case study on leadership and change management

Matt Garris

Above the Fray & Beneath the Surface

• Mar 12, 2021
• 11 min read

Case Studies in Change Leadership

The following post is adapted from my personal academic coursework.

At its essence, leadership is a change-focused enterprise. Leaders influence others to change. While this influence takes place at various levels and through diverse means, change is always the common denominator. Change is the distinguishing feature of leadership. History contains accounts of strong leaders, both good and bad, and weak leaders. The chronicles of the exploits of these leaders fill archives and libraries—those who have made changes that drastically improved the human condition, those who caused others to suffer, and those who history remembers only for the opportunities they squandered. These types of leaders existed throughout human history, from ancient times through the present day. For instance, World War II had good leaders like Eisenhower and Nimitz, bad leaders like Hitler and Mussolini, and weak leaders like Neville Chamberlain. The Bible tells numerous stories of good leaders like Joseph, bad leaders like Nebuchadnezzer, and weak leaders like Adam. Merida also recounted stories of all these leadership types, including the weak leadership of King Ahab, the bad leadership of Queen Jezebel, and the good leadership of King Josiah.

If the adage is true that history repeats itself, then it is vital for modern leaders to learn from the legacies of those who have preceded them. They must be able to identify those characteristics that distinguish good leaders from bad ones and strong leaders from weak ones. Aspiring leaders must know how to replicate good leadership traits and avoid evil ones. Because leaders are constantly effecting transformation, they operate within a moral imperative of making sure they are making the right changes. These changes should maximize the good they achieve while minimizing any negative impacts. This paper serves the goal of learning from others’ leadership through the identification of current best practices in leading organizational change and studying the examples of other organizational leaders from various contexts.

Best Practices

Experts have written countless volumes on the best practices of leadership. Ecclesiastes 12:12 (NKJV) admonishes readers that “Of making many books there is no end, and much study is wearisome to the flesh.” While it is therefore impossible to exhaustively catalogue the best practices of organizational change leadership, the following four main tactics will serve all leaders well: implement necessary changes, begin with the end in mind, rally the troops, and anchor the changes.

Implement Necessary Changes

Kotter stated that establishing a sense of urgency was the first step in achieving significant organizational change. He added that “establishing a sense of urgency is crucial to gaining needed cooperation.” Unfortunately, many leaders struggle to generate the urgency their initiatives require because they either implement changes that are not necessary or fail to implement those changes that are. Thus, a good starting point for any leader is to determine which changes are necessary. This is important because it is nearly impossible to establish a sense of urgency around an unnecessary change.

While applying Kotter’s eight steps to manage change in the United Kingdom’s Integrated Offender Management program, King et al. found that “not all partners had ‘bought into’ the philosophy and objectives of the schemes” because the initiatives did not seem necessary to multiple different agencies in the criminal justice community. This belief highlights how important it is for leaders to choose to implement necessary changes. Kotter stated that “People will find a thousand ingenious ways to withhold cooperation from a process they think is unnecessary or wrongheaded.

Graamans et al. presented another example of this withheld cooperation in their study of a failed attempt to change the brand of suture in a Dutch hospital. They found that cardiothoracic surgeons “adamantly refused to work with the suture…, …stockpil[ed] their own supplies of surgical suture…, …[and threatened to hold] managers accountable for patient deaths that could arise from use of the new suture.” Why were the surgeons so opposed to new suture? They believed that it presented a danger to patient health outcomes. In other words, what was a dollars and cents issue to the hospital management was a life and death issue to the surgeons. The hospital management tried to make this unnecessary change and it ultimately failed. Leaders must make those changes which are necessary and avoid making those which are not.

Begin with the End in Mind

Covey famously articulated this next best practice for change leaders as the second of his seven steps, “Begin with the end in mind.” Covey further explained, “To begin with the end in mind means to start with a clear understanding of your destination. It means to know where you’re going… …so that the steps you take are always in the right direction.” Covey suggested that leaders ask themselves, “What are the things I want to accomplish?” Kotter echoed this sentiment in the third stage of his eight-step process, “Develop a vision and strategy.” Essentially, leaders must know where they are leading the organization. They must have a clear vision of the desired outcome and know the paths that will lead to it. Watts explained, “Defining specific outcomes is an effective way to create actionable goals that… …focus on those whom the initiative is intended to support.” Watts added that “defining outcomes can assist in… …solidifying group buy-in to help move the project forward.” Watts understood the importance of having a clearly defined destination. Effective leaders must begin with the end in mind.

Rally the Troops

Another best practice of change leaders is to get people united around the leader’s vision for the organization. Two of Kotter’s steps—creating the guiding coalition and communicating the change vision—are in keeping with this best practice. Grenny et al. suggested that those who want to lead others should “engage all six sources of influence.” These sources of influence include personal motivation, personal ability, social motivation, social ability, structural motivation, and structural ability. While there are many ways which leaders may employ to draw people to their causes, most of them involve some form of communication. In Habakkuk 2:2 (NKJV), God says to “Write the vision and make it plain on tablets, that he may run who reads it.” Clearly articulating the change vision is critical to the leader’s success.

Watts stated that “If the team knows where they are headed, all the members can steer in the same direction.” Similarly, Muthusamy made the following recommendation: “Managers and leaders should employ collaborative and consensus-building socio-linguistic jargons… [because] …sharing positive communication is central to the creation, sustenance and achieving organizational transformation. Thus, the process of creating, acquiring, articulating, sharing inspiration and knowledge through positive maxims and metaphors is a core organizational capability for modern management. If managers and leaders enact the words they articulate, organizations can realize the mission and goals that seem impossible.” Hemme et al. also emphasized the importance of language in communicating the vision: “We argue for more deliberately crafted change messages that emphasize some aspects over others under consideration of change recipients’ specific change concerns and context. Whereas some readiness beliefs need to be addressed clearly and deliberately early on, others can be affected more easily at later points during the change initiative. Specifically, change recipients need to be convinced that the proposed changes are in fact suitable to engender significant organizational benefits – otherwise all other efforts to affect other change-related attitudes appear to be moot.”

Anchor the Change

A final best practice is for leaders to anchor the change. Kotter recommended that leaders “anchor new approaches in the culture.” Atkins et al. related the story of a failed change effort which relied too heavily upon a single person and dissolved upon that individual’s retirement: “The most significant barrier [to continuing the change effort]… …was the retirement of and failure to replace the director of sustainability. This… …affected virtually all aspects of empowerment through authority. The long-established director position was eliminated… It had created a point person…, but after the person who had held the job retired, support from the Academic Affairs Office declined in awareness, structural support, and resources. With no one assigned to report to the university president about sustainability or lead university-wide efforts, the academic branch… …met with significant setbacks that jeopardized its upward trajectory in gaining participation of both faculty and students on its campuses. The vital role… …was placed at risk.”

Wei and Clegg also addressed anchoring approaches in the culture through their research on the dominance of organizational cultures during acquisition. They found that several trends related to the acquiring company’s culture, the target company’s culture, the power differential between these organizations, and how those impacted the post-acquisition culture of the organization. They found that organizations in the acquisition process pass through three phases—resistance, conformity, and integration. These phases also may be present in other change efforts. Finally, Jeong and Shin found that “when high-performance work practices are paired with organizational change, organizations have a much better chance of survival and prosperity.”

Case Studies

The following case studies offer valuable insights into the organizational change process.

Talent Culture

Li discussed his own experiences building a talent culture at HKBN, a leading Hong Kong news agency.

The Change Process

Li developed a blended approach to organizational change drawing from Kotter’s eight-step model and Yu’s 3H (heart-head-hand) model.. Li spread his blended approach across three super-steps for change: creating the climate for change, engaging and enabling the organization, and implementing and sustaining for change, and explained how he implemented these super-steps at HKBN.

In creating the climate for change, Li created urgency, formed a coalition, and created a vision; in engaging and enabling the organization, he communicated the vision, empowered action, and created the quick win; and in implementing and sustaining for change, he built on the change and made it stick.

The Outcome

Li was successful in creating the talent culture he envisioned. He attributed his success in part to how he balanced the 3H model with Kotter’s eight steps.

Suture Situation

Graamans et al. explained how one Dutch hospital’s effort to reduce expenses by purchasing a different brand of suture backfired.

Although the hospital management thought this was a “relatively small-scale change initiative,” they still utilized some change-management principles. These included building a guiding coalition, consulting department heads, and communicating the change to the surgeons. In fact, this change was believed to be so simple that it would have been one of the guiding coalition’s early wins as they had more cost-cutting measures planned for the future. One manager even stated it, “This appeared to us as an easy win.”

Unfortunately, appearances are sometimes misleading, and this was not an easy win. The surgeons refused to use the new suture, citing patient safety, and the management abandoned the mew suture. One reason for this outcome is that the management team tried to make a change that was not necessary. Another reason the initiative failed is because the hospital management team did not effectively rally the troops.

Integrated Offender Management

King et al. examined the limited success of the United Kingdom’s Integrated Offender Management system, a multi-agency approach to criminal justice and rehabilitation. This program coordinated the efforts of police officers, probation officers, drug addiction counselors, and other stakeholders within the system.

After seeing the system fail to maximize its potential, King et al. retroactively evaluated the implementation of the system using Kotter’s eight-step change model to identify its shortcomings. They found significant issues at several stages. While the police and probation officers saw the urgent need for change, some of the supporting agencies did not and this hindered the entire process. The system had no guiding coalition and no strategic plan to implement its vision. King et al. also found issues with communicating the vision to adjacent law enforcement and probation units and empowering others to act.

Kotter stated that “successful change of any magnitude goes through all eight stages.” King et al. found that the lack of a strategic plan led to later difficulty creating short-term wins, consolidating gains and producing more change, and institutionalizing the new approaches.

King et al. made numerous recommendations for improvement to the system implementation at every stage of Kotter’s process. They acknowledged the difficulty of public-sector inter-agency cooperation, but stated that “the possible tensions between occupational cultures could be mitigated through some of the early phases of Kotter’s model.”

Self-Directed Teams

Vito addressed a failed case of implementing self-directed teams at a large mental health and development services agency.

Two new, inexperienced directors at this agency implemented a rapid-fire change to the organization’s vision, mission, values, strategic direction and structure. The changes all happened in a matter of months with poor preparation, minimal communication, and inadequate support systems.

For many reasons, this change initiative ultimately failed. While the reasons for the failure are varied, they have much more to do with the change process than the change’s intended outcome. Every organization has a limit to the amount of change it may withstand before it reaches critical mass. This study demonstrates precisely why managing change is so vitally important to an organization’s health.

Leading Librarian

Watts described his experience establishing the Department of Knowledge Production at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas.

Watts began with what he knew from experience. As he considered his plans, which consisted of “practical and cutting-edge technologies, furniture ideas, and job descriptions that were applicable to the UNLV campus context.” Watts realized that he was still missing some necessary information: “However, understanding and communicating how learners and researchers would make use of the new services and spaces did not easily unfold. A list of topics and technologies and a sheaf of carpet samples will not help a librarian or project team identify the behaviors that indicate learning or the evidence to demonstrate that a space or service meets an instructional or research need. Further exploration was required. The objectives for the initiative had to be further clarified.” In addition to Watts (2019) explaining how he developed a better plan, he also provided guidance for how to handle what he termed “side-eye” and fear when leading organizational change. Watts succeeded in launching the department.

Case studies contain a wealth of information for aspiring leaders. The case studies in this paper highlighted four best practices—implementing necessary changes, beginning with the end in mind, rallying the team, and anchoring the changes in the organization’s culture. Additionally, the case studies tell the stories of leadership successes, like those of Li and Watts; of leadership failures, such as Graamans et al. and Vito; and of reflective leaders, like King et al. Their experiences help develop the next generation of organizational change leaders.

Akins, E. E., Giddens, E., Glassmeyer, D., Gruss, A., Kalamas Hedden, M., Slinger-Friedman, V., & Weand, M. (2019). Sustainability education and organizational change: A critical case study of barriers and change drivers at a higher education institution. Sustainability, 11 (2), 501-517. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020501

Covey, S. R. (1989). The seven habits of highly effective people: Restoring the character ethic. Simon & Schuster.

Graamans, E., Aij, K., Vonk, A., & Ten Have, W. (2020). Case study: Examining failure in change management. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 33 (2), 319-330. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-06-2019-0204

Grenny, J., Patterson, L., Maxfield, D., McMillian, R., & Switzler, A. (2013). Influencer: The new science of leading change. McGraw-Hill Education.

Hemme, F., Bowers, M. T., & Todd, J. S. (2018). Change readiness as fluid trajectories: A longitudinal multiple-case study. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31 (5), 1153-1175. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-07-2017-0824

Jeong, I. & Shin, S. J. (2019). High-performance work practices and organizational creativity during organizational change: A collective learning perspective. Journal of Management, 45 (3), 909-925. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316685156

King, S., Hopkins, M., & Cornish, N. (2018). Can models of organizational change help to understand ‘success’ and ‘failure’ in community sentences? Appling Kotter’s model of organizational change to an integrated offender management case study. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 18 (3), 273-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895817721274

Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.

Li, E. (2018). A case study of the critical success factors for organizational change of a public listed corporation. Public Administration and Policy, 21 (2), 152-165. https://doi.org/10.1109/PAP-10-2018-010

Muthusamy, S. K. (2019). Power of positive words: Communication, cognition, and organizational transformation. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 32 (1), 103-122. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-05-2018-0140

Merida, T. (2015). Christ-centered exposition commentary: Exalting Jesus in 1 & 2 Kings. B & H Publishing Group.

The Holy Bible, New King James Version (1982). Thomas Nelson, Inc.

Vito, R. (2019). Self-directed teams as an organizational change strategy to empower staff: A teaching/learning case study. Human Service Organizations, Management, Leadership & Governance, 43(2), 146-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2019.1614852

Watts, J. (2019). Navigating the new: A case study on leading organizational change. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 19 (2), 223-232. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2019.0013

Wei, T. & Clegg, J. (2018). Effect of organizational identity change on integration approaches in acquisitions: Role of organizational dominance. British Journal of Management, 29 (2), 337-355. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12226

Recent Posts

Technology and Expansion

Organizations as Open Systems

Changes of Organizations

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Change Management: From Theory to Practice

Jeffrey phillips.

1 University Libraries, Florida State University, 116 Honors Way, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA

James D. Klein

2 Department of Educational Psychology & Learning Systems, College of Education, Florida State University, Stone Building-3205F, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4453 USA

This article presents a set of change management strategies found across several models and frameworks and identifies how frequently change management practitioners implement these strategies in practice. We searched the literature to identify 15 common strategies found in 16 different change management models and frameworks. We also created a questionnaire based on the literature and distributed it to change management practitioners. Findings suggest that strategies related to communication, stakeholder involvement, encouragement, organizational culture, vision, and mission should be used when implementing organizational change.

Organizations must change to survive. There are many approaches to influence change; these differences require change managers to consider various strategies that increase acceptance and reduce barriers. A change manager is responsible for planning, developing, leading, evaluating, assessing, supporting, and sustaining a change implementation. Change management consists of models and strategies to help employees accept new organizational developments.

Change management practitioners and academic researchers view organizational change differently (Hughes, 2007 ; Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Saka ( 2003 ) states, “there is a gap between what the rational-linear change management approach prescribes and what change agents do” (p. 483). This disconnect may make it difficult to determine the suitability and appropriateness of using different techniques to promote change (Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Hughes ( 2007 ) thinks that practitioners and academics may have trouble communicating because they use different terms. Whereas academics use the terms, models, theories, and concepts, practitioners use tools and techniques. A tool is a stand-alone application, and a technique is an integrated approach (Dale & McQuater, 1998 ). Hughes ( 2007 ) expresses that classifying change management tools and techniques can help academics identify what practitioners do in the field and evaluate the effectiveness of practitioners’ implementations.

There is little empirical evidence that supports a preferred change management model (Hallencreutz & Turner, 2011 ). However, there are many similar strategies found across change management models (Raineri, 2011 ). Bamford and Forrester’s ( 2003 ) case study showed that “[change] managers in a company generally ignored the popular change literature” (p. 560). The authors followed Pettigrew’s ( 1987 ) suggestions that change managers should not use abstract theories; instead, they should relate change theories to the context of the change. Neves’ ( 2009 ) exploratory factor analysis of employees experiencing the implementation of a new performance appraisal system at a public university suggested that (a) change appropriateness (if the employee felt the change was beneficial to the organization) was positively related with affective commitment (how much the employee liked their job), and (b) affective commitment mediated the relationship between change appropriateness and individual change (how much the employee shifted to the new system). It is unlikely that there is a universal change management approach that works in all settings (Saka, 2003 ). Because change is chaotic, one specific model or framework may not be useful in multiple contexts (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992 ; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1991 ). This requires change managers to consider various approaches for different implementations (Pettigrew, 1987 ). Change managers may face uncertainties that cannot be addressed by a planned sequence of steps (Carnall, 2007 ; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1991 ). Different stakeholders within an organization may complete steps at different times (Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Although there may not be one perspective change management approach, many models and frameworks consist of similar change management strategies.

Anderson and Ackerman Anderson ( 2001 ) discuss the differences between change frameworks and change process models. They state that a change framework identifies topics that are relevant to the change and explains the procedures that organizations should acknowledge during the change. However, the framework does not provide details about how to accomplish the steps of the change or the sequence in which the change manager should perform the steps. Additionally, Anderson and Ackerman Anderson ( 2001 ) explain that change process models describe what actions are necessary to accomplish the change and the order in which to facilitate the actions. Whereas frameworks may identify variables or theories required to promote change, models focus on the specific processes that lead to change. Based on the literature, we define a change strategy as a process or action from a model or framework. Multiple models and frameworks contain similar strategies. Change managers use models and frameworks contextually; some change management strategies may be used across numerous models and frameworks.

The purpose of this article is to present a common set of change management strategies found across numerous models and frameworks and identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these common strategies in practice. We also compare current practice with models and frameworks from the literature. Some change management models and frameworks have been around for decades and others are more recent. This comparison may assist practitioners and theorists to consider different strategies that fall outside a specific model.

Common Strategies in the Change Management Literature

We examined highly-cited publications ( n  > 1000 citations) from the last 20 years, business websites, and university websites to select organizational change management models and frameworks. First, we searched two indexes—Google Scholar and Web of Science’s Social Science Citation Index. We used the following keywords in both indexes: “change management” OR “organizational change” OR “organizational development” AND (models or frameworks). Additionally, we used the same search terms in a Google search to identify models mentioned on university and business websites. This helped us identify change management models that had less presence in popular research. We only included models and frameworks from our search results that were mentioned on multiple websites. We reached saturation when multiple publications stopped identifying new models and frameworks.

After we identified the models and frameworks, we analyzed the original publications by the authors to identify observable strategies included in the models and frameworks. We coded the strategies by comparing new strategies with our previously coded strategies, and we combined similar strategies or created a new strategy. Our list of strategies was not exhaustive, but we included the most common strategies found in the publications. Finally, we omitted publications that did not provide details about the change management strategies. Although many of these publications were highly cited and identified change implementation processes or phases, the authors did not identify a specific strategy.

Table ​ Table1 1 shows the 16 models and frameworks that we analyzed and the 15 common strategies that we identified from this analysis. Ackerman-Anderson and Anderson ( 2001 ) believe that it is important for process models to consider organizational imperatives as well as human dynamics and needs. Therefore, the list of strategies considers organizational imperatives such as create a vision for the change that aligns with the organization’s mission and strategies regarding human dynamics and needs such as listen to employees’ concerns about the change. We have presented the strategies in order of how frequently the strategies appear in the models and frameworks. Table ​ Table1 1 only includes strategies found in at least six of the models or frameworks.

Common strategies in the change management literature

A = ADKAR (Hiatt, 2006 ); AA = Ackerman Anderson and Anderson ( 2001 ); B = Bridges ( 1991 ); BB = Buchanan and Boddy ( 1992 ); BH = Beckhard and Harris ( 1987 ); C = Carnall ( 2007 ); CW = Cummings and Worley ( 1993 ); FB = French and Bell ( 1999 ); GE = GE CAP model (Neri et al., 2008 ; Polk, 2011 ); K = Kotter ( 2012 ); KSJ = Kanter et al. ( 1992 ); L = Lewin’s Three-step model (Bakari et al., 2017 ; Lewin, 1951 ); LK = Luecke ( 2003 ); M = McKinsey’s 7-S framework (Cox et al., 2019 ; Waterman et al., 1980 ); N = Nadler and Tushman ( 1997 ); PW = Pettigrew and Whipp (1993)

Strategies Used by Change Managers

We developed an online questionnaire to determine how frequently change managers used the strategies identified in our review of the literature. The Qualtrics-hosted survey consisted of 28 questions including sliding-scale, multiple-choice, and Likert-type items. Demographic questions focused on (a) how long the participant had been involved in the practice of change management, (b) how many change projects the participant had led, (c) the types of industries in which the participant led change implementations, (d) what percentage of job responsibilities involved working as a change manager and a project manager, and (e) where the participant learned to conduct change management. Twenty-one Likert-type items asked how often the participant used the strategies identified by our review of common change management models and frameworks. Participants could select never, sometimes, most of the time, and always. The Cronbach’s Alpha of the Likert-scale questions was 0.86.

The procedures for the questionnaire followed the steps suggested by Gall et al. ( 2003 ). The first steps were to define the research objectives, select the sample, and design the questionnaire format. The fourth step was to pretest the questionnaire. We conducted cognitive laboratory interviews by sending the questionnaire and interview questions to one person who was in the field of change management, one person who was in the field of performance improvement, and one person who was in the field of survey development (Fowler, 2014 ). We met with the reviewers through Zoom to evaluate the questionnaire by asking them to read the directions and each item for clarity. Then, reviewers were directed to point out mistakes or areas of confusion. Having multiple people review the survey instruments improved the reliability of the responses (Fowler, 2014 ).

We used purposeful sampling to distribute the online questionnaire throughout the following organizations: the Association for Talent Development (ATD), Change Management Institute (CMI), and the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI). We also launched a call for participation to department chairs of United States universities who had Instructional Systems Design graduate programs with a focus on Performance Improvement. We used snowball sampling to gain participants by requesting that the department chairs forward the questionnaire to practitioners who had led at least one organizational change.

Table ​ Table2 2 provides a summary of the characteristics of the 49 participants who completed the questionnaire. Most had over ten years of experience practicing change management ( n  = 37) and had completed over ten change projects ( n  = 32). The participants learned how to conduct change management on-the-job ( n  = 47), through books ( n  = 31), through academic journal articles ( n  = 22), and from college or university courses ( n  = 20). The participants had worked in 13 different industries.

Characteristics of participants

( n  = 49)

Table ​ Table3 3 shows how frequently participants indicated that they used the change management strategies included on the questionnaire. Forty or more participants said they used the following strategies most often or always: (1) Asked members of senior leadership to support the change; (2) Listened to managers’ concerns about the change; (3) Aligned an intended change with an organization’s mission; (4) Listened to employees’ concerns about the change; (5) Aligned an intended change with an organization’s vision; (6) Created measurable short-term goals; (7) Asked managers for feedback to improve the change, and (8) Focused on organizational culture.

Strategies used by change managers

Table ​ Table4 4 identifies how frequently the strategies appeared in the models and frameworks and the rate at which practitioners indicated they used the strategies most often or always. The strategies found in the top 25% of both ( n  > 36 for practitioner use and n  > 11 in models and frameworks) focused on communication, including senior leadership and the employees in change decisions, aligning the change with the vision and mission of the organization, and focusing on organizational culture. Practitioners used several strategies more commonly than the literature suggested, especially concerning the topic of middle management. Practitioners focused on listening to middle managers’ concerns about the change, asking managers for feedback to improve the change, and ensuring that managers were trained to promote the change. Meanwhile, practitioners did not engage in the following strategies as often as the models and frameworks suggested that they should: provide all members of the organization with clear communication about the change, distinguish the differences between leadership and management, reward new behavior, and include employees in change decisions.

A comparison of the strategies used by practitioners to the strategies found in the literature

Common Strategies Used by Practitioners and Found in the Literature

The purpose of this article was to present a common set of change management strategies found across numerous models and frameworks and to identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these common strategies in practice. The five common change management strategies were the following: communicate about the change, involve stakeholders at all levels of the organization, focus on organizational culture, consider the organization’s mission and vision, and provide encouragement and incentives to change. Below we discuss our findings with an eye toward presenting a few key recommendations for change management.

Communicate About the Change

Communication is an umbrella term that can include messaging, networking, and negotiating (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992 ). Our findings revealed that communication is essential for change management. All the models and frameworks we examined suggested that change managers should provide members of the organization with clear communication about the change. It is interesting that approximately 33% of questionnaire respondents indicated that they sometimes, rather than always or most of the time, notified all members of the organization about the change. This may be the result of change managers communicating through organizational leaders. Instead of communicating directly with everyone in the organization, some participants may have used senior leadership, middle management, or subgroups to communicate the change. Messages sent to employees from leaders can effectively promote change. Regardless of who is responsible for communication, someone in the organization should explain why the change is happening (Connor et al., 2003 ; Doyle & Brady, 2018 ; Hiatt, 2006 ; Kotter, 2012 ) and provide clear communication throughout the entire change implementation (McKinsey & Company, 2008 ; Mento et al., 2002 ).

Involve Stakeholders at All Levels of the Organization

Our results indicate that change managers should involve senior leaders, managers, as well as employees during a change initiative. The items on the questionnaire were based on a review of common change management models and frameworks and many related to some form of stakeholder involvement. Of these strategies, over half were used often by 50% or more respondents. They focused on actions like gaining support from leaders, listening to and getting feedback from managers and employees, and adjusting strategies based on stakeholder input.

Whereas the models and frameworks often identified strategies regarding senior leadership and employees, it is interesting that questionnaire respondents indicated that they often implemented strategies involving middle management in a change implementation. This aligns with Bamford and Forrester’s ( 2003 ) research describing how middle managers are important communicators of change and provide an organization with the direction for the change. However, the participants did not develop managers into leaders as often as the literature proposed. Burnes and By ( 2012 ) expressed that leadership is essential to promote change and mention how the change management field has failed to focus on leadership as much as it should.

Focus on Organizational Culture

All but one of the models and frameworks we analyzed indicated that change managers should focus on changing the culture of an organization and more than 75% of questionnaire respondents revealed that they implemented this strategy always or most of the time. Organizational culture affects the acceptance of change. Changing the organizational culture can prevent employees from returning to the previous status quo (Bullock & Batten, 1985 ; Kotter, 2012 ; Mento et al., 2002 ). Some authors have different views on how to change an organization’s culture. For example, Burnes ( 2000 ) thinks that change managers should focus on employees who were resistant to the change while Hiatt ( 2006 ) suggests that change managers should replicate what strategies they used in the past to change the culture. Change managers require open support and commitment from managers to lead a culture change (Phillips, 2021 ).

In addition, Pless and Maak ( 2004 ) describe the importance of creating a culture of inclusion where diverse viewpoints help an organization reach its organizational objectives. Yet less than half of the participants indicated that they often focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Change managers should consider diverse viewpoints when implementing change, especially for organizations whose vision promotes a diverse and inclusive workforce.

Consider the Organization’s Mission and Vision

Several of the models and frameworks we examined mentioned that change managers should consider the mission and vision of the organization (Cummings & Worley, 1993 ; Hiatt, 2006 ; Kotter, 2012 ; Polk, 2011 ). Furthermore, aligning the change with the organization’s mission and vision were among the strategies most often implemented by participants. This was the second most common strategy both used by participants and found in the models and frameworks. A mission of an organization may include its beliefs, values, priorities, strengths, and desired public image (Cummings & Worley, 1993 ). Leaders are expected to adhere to a company’s values and mission (Strebel, 1996 ).

Provide Encouragement and Incentives to Change

Most of the change management models and frameworks suggested that organizations should reward new behavior, yet most respondents said they did not provide incentives to change. About 75% of participants did indicate that they frequently gave encouragement to employees about the change. The questionnaire may have confused participants by suggesting that they provide incentives before the change occurs. Additionally, respondents may have associated incentives with monetary compensation. Employee training can be considered an incentive, and many participants confirmed that they provided employees and managers with training. More information is needed to determine why the participants did not provide incentives and what the participants defined as rewards.

Future Conversations Between Practitioners and Researchers

Table ​ Table4 4 identified five strategies that practitioners used more often than the models and frameworks suggested and four strategies that were suggested more often by the models and frameworks than used by practitioners. One strategy that showed the largest difference was provided employees with incentives to implement the change. Although 81% of the selected models and frameworks suggested that practitioners should provide employees with incentives, only 25% of the practitioners identified that they provided incentives always and most of the time. Conversations between theorists and practitioners could determine if these differences occur because each group uses different terms (Hughes, 2007 ) or if practitioners just implement change differently than theorists suggest (Saka, 2003 ).

Additionally, conversations between theorists and practitioners may help promote improvements in the field of change management. For example, practitioners were split on how often they promoted DEI, and the selected models and frameworks did not focus on DEI in change implementations. Conversations between the two groups would help theorists understand what practitioners are doing to advance the field of change management. These conversations may encourage theorists to modify their models and frameworks to include modern approaches to change.

Limitations

The models and frameworks included in this systematic review were found through academic research and websites on the topic of change management. We did not include strategies contained on websites from change management organizations. Therefore, the identified strategies could skew towards approaches favored by theorists instead of practitioners. Additionally, we used specific publications to identify the strategies found in the models and frameworks. Any amendments to the cited models or frameworks found in future publications could not be included in this research.

We distributed this questionnaire in August 2020. Several participants mentioned that they were not currently conducting change management implementations because of global lockdowns due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Because it can take years to complete a change management implementation (Phillips, 2021 ), this research does not describe how COVID-19 altered the strategies used by the participants. Furthermore, participants were not provided with definitions of the strategies. Their interpretations of the strategies may differ from the definitions found in the academic literature.

Future Research

Future research should expand upon what strategies the practitioners use to determine (a) how the practitioners use the strategies, and (b) the reasons why practitioners use certain strategies. Participants identified several strategies that they did not use as often as the literature suggested (e.g., provide employees with incentives and adjust the change implementation because of reactions from employees). Future research should investigate why practitioners are not implementing these strategies often.

Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic may have changed how practitioners implemented change management strategies. Future research should investigate if practitioners have added new strategies or changed the frequency in which they identified using the strategies found in this research.

Our aim was to identify a common set of change management strategies found across several models and frameworks and to identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these strategies in practice. While our findings relate to specific models, frameworks, and strategies, we caution readers to consider the environment and situation where the change will occur. Therefore, strategies should not be selected for implementation based on their inclusion in highly cited models and frameworks. Our study identified strategies found in the literature and used by change managers, but it does not predict that specific strategies are more likely to promote a successful organizational change. Although we have presented several strategies, we do not suggest combining these strategies to create a new framework. Instead, these strategies should be used to promote conversation between practitioners and theorists. Additionally, we do not suggest that one model or framework is superior to others because it contains more strategies currently used by practitioners. Evaluating the effectiveness of a model or framework by how many common strategies it contains gives an advantage to models and frameworks that contain the most strategies. Instead, this research identifies what practitioners are doing in the field to steer change management literature towards the strategies that are most used to promote change.

Declarations

This research does not represent conflicting interests or competing interests. The research was not funded by an outside agency and does not represent the interests of an outside party.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Jeffrey Phillips, Email: ude.usf@spillihpbj .

James D. Klein, Email: ude.usf@nielkj .

• Ackerman-Anderson, L. S., & Anderson, D. (2001). The change leader’s roadmap: How to navigate your organization’s transformation . Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
• Anderson, D., & Ackerman Anderson, L. S. (2001). Beyond change management: Advanced strategies for today’s transformational leaders . Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
• Bakari H, Hunjra AI, Niazi GSK. How does authentic leadership influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions: Integration of theory of planned behavior and Lewin’s three step model. Journal of Change Management. 2017; 17 (2):155–187. doi: 10.1080/14697017.2017.1299370. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bamford DR, Forrester PL. Managing planned and emergent change within an operations management environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. 2003; 23 (5):546–564. doi: 10.1108/01443570310471857. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beckhard, R., & Harris, R. T. (1987). Organizational transitions: Managing complex change (2 nd ed.). Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
• Bridges, W. (1991). Managing transitions: Making the most of change . Perseus Books.
• Buchanan DA, Boddy D. The expertise of the change agent. Prentice Hall; 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bullock RJ, Batten D. It's just a phase we're going through: A review and synthesis of OD phase analysis. Group & Organization Studies. 1985; 10 (4):383–412. doi: 10.1177/105960118501000403. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burnes, B. (2000). Managing change: A strategic approach to organisational dynamics (3 rd ed.). Prentice Hall.
• Burnes B, By RT. Leadership and change: The case for greater ethical clarity. Journal of Business Ethics. 2012; 108 (2):239–252. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-1088-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carnall, C. A. (2007). Managing change in organizations (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.
• Connor, P. E., Lake, L. K., & Stackman, R. W. (2003). Managing organizational change (3 rd ed.). Praeger Publishers.
• Cox AM, Pinfield S, Rutter S. Extending McKinsey’s 7S model to understand strategic alignment in academic libraries. Library Management. 2019; 40 (5):313–326. doi: 10.1108/LM-06-2018-0052. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (1993). Organizational development and change (5 th ed.). West Publishing Company.
• Dale, B. & McQuater, R. (1998) Managing business improvement and quality: Implementing key tools and techniques . Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
• Doyle T, Brady M. Reframing the university as an emergent organisation: Implications for strategic management and leadership in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management. 2018; 40 (4):305–320. doi: 10.1080/1360080X.2018.1478608. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2014). Survey research methods: Applied social research methods (5 th ed.). Sage Publications Inc.
• French, W. L., & Bell, C. H. Jr. (1999). Organizational development: Behavioral science interventions for organizational improvement (6 th ed.). Prentice-Hall Inc.
• Gall, M., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7 th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
• Hallencreutz, J., & Turner, D.-M. (2011). Exploring organizational change best practice: Are there any clear-cut models and definitions? International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences , 3 (1), 60–68. 10.1108/17566691111115081 [ CrossRef ]
• Hiatt, J. M. (2006). ADKAR: A model for change in business, government, and our community . Prosci Learning Publications.
• Hughes M. The tools and techniques of change management. Journal of Change Management. 2007; 7 (1):37–49. doi: 10.1080/14697010701309435. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kanter, R. M., Stein, B. A., & Jick, T. D. (1992). The challenge of organizational change . The Free Press.
• Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change . Harvard Business Review Press.
• Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers . Harper & Brothers Publishers.
• Luecke R. Managing change and transition. Harvard Business School Press; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• McKinsey & Company. (2008). Creating organizational transformations: McKinsey global survey results . McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved August 5, 2020, from http://gsme.sharif.edu/~change/McKinsey%20Global%20Survey%20Results.pdf
• Mento AJ, Jones RM, Dirndorfer W. A change management process: Grounded in both theory and practice. Journal of Change Management. 2002; 3 (1):45–59. doi: 10.1080/714042520. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (1997). Competing by design: The power of organizational architecture . Oxford University Press.
• Neri RA, Mason CE, Demko LA. Application of Six Sigma/CAP methodology: Controlling blood-product utilization and costs. Journal of Healthcare Management. 2008; 53 (3):183–196. doi: 10.1097/00115514-200805000-00009. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Neves P. Readiness for change: Contributions for employee’s level of individual change and turnover intentions. Journal of Change Management. 2009; 9 (2):215–231. doi: 10.1080/14697010902879178. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pettigrew AM. Theoretical, methodological, and empirical issues in studying change: A response to Starkey. Journal of Management Studies. 1987; 24 :420–426. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pettigrew, A., & Whipp, R. (1991). Managing change for competitive success . Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
• Phillips, J. B. (2021). Change happens: Practitioner use of change management strategies (Publication No. 28769879) [Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
• Pless N, Maak T. Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business Ethics. 2004; 54 (2):129–147. doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-9465-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Polk, J. D. (2011). Lean Six Sigma, innovation, and the Change Acceleration Process can work together. Physician Executive, 37 (1), 38̫–42. [ PubMed ]
• Pollack J, Pollack R. Using Kotter’s eight stage process to manage an organizational change program: Presentation and practice. Systemic Practice and Action Research. 2015; 28 :51–66. doi: 10.1007/s11213-014-9317-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Raineri AB. Change management practices: Impact on perceived change results. Journal of Business Research. 2011; 64 (3):266–272. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.11.011. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saka A. Internal change agents’ view of the management of change problem. Journal of Organizational Change Management. 2003; 16 (5):480–496. doi: 10.1108/09534810310494892. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Strebel P. Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business Review. 1996; 74 (3):86–92. [ Google Scholar ]
• Waterman RH, Jr, Peters TJ, Phillips JR. Structure is not organization. Business Horizons. 1980; 23 (3):14–26. doi: 10.1016/0007-6813(80)90027-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Leadership and Change Management

• © 2019
• Keow Ngang Tang 0

International College, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

• Demonstrates how business leaders employ effective leadership styles to manage change and transformation
• Helps readers successfully plan for leadership and team development
• Summarizes and analyzes the latest findings and demonstrates their utility for solving problems in practice such as restructuring, communication, power and politics

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Business (BRIEFSBUSINESS)

95k Accesses

29 Citations

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (8 chapters)

Front matter, leadership in business organization.

Keow Ngang Tang

Leadership Styles and Organizational Effectiveness

Leadership development strategies, team development.

• Change Management

Restructuring: Mergers and Acquisition

Communication skills of business leader, power and politics of business organisation.

• Leadership and organizational effectiveness
• Leadership development strategies
• Power and politics of business organization
• Team development

About this book

Authors and affiliations, about the author, bibliographic information.

Book Title : Leadership and Change Management

Authors : Keow Ngang Tang

Series Title : SpringerBriefs in Business

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8902-3

Publisher : Springer Singapore

eBook Packages : Business and Management , Business and Management (R0)

Copyright Information : The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Softcover ISBN : 978-981-13-8901-6 Published: 01 July 2019

eBook ISBN : 978-981-13-8902-3 Published: 20 June 2019

Series ISSN : 2191-5482

Series E-ISSN : 2191-5490

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : IX, 74

Number of Illustrations : 3 b/w illustrations, 1 illustrations in colour

Topics : Business Strategy/Leadership , Organization

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

An Agile Approach to Change Management

• Sarah Jensen Clayton

Six lessons on moving quickly under pressure.

In the wake of Covid-19, organizations are fundamentally rethinking their product and service portfolios, reinventing their supply chains, pursuing large-scale organizational restructuring and digital transformation, and rebuilding to correct systemic racism from the ground up. Traditional change management process won’t cut it. The author borrows from agile software development processes to reinvent the change management playbook.

The business world has arguably seen more disruption in the last nine months than in the last nine years, bringing new and urgent demand for change. Initiatives are being launched by the dozen, adoption can’t happen fast enough, and the stakes are higher than ever. In the midst of a Covid-induced recession, and with some industries on the brink of extinction, change isn’t about fine-tuning — it’s existential.

• Sarah Jensen Clayton is a senior partner with Korn Ferry. She works with leadership teams to define, align around, and activate enterprise and ecosystem change.

Partner Center

Leadership and Change Management: A Case Study of HP

Case study, 2019, 16 pages, grade: 1,3, alexander kahlert (author), list of figures, 1 introduction.

2 Strategy analysis for the company HP 2.1 Current challenges of HP 2.2 HP’s organizational complexities 2.3 Leadership approach of HP’s senior management

3 Strategic Change Plan for HP 3.1 Determination of the required type of change 3.2 Execution plan of the change path 3.3 Required leadership skills for HP’s revolution

Figure 1- Hewlett Packard's dysfunctional organisation

Figure 2- Agile organization as the new dominant organizational paradigm

Figure 3- HP's leadership issues

Figure 4- Types of Change

Figure 5- Lewin's change management model

Figure 6- HP's change path

Figure 7- HP's required leadership profile

Figure 8- HP's path to future success

The company Hewlett Packard (HP) is an international acting technology enterprise with the focus on manufacturing software, hardware and services to individual clients, corpora- tions, governmental and education sector (cf. HP Inc. 2017: I; HPE Ent. 2018: 3.).

HP had a widespread product line starting enterprise standard servers, computing devices, networking products, software and IT-consulting services (cf. Glassman / Zell / Duron 2005: 10.).

Today, HP is structured into two separate companies. HP Inc. is focused on the former hardware product line (computing products, printers, etc.) and the Hewlett Packard Enter- prise (HPE). HPE’s strategy is to use “capabilities focused on technology, people and eco- nomics to enable customer’s digital transformation” (HPE Ent. 2018: 2.). The current share prices of the two HP companies show high volatility in the share price (cf. Yahoo Finance 2019; Yahoo Finance 2019a.).

In 2012, no spin-off was conducted and HP was one IT company. HP struggled with internal structures, significant internal clashes of culture and finding a path to future success. All of these issues are related to a lack of leadership and change management skills within the enterprise (cf. Goleman 2011: 3.; Cook / Macaulay 2004: 5).

This term paper wants to answer the question:

How could a successful strategic turnaround of HP could be structured and implemented?

In answering this question, the focus lies on change management and leadership theories for a successful transformation. The paper is mainly structured in two parts: Chapter two describes the current state of HP in 2012 taking the dimensions of challenges, organiza- tional complexities and leadership issues into account. Based on that insights, a fitting trans- formation plan is derived by using modern leadership and change management tools.

As a result, all gained insights are summarized and finally assessed in the last chapter.

2 Strategy analysis for the company HP

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 1- Hewlett Packard's dysfunctional organisation.

2.1 Current challenges of HP

In 2011, HP struggled with declining financial performances which was expressed by 19% lower profits and losing market share (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 1-2.). This lead to an in- creasing investor pressure on the company to perform better in the short term.

Simultaneously, HP had to deal with an intensive competition with a strong innovation ca- pability (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 3.). However, HP showed a significant lack of innovation (cf. Economist 2015). This lead to a vicious circle because HP was also not able to build up innovation capabilities caused by talent hiring issues (cf. Economist 2015.). This resulted in the need for external acquisitions, but significant investments could not be financed (cf. Hall 2017). Furthermore, HP had to decide which strategy it wants to follow. The hardware fo- cused strategy faced a declining market share. The combination of short term pressure from the investor base and the need to reconfigure internal capabilities and the strategy made a challenging general condition for HP. Further disturbances like ongoing law suits against HP (TomorrowNow case) averted to focus on important decisions.

2.2 HP’s organizational complexities

Modern technology companies established a new form of organizational structure: The agile organization. An agile organization consists of a network of smaller teams which are strongly customer-centered. The employees of the different sub-teams are all committed to one predefined vision (cf. Nadella / London 2018: 5.). Furthermore, it operates in fast de- cision and learning cycles so that the ability of quickly reconfiguring structures and strate- gies toward value-creating opportunities is possible (cf. Aghina et al. 2017: 3.).

However, HP did not establish the required culture and structure to cope with similar chal- lenges of the modern companies.

HP’s culture is poisoned. HP’s employees were preoccupied with internal conflicts and power rivalries. Cross-functional collaboration was not accepted (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 1-5.). Overall, the culture was damaged by a significant lack of trust between employees and directors (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 13.).

Simultaneously, HP established an efficient and cost-saving driven internal structure. Even trash pickups were cut (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 4.). This Taylorism management approach was successful in an environment that was stable and predictable. McKinsey defines this kind of organization as “organizations as machines” (Aghina et al. 2017:3.). There was a strong hierarchy and efficiency management rationale established and the business units were clearly silo-thinking driven which led to dramatic misalignments of the business units. For instance, HP printer software could not be run on HP computers (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 11.). Modern companies are structured like an organism (flexible and responsive) with strong leadership as the core (cf. Aghina et al. 2017: 5.). HP showed a significant gap in terms of an environment fitting structure and culture which was simultaneously poisoned by internal conflicts.

Figure 2- Agile organization as the new dominant organizational paradigm (Authors own illustration based on Aghina et al. 2017: 5.).

2.3 Leadership approach of HP’s senior management

Good leadership is directly interrelated with the success of a strategic transformation pro- gram (cf. Kotter 2000: 60.). The former CEO Leo Apotheker wanted to take HP towards more software business with focus on big data analytics (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 10.). As described in the case, the transformation failed. The leadership approach of HP is evaluated in five dimensions of failure:

( 1) Not Establishing a Great Enough Sense of Urgency

According to Kotter, the first leadership fault in a transformation is to not seed sufficient urgency for the change in an organization. Only motivated and committed people can achieve successful change (cf. Kotter 1996: 4.).

Apotheker did not communicate the urgency in a way that the organization was committed to the change. The process was “messy and contentious” and even senior management participants were not aligned to the new strategy (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 10.).

(2) Not Creating a Powerful Enough Guiding Coalition

It is essential to build up a change coalition that supports the efforts. This is a process of a growing fan base of the future state after the transformation (cf. Kotter 2000: 62.).

Apotheker was clearly committed to his own vision for HP and did not seek for different perspectives (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 13.). Kotter says that a transformation need a co- alition throughout the hierarchy and it has to grow from the senior management down to the employees (cf. Kotter 1996: 6.). The coalition growth stopped at Apotheker and an opposi- tion gained participants which finally stopped the change.

(3) Lacking a Vision

The vision of a leader for the company plays a key role in producing change. It helps to align and inspire large numbers of people dealing with the company (cf. Kotter 1996: 7.).

Apotheker derived a strategy of how to develop HP further, but never defined a clear vision. The strategy could have been the right one, but the main reason why it was confronted with resistance was that no one saw a clear vision. A transformation without vision leads to in- compatible projects and finally to failure (cf. Kotter 2000: 63.).

(4) Not Removing Obstacles to the New Vision

To achieve a high amount of committed people, obstacles have to be removed. Obstacles can be the structure, compensation systems or middle management directors who want to stop the proposed change (cf. Kotter 1996: 10.).

HP’s hierarchical and silo-focused structure is not able to fastly change. Apotheker started with dictating the strategy without reconfigure the internal structure of HP. Apotheker and his team did not show any supportive or inspiring approaches to convince the directors to follow his strategy. Apotheker did not realize that fear is one of the most important feelings in a process of change (cf. Kotter 2000: 65).

(5) Not Systematically Planning For and Creating Short-Term Wins

People of an organization have to see short-term wins to believe in the long-term success (cf. Kotter 2000: 65.). Apotheker’s short-term performance was insufficient and lead to doubts (cf. Bandler / Burke 2012: 10.). The occurrence of leaks show that the employees did not believe in the strategy and felt confirmed that HP does not follow the right path. Resistence was built up.

Figure 3- HP's leadership issues (Authors own illustration based on Kotter 1996: 16.).

3 Strategic Change Plan for HP

HP had to face multiple challenges that were obviously not solvable with the current state of HP. A restructuring of a company is commonly very costly and complex (cf. Katowski / Wysocki 2014: 116). Therefore, a successful transformation always has to predefine the required type of change and derive a proper change path supported by a fitting leadership approach (cf. Katowski / Wysocki 2014: 116).

3.1 Determination of the required type of change

To define the type of change, speed and extent of HP’s change is evaluated.

( 1) Speed of Change

In HP’s case, investor’s trust is decreasing caused by poor financial performances; no clear strategic path can be defined; cultural issues like leaks and mistrust are increasing dramat- ically and a significant lack of innovation is present (cf. Ibarra / Rattan / Johnston 2018: 10). Therefore, HP’s planned change has to be fastly executed. Otherwise, HP is in danger of losing the trust of workforce and investors. HP needs a “ Big Bang ” (cf. Balogun 2001: 3.).

• No comments yet.

Similar texts

Change Leadership. Presencing nach C.O. Scharmer in der Praxis

Change Leadership. Main Theoretical Approaches

Practices and Challenges of Change Leadership. The Case of Ethiopian Sugar Co...

Leading successful changes in your business: Peakmake – A new model combining...

What is Effective Leadership? - Managing People in Organisations

Structure, Culture and Leadership Management. Organisational Behaviour Betwee...

Leadership, Management, and Organisational Theories. A Critical Literature Re...

Change Leadership Strategies. A Comparative Analysis of Apple Inc. and Genera...

Einfluss von New Leadership Management auf Mitarbeitermotivation und -bindung...

Urban Management Studies in the Urban Regeneration Context

Change-Management oder Change Leadership? So gelingen Unternehmenstransformat...

Effektives Leadership und Change-Management

Implementierung eines Inhouse-Consultings zur Unterstützung des organisationa...

Wirkungsvolle Führung im Change-Management: Studie am Beispiel des Privatkund...

Digital Leadership. Neue Führungskultur, Schlüsselkompetenzen sowie Anforderu...

Modern leadership styles. Transformations due to technological development

Digital Leadership. Neue Anforderungen an Führung im digitalen Zeitalter und ...

Individual Case Study Report. A Change of Leadership Style within the "L...

Change Management in einer disruptiven Unternehmenswelt. Change Management od...

Change Management in Franchise-Systemen des textilen Einzelhandels

Upload papers

Your term paper / thesis:

- Publication as eBook and book - High royalties for the sales - Completely free - with ISBN - It only takes five minutes - Every paper finds readers

Publish now - it's free

Leadership and Change Management: A Cross-Cultural Perspective

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research

ISSN : 1355-2554

Article publication date: 19 March 2018

Issue publication date: 19 March 2018

Choromides, C. (2018), "Leadership and Change Management: A Cross-Cultural Perspective", International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research , Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 575-578. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-03-2018-428

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2018, Emerald Publishing Limited

Until recently, books on management had failed to truly synthesise the theoretical perspectives of leadership and change management with more practical know-how. Publications have tended to be either more academic publications or more practical case studies. What was needed is a comprehensive text to the analysis and practice of leadership and change management, both for managers as well as for those studying in higher education, a text that brings together more academic know-why research, and more practical how-to-do-it insights.

Researchers agree that a leader’s inability to fully understand what is needed in order to guide their organisation through successful change can be a reason for failure. Proper planning and management of change can reduce the likelihood of failure, promote change effectiveness and increase employee engagement. Yet, the change in organisations must be viewed as a continuous activity that affects both organisational and individual outcomes. If change management can be considered as an event induced by socio-cultural factors, the cultural variable gains greater significance when applied to the quality of the relationship between a leader and their team. Many organisations today are on the verge of internationalisation. It is here that the cultural context can affect behaviours and in the same way, leadership style.

In a stimulating and original book Leadership and Change Management: A Cross-Cultural Perspective , edited by Daphne Halkias, Joseph Santora, Nicholas Harkiolakis and Paul Thurman, using compelling case studies, covering a diverse range of industries, from around the world, the editors contends that a leaders’ role in the management of change is a critical issue for successful outcomes of strategic initiatives. Globalisation and economic instability have prompted an increase in organisational changes related to downsizing and restructuring in order to improve financial performance and organisational competitiveness. This accessible and comprehensive edited volume addresses the aforementioned gap and successfully combines theoretical management perspectives with practical how-to-do-it insights into the planning, management and leadership of change.

The editors have succeeded in to synthesise distinctive attributes and diverse theoretical and empirical perspectives of leadership and change management in the global economy, advancing our understanding on the characteristics and patterns of managing and leading organisational change. By providing a story and evidence from a diverge cultural/country contexts from European, North American, Latin American, Middle East, African and Asian viewpoints, the editors illustrate how the cultural, ethnic, regional and religious attributes, forces and underlying influences determine on how leaders manage change within organisations and accordingly develop change strategies aligned with the business objectives of the organisational and the concerned stakeholders.

In many ways, the chapters are complimentary and useful not only to professionals and researchers interested in understanding the various perspectives of leadership and change management but also to non-experts and students who are keen on understanding the relevant academic literature and frameworks to leadership and change management

In Chapter 1, Mary Barret examines the management of change leadership in a cross-cultural context; the impact that different management styles had on the successful management of the family business, the challenges of fitting the two different cultures together and the cultural impediments towards change. Her case demonstrates how effective combination of cultural norms of the business made change a success. In Chapter 2, Emmanouela Mandalaki, Cazi Islam and Filipe Sobral discuss organisational change and leadership, and stressing the importance of considering organisational culture before initiating change. Their analysis stresses the importance of successfully communicating the change before initiating it and of developing a change strategy that it is in line with the organisational culture of the organisation in question. The chapter concludes with a case study illustrating the complexity of driving successful organisational changes as well as the importance of understanding organisational culture beyond mere economistic objectives before designing successful changes.

In Chapter 3, Melquicedec Lozano and Kathy Overbeke explore strategic business processes contextualised in the family experience. By including the family experience of the corporate leader, they were able to discover the influence of culture in the form of values, preferences and beliefs in strategic change management. Their case study offers insights into the importance of leadership and the mechanisms that link cultural attitudes and beliefs with leadership and strategic change process. In Chapter 4, Marcos Komodromos examines how an organisational justice framework can be used to explore the employees’ perception of trust, fairness and the management of change during a period of strategic changes for a media organisation in Cyprus amid the recent economic crisis, and the role of leadership in these change.

In Chapter 5, Mari Kooskora and Marta Piigli explore the case of a young female leader in Estonia. Their case study offers insights on how experienced female managers are able to make more balanced decisions and consider different perspectives in managing change. Female leaders often bring needed collaborative and participative skills to the workplace by assuming a transformational leadership style, while gender and cultural diversity being identified as the key competitive factors. In Chapter 6, Marina Niforos in collaboration with Ariane Cherel compare two French companies, one large multinational with global operations in heavy industry and one small, but rapidly growing company in services that is expanding in new international markets, and through their contrasted experiences, the authors try to shed some light on how best to deal with the challenges of globalisation in adopting and executing uniform strategic objectives and policies across global operations and cultural misalignment.

In Chapter 7, Maria Vakola, Dimitris Bourantas and Marina Karli examine how an organisation capitalising on its founder’s leadership competencies, management style, vision, competence and business decisions can emerge from a six-year recession in Greece not just intact, but also confident of its future. In Chapter 8, Shefali Nandan explores and discusses the profound influence of socio-cultural context on leadership and change management from an Indian perspective. In Chapter 9, Simon Jones addresses how the cross-cultural interactions impact the building of a knowledge-intensive institution and the challenges that expatriate leadership at the Nazarbayev University in Central Asia needs to resolve.

In Chapter 10, Janine Saba Zakka and Renee Sabbagh Ghattas present an overview on the survival of small family-owned manufacturing firm in Lebanon with an emphasis on the role of education, leadership styles and internal culture and change management in achieving positive change that led to the development of the business. In Chapter 11, Franco Vaccarino and Steve Elers focuses on Maori leadership in New Zealand, how globalisation has impacted on contemporary indigenous leadership and how Maori cultural values can effectively embrace the different elements and dynamics of contemporary leadership. In Chapter 12, Andrea Santiago focuses on how culture influence core corporate values, enhances leadership and promotes change in Philippines.

In Chapter 13, Natalia Vinokurova, Vyacheslav Boltrukevich and Alexander Naumov focus on leadership and change management in Russia studying the leadership skills, qualities and style of Sergey Filippov, a successful Russian Practitioner. In Chapter 14, Claire Seaman presenting a case study from Scotland addresses the leadership of incremental change that acknowledge both the importance of tradition and the importance of a fresh strategic direction for the business is not simple, but it is vital to the future success of business in rapidly changing markets.

In Chapter 15, Cecilia Bjursell presents a case study of Swedish leadership and defines this approach as transformative leadership in which the manager’s genuine interest for people is at heart. In Chapter 16, Grant Jewell Rich examines the early life of Barack Obama as a case study with implications for better understanding the influence of early multicultural experience on leadership and change management. In Chapter 17, Joseph Hamlett examines how military prepares for change, the impact that leadership has on embracing constant changes, how it maintains control over change and how change management is accomplished.

The discussion sections clearly demonstrate the contribution, originality and value of the research. There is no doubt that the book will spark the interest and engage the reader, as it offers many contemporary and practical examples that allow the reader to develop a progressive and embedded understanding of the context of leadership and change management.

The explicit choice of approach by the authors noted above, that is, the emphasis on practice and application would appear to be at the heart of both the strengths and weaknesses of the book. Whilst the text is clear, accessible and concise, allowing for a free-flowing discussion and distillation of a wide range of relevant concepts, theories and research findings, from the leadership and change management literature, it lacks in certain chapters the depth of conceptual and theoretical engagement that one might expect of an academic textbook. Although it is my understanding that there was a conscious choice by the authors not to overburden the text with numerous references, I feel that some of the chapters (1, 3, 7, 8, 12 and 13) were short on referencing and weak in their theoretical underpinning. Given the scope of the material and the targeted audience the text is aimed at, this seems not to be a significant weakness.

The strength of this edited volume is the choice made not to avoid the presentation of leadership failures that strengthened and validated the deductions the authors made about the positives. The overall structure of the book and the organisation of material within chapters are well thought out with the editor skilfully blending empirical material from diverse sources into an easily readable holistic account of cross-cultural perspectives in leadership and change management.

The book, however, is weakened by the lack of an introductory chapter authored by the editors, where a summary of the papers would be provided along with a reflective commentary of the concepts that motivated the compilation of the volume. Then the volume abruptly ends without a summary chapter or an epilogue that could have been useful drawing the different chapters and arguments together and in relation to the themes of cross-cultural perspectives in leadership and change management, followed by suggestions for linked policy actions. Since this is an edited volume, we would want to see the editors’ personal opinion and reflection on the chapters and how the content of the book has affected their views on leadership and change management. Still this is by no means a significant weakness.

Taken as a whole, this edited volume is well conceived, written with clarity successfully match its title and objectives. It benefits from the use of a balanced mix of broad theoretical frameworks and original empirical research which are used to develop to the targeted audience of students, researchers and entrepreneurs the necessary mindset needed in order to understand cross-cultural perspectives in leadership and change management in a global world. Each chapter has clear research objectives, updated reference list and ends with a number of critical questions and/or propositions highlighting potential future research. The discussion sections clearly demonstrate the contribution, originality and value of the research, giving emphasis on the applicability of the results. As with most edited volumes, what is lost in coherence and homogeneity is gained in variety and originality. All individual chapters have considerable merit and its heterogeneous nature leads to a contribution on the area leadership that is greater than the sum of its parts.

There is no doubt that the book will spark the interest and engage the reader, as it offers many contemporary and practical examples that allow the reader to develop a progressive and embedded understanding of the cross-cultural perspectives in leadership and change management.

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Leadership and Change Management: A Case Study of Pemancar

Related Papers

Asian Case Research Journal

Prescott C. Ensign 安森

Melville Corporate Finance, Inc. (Melville) is approached by a Canadian bottling equipment manufacturer to provide $3.4 million of capital investment foreign buyer financing to their customer, a rapidly expanding Chinese bottling company. The Chinese company needs to purchase the equipment and increase its production capacity to secure long-term, multi-million dollar contracts with Pepsi and Coca-Cola in Thailand. With very short deadlines, Melville's CEO works with Export Development Canada (EDC) to assess the risks involved in offering full financing and insurance for the Chinese bottler, and must keep in mind that the Canadian manufacturer will lose the sale if the financing does not get approved. The deal presents several challenges to Melville; an unknown foreign buyer with no proven credit history, language and communication barriers, geographic distance, incongruent accounting standards, etc. As the risk variables emerge, both Melville and EDC must decide if the stakes are too high to support the transaction.

Roshni Sunny

This case deals with the challenges and dilemma faced by WudStay, a start-up engaged in the aggregation of different accommodation options in India. The company wants to evaluate the attractiveness and the challenges facing the houseboat sector and decide whether to enter this sector. The case illustrates the present state of the houseboat sector and captures the direction it is heading. Since its inception, the sector has remained unorganized, resulting in unsatisfactory customer service standards. The short-sighted approach of houseboat owners to maximize profits and refusal to adopt technological solutions has put doubts on the long-term health of this sector with many tourists looking for better alternatives. The sector is concentrated in two states in India: Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) and Kerala. The differences in the external-macro environment has taken the sector in these two states to completely different directions. In Kashmir, the deteriorating security situation has a negat...

Debasis Pradhan

supriti mishra

On June 14, 2015, Vedanta Resources PLC of the UK announced the merger of two of its Indian subsidiaries, namely, Vedanta Limited and Cairn India Limited. Per the terms of the merger, Vedanta Limited would issue one share of itself for every share of Cairn India. In addition, it would also issue a preference share of INR 10 in face value. The stock prices of the two companies, however, soon started trading outside the range suggested by the above exchange ratio. This gave rise to different possible trading strategies for the investors with different possible outcomes. The case is written around mid-September 2015, when the share prices of both companies declined and the shareholders were yet to receive any formal communication from the management.

Nitin Pangarkar

Journal of Porphyrins and Phthalocyanines

Mikhail Filatov

Hans Steinmüller

Girma Gebresenbut , Genene Mola

International Journal of Innovation Management

Eric Brun , John Daly

Christiane Pavani , Eduardo Caritá

RELATED PAPERS

Venugopal Rao Soma

Cardioprotective Natural Products

Soheir El Zalabani

nicholas tenaglia

raja nerina raja yusof

Raymund Habaradas

Edith Castillo

cyber 880869

Ujaval Patel

Diana herrera

Rizky Ardani

Policies and Prospects

shane pereira

Timur Dadabaev

oswar mungkasa

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Netflix Change Management Case Study

Netflix is one of the world’s leading internet television networks with over 100 million members in 190 countries. It has a wide variety of award-winning original programming, documentaries, TV shows and feature films. 

Netflix offers a subscription services to its users to watch all its content online. Now Netflix is producing its own content and also adding quality content of other producers for its users. It has become one of the popular online video streaming web portals and been on first top 50 websites globally.

But Netflix transformed itself and it embraced change with ever changing technology and business market.

What is Netflix successfully change story? How it happened and what challenges it faced to cope with change?

For this questions, we are presenting here Netflix change management case study.

This case study will explore how Netflix has successfully managed change in the past and present. It will also provide recommendations for other businesses on how to approach change management.

The story of Netflix change management

Netflix is a streaming service for movies and TV shows. It has a library of over 200,000 titles that you can watch on your phone, tablet, computer, or TV. You can also download shows to watch offline. Netflix offers a variety of plans, including a basic plan that starts at $7.99/month and a premium plan that starts at $11.99/month.

Netflix was founded in 1997 by Reed Hastings and Marc Randolph. They started the company with the intention of offering a DVD-by-mail service. In 2007, they introduced streaming, which allowed instant streaming of TV shows and movies on your computer. In 2013, they introduced the concept of ” binge watching” with the release of House of Cards, which all episodes of the first season were released at once so that viewers could watch them all in one sitting. In 2015, they launched their own production company, Netflix Originals, which produces movies and TV shows that are only available on Netflix. 

Netflix has undergone several changes since it was founded. The most notable change was the introduction of streaming in 2007, which changed the way people watched TV and movies.

Netflix made two big changes since its started business. First, it introduced the subscription option in 1999 to store DVD rental. This option allows users to rent unlimited DVD rental without late fees. It was a drastic change in the business model of Netflix.

The second big change was happened in 2007, when it launched an online video streaming service. It was a highly disruptive change which completely revolutionalized the concept of watching movies and Tv shows online. Consumers also welcomed this change because this change was the need of time. Because everyone was using smartphone, laptops and computers and trend of going to cinema to watch a movie was on decline. Netflix also used social media and present its content to reach out their customers.  

Netflix’s Change Management Process 

Netflix’s change management process is a model for other organizations to follow. The company has a dedicated team that is responsible for managing change. This team works closely with Netflix’s engineers and product managers to ensure that changes are made in a controlled and safe manner. Netflix has also implemented a series of mechanisms to help prevent and mitigate the impact of changes. For example, all changes are assessed for risk before they are implemented. Netflix also conducts regular post-change reviews to identify any issues that may have arisen from the change. As a result of these measures, Netflix has been able to successfully manage change while minimizing disruptions to its business.

How Netflix manages organizational change forces

There are many factors that affect organizational change . But primarily these are two broad forces of organizational change: a) external and b)internal. Among the external forces there were rapid changes in technology, globalisation, social media etc. These all external factors led to organizational change at Netflix. .For instance, people’s expectation and behaviour, likes and dislikes in terms of watching content was changing due to new technology. New tools, techniques were also affecting business of movies watching and TV shows. But Netflix managed all those forces of change and responded in a big way to meet expectations of its consumers.

There were also internal forces of organizational change like new skills of employees and employees expectations, need of change in work environment, cost of business model etc. Netflix taken all these factors into consideration before going to execute change. And that’s the reason behind their successfully implementation of change.

How Netflix Uses Data to Drive Change 

Netflix’s data team is made up of over 800 people, including statisticians, analysts, and engineers. Their mission is simple: “to help Netflix understand its business and the world.” To do this, they collect and process tons of data every day. This data comes from a variety of sources, including things like clickstream data (what you watch and when you watch it), surveys, social media activity, third-party research, and more. 

Once all this data is collected, it’s organized and stored in a massive data warehouse. This is where things start to get really interesting. The team then uses a combination of qualitative analysis (looking at the meaning behind the numbers) and quantitative analysis (using statistical models to draw conclusions) to glean insights from the data. These insights are then used to inform everything from what new shows to green-light to which actors should star in them. 

For example, let’s say the team notices that a lot of people who watch Stranger Things also tend to watch You. They might then use this information to suggest Stranger Things to people who haven’t watched it yet or recommend You to people who have finished Stranger Things and are looking for something similar. This is just one small example of how Netflix uses data to drive change within its business. 

It’s clear that data plays a big role in everything Netflix does. From deciding which new shows to produce to suggesting content for individual users, data is at the heart of the company’s decision-making process. And as our watching habits continue to be tracked and analyzed, we can expect even more personalized recommendations and a more tailored streaming experience overall.

Learning from drastic changes

In order to maintain a successful business, it is important to occasionally review your company’s methods and make changes where necessary. This is especially true in today’s ever-changing marketplace. Netflix, a leading provider of streaming video content, knows this well. In 2011, the company made a drastic change to its business model that upset many of its customers. However, thanks to careful planning and execution, the change was ultimately successful and resulted in increased profits for the company.

The introduction of drastic changes can be a difficult process, but with proper planning and execution, it can be successful. Netflix provides a great example of how to successfully navigate a major change. By carefully considering the needs of its customers and taking the time to properly execute its plans, the company was able to weather the storm and come out stronger than ever before.

Final Words

Netflix is a great example of change management. Business organizations can learn from Netflix change management case study to keep up with the latest changes and trends. Netflix has been successful in managing change by using data to drive their decisions. There are multiple lessons for other business entities that how Netflix capitalised on its human resources and rightly understood needs of modern-day customers.

About The Author

Tahir Abbas

Related posts.

Risks of Organizational Restructuring

How to Communicate Organizational Change to Employees

Change Manager Interview Questions and Answers for 2023

2022 Impact Factor

• About   Publication Information Subscriptions Permissions Advertising Journal Rankings Best Article Award Press Releases
• Resources   Access Options Submission Guidelines Reviewer Guidelines Sample Articles Paper Calls Contact Us Submit & Review  
• Browse   Current Issue All Issues Featured Latest Topics Videos

California Management Review

California Management Review is a premier academic management journal published at UC Berkeley

CMR INSIGHTS

Are we asking too much leadership from leaders.

by Herman Vantrappen and Frederic Wirtz

Image Credit | Nick Fewings

Leaders do not have an easy time. In the assumption that the headlines in the management literature are a reliable guide, leaders are expected not only to be brilliant but also servant, humble, transformational, vulnerable, authentic, emotionally intelligent, empathetic, unlocked and connecting – at the least. 1-9 That is a tall order, even for those who are labelled superhuman.

Related CMR Articles

“Transformational Leader or Narcissist? How Grandiose Narcissists Can Create and Destroy Organizations and Institutions” by Charles A. O’Reilly & Jennifer A. Chatman

Fortunately, leaders may not need to take all those exhortations too serious, or certainly not too literal. To begin with, some scholars warn of the shaky grounds of several leadership constructs. For example, Katja Einola et al. point to authentic leadership theory as an example of a “dysfunctional family of positive leadership theories celebrating good qualities in a leader linked with good outcomes and positive follower ‘effects’ almost by definition.” 10 They add that leadership studies should “raise the bar for what academic knowledge work is and better distinguish it from pseudoscience, pop-management, consulting, and entertainment.” Ouch!

Other scholars are adding precautions about the potentially detrimental effects of certain leader behaviors both for the leaders themselves and for the organizations they lead. For example, Joanna Lin et al. point to leader emotional exhaustion resulting from transformational leader behavior. 11 Charles O’Reilly et al. warn of the substantial overlaps of transformational leadership with grandiose narcissism. 12

Still other scholars emphasize that leadership skills are context-specific. For example, Raffaella Sadun emphasizes that the most effective leaders have social skills that are specific to their company and industry. 13 Nitin Nohria points out that charisma often is a liability, yet charismatic leaders can be especially useful at entrepreneurial startups and in corporate turnarounds. 14 Jasmin Hu et al. indicate that humble leaders are effective only when their level of humility matches to what team members expect. 15

The above tells us two things, whether we are a leader or a follower. First, the pertinence of a particular leader behavior depends on the situation. Second, we should temper our expectations of the effect of that behavior. But even then, the question remains: Are we demanding too much from leaders? The answer is nuanced: No, we cannot demand too much; but the real question is how we could lessen the need for those demands to emerge in the first place.

Reading the definitions of those leader behaviors, it would be hard to argue we are demanding too much. Just consider the following examples:

• Servant leaders “place the needs of their subordinates before their own needs and center their efforts on helping subordinates grow.” 1
• Humble leaders “are willing to admit it when they make a mistake, they recognize and acknowledge the skills of those they lead, and they continuously seek out opportunities to become better.” 16
• Vulnerable leaders “intentionally open themselves up to the potential of emotional harm while taking action (when possible) to create a positive outcome.” 4
• Emotionally intelligent leaders “are conscious about and responsive to their emotions, possessing the ability to harness and control them in order to deal with people effectively and make the best decisions.” 17
• Empathetic leaders “genuinely care for people, validate their feelings, and are willing to offer support.” 7
• Connecting leaders “concurrently contend with identities, actions, emotions of a leader and a follower.” 9

While these demands on leaders are pertinent, they are also taxing in terms of time and energy. To solve the quandary, we should look for ways to lessen the need for those demands to emerge in the first place. On many occasions, leaders at the top are led to activate the afore-mentioned behaviors because doubts, disagreements, tensions, trade-offs and eventually conflicts by and between people in the field are allowed to escalate. These frictions may emerge and escalate to the top for all kinds of reasons but they often land there due to organizational design faults: Some designs are intrinsically frictional; others lack mechanisms to resolve friction at origin. Precluding these design faults requires craftsmanship in organization design.

Let us take a stylized example. Laura is the commercial manager in charge of the Brazil region at Widget Inc. As sales this year are going more slowly than planned, she is desperately trying to win a specific new client. To have any chance of winning, she must be able to offer a special off-catalogue product. So she turns to Lucas, the global manager in charge of the product line concerned, who unfortunately has to tell her that the manufacturing plant is fully booked for the next six months, leaving no capacity for the mandatory testing of the special product for her client in Brazil. Tension rises, and the issue escalates to their respective bosses, the EVP Regions and the EVP Products. Unfortunately, these two do not manage to agree on a solution either. Even worse, the incident degenerates into an acrimonious confrontation at the company’s next executive team meeting, where the two blame each other for a chronic lack of flexibility.

The originally operational issue thus lands with a thick thud on the CEO’s desk. After suppressing a deep sigh, she activates various leader behaviors. She is empathetic (“I sense how strongly you both feel about this important matter …”), servant (“I don’t blame you for bringing this to my attention …”), humble (“I realize I should have put in place a way of preventing issues like this …”), vulnerable (“In fact, I once struggled myself with a similar issue …”), and more…

The CEO may be doing all the right things at that moment, but could she have been spared the onus of dealing with the originally operational friction if only the company’s organization had been designed differently? Widget Inc.’s organization architecture features two equally-weighted primary verticals, i.e., “region” and “product”, both having full P&L responsibility, hence competing with each other directly for resources, decision power and attention. While there is no general rule that such an architecture must not be chosen, in general it tends to be an intrinsically frictional design.

The general message for leaders is: When you seek remedies for pain points in your organization, do not count on leader behavior only, but check also for architectural design faults or ambiguities. Here are three examples, each linked to a variable that defines an organization’s architecture.

1. The primary vertical

Small mono-product and mono-market companies tend to have a function-based architecture (e.g., product development, purchasing, production, sales, distribution, after-sales). At large companies, that architecture can be intrinsically frictional. For example, if you are in the business of developing, constructing and maintaining power plants worldwide, the business development people, when they make a bid, might be tempted to foresee low maintenance costs so as to increase their chances of winning the bid. Alas, if the bid is won, the maintenance division will bear the brunt. Such operational tension is inherent to this type of business, but you do not want that tension to constantly manifest itself at the C-suite level. Therefore, consider having “region” rather than “function” as primary vertical and then setting up a function-based organization within each region. 18

2. The corporate parent

Each of a company’s business entities has specific objectives, challenges and priorities. Imagine your company has a mix of large businesses operating in its mature home market and small ventures in promising overseas markets. The latter may be keen to tap into the talent and knowledge that reside in the former, while the former may be reluctant to lend to the latter. Obviously, you do not want every such request and refusal to be elevated to the C-suite level. A global knowledge management and talent mobility system could solve the problem, and you might expect the businesses, out of enlightened self-interest, to set it up among themselves. Alas, that is unlikely to happen, as the benefits are contingent on participation by all businesses. Therefore, consider having a corporate function kick-start the initiative. 19

3. Lateral coordination

Imagine that your organization architecture consists of business entities focused on “product” and others on “customer segment”. Even though these entities by design are relatively self-contained, “product” and “customer segment” still need to coordinate daily on operational matters, such as defining product specs, setting price levels, launching commercial campaigns, etc. Hence you decide to create a matrix, with sales managers reporting both to a product line manager and a customer segment manager. And you expect these matrixed sales managers to make the best possible trade-offs between the partially diverging interests of their two bosses. Alas, a matrix between two verticals with P&L responsibility tends to be intrinsically frictional. 20 The matrixed manager’s anxiety about role conflict and their bosses’ fear of power loss may create festering conflicts escalating to the C-suite level. Therefore, in this case, consider a soft-wired coordination mechanism (such as a periodic joint planning cycle) instead of a hard-wired matrix. 

There are many other examples of organization design faults or ambiguities, not only related to organizational architecture but also to governance, business processes, company culture, people and systems. Admittedly, the perfect organization design does not exist – tension and friction are a fact of corporate life. And we could hardly demand too much authenticity, emotional intelligence, empathy and other commendable behaviors from our leaders, as described at start. But there is an issue when senior leaders are compelled to activate these behaviors to resolve internal conflicts that should not have escalated to the top of the organization. By identifying and removing glaring design faults and ambiguities about roles, we can help lessen the emergence and escalation of such conflicts, and consequently reduce the opportunity cost of senior leaders devoting energy and time to resolving stoppable conflicts. Senior leaders had better focus on genuine people issues, external stakeholders, and the organization’s strategic choices.

References

R.C. Liden, S.J. Wayne, H. Zhao and D. Henderson, “Servant Leadership: Development of a Multidimensional Measure and Multi-Level Assessment,” The Leadership Quarterly 19, no. 2 (2008): 161-177..

E.H. Schein and P.A. Schein, “Humble Leadership: The Power of Relationships, Openness, and Trust,” 2nd ed. (Oakland: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2018).

B.M. Bass, “Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations” (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1985).

J. Morgan, “Leading with Vulnerability: Unlock Your Greatest Superpower to Transform Yourself, Your Team, and Your Organization” (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2023).

B. George, “Authentic Leadership: Rediscovering the Secrets to Creating Lasting Value” (New York: Jossey-Bass, 2004).

D. Goleman, “The Emotionally Intelligent Leader” (Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2019).

O. Valadon, “What We Get Wrong About Empathic Leadership,” Harvard Business Review, Oct. 17, 2023.

H. Le Gentil, “The Unlocked Leader: Dare to Free Your Own Voice, Lead with Empathy, and Shine Your Light in the World” (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2023).

“The Connecting Leader: Serving Concurrently as a Leader and a Follower,” ed. Z. Jaser (Charlotte: IAP, 2021).

K. Einola and M. Alvesson, “The Perils of Authentic Leadership Theory,” Leadership 17, no. 4 (2021): 483-490.

J. Lin, B.A. Scott and F.K. Matta, “The Dark Side of Transformational Leader Behaviors for Leaders Themselves: A Conservation of Resources Perspective,” Academy of Management Journal 62, no. 5 (2019): 1556-1582.

C.A. O’Reilly and J.A. Chatman, “Transformational Leader or Narcissist? How Grandiose Narcissists Can Create and Destroy Organizations and Institutions,” California Management Review 62, no. 3 (2020): 5-27.

R. Sadun, “The Myth of the Brilliant, Charismatic Leader,” Harvard Business Review, Nov. 23, 2022.s

N. Nohria, “When Charismatic CEOs Are an Asset — and When They’re a Liability,” Harvard Business Review, Dec. 1, 2023.

J. Hu, B. Erdogan, K. Jiang and T.N. Bauer, “Research: When Being a Humble Leader Backfires,” Harvard Business Review, April 4, 2018.

T.K. Kelemen, S.H. Matthews, M.J. Matthews and S.E. Henry, “Essential Advice for Leaders from a Decade of Research on Humble Leadership,” LSE Business Review, Jan. 17, 2023.

S.T.A. Phipps, L.C. Prieto and E.N. Ndinguri, “Emotional Intelligence: Is It Necessary for Leader Development?” Journal of Leadership, Accountability & Ethics 11, no.1 (2014): 73-89.

H. Vantrappen and F. Wirtz, “When to Change Your Company’s P&L Responsibilities,” Harvard Business Review, April 14, 2022.

H. Vantrappen and F. Wirtz, “How To Get a Corporate Parent That Is Better For Business,” California Management Review, March 5, 2024.

J. Wolf and W.G. Egelhoff, “An Empirical Evaluation of Conflict in MNC Matrix Structure Firms,” International Business Review 22, no. 3 (2013): 591-601.

Recommended

Current issue.

Volume 66, Issue 2 Winter 2024

Recent CMR Articles

The Changing Ranks of Corporate Leaders

The Business Value of Gamification

Hope and Grit: How Human-Centered Product Design Enhanced Student Mental Health

Four Forms That Fit Most Organizations

Dynamic Capabilities and Organizational Agility

Berkeley-Haas's Premier Management Journal

Published at Berkeley Haas for more than sixty years, California Management Review seeks to share knowledge that challenges convention and shows a better way of doing business.

• Browse All Articles
• Newsletter Sign-Up

LeadershipDevelopment →

No results found in working knowledge.

• Were any results found in one of the other content buckets on the left?
• Try removing some search filters.
• Use different search filters.

--> AGU