Agilent_and_Kodak_Manage_Organizational_Change

Running head: AGILENT AND KODAK MANAGE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE Agilent and Kodak Manage Organizational Change Sharron Lopez-Pasion University of Phoenix Agilent and Kodak Manage Organizational Change Intersect Investment Company has been a leader in the financial services industry since September 2001. Currently, the volatile financial climate has put Intersect under immense pressure to develop new products that can be offered with improved, client-tailored advisory services. Frank Jeffers, the current CEO, has determined that the key to future success is lies in dramatically shifting the vision of the company. The new vision and mission of the company would include offering a new set of products and services to customers and small businesses through a newly developed model of customer intimacy designed to build long-term business relationships based on trust and value. Unfortunately, implementing this new vision will require complete organizational change. Currently, departments like Sales are resistant to the change and as a result are experiencing confusion, frustration, and a lack of direction. Not long ago, industry leaders Kodak and Agilent Technologies experienced similar growing pains when their organizations underwent revolutionary change. Each company was forced to come up with innovative methods of leadership and learning that enabled the companies to remain focused, positive, and dedicated to change, learning, and progress. The key to each company’s success rested on management and leadership that believed in a vision and were committed to change. These successful leaders provided the necessary direction to navigate through the difficult times, and provided the feedback and results that enabled and empowered each employee to continue to be a part of the change process and its successful solution. Both Agilent and Kodak could provide Intersect’s leaders with valuable techniques and skills focused on promoting goal commitment, providing support and feedback, and recognizing the warning signs of decline. The Path-Goal Theory and Leadership Behaviors The path-goal theory proposed by Robert House is based on the expectancy theory of Porter and Lawler that outlined the relationship between employee effort, performance, and motivation (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2004, chap. 9). These researchers determined that motivation and performance were contingent upon an employee’s abilities, skills, and role perceptions within a company. After researching this, Robert House set out to further investigate the role of leadership behaviors in motivation change. House contended that motivational leadership reduced roadblocks to change while encouraging goal accomplishment, provided guidance and support for employees, and provided meaningful rewards for goal accomplishment. Upon revising his theory in 1990, House identified eight supportive leader behaviors that help facilitate change: clarification of path and goals, achievement oriented, work facilitation, supportive, interactive, group oriented decision-making, networking and representation, and value based (Kreitner & Kinicki, p. 609). Eastman Kodak The Eastman Kodak Company is a leading manufacturer of consumer and professional imaging products and technology. The company has been in operation since 1879 when it began manufacturing dry plates for early photography (Datamonitor, 2009, p. 7). From the early 1900s to the present- day, Kodak has continued to expand its business and enter and conquer other arenas such as motion pictures, health care pharmaceuticals, and the Internet. Currently, Eastman Kodak provides imaging technology products and services to the photographic and graphic communications markets in countries all over the world including the U.S., Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. The company shows recorded revenues of $9,416 million for the 2008 fiscal year, and currently employs some 24,400 people in the U.S. alone (Datamonitor, p. 4). In the late 1990s, Kodak morphed from the traditional hierarchical organization associated by function to a flatter, more vertical organization focused on its customers and building corporate success. Such monumental change could only be achieved by strong leadership with achievement oriented behaviors who were not afraid to try new corporate behaviors and modify leadership styles as needed. The company realized that cross-functional teams can outperform individuals and set about changing corporate culture. With proper development and training, it is believed that teams can help to gain customer focus, improve resource efficiencies, restructure and re-engineer work processes, identify best practices for operation, and build a spirit of cooperation and belonging (Kodak’s picture is changing, 1996). The key to the team approach was having the teams properly trained with a full understanding and acceptance of the company’s focus, goals, customers, and partners. The teams had to be innovative, collaborative, supportive, and willing to operate by self-directing and managing themselves. The use of teams has resulted in a broader thinking about the impact that decisions and operations will have on the organization. Through a more flattened hierarchy, management roles and responsibilities are currently shared, with strategies and implementation details that are more clearly received and performance measures more accurately documented and followed. The team approach has also resulted in new consensus and conflict resolution skills, a renewed commitment to learning, and increased levels of empowerment, spirit, and energy. This type of monumental change cannot occur unless an organization and its leaders are committed to the new vision and believe in the values that they are adopting. In the case of Intersect, the need for change is obvious; however, not all leaders are willing to accept that the company has reached a point in which change is necessary if the company is expected to continue performing. Currently Intersect is experiencing angst over the scarcity of clear goals, and the effective communication. The resistance to change by key leaders is creating shifting morale, frustration, confusion, and hesitation for employees. If this resistance is not addressed, Intersect’s inability to bring about change could result in the ultimate breakdown of the company. Promoting Goal Commitment In order for goals to be successfully reached there are three steps that must be followed. The first is to set the goals; preferably through benchmarking of best practices used by other successful people or organizations as a means of comparison. Goals should be specific and precise, have some sort of means of measuring success, realistic and attainable, results oriented, and focused on the end-results, and time bound by start and end dates (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2004, p. 312). The second step is to promote goal commitment using techniques that motivate people to be more productive, efficient, and positive. Managers and leaders are the fundamental link between motivation and change; one cannot happen without the other. Last, the organization and its leaders must provide support and feedback. Training is often provided to leaders and employees in preparation to achieve new goals however, there is little feedback that gives the employee the sense that what he or she is doing is making a difference. Agilent Technologies In 2005, the CEO of Agilent Technologies, William Sullivan, decided that after nine quarters of economic loss it was time to shift from being a diversified technology company to a company strictly focused on measurement that would provide the world’s premier measurement instruments and technology (Prokopeak, 2009). Sullivan realized that this type of radical change would require careful planning and that the transformation of the company could be achieved through well developed leadership. With the help of Chief Learning Officer Theresa Roche, the Global Learning and Leadership Development Group were assembled (Roche, Wick, & Stewart, 2005). The developers examined enterprise-wide standards and practices, staffing, rewards, and employee and leadership development. It soon became evident that for learning experiences to be of any use after training was given the focus would have to be on developing an enriching environment of continuous learning where new skills and techniques were integrated into daily on-the-job thinking and action. A core program designed specifically for managers was started in 2003 that focused on providing skills and techniques that prepared managers to be effective leaders. Greater emphasis was placed on the application and follow-through of implementing new techniques and skills after training, monitoring goal progress, and response to employee participation (Roche et al., 2005). One of the first benefits to arise from the Global Leadership Group and its new learning approach was the ability to recognize goal progress and completion. Goals were specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound and feedback. By the end of a 10 week period of monitoring follow-through and implementation, as much as 79% reported goals that had been completed or showed significant progress (Roche et al., p. 50). Agilent remains committed to a continuous learning environment but admits that the company still faces challenges. In a company such as this, in which technology is rapidly evolving one of the challenges is maintaining constancy of purpose and vision and consistency in its leadership training and development. One of the reasons this is an ongoing challenge is because people are constantly advancing to other positions within the company and sometimes the initial vision and intentions can become blurred, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the development group and its training (Roche et al., 2005). If Intersect were to find a way to implement continuous learning and monitoring into the company culture, it is possible that the company would begin to see results. Evidence exists that the new model of customer intimacy could be successful since a relatively new employee implemented the model in her department two month ago resulting in increased revenue for the department and positive feedback from the employees. Conclusion Employees are more motivated to pursue goals which are viewed as reasonable and profitable. However, to motivate change leaders must provide information and justification for the change. The plan and goals for change must be carefully planned out and participation must be required of everyone to be successful. When organizational change involves changing the culture, much planning and forethought must go into the training and the follow-through that will ensure that the new vision becomes a permanent part of the new culture. Both Kodak and Agilent realized that organizational change takes careful planning, education, training, incentives, and a means of measuring success. Just as important as developing a plan for change is the need for flexibility and focus. These companies remained focused on the end-result, but prioritized company needs and were willing to achieve their goals in a manner other than what was originally planned. By committing to an either-or mindset and not adopting flexibility, Intersect could unwittingly be setting itself up for failure. References Datamonitor. (2009). Eastman kodak company profile. Retrieved from http://www.datamonitor.com on January 4, 2010. Kodak’s picture is changing. (1996). Management Decision, 34(5), 3. doi: A18515651 Kreitner, R., & Kinicki, A. (2003). Organizational behavior (6th. ed.). New York: McGraw Hill Companies. Morozov, B., & Morris, R. J. (2009). Kodak’s challenge: surviving the disruptive “winds of change”. Business Case Journal, 16(2), 21-45. Doi: AN45282230 Prokopeak, M. (2009). Passion and Precision. Chief Learning Officer, June 2009, 26-29. Roche, T., Wick, C., & Stewart, M. (2005). Innovation in learning: Agilent technologies thinks outside the box. Journal of Organizational Excellence, Autumn 2005, 45-53.