Unit 5 db convince us of your conflict initial response in a

1. Unit 5 DB: Convince us of your conflict
Initial Response: In "A Good Man is Hard to Find", O'Connor
brilliantly incorporates the conflicts of Man vs. Man, Man vs.
Nature, and Man vs. Himself. Which of these conflicts do you
think is strongest in the story? Be sure to use text examples and
your best persuasion techniques (This is a great practice for
your upcoming argumentative essay for Fences).
Peer Response: Please respond to at least two of your peers'
initial posts. You might mention if the response is clear,
contains text examples, and if the response persuaded you. Do
you agree with your peer's response?
I think the conflict which is the strongest in the story is Man vs.
Himself, because the two main characters, grandmother and
Misfit, both adhere to a moral code, or a series of conduct and
ethics, which they regard to be logical, and affects their
choices, actions, and viewpoints. The word moral is mostly
associated with good, but that is not always the case. It’s
clearly a rule of behavior, whilst the devotion of an individual's
morals is completely nonobjective. Even though initially, the
Misfit’s ethics appear to be confused, it is really the
grandmother’s ethics that turns out to be shallow and uncertain.
The grandmother has established her moral code on the traits
that she assumes make individuals good. She takes much pride
in being a lady, for instance, emphasizing looks over essence.
Simultaneously, she frequently misleads her family and falls
short of even a basic understanding of her surrounding
environment. Regardless of her acknowledged adoration for
Christian devoutness, she herself is not able to appeal to her
God for assistance when she discovers herself in a critical
situation and even starts to doubt the authority and divine
nature of Jesus Christ. The Misfit, however, sticks to a moral
code that stays true and solid. From his experiences as a suspect

2. who was found guilty, he is certain that the penalty is
constantly unreasonable to the criminal activity and that when it
all boils down, is of no concern. The Misfit additionally
conceals an absolute confusion concerning religion. Although
the grandmother welcomes faith completely and insubstantially,
the Misfit questions religious theories and meditates about how
he should or should not live by them. He has selected to adhere
to the belief that religion is meaningless and sticks to his own
kind of religion: “No pleasure but meanness.” The Misfit’s
moral code is destructive and at no time varies, and ultimately,
his code wins.
Home Translate Share A A A
Search Our Site
How to Use It
Share Feedback
Suggested Books
Meet Your Guides
To Get Updates
5 In%uential
Visualizations
Data visualization is
full of incredible
stories marked by

3. major events. Find
out more.
LEARN MORE
Much of the content of this topic came
from this book:
See a video about various
driving forces causing major
changes in organizations,
including in their cultures and
structures, and in how they are
governed, led and managed.
This affects consultants, as well.
From the Consultants
Development Institute.
See a video about language about change,
types of change, barriers to change,
overcoming barriers, phases in change,
priorities in each phase and models for
change. From the Consultants
Development Institute.
See a video about models for change,
roles during change, interventions, how
choose them and principles for changing
systems. From the Consultants
Development Institute.
Improving/Changing
Organizations: Guidelines,
Methods and Resources for

4. Organizational Change
Agents
©
Copyright Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD,
Authenticity Consulting, LLC.
Suggested Pre-Reading
Organizational Performance Management
Sections of This Topic Include
Overview of Organizational Change
Description
Understanding the Nature of Organizational Change
Major Types of Organizational Change
Why Change Can Be Difficult to Accomplish
Requirements for Successful Organizational Change
Various Organizational Change Models
Major Roles During Successful Organizational Change
Do Most Organizational Change Efforts Fail?
Undergoing Organizational Change
Collaborative Consulting Skills for Accomplishing
Significant Change
How to Choose Which Strategies (Interventions) to Use
for Change
Categories of Possible Strategies (Interventions) to Use
for Change
- - - Human Process Interventions (Group and
Individual Human Relations)
- - - Technostructural Interventions (Structures,

5. Technologies, Positions, etc.)
- - - Human Resource Management Interventions
(Individual and Groups
- - - Strategic Interventions (Organization and Its
External Environment)
Implementing Strategies for Organizational Change --
Finish Phases in Consulting
General Resources
Additional Perspectives on Change
Also See These Closely Related Topics
Overview of the Field of Organization Development
General Resources
- - - Service Organizations Focused on Organizational
Change and Development
- - - Online Groups
- - - Toolkits, Etc.
- - - Bibliographies of Books About Change
Management
Description
(Be sure to read the description in Organizational
Performance Management to understand where
organizational change typically fits into the cycle of
activities in ensuring strong performance in an
organization.)
Organizations are rapidly changing like never before.
Numerous driving forces are causing these changes,
including increasing markets and associated
competition, increasing expectations of transparency
and accountability, and an increasingly diverse
workforce.

6. As a result, leaders and managers are having to learn
about guiding and supporting significant change within
their own organizations. It is difficult to find a
management book today that does not include the topic
of change.
The purpose of the first section in this topic is to give
you a broad overview of organizational change so that
you will have a meaningful context in which to undergo
your own change efforts. The next section is more of a
"how to" in understanding how to plan and implement a
change effort.
However, that new information will not evolve into
actual knowledge and skills unless you continue to
practice applying it. That next section refers to a
process called collaborative consulting that has been
proven to be successful in guiding and supporting
others to successfully implement systems for long-
lasting, successful change.
OVERVIEW OF
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
Understanding the Nature of
Organizational Change
What is a Change Agent?
A change agent is the person or team who's currently
responsible for the overall change effort. It could be
different people at different times during the change.
For example, it could be a champion for change who
encourages the change. Then it could be an expert on
change who plans the change. Then it could be the
leader in the organization who drives the change.

7. Clearing Up Terms and Language
About Organizational Change and
Development
There are several phrases regarding organizational
change and development that look and sound a lot
alike, but have different meanings. As a result, there
seems to be increasingly different interpretations of
some of the phrases, while others are used
interchangeably. Without at least some sense of the
differences, communications about organizational
change and development can be confusing and
frustrating.
Cleaning Up the Language About Organizational Change
and Development
Why the Word "Change" is Heard So
Often
Many people
argue that
organizations are
changing like
never before.
Some of those
changes are
planned to be
accomplished
over a long
period. However,
organizational change is often provoked by some major
driving force, for example, a public relations crisis,
sudden opportunity in markets, dramatic reduction in
profits or new Chief Executive Officer with a very

8. different leadership style.
The subject of organizational change has reached
evangelical proportions. There is seemingly an
explosion of literature about the subject and an
accompanying explosion in the amount of consultants
who offer services in this general area.
When
people
struggle to accomplish successful organizational change
– whether in for-profit, nonprofit or government
organizations – it is often because they do not
understand the nature of organizational change, types
of change, barriers to change, how to overcome the
barriers, major phases in proceeding through change,
various models for planning and guiding change, and
types of approaches (interventions) to implement
successful change. That is the focus of this topic in this
Library.
Factors of Change
Factors That May Cause Change in an Organization
Factors That May Cause Change in an Organization:
Planned and Unplanned
Nine Reasons Why Organizations Need to Change
Major Types of Organizational
Change
Organizational change can seem like such a vague
phenomena unless you can think of change in terms of
the various types of change. There are different types,
including the scope, pace, urgency and style of the
planning for change.

9. Organization-wide Versus Subsystem
Change
Examples of organization-wide change are an
organizational redesign and change in overall
strategies. Experts assert that successful organization-
wide change requires a change in culture – cultural
change is another example of organization-wide
change. Those examples change the entire
organizational system.
Organizations have many subsystems, as well.
Examples of a change in a subsystem include removal
or addition of a product or service and reorganization of
a certain department.
Transformational Versus Incremental
Change
Transformational change is a radical and fundamental
shift in the way the entire organization operates.
Transformational change is sometimes referred to as
quantum change. An example is changing the culture
from the traditional top-down, hierarchical style of
leadership to a network of self-directing teams. Another
example is using Business Process Re-engineering to
take apart all the parts of the organization and then put
them back together in a more optimal fashion.
In contrast, incremental change is making small
adjustments over time to improve the performance of
the organization usually by increasing efficiencies in
various processes, such as in refining product
development and delivery and in reducing labor costs
through attrition.

10. Remedial Versus Developmental
Change
Change can be intended to remedy a current situation,
for example, to improve the poor performance of a
product, reduce burnout in the workplace, become
much more proactive and less reactive, or address
large budget deficits. Remedial projects often seem
quite focused and urgent because they are addressing a
current, major problem. It is often easier to determine
the success of these projects because the problem has
been solved or not.
Change also can be developmental – to make a
successful situation even better, for example, to expand
the amount of customers served or duplicate successful
products and services. Developmental projects can
seem more diffuse and long-term, depending on how
specific and important the goals are for the change.
Unplanned Versus Planned Change
Unplanned change can happen when a sudden crisis
occurs in the organization that can cause its members
to respond in a highly reactive and disorganized
fashion. Examples are when the Chief Executive Officer
suddenly leaves the organization or a significant public
relations problem occurs.
Planned change occurs when leaders in the organization
recognize the need for a major change and proactively
organize a plan to accomplish the change. Examples
are strategic planning that is focused on truly strategic
topics and succession planning for key leaders in the
organization.

11. Additional Perspectives
Types of Organizational Change
The Three Shades of Change
Coping With Type I Change
Managing Type II Change
Why Change Can Be Difficult to
Accomplish
Change can be difficult for you and your client to
accomplish for a variety of reasons.
People are afraid of the unknown. They
communicate their fear through direct means,
such as complaining about the plans for change.
Or, they communicate their fear indirectly, for
example, coming late to meetings and not taking
agreed-upon actions.
People think things are just fine. This might
occur if the executives in the organization have
not adequately communicated the need for the
change.
People are inherently cynical about change.
This cynicism often occurs if earlier attempts at
change were unsuccessful and it was not admitted
to the employees.
People doubt there are effective means to
accomplish successful change. They may have
read publications in which writers assert that
most organizational change efforts fail.
There may be conflicting goals in the
organizational change effort. A conflicting goal
might be, for example, to significantly increase
resources to accomplish change, yet substantially
cut costs to remain viable. That conflict can occur,

12. especially if employees were not involved in the
plans for the change.
Change often goes against values held dear
by members in the organization. For example,
they might disagree that the organization should
maximize profits more than contribute to their
community. This situation is not uncommon,
particularly in nonprofit organizations.
People get burned out during the change
effort. Organizational change usually takes
longer to achieve than most people expect. This
problem can occur if the question "Is this
realistic?" was not continually asked and if an
insufficient number of staff were not involved in
the planning.
Key leaders leave the organization. Especially
in smaller organizations or organizations with
very limited resources, leaders might not believe
they are receiving sufficient value for what they
are investing in the organization. They might
conclude that it is better to just leave. Or, the
change may not be going as expected, and the
leaders are asked to leave.
Participants do not understand the nature of
planned change. Frequently, participants expect
the change to be according to a well-designed,
well-organized effort that has few surprises. When
surprises do occur, they lose faith in the change
effort and seek to abandon it.
The relationship between the consultant and
the client “sours.” The relationship can
deteriorate, especially if the client does not want
to change or if the project struggles because of
one or more of the above-listed barriers to
change.

13. You can overcome many of those barriers if your
consulting project meets the requirements for
successful change listed below.
Requirements for Successful
Organizational Change
Cummings and Worley, in their book Organizational
Change and Development (Fifth Edition, West
Publishing, 1993), describe a comprehensive, five-
phase, general process for managing change, including:
1) motivating change, 2) creating vision, 3) developing
political support, 4) managing the transition and 5)
sustaining momentum. That process seems suitable for
organizing and describing general guidelines about
managing change.
Whatever model you choose to use when guiding
organizational change, that model should include the
priorities and areas of emphasis described in the
following five phases of change.
Motivating Change
This phase includes creating a readiness for change in
your client's organization and developing approaches to
overcome resistance to change. General guidelines for
managing this phase include enlightening members of
the organization about the need for change, expressing
the current status of the organization and where it
needs to be in the future, and developing realistic
approaches about how change might be accomplished.
Next, organization leaders need to recognize that
people in the organization are likely to resist making
major changes for a variety of reasons, including fear
of the unknown, inadequacy to deal with the change

14. and whether the change will result in adverse effects on
their jobs. People need to feel that their concerns are
being heard. Leaders must widely communicate the
need for the change and how the change can be
accomplished successfully. Leaders must listen to the
employees – people need to feel that the approach to
change will include their strong input and ongoing
involvement.
Creating Vision
Leaders in the organization must articulate a clear
vision that describes what the change effort will
accomplish. It should readily convey the benefits to the
employees, as well. Ideally, people in the organization
have strong input to the creation of the vision and how
it can be achieved. It is critically important that people
believe that the vision is relevant and realistic.
Research indicates that cynicism is increasing in
organizations in regard to change efforts. People do not
want their leaders to promote an idealized vision that
will completely turn the organization around and make
things better for everyone all the time. They want to
feel respected enough by their leaders to be involved
and to work toward a vision that is realistic, yet
promising and rewarding in the long run.
Developing Political Support
This phase of change management is often overlooked,
yet it is the phase that often stops successful change
from occurring. Politics in organizations is about power.
Power is important among members of the organization
when striving for the resources and influence necessary
to successfully carry out their jobs. Power is also

15. important when striving to implement a plan in which
everyone is involved. Power comes from the authority
of one’s position in the organization. Power also comes
from credibility, whether from strong expertise or
integrity.
Some people have a strong negative reaction when
talking about power because power too often is
associated with negative applications, for example,
manipulation, abuse or harassment. However, power
exists in all human interactions and is not always bad.
It is how the power is used that determines how the
power is perceived.
A strong mechanism for ensuring political support for
the change effort is to develop a network of leaders at
various levels who interact and count on each other to
support and guide the change effort. Means to do that
can include ensuring that all power-players are involved
in recognizing the need for change, developing the
vision and methods to achieve the vision, and
maintaining organization-wide communications about
the status of change. Any recommendations or
concerns expressed by members to the leaders must be
promptly recognized and addressed.
Managing Transition
This phase occurs when the organization works to make
the actual transition from the current state to the
desired future state or vision. In consultations, this
phase usually is called the implementation phase. The
ways that consultants and organizations go through this
phase can vary widely, ranging from clearly delineated
phases and steps to a continual mutual engagement
with the client from which the project activities

16. continue to unfold. See How Consultants Customize
Their Approaches.
Conventionally, it includes implementing a variety of
“interventions" designed to make the necessary change
in the organization, ranging from strategic planning,
leadership development and team building to whole-
systems change, strategic restructuring and cultural
change.
Ideally, the various interventions are detailed into
associated actions that are integrated into one overall
Implementation Plan. If the change is deep and
extensive, then each action plan would includes specific
objectives, or milestones, that must be accomplished
by various deadlines, along with responsibilities for
achieving each objective. Rarely are these plans
implemented exactly as planned. Thus, as important as
developing the plan, is making the many ongoing
adjustments to the plan while keeping other members
up-to-date about the changes and the reasons for
them.
These changes might require ongoing coaching, training
and enforcement of new policies and procedures in the
workplace. In addition, means of effective change
management must continue, including strong, clear,
ongoing communications about the need for the change
and status of the change.
Sustaining Momentum
Often, the most difficult phase in managing change is
this phase when leaders work to sustain the
momentum of the implementation and adjustment of
plans. Change efforts can encounter a wide variety of

17. obstacles, for example, strong resistance from
members of the organization or unexpected changes in
the environment outside the organization. Client
resistance can be expected because organizational
change requires a change in behaviors, which can be
very difficult. Authentic responses to the resistance can
be very effective. See Authenticity -- How to Remain
Authentic With Yourself and Others.
The role of support cannot be minimized. Despite its
importance during organizational change, the role of
support is often forgotten. Strong, visible, ongoing
support from top leadership is critically important to
show overall credibility and accountabilities in the
change effort.
Supervisors play a critical role in effectively delegating
tasks to employees and providing ongoing support in
the form of feedback, coaching and training. Employee
performance management plays a key role in ensuring
that the required actions are being taken at the right
times and are being done with high quality.
At this point in a consulting project, it may be wise for
the consultant to ensure he or she has ongoing support
themselves (for example, from other consultants) who
can provide ongoing objectivity, affirmation and other
forms of support.
Additional Perspectives
The following links are to articles that together provide
an increasingly comprehensive and detailed orientation
to change management.
Basic Overview of Organizational Change
Biggest Mistakes in Managing Change

18. Requirements for Successful Organizational Change
Change Management 101
Various Organizational Change
Models
The
purposes of an organizational change model are to 1)
provide guidance to leaders of the change effort and 2)
give a common perspective and frame of reference for
participants when communicating about their change
effort. The following paragraphs provide a general
overview of some of the more prominent change
models. The purpose of the overviews is to increase
your general knowledge about approaches to change
and help you grasp the diversity of approaches. The
overviews are not intended to provide you detailed
guidelines about implementing any of the models.
Note that there are many other change models, many
of them formed by modifying the well-known models,
such as Kurt Lewin’s action research. Also note that,
because there is no standard definition for a change
model, some readers might consider some of the
following to be standard management practices, rather
than means to affect change.
Unfreeze, Move, Refreeze
Lewin’s model is probably the most well known. Its
simple, but powerful, premise is that to change a
system, you first have to “unfreeze,” or loosen up those
structures and influences that currently hold the system
together. Without attention to those factors, the actions
to accomplish desired changes are not likely to be

19. successful because they will continue to encounter
strong resistance from members of the organization.
Structures can be loosened in a variety of ways. The
means mentioned in the above section Requirements
for Successful Organizational Change about motivating
change and creating a vision are powerful for
unfreezing an organization. The next general phase in
this model is about moving the change along, including
by developing political support as described in the
above section. The final phase is about developing and
implementing new structures, such as new plans,
policies and procedures, which freeze, or hold, the
current state of change in place. The means mentioned
in the above section about managing the transition and
sustaining momentum would be very useful in
refreezing the intended changes.
Lewin's 3-Stage Model of Change
Action Research
Lewin’s action research model is based on an overall
cycle of 1) clarifying the current problem in the system,
2) involving a specialist or consultant, 3) gathering data
and diagnosing the situation, 4) providing feedback to
people in the system, 5) incorporating members’
feedback to further clarify the problem and its causes,
6) developing action plans to address the problem, 7)
taking those actions and 8) gathering data to assess
the effects on the problem. The cycle can also generate
tremendous learning for those involved.
Many models for consulting are based on action
research and include various modifications. They
include, for example, more involvement of members of

20. the organization in the process, and less focus on
“diagnosis” and more focus on joint discovery. There is
also more focus on strengths and opportunities and less
on weaknesses and problems, as well as more focus on
learning.
Action Research
Business Process Reengineering (BPR)
This method aims to increase organizational
performance by radically re-designing the
organization's structures and processes -- by starting
over from the ground up. As with any major model for
change, there are many proponents and opponents of
BPR. BPR can require an extensive amount of detail,
attention and time and can be quite demanding on
employees.
Still, the process might be one of few that provides
clear guidelines and procedures for carefully
dissembling and assembling an organization. The
model, like Future Search Conference (below) and
Whole Systems Change, really forces leaders to take a
complete, fresh look at systems in their organization
and how to re-develop those systems anew.
Business Process Re-Engineering
Future Search Conference
Marvin Weisbord developed the future search approach,
which can involve 30-100 people or more, usually over
three days, to articulate a preferred future and develop
the action steps to accomplish that future. It is an
example of a relatively recent category of change

21. models called large-scale interventions. Large-scale
change is an example of transformational, organization-
wide change.
In the approach, a consultant works with a small
planning group to design the event. All key internal and
external stakeholders are encouraged to attend.
Participants examine the past, present and future of the
organization from the perspective of the participants
themselves, the organization and its industry.
Participants discover their shared values and
assumptions to clarify a preferred future or vision. The
vision emerges from various scenarios, built from
considering what has worked and what has not worked
in the past -- but especially what has worked. Short-
term and long-term action plans are established.
Emphasis is on building to the desired future, rather
than on solving problems.
Future Search Conference in Theory and Practice
McKinsey 7S Model
The model was developed by Watermann and Peters
and depicts seven dimensions of organizations that
must be considered when accomplishing organizational
change. Imagine a circle of six circles with one circle in
the middle. The middle circle is labeled “shared values.”
Shared values represent the overall priorities in how
Home
Index
Your Learning

22. Need Ongoing Support?
Build Your Learning Plan
General Resources
Blog Directories
Free Trainings
Job Banks
Online Groups
Orgs That Help
Periodicals
Reference Material
Supersites
Categories
Yourself
Leadership
Entrepreneurship
Products
Sales
Personnel

23. Finances
Organizations
Consulting
Launch Your
Website
You'll need: Vibes,
vibes, more vibes.
And an online store.
Launch it with
Squarespace.
OPEN
-44%
-59%
-29%
-50%
-41%
https://managementhelp.org/
https://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&sl=auto&tl=destinat
ion_language&u=https://managementhelp.org/organizationalcha
nge/index.htm#anchor317286
https://www.facebook.com/FreeMgmtLibrary
https://www.twitter.com/FreeMgmtLibrary
https://www.linkedin.com/company/authenticity-consulting-llc
http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&pubid=ra-

24. 4dbb234049ac109b
https://managementhelp.org/organizationalchange/index.htm#
https://managementhelp.org/organizationalchange/index.htm#
https://managementhelp.org/organizationalchange/index.htm#
https://managementhelp.org/aboutfml/how-to-use-it.htm
https://managementhelp.org/blogs/form-to-provide-feedback/
https://managementhelp.org/books/list-of-books.htm
https://managementhelp.org/guides/meet-your-guides.htm
https://managementhelp.org/aboutfml/social-media.htm
https://managementhelp.org/
https://managementhelp.org/topics.htm
https://peersupportcircles.org/
https://managementhelp.org/personaldevelopment/lear ning/how-
to-design-your-learning-plan.htm
https://managementhelp.org/generalresources/blog-
directories.htm
https://managementhelp.org/generalresources/free-trainings.htm
https://managementhelp.org/generalresources/jobs.htm
https://managementhelp.org/generalresources/free-online-
groups.htm
https://managementhelp.org/generalresources/help.htm
https://managementhelp.org/generalresources/free-online-
newsletters.htm
https://managementhelp.org/generalresources/references.htm
https://managementhelp.org/generalreso urces/supersites.htm
https://managementhelp.org/#yourself
https://managementhelp.org/#leadership
https://managementhelp.org/#entrepreneurship
https://managementhelp.org/#products
https://managementhelp.org/#sales
https://managementhelp.org/#employees
https://managementhelp.org/#finances
https://managementhelp.org/#capstone
https://managementhelp.org/#consulting

25. See a video about where consultants
should focus, where clients should focus,
where projects should focus and core
components of change plans. From the
Consultants Development Institute.
Shared values represent the overall priorities in how
the organization chooses to operate. The six outer
circles include “strategy,” “structure,” “systems,” “skills,”
“staff” and “style.” The point of the model is that an
effective organization has to accomplish a fit between
all seven S’s, and to realize that a change in any one of
the seven dimensions will effect a change in all others.
Strategy is the overall direction of the organization and
how it is going to follow that direction. Structure is the
organization of the company, defining its roles and lines
of authority. Systems include the processes and
procedures that guide day-to-day activities in the
organization. These three are the hard S’s.
Skills are the capabilities of the organization. Staff
includes the organization’s people and how their
expertise is utilized. Style is how the organization is
led. These three are the soft S’s.
McKinsey 7S Framework
Various Additional Models
Examples of Organizational Performance Management
Systems
Strategic Management (systematic, explicit
implementation of a strategic plan)
Plan Do Check Act (this approach also is quite common)
Lewin's Freeze Phases

26. McKinsey 7S Model
Kotter 8-Step Model
Bridge's Transition Model
Embedding Adaptive Change
Prosci ADKAR
Major Roles During Successful
Organizational Change
The process of organizational change can include a
variety of key roles. These roles can be filled by various
individuals or teams at various times during the change
process. Sometimes, individuals or teams can fill more
than one role.
Change Initiator
It is conventional wisdom among organizational
development consultants that successful change is
often provoked by a deep “hurt” or crisis in the
organization, for example, dramatic reduction in sales,
loss of a key leader in the organization, warnings from
a major investor, or even actions of a key competitor. It
is not uncommon then that someone inside the
organization reacts to that deep hurt and suggests the
need for a major change effort. Often the person who
initiates the change is not the person who becomes the
primary change agent.
Change …
SHORT PAPER
RESISTING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE

27. Resisting Organizational Change
http://dx.doi.org/10.3991/ijac.v8i1.4432
G. Andersson
Østfold University College, Fredrikstad, Norway
Abstract—We are continuously reminded of how change
induces controversy and resistance, regardless of support.
We repeatedly experience resistance in difficulties of im-
plementation, little progress, and poor results, rather than
increased productivity as anticipated. In a detailed account
of how change plays out, a mosaic of what resistance looks
like emerges. The picture is both familiar and absolutely
concrete, and challenges the structural assumptions and
dichotomies on support and resistance in an organization.
The findings invite technologies, people, actions, practices
and materiality to the discussions on support and resistance.
Index Terms—Change Management, Lean Operations,
Actor-Network Theory, Resistance.
I. INTRODUCTION
Lean literature emphasizes the importance of top man-
agement support [1]–[3], but we are continuously remind-
ed how change, like introducing Lean operations into an
organization, induces controversy and resistance regard-
less of initial support. We repeatedly experience resistance
in difficulties of implementation, little progress, and poor
results rather than increased productivity as anticipated
[4].
Literature has introduced concepts like force and fric-
tion [5] to account for resistance. Concepts borrowed from
physics to illustrate interactions between related objects,

28. given both positive and negative influence on change.
Other approaches include attention and awareness to con-
troversies and alliances, and concepts like the sociology of
translation [6], [7]. These, and related concepts, do have
extended impact in academic discourse, but fail to be
noticed within the field of Lean Operations. They fail, I
will argue, because the generic and abstract concepts and
metaphors disconnect theory from people, materiality,
practices, and processes on the Gemba (the real place),
and in the workplaces. They fail to prove to be relevant.
This simple line of arguments challenges our under-
standing of what is going on, and motivates the question:
What does resistance look like in a change project?
The renewed focus on events and processes in the
workplaces is important, because it invites technologies,
people, actions, practices and materiality to the discussion.
II. METHOD AND MATERIAL
The problem statement suggests a more concrete ap-
proach to change; not looking at change as a structural or
ideological issue, but looking at concrete events and con-
tributions to change in the making.
The methodological approach in this study draws on the
perspectives on construction of facts, and assembly of
technologies and practices found in the works of Bruno
Latour, John Law, Michel Callon and others - part of what
is known as Actor-Network Theory (ANT) [8]–[14].
This descriptive, but analytical, approach is about open-
ing up the black box of change. It requires looking at the
processes leading up to the changes, as opposed to the end
product or result alone. It is about contributing to an in-

29. creased sensitivity towards the practices and processes of
change.
The framework introduces actors based not on catego-
ries, but on actions and contributions. Removing the cate-
gories implies removing the presumptions of the special
nature of someone, or something, and introduces the same
theoretical framework and concepts for all actors. This
may be a challenging position, but it is also rewarding,
because it enables us to treat different elements in the
project as parts of the same instead of unrelated parts of
different theoretical frameworks, levels or domains. Treat-
ing all actors within the same framework makes it possible
to build an awareness and sensitivity based on findings
excluded from the literature criticized earlier.
The starting point is the implementation of Lean Opera-
tions in a manufacturing company in Norway. The reader
who is unfamiliar with Lean could think of it as a method-
ological effort to improve quality in production based on
removing waste in a broad understanding, and optimizing
flow of goods and information. Lean operations represent
a radical change in both design, and practices of produc-
tion in most factories.
“The Assembly of Lean production” [15] analyzes, in
depth, the making of the project, practices, and processes,
but the data and analysis also represent great opportunities
to explore resistance in a change project in more detail.
III. RESULTS
A. Background
The development project was organized in three phases,
over a period of almost three years. The first phase target-

30. ed the mapping of work processes and organizational
culture, identifying pitfalls and bottlenecks in the value
stream. The second phase targeted measures and activities
for the selected pitfalls and bottlenecks, and the third
phase targeted the implementation and continuous evalua-
tion of measures chosen.
In the first phase, work was concentrated in the project
team with regular meetings approximately every fourteen
days. In the second phase, the work opened up to involve
a broader group, including operators in the factory, and
other actors identified in the production process mapping.
This way the project went through a major metamorpho-
sis. What had been a project of a small number of individ-
uals, choosing to take part, became a project involving
“everyone”, including outside services, and departments.
In the third phase, the project went from ideas and plans,
to radical changes in the way to do production.
48 http://www.i-jac.org
SHORT PAPER
RESISTING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
B. The Quality Management System (QMS)
The quality system (QMS) got an important role in the
project. It became the major official source of data on the
progress of the project, but, early on, it also became a
symbol of change from the old way of doing production.
None of these roles were naturally given or passively
acquired; they proved to be an effect of the contributions
from many actors over a long time.

31. Seen from the workplace, and a user driven perspective,
the old QMS had an irrelevant and insignificant role in the
way of doing production, because it was isolated from the
operators in production. There was no IT hardware availa-
ble on the Gemba. Operators had neither access to the
system, nor training in the use of the system. It was not
experienced as a part of the way to do production. In ret-
rospect the picture is somewhat different. Yes, seen from a
user-driven perspective, it can be argued that the QMS
was not part of the way to do production, but it can be
argued, that this is not what the QMS is about. The factory
had a working, well-established QMS, and procedures for
using it. It was an electronic system supplemented with
hard copies, where complaints and divergences were re-
ported on paper, and handed in to the production manager.
The production manager did a quality check, and regis-
tered the data in the electronic system. This way it was
very much part of the way to do production, and illustrat-
ed the task and role sharing in the factory. The old QMS
represented and inscribed hierarchical and hegemonic
practices that were part of the way to do production in the
factory. The old QMS was a tool to set major economic
differences between departments, but not a tool for mak-
ing continuous improvements.
C. Introducing Lean Operations
The practical and ideological gap between the old and
new QMS is illustrated in the ratio of divergences versus
complaints (about 1:1 in 2007). In a Lean perspective the
number should be at least 3:1-- the higher ratio the better--
indicating an approach to production that identifies and
stops the defects before they end up as complaints, and
economic losses.

32. The Lean rhetoric of flow and waste, and continuous
work improvements introduced [16], put the role of the
QMS on the agenda. It became essential to know details
and facts behind the waste in order to develop measures to
address the problems in a systematic way.
The project team decided October 10, 2007 to “Include
the QMS in the project. Start the process of redesigning
the databases to better reflect the actual challenges. Make
the QMS a central tool in local development of produc-
tion”. But it was not until November 19, 2008 that the
“The hardware is in place. Training of all employees at the
department is completed and the use of QMA (QMS) and
AS400 is in progress. Evaluation and possible follow -up
of training remains”.
The redesign included a new scheme that allowed oper-
ators to access the system; new and improved procedures;
and new layouts to increase the diagnostic features of the
system. New roles were created to establish a new work-
flow where everything didn’t go to the manager, but in-
stead was directed to operators responsible.
Now, the main users in the QMS are the ones doing the
different tasks in production. The operators write and
update the procedures, file and respond to divergences and
complaints. The effects are actual changes of practice, and
not only in the rhetorics which is illustrated in reduced
numbers of procedures, increasing ratio of divergences
versus complaints, and sources of defects identified.
D. Filaments of Resistance
The time gap illustrates the many obstacles, and the re-
sistance to changes taking place. At the same time, it was

33. a project with strong support from top management, pro-
duction managers, and the trade union. The project team
experienced this blend of resistance and support as a para-
dox, and a source of much frustration.
The analysis establishes both the old and new QMS as
pieces of technology that inscribe and support certain
ways of doing production. This way the analysis implies
the coexistence of multiple ways of doing production in
the factory and explains the heterogeneities of resistance,
and support observed. A resistance not linked to individu-
als, but to practices inscribed in technologies, procedures,
structures, training, and schemes of doing production.
The first resistance identified were the factory rules on
denying operators access to the QMS. The factory rules
and procedures were clear, in a way, but, at the same time,
there had been a development project on production effi -
ciency in a different department that had been allowed to
bypass the procedures and grant the operators access to
hardware and training in the QMS. That project had im-
proved the efficiency significantly in the department in
question, and left a door open for us to use.
The second resistance identified was missing IT hard-
ware on the shop floor. Rules or not, no computers were
initially available for the operators to use according to the
Lean Operations plan.
The third resistance identified was missing training.
The QMS was a complex system based on Lotus Domino
databases requiring training and skills to be used effective-
ly. This was not in place.
The fourth resistance identified was infrastructure. The
project team was informed by internal IT support that the

34. present network infrastructure made it impossible to use
the system because the bandwidth was inadequate for our
use. The location of the factory, and the network infra-
structure, further made it impossible to increase the band-
width to the level required. Since we already had a work-
ing connection for the production manager, the bandwidth
requirements were challenged, and after much back and
forth, a solution was established based on our local needs,
and not a general access to all the intranet services.
IV. DISCUSSIONS
A. What Did Resistance Look Like?
This project had espoused practical, and financial sup-
port. At the same time, the obstacles were many, as was
the resistance exemplified in the QMS, and illustrated in
the long time it took to establish the new QMS and prac-
tices. In a situation like this, it is easy speculate about
blame. In retrospect, this was not about blame at all. It was
about a much stronger, and more serious opponent. It was
not about trying to convince a person or a group. Findings
suggest that the stronghold of the resistance was among
others who preferred the old QMS, and their allies who
were embedded in those methods of production, and in-
scribed in the associated technology and practices, and
work organization established.
iJAC ‒ Volume 8, Issue 1, 2015 49
SHORT PAPER
RESISTING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE

35. The new QMS produced and interrelated what we could
think of as emissaries [6, pp. 251–254] that aligned the
network of procedures, schemes, technological infrastruc-
ture, and trained people.. The emissaries inscribed the new
way to do production, and made the QMS become an
apparatus that materialized our understanding of Lean
Operations, in electronic documents and procedures, act-
ing as agents sent on a mission to represent the project,
making it possible for the project’s ideas to become both
mobile and in compliance with our understanding. This
way, the quality system goes from a neutral artifact, unin-
teresting and forgotten, to a biased actor, taking part in
how the changes transform the way to do production.
The analysis and discussions on the assembly of the
new QMS bring forward the strange relationship between
resistance and support. Not as an individual “problem”
(even if that could be a part of the challenge, of course),
but as an effect of another actor-network present in the
factory. This way, it is not, anymore, about the dichotomy
of support or resistance, but both at the same time. We
will have to anticipate resistance in the presence of strong
support, as in our case. This acknowledgement links re-
sistance to technologies, practice, and the materiality, and
address the “strange” example of someone supporting the
project, while at the same time, being part of a practice
that resists the project, showed in the analysis of the new
QMS.
The heterogeneity of resistance and support illustrates
how it is no longer about management support, it is about
the way to do production and the materiality and the peo-
ple part of these practices. We have to anticipate a multi -
plicity of rationalities, discourses or actor-networks shar-
ing the same space in the factory especially in a period of
changes.

36. The heterogeneity of resistance and support also con-
fronts us with someone we know, when we try to answer
the question about what resistance looks like. Resistance
looks like our own factory, technologies, software, proce-
dures, training, schemes and people. It is us. To cite Pogo:
"We have met the enemy and he is us." [17].
B. Introducing a Metaphor to Understand Resistance
It is argued that the resistance was not about individuals
trying to “sabotage” the project, but about the presence of
another actor-network, embedded and entangled in the
materiality of the factory. It was an actor-network in many
ways like the one we were assembling. The factory was
therefore, not a tabula rasa, but full of actors already mak-
ing up a network. To make it even more challenging, this
“other” thinking was inscribed in many of the structures
and technologies in the factory. It was not about convinc-
ing individuals with rational or emotional arguments, but
about challenging technologies, practices, and the way we
do production. It was, therefore, not only about assem-
bling Lean Operations in an empty room, but about as-
sembling something stronger, better, more significant, and
more relevant than that already present.
The factory was not an empty place for us to “transfer”
our new QMS and related practices. The landscape was
already full of actors assembling a strong network, and
our biggest error was to treat it as empty, and virgin. It
was like trying to teach students about force and momen-
tum in physics, without taking into account all the concep-
tions about these, and related, phenomena already in the
heads of the kids. We met resistance from the already
established framework and practices, that, from the project

37. perspective, seemed like misconceptions. Neither the
factory, nor the kids are tabula rasa. We better take that
into account when trying to introduce a competing con-
ceptual framework and practice even if the space seems
empty.
The new network was assembled in the presence of, and
in competition with, the already established practices. The
metaphor of learning and misconceptions is used to ill us-
trate the resistance in the factory, and the presence of an
alternative actor-network.This was a resistance not based
on rational individuals to be convinced, but on practices
inscribed in the way to do production, and therefore, a
much stronger opponent.
Resistance becomes a passive, as opposed to an active
process. The practical implications are seen as part of
introducing the new way to do production, and in how to
make it stick. As part of the new way to do production,
this understanding presents the existence of alternative
practices, already part of the materiality in the factory.
That can be in the way the work is organized, the proce-
dures established, the economical scorecard in the compa-
ny and embedded in technologies and software in use. To
establish something new is not about establishing some-
thing on a tabula rasa. It is the opposite; to establish some-
thing in parallel and competition with something already
in place. To establish something new is then about recruit-
ing allies from within the people and materiality of the
factory. This way, it also becomes easier to build on and
not compete with local knowledge, know-how, machines,
and experiences in the factory, as they are seen as possible
allies. The commitment and contribution from the actors is
the key to establishing the way to do production; the same
way the project cannot live without the commitment and
contributions of those who have created it. It means, that if

38. the project fails, it is because the individuals, technolo-
gies, and structures in the factory have abandoned it.
REFERENCES
[1] T. !no, Taiichi Ohno’s workplace management, Special
100th
birthday ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill, 2013.
[2] W. E. Deming, Out of the crisis!: quality, productivity, and
com-
petitive position. Cambridge Cambridgeshire; Cambridge,
Mass.:
Cambridge University Press; Massachusetts Institute of
Technolo-
gy, Center for Advanced Engineering Technology, 1986.
[3] J. K. Liker, The Toyota way!: 14 management principles
from the
world’s greatest manufacturer. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2004.
[4] L. Rubrich, How to Prevent Lean Implementation Failures:
10
Reasons Why Failures Occur (Making Companies Globally
Com-
petitive). WCM Associates, 2004.
[5] H. Håkansson and A. Waluszewski, “Co-evolution in
technologi-
cal development. The role of friction,” Sinergie Riv. Studi E
Ric.,
no. 58, 2011.
[6] M. Callon, “Some elements of a sociology of translation
domesti-
cation of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieux Bay,” i n

39. Power, Action and Belief. A new Sociology of Knowledge?, J.
Law, Ed. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986, pp. 196–233.
[7] M. Callon, “Actor-Network Theory - The Market Test,” in
Actor
Network Theory and After, J. Law and J. Hassard, Eds.
Blackwell
Publishers, 1999.
[8] B. Latour, Laboratory life: the construction of scientific
facts, 2nd
ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1979.
[9] B. Latour, Science in action!: how to follow scientists and
engi-
neers through society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press,
1987.
[10] B. Latour, The Pasteurization of France. Cambridge Mass.:
Har-
vard University Press, 1988.
50 http://www.i-jac.org
SHORT PAPER
RESISTING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
[11] B. Latour, Aramis or the love of technology, 4. print.
Cambridge
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002.
[12] W. Bijker and J. Law, Shaping Technology / Building
Society:

40. Studies in Sociotechnical Change. The MIT Press, 1992.
[13] J. Law, “Actor Network Theory and Material Semiotics,” in
The
New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory, B. S. Turner, Ed.
Blackwell Publishing, 2008.
[14] M. Callon, Acting in an uncertain world!: an essay on
technical
democracy. Cambridge: Mit Press, 2011.
[15] G. Andersson, The assembly of lean production: an
analysis of
doing production improvements. Trondheim: Norwegian
Universi-
ty of Science and Technology, 2011.
[16] M. Imai, Gemba Kaizen: a commonsense approach to
continuous
improvement strategy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012.
[17] Z. Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust. Cambridge, UK;
Mal-
don, MA, USA: Polity Press, 1989.
[18] M. Foucault, Discipline and punish!: the birth of the
prison. New
York: Vintage Books, 1979.
[19] S. Lysgaard, Arbeiderkollektivet, vol. 5. oppl. Oslo:
Universi-
tetsforlaget, 1981.
[20] W. Kelly, Pogo: we have met the enemy and he is us.
Simon and
Schuster, 1972.

41. AUTHORS
Dr. G. Andersson is with Østfold University College,
Fredrikstad, Norway (e-mail: [email protected]).
This work was supported in part by The Research Council of
Norway
and Østfold County Council as part of the Program for Regional
R&D
and Innovation (VRI). Submitted, January 31, 2015. Published
as resub-
mitted by the author 10 March 2015.
iJAC ‒ Volume 8, Issue 1, 2015 51
Copyright of International Journal of Advanced Corporate
Learning is the property of
International Association of Online Engineering and its content
may not be copied or emailed
to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.
197
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1

42. JAN SKALIK
Prof. Eng. Jan Skalik
University of Zielona Góra
JAN SKALIK
Strategic orientation
in change management
and using it when
designing a company’s
development
1. Introduction
The growth and development of a company
is closely related to the need to implement
changes in its management system. Their
implementation is the expression of the
internal organizational movement the course
of which depends on a number of external
and internal conditions. A particular role
in the collection of the latter is played by
managerial orientation valid within the
company. Its content is the expression of the
preference of objectives, values and features
of the management system making it possible
for the business organization to become
distinct in its environment. The growth and
development of a company is the expression
of a consistent and logical implementation of
a string of positive changes resulting from
the adopted managerial orientation which

43. is the representation of the basic, distinctive
features a company’s management system
should have, the values and principles it
should be focused on and what conditions it
should meet. The growth and development
of a company require a simultaneous
observance of a number of orientations,
especially: pro-market, pro-quality, strategic,
ISSN 1429-9321
DOI:
10.1515/manment-2015-0034
198
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
Strategic orientation in change management
and using it when designing a company’s
development
focused on knowledge and focused on changes (Lichtarski
2010). A particular
role in the collection of the orientations referred to above is
played by the
orientation on changes because its implementation guarantees
the achievement
of benefi ts resulting from following the recommendations of
other approaches
to company management. It also plays an integrating role

44. towards all
managerial orientations. The mechanism of activating positive
changes in the
organization, which constitute the condition for achieving
results confi rming
the growth and development of a company, is found within the
structure of
the management system, especially in the content of regulatory
mechanisms.
They are responsible for generating adaptation and anticipation
changes,
ensuring the achievement of a new level in the organization’s
general balance,
which is not only the condition but also the confi rmation of
development
processes. The presence of regulatory mechanisms is also the
confi rmation
of the dialectic theory of organizational development and
changes in the
organization (Krzakiewicz 2012, p. 35), according to which its
existence in
a pluralistic world of confl icting events, forces or contradictory
values leads
to an internal confrontation. It results in creative synthesis in
the form
of a positive change. The orientation profi le of a company’s
management
covers not only the regulatory mechanisms but also the
remaining elements
of the management system, which also include: values and
objectives,
structures and regulations as well as methods and practice of
management
(Skalik, Bełz 2007, p. 16). Components of the management
system include
factors shaping the organization’s potential for change. The

45. strategic
orientation of a company’s management enables their activation
and the
implementation of changes supporting the achievement of its
long-term
development objectives. The purpose of this paper is to defi ne
the essence of
the strategic approach in change management and to identify its
role in the
process of creating the development strategy as well as a
program enabling the
achievement of its long-term objectives. The content of the
article is the result
of a critical analysis of the literature and the author’s own refl
ections.
2. Strategic orientation in change management
Strategic orientation in change management in a company
derives from the
general strategy which has a comprehensive impact on all areas
and forms of its
activities. The general strategy seen as a model of the
organization’s development
defi nes the way in which the target image resulting from the
company’s vision
is achieved. Most often, however, this image differs from
reality, and the
199
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1

46. JAN SKALIK
revealed differences become a stimulus for internal
organizational movement,
the content of which includes changes of a great degree,
requiring not only great
outlays but also a longer time. These changes result from the
company’s policy
and general strategy (fi gure 1). The company’s policy, to which
little attention
is devoted in the literature on the subject, expresses the global
vision of the
functioning and perception of a business organization (Galata
2004, p. 50) in the
convention of a game in which it plays the role of an actor of
economic and social
life (Strategor 2001, p. 16). Adopting this method of perceiving
the organization
makes it possible not only to learn the conditions for its
operation but also to
explain the mechanism of its previous behavior as well as
predict and focus its
future actions, which is signifi cant when designing future
changes. Strategic
orientation in change management expresses the approach of
people managing
the internal organizational movement to initiate, design and
implement
changes depending on the company’s situation. The content of
this approach
largely depends on the business organization’s strategic location
subject to
changes. The nature and the method of executing internal
transformations in
a non-sustainable organization at risk of a downfall will be

47. different than in
the case of a company with a strong strategic position and great
potential for
development. The deliberations contained in this paper relate to
the selection of
a strategy of change management in a company focused on
development, and
not on overcoming crises. Therefore, the implementation of a
string of changes
of a reactive and anticipatory nature is the expression of the
organization’s
internal dynamics. Reactive changes are the response to signals
coming both
from the organization’s interior and from its environment. Each
type of change
listed here may have a pro-development impact and be
perceived as a sign of
the organization’s development. Reactive changes that not only
eliminate the
revealed problems of internal functioning but are also the
expression of the use
of new ideas and new knowledge in a manner ensuring a growth
in the business
organization’s competitiveness may be of great value for the
stimulation of
the company’s development. Anticipatory changes, the
introduction of which
is inspired by the results of long-term forecasts regarding the
course of key
phenomena in the organization’s environment, are a particularly
valuable
element of the internal organizational movement. Although they
are burdened
with greater risk, they create the possibility to achieve a greater
and more
permanent success. However, transformation changes are the

48. most important
for the company’s development because they relate to the
strategic level.
They are characterized by the greatest radicalism. They include
not only
important transformations of a structural or process-related
nature, but they
200
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
Strategic orientation in change management
and using it when designing a company’s
development
apply also to the philosophy of management and directions of
the managers’
thinking. Strategic orientation in theoretical studies on change
management
in organizations is mainly associated with the sphere of making
decisions on
changes and selecting its content and the method of
implementation. This is
confi rmed by the proposal from P. Gilbert (1988, p. 21) who
distinguishes four
types of the strategy of changes in organizations: conservative,
rational, focused
on people and comprehensive. None of them contains
recommendations that

49. could be associated with the long-term development of a
company. Some of
them, especially the conservative strategy, are of a backward
nature because
they treat change in the organization as a source of potential
threats and
related risk. Only certain pro-development elements may be
found in the
strategy focused on people because the recommendations
contained in it may
improve the company’s development capacity by maintaining
positive relations
between participants of the organization and achieving
behavioral rationality.
Some authors associate the strategic aspects of changing the
organization with
the process of implementing change projects, differentiating the
strategies
depending on their scope, concentration of resources and
measures, initiatives
as well as achieved results (Masłyk–Musiał 2003, p. 57). This
made it possible
to separate the following strategies of implementing changes:
striking,
continuous, top-down, emerging, managerial, common, clear
and fuzzy.
The connection between the content of these strategies with the
issue of the
company’s development may be seen only in the case of the
striking strategy,
also known as the jumping strategy as well as the continuous
strategy. The
striking strategy requires strengthening in the concentration of
resources and
measures, high intensity of actions modifying the current
condition of the

50. organization the further maintenance of which may threaten the
company’s
existence. As a result, it is recommended for unbalanced
organizations. Pro-
development trains in this strategy may be noticed only in the
case of these
companies that have a considerable strategic potential and that
wish to use the
emerging or expected opportunities in the environment.
The pro-development perception of the internal organizational
movement
has a relatively short history because the domination of classi c
trends in the
theory of management made it possible to perceive stability as a
particular
value which was treated as the guarantee for the preservation of
the internal
organizational order. The emergence of the idea of balancing
the organization
(Koźmiński, Obłój 1989), in which the need to balance between
opposite states of
stability and change was treated as the source of an increase in
the current and
long-term effectiveness, created a new perspective for the
intensifi cation of the
201
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
JAN SKALIK

51. company’s internal dynamics. Although management practice
prefers changes
focused on the growth in current effectiveness, the growing
turbulence in the
environment increasingly stimulates the implementation of
changes ensuring
the achievement of long-term effects strictly related to the
development of the
company. The capacity and ease in making changes has become
a key category
in managing contemporary organizations. It is identifi ed with
the organization’s
fl exibility which should be treated not only as a form of
response to external
processes taking place in the company’s environment but also as
a value which
should be respected in order for development to occur.
However, effective
management of the organization’s development requires the
adjustment of the
content and method of introducing changes to development
plans which is
associated with the necessity to conduct strategic accumulation
in managing the
company’s development.
3. Strategic accumulation in managing the company’s
development
The development of a company is a holistic and long-term
process of
a strategic nature. Its bases are formed by changes in particular
elements

52. 202
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
Strategic orientation in change management
and using it when designing a company’s
development
of the organizational system as well as in the method of the
implementation
of particular management functions. . The essence of these
changes is often
identifi ed with the process of creative destruction of the
existing organizational
balance. Defi ning the content of the company’s development
does not have a
uniform nature. Authors representing the qualitative trend share
a belief that
the essence of the organization’s development consists in the
implementation of
positive changes in its management system and functioning that
provide new
features to the entire organizational system. Achieving these
features should
be equivalent to the increase in the organization’s ability to
pursue the assumed
objectives. Their identifi cation may be of a multi-dimensional
nature and it
may relate to those aspects of the company’s functioning that
are of a critical
importance for pursuing its objectives and the preservation of

53. the expected ability
to develop. The features referred to above relate to the
following dimensions:
economic, organizational, personal, information and technical -
production. The
problem of strategic orientation in change management
perceived in the context
of the company’s development processes is strictly related to
the organizational
dimension which, among others, refers to the company’s
management
system structure, the behavior of human teams and information
resources.
Transformations in this dimension, related to the development
of a business
organization, involve (Stabryła 2014, pp. 173-184):
roduction factors,
functioning,
Changes taking place in the organizational aspect need to
consistently conform
to the company’s general strategy. As a result, managing its
development
requires a strategic accumulation of the development strategy as
well as the
strategy of change management in the space designated by the
company’s
general strategy (fi gure 2). This means that the adopted
strategy of development

54. needs to take into account restrictions resulting from the general
strategy, while
the strategy of change management should respect the
recommendations of
the company’s adopted development strategy, which is refl
ected in the content
and the method of implementing development changes. The
direct effect on
the content of the change management strategy has the form of
the company’s
203
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
JAN SKALIK
adopted development strategy. The theory of strategic
management provides
a number of model behaviors of a business organization focused
on development.
As a result, development strategies may be divided with the use
of three criteria:
content, direction and method of development (Światowiec-
Szczepańska 2011,
p. 275). Four strategies may be identifi ed using the content
criterion of the
strategies: growth, stabilization, withdrawal (defensive) and
diversity (combined
strategies). The impact of the development strategy on the
content and the
method of implementing changes in the company is most clearly

55. noticed in the
case of the growth strategy, which involves market expansion
and investment
as well as the extension of the scale of activities. Adopting this
strategy requires
the introduction of radical transformations of a structural and
technological
nature, which are accompanied by the use of new management
methods.
In this case we are most often dealing with the striking strategy
of change
management, which involves a high concentration of resources
and measures
as well as a considerable intensifi cation of modifying actions
with a high level
of innovativeness, which serves as the mechanism fostering the
growth in the
company’s value and accelerating its particular functions. We
are then dealing
with development through innovations, which consists in
creating new and
original solutions in various areas of the company’s activities
expressing new
204
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
Strategic orientation in change management
and using it when designing a company’s

56. development
quality. These solutions also include organizational innovations
of a structural,
methodical or information nature.
Links between development strategies and strategic orientation
in change
management are also noticed in the case of defensive strategies
related to
disinvestment and limiting the scope of activities. Changes
leading to reducing
the organizational system and reducing the costs of the
company’s functioning
are then preferred. Using this strategy is typical of
organizations affected by
crises where radical internal transformations are the condition
for survival. Their
introduction is also associated with great time pressure, which
is of priority in
change management. Changes are then made with great intensity
and in a short
period of time. The impact of development strategies on change
management in
large business organizations using combined development
strategies, namely
ones referring to particular units and business areas, may be
observed in the
content and the method of implementing single organizational
projects. They
may be of a different nature in particular modules of a lar ge
organization but
they should result in the growth in revenues and in the reduction
in operating
costs. The company’s development activities perceived from the
perspective of

57. strategic management may have the form of restructuring or
innovative actions
implemented in a short or a long period of time. Projects of
changes of a short-
term nature relate to operating activities and are of smaller
signifi cance for
the company’s long-term development. However, development
projects strictly
related to innovations, both in technical and organizational
terms, confi rm this
development. This group of projects includes organizational
innovations in the
form of designs of modern organizational structures,
information management
systems or quality assurance. Managing this type of projects
requires the
observance of the convention of strategic approach and the
adaptation of the
change management process to the requirements of the general
strategy.
This requirement should be met by building and implementing a
program of
development changes in the company.
4. The structure of building and implementing the program of
development
changes in the company
Managing the company’s development should lead to progress
in all spheres
of its activities. This progress is manifested by the
implementation of changes
of a various nature, including organizational and economic
changes. Their
content is formed in a complex process of designing the
program of development

58. changes (fi gure 3). Its creation begins from typical analytical
works and studies
205
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
JAN SKALIK
usually conducted in order to design the company’s general
strategy. Therefore,
it is necessary to conduct its strategic analysis which requires
not only the
identifi cation of the company’s competitive profi le but also
the evaluation of its
material and intangible resources from the strategic aspect,
which is a necessary
condition to formulate a strategic diagnosis. Its content contains
recommendations
regarding the company’s strengths and weaknesses. Knowing
these identifi ed
features of a business organization, it is possible to build not
only the general
strategy but also a model of the organization’s development.
The scope of
the company’s strategic analysis usually covers areas assigned
to its material
functions, such as: marketing, fi nance, management, personnel
management,
technology or production. In order to create the company’s
development strategy,
it is particularly valuable to identify its strengths found in

59. unique resources
making it possible to obtain a long-term competitive advantage.
Disclosing the
company’s weaknesses also has strategic signifi cance for its
development because
it enables changes ensuring the elimination of active barriers for
development.
Determining the company’s general strategy as well as its
development strategy
also requires the assessment of the environment in which it
operates as well as the
prediction of the confi guration of phenomena and trends of
crucial importance
for its future. The problem in this case is the clear
determination which expected
events and trends are of favorable signifi cance for development
and which may
be the source of active limitations. The identifi cation of the
existing and expected
opportunities and threats in the company’s environment is thus
the basis not
only for building the general strategy but also for determining
the company’s
future directions of development as well as the methods for
their successful
implementation. Analytical works conducted in connection with
the evaluation
of the organization’s opportunities and threats should take into
account a wide
context of its functioning and include not only the narrowly
understood space
associated with the market and the sector but also these
phenomena that take
place in the further environment. As a result, it is possible to
reveal and use these
opportunities and threats for the company’s development that

60. may be found
in particular segments of the macroenvironment and have
various conditions
of the following nature: economic, legal, political, technical,
demographic and
social.
The strategic analysis of the company and its environment
opens the way to
formulate the general strategy the essence of which may be defi
ned in various
manners. Different approaches in this respect exist. Some
people treat strategy
as the creation and execution of a plan of action. Others see its
essence as the
position towards the environment. Some others see it as a
pattern of action of
206
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
Strategic orientation in change management
and using it when designing a company’s
development
the organization perceived as a collection of rules and ways of
responding to
problems and phenomena taking place in it and in the external
environment.

61. The company’s development aspects in the content of
formulated defi nitions of
strategy are clearly stressed in the defi nitions by R.L. Ackoff
and A.D. Chandler.
According to the former, strategy applies to long-term
objectives and methods
of achieving them affecting the system as a whole (Ackoff
1974, p. 29), while
according to A.D. Chandler (1962, p. 13), it determines long-
term objectives and
directions of action as well as such method of resource
allocation that enables
their fulfi llment. Not all general strategies defi ne actions confi
rming their
development nature. Organizations endangered with a crisis or
experiencing
a crisis see survival as the main purpose of their activities. The
development
nature of the general strategy results in the fact that its content
becomes
a source of inspiration in the process of building the program of
development
changes as well as determining the manner of their
implementation contained
in the company’s development strategy. The content of the
strategy, in turn,
affects not only the content of expected changes but also the
approach to their
implementation, expressed in the adopted strategy of change
management. The
company’s development potential plays a particular role in the
complex system
of actions related to designing and implementing development
changes in the
company. It is the expression of internal possibilities regarding
the creation and

62. implementation of positive changes signifying progress in the
organization. The
possibilities referred to above are found in owned tangible, fi
nancial resources
as well as in human and structural capital. A particular role in
shaping the
company’s development possibilities is played by its structural
capital which
consists of (Pietruszka-Ortyl 2007, p. 81):
The managerial infrastructure, formed by: the company’s
organizational
structure, its strategy, the applied systems of operation, the
implemented
processes and the way they are executed as well as the owned
intellectual
resources, is the expression of possessed internal possibilities
regarding the
initiation and implementation of positive changes. The level of
relational capital
as well as the pro-development nature of certain types of
organizational culture
plays an inspiring role in this process. The exploration and the
creative culture
have such power. The impact of relational capital on the
development of the
company is the expression of the use external mechanisms and
the environment’s
207

63. Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
JAN SKALIK
energy to initiate and implement positive changes originating
from cooperation
relations as well as organizational concentration. The pro-
development impact
of cooperation relations may be observed especially in strategic
alliances,
consortia, corporate businesses, franchise organizations,
clusters, joint venture
organizations as well as in associations. The active impact of
organizational
concentration on development of the company based on the
effect of synergy
208
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
Strategic orientation in change management
and using it when designing a company’s
development
is confi rmed by such phenomena in the organizational world as
mergers or

64. takeovers as well as the experience of corporate businesses,
conglomerates and
holding companies. The practice of Polish companies in recent
years shows
that development effects may be achieved not only by way of
concentration but
also by way of an opposite process, namely the separation of
separate business
entities from companies previously operating in the form of
groups. This is
a form of response to the negative effects of growing
organizations in which
the benefi ts of size are eliminated by the growing costs of
coordination at an
advanced degree of their development.
The fi nal effect of the impact of the company’s development
potential, its
general strategy and the strategy of change management on the
fi nal content of
the internal dynamics of a business organization is its program
of development.
It is a collection of organizational-managerial projects the
implementation of
which, according to the adopted strategy of change
management, guarantees
the achievement of a higher level of internal balance, the
achievement of
strategic objectives confi rming the company’s development, the
increase
in its competitiveness and the improvement in the strategi c
location in its
environment.
5. Conclusion

65. The majority of business organizations aim at development and
an increase
in their position in the market space and in the entire external
environment.
However, not all companies are successful in achieving these
ambitious objectives.
The reason for these failures is largely found in irregularities
associated with the
creation and implementation of development programs. One of
them is the lack
of respect for the consistency of the company’s general
strategy, the development
strategy as well as the adopted strategy of change management
when building
the company’s development program. The presence of the
consistency referred
to above is the consequence of the phenomenon of the strategic
accumulation
of effects of the adopted management policy, the general
strategy as well as the
change management strategy. The observance of the sequence of
actions and the
conditions enabling the creation of the company’s development
program and
the necessary changes presented in the article seems to be a
reasonable way to
achieve its substantial correctness. The relevance of the
assessment of the course
of future and crucial phenomena in the company’s external
environment is also
very important. The condition for the correctness of
development programs and
their effective implementation is also the use of these forces
and possibilities

66. 209
Management
2016
Vol. 20, No. 1
JAN SKALIK
found in the company’s development potential, especially in its
structural capital.
The article was prepared based on the analysis of secondary
sources, and its
content can be an inspiration for further discussion and research
concerning the
impact of the strategic approach to change management focused
on developing
the company.
Summary
Strategic orientation in change management and using it when
designing the company’s development strategy
Designing the company’s development program is a complex
project in which it is necessary to preserve the logical sequence
of
analytical actions but also to respect the basic factors defi ning
the
correct direction and program of changes. The article presents
the
structure of related design actions as well as the strategic
aspects
of building a program of development changes in the company
resulting not only from its general strategy but also from the
adopted pattern of …

67. Habits as
Change
Levers
By Daniel Denison and Levi Nieminen
Lasting changes must be embedded
deeply within the fabric of an organization.
Changes that don’t “stick” won’t improve
the performance or effectiveness of an
organization. A useful framework for
understanding the deeper human and social
elements of organization change is the
organizational culture perspective.
O
ver 30 years of scholarship has shown
that culture can be either a potential
springboard or a potential barrier to
change within organizations, and that ultimate-
ly, culture is a key driver of business performance
(Sackmann, 2011). Recent advancements in
practice now allow change professionals to use a
well-researched set of tools to diagnose organiza-
tions and to plan interventions to create change.
VOLUME 37/ISSUE 1 — 2014 23

68. ➤
24 PEOPLE & STRATEGY
Embedding Change in
“the Deep Levels of
Culture”
The “iceberg model” is the dominant way of
representing the multiple layers of culture
(Schein, 1985).Above the water’s surface,
artifacts are the visible, tangible manifesta-
tions of culture in various attributes of the
physical workplace. Just below the surface,
espoused values characterize the preferences
and aspirations that are shared within the
organization and which contribute to a
shared sense of identity and meaning. Behav-
ioral norms and work practices also reside
at this level, constituting “the way things are
done around here.” And in the deeper water,
far below the surface, lie the beliefs and
assumptions—the underlying mindsets—
which shape the culture at a fundamental
level and influence its manifestation at all
other layers. Together, these visible and
invisible layers comprise the culture of an
organization (see Exhibit 1).
As a conceptual model, the iceberg creates
an awareness of depth for practitioners, rein-
forcing the idea that much of what drives
behavior in the organization is hidden from
plain view. This, of course, encourages us all

69. to look for those deeper factors, making nec-
essary a set of diagnostic tools and method-
ologies that are up to the task. The iceberg
also focuses the point of change intervention
at the deepest level, at the layer of underlying
beliefs and assumptions. According to the
theory, it is this deepest layer that is the most
consequential for the organization—this is
the part of the iceberg that “sinks the ship”—
and hence where the most crucial action
needs to be focused. Accordingly, change
needs to be embedded at this same depth to
have a lasting impact within the organiza-
tion.
The iceberg model has had a profound influ-
ence on both the academic study of culture
and the way in which practitioners affect
culture change in organizations. This three-
level model has often been interpreted to
suggest that changes must be targeted at one
of the three different levels. Interventions at
the levels of visible behaviors or values are
sometimes downplayed in favor of the points
of leverage that exist in “the deeper levels of
culture.” Because beliefs and assumptions
are cognitive, in that they reside in the mind-
sets of people, th is sug gests the most
impactful interventions ought to be “psy-
chological” in nature. In a practical context,
this frames the intervention in a way that
might either be construed as ‘off limits’ (i.e.,
not modifiable) or “off putting” to business
leaders (i.e., generating skepticism or nega-
tive stereotypes).More importantly, we

70. think it misses an opportunity to address the
targets of change that span across these three
levels emphasized by the iceberg model.
The habits and routines that span these three
levels of culture guide much of what happens
within organizations, yet they have received
little attention from organizational scholars
For the individual, habits are both functional
and, sometimes, problematic. Personal habits
provide structure and constancy, reduce
uncertainty, and free up cognitive resources
for a select number of complex tasks. Habits
can also be dysfunctional, such as when they
are expressed rigidly despite a context mis-
match (i.e., mindlessness) or when individuals
fail to appropriately switch between auto-
matic and effortful behavior (Luis & Sutton,
1991). The powerful effect of personal habits
has been studied in a wide range of situations,
from healthcare to the workplace and com-
petitive sports (e.g., Grant & Schempp, 2013).
Organizations, too, have habits and routines (i.e.,
larger, sequenced bundles of habits) which set them
apart and provide internal structure.
and practitioners. It is here, in these “auto-
matic” and repetitious behaviors that practi-
tioners can find a powerful point of leverage
to affect the change process, deep within
organizations.
Habits: Old and New,
Good and Bad

71. Drawing on neuroscience, Graybiel (2008)
provides a technical definition of habits as the:
sequential, repetitive, motor, or cog-
nitive behaviors elicited by external or
internal triggers that, once released,
can go to completion without con-
stant conscious oversight (p. 361).
Decades of research has shown that habits
are:
• predominantly acquired through experi-
ence and interaction with the environment;
• are repetitious and can become resistant to
change, such as in addiction;
• are performed with little conscious thought
or effort;
• can be elicited by environmental or inter-
nal cues; and finally,
• the expression of habits can be behavioral
or cognitive, such as in habits of thought
(Graybiel, 2008).
Habits also appear and are enacted with
consistency among and within groups of
people, from families to societies. Organiza-
tions, too, have habits and routines (i.e.,
larger, sequenced bundles of habits) which
set them apart and provide internal structure
(Pentland & Feldman, 2003). Habits are
inherently cultural. They reflect all three

72. levels; the underlying assumptions about
“the way we do things around here,” the
values that those assumption represent, and
the visible behavior and artifacts that we can
see in action. Functionally, they capture the
organization’s specific knowledge that has
been created over time and then translate
that knowledge into action in an efficient
way that conserves energy and resources.
Denison, Hooijberg, Lane, and Lief (2012)
developed a useful framework (see Exhibit
2) that puts habits and routines into one of
four categories based on two aspects: good
or bad and old or new. Each combination
calls for a different set of possible actions.
Bad, Old Habits: Unlearn and Leave Behind.
Bad habits are “like chains that are too light to
feel until they are too heavy to carry,” as War-
ren Buffett said. Often, we are too late to
realize how restrictive our old habits have
become and miss the opportunity to do some-
t h i ng ab out t he m . U n le a r n i ng t he s e
well-established habits can be very difficult,
but that is exactly what needs to happen. To
leave behind bad, old habits, organizations
need a clear focus on the areas of consensus
about these targets for change. With a clear
VOLUME 37/ISSUE 1 — 2014 25
focus, organizations can start building prog-
ress and momentum and develop the experience
and conviction to take on bigger challenges.

73. Good, Old Habits: Preserve and Strength-
en. In the midst of organizational change,
it can be easy to forget to protect those ele-
m e n t s of t h e c u lt u r e t h at m ad e t h e
organization great. Some of the old and
well-established habits and routines from
an organization’s past are still essential to
the organization’s success in the future.
They are clearly understood by the organi-
zational members, make up a key part of
the organization’s mindset, and are closely
linked to other aspects of the organization’s
functioning. Therefore, it is vital for orga-
nizations to clarify the core habits and
routines that they need to preserve and
strengthen.
Bad, New Habits: Rethink and Try Again.
During the time of change initiatives, orga-
nizations attempt to create various new
habits and routines. However, cultu re
change requires a lot of trial and error. Cre-
ating a new set of habits and routines does
not always mean that they are going to work
as intended the first time and fit the situation
well. The culture of every organization rep-
resents its wisdom accumulated through
years of experimentation. Enlightened trial-
and-error is critical when trying to create the
new habits and routines to transform an
organization’s culture.
Good, New Habits: Invent and Perfect. The
opportunity to create new habits might be the
most exciting part of the culture change pro-

74. cess. However, creating new habits and
routines is difficult, as there are several pieces
to the puzzle. Mindset, behavior, and systems
must all change together to reinforce the
adaptation process for the organization.
Organizations cannot simply change people’s
mindsets, prescribe a new set of behaviors to
follow, or mandate a new system. Instead,
organizations need to persistently push hard-
er and harder on all three of those levers at
once, until signs of success manifest and
encourage others to join in to help build the
momentum.
Analyzing an organization’s culture as a
bundle of habits that fit into these four cat-
egories serves to focus the discussion on key
areas of consensus that reveal a targeted and
practical agenda for change.
When driving successful changes, leaders
choose the “keystone habits” that can have
the biggest impact on the organization.
Below are three real case examples that illus-
trate the role of keystone habits in creating
successful and sweeping change in organiza-
tions.
Identifying Keystone
Habits: Three Case
Examples
One of the inspirations for our attempts to
understand how organizations identify the
keystone habits that are the most promising
targets of intervention comes from Charles
Duhigg’s best-selling book, The Power of

75. Habit (2012). In this book, Duhigg tells the
story of the early days of Paul O’Neill’s term
as CEO at Alcoa. After a long struggle to find
some targets for improvement that would be
supported by both the management and the
workers at Alcoa, O’Neill decided to put his
emphasis on safety. During a time when
there was little alignment between manage-
ment and the workers, this was the area that
he saw as being most likely to build collabo-
ration. The organization set the goal of
having zero injuries, and the main point of
intervention was that all injuries, world-
wide, must be reported to the CEO’s office
within 24 hours. The best way to solve this
problem, or course, would be to have no
injuries. Though the goal of zero injuries was
not achieved, both management and the
unions learned to move fast with a level of
transparency that was unprecedented.
This safety effort took serious commitment
by everyone involved, but in the end it was
very effective. The unexpected impact was
that changing this single set of habits and
routines concerning the way that the organi-
zation managed safety incidents created a
level of transparency that was new to the
organization. The company discovered that
Often, we are too late to realize how restrictive our
old habits have become and miss the opportunity to
do something about them. Unlearning these well-
established habits can be very difficult, but that is
exactly what needs to happen.

76. EXHIBIT 1. ICEBERG MODEL OF ORGANIZATIONAL
CULTURE
➤
26 PEOPLE & STRATEGY
it could share information about perfor-
mance, about best practices, about business
opportunities to a much greater degree than
it had in the past. So, these underlying beliefs
about transparency and collaboration spread
broad ly t h roug hout t he orga n i zat ion.
O’Neill credits this process with leading
Alcoa to a dynamic, new level of perfor-
mance that lasted for most of the decade.
A second habit change example involves the
Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) of
New York City, which manages all public
transportation in and out of the city. This
includes a high-volume subway system,
which carries an average of 5.4 million pas-
sengers per day (1.6 billion per year)!
Servicing the 820 miles of track comprising
the subway system is a major and ongoing
task, one of several maintenance functions
that are crucial to keeping the trains moving
and the people on them safe. In the past, all
maintenance to the tracks was done on the
weekends, late at night when the train vol-
ume was lowest. With the crews repairing
the tracks in the short windows between
oncoming trains, the maintenance work was

77. slow, expensive, and quite dangerous. How-
ever, the old strategy was deeply engrained
in one of the MTA’s strong points of pride:
keeping the trains moving, no matter what
and at all costs! The keystone habit in this
case directly challenged this point.
In 2010, the subway system experienced a
number of high-profile safety incidents, cul-
minating in a worker fatality in April and
then a blizzard in December that left some
passengers stranded in train cars for over 12
hours without food, water, or heat. Follow-
ing these incidents, an u nprecedented
decision was made to stop the trains. The
president of the Department of Subways,
Carmen Bianco, architected a program
called FastTrack to identify and shut down
whole sections of track for maintenance
beginning at 10 p.m. and reopening the fol-
lowing day at 5 a.m. For the first time, this
allowed ser vice workers uninterrupted
access to the tracks, signals, cables, and
other rail components. Initially, the public
reaction was a widespread outcry. Subway
passengers, like MTA workers, were unac-
customed to any interruption to service.
Over time, however, the sweeping, positive
effects were staggering! FastTrack improved
productivity, saved money (estimated sav-
ings of $16.7 million in 2012), cut accident
rates nearly in half, and increased train reli-
abi l it y by ne a rly 5%. T he suc c e ssf u l
implementation of this program was no
small strategic and operating feat, but at the

78. core, the MTA achieved a shift in one fairly
simple keystone habit: they can stop the
trains.
A final example involves GE Healthcare Chi-
na.1 GE entered an emerging Chinese market
in the early 1990s. In the decade that fol-
lowed, GE expanded its anesthesia business
through the acquisition of two companies,
Datex-Ohmeda and Zymed, both of which
were strong global brands with a presence in
China. Zymed became the center-point of a
new and growing business, Clinical Systems
Wuxi (CSW) in Wuxi, China. CSW was
responsible for the design, engineering, and
production of anesthesia equipment. The
rapid grow th of this business exposed
increasing weaknesses in quality and declin-
ing customer reputation, eventually resulting
in the business halting distribution of prod-
ucts for a period of time.
In 2007, a new general manager was appoint-
ed, Matti Lehtonen. It was clear to Lehtonen
that restoring quality and customer service
should be the top strategic priorities moving
forward. Lehtonen and his senior team
implemented a simple yet extremely power-
ful intervention by requiring their engineers
to visit operating rooms and witness their
anesthesia equipment being used in live sur-
gical procedures. In this case, a single
habit—sending people out to where the cus-
tomers are—had a profound set of cascading
effects. Seeing the equipment in use added
new meaning and clarity about the purpose

79. of the work and provided the engineers with
1 For more on this case, see Denison, Hooijberg, Lane, &
Lief (2012).
a deeper appreciation and understanding of
the specific needs of multiple end users,
including the patients, the doctors and nurs-
es, and the hospitals and insurers. Over time,
this keystone habit did help to restore qual-
it y a nd c u s tom er reput at ion . I t a l s o
broadened the role and skill set of the engi-
neers and became a focal point for talent
recruitment and retention. Moreover, it
opened up new insights and new product
innovations, and by 2010, one of these new
products was shipping to emerging markets
all over the world!
From these case examples we can begin to
learn some useful principles for targeting key-
stone habits as high impact areas of action.
Below, we outline three principles for change
management professionals to consider.
Principles for
Intervening on
Keystone Habits
Principle 1: The diagnostic process
should differentiate keystone habits
from ordinary habits by looking for
impact and interconnectedness.
Like most change efforts, the process begins
with diagnosis. The cascading effect seen in

80. Alcoa was described by Duhigg as seren-
dipitous, but acting intentionally to modify
or build keystone habits calls for a reliable
diagnostic process that pays attention to the
right factors. Practitioners need to develop
the skills (and methodologies) to identify
and distinguish keystone habits from ordi-
nary habits. Each of the case examples above
highlights two interrelated factors that can
EXHIBIT 2. CHANGING CULTURE BY CHANGING HABITS
AND ROUTINES
G
o
o
d
Preserve
&
Strengthen
Invent
&
Perfect
B
a
d
Unlearn