It is also a "what" problem, however, because the major issue Mr. McNerney, (and others at the company) need to address is "what needs to be changed." It is a "why" problem, moreover, because 3M executives need to endeavor to discover how 3M "lost its groove" (so-to-speak) in the first place, and how it might now go about getting it back. So the problem of #M's organizational leadership problem is a three-part problem (or, perhaps, three separate yet related problems). 3. One strategy Mr. McNerney is using is to attempt to get everyone onboard, and in favor of the changes he envisions, rather than simply ordering change. Mr. McNerney is using persuasion with subordinates, rather than coercion. As one 3M employee, having watched McNerney in action, observes: "Jim doesn't say, 'You've got to do this.' Instead he says, '3M has this tremendous reputation and global presence and great technology, and I see all these opportunities we can leverage if we get on the same page and help each other.'" That is a strategy of "we're all in this together, working toward the same goals for our the long-term benefit of our company." Mr. McNerney has also begun asking managers to rank their employees, something not done before at 3M; to award stock options only to top performers (not everyone, as had been previously done); and to ask engineers to account for their R & D. dollars. In essence, he is "running a tighter ship," with more checks and balances, and more accountability measures, than before at 3M. Mr. McNerney is also being very careful, however, not to sap the creativity, or the entrepreneurial, spirit at 3M. He is aware that this remains the company's lifeblood.

4. I think that Mr. McNerney will be successful, overall, in bringing about change in the organizational atmosphere at 3M. This is because he is, first, making efforts to work with the company...

He took company executives on a retreat in order to communicate and exchange ideas together, and so that he himself could perhaps get a better sense of what made the company tick, internally, as it is right now. This is always a good strategy, psychologically and otherwise, before attempting to implement broad-based change. Mr. McNerney is also building loyalty among subordinates rather than simply giving orders from the top.
Specific changes I would recommend to his current strategy would include putting a time limit on certain changes Mr. McNerney would like to see made (since this company seems very used to a lack of structure).

Also, according to the article, "Aggressive young employees applaud the new system. In the past, they had to prove themselves in a series of narrowly defined jobs. Now, they are encouraged to step out of their niches, and even leapfrog veteran employees." Another change to Mr. McNerney's strategy I might make, based on this, would be to begin offering reward incentives for positive changes made, not just to newer, more aggressive employees who support and help bring about the changes Mr. McNerney envisions, but all employees. In this same vein, Mr. McNerney needs, I believe, to make an effort to reach out to older employees as well, those who might be less enthusiastic toward and resistant to change, than newer ones. Company events, morale boosting, awards, other kinds of public recognition for individual employees and/or units or departments that have done well -- any of these would help toward 3M's redefining itself as a dynamic, forward-looking new team, with no one left out or ignored.