Green Mountain Resort Case Study
That meant that it was hard to find good employees locally, and those that were good, whether local or imported, didn’t stay long” (Palmer, Dunford, & Akin, 2009, pg 40). Gunter being the core of the management team as well as owner was concerned about making this change but the outcomes that would come with it. Image 2: Change Manager as a Navigator is perceived as the heart of any action taken by management.
Palmer, Dunford, & Akin (2009) also explain that in the navigator image, a variety of factors external to managers mean that while they may achieve some intended change outcomes, others will occur over which they have little control (p. 27). In regards to the hospitality literature the change image discussed that can identify the assumptions about changing turnover is Image 1: Change Manager as a Director. The hospitality literature identified that employee turnover was a problem and that it needed to be handled.
The difference between Gunter and hospitality literature was the fact that they saw it as constant, something that will always be an issue regardless of change and should be tolerated. Hospitality literature recommended “was to minimize the debilitating effects: streamline training, simplify jobs, don’t become dependent on individuals, make HR processes more efficient” (Palmer, Dunford, & Akin, 2009, p. 41). The director image is based that results of change is reachable and management needs to be able to take control of making this change.
Lastly the change image associated with the consultant would be Image 5: Change Manager as an Interpreter. “The interpreter image to managing change places the change manager in the position of creating meaning for other organizational members, helping them to make sense of various organizational events and actions” (Palmer, Dunford, & Akin, 2009, p. 31). Instead of coming up with way to solve the problem of high turnover, the consultant helped Gunter see the problem in a different perspective by using it to benefit the organization vs. hurting it.
The three change images discussed could all help with influencing assumptions about a recommendation to help with “the turnover problem. Gunter could have just took full action and made changes that he thought would benefit the organization or even take the approach of the hospitality literature and be direct with the change as other companies have probably done in the past. The change Image the consultant took was definitely the most beneficial by helping Gunter interpreter a new type of change by using the high turnover to the company’s advantage.
Another change image that could have been used to help Green Mountain Resort with the high turnover could have been Image 4: Change Managers as a Coach. Gunter could have help deliberately mold the organization’s natural ability in specific ways. “Rather than dictating the exact state of each play as the director might attempt to do, the coach relies upon building in the right set of values, skills, and “drills” that are deemed to be the best ones that organizational members, as players, will be able to draw on adeptly in order o achieve desired organizational outcomes” (Palmer, Dunford, & Akin, 2009, p. 30).
In conclusion, the statement at the start of the chapter that “if we only draw upon one particular frame, then this will take us away from thinking about what is going on from an alternative perspective” reminds us as manager leading change in an organization to not just jump to the first idea on how to make change.
We need to be able to think outside the box and make a change in how we react to change and what are first instincts of action would be. Having different perspectives in how to go about change will allow managers to really engage and figure out what the best plan of action will be. “Changes often fail because leadership fails to fully understand or underestimates the complexity of the change, increasing the risk that the change will not yield the desired results”(Keep & Newcomer, 2008).