This paper examines a business case involving organizational leaders Walsh and Mangel, who faced mounting pressure to restructure their company in response to a shifting external environment. The paper analyzes how the rational decision-making model guided their change strategy — from identifying problems and setting objectives to implementing difficult personnel decisions. It also explores the ethical dimensions of their actions, including the high ethical intensity surrounding workforce terminations, and considers how utilitarian reasoning ultimately shaped their final approach. The case illustrates why rationality and ethical awareness must coexist in effective organizational change management.
In the 21st century, organizational change has shifted from something that occurred only occasionally — for example, as the result of a crisis — to something that happens constantly. The pace of change in the technological and economic environments is far more rapid than it has been in the past. This affects the organizational change process in a number of ways. Organizations must be ready for change at any time, and those in charge must be prepared to exercise their leadership skills continuously, not just when the external environment demands it. Change in the 21st century is a state of mind, not merely a set of tools and techniques (Entrepreneur, 1998).
The reactions to change from employees can vary significantly. Fear of injustice in the change process correlates highly with change resistance (Shapiro & Kirkman, 1999). Resistance to change is therefore inevitable. With effective communication, some individuals can be brought to support the change process. However, the focus of a change program must be on overcoming resistance among employees who cannot easily be won over through the communication of basic information alone (Reh, 2009). Resistance can range from a reduction in morale and an increase in turnover to outright hostility toward the change and the change agent.
There is a high degree of ethical intensity in the changes made by Walsh and Mangel. The magnitude of the consequences is high: the workers are losing their jobs, which supply them with their livelihood. In addition, these workers are unlikely to find other positions that pay as much in the future. The mortgage industry is in a slump, further constraining their ability to recover financially. These factors increase the probability that the most negative consequences will be realized.
The temporal immediacy of the change is intense as well. The workers are going from holding easy, high-paying jobs to immediate termination. The change is highly proximate, having a direct effect on nearly all of the employees. The effects are also highly concentrated. While some proposed changes are diffused throughout the organization, the termination of the sales staff is a concentrated change effort. However, the decision was made in the best interests of the organization, which is more ethically sound than other self-serving rationales.
"Walsh and Mangel follow logical goal-to-implementation model"
"Consistent vision aligns strategy with decisive action"
"Rational approach proves more effective than ethical compromise"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.