Ethical Change Management: Analysis, Critical Response and Recommendations

RUNNING HEAD: ETHICAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT
ETHICAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT
1

RUNNING HEAD: ETHICAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT
Introduction
Change is an aspect that allows management to cope with future competitive changes and
changes (Hamel, 2008). CEO Cheryl Hailstorm in her company Lakeland Wonders wants to
bring about two significant changes. The first change relates to entering mid-market retail
segment and the second being in establishment of manufacturing capabilities offshore. The
current scope of analysis relates to Mark Dawson resisting to change and Cheryl Hailstorm
response towards Mark Dawson. There are recommendations provided which can be adopted by
Cheryl in order to manage the resistance faced in terms of ethical change management model
(Cameron & Green, 2015).
Analysis
Mark Dawson resistance to change
Mark Dawson was the senior Vice President of the Company and was resisting to the
change that was brought about by Cheryl Hailstorm. Cheryl’s clear vision and progress planned
for the Company for the future was not adequately shared with other senior members of the
Company (Frankland, Mitchell, Ferguson, Sziklai, Verma, Popowski & Sturgeon, 2008). She did
not share her vision with the Swensen family not with the senior management. The Company’s
board had planned to foray into middle of the non-electronic toy market segment, in its board’s
annual target. In order to achieve that Hailstorm decided that Lakeland had to considerably
reduce its levels of costs at which it was operational so that it could achieve significant cost
competitiveness (Ford, Ford & D'Amelio, 2008). Therefore, she decided that the production line
had to be set up offshore, but she did not provide evidence that could allow the senior
management being convinced of her plan. This provided adequate opportunity for Mark Dawson
to resists changing, as according to change management models employees need to be stated
clear vision regarding the change before initiating the process or making them participate in the
process. Another major reason which led to resistance was the branding issue (Paton &
McCalman, 2008). Hailstorm wanted the packaging be emblazoned by a famous packaging
2

RUNNING HEAD: ETHICAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT
company Sampsen Design from the current local Company. Changing the packaging Company
all of a sudden was not clear to t eh senior management which led them to resists to the change.
In order to implement the process of change, a well-planned process was needed and
Hailstorm devised certain processes in order that the company’s annual target can be achieved
(Blin & Munro, 2008). The Company’s senior managers did not at all participate with Hailstorm
in the change process. Rather, the senior vice president and union were posing questions related
to the offshore manufacturing lines, new person and new packaging company, who were taking
over new product development. Hailstorm’s plan caused conflicts with the traditional
organizational culture that was existing at the Company (Hayes, 2018).
Critical response of Cheryl Hailstorm towards Mark Dawson
Cheryl Hailstorm facing resistance form Mark Dawson was rather critical and
apprehensive (Starr, 2011). She replied that all employees within the organization were very
used to the culture that they had been following since 94 years. The traditional organizational
culture suited them immensely hence the Company failed to meet its target. She felt that there
needs to be some new employees brought into the Company, who might be able to bring about a
positive change (Anderson & Anderson, 2010). She critically said that all employees in the
current Company was rather slow and acting in a traditional old fashioned manner, which did not
allow the Company to attain its target. All her actions and step was undertaken so that a new
course of action could be charted for the Company. She called meeting a day later so that she
could share her vision with the managers. In short her critical response to Mark Dawson was
rather aggressive in nature and was imposing. As against change management models which
aims at communicating and convincing employees to participate in the course of changed action,
her procedure was totally different (Kotter & Schlesinger, 2008). She wanted to bring about a
dramatic change process by overnight changing the organization culture at the organization.
Recommendations Conclusion
3