the administration did not admit it openly, the teachers “read between the lines for real messages and their true intent” (Lee, 2008, 24).  Teachers understood the change to be a failure. Students were not allowed to leave the classroom to drink water. The problem with the water bottles was deemed a classroom management issue and teachers were left to deal with it.

How could the above situation improve?

I believe the change was valid and necessary. I think the problem was with the plan and the implementation. Firstly, students should have been reminded that they need to drink water between passing periods. As each period is only 50 minutes, students do not need to take water into classrooms with electrical equipment. There should a recycling bin, for plastic bottles, available in the hallways and classrooms. In the classroom, students should be told to keep their water bottles in their back packs and should only take them out when necessary. Every teacher should ensure before the end of class that all trash has been taken care of. Administrators can provide incentive to senior students for taking responsibility of the trash i.e. a contribution, from the Principal, to the prom fund.

I think the administration should have had “periodic team meetings” (Anderson, 2010) with department heads to see how the change was progressing and to give feedback from teachers about making changes to the plan.

I think when a change fails and the leaders do not attempt to acknowledge the failure, it creates resistance for any future changes. I think it is very important for leaders to admit failure and propose alternative plan (Beach, 2006). In this case the administration should have looked at the failing aspects of the plan and made changes.

Would anybody have taken a different approach?

 Please note: water in the classroom was just a small component of the brain based learning initiative. There were many other changes that were more successful and our administration does a wonderful job with many changes. I picked this one to discuss this week as it highlights some problems with change in organization.

Beach, L. R. (2006). Leadership and the art of change: a practical guide to organizational transformation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Behavior: A Strategic Approach (2nd ed.) by Hitt, M. A., Miller, C. C., & Colella, A. Copyright 2009 by John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Jensen, E. (2007). Introduction to brain-compatible learning(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Lee, T. J. (2008). Actions speak loudly. Communication World, 25(4), 24–28. 

Organization Development: The Process of Leading Organizational Change by Anderson, D. L. Copyright 2010 by Sage Publications,

Video Program: “Sustaining Change” Dr. Michelle Bligh 

The case of Kelsey High School

Change in any organization will be met with resistance and so a good leader will anticipate the resistance and have a solution to combat it (Dr. Bligh).  Resistance is not necessarily, negative as it can force the change agent to question their own beliefs and form a more powerful proposal.   (Gullickson, 2009)This week I looked at the case of Kelsey High School in which the new interim Principal, Rose, tries to make the necessary changes but is faced with resistance (Payne, 2007)

When Rose started at Kelsey High School, some of the major problems at Kelsey High included low test score, teacher vs administration culture, and lack of consistency in disciplining students. After her briefing of the problems at the high school, Rose drew her own conclusions and was excited about embracing the challenge.  She looked at the staff developed strategic plan and came to the decision that all classes should be at the “college preparatory level regardless of student’s post-secondary education plans” (Payne, 2007, 26) Rose’s vision was based on sound research and it was obvious she was very excited about it. However, when she shared this with the staff, and asked them to explore the option, their response was not the same.  She was bombarded with questions and negativity which, in turn, baffled her. She could not understand why the staff would resist “a positive change… a science based practice” (Payne, 2007, 26). In this situation, Rose had made a number of errors. Firstly she created a vision without any input. Secondly she did not anticipate any resistance from the staff and lastly she saw the resistance as negative.  Each of these points needs to be examined separately to understand what Rose could have done differently.

Rose developed a vision for the school, without input from anybody and then expected the staff to embrace her plan. From her debriefing session with the superintendent Rose should have understood, that due to the errors made by her predecessor, the staff would not trust her easily; she would have to build her credibility. The research based idea that, Rose wanted to remodel the curriculum on should not have been announced at a meeting. Instead, she should have focused on the key influencers (Kim, & Mauborgne,  2003) as “ one cannot and should not try to win over everyone (Michelman, 2007, 3) and so she should have focused her efforts where “they’ll have the most impact” (Michelman, 2007, 3).  If she had put the ideas to the department heads and allowed them to explore the idea, she may have had better luck. Although there are many differences between the administration and faculty at Kelsey High, everyone agree with one problem: the low performance of the students on the standardized test. At the meeting, Rose should have started off with this idea and reminded everyone of this common purpose and a common vision (Bolman & Deal, 2008). This would have been a good starting point. Reminding everyone that they are working together for a common goal sets the tone for the meeting. She could have then said that there are a number of ways that student scores could be improved and a college bound curriculum was one of the options that they could look at together.  Making people feel included in the change process helps them understand what is expected of them and how this will affects their role (Beach, 2006)

Rose’s other major problem was that she had not anticipated the resistance she would face from the staff.  Had she been prepared for it, she might have done a better job convincing them of a need for change. With the knowledge of the problems at Kelsey High, Rose should have anticipated that her ideas would cause, at the very least, some resistance. My suggestion to her would have been to play devil’s advocate with her vision. She should have outlined all the negativity people would see in her proposal and should have prepared material to deal with that. In her outline she could have looked at whether resistance would be due to “lack of understanding, different assessments, self-interest, and low tolerance for change” (Hitt, Miller, & Colella, 2009, 498). Maybe she should have conducted a survey as these “can help scout out pockets of resistance among units. Even anonymous polls gauging attitudes toward change can reveal important trends” (Michelman, 2007, 3).   I also believe that change leaders need to be sympathetic when they communicate the idea of change and that any resistance is “bought up by uncertainty and fear” and so Rose could have started the communication with telling the faculty that the idea she has is something the staff should consider to improve scores and she knew that the teachers were working hard and this new idea would assist them in this area.  Then she could have addressed some of the fears of the teachers and shown them that this was not just to assist students but teachers too.  When the resistance arose, Rose could have given them the opportunity to “express the resistance more authentically” which would have helped to “diffuse tension by allowing it to be expressed and addressed honestly (Anderson, 2010, 166). Since she would have already anticipated some of these and prepared for them, she would have been able to deal with them one at a time and make the staff understand her reasons for the choice. Her lack of anticipation and preparation caused Rose to lose credibility.  As a leader, Rose should have understood and prepared for the DADA syndrome (Hitt, Miller & Collela, 2009). Providing support and being persistent during the stages is also an important aspect of leadership. Rose gave up at the denial stage and so could not persist with her research based idea. Had she allowed the DADA syndrome to take its course and as a leader had she provided the necessary support and persistence, I believe the staff would have eventually accepted the change.

Additionally, Rose viewed the resistance from the staff as negative. I believe that Rose had good understanding of the research based, college bound curriculum, but failed to understand her role as a leader. Otherwise she would have understood that resistance “gave us the opportunity to explore, to reflect, to clarify what truly mattered to us (Gullickson, 2009, 8).  

As a leader, Rose should have begun by exploring the culture of the school, instead of relying on just the superintendent. Exploring the culture before the announcement of the vision would have helped her understand the history and status quo (Beach, 2006) and what forms of resistance would arise because of these.  She should have then reflected on her vision to see if she needed to make any accommodations due to this knowledge or if she needed to focus on “areas that needed attention, situations that may have required further thought, ways to use resources that had been overlooked (Gullickson, 2009, 8).  Rose, on the other hand, found herself becoming “frustrated by others” (Gullickson, 2009, 10).  At this point she should have asked herself if the change she wanted really was something that would work. What were her reasons for wanting this particular type of curriculum or was their another possibility that they could explore? What was it?  If she could not answer these questions herself, then she was not convinced of the change herself and needed to work on herself first. If she was able to answer these questions then should have communicated these to the staff.

Although Rose had some excellent ideas as an educator, her leadership skills needed further development as “recognizing resistance is an important skill, and the ability to work it is an even more important skill” (Anderson, 2010, 164). Rose failed to realize that “there is a lot of distrust between employees and management historically and that can be a huge source of resistance to change” (Dr. Bligh). Rose should have worked with the key influencers to explore ways of increasing student scores. Together they could have come up with a common vision and anticipated the resistance the staff might have felt. They could have outlined the advantages and looked at ways of dealing with the negativities. She should have then announced the common vision at the faculty meeting and allowed people to air their resistances.  She should have allowed the key influencers to address the concerns with her and then allowed those that weren’t convinced to go through the stages of DADA, while providing support and persistently pushing the vision. I believe that had she taken these steps, she may have had better results. 

Anderson, D. L. (2010). Organization development: The process of leading organizational change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc

Beach, L. R. (2006). Leadership and the art of change: a practical guide to organizational transformation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (4th ed.) by Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. Copyright 2008 by John Wiley & Sons Inc

Organizational Behavior: A Strategic Approach (2nd ed.) by Hitt, M. A., Miller, C. C., & Colella, A. Copyright 2009 by John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Gullickson, B. R. (2009). Working with resistance. Strategic Finance. 90(8), 8–10. 

Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2003). Tipping point leadership. Harvard Business Review, 81(4), 60–69. 

 Michelman, P. (2007). Overcoming resistance to change. Harvard Management Update, 12(7), 3–4. 

Payne, H. J. (2007). Hard times at Kelsey high: Issues of change, climate, and culture. Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies, 13(5), 25–29. 

 “Resistance to Change” Dr. Bligh

The Case of Principal David King

Change is a difficult process for anyone. It is particularly difficult for the person making the change and for this reason strategic planning is required to make the change a lasting one.  A transformational leader has the skills to show people the issues, the vision, necessity of the change and then gets members on board to bring changes to the status quo. The four characteristics of intellectual stimulation, idealized influence, inspirational appeal and individualized considerations, are essential in helping the leader bring this about (Dr. Bligh). These skills are reflected in the case of Principal David King (Bolman & Deal, 2008) with a high degree of success.

            David King assumed the role of transformational leader, by giving individualized considerations to the faculty, through the interviews that he held. He understood how each one felt about their role and the role of others at the school. This allowed him to see and understand the reason for conflict and was the basis of his notes. Key issues regarding the culture and the lack of tradition were highlighted in these interviews. He was able to evaluate each individual’s efficiency against the role they had to fulfill. He concluded that there were people who had excellent skills but were given the incorrect position. For example Housemaster Perkins was excellent at scheduling but was not a very good housemaster. He used this knowledge to create a better position as he understood that improvisation from people who lacked certain skills was part of the problem (Beach, 2006). King also understood that some of the housemasters had a lot of support and for any change to take place he had to get them on board as “individuals with power based on their formal positions can block or at least slow it down (Hitt & Colella, 2009, 496).  King proved that individualized considerations was a strong element of his leadership skills.

            Although intellectual stimulation is an important aspect of transformational leaders, King’s attempt to get the faculty to actively participate in the change, through discussion of the conflict, created a serious situation for him. In the Friday afternoon meeting, Carver threatened Dula over an issue, an issue that could have given an uprising to racial and gender tension. I think King could have dealt with this situation differently. Communication between management and subordinates is very important (McAllaster, 2004) but communication between conflicting members is dangerous, as was proven by the Carver-Dula situation. It would have been better if King had worked on his vision first and then called a meeting to discuss the proposed changes. He could have shown them “how the new vision and plan will affect the person’s own unit and his or her own job” (Beach, 2006, 79). The lack of vision at the meeting was the basis of the problem (Kotter, 2006). I also think that this situation affected King’s credibility and gave Bill the opportunity to see King as “not having the stomach or the forcefulness to survive at Kennedy” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, 421).  Later on King realized that intellectual stimulation needs to be backed by a powerful and common vision (Bolman & Deal, 2008) otherwise it can escalate the conflict. Intellectual stimulation was an element that King initially misunderstood. He was, however, able to use it effectively later on.

           

King used inspirational appeal to help him motivate others for the necessary change. After the staff meeting conflict, King took some time to “reflect and reframe” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, 421), which was necessary to improve the situation. During this time he formed the vision but before he could do that he had to go over the problems at the school. He noticed that there was a huge structural problem with Kennedy and that the roles of people were not clearly defined. Due to the newness of the school, there seemed to be a lack of culture and tradition and so he created something to help them unify: “excellence and caring” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, 428).  This was to become the core of his vision.  He focused on the purpose of them being together. He also understood that they wanted to participate in the change process instead of being told what to do and that “the more people involved, the better the outcome (Kotter, 2006).  King organized his ideas into a chart and so was able to produce a plan which allowed him to define the roles of the faculty and assign them a more appropriate one. (Beach, 2006). I think King’s strongest element was his inspirational appeal and that is where his predecessor, Weis, had failed. Weis had created more conflict and had not established a culture or a tradition. King, on the other hand, had realized the importance of culture and establishing a common cause at the core of it.

           

King’s role as an idealized influence came into effect when he called Dula and Carver and reminded them of their reasons for being at Kennedy and the importance of their contributions. This helped each one to understand the vision and made them see the big picture in which their conflict was irrelevant. King knew that as a leader he had to show that he cared and this helped to build his credibility as he established relationships. This was particularly important for him as “individuals who have credibility are admired and respected and can be effective in selling change (Hitt & Colella, 2009, 496). He set up a task force to deal with the structural issues. That meant that the faculty would actively participate in the change process and would feel valued. It would also communicate to them “about what is expected of them (and why) and communication from them about the success of their efforts” (Beach, 2006, 85). Even though King was relatively new in his position, the element of idealized influence was a very strong aspect of his leadership as he was able to convince them of the need to change and to believe in the new vision.

            King’s role in the case study certainly shows he was able to assess the situation and provide the solutions. These are traits of good leaders as “Real change occurs when a leader and a manager understands the organization (its strategy, people and culture), identifies the problems, and seeks solutions that will work” (McAllaster, 2004, 322).  He may have made a mistake with allowing people to vent their conflicts in public, but he soon turned that situation around to his advantage. He was able to make these changes as he created a vision based on assessment and then communicated the vision to the faculty (Kotter, 2006). His ability to turn around Kennedy High School showed that he was a transformational leader.

McAllaster, C. M. (2004). The 5 P’s of change: Leading change by effectively utilizing leverage points within an organization. Organizational Dynamics. 33(3), 318–328.

Beach, L. R. (2006). Leadership and the art of change: a practical guide to organizational transformation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Kotter, J. P. (2006). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail (chap. 10, pp. 239–251). In Gallos, J. V. (Ed.), Organization development: A Jossey-Bass reader. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Organizational

Behavior: A Strategic Approach (2nd ed.) by Hitt, M. A., Miller, C. C., & Colella, A. Copyright 2009 by John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (4th ed.) by Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. Copyright 2008 by John Wiley & Sons Inc. Reproduced with permission of John Wiley & Sons Inc. 

Video Program: “Transformational Leadership”

Organizational Change- The Change Process

People fear change. Human beings are accustomed to working in patterns and following schedules. When a change occurs it upsets the natural balance of things and this is what most causes conflict.  However, there are people who thrive on change and see it as an opportunity. These are people who understand that change is necessary for the survival of an organization. A good leader deals with these two conflicting views and presents the change as an opportunity and focuses on the positive. Dr. Blair outlines, in “Leading change in organizations”, three stages to change: the beginning stage, the implementation stage and the after period of the change.  The leader’s role is to ensure that the change is for the better and is a lasting change, while reassuring members that it is for the good of the organization.

In the beginning stage there needs to be, an assessment, a reason for change. During this period the organization will look at the positive and negative aspects of itself and so members may appear defensive. Many people do not like to look at the negative aspect and so might resist change from the beginning. The leader has to have knowledge of the internal and external environment (Beach, 2006) A good leader’s role includes the “ability to convince their members of the organizations to follow them on the paths on this fund of knowledge” (Beach, 2006, 3). She must have a good relationship with the members to convince them of the change.  Dr. Bligh says, in the video program “Organizational Change”, that the leader must have a good understanding of the culture of the organization and the status quo before implementing any change.  The leader must gather information and present it in such a form that members can see the threat to the organization and also the potential opportunities. If members do not trust the leader, and see the change as negative, there will be resistance. The nature of the change will also affect people’s reaction. For example, if the company has to downsize, then there will be strong resistance to that. Providing strong knowledge from internal and external assessments and reaffirming the vision to the unit leaders may help with this.  Recently our school made lesson plans mandatory. Every teacher was told that lesson plans for the week had to posted, on our common drive for principles to see, on the Wednesday of the week before. The new Assistant Principle of Instruction had made that decision. She did not initially state the reason behind it. This caused much stress amongst teachers as each team had already been submitting a quarterly plan. They saw this as an additional burden. Although there was not open resistance to the change, there was plenty behind closed doors. A few weeks later, at a faculty meeting, the API explained that our school wanted to move from recognized status to exemplary. She explained that research showed, that detailed planning led to better results and it was a way for leaders to monitor consistency amongst teams and departments. After the meeting some people were convinced, but others thought this would not be a long lasting change, that the principle, API and the APs would eventually stop checking.

The second stage of the change is the implementation of the change. Even though the leader might have convinced members of a need for change, the danger is not over. The members must be convinced that the organization can change successfully (Miller & Colella, 2009) that the change is beneficial and lasting. If leaders fail to do this at this stage then members will not be committed to the change. To help them with this, leaders will have to provide “a compelling vision of the future (Miller & Colella, 2009, 494). A good support system needs to be in place for those that are unsure. Highlighting “quick and highly visible successes can be helpful in supporting this stage of the change process” (Miller & Colella, 2009, 494).   If members are shown the benefits of change, i.e. pay raise, they maybe more susceptible to it (Mcallaster, 2004).  Leaders and members should understand that mistakes will be made and that there needs to be a strategy and process in place for this. The organization will learn whether changes are effective, and they may have to make changes to the original plan (Mcallaster, 2004). Sometimes in this stage a reassessment might be necessary. If management and leaders can continue to support the members and reassure them that success and failure are part of the implementation, they maybe more committed. Leaders may have to keep penalties at a minimum as a way of reassurance.  In this stage communication is vital (Mcallaster, 2004). Members need to feel secure and should feel that leaders and management are not hiding anything. If there are is no communication, then members will rely on hearsay which could give conflicting information. This could mean that “moral takes a nosedive” (Mcallaster, 2004, 322).  This can illustrated further with my example of the lesson plans. Once teachers started to post their plans online, they were given feedback on the quality of the plans and whether teams were aligned within the department. This communication helped to reinforce the idea that the lesson plans were all about moving towards exemplary status and not simply a time filler. The teachers also let the principle know that Wednesday was too early and that some teachers like to wait till Friday to create lesson plans for the following week. This was taken into account and teachers were given permission to submit plans on Friday.

The final stage of the process is to ensure that change is permanent.   This is the most volatile stage of the process of change. In this stage members must see leaders and management is firm in the change and remains consistent (Mcallaster, 2004, 322). Members will look at leaders and management to see if they still believe in the change or if it is “just another fad they can wait out” (Mcallaster, 2004, 322). If they to want sustain their credibility, and then they must persist with the change. This provides reassurance to the members that the change is for the better of the organization, especially when it has changed or modified the culture. Members need to know and understand that it was required and worth it. Again leaders will have to appease the naysayers and may have to “create minor levels of guilt/ anxiety about not changing (Miller & Colella, 2009, 493).  They will have to put in an accountability and evaluation system in place to assure members that the change is long lasting. If members see this, then they will view this as a long lasting change and so will know that they must continue with the change.   Some months after the implementation of the lesson plans, some teachers stopped posting them. These teachers were contacted by the principles and reminded of our goal of exemplary status. A school wide announcement was made that lesson plans would be part of teacher evaluations.

A good leader is active during the process of change and one of their most important duties is to ensure that members see change as positive, even though there may be some negative aspects. For example, if a company has to downsize and fire people, leaders need to assure members that this is a necessary step for the continuation and survival or the organization (Beach, 2006).  People may react negatively to change; they might be stressed and this may manifest itself in poor quality of work or lack of commitment. Good leaders combat this by presenting: a strong vision, threats and opportunities discovered during external and internal assessments, and specifying the necessity for change (Beach, 2006).  After almost seven months of creating and posting lesson plans, many teachers have seen the value of them. It has given each department chair an idea of what each team is doing and what changes need to be made to the curriculum so that each grade level is aligned and how it can reach exemplary status.

Organizational Behavior: A Strategic Approach (2nd ed.) by Hitt, M. A., Miller, C. C., & Colella, A. Copyright 2009 by John Wiley & Sons

McAllaster, C. M. (2004). The 5 P’s of change: Leading change by effectively utilizing leverage points within an organization. Organizational Dynamics. 33(3), 318–328. 

Beach, L. R. (2006). Leadership and the art of change:  a practical guide to organizational transformation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Video Program: “Leading Change in Organizations” Dr. Nancy Blair

Video Program: “Organizational Change” Dr. Michelle Bligh

Organizational Change

Leadership is multi-faceted. As the video program “The Many Hats of Leaders” shows, a leader has to fulfill many roles. In my ten years as a teacher, I have encountered many different types of leadership, some extremely effective and some not so much. In ‘Reframing Leadership’ Bolman and Deal (2008) discuss various types of leaderships such as political, symbolic, human resources and a few others. I believe that a good leader possess a combination of those skills, although their leadership may lean towards any one of them. Unfortunately, every organization has a Wayne (Beach, 2006, xi) that assumes that being a manager is the same as being a leader.

One of the best leaders I encountered was an Assistant Principle of Instruction (API). She was the epitome of leadership. She made it a point to introduce herself to new staff members, spent time with teachers at lunch time, consistently praised people and knew how to approach people if they were not fulfilling their roles.  She went beyond her job description to help people as she discussed health issues with people and recommended doctors. Her motto was that a “happy and healthy staff is a successful staff.”  Anytime she introduced any new changes, she always discussed the big picture and “saw the need to cultivate understanding and acceptance of major decisions” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, 360). People such as this API do not struggle to make changes in any organization. However, no matter how good a leader is with her team, she must also have “the skill in managing relationships with all stake holders, including superiors ( Bolman & Deal,  2008, 348) Although our API was apt at dealing with conflict between people, she was unable to deal with conflict between herself and higher management and this led to her taking a job in another organization. I think had she been able to resolve this conflict our school would have continued to benefit from her leadership.

Leaders do not always have to be people of position (Bolman & Deal, 2008). Leaders are people who take initiative and work for the greater good of the organization. They are people who become leaders because a situation requires it. Two years ago, a teacher suddenly left our school, in the middle of the school year, without any notice. With just a few weeks left to the state test, her students were left in the lurch.  Different substitute teachers were placed with the students. These substitutes had little understanding of the state TAKS and so were unable to assist the students. The school district has a lengthy process for hiring teachers and so the students were left to the mercy of untrained substitutes.  During that time, one of the teachers decided that she would take the extra students herself. She placed the needs of the students first and instead of teaching thirty five students each period, she started teaching seventy. When the other teacher’s in the team saw this, they were inspired by her and wanted to help. The students were then divided between three teachers. Each one of those teachers did this without any incentive; they simply put the needs of the students first; “Authentic leaders put the interests of their organizations before their own” (Beach, 2006, xvii).  Like the case of Giulliani,  (Bolman & Deal, 2008). True leadership is highlighted in the times of crises.

            True leaders also see themselves as team members. A good example of this is the specialist of our English department, who always maintains that a department can only be successful if everyone works as a team. Even when she held the position as head of the English department, she held true to the belief that Together Everyone Achieves More (TEAM). To an outsider this may seem a childlike idea but it became an important part of the culture of our department and continues to bind the members. The secret to her success is her belief in “horizontal leadership” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, 361) in which there are no hierarchies and an innate culture of trust. Due to this she is able to bring changes into the department without resistance from the teachers.

            In many organizations, the belief is that leadership is synonymous with position. I think this is the cause of resistance during the process of change. When new managers take up their positions they think “that the only way to lead is to be tough, make massive changes, and force recalcitrant subordinates to do things a new way” (Beach, 2006, xvi). They forget that first they must earn the trust of their subordinates by proving that they understand the culture of the organization and that they too work for the success and survival of the organization.

            The examples I have used to illustrate my idea of leadership are all from a school point of view. It would be interesting to see if this idea transpires in other organization too.

The many hats of leaders. Laureate Education Inc

Bolman, L. G. & Deal T.E., (2008). Reframing organizations: artistry, choice, and leadership (4th Ed.). John Wiley & Sons Inc

 Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2003). Tipping point leadership. Harvard Business Review, 81(4), 60–69.