6 Responses

  1. Miranda Marlin at |

    That is great that you had change leaders monitoring the change to make sure that the implementations were successful. How long do you monitor the changes once they are implemented? When a change is implemented does the monitoring process lead to actual changes in your process or does it just ensure that your staff is following the new changes that have been made?

  2. mcburgos at |

    Excellent post! It is great to see real-life examples of Kotter’s 8-step model put into practice. In my opinion, Kotter’s model is different from many of the other organizational theories because, in his work, he is addressing how to effectively impose change in system rather than assessing/diagnosing the system or its followers. Unfortunately, as you mentioned in your post, it generally takes awhile for employees to accept change – no matter how it is implemented. However, Kotter’s model makes this a little easier by suggesting the designation of change leaders to help ease the transition of change into the workplace.

    Steven Thomsen (2013, February 17). Kotter’s 8 step organizational change model fc. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxtF4OXzhyI#action=share

  3. gareichert at |

    Your organization sounds like it is driven by transactional leadership. Your leadership works within the organization’s existing culture and is very task and policy oriented. Transactional leaders, which tend to think short-term, utilize reward and punishment and constantly re-evaluate for group and organization success. My organization as a whole is transactional as well. I think individual units operate with more transformational leadership. Culture is very important to units, so leaders at this level work to effect the work-place culture. These leaders work to keep worker’s satisfied and engaged in their work.

  4. Nimisha Patel at |

    Great Post. I agree with you, at first everyone is resistant to the change but in the end it’s for the best. I think the objective is to get everyone talking and using critical thinking as to what the change could mean. Getting outside help to fight in the arguments is another good step in creating the urgency of change that may need to be explored. This brings to the table a un-bios view on the matter. Although the need for change as a critical weighing out all the pros and cons is important, creating the urgency and not rushing through it is an important first step.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Skip to toolbar