Review and Edit

2

The Organizational Change Initiative

Tashina Tupai

University of Arizona Global Campus

BUS661

Professor Journey

March 9, 2026

Organizational change is a necessary aspect of organizations operating in fast-changing, technologically and operationally fluid environments. As organizations scale and adapt to changing needs, leaders often institute various new systems to increase efficiency, accountability, and coordination among the functions of the organization. However, while these efforts are meant to create efficiency in organizations, change on a massive scale and in large organizations can be challenging. Employees must learn new technologies, procedures, and expectations while still performing their jobs. Notwithstanding the above, carrying out organizational changes requires careful planning, effective leadership, and clear communication during the transition phase. According to Palmer et al. (2022), a successful change will come to a resolution if both the structural transformation and the human drivers of employee acceptance of new systems are considered.

A significant example of enterprise-wide organizational change was the implementation of the Global Combat Support System Army (GCSS-Army) within the United States Army. This change was intended to renew logistical methods with the replacement of a range of old systems previously used for supply chain control, maintenance, and property accountability. Army strategy for the system attempted to amalgamate all logistical functions into one enterprise resource planning system that would provide for a transparent logistics process and accountability integration to all units. But changing operational practices and implementing this system required personnel to get used to the new technology.

This paper analyzes the Global Combat Support System–Army as a large-scale change initiative through exploration of leadership, follower, success and challenges, theory and the application of organizational change theories, as well as ethical leadership towards prolonged organizational change. To understand the operation of the change, we need to consider the nature of the GCSS-Army system and the environment in which it was introduced.

Description of the Professional Change Initiative

The adoption of GCSS-Army was a major technological change in the Army’s logistics system. Before the introduction of the system, logistics operations relied on several separate legacy systems to track supply transactions, maintenance activities, and property accountability. Such systems also frequently consisted of manual data entry without integration across units, which restricted leaders from obtaining accurate and timely information regarding equipment readiness and supply availability.

To address these issues, the Army developed GCSS-Army, an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system designed to consolidate logistics functions into a single platform. Enterprise resource planning systems consolidate different organizational processes and centralize data so that leaders and people can coordinate operations more effectively. According to Palmer et al. (2022), technological transformation efforts often compel organizations to redesign operational processes and induce employees to develop new behaviors that promote progress towards reaching the goals of the change.

GCSS-Army was integrated over multiple years in a phased plan. The deployment of the system had its initial launch in November 2012, ushering the Army out of conventional logistics systems (U.S. Government Accountability Office [GAO], 2015). There were two major waves in the deployment, Wave 1 and Wave 2. Wave 1 was implemented as a system in 2013, replacing supply systems such as the Standard Army Retail Supply System (SARSS) (U.S. Army, 2016). Wave 2 expanded the system’s capabilities by replacing other logistics platforms, like the Standard Army Maintenance System–Enhanced (SAMS-E) and Property Book Unit Supply Enhanced (PBUSE). The full integration of GCSS-Army across the Army was finalized in November 2017, which represents the shift to a single logistics system used in the whole organization (McDonough, 2018).

Even though there were many positive benefits for operational impacts from the system changing, the change required new processes and new operational knowledge of logistics staff with an introduction to an intricate digital tool. Supply and maintenance Soldiers had to master new software and still execute their day jobs. As with any technological change, there was an early learning curve during the introduction process when personnel developed proficiency with the system. While there were clear technical goals within the system, the experience of adopting the change was different for each role in the organization.

Leader and Follower Perspectives during the Change Initiative

Understanding how change is experienced on different organizational levels is a way to gain insights into both the success and resistance that some initiatives can undergo. Change in an organization is achieved by leaders and employees, whose perspectives and emphases differ, and who have specific responsibilities and priorities within the organization. From a leadership perspective, the implementation of the GCSS-Army is a crucial achievement to improving logistics operations in the Army. Considered central to the task, leaders saw the centralized platform as contributing to greater accountability with respect to equipment and supplies and for providing better logistics visibility across units.

Transitioning seemed at first more pragmatic than strategic for the Soldiers; personnel who depended for a long time on aging systems suddenly had to adapt to such an advanced technology as enterprise software whilst handling day-to-day operational activities. This was frustrating to try to figure out early in the process, grappling with new transactional method codes and learning techniques while managing daily duties from the beginning of the process. As Hughes (2016) explained that failed organizational changes are often oversimplified, not because employees are resistant to the change.

At the operational level, the biggest changes arose from how Soldiers handled routine supply and maintenance tasks. Tasks that were once performed on conventional legacy systems are now required to navigate multiple system menus on the GCSS-Army platform using a single transaction code at a time. The change initially disrupted several logistics processes; however, personnel got used to the new system quickly. The platform provided a beneficial effect on the accuracy and consistency of logistics reporting across various units over time. Many of these perspectives have served the great needs of understanding not just the successes, but the challenges, of how this process was implemented.

The Successes and Failures of the Change Initiative

The implementation of GCSS-Army resulted in various logistical improvements, although it was not the easiest transition in many ways. Improved visibility of logistics data across units was one of the most recognized benefits of the new initiative change. Leaders and supply staff had access to ongoing visibility of both operational issues of equipment readiness, maintenance, and supply transactions in real-time.

The centralized system also improved accountability for equipment and supplies. Logistics transactions were recorded within a single platform, so any discrepancies in supply records could be more quickly identified and resolved. Over time, both the logistics operations and administrative processes within the logistics sections benefited from more unified processes as well as eliminating administrative overhead stemming from the use of multiple legacy systems.

However, the implementation proved quite difficult too. Initial frustration among users in the early adoption was due to the poor early performance of the system and the platform being too complex. Furthermore, inconsistency of training that happened among units also led to the disparity of levels of proficiency among personnel. Hughes (2016) points out that many change initiatives fail when companies underestimate the significance of communication and preparing employees during the transition.

Further exploration of these outcomes by using well-referenced organizational change frameworks tells us why change occurred as it did.

Organizational Change Concepts and Theories Facilitating the change process

Applying existing organizational change theories may have helped Soldiers to better understand the GCSS-Army implementation. According to Lewin’s three-stage model for organizational change, there are unfreezing, changing, and refreezing stages to organizational transformation. Burnes (2004) describes the unfreezing stage as pre-conditioning people to break through established behaviors and accept the necessity of change.

Unfreezing in the implementation of GCSS-Army led to the process of personnel moving away from legacy logistics systems and toward an enterprise platform. The changing phase started with the system being introduced and staff gaining technical and practical experience on new processes. Finally, the refreezing phase took place after the system came to be embedded in everyday logistics operations and personnel gained confidence in using the system.

Palmer et al. (2022) also observe that leaders need to support employees at every step of the change lifecycle. Training, resources, and communicating effectively for all will facilitate employees to take part in new systems and minimize resistance during organizational changes. Understanding the theoretical framework behind this change process also makes it easier to assess the wider implications that GCSS-Army had on Army logistics operations.

Impact of the Change on the Organization

Global Combat Support System-Army (GCSS-Army) has had a largely positive long-term impact on Army logistics operations. This centralized platform helped to sharpen the accuracy of logistics data so that units could stay informed on equipment readiness and supply availability. However, real-time information enabled leaders to better plan and manage resources.

Centralized logistics data greatly improved the capability of units responsible for keeping equipment ready to check shortages and maintenance requirements. This allowed identifying equipment problems earlier and coordinating resources more effectively, thus advancing operational readiness across the units. Although these enhancements exemplify the benefits of the system, long-term success is contingent on the degree to which the change becomes embedded into the routine of the organization.

Sustainability of Change Initiative

Successful organizational change is only achieved if the change is firmly embedded within routine operations. For GCSS-Army, sustainability heavily relied on the Army’s capacity to institutionalize the system as the primary platform for logistics operations across all units. After the initial implementation phases, the system gradually became the standard tool used for supply management, maintenance tracking, and property accountability. Soldiers developed familiarity with the system and learned to perform logistics transactions as a component of logistics functions rather than acting as a temporary technological initiative.

According to Kotter (1996), leaders must reinforce change initiatives by anchoring them within organizational practices, policies, and performance expectations. As employees see the change as permanent instead of temporary, if leaders continuously reinforce the rationale for the new system and maintain its functionality as the primary mode for carrying out logistics tasks then they will be more likely to adopt the change.

In addition, training and knowledge transfer play a major role in the sustainable nature of organizational change. In order to keep supply chain operations continuous, new personnel entering logistics roles must be trained on the system. Burnes (2004) explains that this is known as the refreezing stage of change which ensures the acceptance and institutionalization of the new behavior and processes within the organization in the last stage of Lewin’s change model. In the context of GCSS-Army, soldier training and integrating this solution into logistics doctrine helped ensure that the new platform remained embedded within Army logistics operations.

GCSS-Army's sustainability serves to illustrate how initiatives for technological change can be successfully embedded into an organization when the leadership support of the initiative is strong, the training is robust and all operational workflows are uniformly implemented. Though the first roll out was not without its bumps, the system developed into a critical piece of the Army's logistics system. The enduring integration of GCSS-Army underscores that organizations can achieve lasting change by embedding new systems into routine operations and maintaining continuous commitment from leadership.

Impact of Ethical Thinking on the Change Process

Ethical reasoning influences decision making for change in an organization. Although change efforts usually attempt to increase efficiency or performance, how employees can be impacted during the change process can profoundly influence the transition. Ethical leadership fosters decisions made in an open, accountable and respectful manner toward the individuals affected by organizational transformation. Palmer et al. (2022) point out, successful change initiatives require leaders to consider both the structural goals of the organization itself and the human effect that change can have on employees.

Transparency throughout the decision-making process is one of the most important components of ethical leadership in the context of organizational change. When organizational leaders explain explicitly why change is occurring and what results they expect, employees are more likely to see why change is happening and how it relates to organizational objectives. By providing employees with a strong and credible vision, Kotter (1996) explains that ambiguity regarding the transformation is reduced. Conversely, vague or inconsistent communication can cause employees to start doubting leadership decisions, resulting in an unwillingness to embrace change the change in process.

Ethical thinking is a major part of how leaders reconcile the goals of the organization with those of employees confronting new systems and expectations. The development of new skills and procedures that employees must face during the transition phase is common for initiatives of change. Ethical leaders are well aware of these challenges when leading a team through change in an organization and help their teammates adapt appropriately. Burnes (2004) states that an organizational change transition has employees gradually moving into adopting new behaviors and practices. Ethical leadership at this phase creates an environment in which employees are supported, rather than overwhelmed, to adjust to new learning demands.

One of the most important aspects in ethical transition from conception to completion is keeping fairness and the same level of consistency throughout all organizational changes. Leaders must apply these new organization-based frameworks consistently in their policies and ensure that those policies are enforced consistently across the organization's hierarchy. Trust is not lost if they respond consistently, thus making it impossible to fall prey to allegations of favoritism or unequal treatment. As noted by Palmer et al. (2022), the established trust between leadership and staff becomes an important factor in whether or not change initiatives in the long term are accepted.

Thus, ethical aspects are closely related to organizational change over time. At such times, trust and respect between the employees and leadership are paramount. When employees view their leaders as behaving ethically and fairly, they’re more apt to stay engaged and work together — with a positive impact on success. For instance, the GCSS-Army implemented a logistics system that could be implemented in multiple phases thanks to its leadership structures that emphasized transparency, accountability, and fairness. When ethical principles are woven into the decision-making processes, organizations can take on complex change endeavors with employee trust intact.

Conclusion

Initiatives for organizational change also often do provide both opportunities and challenges among those implementing their new organization. The shift to the Global Combat Support System–Army also shows that changes in technology at scale can change the landscape of operations at the same time as it demands organizational processes to make major adaptations to ensure a broad level of change for them at the workforce. The Army aimed to improve accountability, operational visibility, and coordination among units by bringing together several legacy logistics systems under a single enterprise platform. Initially, the process made things difficult from an operational point of view, but ended up enhancing logistics management and making it better for real-time data dissemination to the entire organization.

The analysis of GCSS-Army implementation from the leaders’‒followers’ perspectives illustrate how organizational roles shape the experience and interpretation of change. Leaders emphasized long-range strategic outcomes from the system, and a significant portion of staff responsible for the logistics had a difficult time adjusting to new routines and technology. Its successes and hurdles illustrate that technology change efforts typically begin with some adaptation before the benefits emerge more fully.

Understanding the dynamics of the transition is enhanced by the application of organizational change theories. Lewin's model of organizational change offers insight into the Army’s transition from legacy logistics systems to a new enterprise platform through a series of transition and eventual institutionalization stages. Similarly, when Kotter focuses on the vision and communication of leading employees, we see why it’s so valuable to help employees through a state of uncertainty when companies are transforming, like our own. These theoretical frameworks suggest structural changes as well as strategies of leadership are critical to successful change.

The longevity of GCSS-Army also illustrates how change becomes institutionalized in an organization over time. Gradually, leadership training, reinforcement, and integration into day-to-day operations served to ensure that the system became the normal infrastructure for Army logistics. Transparent, fair, trust-building ethical leadership supported a significant aspect in facilitating the transition: people adopting the new system.

In the end, GCSS-Army proved that organizational transformation is not only about an institution adopting new systems rather it is a system that the institution need to lead along with in order for their employees to be adjusted and they need to have institutional support over the long term. When strategic and ethical leadership and training are strategically aligned with change initiatives, an organization’s initiatives are more likely to be sustained with good culture. The successful implementation of GCSS-Army demonstrates the idea that complex organizations must manage to leverage technology transformation without compromising organizational readiness and continuity and human resource engagement through technological integration in all aspects of an organization.

References

Burnes, B. (2004). Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: A re-appraisal. Journal of Management Studies, 41(6), 977–1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00463.x

Hughes, M. (2016). Leading changes: Why transformation explanations fail. Leadership, 12(4), 449–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715015571393

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.

McDonough, J. P. (2018, June 25). U.S. Army’s signature logistics system completes full system deployment. Defense News. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/06/25/us-armys-signature-logistics-system-completes-full-system-deployment/

Palmer, I., Dunford, R., & Buchanan, D. (2022). Managing organizational change: A multiple perspectives approach (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. https://www.mheducation.com/highered/product/managing-organizational-change-multiple-perspectives-approach-palmer/M9781260726724.html

U.S. Army. (2016, April 28). GCSS-Army: Wave 1 is done. https://www.army.mil/article/166174/gcss_army_wave_1_is_done

U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2015). Army logistics: Global Combat Support System–Army is supporting requirements at selected units (GAO-15-378R). https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-15-378r