After
reviewing the YouTube video, Board of Directors: A Tale of Power and Vision,
there are a number of positive and negative aspects with the different agents
of the organization. The agents discussed will be those of pessimists,
pragmatists, visionaries, power players, and the crowd.
The
major difference between the pragmatist and pessimist is that a pragmatist will
make enough effort to consider change but not enough effort to evoke it, thus
the two are portrayed in similar light in the video and I will compare the two
as a similar single agent. One potential benefit is that these agents will act
as a devil’s advocate for change in an organization. For example “change is
likely to be rejected if there is no clear evidence of a serious problem or
opportunity that would justify major change.” (Yukl, 2013)
The most common type of resistance to be expected is, “if it isn’t broke, don’t
fix it.” What this means is that before coming up with a solution, an obvious
problem needs to be identified first. A potential negative for these agents is
that if they have a high amount of influence of others, it’ll be more difficult
to get the rest of the crowd to follow.
Another
agent is that of the visionary. Gary Yukl mentions in his book, Leadership in
Organizations, is that “when it is necessary to make major changes in an
organization, a vision of what the changes will do to achieve shared objectives
and values is very helpful in gaining commitment for the change.” (Yukl, 2013) The positive of such
a visionary is that they can create the momentum required to get the change
going. A potential negative is open to interpretation, but it also possible for
a visionary to commit to negative change (take Hitler for example).
A forth
agent is one of the power players. Change is usually too big a task to be
handled by a single leader, thus the identification and allegiance of power
players is absolutely crucial. It is said that “it is essential to build a coalition
of supporters, both inside and outside the organization.” (Yukl, 2013)
By having the support of power players throughout multiple layers of an
organization can change be implemented to its full effect. A potential negative
is if these power players abuse their powers for personal gain and derail any
change.
The
final change agent is that of the crowd. The positive of the crowd as an agent
is that their behavior can be predicted. In comparison to Geoffrey Moore’s
Crossing the Chasm analogy, it can be said that if the innovators and early
adopters (e.g. the visionaries and power players) take advantage of the change
and can see its success, then the rest of the crowd (early majority/late
majority) will follow. (Moore, 1991)
The potential negative is that if the crowd doesn’t see the benefit of the
change, then it may be hard to gain their support.
All
five agents in the video, Board of Directors: A Tale of Power and Vision, have
been compared with their potential positives and negatives. Based on the video
it can be said that first a vision must be made by a visionary followed by an
allegiance with power players. Once the two have developed and implemented
change, will the rest of the crowd follow. Then when the majority of the crowds
have embraced the change, will the laggards (pessimists and pragmatists)
follow.
References
Moore, G. (1991). Crossing the Chasm.
Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organizations.
New Jersey: Pearson.
No comments:
Post a Comment