The Rational and Emotional Approaches to Change
With globalization and present state of the economy, the organizations around the world are dealing with great challenges that affect both their established culture and productivity. The implications of new technology, new competitive threats, or industrial consolidation not only influence the financial ranks, but the way in which society sees the organization, therefore its sustainability (Hughes, Ginnette, & Curphy, 2009). To take care of those situations, Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy (2009) describe two approaches for leaders to employ as they seek to drive organizational change. The first one and maybe the more frequently employed by managers: The Rational Approach and the second one, more commonly expected to be employed by leaders: The Emotional Approach. Rational or Emotional Approach
Both approaches aim to motivate organizational change; however, one excludes the other (Hughes, Ginnette, & Curphy, 2009). The differences between the two approaches appear to be as evident as the differences between leaders and managers. An effective leader should be able to play the role of a manager, recognize the problem, and identify the factors inhibiting or facilitating change (Collins, Good to great and the social factors: Amonograoh to accompany good to great, 2005). Driving organizational change requires of both managerial skills and leadership strategies. A leader is entitle to redesign the vision and mission of the organization, but it requires more than individual coaching and mentoring to successfully lead larger-scale change initiatives (Hughes, Ginnette, & Curphy, 2009). A transformational change needs of a leader with management skills, in other words, a Level 5 Leader (Collins, Good to great: Why some companies make the leap…and others don’t, 2001). However, since Level 5 Leaders are not common to find, the employ of the Emotional Approach is what would better mimic the outcomes....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document