Page 44 - Managing Change in Organizations

CarnCh02v3.qxd 3/30/07 4:09 PM Page 27

Leadership and ‘excellence’
and the commitment model, following Walton (1985). We also identify the tran-
sitional mechanisms needed to move from one model or organization to the
other. Does this mean that all accountability in the commitment model is through
teams? Walton (1985) does not make that clear. However, the view taken here is
that modern thinking emphasizes a duality. The individual manager is account-
able for the performance of his or her team, at all levels. However, in order to
engage high-level performance the manager needs to develop strong team work-
ing. Only then will people’s ideas, talents and commitment be harnessed.

Change versus stability

In a changing world the organization must change to survive and prosper.
However, must everything change? Moreover, while we are changing we must
still deploy people to produce goods and services as normal, even if we are
demanding extra effort from them as they experience change. The final dilemma
is that of balancing change with stability. In a real sense this book is about this
final organizational dilemma. I thus propose merely to ‘signal’ the dilemma now.
Throughout the book we shall deal with this dilemma.

Leadership and ‘excellence’

O’er structures of government let fools contend.

Whate’er is best administered, is best.
Alexander Pope
These words, written long ago, direct our attention to the quality of leadership and
to managerial performance. An appropriate organizational structure will not enable
people to work effectively unless they are appropriately managed. Moreover, in
many circumstances different organizational structures can be equally effective as
long as management is practised to good effect. We often refer to the ‘organizational
choice’ available to those concerned in the design of an organizational structure (see

Trist et al., 1963), by which we mean that the various technological, economic,
social and political pressures on organizations do not require unique solutions. In
reality, variations of the basic structure are not just possible but are often found in
practice. In any event, the informal structure is much more important than the for-
mal structure when trying to understand an organization. Moreover, the structure
alone does not define an organization’s solutions to the organizational dilemmas
discussed above. Rather, corporate policies and management practice do so. Finally,
therefore, understanding managerial performance is important if we are to assess
whether or not an organization’s structure is appropriate in practice.
This suggests that we must look at more than the organizational structure if we
are to assess an organization properly. Much attention is now devoted to ‘corpo-
rate culture’. A number of authors have attempted to define the corporate cul-
tures they see as emerging in ‘excellent’ companies.
A number of books reviewing the characteristics of excellent companies have
been published, notably In Search of Excellence by Peters and Waterman (1982)

27