2

Spectrum Change Simulation

Daylyn A. Mosher

Brandman University

OLCU 615

Dr. Michael Goold

August 9, 2020
 2

Introduction

BigMart is Spectrum’s top account and started implementing an in-house labeling

program where their products receive a “Green Stamp” to promote environmental friendliness.

The company is recommending that all its current suppliers, including Spectrum, go through this

Green Stamp certification process. If Spectrum does not come up with a plan within three

months on how this plan is going to be initiated, then BigMart would consider cancelling all its

contracts with the company, resulting in a loss of 30% to Spectrum’s annual revenues (Harvard

Business Publishing, 2013). As the Director of Product Innovation and studying within this

scientific field, the use of change strategy and resources is needed to get the company on board

with this sustainability initiative.

Diagnosis

In order to get an overall perspective of how the company feels about the initiative, it is

important to gain information to receive feedback on progress and get an overall sense of

people’s reactions to the initiatives (Deszca, Ingols, & Cawsey, 2020, p. 384). This was done

through interviews throughout the entire organization to get personal accounts and feelings on

the sustainability initiative.

For the first round of interviews, the first targets were the ones within the research and

development division of spectrum as well as the Chief Executive Officer and the Executive

Assistant, Michelle Barth. From this first set of interviews, Yao Li, the Director of Process

Innovation, and Henry Adams, the CEO, were strong supports of the sustainable initiative being

proposed to be implemented within the company. Li was hesitant though as he is a conflict

avoider, which meant that more people were needed to help assist in getting his support. Adams
 2

was fully for the initiative and mentioned having connections to Andrew Chen through outside

work activities. Deborah Edge, the Vice President of Research of Development, and Barth were

both somewhat resistant to change but were willing to see where things went. Barth and Edge

were unsure due to lack of knowledge of environmental factors (Harvard Business Publishing,

2013).

The second round of interviews involved the heads of the four other departments, Paul

D’arcy the Chief Financial officer, Luke Filler, the Vice President of Operations, Mary

Gopinath, the Vice President of Human Services, and Leslie Harris, the Vice President of Sales

and Marketing. D’arcy and Filler were both resistors the change initiative due to concerns for

the company and seemingly better priorities for the company. Gopinath and Harris, however,

were both proponents for the sustainability initiative. Gopinath was more hesitant than Harris,

wanting to wait and see if management would fully support it. Harris believed that it would be

excellent for the marketing team and backed the science behind it (Harvard Business Publishing,

2013).

The third round of interviews involved the other head under the CEO, the General

Counsel, Andrew Chen. Also interviewed due to relations to the previous interviews and level in

the company were Mark Roberto, Foreman and Wave Runner, Paul Schenian, Foreman and

Waver Rider, and Anne Thompson, Manager of Customer Relations. Roberto and Anne

Thompson were both supporters of the change initiative, believing that it could better their

careers and the work they did within the company. Roberto was the more open supporter of the

two. Schenian was somewhat against the initiative due to being risk averse as well as the

difficulty of getting his union workers to support a previous change they just went through.

Chen, however, is a resistor to the change, worrying about lawsuits, shareholder issues, negative
 2

impacts, and the lack of meeting profitability margins while also worry about a sustainability

initiative (Harvard Business Publishing, 2013).

The next set of interviews involved Bob Ingram, the Corporate Controller, Diane McNatt,

Plant Manager, Ian Newman, Director of Health and Safety, and Sam Puffer, Director of

Marketing. Newman and Puffer both like the idea of this initiative but are hesitant as they want

to see if leadership is serious about the initiative and whether others support it as well. Both

Ingram and McNatt want the initiative to fail as they believe it is a waste of resources and will

only create more work. Ingram is resistant to the change and claimed that if able he would

discreetly oppose it (Harvard Business Publishing, 2013).

The last set of interviews included Walt James, the Director of Info Systems, Louise

Orysh, Director of Benefits Administration, and Regina Quinn, Director of Sales. Quinn was the

only one out of this group to be fully for the sustainability initiative due to the advantage it could

give her sales team. She wanted to wait to see where everything leads before acting out on it,

like James who would be behind it if everyone else was but still on the fence regarding the

change. Orysh does not intend to support the change being risk averse as she does not want to

deal with the fallout in case the change fails (Harvard Business Publishing, 2013).

Change Strategy

A main focal point used during this simulation was the relationships throughout the

organization. Playing on these relationships stimulated change through key characteristics such

as frequent interactions between those in the company, extended histories, intimacy and sharing,

and relationships that have trust based or mutually confiding interactions (Tenkasi & Chesmore,

2003, p. 283). This was imperative in the relationship with Chen and Adams since Chen was a
 2

resistor of the change initiative but being friends with Adams on a personally level and playing

on that relationship helped push Chen into the adaptor state. This is similar with the relationship

between Filer and Gopinath as well, with Filer being the resistor in that social relationship

(Harvard Business Publishing, 2013).

Another important aspect of being the change initiator is being involved in both driving

and enabling change. Without having this driving force within the organization, the initiative for

change may slow. This can be reinforced with resources to assist in the change moving forward

and help in whatever way possible (Deszca, et al., 2020, p. 30). This was done through getting a

consultant’s support as outside experts bring in new resources to present to the company while

also gaining the attention of the organization. Also, with many people not understanding the

reasoning behind the change initiative, this resource would also help teach employees about the

science of the sustainability initiative (Harvard Business Publishing, 2013).

Another tool that helped drive initiative was the decision to “walk the talk” to build trust

and effective change within Spectrum (Harvard Business Publishing, 2013). This is important in

backing change and most companies fail in exemplifying this form of initiative, resulting in 88%

of business falling short of their original goals (Michels, 2020). Change is also more likely to

fail when the actions of managers and change leaders are incongruent with the vision or goal of

the change (Deszca et al., 2020, p.126). It is important to recognize that the actions are in

alignment with the goal Spectrum is trying to accomplish.

Change Agent Effectiveness

The company started out within the stagnation state in accordance with Duck’s Five-

Stage Change Curve. This is when the organization or people involved do not have an informed
 2

sense of what is occurring and it met by the forceful demand for change (Deszca et al., 2020, p.

50). This led to the Director of Product Innovation to start brainstorming the potential obstacles

and issues that would arise through composing this plan for BigMart. The main challenges being

the convincing of colleagues that this change is necessary (Harvard Business Publishing, 2013).

This leads to Duck’s second stage of preparation, involving extensive planning and

operational work by change initiators (Deszca et al., 2020, p. 50). This planning was done

initially through interviews to gather information of employees. This put all employees within

the awareness state and some others into the interest and trial states due to connections and

relationships within the organization. The use of town hall meetings and getting an outside

consultant’s support helped spread information as well as stimulate two-way conversations so

employees could learn and ask questions. These two forms of stimulus to change also propelled

many people into the trial and interest states. This also bolstered full credibility as well.

The next stage is that of implementation, involving restructuring of the organization and

changing people’s mindsets within the organization (Deszca et al., 2020, p. 50). Restructuring

the organization of the company allowed for better communication flow and reallocated

authority in order to build better support for the sustainability initiative. Revising the reward

system allowed for recognition and motivation for wanted behaviors regarding the change

initiative while discouraging those not wanted (Harvard Business Publishing, 2013). This

propelled many within the company into the trial and adoption states.

This led to only a four people left in the trial state and moving towards the stage of

determination within Duck’s model. This level is when people within the organization realize

that the change is real and to further the enthusiasm and need for change (Deszca et al., 2020, p.

50). In order to further the change to be fully encompassed by everyone within the organization,
 2

it was necessary to employ certain levers to engage those who were resistant to the change such

as internal and external skill building, building a coalition of support, and conducting a pilot

project. These levers allow employees to positively influence employees to adopt change, create

alliances for others to help resistors be more receptive to the sustainability initiative, and having

hands on learning to realize the importance of the initiative (Harvard Business Publishing, 2013).

Using these levers pulled the rest of the company into the adoption phase by week 59. It

also led to the final stage of Duck’s model, fruition, where the hard work pays off and the

company seems new. It is also necessary for change leaders to maintain these changes and not

let the company settle into stagnation again (Deszca et al., 2020, p. 51).

Insights Gained

An important insight gained through this change simulation is the necessity for

information sharing. This aspect in organizational change is essential and has an integral role in

the success of organizational change. Through use of information sharing, it promotes enhanced

productivity and creativity, individual level knowledge, team performance, cohesion, and

knowledge integration (Ahmad & Huvila, 2019, p. 678). Gaining information regarding the

change situation was important to understand everyone’s stance on the situation and to be able to

move forward to apply the correct levers to further change within the organization.

Another insight gained was the importance of engaging others and ensuring alignment in

goals while moving forward through the implementing the sustainability initiative. It was

important to make sure that the decisions made throughout the simulation were made with the

goals in mind and that they were logical and consistent to achieve those goals (Deszca et al.,

2020, p. 334). For example, if no one was in the awareness state and the decision to hold a town
 2

hall meeting was made, most likely no one in the organization would engage with that lever due

to not being interested or involved yet. Therefore, it was necessary to conduct interviews first

and make people aware before performing other tasks to increase involvement.

The last insight in stimulating change is the necessity to walk the talk. When leaders do

not follow through with what they are saying or trying to promote, employee moral and

organization success falls too. CEO Jürgen Schrempp orchestrated a merger between Diamler-

Benz and Chrysler while promoting “team work” and “team spirit” in an environment where

employees did not seeing these promises and became dispirited, later leading to layoffs and the

eventual stepdown by the CEO (Fendt, 2006, p. 3-4). It is best for change initiators to be the first

to change, be visible, tell it all, and keep their eyes on the prize when walking the talk (Fendt,

2006, p. 6).

This is being implemented currently at Disney through new mask policies. Not only

guests, but cast members as well are required to wear masks. Cast members are enforcing the

policy fervently and have even been given special training regarding mask wearing on their

return to work through their leaders and area coordinators. Continuous updates to mask policies

have also shown Disney’s commitment to providing the safest conditions for everyone within

their parks to keep up with new safety guidelines with no exceptions (Ayers, 2020).

Through organizational change strategies, the Spectrum company was able to see the

necessity of adopting the sustainability initiative. With Duck’s Five-Stage Change Curve and

implementing levers according to each stage, the organization was able to see the need to adopt

the initiative within 59 weeks. It is important to consider information sharing, engaging others

and assuring alignment of goals, as well as walking the talk when trying to implement change

within an organization to ensure success and adaptation of new ideas and policies.
 2

References

Ahmad, F., & Huvila, I. P. 1976. (2019). Organizational changes, trust and information sharing:

an empirical study. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 71(5), 677–692. Retrieved

from https://doi-org.libproxy.chapman.edu/10.1108/ajim-05-2018-0122.

Ayers, J. (2020, August 3). Disney World and Downtown Disney in California have enforced a

new mask policy. Retrieved from https://gritdaily.com/disney-world-and-downtown-

disney-in-california-have-enforced-a-new-mask-policy/.

Deszca, G., Ingols, C. & Cawsey, T. (2020). Organizational change: an action-oriented toolkit.

Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.

Fendt, J. (2006). Are You Promoting Change--or Hindering It? Harvard Management

Communication Letter, 3(1), 3–6. Retrieved from https://eds-a-ebscohost-

com.libproxy.chapman.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=e14e4d5c-f28f-40dc-

a696-769109a753bf%40sessionmgr4007.

Harvard Business Publishing. (2013). Change management simulation: power and influence.

Retrieved from https://forio.com/simulate/harvard/change-

management/simulation/index.html#network.

Michels, D. (2020, February 28). Walking the talk on change. Retrieved from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidmichels/2020/02/28/walking-the-talk-on-

change/#53b8f88772f1.

Tenkasi, R. V., & Chesmore, M. C. (2003). Social networks and planned organizational change:

The impacts of strong network ties on effective change implementation and use. Journal
 2

of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(3), 281–300. Retrieved from https://doi-

org.libproxy.chapman.edu/10.1177/0021886303258338.