Cheryls Change Management Approaches: Experience in Product Design - Research Paper Example

1 Introduction This paper critically looks at the Case Study whereby Cheryl Hailstrom, a long-time employee of Lakeland Wonders, a high-quality wooden toy manufacturer, who has just assumed the CEO of the largely family-owned business attempts to make dramatic changes in the management of the company. Her efforts were met with subtle resistance from her senior managers who believed that her push for changes was too dramatic and could hurt the company instead of improving the profitability of the company for which she was promoted into the CEO position. This case study is investigated using the Greenwood and Hinings analysis model to look at the possible internal and external environments confronting Lakeland Wonders, and expounding how these factors may have contributed to the impossibility of adapting changes in the organization. To better understand Cheryl’s intentions, her suggestions for change will be enumerated while concentrating on the prevailing interventions that prevented the changes from being realizable. At the end of the analyses, appropriate recommendations would be offered about the right procedures that could bring about the best changes at Lakeland Wonders. These recommendations could be considered as a possible panelist contribution to alleviate the problem redundancy which Cheryl has been working against, but which other senior managers are secretly admiring. 2 Changes within an Organisation: A look at the Relevant Literature There are different reasons why an organization can aspire to implement some changes in its method of operations. Profitability and efficiency is just a couple of the major reasons corporate managers push for widespread or operational changes in their organisations (Olmstead, 2002). Bringing changes into an organisation has not always been an easy exercise, rather it is time-consuming and such a process could hit a snag if some people--fellow workers or senior officers at the same organisation—do not throw their full weight behind the project. Hence, successful changes are obtainable through precise design and proper implementation (Stanford, 2005). This design may require that internal culture or routine procedures are transformed to pave way for more proficient approaches. Or the change could require that the organisation engages in expansionism that could help it extend its products to a bigger market, through which profitability could be achieved (Cummings and Worley, 2008). Whenever there are strong oppositions to these change concepts, several approaches must be explored to remove any source of hindrance to the organisational changes. Sometimes, it might be important to strike some concession with the stakeholders; this may help douse doubt and suspicion as far as the change is concerned in an organisation (Cummings and Worley, 2008). 3 Greenwood and Hinings Analytical Model The Greenwood and Hinings analytical Model has been used by experts to analyse the prospects for a change within an organisation. This model typically states that managers should demonstrate capacity for action that would sees a transition or change through from one template to another (Hatum, 2007). Invariably, the mover of “ a change” must be up to task to handle all the challenges arising from this transformation. Looking at Cheryl Hailstrom’s qualification, it is clear that she is experienced and capable of moving for a change at Lakeland wonders. She fully understood the 94-year family-owned business having worked as the COO of one of its largest customers and had been instrumental to the design of some best-selling products manufactured by the Company (McNulty et al. 2002). This level of experience simply qualifies Cheryl to moot the idea of starting a new line of toy product, which she strongly believed might as well be another profitable best-selling product for Lakeland Wonders (Anderson and Anderson, 2010). The criteria for the implementation of a transformative change-action by an organisation depend on these three indices as proposed by Greenwood and Hinings (Hatum, 2007): (i) Willingness in management:- The first indication that an organisation is ready to take some risks by investing in an entirely new product comes from the willingness of its management group to support a motion or suggestion for new investment. In this case study, Cheryl appears to be the only member of the management who is super enthusiastic about 4 the project. Even though the other senior managers do not completely or openly opposed her, but their minds were not on allowing her to take such a risk. They spoke their opposition to her pet project silently among themselves; but their silent opposition might be transferred into loud votes against her when the time comes to vote for or against the investment (Koller, 2005). (ii) Risk-taking appetite by the organization: It is correct to state that due to the years of operations and much capital in reserves, Lakeland Wonders is capable of taking any commercial risks (Panglaykim and Palmer, 2006). The company is not currently facing any financial problems, and the current financiers of its operations are not showing any signs of letting up. Lakeland Wonders has a large number of customers that could purchase the new products (McNulty et al. 2002). It is also interesting to notice that Cheryl has already found some customers that would be willing to purchase the newly designed toys. Although, some of the senior managers have reservations about outsourcing the new toy product to another company, but that does not mean that Lakeland Wonders had never outsourced some of its manufacturing to other companies. Outsourcing stands to help Lakeland make some more profits by reducing its overhead cost of production and engaged jn time-management (McIvor, 2005). It is not clear from the case study that other senior managers have done their homework to analyse the possible gains of allowing Cheryl to go ahead with the design and production of the new toy through complete outsourcing (McIvor, 2005). From all indications, the organisation has the capacity to take a risk of investment. 5 (iii) Top-management readiness:- The case study reveals that apart from Cheryl Hailstrom, the other top management members are not ready for this kind of transformation in the company’s production and marketing strategy of a new toy product. Though they did not make their fears known to her in person, but their silent disagreement to the process speaks volumes that they would do everything in their power to frustrate her efforts to transform the manufacturing and marketing procedures of the company (Levy and Merry, 1986). This kind of unsupportive attitude on the part of the remaining top management indicates that, even if she tries, Cheryl may not be successful in harnessing all the resources of the company to manufacture the new product. (iv) Internal and External Environments: In this scenario, the internal environment is composed of the Company’s culture, management structure and the manufacturing process that has longed been used by Lakeland. The external environment includes but not limited to the customers, the company that the new product will be outsourced to, the price, the market and the society. Both the external and internal environments are important in the eventual possibility of manufacturing the new toy product. It is evident from the application of Greenwood and Hinings analytic model that Lakeland Wonders is not ready to take on the new project suggested by Cheryl. The simple reasons for this are that the top management of the company does not see any reasons why the Company should go that way. They were not ready to support her or not showing the readiness to allow her outsource the new product—their argument against this practice is 6 that outsourcing would damage the Company’s reputation, and that the Company lose some customers’ loyalty if low-quality product is produced under the Company’s brand name (Kapferer, 2008). There is no doubt that the company is ready to undertake the risk of investing on a new toy product; however, the opposition from other top management members has not made the prospect bright for its execution. Interestingly, Greenwood and Hinings analytical model shows clearly the pros and cons as far as the new toy manufacturing is concerned. Cheryl’s Change Management Approaches Cheryl Hailstrom may have believed in her years of experience in product design and manufacturing, which has led Lakeland Wonders to produce many best-selling wooden toy products. She has a strong vision of expansion for the Company, and she felt it was time to carry out her long-time plan as she neared her six-month anniversary as the CEO of the Company. Below are the steps she took in presenting her case to the other senior managers (McNulty et al 2002): She personally designed and mooted the idea for a new toy product—she had researched what kind of toy product customers are currently looking for, and at what price. She had asked them questions and discovered the design they are urgently looking for. Cheryl has spent her time out-of-office to investigate every sensitive information that would make the new product win the approval of the market and the customers (Kmetovics, 1992). 7 She set aside her personal time to visit the company’s customers to see how they are doing with the marketing the company’s products—these visits afforded her the unique opportunity to see first-hand the different kinds of marketing strategies that the customers who bought Lakeland’s products used. This would have given her the clear picture about how to market the newly designed toy product (Birn and Forsyth, 2002). She succeeded in finding a willing and ready customer for the newly designed product—this is the most difficult aspect of marketing; that is, finding a willing buyer who will order the new product and retail it to other consumers. However, Cheryl’s experience in locating the right customer for the right product has paid off here. This is an indication that she had thoroughly researched each step of the process and discovered that she needed to work hard in order to achieve her aim. She communicated her progress with the Company’s senior managers who paid lip-service to all her efforts—praising her outwardly but kicking against the idea inwardly. Communication is a vital part of a product introduction to the management of any company. Cheryl had carefully presented her findings and discoveries with the senior management members with the hope of winning their favor on the product. As a senior manager herself, Cheryl understood the importance of having clear and direct business communication. This rules out any doubt that she might have failed to convinced her fellow senior managers through effective communication (Blundel and Ippolito, 2008). 8 She felt that the senior managers are not going to support her in her efforts to manufacture a new product. This is evident in the slow feedbacks she had received from them after her product introduction. She would have expected them to call up several meetings to excitedly discuss the issue with her. However, her fellow senior managers began to avoid the issue in their meetings. Cheryl realised that her desire to help the company make more money through the manufacturing of the new product would not materialise as they silently form a formidable opposition to her plan. Although she learnt a lot from this experience, but she felt seriously disappointed by her colleagues’ unwillingness to accept a change. The outline of the steps Cheryl took above following the expected approach or procedures someone who is convinced about the profitability of a product should take. Usually the first step is to identify a product that could bring in more profits to the Company and design it for future manufacturing (Kmetovics, 1992). Her next approach was doing the market research for the new product. As an experienced manager, she would have understood that no matter how good a product might be, it becomes useless if it could not find a market (Birn and Forsyth, 2002). Then she took the pain to communicate her plans and findings to the senior managers, who patiently listened to her (Blundel and Ippolito, 2008). But they could not openly disclose their opposition to her plans based on the fears that the customer to which the new product would be outsourced to may compromise the Company’s brand as well as cause some unwanted unionism among its workers (Dufuor et al. 2007). 9 Looking critically at the steps she had taken, Cheryl’s approaches should have convinced her fellow senior managers that the new product will be profitable, well-accepted in the market by customers and will give Lakeland Wonders the opportunity to diversify its sources of revenues. Cheryl made her case known in a logical and convincing manner. The presentation includes all the vital parts of new-product presentation that management of any company will like to see before being convinced of the profit-making ability of such an investment. Another important area in Cheryl’s approach is that she went ahead to request for contributions from other senior managers if they had got any. Her intention was to make everyone see the rare chance of making money from the new toy product (Kmetovics, 1992). The problem of doubt and misconception only lies with the other senior managers who could not see any reasons to give Cheryl’s idea a try. As a seasoned manager who had supervised some best-selling toy products, Cheryl worth being given the benefit of the doubt before the other senior managers would kick away her golden idea. But her persistence with the idea was even a convincing fact that she had done her homework on the issue and had demonstrated high-level readiness for the exercise. My Insights and Recommendations If I were a member of the invited expert panelists, I think I would offer the following pieces of professional advice: 10 Though, I fully understand that: (i) as the CEO, Cheryl has the right to wish the Lakeland well by designing a new toy product she hopes would revolutionize the Company’s product line; (ii) she has undertaken the appropriate market research and discovered the right market for the new product; (iii) she had properly communicated her desire and findings with the other senior managers in the company; (iv) the other managers are treating her case without similar passion and enthusiasm; (v) she began to perceive that the other senior managers are reluctant to welcome any change in the company. From the above foregoing, I think there are some problems in this company which is preventing any attempt to transform the company. These problems may include: (a) rigid organisational culture: companies that have rigid organisational cultures do not easily accept any new change. This is because the management that had been enshrined in one way of operating will increasingly find it difficult to change their methods of operations. Rigid culture will frustrate any new plan that may change the status quo. As a result of this, any company that is aspiring to absorb new idea or product, it must first of all change it rigid culture and let the new concept take grounds (Cummings and Worley, 2008). Lakeland Wonders is a family-owned business, and most family businesses are rigidly managed so that any new ideas are not easily accepted by the senior managers, many of whom are members of the founding family. And when a situation like this persist, it will be impossible to steer the company towards greater achievement since there are no opportunities to do so. 11 (b) Communication problem: It may be possible that other senior managers have misunderstood the intention of Cheryl and placed her in a difficult circumstance to prove the efficacy of her plan to them. Poor organisational communication could hinder smooth interaction on a number of things—for example, it could rob the optimistic manager her dream if the other senior managers thought she was aiming at a difficult goal. (c ) Realistic goals: I think Cheryl’s goal is realistic and she was not pushing her colleagues or the company too much by requesting for their support. Her experience qualified her for such a plan, and judging by the previous successes in her career, she could as well pull off the introduction of a new product into the product line of Lakeland Wonders. The only problem here is that her fellow senior managers did not see what she saw. They saw a problematic business proposal that might cost the company its brand image and plunge it into squabbling labour union disputes. Although, these two reasons are not enough to judge the veracity of Cheryl’s plan, but their stand was as well clear but ambiguous. They should have given her sometime to prove herself. (d) Is outsourcing evil? Cheryl’s colleague almost equated outsourcing to evil. This is not right. Outsourcing offers companies the opportunities to cut cost and expand their operations without having to worry about the intrigues of managing it from scratch. This is what the modern business operations require, and any company that wants to expands it market reach must welcome the idea, which Cheryl has rightly suggested. 12 Bibliography Anderson,D., and Anderson, L.A., 2010. Beyond change management: advanced strategies for today’s transformational leaders. London: John Wiley & Sons. Birn, R., and Forsyth, P., 2002. Market research. London: John Wiley and Sons. Blundel, R., and Ippolito, K., 2008. Effective organisation communication: perspectives, principles and practices. London: Financial Times/Prentice-Hall. Cummings, T.G., and Worley, C.G., 2008. Organization development & change. Florence (KY): Cengage Learning. Dufuor, C., Hege, A., Murhem, S., Rudolph, W., and Wassermann, W., 2007. Industrial relations in small companies: a comparison: France, Sweden and Germany. Switzerland: Peter Lang. Hatum, A., 2007. Adaptation or expiration in family firms: organizational flexibility in emerging economies. London: Edward Elgar Publishing. Kapferer, J., 2008. The new strategic brand management: creating and sustaining brand equity long term. London: Kogan Page. 13 Kmetovics, R.E., 1992. New product development: design and analysis. London: Wiley-IEEE. Koller, G., 2005. Risk assessment and decision making in business and industry: a practical guide. Boca Raton (FL): Chapman and Hall/CRC. Levy, A., and Merry, U., 1986. Organizational transformation: approaches, strategies, theories. Santa Barbara (CA): Greenwood Publishing. McIvor, R., 2005. The outsourcing process: strategies for evaluation and management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McNulty, E., Calcidise, K., Benton, D., Cohen, D.S & Aversano, N.,2002. Welcome aboard (but dont change a thing). Harvard Business Review, 80 (10), pp. 32-40. Stanford, N., 2005. Organization design: the collaborative approach. London: Butterworth-Heinemann. Olmstead, J. A., 2002. Creating the functionally competent organization: an open systems approach. Santa Barbara (CA): Greenwood Publishing. Panglaykim, J., and Palmer, I., 2006. Entrepreneurship and commercial risks: the case of a Schumpeterian business in Indonesia. Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan Press. Read More