Carlzon Establishes a Strong Sense of Urgency

Carlzon establishes a strong sense of urgency with his moves, and this was in evidence at both SAS and Linjeflyg. On his first day at the latter he called a meeting that included all employees from across the country. He also met quickly with employees at SAS after his posting and he outlined that there were going to be changes. His first order of business was actually to engage the employees in the change process, before the change process was even identified. In doing this, he encouraged the employees to become part of the process.

The second step was to quickly establish the market and competitive realities. Senior managers were quickly asked to provide assessments of the key customer groups and in doing so Carlzon was able to quickly identify the key issues. Strategies were then formed on the basis of these issues. The analysis was largely informal, which allowed it to be conducted with a sense of urgency, distilling down to the basic truths rather than becoming lost in analysis of the details.

2. Carlzon took the approach that the entire organization needed to buy into the change effort in order for it to be a success. The first step in his change process was to engage the workforce at large in the process. He gathered information from his senior managers, ensuring that they would be quickly involved. Although Carlzon directed the process, he made few of the decisions. When he did make the decisions, he was essentially confirming what many employees felt about the situation, rather than instilling his own vision of the company that did not correspond with their own. This clarity of vision was key, because the groups within the company that were charged with the change process were able to come together under a common vision of the change process.

3. Carlzon's philosophy with respect to the vision was that it needed to be simple. Vision and strategy are critical because they align the employees with the efforts that need to be made, but ultimately they must also be easy to understand. If they are, employees cannot become confused. Thus, Carlzon made certain to derive a very simple, clear vision, outlined in just a handful of points. Nor did the vision for SAS did not have any mutually exclusive points.

With a vision in place, Carlzon was able to formulate specific strategies and tactics that supported that vision. As a result of this, the company had specific objectives towards which to work. For example, the focus on business travelers as the primary customer allowed all employees within SAS to galvanize around that mission. As a result, service levels improved significantly. Carlzon was successful because he was able to communicate the strategy in a simple manner, and that strategy was well-aligned with the vision.

4. Carlzon was successful because he was effective in his use of communication. At Linjeflyg, his messages was brief but clear and all employees came away from that first meeting understanding what Carlzon wanted. With SAS, he improved on his ability to deliver the message. He had a theme song for his change strategy, something that assisted significantly with employee buy-in. Carlzon is also noted for his ability to spread his ideas. Likened as a preacher-leader, Carlzon was capable not only of delivering a clear message but of repeating that message frequently and to all people. This communicates the message more clearly to all of the organization's stakeholders.

Carlzon supported his communication style with managerial actions. He wanted to reduce formality in communication, but he backed this up by removing barriers to communication that had been built up in the company over time. He used a number of tools to accomplish this, including the little red book and rewards to assist with communication -- a number of different tools, utilized specifically to enforce the message with greater clarity and effectiveness.

5. Carlzon's greatest success may be as one who empowered his organizations. At Linjeflyg, all of the employees of the company were immediately engaged to assist in the change process. At SAS, Carlzon performed all of the key functions of empowerment. He removed the bureaucratic layers that had paralyzed the company's decision-making; he reorganized the company around his vision; and he allowed managers to make their own decisions. As important, he allowed these decisions to be evaluated on the basis of their outcomes, which encouraged riskier and more creative decisions on the part of the company's managers. This worked to give the employees more tools with which they could complete the change effort.

6. Carlzon's strategy with respect to wins was mixed. On the one hand, he was able to set new objectives for both of the airlines, which they were then able to meet. In this respect, the wins were both planned for and created. This gave further encouragement to employees, for example when the second wave of change was needed at SAS they were able to draw on the first wave. However, there was not much reward for small wins. The change program had significantly buy-in already, so it was not necessary to reinforce that. It is unclear whether or not Carlzon would have been able to produce results as positive had there been some resistance or early failure.

7. Carlzon was able to refrain from declaring victory too soon. This was especially important at SAS. The company had success with its first wave of change, but the changing industry environment dictated that another wave of change was going to be necessary. To this end, Carlzon had realized all along that training was key to allowing the organization to remain flexible. With better-trained staff and a more flexible organizational structure and managerial culture, SAS was well-positioned to undertake success rounds of change, responding to different challenges.