The Grayson Chemical Company
The Grayson Chemical Company
I. Problems
A. Macro
1. Grayson has become stagnant, failed to change, and is no longer competitive.
2. The current people at Grayson are not acceptable to change.
3. There is a culture of doing things by the book.
B. Micro
1. Incompetent managers promoted.
2. Board does not have a consensus of opinion.
II. Causes
1. Grayson has not been proactive with its environment.
2. Corporate culture is very resistant to change.
3. Board does not speak with one voice. So entire organization is somewhat disorganized in its operations—no clear direction or focus
III. Systems affected
The entire organization is affected. The organization is still functioning; however, to be a healthy company and to grow, changes are needed.
1. Structural – with major changes, the structure could be radically altered.
2. Psychosocial – status quo and contentment seems to be prevalent among management.
3. Technical –there is evidence that managers are “fairly” competent technically, but this may not be enough to make the kind of changes that Grayson requires.
4. Managerial – the management currently seems to be comfortable in their positions and performance. The changes that Tom Baker may initiate would likely create turmoil in the management ranks.
5. Goals and values – the system seems to value putting in your time and you will get promoted. Excellence in performance is something not present at Grayson, but complacency seems to be prevalent.
IV. Alternatives
1. Maintain status quo—do nothing.
2. Develop a pathfinder style, involve board, and organization members in renewing the company.
3. Develop a persuader style and avoid “rocking the boat” by making gradual or slow changes.
V. Recommendations
Develop pathfinder style, involve entire corporation in change process. Establish open communications with board and establish a consensus on what the board wants/expects/desires. Since incompetent managers have often been promoted,
I. Problems
A. Macro
1. Grayson has become stagnant, failed to change, and is no longer competitive.
2. The current people at Grayson are not acceptable to change.
3. There is a culture of doing things by the book.
B. Micro
1. Incompetent managers promoted.
2. Board does not have a consensus of opinion.
II. Causes
1. Grayson has not been proactive with its environment.
2. Corporate culture is very resistant to change.
3. Board does not speak with one voice. So entire organization is somewhat disorganized in its operations—no clear direction or focus
III. Systems affected
The entire organization is affected. The organization is still functioning; however, to be a healthy company and to grow, changes are needed.
1. Structural – with major changes, the structure could be radically altered.
2. Psychosocial – status quo and contentment seems to be prevalent among management.
3. Technical –there is evidence that managers are “fairly” competent technically, but this may not be enough to make the kind of changes that Grayson requires.
4. Managerial – the management currently seems to be comfortable in their positions and performance. The changes that Tom Baker may initiate would likely create turmoil in the management ranks.
5. Goals and values – the system seems to value putting in your time and you will get promoted. Excellence in performance is something not present at Grayson, but complacency seems to be prevalent.
IV. Alternatives
1. Maintain status quo—do nothing.
2. Develop a pathfinder style, involve board, and organization members in renewing the company.
3. Develop a persuader style and avoid “rocking the boat” by making gradual or slow changes.
V. Recommendations
Develop pathfinder style, involve entire corporation in change process. Establish open communications with board and establish a consensus on what the board wants/expects/desires. Since incompetent managers have often been promoted,