Sears' organizational change and innovation strategy

Organizational Change and Innovation

During the latter half of the 20th century, Sears (hereinafter alternatively “the company”) enjoyed remarkable success as a business retailer. Entire families would make a day of shopping at Sears where they would do their annual shopping for school clothes and supplies, purchase major appliances and treat themselves to a tasty dinner at the Sears’ restaurant. By very sharp contrast, though, the leadership of Sears is struggling to remain a viable enterprise, especially in the face of online retailers such as Amazon. Although this company has managed to survive due to its leadership’s ability to leverage Sears’ longstanding reputation for family-friendly and inexpensive clothes and housewares, the future of this company remains uncertain for the same reasons it has suffered in recent years. Future of Sears & Brick-and-Mortar Retailers The purpose of this business report is to provide a description of a needed change or innovation that will help this company remain viable, together with an explanation concerning the value of the change or innovation for this organization, In addition, a discussion concerned proposed methods for leading and managing the innovation and change process, and a proposal for strategies for engaging employees in the innovation and change process is followed by an explanation concerning how the concept of whole-person leadership and personal leadership strengths can help with this effort. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings about the future of Sears are presented in the business report’s conclusion.

Review and Discussion It was just a few years ago when the Blockbuster business model was not only viable, it was highly successful and generated enormous revenues for its stakeholders. The harsh reality facing many conventional major retailers today, though, is the fact that consumers can easily find what they want and need using online services such as Amazon. Indeed, the most recent development in the company’s history was when Eddie Lampert's offered a $4.4 billion that was widely regarded as the only thing that could help maintain Sears’ viability in the future. In this regard, Hirsch (2018) reports, "Sears, which also owns Kmart, filed for bankruptcy in October.[2018] and ESL plans to contest Sears' decision, pointing to the money it's spent on advisors A bankruptcy judge decided to give Sears Chairman Eddie Lampert another chance to buy the retailer out of bankruptcy and save roughly 50,000 jobs” (para. 2). Against this backdrop, it is clear that Sears’ leadership has its task cut out for them, but it is less clear how they intend to proceed.
More to the point, even the leaders of the company’s holding company have reservations about whether the proposed salvation plan will actually help Sears remain solvent in the coming years. For instance, Hirsch (2018) also notes, “Sears Holdings had planned to reject Lampert's bid to save the 126-year-old company, which would have put it on a course to liquidation” (para. 2). This eleventh-hour move by Lampert may or may not be the antidote to this company’s current dilemma, but it does highlight the fact that traditional brick-and-mortar retailers have their jobs cut out for them considering the increasing presence of online retailers such as Amazon. This effort also underscores the company’s current plight in an era when the “look and feel” of merchandising has been surpassed by the ease of shopping online. It is reasonable to posit that many consumers actually like the fact that stores such as Sears exist, but they are not necessarily inclined to shop there.
Moreover, despite the enormity of the salvage bid by Lampert, it remains unclear whether it will be sufficient to keep the company afloat. For example, Hirsch adds, “Lampert had put forward a $4.4 billion bid to save Sears through his hedge fund ESL Investments. One of the biggest unresolved issues had that it fell short of covering the fees and vendor payment it owes, making it "administratively insolvent’” (para. 4). Taken together, it is apparent that Sears is faced with some seemingly insurmountable challenges in its efforts to continue to serve consumers in the United States, but the same “too big to fail” logic that has been applied to other major retailers is something to take into account.
According to business analysts such as Kotter (n.d.), companies such as Sears are faced with a problem that demands action now rather than later. For instance, Kotter explains that one of the first requirements of effecting meaningful change in any organization is creating a sense of urgency among the stakeholders. It is also reasonable to suggest that even the most loyal employees of Sears sense this urgency, a fact that will facilitate the implementation of Kotter’s remaining seven steps to effect meaningful change in organizations of all sizes and types. In this regard, Kotter (n.d.) reports that organizations must ensure that they: Institute change; Build a guiding coalition; Sustain the momentum; Develop a strategic vision and corresponding initiatives; Generate and celebrate short-term wins; Enlist a “volunteer army”; and, Enable action by removing barriers. Certainly, all of these initiatives can help capture and sustain a competitive advance, but companies such as Sears must take into account the perceptions about the company’s future as evinced by even its most loyal and long-term employees. No one wants to connect their future success to a failing business, and the employees at Sears are no exception. Of course, Sears is not alone in its current predicament. For example, according to Trisk (2016), “Many heritage brands face a similar dilemma when it comes to completely rethinking their core business. In fact, it's the same dilemma faced by all organizations today” (para. 2).
Taken together, it is clear that companies such as Sears are faced with a situation wherein investors may feel like they are simply throwing good money after bad given the company’s dismal track record in recent years. Nevertheless, the need for major brick-and-mortar retailers such as Sears is obvious since these types of stores provide consumers with the opportunity to actually experience the look-and-feel aspects of merchandise, something that companies such as Amazon are unable to replicate. Unless and until this attribute can be replicated in an online setting, Sears just may stand a chance in remaining solvent in the future. Conclusion The research showed that major brick-and-mortar retailers such as Sears are not only faced with a changing competitive environment, they are also challenged by the increasing competitiveness of online companies such as Amazon. At some point in time, though, it is also reasonable to conclude that companies such as Sears will have outlived their viability in an era when the consumer can not only find comparable merchandise online, they can do so in the comfort of their own homes. In the final analysis, the research was also consistent in showing that consumers will tend to shop for what they want and need in ways that are making it possible for online retailers to compete more effectively and efficiently compared to the stick-in-the-mud exemplars such as Sears and this company’s future remains in serious doubt.

References Hirsch, L. (2019, January 8). Court allows Chairman Eddie Lampert another chance to buy Sears, pushing off the decision to shut stores. CNBC. Retrieved from https://www.cnbc. com/2019/01/06/sears-rejects-eddie-lamperts-bid-to-save-company-will-liquidate-.html. Kotter International. (n.d.). The 8-step process for leading change. Retrieved from https://www.kotterinc.com/8-steps-process-for-leading-change/ Trisk, A. (2016). Three huge industries facing death because they won’t embrace radical ideas. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/adam-trisk/3-huge-industries-facing-death-because-of-a-lack-of-innovation.html