long range planning - PDF document

long range planning LongRangePlanning35(2002)153–178www.lrpjournal.comDevisingContextSensitiveApproachesToChange:TheExampleofGlaxoWellcomeVeronicaHopeHailey,JuliaBalogunThereisagrowingawarenessoftheneedfordesignersoforganisationalchangetodevelopcontextsensitiveapproachestoimplementationifchangeistobesuccessful. ChangeManagement.Consortium,aVisitingFellowatLondonBusinessSchool,andpartoftheresearchteamfortheLeadingEdgeResearchConsortium.CraneldSchoolofManagement,CraneldMK430AL,UK.Tel.:01234-751122e-mail:v.hope-hailey@Craneld.ac.ukJuliaBalogunBScMBAPhDisLecturerinStrategicManagementattheCraneldSchoolofManagement,StrategicManagementGroup,specializinginthemanagementofstrategicchange.Sheworksregularlywithseniorandmiddlemanagersonstrategyandchangeissues,directsaprogrammeonDeliveringStrategicChangeandisco-directoroftheCranChangeManagementConsortium.Tel.:01234-751122e-mail:j.balogun@Craneld.ac.ukContextSensitiveApproachestoChangetounderstandthecontexttheyareworkinginanddeviseapproachestochangethatwillbeeffectiveinthatcontext.Suc-cessfulchangerequiresacontextsensitiveapproach.Anexaminationoftheextantliteratureonchangerevealsthattherearemanyaspectsofanorganisationschangecontextthatrequireconsiderationwhendesigningchange,andthatawiderangeofimplementationchoicesareavailable,someofwhicharedrawnonbyexistingcontingencymodels.Implementationoptions,suchaschangetypeandmanagementstyle,receiveattention,asdoalimitedrangeofcontextualissues,suchastimeinwhichchangemustbeachievedandchangescope.Thispaperusestheexistingliteraturetobuildaframeworkthatpresentsamorecomprehensiveviewofboththerangeofimplementationoptionsopentoorganisationswhendesigningachangeapproach,andtheaspectsofcontextthathavetobetakenintoaccountwhenchoosingbetweentheoptions.Thisframework,whichwecallthechangekaleidoscope,formsadiagnostictoolformanagerswhichencourages(1)arigorousanalysisofcontext;(2)aconsiderationofarangeofimplementationoptions;(3)anawarenessofonesownpreferencesaboutchangeandhowthislimitstheoptionsconsidered;and(4)developmentofchangeToillustratetheapplicabilityoftheframeworkinpracticeweusetheexampleofGlaxoWellcome.Thisisaninterestingexample,sinceitexamineshowasuccessfulorganisationunder-tookchangeinanticipationoffutureindustrychanges.Therewasnocrisistoprecipitatethechangesbeingputinplace.ThedataonGlaxoWellcomewascollectedaspartofalongitudinalresearchprojectthatfollowedtheprogressofagroupofmajorbluechipmulti-nationalprivatesectorÞrmsinarangeofbusi-nesssectorsfromtheearly1990supuntil2001.TheÞndingsfromthisresearcharedetailedelsewhere.ThisarticledrawsonthecomprehensivedatacollectedonGlaxoWellcomeforan8yearperiodtoillustratehowthekaleidoscopecanbeusedtogainanappreciationofanorganisationÕschangecontextandthesuitabilityoftheimplementationoptionsselected.By1996GlaxoWellcomewastheworldÕslargestpharmaceuticalcompanybysalesandthethirdlargestcompanyintheUK.Fromitsinceptionasageneraltradingcompanyin1873thecompanyatthattimehadgrownintoanorganisationwithacombinedturnoverof£10.5billion,operatingin70countriesandwithmanufacturingfacilitiesin30differentcountries,employing54,000people.WeÞrstreviewexistingliteraturetopresentthecaseforbuild-ingcontextsensitivityintochangedesign,andtoshowhowwedevelopedthekaleidoscopeasaframeworktoaidthosemanag-ingchange.ThenweanalysetheGlaxoWellcomecasestudyusingthekaleidoscopeandbuildonthisanalysistodevelopimplicationsformanagersleadingchange.Weshowthatthisframeworkhastwomainstrengths:itallowsforretrospectiveanalysisandadeeperunderstandingofchangeoutcomesachi-eved,butitalsoaidspractitionersindesigningfuturechangeimplementationinitiativesintheirownorganisations. ThecaseforcontextsensitivityThereiswidespreadrecognitionbothofthedangersofapplyingchangeformulaethatworkedinonecontextdirectlyintoanotherandoftheincreasedlikelihoodofsuccessifacontext-dependentapproachisadoptedtotheimplementationofchange.gencymodels,suchasthosebyKotterandSchlesinger,Nutt,StaceandDunphy,havebeendevelopedwhichattempttounderstandif,andwhy,particularimplementationoptionsaremoresuccessfulincertainchangecontexts.Thesemodelstypi-callyconcentrateonparticularchangeimplementationoptionsandrestricttherangeofcontextualfeaturesconsidered.Themodelstendtoexaminechoicessuchasofchangeinthecontextoffactorssuchastheinwhichthechangemustbeachieved,thedegreeofthemainchangeagenthasandtheextentofforthechange.Byconcentrat-ingononlyselectedcontextualfeaturesanddesignoptionsthereisadangerthatthedescriptivecontingencymodelsmayappeartoofferaformakingthehighlycomplexbusinessofchangesimplerandmoremanageable.Practitionersthenapplythemprescriptively,althoughtheywereneverintendedtobeusedthisway,andthiscanresultinalimitedrangeofformulaicrecipedrivenapproachestochange.Anotherfactorthatcanaffectthetypeofapproachtakentochangeisthewaypeoplevieworganisations.Individualsperceiveorganisationsinfundamentallydifferentwaysandsubcon-sciouslymayallowtheirpersonalphilosophyandmanagerialstyletoinuencethechoicestheymakeabouttypesofchangeinterventions,withlimited,ifany,considerationfortheactualchangecontext.Formanagers(andacademics)whobelievethatempowermentorself-managingteamsarethekeytoorganis-ationalsuccess,changedesignislikelytoincludehighlypartici-patoryinterventionsaimedatelicitingsupportfromstaff,whereasmanagerswithahighlyautocraticstylemaybeindangerofbelievingthatchangemanagementalwaysrequiresdirectivestylesofleadership.Thosewhoadvocatetheneedforcontextsensitiveapproachestochangewouldarguethatdesignersofchangeshouldbedrivenmorebytheneedsoftheorganisationthanbyeithertheirownbiasesorexperienceofwhathasconsti-changemanagementinthepast.Thisisnottodenigratethevalueofpreviouslearning,butthepastmustbeanalysedwithreferencetotheneedsofthecurrentcontext.Thereisalsoevidencethatindividualspersonalpreferencesmayinencetheirapproachtoothers.Amoreappropriatewayofdesigningchangeistousethescontexttoguidetheapproachselected.requiresthechangeagenttocarryoutananalysisofthechangecontexttoassesswhicharethemostcriticalfeaturesforthechange.S/heistheninapositiontoselecttheappropriatedesignchoice.Informationderivedfromthecontextualanalysisshouldmakesomedesignoptionsseemunworkableandotherspossibleoressential.However,thisrequiresanunderstandingoftherangeofthecontextualfeaturesthatshouldbeexamined,theLongRangePlanning,vol352002 adangerthatmodelsmayappeartooffera“recipe”formakingcomplexchange contextualsensitivityandinformedjudgementareessentialmanage ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangequestionsthatshouldbeasked,andtheimplementationoptionsavailable.Inthenewcomplexworldofchangemanagement,self-awareness,contextualsensitivityandtheabilitytoexerciseinfor-medjudgementwhendesigningchangearebecomingessentialmanagerialcompetencies.Inthispaper,wedevelopthechangekaleidoscope(seeFigure1)asawayofpullingtogetherthewiderangeofcontextualfea-turesandimplementationoptionsthatrequireconsiderationwhendesigninganapproachtochangeimplementation.Thekal-eidoscopecontainsanouterringconcernedwiththefeaturesofthechangecontextthatcaneitherenableorconstrainchange,andaninnerringthatcontainsthemenuofimplementationoptionsopentochangeagents.Thecontextualconstraintsandenablersofanorganisationshouldbeanalysedbythechangeagentbeforeselectingthechangeapproachfromtheimplemen-tationoptions,tounderstandwhataspectsoftheorganisationmayfacilitatechange,suchasanavailabilityofchangecapacity,andwhichaspectsmayhinderchange,suchasalowreadiness.Itisthecontextualfeaturesthatenablechangeagentstojudgetheappropriatenessofanyapproachfortheirparticularcontext.Devisingcontextsensitiveapproachestochange:contextualconstraintsandenablersandimplementationoptionsBeforeweexplainhowthekaleidoscopecanbeusedtohelpman-agersmakechoicesaboutthemostappropriaterangeof Figure1.Changekaleidoscope implementationoptionsfortheirchangecontext,weneedtoexplainhowwederivedtheelementsofthekaleidoscope.ImplementationoptionsThecontingencymodelsdevelopedtodateviaresearchhighlighttherangeofimplementationoptionsthatneedtobeconsideredbychangeagentswhendecidinghowtoimplementchange.Oneofthechoicesfeaturingmostprominentlyinthemodelsisthatofchange.Inoneoftherstcontingencymodels,KotterandSchlesingeridentifysixmainstylesthatcanbeusedtoover-comeresistancetochangeeducationandcommunication,par-ticipation,facilitation,negotiation,manipulation,andcoercion.Thestyletousedependsoncontextualfeaturessuchastheamountandtypeofresistancefromstakeholders,therelativepoweroftheinitiator,andtheurgencyoftheneedforchange.Nuttexaminedwhichoffourstyles,intervention,persuasion,participationoredict,wasmosteffectiveinachievingadoptionofchange.Oneoftherecommendationswasthatmoreresearchwasneededtoidentifywhenwhichtacticwasmostuseful.Therearemoreambitiouscontingencymodels,suchasthatbyStaceandDunphy,whichcombineschangestylewithchange,orscaleofchange,rangingfromne-tuningtotransform-ation.Fromcasebasedresearchfourviablechangeapproacheshavebeenidentidevelopmentalandtask-focusedtran-sitions,charismatictransformations,andorganisationalturnar-ounds.Thetypeoftransitionortransformationadoptedwillbedeterminedbythedegreeofsupportforchangefromkeyinterestgroupswithintheorganisation,andthetimeforchange.TheDunphyandStacecontingencymodelalsohighlightstwootherimplementationoptionsinadditiontochangestyleandtypethechangeandtherangeof.Collab-orativedevelopmentaltransitionsandcharismatictransform-ationsaremorelikelytofeatureinterventionstargetingattitudesandvalues,suchasmanagementdevelopmentandeducation,andvisionstatements,whereasmoredirectivedevelopmentaltransitionsandturnaroundsaremorelikelytofocusonchangingthesystemratherthantheindividuals.Thereisadebateintheliteratureaboutwhattheprimarytargetofchangeinterventionsshouldbeindividualvaluesandattitudes,orindividualbehaviours.Othersadvocatefocusingonworkoutputsorobjectives,suchasansweringphonecallswithin5rings,orsellingmore,asadditionaloralternativechangetargetstovaluesorbehaviours.Itisworthnotingthatsuchoutputssaynothingaboutthebehavioursthatwillleadtotheachievementofthenewgoals:theaimistousetheoutputstoencourageappropriatenewbehaviours.Similarlythereisadebateabouttherangeofleversandmechanismsthatneedtobeused.Organisationshavethreesub-systemsthetechnical,thepoliticalandthecultural.Successfulchangerequiresre-align-mentviaarangeofleversandmechanismsimpactingacrossallthreesub-systems.ThisthemeisechoedinothermodelssuchastheculturalwebthatconsidersbothhardorganisationalLongRangePlanning,vol352002 ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangeaspectssuchasstructuresandsystems,andsofteraspectssuchassymbolismandroutinesandrituals.Infact,thecomplexityofchoiceisevengreaterthanshownbythislimitedexaminationofthecontingencymodels.Additionalconsiderationsincludethechangestartpointandthekeyinchange.Changecanstartfromtop-down,bottom-up,orsomecombinationofthetwo,or,asanotheralternative,bedevelopedfrompocketsofgoodpractice.Shouldchangebeimplementedthroughouttheorganisationsimultaneously,orcanitbedeliv-eredgraduallythroughpilotsites?Andwhoisbestsuitedtoleadchange:[17]shouldleadershipcomefromwithin(eitherfromtheCEOormaybeafunctionalheadsuchastheHRDirector),viatheuseofconsultantsasexternalfacilitators,orfromsomeformofchangeteam?ContextualconstraintsandenablersTheabovediscussiononimplementationoptionsshowshowexistingcontingencymodelsmakerecommendationsaboutdesignchoicesbasedoncertaincontextualfeatures.Thisencour-ageschangeagentstoexaminethesefeatureswhenmakingchoices.Thosementionedincludethedegreeorscopeofchangeanorganisationneedstoundertake;howrapidlychangeneedstobeachieved;therelativepoweroftheinitiatorinrelationtootherstakeholders;andthedegreeofacceptance/resistancetochange.Itiscommontodrawonscopeandurgencyofchangewhenmakingdecisionsaboutthechangeapproach,sinceitisoftenadvocatedthattheyhaveabigimpactonthetypeandstyleofchangeadopted.Relativelyrapidtransformationalchange,orrevolution,asopposedtomoreon-goingandincrementaladap-tation,hasgainedmuchinterestintheliterature.areequatedwithfundamental,discontinuouschangethatchallengesboththeexistingwaysofthinkingandbehavingwithinanorganisation,disruptingestablishedactivitypatterns.Assuch,atransformationinvolvesnotonlychangestostrategyandstructure,butalsothecultureofanorganisation.Incremen-taladaptationhasmoretodowithbuildingontheexistingwayofdoingthings,typicallywithintheexistingorganisationalstrategy,andnotrequiringfundamentalshiftsinpowerandculture.However,anissueconnectedtoscope,andfundamentaltocurrentresourcebasedviewsofstrategyisthequestionofwhattopreservewithintheorganisation.Itmaybedesirabletomaintaincontinuityincertainpracticesorpreservecassetsbecauseoftheircontributiontostabilityorident-ity,orbecausetheyareinvaluableingainingcompetitiveadvan-tage.Theseassetscanthereforebeeithertangibleorintangible:forinstanceanachronisticpaternalistorganisationsmayachievehighlevelsofloyaltyandcommitmentamongsttheirstaffinreturnforcomparativelylowratesofpay.However,aswiththeimplementationoptions,othercontex-tualfeaturescanalsobeimportant,eventhoughtheyusuallyreceivelessattentionthanscopeandurgency.Asmentionedisanissue:ifthechangeinitiatorisrelativelyweak incomparisontoresistantstakeholders,thenitisnotpossibletoadoptadirectivechangestyle.Inpublicsectororganisations,suchashospitals,wherediverseandpowerfulstakeholderscanholddifferingagendas,understandingthepositionofdifferentstakeholders,andtheappropriaterangeofchangestylestoemploy,canbeparticularlyimportant.Othercommentatorshighlighttheimportanceofforchange,thecognitiveprecursortobehavioursofsupportfor,orresistanceto,change.Inconjunctionwiththeurgencyofchange,readinessshouldaffectthechangestyleselected.forchangearealsoanissue.Whataretheresourceneedsandavailability(capacity)?Andwhatskillsareavailabletomanagechangewithintheorganisation(capability),atindividual,managerialandorganisationallevels?Thereislittlepointinattemptingtomimicsomeformsofchangeifthereareneitherthephysicalresourcestoinvestnorthehumancapabilitytoimplementthedesiredchange.Finally,thedegreeofamongtheworkforcemaybeafactorinthedesignofchange.Theexistenceofnumeroussubcultureswithintheorganisation,whichmayoriginatefromdifferentdivisionalcultures,nationalculturesorprofessionalgroups,willmeanthatchangeagentsshouldnotassumehomogeneityofatti-tudesandvalueswithinanorganisation.ItmaynotbepossibletotaketheapproachofonesizetsallThechangekaleidoscopeThechangekaleidoscope(seeFigure1)featuresallofthecontex-tualconstraintsandenablersandimplementationoptionsdis-cussedabove.Itenablesquestionstobeaskedofthespecichangesituation.Whattypeofchangeisbesthere?Doweneedsomethingradicalandfast,orsomethingslower?Whereshouldwestartthechangecascadingdownfromseniormanagementorfromtheperipheryoftheorganisation?Doweneedtopushchangethroughinadirectivemanner,orshouldwebemorecollaborativeinthewaywedesigntheprocess?Thepurposeofthekaleidoscopeistogiveparticularcongurationsthatinturncanbeusedtoprescribechangeformulasforcertaincon-texts.Hencethenamewehavechosenfortheframework.Justasarealkaleidoscopecontinuouslyreconguresthesamepiecesofcolouredglasstoreproducemanydifferentimages,theeightcontextualfeaturesremainthesamebutareconstantlyrecon-guredtoproducedifferentpicturesforeachorganisationalchangesituation.Thereforethechangedesignswillalsovary.Equally,sincetheorganisationscontextchangesaschangepro-gresses,thechoicesmadeatonepointmayneedtoberecon-sideredbeforefurtherchangesaremade.Theuseofthekaleido-scopealsoreinforcestheviewofchangeasaprocessinitselfratherthanacontrollablesequenceoftransitioneventsbetweenpresentandfuturestates.(Manychangemanagementcasestud-iesinexistingresearcharewrittenassnapshotsatonepointintime,tendingtoreinforcethisviewofchange.)TheGlaxoWell-LongRangePlanning,vol352002 changeasaprocessinitselfratherthanacontrollablesequenceoftransitionevents ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangecomecase,incontrast,showsthecomplexityofthechangepathtakenbythermoveraneightyearperiod.Thecontextualconstraintsandenablersaredrawndirectlyfromtheaboveliteraturereview.Table1providesalistofdenitions.Theexistingliteraturereviewalsosuggeststherearesixmainimplementationoptionsopentoachangeagenttype,changestartpoint,changestyle,changetarget,changeinterventions,andchangeroles.DenitionsareprovidedinTable2.However,someofthesedenitionsrequirealittlemoreexplanationasthereisarangeofexistingclassicationsthatcouldhavebeendrawnon.ChangetypeAcommonwayofdeningthetypeofchangeistocombinespeedofchangewithextentofchangerequired,andwetakeasimilarapproach(seeFigure2).Theextentofchangerequiredcanbeclassiedintermsofscope,asre-alignmentortransform-Table1.DeÞnitionsofcontextualconstraintsandenablers TimeThespeedwithwhichchangeneedstobeachieved.Forexample,ischangereactiveinresponsetoparticularevents,orisitpro-active?Organisationsincrisishavelittletimeandneedtochangere-actively.Thoseconcernedwithlonger-termstrategicdevelopmentnormallyhavemoretimetochange.ScopeTheextentofchangerequired,intermsoftransformationorrealignment,withinthepartsoftheorganisationaffectedbythechanges.PreservationTheextenttowhichitisnecessarytomaintaincontinuityincertainpracticesorpreservespecicassets,beitstaff,aspectsofculture,orparticularcompetences.DiversityThedegreeofdiversityintermsofvalues,normsandattitudesamongthegroupsofstaffaffectedbychange.Thiscouldbeaffectedby,forexample,theexistenceofmultiplesubcultures(salesversusR&D)ornationalcultureswithinanorganisation,ordifferentprofessionalCapabilityThelevelofcompetenceformanagingchangeintheorganisation,intermsofstaffknowledgeableaboutthedesignofchange,andintermsoftheabilityofindividualstocopewithchangeandmanageothersthroughtheprocess.CapacityTheamountofmoneyavailabletoinvestinthechangeprocess,andtheavailabilityofhumanresourcesandmanagerialtimetodiverttowardsthechange.ReadinessforTheextenttowhichstaffareawareoftheneedforchangechange,understandtheextentandimplicationsofthechange,andaremotivatedtowardsachievingthechange.PowerTherelativepowerofthechangeinitiator,orthemainchangeagent,inrelationtootherstakeholderswhohaveaninuenceonthechangeprocess. Table2.Denitionsofimplementationoptions ChangetypeThetypeofchangetobeundertakenintermsoftheextentofchangeandthespeed.Changestart-pointWherethechangeisinitiated,forexample,top-downorbottom-up,orsomecombinationofthetwo.Changecouldalsobeinitiatedviapilotsitesandpocketsofgoodpractice.ChangestyleThemanagementstyleusedduringtheimplementationofchangethiscanvaryonacontinuumfromcoercivetohighlyparticipativeandcollaborative,andcanbevariedaschangeprogressesandbydifferentgroupsofstaff.ChangetargetChangeinterventionscanbefocusedonchangingtheoutputsofwhatpeopledo,theirbehaviours,ortheirattitudesandvalues.ChangeinterventionsTherangeofleversandmechanismstobedeployedacrossthedifferenttechnical,politicalandculturalsubsystemswithinanorganisation.Thereisalsoarangeofinter-personalinterventionssuchaseducation,communication,trainingandpersonalChangerolesWheretheresponsibilityforleadingandimplementingthechangeslies.Rolesincludeleadership,externalfacilitation,andchangeteams.Theserolesarenotmutuallyexclusive. Figure2.Typesofchangeation.Thespeedofchange,caneitherbe(anall-at-oncechangewithmanyinitiativesinarelativelyshorttime-frame)ormoregradual,withchangeinitiativesphasedthroughtime.Thisleadstofourchangetypes.Thehorizontaldimensionofthematrixislabelledextentofasopposedtoscopeofchange,becausethedesiredscopeofchangemaybedifferenttotheextentofchangeactuallydeliv-LongRangePlanning,vol352002 ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangeered.Organisationscouldchooseastagedapproach,movingfromonechangetypetoanother.Asanexample,anorganisationcouldhaveinsufcientfundstoinvestinalonger-termtrans-formation,andneedtorststrengthentheircompetitivepositionviasometypeofre-alignment.Thisre-alignmentmightbearapidre-construction,suchasaturnaround,oraslowerrational-isationofthebusinessportfolio,whichthenleadsintomoreevolutionarychange.ThiswasthepatternofchangeseenatBri-tishAirwaysinthe1980sandGEinthe1980sand1990s.Othersarguethatre-constructioncanruninparallelwiththeearlystagesofevolutionasatAsdainthe1990s.ChangestartpointandstyleTheliteraturereviewabovemakesreferencetodifferentchangestartpoints.Theimpetusandmomentumforchangecancomefromtop-downorbottom-up,orsomesortofcombinationofthetwo.However,changedoesnothavetobeimplementedonanorganisation-widebasissimultaneously.Itispossibletostartwiththeuseofpilotsites(orincasesoftechnologicalchange,prototypes),ortheuseofpocketsofgoodpractice,inwhichindividualstakeresponsibilityforinitiatingthechangestheyseeasappropriateintheirpartofthebusiness.However,akeyissuehereistomoveawayfromexistingrecipes,suchastop-downchangemustbedirective,andconsidertherelationshipbetweenchangestart-pointandstyle.Thereareseveraldifferenttypologiesforstylesofchange.Mostofthemuseacontinuumthatmovesfrommorecoercivestylesatoneendtomorecollab-orativestylesattheother.Weusevestylesofchangeasothershaveeducationandcommunication,collaboration/participation,intervention,directionandcoercion.Thekeyistorecognisethattherearenosetcombinationsofchangestartpointandstyleforexample,whiletopdownchangeisoftenpresentedasdirectiveorcoercive,itcanbemorecollaborative.TheGlaxoWellcomecasealsoillustratesthispoint.ChangetargetsandinterventionsThereviewofexistingthinkingonchangealsomakesreferencetodifferentchangetargetsoutputs,behavioursorvalues,anddifferentrangesofchangeinterventions.Changeinterventionscanbeclassiedintotechnical(structuresandsystems),political(formalandinformalmeansofexercisingpower),andcultural(symbols,ritualsandroutines,storiesandmyths).However,changeoftenrequiresintensivecommunication,andinvestmentineducation,trainingandmanagementandpersonaldevelop-mentasillustratedbytheGlaxocasestudywhichfollows.Thesechangeinterventionsarehardtoclassifyintotechnical,politicalandculturalinterventionsandeffectivelyformafourthsub-sys-temofinterpersonalinterventions.Aswithchangestart-pointandstyle,akeyissueisthelinkagebetweentargetandinter-ventions.Ifthefocusisinchangingoutputsalone,thiscanbeachievedviachangestoorganisationalsystems.However,whenvaluesordeeplyingrainedbehavioursneedtobetackled,inter- ventionsinallfourareasarelikelytoberequired,includinginvestmentincommunicationandpersonaldevelopment.ExercisingjudgementAstheabovediscussionreveals,thereisacomplexrangeofoptionsandawidenumberofpermutationsopentothoseimplementingchange.Understandingthecontextualconstraintsandenablersiskeytounderstandingthetypeofchangeanorganisationistoundertakeasopposedtothetypeofchangeittoundertake,andthereforewhatsortofchangepathisrequired.Similarly,understandingthecontextualcon-straintsandenablersiscentraltomakingchoicesaboutstart-pointandstyle.Moreparticipativechangeapproaches,forexample,requiregreaterskillsinfacilitation,agreaterreadinessforchangefromthoseparticipating,moretime,andtherefore,often,morefunds.Choicesaboutthechangetargetandinter-ventionsmayobviouslybeaffectedbythescopeofchange,butalsoby,forexample,capacity.Managementdevelopmentinter-ventionscanbeexpensiveandmaynotbeaccessibletoorganis-ationswithlimitedfunds.Inrealitychoosingtherightoptionsisaboutaskingtherightquestionsandexercisingchangejudge-ment.Thelinkagesbetweenaparticularcontextualfeatureandparticulardesignchoicesmaybeobvious,butunderstandingthelinkagesbetweenallthecontextualfeaturescombinedandthedesignchoicesisfarmorecomplex.ThisiswhywehavechosentoillustratetheuseofthekaleidoscopeviaalongitudinalcaseDatacollectionLongitudinalcasestudies,withtheircapacitytoexaminechangeimplementationanditsoutcomesovertime,areparticularlysuitableforinvestigatinghowcontextimpactsonimplemen-tationoptions.Inthisstudywedrawonthelongitudinalresearchconductedonaconsortiumoforganisationsfromtheearly1990sthroughto2001.Theorganisationswereself-selectedinthattheychoseeachothertojointlysponsortheresearchalongwithArthurD.LittleInc.TheycametogetherbecauseofthechangeissuestheywerefacingfollowingtheUKrecessionofthe1990s.Allthecompaniesarematureorganisationsfacingtheissueofcorporaterenewalandthereforetransformation.Thesamplecontainsmajormulti-nationalprivatesectorrmsinthetopveoftheirrespectivesector/industrywithregardtosizeandlevelofturnover.Withtheexceptionofone,theresearchsiteswerealmostallwhite-collarsettingsintermsofworkforceThegroupcontainsawiderangeofbusinesssectors:pharma-ceuticals,electronics,investmentbanking,distribution,telecom-munications,food,retailbanking,andtheNationalHealthSer-vice.Thismeansthattheresearchisunabletoprovidegeneralisationsforeachofthesectors/industriesthatthecompa-niesrepresent,butthecasescancontributetotheory-buildingLongRangePlanning,vol352002 choosingtherightoptionsisaboutaskingtheright ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangethroughanintensivemultiple-caseresearchstrategywhichallowsforsomecomparativeanalysis.Theresearchershadtheunusualprivilegeofbeingallowedcompleteaccesstotheorganisationsinvolved.Thismeanttheycouldobtaintheviewsoflargenum-bersofmanagersandemployeesontheimplementationofchange.Avarietyofdatacollectionmethodswereused,bothquantitativeandqualitative(seeAppendixA),toexplorethetransformationprocessesundertakenbytheseorganisationsindetailandtoprovidehighlevelsoftriangulation.ThispaperpresentsacasestudyofchangeatGlaxoWellcomeUKbasedonthetwosetsofdatacollectedin1993/94and1996/97,primarilyfromthesalesdivision.Therstphaseofdatacollectionexploredtheoriginsanddevelopmentofthechangesunderwayfromthelate1980s,whilethesecondphaseexaminedhowchangehadprogressedsince1994.Theanalysisofthecasealsodrawsonreectionsontheearlierchangeinitiativesgath-eredinthethirdroundofdatacollectionin2000/01.WehavechosentheGlaxocasestudytoillustratetheuseofthekaleido-scopebecauseitrepresentsanunusualchangecontext.Whilemanystudiesofchangeexamineunder-performingorganisationsundertakingchangeonare-activebasis,theGlaxocaselooksatasuccessfulorganisationundertakingchangeonapro-activebasisinanticipationoftheimpactofforthcomingindustryandproductchanges.TheexampleofGlaxoWellcomePartone:changeatGlaxoPharmaceuticals1994In1988GlaxoUKfacedanumberofthreatstoitscompetitivepositionandprotability,includingincreasedcompetition,expiringpatentsonitsproducts(particularlyZantacinthemid-1990s)andchangeswithintheNationalHealthService(NHS),thecompanyscorecustomerbase,itselfundergoingchangeinresponsetogovernmentlegislation.However,anattitudesurveyrevealedthatstaffcomplacentlybelievedtheseniormanagementteamcouldaddresstheseissues,withlittleneedforthestaffthemselvestodoanythingdifferentlytoensurefuturesuccess.Thesurveyalsoidentiedacultureofslowdecisionmakingexacerbatedbyfunctionaldivideswithintheorganisation,threat-eningtheabilityofthecompanytorespondtochangesintheirmarketplace:Baronial,parochial,fewcross-functionalteams,unhierarchical,inwhichwasprobablyappropriateforthe60sand70sbecausewewereinastablehealthcaremarket,butthisisnowinappropriatetothemarketandthetypeofpeopleweemploy.(SeniorManager)Inresponsetotheseissues,andabeliefintheneedforanewsetofbehaviourstounderpinfuturebusinesssuccess,theseniormanagershadintroducedpriortothestartofthisresearcha plannedculturalchangeprogrammecalledRATIO(Roleclarity,Acceptanceofchange,Teamwork,Innovation,Outputorientation)focusinginitiallyondesiredbehaviours.Atthesuggestionofexternalconsultants,theseniormanagerswentonanoutdoordevelopmentcoursethatenabledthemtounderstandandexperimentwiththenewbehavioursandtounderstandthedepthofchangetheywereaskingofstaff.Thisinterventionwassosuccessfulthatasimilarexperiencewasrepeatedfor700staff.StaffwereaskedtotakethebehavioursencapsulatedwithinRATIOandexpandonthemandtailorthemfortheirownjobroles.Aseriesofcomplementarychangeinitiativeswasintroduced.Avaluesstatementwasissuedstatingthevalueswhichshouldunderpinthebehaviours.Crossfunctionalprojectgroupswereintroducedtobreakdownintra-organisationaldivides.Glaxoplannedrelocationalsoallowedthemtomakefullsymbolicuseoftheinterioropenplandesignofthenewbuildingtoreinforcethedesiredculture.Thisofcedesignenabledmoreopencom-municationbetweenfunctions.AnHRinitiativeincorporatedRATIOwithinanewsetofmanagerialcompetencies.Theseinitiativesweredesignedtoshakestaffoutoftheircom-placencyandincreasetheirreadinessforchange.InterviewsrevealedthattheRATIOinitiativehadwideownershipitwasperceivedasdevisedbythestaffratherthanasdevisedandimposedbymanagement,andwaswellcommunicated.StaffunderstoodwhatRATIOmeantandcouldrelatetheinitiativetotheirwork.Bycomparison,thevaluesstatementwasnotwidelyrecognisedorremembered.Therewasalsoaperceivedconbetweensalestargetsandthelonger-termaimsofthechangeprogramme.Morefundamentalchangehadtofollow.Parttwo:changeatGlaxoPharmaceuticals1997mergerwithWellcomeandtheintroductionofacustomerInJanuary1995GlaxomergedwithWellcome,ina£9.1billiondealgivingthecombinedcompanya5.1percentshareoftheworldmarket.Glaxoalsoundertookabusinessreengineeringprogrammeandarestructuringofitsbusiness.InternallythetwooriginaltradingcompaniesofGlaxoAllenandHanburysandGlaxoLaboratoriesweremerged.Theoverallbusinesswasrestructuredintoveregionaldivisions.Underlyingthesechangeswasastrategicshiftawayfromindividualproductsandintodiseasemanagement,amovetoworkinpartnershipwithcustomers,andanattempttoreduceR&Dcostsviaalliances.Thesechangeswereinresponsetothechangingexternalcontext,suchasagreatercostconsciousnessamongGlaxoscustomerstheprescribingdoctors.Thecompanystartedtomarkettheideaofsellingproductsandcomplementaryservicessuchasasthmaclinicsinhospitals.Thiswasaccompaniedbyamorecustomer-relationshipmarket-ingapproachtotheirmainclients,theprescribers.Thecompanydevelopedcollaborationswithuniversitiesandsmallbio-tech-LongRangePlanning,vol352002 ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangenologycompaniesinanefforttobolsterR&Dactivityandpro-le.Thechangesimplementedatthistimecontinuedtheachievementsofthechangeprogrammeintheearly1990s.Are-engineeringinitiativecalledCustomerFocuswasputinplace.Ananalysisofcustomerneedswasfollowedbyprocessredesignandtheidenticationofnewcompetencies.Thetwointernaltradingcompaniesweremergedandtheveregionaldirectoratescreatedaspartofthere-engineeringinitiativetodevelopanorganisationalstructuretomirrorthatoftheNHS.ItwasduringtheimplementationoftheinternalmergerthatthemergerwithWellcomewasannounced.TheinternalmergeroftheoriginalGlaxotradingcompaniesinvolvedbringingtogetherthetwolargesteldsaleforcesintheUK.Wellcomessalesforcewas,bycomparison,the10thlargest.Inthatsense,theinternalmergerwasmorecomplex.Therewerefewredundanciesasaresultoftheintegration,butsevenhier-archicallayerswerereducedtofour.Awholeraftofcommuni-cationexercises,seminars,workshops,employeemeetings,news-lettersandothermediaputthecaseforwardforthenewprocessstructure.Yettherewasstillanxietyatalllevels:Itisanexperimentonourpart.Wedonotknowifitwillsucceed(HRStaff).Thenewbehavioursrequiredamajorshiftinemployeemind-set.Employeeswerebeingempoweredthroughtheholdingoflargebudgetsforregionalandbusinessareas:Therephashadtomovefromtheoldcommercialtravellertobeingthemanagerofa£1millionpoundyieldingterri-tory.(HRStaff)Inadditiontothere-structuring,differentemployeebehav-iourshadtobealignedbehindthenewbusinessstrategy.Theyincludedteam-workingcompetencies,increasedcustomer-facingskills,abilitytoworkinanetworkedorganisation,andtakinggreaterbusinessresponsibility.Tounderpinthecustomerfocusprogrammearevampedcompetencyframeworkwasintroduced,andtheappraisalprocesswasoverhauled.Thenewapproachreliedontheindividualtogatherasmuchinformationabouttheirperformancefromwhomevertheythoughtrelevantandtodiscusstheirperformanceonanongoingbasis:Youmaywanttohaveadiscussionatsomepointwithyourmanagertotalkabouthowyouaredevelopingandyoumayalsowanttodothatwithyourpeers.Yourmanagerwillinevitablyretain,inthemain,thedecisionforpaysoheorsheatsomestagewouldneedtomakethatdecision.Inordertomakethatjudgementyoucanleaveittotallytoyourmanageroryoucanshowthemwhatyouhavedevelopedandwhatyouhavedoneandachieved.(Focus Extendingthesourceofinputsintothereviewwasareoftheincreasedprojectworkingandthemoveawayfromwork-ingexclusivelyforonemanager.Therewardsystemwasoverhauled:jobfamiliesreplacedgrad-ingstructures,amuchstrongeremphasiswasplacedonthevalueofdevelopmentandcontinuousimprovementinthecalculationofindividualspaylevels,andgreatermixofbasicandbonuspay.Traininganddevelopmentmovedawayfromcourseprovisiontogreatercoachingandcounsellingactivity.Acoachwasmaderesponsibleforthedevelopmentofanareateam,andeachbusi-nessunitmanagerhadanexternalmentorfromaconsultancygroup.Developmentsponsorsandopenlearningcentreswereestablishedatheadofce,togetherwithacomputerbasedper-sonalfeedbackpackagethatenabledindividualstogiveandreceivefeedbackonnamedindividuals.Yetdespiteallthischangeactivity,whichemphasisedself-managementandindividualresponsibility,signsofcomplacencywerestillevidencedinthe1996attitudesurvey.71percentagreedthattheorganisationwasexibleenoughtocopewithchangecomparedwith69percentin1993;85percentbelievedtheorganisationwouldachieveitsaims(62percent93)andthecon-denceinmanagementsabilitytocopewithacrisishadactuallyrisen(61percent96,56percent93).Risktakinghadincreasedbutnotradically37percentagreedthatpeoplewereafraidoftakingriskscomparedwith45percentin1993.88percentagreedthattherewasmorepressureatworkoverthelasttwoyears.However,theindicesforindividualresponsibilityforperform-anceandteamworkingshowedonlyminorincreasesonthescoresobtainedthreeyearsearlier,whilesomemanagersstillhar-boureddoubtsaboutthenewapproach:Ifyouwantanempoweredenvironmentyouwantpeopletotakeresponsibility.Howdoyoumanagepoorperform-anceinanempoweredenvironmentwheretheteamshav-tquitegottothestagewheretheycantakeoverthatfunctionandtakeoutpoorperformance.(LineManager)Buildingreadiness:GlaxoWellcomepart1ThechangekaleidoscopeforpartoneoftheGlaxoCasestudy(seeFigure3)summarisesthesituationintermsofcontextualenablersandconstraintspriortochange.Thecontextualfeaturesinthekaleidoscopedonotcarryequalweightinallorganisationsandatalltimesthosethatenablechangeandthosethatcon-strainitwilldifferfromorganisationtoorganisation,andfromonepointintimetoanother.Furthermore,somecontextualfea-tureswillbemoreimportantthanotherones.Thereforecriticalfeaturesneedtobeidentiedinthemappingstage.Itisnotcienttojustidentifythecontextualenablersandcon-itisalsonecessarytoidentifywhichenablerstoexploitandwhichconstraintstotackle.Figure3showsthatGlaxohadseveralcontextualenablers.First,intermsof,therewasnogreaturgencyforchange,LongRangePlanning,vol352002 despiteallthischangeactivitysignsofcomplacencywerestillevident ContextSensitiveApproachestoChange Figure3.KaleidoscopeforGlaxoatstartofpartone(early1990s).AdaptedfromJ.BalogunandV.HopeExploringStraetgicChange,PrenticeHall,1999althoughtheseniormanagementneededtoshakethestaffoutoftheircomplacency.Thecompanywascashrichsotherewastoinvestmoneyinasignicantchangeprogramme.ThedivisionrequiringchangewastheUKSalesDivisionand,assuch,hadahighdegreeofculturalhomogeneityandstaffwithastrongsenseofcommitmenttothepharmaceuticalscompany.andtheneedfordifferentinterventionsfordifferentgroupsofstaff,wasthereforelowerthanwouldhavebeenthecasehadthechangesaffectednotjustsales,butalsoR&Dandmanufacturing,forexample.Theofchangesoughtatthisstagewasrealign-mentratherthantransformationandassuchwasalesserchangechallenge.Thekeyconstraintswere.Thelowawarenessoftheneedforchangeandexistinglevelsofcom-placencyamongthestafftranslatedintoalow.Therewasalsoaneedtopreserveasmanyofthetalentedworkforceaspossiblesincetherewasavastpoolofknowledgewithinthesalesforcethatseniormanagementdidnotwanttolosethroughunnecessaryalienation.Theneedtoretainasmanystaffasposs-iblelimitedtheextenttowhichthedirectorscouldusetheirtoimposechangeandsothisismarkedasneutral.Thehighlyeducatedworkforcecouldnotbetreatedasiftheyhadnomindsoftheirown.Finally,wasanissue,astherewaslimitedchangemanagementexperiencewithinthesalesThechangeprocessdesignedmatchedthiscontext.Aninitial bigbangreconstructionwasselectedtodestroystaffcomplacencyasatriggerformorefundamentalchangeyettocome.Atopdownapproachledbytheseniormanagerswastakeninordertoovercometheproblemoflowreadinessforchange,withtheuseofconsultants,wherenecessary,toovercomegapsincapa-bility.Thestylewasmorelikeinterventionthandirectioninordertoincreasetheawarenessoftheneedforchangeandasenseofownershipamongstthestaff,and,atthesametime,recognisestaffsneedforautonomyandfeelingofbeingincon-trol.Managementdevelopmentinitiatives,althoughunusualinsituationsjustaimedatcreatingsomelevelofreadiness,wereusedtogetmanagerstorealisethatorganisationalchangemeantpersonalchange,andtheseweresupportedbysymbolicofDevelopingmorefundamentalchange:GlaxoWellcomepart2Figure4showsthekaleidoscopeforGlaxoWellcomeUKattheendofthechangeprocessdescribedinPartOne1993.Someaspectsofthecontexthadchangedwhilstothershadremainedthesame.TherewasstillfourorsoyearsbeforeZantacwouldcomeoffpatentsowasstillnotapressingissue,butintermsoftrulytransformationalchangehadyettobeachi-eved.Thechallengeoftransformationalchangeforanyorganis-ationmakesitaconstraint.Allthattherststagehadachievedwasadegreeoftoimprovestaffchange,makingthisfeaturenowatleastneutral,andpossiblyapositiveenablerofchange.Readinessforchangeappearedtobe Figure4.KaleidoscopeforGlaxoatendofpartone(1994)LongRangePlanning,vol352002 whilebehavioursandoutputschanged,thefailedtokickin ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangebetterinthesensethatemployeeswereawareofthechangesinthemarketplaceandtheneedforthecompanytorespond.How-ever,whatwasunclearwasthemeaningofthechangeaheadofthematapersonalandindividuallevel.Thecompanyhadmanagedtoretainmostofitsqualitywork-forcewhich,alongwiththeincreasingawarenessoftheneedforchange,reducedconcerns.ThesuccessfulexecutionofRATIOhadalsoincreasedthechangemanagementInphysicaltermswasstillstrong,theorganisationwasstillhomogeneousratherthandiverse,andseniormanagementretainedtheThechosenchangedesignatthisstageappearedmoretrans-formationalinactivity:forexample,internalandexternalmerg-ersandpromotionofself-management.However,intermsofthechangepath,whilsttheinteractionwiththeexternalenviron-mentandcustomerappearedtobetransformingtheimageandbrandoftheorganisation,theattitudesurveyscoresin1996didnotrevealasignicantshiftinemployeevaluesandorientation.startingpointforthechangesremainedpredominantlytopdown,althoughseniormanagementdidsanctionsomepilotsitesinthenewbusinessventurespioneeredaroundtheconceptdiseasemanagement.Thechangewasmoreparticip-ativethandirective.Thedecisionsaboutthechangeprocessandthebusinessstrategyitselfstillrestedwithseniormanagement,buttheoutcomesoftheseniormanagementsdecisionspointedtowardsamorecollaborativestyleofworkingintermsofcoach-ing,appraisalandteamworking.Themanagementoftheexter-nalmergermademuchmoreuseofchangeactionteamsinlead-ingandmanagingchange,inadditiontotheseniormanagementleadershipinthisarea.Theofthechangeinterventionsremainedattheleveloftheoutputsandbehavioursofanindi-vidual.Theinterventionsusedsupportedthis,andincludedstructuresandsystems(restructuring,newrewardsystems,newappraisals,competencyframeworks),personaldevelopmentinitiatives(coaching,counselling),andcertainsymbolicinter-ventionssuchastheabandonmentofformalappraisalforms,andofcourse,newformalperformancerelatedrewards.Why,then,wastheresolittlechangeinfundamentalattitudestowardsrisktaking,orteamworking?Onepossibleinterpret-ationisthatthechangedesignandsolutionssoughtwerestilltypicalofaprotablepharmaceuticalcompany.Zantacrep-resentedasubstantialproportionofGlaxosturnover,andformostorganisationsachangeequivalenttotheexpiryoftheZan-tacpatentinthemid1990swouldhavebroughtamorelean,meanandhungrycultureintofocus.Yettheinterventionssuchascoaching,mentoring,counsellingandself-appraisalsentmess-agesofchangebutnotnecessarilycrisis.Inotherwordsthepro-cessofchangereectedmoretheculturethatthecompanywastryingtomoveawayfromthantherealitywithwhichitwasthreatenedaftertheremovalofthepatent.Furthermore,whilstbehavioursandoutputschanged,theemotionalunderstandingoftheimplicationsofthelossofpatent,andthefailuretodevelop alternativeproducts,failedtokickinattheleveloftheaverageemployee.Inotherwords,thelevelofreadinessforchangeachi-evedviaRATIOwasnotasgreatasmaybeitappeared.Perhapsmorescenariobuildingatthelowestlevelsoftheorganisation,orchangesthatindicatedtheneedforgreatercostconsciousnessassociatedwithlessafuencepost-patent-expiry,wouldhaveenabledtherhetoricoflossofpatentchangesinthecustomertobetranslatedintowhatitwouldmeanfortheaveragesalesrepresentativeonaneverydaylevelreductioninbeneandmorepressureofwork.Furtherresearchconductedattheendof1999revealsthistobethecase:TheZantacpatent,whilstweallknewitwashappening,wetthatbrilliantlypreparedforeverythingSincethenthecompanyhasexperienceddifcultiesinreach-ingtargets,andtheyhaveprovedtobemistakenintheirantici-pationofchangeswithintheNHS.Nevertheless,inthewakeofthelossofitsstardrug,thecompanyisstillexperiencinggrowth(albeitatalowerratethanitwouldprefer).Thiswouldhavebeenunlikelyhaditnotattemptedtotacklethecriticalcontex-tualfactorssuchasreadinesstenyearsearlier.ThemergerwithSmithKlineBeechamwillchangetheorganisationalcontextstillfurther.Thelongitudinalcasestudyaimstoillustratethelinkagebetweencontextanddesign.Anumberofobservationscanbemadeaboutsmanagementofchangeoveraprolongedperiodoftime.Tosuggestgeneralisedprescriptionsaboutsuchmanagementwouldbetomixdescriptionwithprescription,andriskmislead-ingpractitionersbyarguingfromaspeciccasestudytothegeneralexperience.Neverthelesstherearecertainlessonsthatcanbelearntaboutspeciccontextualfeatures,andtheuseofcertainimplementationoptionsthatareenlighteningalthoughthewaythesearecombinedinanychangesituationshouldalwaysremainunique.LessonsfromtheGlaxochangeprocessGlaxoachievedsomeshiftintheorganisationalcontextasaresultoftherstchangeprogramme.Therewasarationalaware-nessoftheneedforchange,andthisshiftinorganisationalreadi-nessmeantthatamorecollaborativestyleofchangewaspossibleinsubsequentchangeinitiatives.Thegreaterreadinessalsomadepossiblethepilotingofnewbusinessdevelopmentideasthatcouldnothavebeenusedafewyearsearlier.Theoverallcapa-bilityforchangehadalsomatured,illustratinganimportantfea-tureofchangenamelythattodeliveratransformation,organis-ationsmayneedtore-conguretheirchangecontextinsomeway,suchasbuildingreadinessandincreasingchangecapability,LongRangePlanning,vol352002 amoresophisticatedunderstandingmayavoidendlesslyturningfromonefashiontothenext ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangebeforetheyattemptatransformationalchangeinitiative.Assuch,itmaybemoreappropriatetotalkaboutpathsofchangeasanimplementationoptionratherthanchangetype.ForGlaxo,thepathwasre-constructionfollowedbyevolution.Glaxowantedtoachieveamoretransformationalchangeinphasetwo,buttheydidnotachieveallthattheywanted.Whilstrationalawarenessoftheneedtochangewasheightened,theemotionalunderstandingofwhatthismeantfortheindividualstaffseemedimpenetrable.Havingfoundthevaluesapproachtohavebeensomewhattepidinphaseone,theorganisationchosetotargetoutputsandbehavioursagaininphasetwo.Perhapsthiswasinsufcientwhenthetransformationalaimsofthechangeprogrammeareconsidered.ThearrayofpersonaldevelopmenttechniquesusedmighthavebeenexpectedtohelpindividualsunderstandthenecessityforchangingtheiraspirationsandtheirperceptionsofwhatitwasliketoworkinGlaxo.Whatthecasesuggestsisthatpersonaldevelopmentcanmakeacriticalcontri-butiontotransforming,butconductedinavacuumanddivorcedincontentfromtherequirementsofbusinessstrat-egy,itmaynotshifttheinthedirectionrequired.Themotivationofagoodvisioncanbecritical.Glaxousedachangeprocessinphasetwowhichinstyleandcontentstillectedthecultureofasuccessfulpharmaceuticalcompany.Itssubstantialcapacityforchange,intermsofphysicalresources,almostbecameanegativefeature!SomeaspectsoftheprocesscouldhavebeenmoresymbolicofthebleakerfuturetheyfacedoncethepatentonZantachadexpired.Glaxowerealsooveroptimisticintheirvisioningofthefuture.Theyanticipatedthattheirmajorcustomer,theNHS,wouldchangemorequicklythanitwascapableofdoing.Usingthechangekaleidoscope:achievingtbetweencontextanddesignWehavefoundtheframeworkpresentedinthispaper,thekal-eidoscope,usefulforpractitionersintwodifferentways.FirstitcanbeusedforretrospectiveanalysisinmuchthesamewaythattheGlaxoexperiencehasbeenanalysedhere.Thelearningthatcomesfromusingtheframeworkinthiswayisthatpeoplegainagreaterappreciationofthecomplexityofchange.Ifacaseshowsthatatopdownapproachtochangewasunsuccessful,insteadofdismissingalltopdownapproachesasinappropriate,thekaleidoscopeallowsustounderstandwhysuchadesignchoicewasinappropriateforthatcontext.Italsoallowsustoseethattheverysamedesignchoicemaytanotherorganis-scontextwell.Throughamoresophisticatedyetaccessibleunderstandingofchangewemayavoidthetrapofendlesslyturn-ingfromonefashiontothenext,frompromulgatingdirectivecharismaticleadershipinonedecadetobottomupempowermentinthenext!Byenablingretrospectiveunderstand-ingofsuccessfulandlesssuccessfulchangeinitiativestheframe-workcanalsohelpdevelopinformedjudgementinmanagers.Thesecondwaythatthekaleidoscopecanbeused,andisused mostcommonlywithorganisations,isforgroupsofmanagerstoproblemsolvethechallengeofchangethattheyarefacingintheircompany.Weencourageorganisationstofollowthreesteps:1Assessthecontextualconstraintsandenablers.Considereachofthecontextualfeaturesindividuallytodecidewhetherinthischangecircumstancethefeatureisanenabler(e.g.moneyavailabletonanceinvestmentinchangeasatGlaxoandthereforeahighcapacity),oraconstraint(e.g.alowreadinessforchange).2Determinethechangepath.Considertheextentofchangerequired(transformationversusre-alignment)usingthedesiredscopeofchange.Thenusetheothercontextualcon-straintsandenablerstoconsiderhowtogetthereisare-construction,forexample,sufcient,orisitnecessary,likeGlaxo,tocarryoutsomesortofre-alignmenttoenableasub-sequent,longertermtransformation?3Selecttheremainingdesignchoicesforeachpartofthechangepath.Usingthecontextualfeatures,andtheirstatusascon-straintsorenablers,toinformthechoices,considertheremainingdesignchoicesofstartpoint,style,target,inter-ventionsandrolesforeachphaseofthechangepath.Forexample,ifanorganisationchoosestogoforre-constructionfollowedbyevolution,itmaybethatthere-constructionistop-downanddirectivewithafocusonoutputstosignalachangeindirectiontoanorganisationsmemberstohelpbuildreadiness.Whereastheevolutioncouldbemorepartic-ipativewithmoreofanemphasisonbehaviours.Thismakestheprocesssoundverysimple.Inrealitythereareanumberofpitfallstoguardagainstandacomplexarrayofissuesanddecisionstoconsider.Inourexperience,whenexam-iningthecontextualconstraintsandenablers,seniormanagersoftenover-estimatethereadinessandcapabilityoftherestoftheorganisation,ignoreissuesofpreservation,andunderestimatethescopeofchange.Thesefeaturesthereforemeritparticularattention.Diversityisalsopotentiallybecomingmoreofanissue,withmoreorganisationscreatedthroughmergersandacqui-sitionsandoperatinginaninternationalcontext.Devisingachangepathcanbecomplex.Iftheextentofchangeultimatelyrequiredistransformation,thenthepathbecomescomplex.Arevolutionisonlylikelytobepossiblewhenallthecontextualfeaturesotherthanscopeareenablers,orthereisanoptionofbringinginmanynewpeoplemoresuitedtothenewrequiredwaysofworkingandlettinggothoseemployeeslesssuited,whichmaybeneitherdesirablenoravailabletomostorganisations.Evenanimmediateevolutionrequirescapacity,capability,powerandreadiness.Ifanyofthesefeaturesarecon-straints,andtheyfrequentlyare,thenthereisaneedtocarryoutaphaseofre-alignmenttore-congurethesecontextualfea-LongRangePlanning,vol352002 ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangeturestobemorepositivebeforeembarkingonmoretransform-ationalchange.Asthechangedesignisdeveloped,withconsider-ationmovingontothedesignchoicesforeachphaseofthechangepath,itmustberememberedthatitisnotpossibletoprescribeparticularformulasaseachchangecontextwillbedif-ferentandrequireadifferentrangeofchoices.Althoughachangepathofre-constructionfollowedbyevolutionmaybecommon,thisdoesnotmeanthechoiceswithineachphaseareidentical.Whenfacilitatingworkshopswithmanagers,wendthisexer-cisehasanumberofotherbenets.Bymappingoutthecurrentcontextandthenconsideringthelargerangeofimplementationoptionsavailabletothem,managersgainanumberofinsightsusingtheirownexperience.Thesheercomplexityofchangebecomesapparenttothem,andtheyrealisewhymoresimplisticsolutionswithintheirownorganisationshavepreviouslyfailed.Byworkingonconstructingakaleidoscopewiththeircolleagues,theybegintoappreciatetheconstrainingeffectofpersonalmanagerialbiasesandpreferencesforchange.Forthosefromlargecorporations,askingthemtoproblemsolvechangeques-tionsbyexaminingdifferentbusinessdivisions,helpsthemunderstandthatitisseldompossibletounfurlonechangestrat-egyacrossdiversebusinessunits.Usingtheideaofchangepathshelpstheperceptionofcorporatechangeasajourneywherechecksandadjustmentstoplanswillneedtobemadeatdifferentmilestonesalongtheway.Wehavealsofoundthroughourcol-laborativeworkingwithpractitionersthatsharingthekaleido-scopeamongstdifferentdivisionsoroccupationalgroupsallowsacommonchangelanguageandstructuretoemergewhichenablescolleaguestosharetheirthoughtsaboutthecomplexandoftenintangibleissuesassociatedwithorganisationalchange.LimitationsofthekaleidoscopeThestrengthofthekaleidoscopeliesinitsrecognitionofthecomplexityofchangeandtheneedforchangedesignstobecon-textsensitive.However,thekaleidoscopehascertainlimitations.Toderiveacompletedesignofthechangeprocessitneedstobeusedincombinationwithotherframeworks.Tounderstandthescopeofchangeandtherangeoftechnical,politicalandcul-turalchangeinterventionsthatneedtobeemployedwenditusefultouseframeworksliketheculturalweb(seefootnote13).Toproperlyassesscontextualfeaturessuchasreadinessandcapability,instrumentssuchasattitudesurveys,questionnaires,orstaffinterviewsorfocusgroupsmaybeneeded.However,moreimportantly,thechallengeofchangeliesnotjustinthedesignofthetransitionprocess,butalsotheactualdeploymentoftheplanstheactualphysicalmanagementofthechangepro-cess.Thekaleidoscopegivesanoutlinedesignforthetransitionstate,butalotmoredetailedthinkingisrequiredintermsoftheorderinwhichthevariouschangeinterventionsareputinplaceandhowtheyaresynchronisedandphasedthroughtime.Assuch,thekaleidoscopeisonlythestartofthestoryofchange. Thetransitionmanagementtask,itscomplexityandresourceconsumingnature,mustnotbeoverlooked.Thereisalsoanissuehereaboutchangeagentcompetencies.Allframeworksareonlyasgoodastheirusers,andsuccessfulchangeagentsneedtohaveanalytical,judgmentalandimplementationskills.Analyticalskillsareneededtobeabletobuildanin-depthappreciationoftheircontextofoperation,whilejudgementalskillsarerequiredtobeabletoassessthecriti-calcontextualenablersandconstraintsofthiscontext.Thisrequiresexperienceandissomethingchangeagentsarelikelytobuildthroughtime.Assuch,changeagenttrainingshouldbelessaboutteachingindividualsthetenrulesofchange,forexample,andmoreaboutgettingthemtoexaminedifferentchangesituations,whatworkedandwhatdidntwithinthosecontexts,andwhy.Theimplementationskillsaretodowiththephasingandsynchronisationofthechangeinter-Finally,thekaleidoscopeisprimarilyamechanismfordealingwithplannedchange.Itisatoolfororganisationsthatndthem-selvesneedingtoundertakechangeasaresultofeitheranactual,oranticipated,lossofcompetitiveness.Whilstitcanbeappliedtomanydifferentchangesituations,suchastheimplementationofnewinformationsystemsortechnology,culturalchangepro-grammes,orevenre-engineeringinitiatives,itismostappropri-atewhenthereisaparticularendgoalthatistobeachievedand,wewouldsuggest,lessapplicablewherechangeprocessesaredeliberatelydesignedtobeopenendedandevolving.AppendixA.TheactualcasestudybasedresearchmethodologyiswrittenupindetailinGrattonetal(seefootnote4).TheresearchwasorganisedasaconsortiumtheLeadingEdgeForumpractitionersandacademicsinterestedinexploringissuesofstra-tegichumanresourcemanagement.TheorganisationsinvolvedwereCitibank,GlaxoWellcome,HewlettPackard,BTPay-phones,ChelseaandWestminsterHealthcaretrust,KraftJacobsSuchardandLloydsBank.Eachorganisationprovidedaccesstooneoftheirdivisionsasacasestudysite.Thestudywassetuptocapturein-depthdatathatcouldprovideinsightintothedifferencesbetweenrhetoricandrealityintheorganisationsinvolvedandthelinkagesbetweenbusinessstrategy,humanresourcesstrategyandoutcomes,bothorganisationalandindi-vidual.Thedatacollectedwasbothqualitativeandquantitativesincetheintentwastousemultiplemethodstogaintherichnessofdatarequiredandprovideadequatelevelsoftriangulation.Quantitativedatacamefromarchival,secondarysources,suchascompanyreports,andLeadingEdgeForumquestionnaires,andqualitativedatacamefrominterviewsandfocusgroups.Firstly,focusgroupswererunwithmembersofthevarioushumanresourcesdepartmentstogainanappreciationoftheissuesandchallengesfacingeachorganisation.Semi-struc-LongRangePlanning,vol352002 Wewouldliketothanktheeditor,CharlesBaden-Fuller,andtwoanonymousreviewersfortheirhelpindevelopingthisContextSensitiveApproachestoChangeturedinterviewsfocusingonissuestodowithstrategy,theroleofHRandthenatureofHRactivitieswerethenconductedwithseniormanagers,linemanagers,generalemployeesandunionrepresentativesineachorganisation.Theseinterviewsweresup-plementedbyinterviewsbasedontherules-of-the-gamemethod-togetabetterunderstandingofthewaysofworkingineachorganisation.Thequestionnairesincluded:anemployeesurveylookingatissuestodowithcommuni-cation,HRactivities,strategy,employeerelationsandjobsat-isfactiondistributedto20percentoftheemployees(averageresponserateof60percent);aseniormanagersurveyondecisionmaking;anHRsurveyonthedesignofpolicy.Alongitudinaldimensionwasaddedtothestudysincedatawascollectedineachorganisationmorethanonce.TherstsetofdatawascollectedonacompanybycompanybasisbetweenAugust1993andJanuary1995,asecondsetbetweenSeptember1996andDecember1997andathirdsetbetween1999and2000.1.C.Coulson-ThomasandT.Coe,TheFlatOrganization,Bri-tishInstituteofManagement:London(1991);M.J.WheatleyandM.Wheatley,TheFutureOfMiddleManagement,InstituteofManagement,London(1992);IndustrialSociety,Culturechange.Managingbestpractice35.IndustrialSociety:London(1997).2.M.BeerandN.Nohria,Crackingthecodeofchange,ardBusinessReviewJune,133141(2000).3.A.M.PettigrewandR.WhippManagingChangeForCom-petitiveSuccessinBlackwell,Oxford(1991).4.L.GrattonVHopeHailey,P.StilesandC.Truss,StrategicHumanResourceManagementinOxfordUniversity,Press5.A.M.PettigrewandR.Whipp,ManagingChangeForCom-petitiveSuccess,Blackwell,Oxford(1991);T.Jick,Change:CasesAndConcepts,Irwin,Homewood,IL(1993).6.J.P.KotterandL.A.Schlesinger,ChoosingstrategiesforHarvardBusinessReviewMarch,106(1979);P.C.Nutt,Identifyingandappraisinghowmanagersinstallstrategy,StrategicManagementJournal14(1987);D.A.StaceandD.C.Dunphy,BeyondtheBoundaries:Lead-ingandRecreatingtheSuccessfulEnterprise.McGraw-Hill,Sydney(1994).7.N.J.BargerandL.K.Kirby,TheChallengeofChangein,Davies-Black(1995).8.D.A.NadlerandM.L.TushmanOrganizationalframebending:principlesformanagingreorientation,TheAcademyofManagementExecutive,194204(1989).9.StaceandDunphy(1994)(seeReference6);D.A.Stace, Dominantideologies,strategicchangeandsustainedper-HumanRelations(5),553570(1996).10.M.Beer,R.A.EisenstatandB.Spector,TheCriticalPathofOrganizationalRenewal,HarvardBusinessSchoolPress(1990);V.HopeandJ.Hendry,Corporateculturalchangeisitrelevantfortheorganizationsofthe1990s,ResourceManagementJournal(4),6173(1995).11.Grattonetal.(1999)(seeReference4).12.N.M.TichyManagementStrategicChange:Technical,Polit-icalandCulturalDynamicsinWiley,NewYork(1983).13.G.JohnsonManagingstrategicchangestrategy,cultureandLongRangePlanning(1),2836(1992).14.Beeretal.(1990)(seeReference10);L.J.Bourgeois,andD.R.Brodwin,Strategicimplementation:veapproachestoanelusivephenomena,StrategicManagementJournal264(1984).15.D.Butcher,P.,HarveyandS.Atkinson,DevelopingBusinessThroughDevelopingIndividuals,CraneldSchoolofManage-ment(1997).16.R.M.Kanter,B.A.SteinandT.D.JickTheChallengeofOrganizationalChangeinTheFreePress,NewYork(1992).17.A.GinsbergandE.AbrahamsonChampionsofchangeandstrategicshifts:theroleofinternalandexternalchangeadvo-JournalofManagementStudies(2),173199(1991).18.M.C.TushmanandC.A.OReilly,Ambidextrousorganiza-tions:managingevolutionaryandrevolutionarychange,ChangeManagementReview(4)(1996);E.RomanelliandM.L.Tushman,Organizationaltransformationaspunctu-atedequilibrium:anempiricaltest,AcademyofManagement1166(1994);D.MillerandP.Friesen,Momentumandrevolutioninorganizationaladaptation,AcademyofManagementJournal(4),519614(1980).19.J.B.BarneyLookinginsideforcompetitiveadvantage,AcademyofManagementExecutive(4),4961(1995).20.P.A.NuttandR.BackoffTransformingpublicorganizationswithstrategicmanagementandleadership,JournalofMan-(2),299347(1993).21.A.A.Armenakis,S.G.HarrisandK.W.MossholderCre-atingreadinessfororganizationalchange,HumanRelations(6),681703(1993).22.Kanteretal.(1992)(seeReference16).23.P.LawrenceandJ.LorschOrganizationandEnvironmentHarvardUniversityPress,Boston(1967).24.S.Sackmann,Cultureandsubcultures:ananalysisoforgani-zationalknowledge,AdministrativeScienceCulture161(1992)andS.Sackmann,UncoveringcultureinJournalofAppliedBehaviouralScience317(1991).25.BeerandNohria(2000)(seeReference2).26.ForadiscussionoftheuseofpocketsofgoodpracticeandsimilartechniquesseeButcheretal.(1997)(Seereference17);M.ClarkeandM.Meldrum,CreatingchangefromLongRangePlanning,vol352002 ContextSensitiveApproachestoChangebelow:earlylessonsforagentsofchange,Leadership&OrganizationDevelopmentJournal(2),7080(1999);J.Lipman-BlumenandH.Leavitt,Hotgroupswithattitudeanewstateoforganizationalmind,OrganizationalDynamicsSpring(1999);C.Hendry,Understandingandcreatingwholeorganizationchangethroughlearningtheory,,5(1996).27.G.JohnsonandK.Scholes,ExploringCorporateStrategy,5thedition,Prentice-Hall,EnglewoodCliffs,NJ(1999).28.D.L.CoxDoublingProductivityatMajorBrewery,RangePlanning(4),5864(1990).29.A.M.PettigrewTheAwakeningGiant:ContinuityandChangeinICIinBlackwell,Oxford(1985).30.P.Scott-MorganTheUnwrittenRulesoftheGameMcGraw-Hill,NewYork(1994).