Naval Special Warfare Teamwork

The Leadership at Microsoft has evolved from an innovative driving force of the technology industry into a force opposed to effective change by becoming the personification of an obstacle. Five ways that leadership can present barriers to change are for them to be disengaged, falsely urgent, complacent, lopsided, and siloed (Kotter, 2015). Overcoming these types of obstacles and following fundamental change practices are the only way to implement and efficiently manage change in an organization regardless of the size.

Step 2 is forming a powerful guiding coalition. Leadership will have to be on board and on the same page in regards to the change. Kotter and Cohen reveal the core problems people face when leading change. Their main findings are that the central issue concerns not structure or systems but behavior and how to alter it (Farris, 2008). The success of the changes will depend on the ability of the managers to show their commitment to change and motivate the employees to do the same. Without any process to track the implementation, the change can also fail.

“The images, metaphors, or frames that we hold, both of managing and of change, influence our ideas of what we think managing change is all about” (Palmer, Dunford, & Akin, 2009). As people we all see through our own eyes, we call see a different perspective and have a different reaction to what is coming next. As human beings we react differently to situations. Situations of change are transitions that some are able to adapt to quickly while others have a hard time. Being the leader of that change can be difficult and helping make a change does not come easily or effectively. Keep and Newcomer (2008)

1. Today when looking at members of the Coast Guard there is very little difference in uniform to distinguish the senior enlisted and Officer Corps from that of the Junior Enlisted Corps. The Coast Guard believes that there is a distinct difference between a First Class Petty Officer and a Chief but has gone away from making that difference easy to see from a distance. The Navy goes so far as to change the entire color and style of their uniform as well as the change of the combination cover when a member is advanced to the pay grade of E-7. This is due to the belief that the amount of responsibility one takes on with this advancement warrants the clear delineation, one that can be seen right away. Furthermore, even today when going through the Chiefs Call to Indoctrination process, all Navy and Coast Guard Chiefs build a hat box solely for the purpose of housing their new combination cover, a cover that in today’s Coast Guard members have been wearing since boot camp. The Coast Guard used to make the same uniform change as the Navy, and we have strayed from this tradition, strayed at the cost of a loss of respect in this advancement. The Coast Guard should visibly distinguish E-7 and above by making a change in the uniform regulations and making E-7 and above only authorized to wear the combination cover.

There are several definitions and applications for organizational culture found within Army doctrine. Through synthesis of L100 readings, organizational culture is a set of institutional norms shared by its people who create a distinctive environment to observe, analyze, and act. Like organizational culture, L100 provides much source material, both literally and figuratively. Commander’s actions and examples model organizational climate which influence localized standards of conduct for his or her subordinates which can directly correlate to the health and sustainability of a unit.

“If we understand change better, we will be able to influence (but not control) it for the better” (Fullan, 2014). When change in a culture is in effect, the organizational culture tends to be unsettled. This may seem like an inopportune time for our staff to be unsettled, but this is the best opportunity to identify and create breakthroughs (Fullan, 2014). When analyzing the structure for a change initiative, strategic planning must first take place. What problems are foreseen or obvious? Are there

The book Influencer tells us that attempts at implementing change initiatives often fail for 3 reasons. One – fuzzy, un-compelling goals; Two – infrequent or no measures; and Three – bad measure. Some would say that experiencing this is not a privilege, however I will say that I have had the privilege to experience a management change initiative fail first hand in the recent future. Not privileged in the fact that it was a great experience to be in the middle of, however it did provide for a boundless learning environment, showing me exactly how to not go about the process if I aim to be a successful leader. In this paper I will explain the change initiative and how management failed in all three areas listed by the authors, along with one more reason I feel the initiative failed.

Organizations must respond to their internal and external environment. Therefore, organizational success heavily relies on leaderships ability to manage change. Unfortunately, many leaders struggle to effectively lead change initiatives. In fact, Ashkenas (2013, para. 1) reported 60 – 70% of organizational change initiatives fail to meet their objectives.

This Chapter is intentional about three specific areas requiring action that all leaders must focus on to mobilize a system of change. Section 3 is comprised of five chapters: 1. Make Interpretations (2), Design Effective Interventions (3), Act Politically (4), Orchestrate Conflict (5) and Build an Adaptive Culture (6).

Large scale change is not a simple matter, the complexity and many moving parts can be distilled down into a couple models, however pulling off a successful transformation is extremely challenging. Unfortunately, the odds are not good for change. Research by John Kotter revealed that only thirty percent of change programs succeed. The main reasons for the failures are not related to resources or budgets, but behavior and more specifically, employee resistance and management behaviors that do not support the intended changes. These are the two leading causes that result in seventy percent of failures. Kotter first reported on this dismal success rate back in 1995, and quite honestly, there has been little progress at advancing the success of

(2009) building an adaptive culture will require organizations to institutionalize the five previously mentioned adaptive capacity characteristics. Here are some suggestions to improve SDHS’ lack of teamwork: First, elephants in the room must be named, and it will need to start at the executive level. Heifetz et, al. (2009) suggest “modeling the behavior,” which can have a powerful impact because leaders are expected to set the tone. Current issues need to be openly addressed by seeking and encouraging advice from all members of the organization. This can be done by assigning new middle managers to link the workers and volunteers with the executives. Fixing “elephants in the room” issue will also help “shared responsibility” and “independent judgment” by allowing input from all levels. The “developing leadership capacity” should be done by going back to the basics. According to Crowley (2013) the basics include; getting people in the right job, setting clear expectations, giving people the tools to do their job, and giving high praises. Therefore, it is suggested that competent middle managers and executives should conduct daily training, coaching, and mentoring. Constant training behavior should be institutionalized across the organization. Additionally, previously successful aspects from the newly merged organizations should be incorporated. Finally, promoting teamwork will require the organization to set up informal group activities such as pot lucks and small birthday celebrations for its

Individuals when faced with any major change will be inevitably resistant and will want to preserve the status quo, especially if they think their status or security within the organization is in danger (Bolognese, 2010). Folger and Skarlicki believe that organizational change produces skepticism in employees which make it problematic and possibly even impossible to contrive improvements within the organization (as cited in Bolognese, 2010) Therefore, management must understand, accept and make an effort to work with resistance, since it can undermine even the most well-conceived change efforts (Bolognese, 2010). Furthermore, Coetsee states for organizations to achieve the maximum benefits from change they must effectively create and

In Part Two: The Response the authors share some of the best leadership advice in the book the process and mindset to solve adaptive problems. The first section “Get on the Balcony” requires the leader to gain perspective on the problem and to take an objective look at the mess. The development of a new instruction was a technical challenge that required a coordinated effort to develop. Technical feedback sessions were held and employee buy-in was earned through the incorporation of employee effort and feedback into the final instruction. But the adaptive challenge was the rapid adoption of new and revised policy to correct the engineering culture that prioritized completing tasks quickly over technical accuracy and documentation

Previous success can be a factor into why an organization does not recognize the need for change because of how successful they were. Previous success can disable an organization to learn and think, because they are only relying on their past success. Along with previous success, a lack of diversity can factor into why an organization fails to recognize the need for change. A lack of diversity can create groupthink in an organization. Groupthink among an organization can impact the ability to see any necessary need for change because no one in the organizational evaluates anything effectively and just conforms to the overall consensus decision. Political behavior is another aspect that factors into why an organization fails to recognize the need for change. Political behavior that promotes self-interests can impact an organization through the selfish decision making, which can harm the effectiveness of the decision making. Another factor into why an organization fails to recognize the need for change is limited influential power. The wrong people in the organization are being listened to and the lower management has no influence. These are the critical and most important employees and the backbone to the company; therefore, without any influence the effectiveness of the whole organization is harmed. Another factor into why an organization fails to recognize the need for change is cognitive

As organizations change, leadership must find ways to adapt and adjust to those changes. Many times it’s the inability of being open-minded to new ideas, beliefs, thoughts and cultures that prevent individuals from moving forward. Saner (2004) states, “Increased globalization and integration of information technology have brought about a fundamental rethinking of how to conduct business and how to lead a complex organization for continuous improvement and reinventing of the organization” (p.654). In any organization, change brings resistance, but with positive managerial and leadership skills, accepting the challenges that come with diversity such as ambiguity, complexity, resistance and confusion, will give managers the foresight to effectively and efficiently implement processes that will benefit the organization as a whole.