Technology is the processes, mechanics, and interactions of human behavior required to convert raw material into finished offerings

B. Choices about how to use technology:

1. Apply technology in a way that automates existing processes.

2. Apply technology in a way that transforms these processes.

C. Sequencing technology change.

1. When dealing with new technology, not only the what question is important, but also the how and when questions. Make sure technology fits with the strategy and reinforced desired behaviors.

Theory into Practice:

• When introducing new technology, organizational leaders face a choice: to use that technology to automate existing processes or to use new

technology to support transformed behaviors.

• New technologies can be introduced as a way to support desired behavioral changes.

V. Conclusion.

A. Change leaders find interventions designed to alter the hardwiring of their organization—structures, systems, and technologies—especially appealing and often use them to try to drive the change.

B. Structural interventions often end up in disappointment, provoking resistance.

C. Structural change can occur more effectively at the end of implementation process to reinforce new patterns of behavior.

Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 78 Additional Suggested Reading

• Teresa M. Amabile, Creativity in Context (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996).

• Dan Baum, “Battle Lessons,” New Yorker, January 27, 2005.

• Gary Cokins, Activity-Based Cost Management: An Executive’s Guide (San Francisco: John Wiley, 2001).

• Jay R. Galbraith, Competing with Flexible Lateral Organizations, 2^nd edition (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1994).

• H. Thomas Johnson, Relevance Regained: From Top-Down Control to Bottom-Up Empowerment (New York: Free Press, 1992).

• Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton, “Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System,” Harvard Business Review (January-February 1996).

• Edward E. Lawler, III, “Pay Strategy: New Thinking for the New

Millennium,” Compensation and Benefits Review 32 (January-February 2000).

• Raymond E. Miles and Charles C. Snow, Fit, Failure, and the Hall of Fame: How Companies Succeed and Fail (New York: Free Press, 1994).

• Richard E. Walton, “Social Choice in the Development of Advanced Information Technology,” Human Relations 35 (1982).

• Shoshona Zuboff, In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power (New York: Basic Books, 1984).

Chapter Discussion Questions

1. In realigning IBM’s global organization with his new strategy, what options did Lou Gerstner have other than restructuring?

Students can use the steps previously discussed to construct an

alternative scenario: a participative diagnostic process including country general managers and product executives; a redesign of roles,

responsibilities and relationships; possibly training for required new skills;

replacing a small number of country general managers who could not work well in the new environment, and finally a restructuring to reinforce new behaviors.

Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 79 2. It has been said that, given the growing complexity and dynamism of the

world of business, all organizations will have to adopt some type of a matrix structure. Do you agree or disagree with that argument? Explain.

Arguments for the proposition hold that in an increasingly global and dynamic competitive environment, organizations simply need to focus on many different areas at the same time. Arguments against (and there are many executives who adamantly refuse to use matrix structures) are that they are too complex, dilute responsibility and accountability, and—

ultimately—don’t work. Also, there are other alternatives, e.g. hybrid and horizontal structures that may also allow for the kind of integration needed in today’s complex and dynamic environments.

3. What is it about incentive systems that make them so attractive to leaders attempting to oversee an organization transformation? Can you think of examples when it would be useful to create new incentives early in a transformation process?

Changing an incentive plan can alter behaviors almost immediately. That’s what makes incentives so attractive. The pitfall, of course, is that the new behaviors that occur in reaction to new incentives may be temporary, dysfunctional, or both. One example of a possible good use of early incentives is to incentivize participation in diagnosis, pilot teams, or transformational training.

4. Can you think of examples from your own experience—at work or in the classroom—where the manner in which your performance was being measured worked against the goals you were trying to achieve?

I can tell you two examples I just heard in my class:

a. “Professors have us work in groups to learn teamwork and then give us individual grades.”

b. “I’m a financial trader. I would actually get hurt financially if I were to share some of my investment models with my colleagues.”

Case Discussion – Making the Problem Worse Introducing the Case

Medication mistakes – also called, adverse drug events – are a major problem in U.S. hospitals. The most common error is handwriting identification. Complex General Hospital implemented the Computerized PhysicianOrder Entry (CPOE)

Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall 80 system as a way to fix the problem. The result was an increase in adverse drug events.

1. What went wrong? How can you explain how the technology actually led to more rather than fewer mistakes?

It seems that the technology may have made staff less careful, as technology often does. They relied on information in the system, without double checking it. Also, the system information does not seem to be provided in a form that facilitates effective usage, e.g. the use of warehousing criteria rather than clinical guidelines and the manner of grouping patients.

2. What theories of change implementation would have helped the administrators at the Complex General Hospital solve the problem of medication mistakes?

CGH should have started with mutual engagement of doctors and staff in a shared diagnosis of the problem. Following that, a process of redesign should have taken place, along with training and people alignment. The choice of technology should have been a part of this process. Here, the technology was used to drive the change rather than to reinforce an existing awareness of the problem and behaviors selected to address the problem.

3. How might you have gone about solving the problem at Complex General? To what extent, if any, would new technology have been helpful?

New technology might have been helpful but it should have been a part of the process described above. Also, the technology should have been tested in a pilot project and doctors and staff should have been trained in the proper usage of the technology. As it stands, this was a good example of technology applied prematurely in a change process that actually hurt performance.