Nonethless if I Had to Choose a

¶ … Nonethless if I had to choose a theory that I consider valuable due to its manifold applications, I would single out Weick and Quinn's (1999) theory of episodic change. According to Weick and Quinn, organizational change can be perceived in two ways: (1) Episodic change where there is an unfreeze-transition-refreeze sequence, and (2) Continuous change, which follows the freeze-rebalance-unfreeze sequence. Much depends on the perspective of the observer.

From a distance when participants of the organization perceive the flow of events that constitute the life flow of their organization, they may see what appears to be repetitive action interspersed with inertia, and the occasional spurt of change. These observers would define their organization as experiencing episodic change. On the other hand, participants zoning closer would discern patterns of continuous ongoing adjustment and adaptation and the frequent small changes and gradations introduced by the peak of revolutionary change.

In this way, the change is frequent and continuous, and this later category of observers would perceive their organization as having undergone frequent and continuous organizational change. Leaders can use this insight to slant employees -- and stakeholders' perception of change. I found this theory valuable in that so much depends on metaphor and on the way we slant situations. Weick and Quinn apply it to organizations. I think we can apply it to almost any personal and social situation. B.

What was covered that you, other stakeholders, or your business can generally benefit from? The coke case made an impression on me and I think that stakeholders and myself can benefit from application of the knowledge that howsoever salubrious Porter's popular model may be in assessing a company, other strategies -- such as Barney's VRIO model that stands for an internal assessment of questions of value, rarity, imitability, and organization -- can help in providing an alternate perspective.

Coca-Coal itself may be successful in that it meets most, if not all, of the VRIO requirements, whilst the industry may be falling to pieces when compared to Porter's positioning. To instantiate: Coke's advantages center around a number of firsts: being the first to enter the field; the first to make contacts with various major restaurant chains; the first to introduce itself in various countries. All of this helped it to succeed in such an impressive manner.

Its disadvantages include the fact that its product is easily imitable by competitors and those competitive prices and products succeed in reducing its appeal. It is particularly during eras of change that culture can become an emergent issue, For instance when companies merge, or when a company is forced to deal with periods of change. Corporate culture can have a huge impact on the ethos and work output of the company but corporate culture can be tricky to pin down.

Were I ever to involve myself in organizational change or involved in some manner that would necessitate my analyzing the company's culture, Johnson's (1992) web of culture would help me by providing some ethnographic tool with which to do so. Observance of the stories, the ritual and routines, the symbols, the organizational structure, control systems, and power structures of the organization would give me a general layout as to its character. C.

How will what you have learned impact you personally and professionally? The war between Coke and Pepsi illustrates the chase and the necessity of being open to opportunity and here we come onto the difference between analytical / planned and emergent approaches. When you fly by the set of your pants vs. planned approaches. With planned approaches top management devises the strategy middle management 'fleshes' it out more, whilst management actively involved with the organization and employees implement it.

It has both its advantages and disadvantages: advantages in that it is carefully planned allowing minimal room for error Disadvantages in that it allows minimal or utter lack of space for spontaneity and feedback. Emergent planning on the other hand integrates to-down planning with structures that allow employees to respond. In this approach all members of the organization are involved in the debate, but the procedure can take far longer than the first and may leave room open for conflict.

One has to be fluid and flexible -- it seems to me -- whilst moving along. The emergent approach may be best in a small organization, but it may stump a large organization that has to be constantly poised to catch and translate opportunity, perhaps, what is ultimately needed, is the balance: Innovation demands that companies be open to emergent strategy -- to be open to innovation and opportunity that were not available before and, therefore, to allow plans to emerge.

At the same time, there had to be a direction and certain statements of objective in place beforehand so as to disable change from begin potentially disruptive or to disable the organization from treading in a zigzag direction. For me the emergent approach -- carefully tempered -- seems best. D.

How can you link the topics you have learned with previous classes? Both Weick and Quinn's treatise of change and Porter's (or the VRIO) assessment of organization are oft-replicated topics appearing over and again in various guises throughout the field of organizational science. Change, for instance, is particularly present with globalization. Globalization has both its advantages and disadvantages.

Its advantages, for instance, are that labor is cheaper; I will be saving money in other areas too (such as resources and taxes); production time will be speeded; taxes may be more promising in other countries and so forth. The disadvantages are that I will have to be careful to select a reputable, honest crew -- and managers - to work for me and constantly monitor their progress so that the offshore company fulfills its task according to my objective.

Here, I am not in charge -- someone else is and that may be disadvantageous in that I have specific ideas and direction that I can no longer.