Change Simulation Game Hb Analysis

[pic 1]

CHANGE MANAGEMENT SIMULATION MEMO

MBA-521 LEADING EFFECTIVE ORGANIZATIONS

NOVEMBER 19, 2015

 GAYATRI SUBRAMANIAN

[pic 2]

[pic 3]

[pic 4]

To:  Dr. Lori Coakley, Professor of Management

From: Gayatri Subramanian

Date: November 17, 2015

Subject:  Simulation and Influencer Model Memo

The purpose of this memo is to appraise you on how the simulation helped me understand the art of influencing people without using authority. I also wish to express my gratitude for providing the multiple scenario set up of simulations that gave me an opportunity to learn from my mistakes and actuate the lessons I learnt from the influencer model.

The Business Simulation Game we had at boot camp taught us to sell goods to consumers and it was pretty much about the pricing strategies. The Change Management Simulation was all about influencing people. Whenever I had the power and authority, I always chose to use authority to convince people. My personality type is ESTJ. I view ‘management’ more as a science and less as an ‘art’. Influencing people is an art. Change is not formulaic and understanding the effect of each action was a good lesson. In most situations I exhibit structural and political behaviors. The Change Management Simulation taught me that an influencer’s thought process is an amalgamation of all four perspectives and that reframing is essential.

The Change Management Simulation had three scenarios and all of them were equally challenging. I played two roles, as the CEO and as the Director of Spectrum Sunglasses and the task assigned to me was to influence the entire organization towards sustainability. The description of the scenario and the private interviews helped me to arrive at a few initial conclusions about the organization and its employees. Most employees were uncompromising on profitability while some considered sustainability to be of equal importance and hence showed interest. The top level management had considered discussions about sustainability seriously however the mid and bottom level managements were not as much a fan of it and chose to be risk averse and  followers of the majority.

In my potential as the Director of product innovation department, I tried to influence people to adopt sustainable product innovation. The CEO, Henry Adams adopted the proposal and supported my initiative. I had 11 adopters and all the other employees of organization were in trail stage. While I was CEO, I influenced 8 people to adopt the proposal and the rest of the organization was in trail stage. Most of the top level managers had adopted. I was not very confident of how it works and how to strategize, so I did pretty much on trial and error basis. Mid way I realized there was a strategy to it and tried to figure out. At one point none of the levers had an effect on the organization and I was running out of time. This got me concerned about my actions and I focused on the resistors opinions to understand their intentions. The CFO initially played as a resistor who was uncompromising on profitability, however he graduated to trial stage. The CFO’s subordinates were as equally risk averse as their boss and hence they were also reluctant to adopt.

I assumed that it was important to positively influence top level managers and their adoption would indirectly influence the remainder quorum of the organization. My assumptions cushioned my actions to a certain extent but I focused extensively on the top level management. The indirect influence of top level management on bottom level managers was partial. Managers became aware and interested but did not adopt just because their boss adopted. In my first scenario as the director, every decision I made positively increased the number of adopters or got them interested but as the CEO, I tried to confront resistors with my authority and it did not work in my favor at all. Unfortunately I realized this a later stage when I ran out of weeks to repair the damage. I learnt that it was extremely important to talk to people and reassure them that they are at the right roads. I strongly believe it is about the timing of decisions that stimulates the effect.

The experience I gained from the previous two scenarios helped me to get better understanding of the simulation process. When the third scenario was assigned in class, I knew what exactly was expected of me. I did my ground work before I started. I invested a few weeks to conduct private interviews and took notes, examined the network charts and looked for friends and connectivity. (Refer exhibits 1- 3)

Mary Gopinath and Leslie Harris are perceivers and encouraged my initiative and thus were easier targets. Luke filer, VP of operations, possessed a ‘thinker’s personality type’ and was mainly opposing because he wanted evidence that it was a tried and tested method and that it has worked in the past. He did not want to venture into unknown domains. On having understood his concerns, I conducted pilot project, provided progress reports, told success stories and got consultant’s support to aid the proposal. These decisions had positive effects on my target (Luke Filer) and he adopted the proposal. The CFO, D’Arcy had concerns similar to those of Luke Filer and thus CFO also adopted the proposals almost at the same time. Levers such as ‘walk the talk, private interviews and reward system’ helped in motivating most of the employees. Some of the employees entered awareness stages because of the influence of their friends. Most people were reluctant to adapt because they had very little idea about the subject. Telling success stories, getting consultants support, issuing emails and conducting town hall meetings were beneficial in winning the interest of people who has little idea.

In 45 weeks all the employees were aware of the proposal. Within 60 weeks most employees were in the awareness stage. In less than 70 weeks most employees entered the trial stage from the interest stage. In 77 weeks the entire organization adopted the proposals and my simulation ended with 20 adopters with a credibility of 10/10.

The change simulation included a considerable proportion of symbolic and political perspective analysis. Achieving cultural change is challenging and intricate. An effort of synergistically aligning culture with the organization’s mission and vision creates a shift in cultural interpretation. “It is both a search for the spirit within the creation of a community of believers united by shared faith and shared culture. Peak performance emerges as a team discovers its soul.”(Bolman & Deal.pp.284). Clarifying organizational goals was a time consuming process. I was initially skeptical about investing 6 weeks in this process. The effect was tremendous. Around 8 employees upgraded from awareness stage to trial stage. I realized that organizations are like complex organisms and there were different ways to stimulate change. The effort of clarifying goals established the symbolic platform and knit the employees to unified culture that reinforced their mission.