The Strategy that wouldnt travel
The Strategy That Wouldn’t Travel
Karen Jimenez thought that since phase one was implemented without friction in the Wichita facility, than it would be the same for Lubbock. These facilities were owned and operated by Acme Minerals Extraction Company and in order for the company to be competitive they needed to replicate the Wichita facility.
The initiatives which were undertaken by Karen to implement the change in the other facilities came to a screeching halt when the results weren’t identical to Wichita. The facility at Wichita was willing and ready for change, therefore the change was done through the right model as well as there weren’t any blocks to change. Therefore there wasn’t any organizational inertia and neither was there any anticipated consequences of change.
David Keller was introduced into the equation so that Karen could potentially overcome obstacles at the Lubbock facility. David’s change initiative followed Tichy & Devanna model where the change needed was to be recognized by creating the feeling of change, in conjunction with overcoming resistances as well as managing this change. This task which David took on as a leader to implement change was key to the success of the Lubbock facility. He was behind this initiative and emphasized the importance amongst his colleagues and was consistently working towards engaging the process of change.
There are four dimensions which fall under scope of change initiative are incremental, continuous, bottom-up and emergent. The changes which were being implemented in the Lubbock facility were incremental since it was a local change rather than a system wide change. Also the changes which Lubbock was facing needed to work on having transparency in regards to any animosity against each other. The pace of change is continuous and it can establish enough momentum to captivate more individuals agreeing to the initiative. This momentum’s source of change which is usually directed by a CEO, but is
Karen Jimenez thought that since phase one was implemented without friction in the Wichita facility, than it would be the same for Lubbock. These facilities were owned and operated by Acme Minerals Extraction Company and in order for the company to be competitive they needed to replicate the Wichita facility.
The initiatives which were undertaken by Karen to implement the change in the other facilities came to a screeching halt when the results weren’t identical to Wichita. The facility at Wichita was willing and ready for change, therefore the change was done through the right model as well as there weren’t any blocks to change. Therefore there wasn’t any organizational inertia and neither was there any anticipated consequences of change.
David Keller was introduced into the equation so that Karen could potentially overcome obstacles at the Lubbock facility. David’s change initiative followed Tichy & Devanna model where the change needed was to be recognized by creating the feeling of change, in conjunction with overcoming resistances as well as managing this change. This task which David took on as a leader to implement change was key to the success of the Lubbock facility. He was behind this initiative and emphasized the importance amongst his colleagues and was consistently working towards engaging the process of change.
There are four dimensions which fall under scope of change initiative are incremental, continuous, bottom-up and emergent. The changes which were being implemented in the Lubbock facility were incremental since it was a local change rather than a system wide change. Also the changes which Lubbock was facing needed to work on having transparency in regards to any animosity against each other. The pace of change is continuous and it can establish enough momentum to captivate more individuals agreeing to the initiative. This momentum’s source of change which is usually directed by a CEO, but is