Page 111 - Managing Change in Organizations

CarnCh06v3.qxd 3/30/07 4:20 PM Page 94

Chapter 6 ■ Theories of change: strategic management models
Following Kay (1993) we can note that the above list, while of use, begs a further
question. This relates to the extent to which a company has distinctive capability
which relates to its architecture, reputation and to innovation, and these ideas also
relate to the widely adopted idea of core competence (Hamel and Prahalad, 1994).
These are delivery technologies and capabilities which allow a firm to provide
benefits to customers.
Clearly this view makes good sense. How can we understand the success of the
Walt Disney Company without recognizing that much of it relies on the way it
manages its assets, tangible and intangible; the film library, the brand name, the
Disney Channel and so on. Using its in-house film-making capabilities, it pro-
duced major box office hits such as Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin, which it
exploits vigorously. At least in part this success arises out of strategies designed to
exploit existing resource bases.
This is particularly relevant to this book for two reasons. First, the focus on
exploiting resources drives forward the importance of value added as a strategic
management concept – and the linked concept of synergy. Second, as we shall
see, I will be seeking to show that much of the success in change management
situations is derived from leverage and connectivity. Where changes seek to
leverage existing resources and capabilities and where there is a higher degree of
connectivity between existing resources and processes – and these are put in
place to manage change – there is a higher likelihood of success in strategic
change.
These ideas are depicted in Figure 6.1 which seeks to map out some initial
ideas linking strategic management and change management. Thus if strategic
management comprises means of identifying vision, strategy, business model
and strategic implementation, change management deals with behaviour,
structures and configurations, delivery and so on. Both are conceptually under-
pinned by ideas such as creativity, adaptability and innovation; albeit the
nexus of strategic management is to look at environmental uncertainty regard-
ing markets, competitors, technology and the like, while the nexus of change
management is in the field of measurement, efficiency and effectiveness.
Strategic management thinking seeks to help us decide what we should do;

change management thinking starts by taking such decisions as inputs and
looks at how we can put them into effect. But, and this is crucial, the two ‘fields
interconnect’. We need to ensure we can learn from our attempts to put new
strategies into effect. The experience of doing so on the ground, with customers,
suppliers and employees, needs to be fed back into the strategy process. Thus
success requires a high degree of connectivity between strategic thinking and
change architecture.
But effective change management is hard. The more you can base the change
architecture, processes and thinking on existing resources and capabilities, the
more you will build in stakeholder buy-in, and the more likely you are to be
successful. Thus it is that strategies, no matter how innovative, should seek to
leverage existing resources, thinking capabilities and so on. We shall see that
leverage and connectivity are two important dimensions for success in change
management.

94