Alaska Airlines

Running head: KOTTER’S STEPS 1 AND 2 1

KOTTER’S STEP 1 AND 2 6

Kotter’s Steps 1 and 2

Institution Affiliation

Date

Section I

Alaska Airlines was experiencing operational challenges, and they decided to resolve the matter. During an executive meeting, one executive complained of how the three-million-dollar company was making too little money, and its reputation was taking a beating. They were also having problems with two major groups of employees. In the meeting, the airline realized they were not performing to the right standards. 60% of the flights were not on time, and approximately seven bags per 1000 customers were reported to be mishandled, lost or damaged. Further, the airlines had demoralized pilots due to pay cuts. Due to this, the staff had no efforts to improve operational performance, and they reported maintenance problems on the rush hours.

According to John Kotter, there are eight steps to achieve change. The first two steps were what was incorporated by Alaska Airlines after the realization that the airline operations were failing. The first step is the conception of a sense of urgency which involves creating the right opportunity as a means of agreeing to make changes to their organization (Rajan & Ganesan, 2017). The convergence of the executives was a sign that the organization saw the issue and saw a sense of urgency. The management was to focus on the culture of mediocrity as well as employee relation. The mediocrity culture was there because they assumed the late departures as long as they provided other services to the satisfaction of the customers.

Section II

Part A- Create Urgency

The first step to creating an urgency of need is the identification of potential threats. The threats identified should be able to help develop scenarios that show what could happen in the future. The second step after the threats and identifying the reasons for operational failure is examining the available opportunities. The opportunities should help the organization to overcome the existing challenges. For instance, Alaska Airlines could identify opportunities such as a reshuffle of the managers and directors. The directors would lead a different team from the one they are used to which would then help identify many operational difficulties. The third step in the plan is the creation of a change vision. This needs an equipped team that will come up with a structured vision and communicate the concept to the responsible authorities as they ask for their support in implementing the necessary changes (Rajan & Ganesan, 2017).

The processes that currently exist in implementing change is the preparation for change. Preparing for change will involve steps such as the definition of a change strategy, and the creation of a change management team. The second process is the management of change. This is the most vital since preparation without the real action of managing change will not be effective. This process needs to be updated as the team comes up with change management plans. The team should also add on resistance management plan which would help when there is a resistance to change from the members. Through these processes, the change management team should also ensure a two-way communication plan which will promote openness and quick problem-solving capabilities.

It is vital to get support from the employees since they are important stakeholders in an organization, and without their support, the change plan would not be successful. Even with informing the executives on the importance of the change, the employees need frequent meet-ups to convince them as well. This will make them feel important and part of the organization. Among the pros to be stated, the employees should know that an improvement in the operations of the airline will, in the long run, lead to better employment terms and increased wages. Allowing the employees to air their concerns and raise opinions and suggestions will also result to change implementation support. This strategy would be useful because the change team would know the challenging areas in the airline and would aim at resolving the problems.

Part B- Building a Guiding Coalition

This is the second step in Kotter's change model where the management comes up with a group that will exercise power and has the energy to support the change effort. This team should comprise of a skilled and willing workforce that will stir the change vision to be accomplished. According to Kotter, the team should have 50% of leaders and 50% managers. Alaska Airlines should incorporate both the 33% leaders, 33% managers and 33% informal leaders to the management plan for it to be effective. First, they should involve all the leaders who would be responsible for guiding and making the right decisions for the airline. The leaders, either from the management and stakeholders would be responsible for allowing the implementation of decisions, interactions with staff and managers, and solving problems that arise during the change steps. The managers are vital in this case as well as the informal leaders such as the staff and department directors as they would work with smaller teams for the success of the change plan (Salman & Broten, 2017).

For a big organization, working on a change plan requires an all-time dedication and commitment. The team responsible for overseeing change should ensure engagement through holding frequent meetings with the staff, and reminding them of the change strategy. This would keep everyone on their toes and work on its success as they are also reminded of the benefits of the change. Secondly, the entire change plan should have deadlines, rewards, and punishments. This would keep each one motivated to meet the deadline and attain an award. Short term achievements should be awarded so as to propel the departments that are lagging behind in achieving their set objectives (Salman & Broten, 2017). The third way to ensure commitment is ensuring that all teams have an understanding of the tasks they are supposed to do. Lack of a clear focus facilitates the relaxation of teams. The last way is allowing flexibility in the change plan. This is because some policies may be suggested for the change effort, but cannot be implemented due to the structural complexity of the organization. In conclusion, allowing room for change would enable members not to get stuck on any step of the change plan.

References

Rajan, R., & Ganesan, R. (2017). A critical analysis of John P. Kotter's change management framework. Asian Journal of Research in Business Economics and Management, 7(7), 181-203.

Salman, Y., & Broten, N. (2017). Leading Change. Macat Library.