The text discusses theory E and theory O as necessary for successful change
Christina Cauchy
Week 6 discussion
Top of Form
The text discusses theory E and theory O as necessary for successful change, but goes on to state that it is not one or the other, but an even balance of the two. Theory E emphasizes economic value, whereas Theory O focuses on corporate culture and human capability, with the even mix being a paradox between the two (Kotter, Kim, & Mauborgne, 2011). If I were to think about these theories in the context of my organization and current change efforts, I would have to say I agree that a balance of these are needed for successful change. I am working towards changing my position into its own department, which is being done with metrics to show how it can be beyond beneficial to our organization. If I were to take the concept of these two theories, I could ask myself, does this change fit in with our corporate culture, are we capable of such change, and is there economic value? The answer being yes. The text does go on to mention that even though an organization blends these two theories together, but if not done properly or that even balance is not found, melding these two could be disastrous (Kotter, et al., 2011). Kotter (2011) also follows that up with an organization being better off with one or the other rather than both if an even balance cannot be found. Throughout my studies I have found that many theories prove to be better when combined or finding an even balance between them. Leadership strategies/traits is one example I can think of. I do not believe it is a good idea to be one style or another for every situation. Some situations require a different strategy/approach/style. Authoritarian is an example of a leadership style that should probably be avoided for the most part, however, there are certain situations that it would prove to be useful. I feel like finding a balance between theory E and theory O is a similar strategy we use in our personal lives. Kind of like thinking ahead and exploring what ifs, or playing our various scenarios of how things will go if we do this or make this change and asking if the household is even capable of the change. Not to mention wondering if there may be some unintended consequences from the change. Each strategy comes with pros and cons and it is up to us to find a way to utilize them or blend together the pros, while thinking ahead to make sure that the change is doable and fits within the culture of the organization.
Kotter, J. P., Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. A. (2011). HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Change Management (including featured article “Leading Change,” by John P. Kotter). Harvard Business Review Press. https://ambassadored.vitalsource.com/books/9781422172063
Bottom of Form
Ricci Week 6 Discussion
Top of Form
Managing a change can be difficult and rewarding and usually both are true when the change is complete and successful. You cannot deal with or take the same approach with every change the same way, as there are obviously going to be differences each time. Therefore, a blended or balanced approach of different ideas, theories and solutions are needed if you want to achieve the best outcome. In our textbook in this week’s reading the authors state, “then, carefully, and simultaneously balance these very different approaches. It’s not easy. But, done well, you’ll boost profits and productivity, and achieve sustainable competitive advantage” (Kotter et al, 2011). The authors highlight the fact that you must have a balanced approach to a change and even in the elements of your change process you may have to alternate to a different solution to achieve the desired results.
One step in cracking the code of change is having a leader or a leadership team who cares, they must have heart and soul and have the desire to lead. Then the leader needs to develop a team that can exhibit some of the same traits as the leader, regarding wanting to make the change and to see it through. The team must be able to identify the issue, then confront the issue, and solve the issue. “There are two capacities available to us, human capacities, one is our words and two is our presence” (Thibodeau, 2016).
If a company’s desire is to increase their economic value and increase their profitability, Theory O and Theory E both would work independently from each other in different ways, but if you were able to balance them and integrate them into a single use, then you increase your chances for success. To achieve the success of increasing your economic value, you need to consider an organizational approach too, because one thing that is going to help you achieve your goal is your human capitol. If you can change and improve the culture and the morale of your people, this creates employee retention, employees who will be more apt in providing inputs and feedback, and employees who are happy. When your employees are engaged and appreciated, then you have more productivity, which leads to an increase in your profits. “Theory E is change based on economic value. Theory O is change based on organizational capability. Both are valid models; each theory of change achieves some of management’s goals, either explicitly or implicitly” (Beers &Nohria, 2000).
Beers, M., &Nohria, N. (2000). Cracking the Code of Change. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2000/05/cracking-the-code-of-change.
B., Kotter, J. P., Kim, W. C., Mauborgne, R. A. (2011). HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Change Management (including featured article “Leading Change,” by John P. Kotter). [VitalSource Bookshelf 10.1.0]. Retrieved from vbk://9781422172063
Thibodeau, T. (2017). Positive Power of Servant Leadership. Youtube.com https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC9OwLLW5HQ.
Bottom of Form
Answer preview to the text discusses theory E and theory O as necessary for successful change
APA
443 words
