Essay on HP's Institutionalization Process

“Bill Hewlett & Dave Packard founded Hewlett Packard (HP) in a one-car garage in 1939. Its first product was an audio oscillator which was used as an electronic test instrument by sound engineers. Its first customer was Walt Disney Studios. For the first twenty years, HP’s products were predominantly electronic test & measuring instruments for engineers & scientist. Since then HP has added computers, calculators, medical electronic equipment, instrumentation for chemical analysis & solid-state components. In 1980 sales had grown at a compounded rate of 23% over the last decade whereas net profits had compounded at 27%. Such a growth was consequently followed by the increasing number of employees which rose to 57,000 across the world. There are currently twenty manufacturing locations across United States & eight others around the world.” (Beer, Michael, & Richard, 1982)

It was noted that communication efforts must be verbal and active (Kotter, 1995). Kotter eight step change model has many drawbacks and benefits. The advantages are that it is the step by step, which is easy to follow model. Another is that it does not focus on the change itself, but rather the acceptance and the preparation of this change, which makes it an easy transition. In Kotter’s and Lewin’s models, both consider the difficulties that organizations encounter when trying to move people from their comfort zone for the change to happen. In both of the models they use a different set of calculations to know whether there is any need to change to take place in the

Each of the readings from week 9 play into each other, and themes emerge that can help build new theories and expand the opportunity for future research in institutional change. As referenced in Clark (2004), institutions are extremely complex, and arguably increasing their complexity with every passing year. The notion that one theory or framework can explain the best way for an institution to change is delusional. The influences of so many factors at play make approaches and explanations themselves just as complex as the organizations they are intending to change.

HP, an expert in the hi-tech industry understands the fiercely competitive environment where technological and innovative advancements could create turbulent

Organizational change encompasses many challenges to both the individual, and the organization. An organization is a living system, as Flower (2002) states “living systems cannot survive without change, challenge, variety, and surprise” (Flower, 2002, p. 16). An organization requires the ability to adapt in to survive as Darwin states in The Origin of Man, “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change” (Read Me First, 2013, p. 1). It must adapt to the changing market, global economic pressures, stakeholder demands, and the diverse needs

John Kotter, a leading advocate and educator in change initiatives, expresses two essential characteristics that must be present in any change initiative. First, any change that is considered to be useful and necessary must go through a multi-step process that will transcend obstacles in its way. Second, it is essential that any change initiative must be lead by effective leadership (Kotter, 1996). However, any leader in a change initiate must reconcile the reality that a major component to mankind’s instinctive nature is that people have an inherent need for predictability and order (Hogan, 2007). Leaders must, therefore, consider that initiatives may be experienced in ways that contradict this basic need leading to employee resistance (Bernerth, 2011). Considering such a potential obstacle, Kotter developed an eight-stage change process to guide organizations through initiatives in ways that may retain employee stability and enable employees to maintain a sense of identity and understanding (Huy, 1999).

The factors of organizational change are those who, for various reasons, an organization can identify the need for change, these are: technological, structural, personnel and cultural factor. In today's world of organizations, characterized by globalization, the power of customers and the avalanche of information, these have to be in a permanent process of change for continuous improvement. Are structural, technological and cultural factors staff of those organizations has to act on them and thus achieve adaptation and / or probation they need.

Every organization deals with several challenges when they have to make the decision of changing and structuring the organization frame. Organizational change is a complex systemic undertaking (Bolman and Deal, 2013, p.378). It is common for employees to be resisting to change when they are not well informed as to why the changes are being made and when they do not have clarity of what is going to happen next. Bolman and Deal did a phenomenal job explaining the four frames which are human resources, structural, political and symbolic fram when reframing organizational change. It is important for the leadership to understanding how each frame affects the employees by knowing the mission, training and participating with the staff.

How can organizations enact the programs required to improve their institutional constancy? Research performed by Captain John Crawford and Steven Krahn provide a case study of institutional constancy using the guidelines created by LaPorte and Keller. They summarize that the three major attributes that organizations have the capacity to enact institutional constancy programs are: “(1)

Organizational change is an important issue in all organizations. The process in which an organization optimizes its performance working toward its new state of function is pivotal. Resistance is easily found in direct or indirect challenges to authority, lack of action, and even open hostility. (Scheid,

Week 3, the lecture on Managing Change describes organizational changes that occur when a company makes a shift from its current state to some preferred future state. Managing organizational change is the process of planning and implementing change in organizations in such a way as to decrease employee resistance and cost to the organization while concurrently expanding the effectiveness of the change effort. Today's business environment requires companies to undergo changes almost constantly if they are to remain competitive. Students of organizational change identify areas of change in order to analyze them. A manager trying to implement a change, no matter how small, should expect to encounter some resistance from within the organization.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss organizational change and the management of that change. I will talk about the different drivers of change, the factors a leader needs to weigh to implement change effectively, the various resistances a leader may encounter while trying to implement change, and how various leadership styles will effect the realization of change. I will also discuss the knowledge I have gained through the completion of this assignment and how I think it might affect the way I manage change in my workplace.

Change has become necessary for every organisation there is. World is moving rapidly towards better technologies, efficient systems, new techniques, compact profits, different friendlier environments and organisations are always in the race to reach new heights by thriving effectively in this competitive environment (Kotter, 1996).

Implementing Organizational Change: Theory into Practice, Third Edition, by Bert Spector. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education Inc.

While Hurd was considered a decent CEO, a scandal emerged consisting of missing funds and legal issues which ultimately resulted in his resignation. HP brought in Leo Apotheker to replace Hurd as CEO. Unfortunately for the company, Apotheker proved to be an incompetent leader who did not know how to succeed in the market and deal with the press. In August 2011, Apotheker decided to utilize a “surprise press release” to announce that HP was planning to spin off from its PC business. As a result of this unexpected announcement, investor confidence plummeted as did HP’s stock price. After less than a year as CEO, HP’s board of directors fired Apotheker. Meg Whitman, the next CEO who previously ran eBay, unfortunately took control of a company which dropped 50% in corporate value. ("Leo Apotheker Dumped as HP CEO.")