Leadership and the Art of Change by Lee Roy Beach Essay Example

guidance for individuals other than Executives of large organizations, Beach created a matrix system that generalizes the analysis of change leadership. The matrix includes eight cells that identify organization type, size, and leader role when enacting changes. Each cell contains detailed descriptions of how leaders should approach change within their organization. The author warns leaders that change is not straightforward and should be approached with caution.

According to Beach (2006; pg. 138), leading during significant organizational change is not a straightforward task and requires the use of one's own judgment. Therefore, leaders should take caution and apply common sense when guiding an organization through change. As an example, Wayne faced a challenging situation as the leader of a struggling organization tasked with implementing major changes.

Wayne possessed all of the key qualities that he thought would make him successful in introducing change and enhancing the organization. Nonetheless, despite having advantages and a positive start, his approach had significant shortcomings that ultimately led to his downfall and a feeling of defeat. The most damaging flaw was his inability to involve other members of the organization in his decision-making process. Upon assuming his role, Wayne had a standard view of leadership and what it entails to effect the necessary changes for the organization's advancement. He presumed that it was solely his responsibility to pinpoint where adjustments were needed and create a plan for implementing them. However, instead of including managers and seasoned employees in the decision-making process, Wayne chose to confine himself in his office during planning.

Wayne's decision to create changes for his organization by comparing it to his previous employments had dire consequences. The varying cultures

of different organizations meant that imposing one organization's values onto another could lead to negative employee behaviors. Despite receiving feedback from managers that should have been alarming, Wayne's mimicked leadership style allowed for no open feedback or reevaluation. He chose to ignore concerns and instead threatened his authority over them after presenting his proposal.

Wayne should have been alerted by how the proposals were returned to him. He instructed the managers to submit their department’s proposal with no exceptions by the end of the week during a meeting. However, it took almost two months for all the proposals to be handed in. This indicated that not all managers were fully committed to the plan, which could lead to calamity as they need to convince their employees to be on board as well. Some of the organization’s most experienced staff began quitting because they believed that the company was heading in the opposite direction of where it started. Despite these telltale signs, Wayne failed to reassess his approach and instead chose a different path.

Wayne sought to energize his movement and boost employee morale by adopting a more "opportunistic" approach. He experimented with various strategies to gain momentum, including providing exclusive discounts to two key customers. Though this bold move was acknowledged by employees, it failed to improve their negative attitudes. To counteract this, Wayne also acquired new technological advancements that promised to revolutionize the industry.

Although the technology was working well, it was not integrated properly with the rest of the production line, resulting in issues that were noticed and disliked by employees. Additionally, Wayne's attempts at co-marketing a product with a high-profile company failed after six months,

followed by a proposal to merge with a competitor as a last resort.

This last effort to enhance morale had the opposite effect, causing anger among both the employees and board members. The employees were now worried about job security while the board members were furious about the premature communication of the proposal to the employees. Wayne, at this point, had a realization that his strategies were not effective and decided to seek other job opportunities where his talents could be better acknowledged. Several mistakes made by Wayne led to his sudden downfall.

Wayne failed to comply with the six prime responsibilities of leaders implementing change, which resulted in a lack of success in his attempts to bring about change. According to the text, leaders' primary responsibility when leading change is to assess and specify necessary changes by collaborating with others within the organization to evaluate both internal and external environments (Beach, 2006; pg. 1). Beach emphasizes that change is a formidable challenge for organizations.

According to Beach (2006; pg. 1), when an organization undergoes change, there may be changes in learned routines and reductions in productivity, which can result in decreased efficiency. This inefficiency can have negative effects on the production of goods or services, leading to a loss of customers and compromised relationships with stakeholders. Therefore, assessment is crucial in identifying necessary changes and avoiding a similar path as "Poor Wayne". When assessing an organization, leaders must consider both the internal and external environment.

According to Beach (2006; pg. 15), the internal environment is comprised of the organization's purpose, differentiation efforts from competitors, component functions, organizational structure, distribution and exercise of authority and power, and values

and beliefs that shape the organizational culture. In contrast, assessing the external environment entails gathering information about external demands and constraints on the organization's actions (Beach, 2006; pg. 2). Despite their distinctions, both internal and external environments play crucial roles in organizations and can impact change. The second duty of management when implementing change is to understand the organization's culture to limit change (Culture: Constraining Change).

According to Beach (2006; pg. 29), leaders need to collaborate with others in the organization to comprehend its culture – which encompasses the fundamental convictions and principles shared by its members, steering their actions and dictating their expectations of those around them. The author identifies five factors that can prompt cultural transformations within a company – financial upheavals, legal and regulatory changes, societal shifts, demographic variations, and internal crises (Beach, 2006; pg. 38-39).

Beach discusses two types of cultural change in an organization: evolutionary and revolutionary. Although they differ in approach, their key to success is the same. According to Beach (2006; pg. 43), "for both evolutionary and revolutionary change, the key lies in changing activities first and then allowing the culture to adapt...the focus, rather than being on the culture itself, must be on getting the organization’s members to accept changes in their routine activities and the immediate goals of these activities." Management has a responsibility in motivating change by creating a vision. Leaders must collaborate with others in the organization to develop a reasonable story about the organization's future and articulate a goal agenda. Then, they should promote acceptance of the vision throughout the organization (Beach, 2006; pg. ).

The vision of an organization comprises of four essential elements: goals,

priorities, requirements, and implications. Incorporating the leader's and members' visions in alignment with these four elements leads to better chances of widespread acceptance of the vision within the organization. As far as managing the "Plans" responsibility is concerned, leaders must collaborate with other members to create a plan for achieving the envisioned future. This plan must also focus on how it will address the goal agenda in pursuit of the vision, and promote comprehension among all members of the organization. (Beach, 2006; pg. 9).

It is necessary to have three layers of a plan for building a successful plan: a strategic plan, an operating plan, and a task plan. The strategic plan addresses issues related to threats and opportunities, while the operating plan focuses on the organization's structure and functions. The task plan works alongside the operating plan to implement changes to production and distribution procedures(Beach, 2006; pg.1).
The text mentions four critical areas of planning, including the task plan itself, monitoring the change process in accordance with the plan, measuring progress, and properly coordinating time for events within the change process.

Effective communication is crucial for building consensus when planning in four areas. To accomplish this, six rules for communicating visions and plans have been identified: correctness, understanding, credibility, small steps when possible, reasonableness, and repetition (Beach, 2006; pg. 79-81). Although these requirements do not guarantee the success of a plan, they increase the chances of success. During plan implementation, leaders must work with others to maintain momentum and monitor progress to discover and correct weaknesses within the plan (Beach, 2006; pg. 3).

Management's implementation responsibility heavily relies on monitoring. To effectively monitor change, management must take into

account the comprehensiveness of the monitoring system, the frequency of evaluation periods, the amount of effort/time invested in monitoring, and the tradeoff between thoroughness and frequency (Beach, 2006; pg. 100-101). Three types of information are essential when monitoring a plan or vision: first, information provided by the monitor reporting on implementation progress; second, information from the mechanism constantly assessing the organization's environments; and third, information given by the organization based on performance (Beach, 2006; pg. 102).

Institutionalizing Change involves working with others to maintain achieved changes and create a culture that accepts ongoing change as a normal aspect of the organization (Beach, 2006, p. 113). This responsibility promotes the sustainability of changes and prepares for future ones. The process requires communication of success, documentation updates, and realignment of rewards to match the changes made (Beach, 2006, pp. 114-122). The result is a changed culture. Throughout this process, foreign concepts and strategies were learned, with institutionalizing change being the most important.

My struggle with follow-through extends to my leadership skills. While I am skilled at devising and implementing plans and visions, I find monitoring and sustaining changes to be challenging. Interestingly, this is also a personal challenge I face. For example, in building relationships, I often fail to establish a lasting connection due to insufficient focus on follow-up. Although I may form a connection with someone initially, it is not sustainable without consistent follow-up efforts.

From this section of the text, I have learned about the four tasks involved in institutionalizing change - communication, document updating, realigning rewards, and culture changing. By focusing on these tasks intentionally in my professional journey, I can enhance my skills to create sustainable

change. Sustainability is crucial for creating change that can withstand opposition within an organization. Personally, reading this text has given me valuable information for my future professional endeavors.

My aspiration is to develop a non-profit organization/social entrepreneurship in Cincinnati that offers essential services but with a distinct business structure. I think that the non-profit industry I operate in consumes more resources than is necessary, which are better utilized for creating a broader impact within the city. I aim to instill a fresh culture within the non-profit network that supports change and optimizes resource utilization. This text has been invaluable in my leadership evolution and becomes a crucial reference material for my future aspirations.