lc_u3.1rpl

Read the posts of your class and respond to at least two of your colleagues’ posts with a comment or a question.

Peer One:

What difference in the change effort and outcomes would you expect if an organization implements the recommended actions in Kotter’s steps 1 and 2?

One of the reasons change initiatives fail is because leaders have it in their head what needs changed and exactly how they want the change to occur. Failing to get the buy in from the people of the organization. (Cohen, 2005) For a change initiative to truly take root and grow, the people aspect needs to be addressed. This happens in the first two steps of Kotter's model. If a leader just announces that a change is happening the message communicated is that this is happening because I said. The first two steps in Kotter's model is establish a sense of urgency, and create the guiding coalition. Showing why the change is good, and how it will help the organization, and more importantly, the people of the organization, and making members of the organization part of the change, the leader will gain the trust and confidence of the employees. They will actually understand, want, and encourage the change. Failure to get the buy in from the individuals of the organization can actually inhibit the change initiative. If the leader doesn't have the buy in of the employees, they may encourage the change to fail, and sabotage the change initiative. By doing this they show the leader that the change wasn't a good idea and that things were fine the way they were. 

Getting the buy in and creating a coalition creates ownership of the change by the individuals of the organization. They become empowered by the idea that the change is happening, they will work hard to encourage others to want the change. And when the change happens, they will feel like part of the change, part of something bigger than themselves, they will feel like a valued member of the organization. That is a very powerful thing for a company. Getting the buy in for the change is the difference between success and failure of the change. By getting the individuals on board with the change the failure rate decreases significantly. (Cohen, 2005)

Cohen, Dan S. (2005). The Heart of Change Field Guide. Harvard Business School Press.

Peer Two:

Hi all,

I would hope that creating a sense of urgency and pulling together a guiding team to create change would create a better outcome (Kotter & Rathgeber, 2016, p. 133). This is because Kotter's guide is meant to create sustainable and methodical change. In my opinion, most organizations struggle to implement change because they do not have a clear method or they cannot bolster up enough need to change. Using Kotter's first step of creating a sense of urgency, could mitigate the problem of others not seeing the need to change. If the correct amount of energy can be dedicated to changing, then the organization can follow through with the vision (Kotter & Rathgeber, 2016, p. 133). The next step would be to build a building team so, there are people to specialize in implementing the change (Kotter & Rathgeber, 2016, p. 133). These people are responsible for the timing, communication, and knowledge about the change. If all parties have someone to turn to with any hesitations or questions, the change is more likely to be successful. Overall, these are the first two steps in order to create a successful change in an organization, which could arguably make them the most important. Therefore, I would hope that using these two steps would create a smoother and more successful change effort and outcome.

References

Kotter, J. P., & Rathgeber, H. (2016). Our iceberg is melting: Changing and succeeding under any conditions. Portfolio.

Reply to Thread