Still, despite the paramount importance of change and the need for continual evolution in the corporate world, there is no dearth of organizations who pathetically fail to qualify the preliminary challenge of recognizing the urgency to alter and change, what to speak of ensuing adjustments and planning. The organization under consideration that is Rondell Data Corporation is an apt example of such a dilemma where an organization fails to acknowledge the pressing need for change, despite being aware of the debilitating warning signals and unhealthy symptoms.
Acceptance of change within organisations is a trait that often percolates down from top to bottom (Clement, 1994, p.1). It is the cardinal duty of the top management within an organisation, whether it is the president or the top executives, to clear the behavioural or cultural obstacles that hamper change (Beer, Eisenstat & Spector, 1990, p. 158-166). Specifically speaking, it is the prerogative of the top management to take the necessary steps to bring about the desired changes in all the three aspects of organisational culture i.e. assumptions, values and artefacts, to aid and assist the painful process of change (Schein, 1985, p.25). However, the top management at Rondell seems to be utterly confused or self complacent. The President i.e. Bill Hunt is well aware of the problems being faced by the organisation, but has still chosen to ignore the urgent need for fostering the requisite changes within the organisation. He prefers to act more of an academician, which goes well with his background and favours to delegate the onus for change to his immediate subordinates. To assess an organization's culture, it is often more relevant to consider the behaviours and performance rather then blindly appreciating the stressed upon values (Clement, 1994, p.2). His insistence on maintaining the family spirit at Rondell is not matched by the required levels of output and success.
Frank Forbus, though being the incharge of one of the most crucial departments at Rondell i.e. Engineering Services Department, is caught in a precarious situation. Rather then performing the core task of extending engineering related backup and assistance to the concerned departments, most of his time and efforts seems to be engaged in soliciting the cooperation and support of other departmental heads. His commitment and credibility is being severely jeopardized by the limited job security that his position commands (Becker, 1960, p.14). Doc Reeves though enjoys a position of unique importance at Rondell, appears to be least committed to administrative procedures, schedules and deadlines. He is infact more of a visionary academician who prefers to work in isolation from the overall production and sales objectives, a flaw that is severely compromising the sustainability of Rondell (McFarlane, 1993,