Organizational Change in Lakeland Wonders

This paper discusses a case of change management in Lakeland Wonders, a wooden toy manufacturing company. It evaluates the change approach, provides contextual analysis, and identifies gaps in the change initiative. Suitable strategies to overcome the gaps are recommended.

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Organizational Change in Lakeland Wonders
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Executive Summary:
The paper discusses a case of change management that took place in a wooden toy
manufacturing company named as Lakeland Wonders. The paper evaluates the change
approach with precise focus on different change frameworks. Apart from this, the paper
provides contextual analysis of the change, cultural analysis and stakeholder analysis. Along
with that, the paper identifies the gaps in the change initiative proposed by the CEO of the
organization, Cheryl Hailstrom and recommends suitable strategies to overcome the gaps.

2ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Table of Contents
Introduction:...............................................................................................................................3
Organizational Overview:..........................................................................................................3
Discussion:.................................................................................................................................4
Change Theories:...................................................................................................................4
Communication to the Stakeholders:.....................................................................................5
Strength and Weakness or Gaps:............................................................................................6
Gaps:......................................................................................................................................6
Contextual Analysis:..................................................................................................................7
External Analysis:..................................................................................................................8
Internal analysis:....................................................................................................................8
Industry Analysis:..................................................................................................................9
Cultural Analysis:.......................................................................................................................9
Stakeholder Analysis:...............................................................................................................11
Leadership:...............................................................................................................................12
Recommendations:...................................................................................................................13
Conclusion:..............................................................................................................................13
References:...............................................................................................................................15

3ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Introduction:
The modern business world is becoming significantly competitive with entry of
multiple numbers of market competitors into the industries. Under such situation, each and
every organization is observed to strategize their business conduction in such a manner that it
enables them the desired space so that they be able to survive and concentrate on the growth
of the organization. For the modern organizations, the plan of the business expansions is
observed to be the way out under such situations (Fleisher & Bensoussan, 2015). Cameron
and Green (2015) are observed to comment that the success in the implementation of the
change is the key factor in the success of the expansion. The paper is focused in specifying
one such business case where the chosen organization is Lakeland Wonders. The paper
evaluates the change proposal that is recommended by the CEO of the organization with the
application of specific change frameworks. Apart from that the paper also discusses regarding
the implications of the change proposal and identifies gaps in it. Along with this, it provides
significant recommendation for the identified gaps.
Organizational Overview:
Lakeland Wonders was a renowned name in the wooden toy manufacturing industry
of United States. The organization was significantly famous for manufacturing high quality
wooden toys. It was observed that the organization had three plants running in Minnesota
with approximately 5000 employees working in it. The organization was experiencing some
tough time under the leadership of Cheryl Hailstrom, the Chief Executive Officer of the
organization and Mark Dawson, the senior vice president of Operations for the organization.

4ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Discussion:
Change Theories:
In order to evaluate the change, four frameworks of organizational change
management will be significantly helpful and that are the Van de Ven and Poole’s
framework, Burnes’s speed and scale framework, Alvesson and Karreman’s metaphors
framework and Allen, Maguire and McKelvey’s organisational complexity framework. The
analysis of the Van de Ven and Poole’s Framework of the change confirms that any sort of
organizational change lies in one of the four quadrant of the framework depending on the
number of entity for the change and the form of the change may that be prescribed or
constructive. The framework shows that any change can either follow the form “evolution”,
“dialectic”, “life” and “teleology” depending on the varying variables. In the case of the
Burne’s framework of change, the variables is observed to be large scale change, small scale
change and the sped of the change that may be slow or rapid in nature. Depending on the
variables, the framework is divided into four parts which are cultural change, structural
change, procedural change and behavioural change. In the Alvesson and Karreman’s
metaphors framework, there are four metaphors for the assessment of the change which are
fix and maintain, build and develop, move and relocate and liberate and recreate. These
metaphors are usually selected with a precise focus on the situation of the organization and
the goal of the change. Apart from this, one framework which is significantly crucial in this
case is the Allen, Maguire and McKelvey’s organisational complexity framework and it
specifies two different schools of thought which are punctuated equilibrium model of change
and the Incremental adjustments. The mentioned schools of thought are dependent on two
factors which are the continuity of the change and the occurrence of the change.

5ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Communication to the Stakeholders:
Cheryl Hailstrom, the CEO of the organization was able to conduct a situational
analysis of the organization where she found that the organization is not performing as
desired. Two of the departments of the organization that are the design and the manufacturing
department of the organization, were observed to be the main guilty party. Cheryl observed
that the design section of the organization was involved with unethical business conduct
where it favoured the ordinary design firms by selecting them instead of the quality design
firms which can increase the quality of the products and on the other hand the manufacturing
section of the organization was observed to disagree to the proposal of increasing the
manufacturing until and unless the management provides them with a third shift. In response
to this, Cheryl was seen to have the thoughts of recruiting Pat Sampsen and Cecil into the
workforce to increase the quality of the products manufactured from Lakeland Wonders.
Apart from that, Cheryl was significantly focused with the achievement of the Bull’s
Eye deal which had the potential to create such a state for the organization where they will
easily achieve the desired growth. In order to prepare for the Bull’s Eye deal, Cheryl
recommended that the organization is in need to start offshore manufacturing which will
enable the organization to meet the desired manufacturing cost for the achievement of the
Bull’s Eye deal (Castellani & Pieri, 2013). In response of this, Mark Dawson was observed to
inform her about the incapability of manufacturing the infrastructure immediately where
Cheryl claimed that the organization can still go for the outsourcing of the infrastructure in
the mid-market. Apart from that, Dawson was observed to be concerned with the probable
contract expiry of the organization with the labour union where Cheryl was seen to comment
that the restructuring will not lead to any job cut rather it will expand the workforce.

6ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Strength and Weakness or Gaps:
Cheryl was able to consider the recruitment of Pat Sampsen and Cecil into the
workforce as a measure for the declining effectiveness of the group owing to the misconduct
of design department and constraint in operations of the manufacturing department. The steps
were perfectly in place for the organization to revive from the situation and strive towards the
desired growth that the management of the organization had set. From the case, it is evident
that the Bull’s Eye deal was significantly crucial for the growth of the organization and in the
preparation of that, the members of the management had some doubts regarding the
infrastructure, employees or the shift in focus for the market for the manufacturing. In
response to the concern of the management, Cheryl was able to comment for the introduction
of the outsourcing of the infrastructure, offshoring manufacturing to reduce the
manufacturing cost of the products (Ellram,Tate & Petersen, 2013). Hence change initiative
proposed by Cheryl is seen to significantly in alignment to the concern of the members of the
management.
Gaps:
Cheryl missed some important tricks in the proposal for the change. Cheryl was
observed to consider the recruitment of Cecil and Pat Sampsen to compensate the misconduct
that the design and the manufacturing section of the company was seen to do. However, she
did not communicate about faults in the operation that the concerned sections of the
organization conducted (Carter et al., 2013). This had the potential to alert the employees of
the organization regarding the knowledge of the management of their unethical operation and
could have triggered them to resolve those faulty operations on their own. Apart from this,
the organization was seen to suffer from the lack of quality in the products and even with the
thought of offshore manufacturing, Cheryl missed an effective communication regarding an
efficient follow up of the quality standards of the products that will be manufactured in the

7ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
firms of the mid-market(Plugge, Bouwman & Molina-Castillo, 2013). In addition to this, the
management of the organization was seen to fear the fact that with the implementation of the
idea of offshore manufacturing, the belief of the people of the nation regarding the origin of
the organization and the products of it, will face a significant hit and that will be not be good
for the organization. Cheryl’s plan of the change lacked a concrete plan on this aspect to
make sure that the fear of the management of the organization be minimized.
Contextual Analysis:
The evaluation of the change confirms the fact that the change initiative proposed by
Cheryl was a change of multiple entities as the recruitment of the employees and the shift of
the market for the organization were present. Along with that, the change initiative was for
the improvement of the organization in terms of quality of the products and for the higher
productivity. Hence it was constructive in nature and that makes it a change of “Dialectic”
form in accordance to the change framework of Van de Ven and Poole (Hargrave & Van de
Ven, 2017). As Cheryl commented that the change initiative was associated with considerable
amount of speed in order to achieve the Bull’s Eye deal, the change initiative was following
the rapid change nature. At the same time, the organization was large scale as it was
including the important aspects like the shift in the selection of the market for the
manufacturing and the method for theachievement of the infrastructure. Hence the proposed
change initiative followed the structural change framework in the Burne’s framework of
change (McMillan,Rodrik & Verduzco-Gallo, 2014). However, it is controversial to specify a
particular metaphor for the change in accordance to Alvesson and Karreman’s metaphors
framework as the change initiative proposed by Cheryl had some reflection of the fix and
maintain metaphor as the recruitment of Cecil and Pat Sampsen satisfies the needs for the
metaphor but at the same time, the idea of the offshore manufacturing and the outsourcing of
the required infrastructure guarantees the fact that the build and develop metaphor had

8ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
predominant impact. Considering the Allen, Maguire and McKelvey’s organisational
complexity framework, the change proposed by Cheryl Hailstrom followed the Punctuated
equilibrium model of change due to the discontinuous occurrence of the change.
External Analysis:
Considering the case of Lakeland, the organization was subjected to significant
competition. Under such condition, the accomplishment of the desired growth rate of the
organization was significantly dependent on the achievement of the Bull’s Eye deal. However
the external environment of the organization in the upscale market was not suitable for
production in accordance to the desired manufacturing cost for the achievement of the Bull’s
Eye deal. Hence the CEO of the organization was seen to introduce the plan for the
manufacturing from the mid-scale market as that will be significantly helpful for the
organization in achieving the desired manufacturing cost.
Internal analysis:
The internal condition of the company was not too great. It is observed that the
manufacturing and design departments of the company were obstructing the growth of the
company. As mentioned earlier, the design department of the organization was involved in
unethical business conduct where they compromised the quality of the product by selecting
ordinary design firms instead of good quality firms. On the other hand, the manufacturing
department of the company was seen to ignore the scope of increment of the production and
instead they demanded a third shift. In a nut shell, these two departments of the company
needed an effective restructure.

9ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Industry Analysis:
The bargaining power of the suppliers in the change initiative of Lakeland was
observed to be low as the organization is expected to have multiple numbers of suppliers with
efficient supply in the mid-market.
The bargaining power of the buyers is seen to be high as the company and its CEO is
observed to desperate in achieving the Bull’s Eye deal. The intensity and the sense of urgency
reflected from the CEO of the organization clarify the importance of the deal and the power
of the buyers.
Cheryl Hailstrom, the CEO of the organization was observed to portray the
importance of the deal and the necessity of the restructuring. In addition to this, she was
significantly focused in triggering the change initiative with immediate effect so that they are
able to prepare themselves for the Bull’s Eye deal. The sense of urgency reflected from the
part of the CEO was of great significance as that clarified her concern of the competitors,
approaching the deal. This also portrays the competitive rivalry that the mentioned
organization was expected to face and along with that the threat of substitution was pretty
evident with the urgency of the CEO for implementing the change.
Cultural Analysis:
In the evaluation of the culture of the organization, it was found that certain sections
inside the organization were not effective enough for the betterment of the organization.
Specifically the unethical conduct of the design section regarding the improper selection of
the design firms and the unjust demand of the manufacturing department regarding the third

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
shift for the increment of the productivity significantly portrays the negativity that is surrounded the organization and the people of it
(Cameron & Green, 2015).
Rituals
and
routines
The senior level management of the company is observed to be significantly afraid of taking any
sort of risks for the improvement of them and the achievement of the desired growth of the
company.
Stories In the evaluation of the culture of the organization, it was found that certain sections inside the
organization were not effective enough for the betterment of the organization. Specifically the
unethical conduct of the design section regarding the improper selection of the design firms and
the unjust demand of the manufacturing department regarding the third shift for the increment of
the productivity significantly portrays the negativity that is surrounded the organization and the
people of it (Cameron & Green, 2015).
Symbols The unethical business conduction of the design section of the company and the intentional
avoidance of the increment of the production of the manufacturing department portrays the
negative vibes inside the workplace.
Power structures With the concern of Mark Dawson regarding the contract expiry and the perception that might be
formed among the members of employee union regarding the implementation of the concept of
outsourcing for the required infrastructure, the influence of the union on the management of the
organizations is observed to be significant. On the other hand the unethical business conduct of
the mentioned departments was significantly influential in dragging the growth of the company
down. The stiffness of the manufacturing department of the organization in intentional barring of
the production was highly influential in making the life difficult for the senior level managers.

1ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Organisational structure The organizational structure of the company was observed to be hierarchical in nature where the
workforce was divided into different departments and the head of the departments were
answerable to the Chief Executive Officer of the organization. The directors of the various
sections like operations were subjected to look at the organization through the eyes of the CEO.
Control systems The responsible individuals for monitoring the behaviours of the employees were the higher
authority of them. In case of the employees of manufacturing department, the responsibility of
monitoring was on the head of the manufacturing department.
Stakeholder Analysis:
The stakeholders for the organization and the change proposed by Cheryl Hailstrom, the CEO of the organization, were the
management of the organization including the director of the operations Mark Dawson, the head of the departments, current employee union,
employees, customers, community and the suppliers for the infrastructure in the mid-market. With the evaluation of the interest and influence
of the mentioned parties associated with the change, it can be stated that the members of the management like the directors or the head of the
departments are key players in the implementation of the change (Jacobs, van Witteloostuijn & Christe-Zeyse, 2013). On the other hand, the
customers and the suppliers of the materials and infrastructures are considered to be the observers as their interest in the change initiative is
expected to be high. However the influence of those parties is evaluated to be low. Current employee union and the employees are considered
to be the latent players as their interest in the change is low but the influence of them is significant in the successful implementation of the
change. Along with this, the community is considered to be low in interest and in influence as well.

2ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Leadership:
One of the major aspects of the leadership is considered to be the communication. In the case of Lakeland Wonders, Cheryl Hailstrom
was observed to lack in this aspect. The CEO of the Lakeland Wonders was observed to strategize effective change management initiative for
the various sections of the organization. However, the CEO missed the communication regarding the different aspects of her change proposal.
As the success in the implementation of the change depends largely on the employees, the CEO was in need to communicate the needs of the
change to the employees of the organization. The absence of the communication of the absence of the exchange of information between
Cheryl and the workforce was converting Cheryl’s leadership to autocratic leadership. The reflection of Cheryl’s leadership can be considered
as “Enabling” as she followed the procedure of freezing, change and unfreezing. But at the same time, her communication of the change was
partially clear and that created as space of bother in management of the change.
Mark Dawson, the
head of the
departments
Customers,
Suppliers
Current
employee union,
employees
Community

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Recommendations:
As mentioned earlier, Cheryl’s proposal missed some important considerations.
Cheryl was seen to propose for the recruitment of Pat and Cecil in the organization. However
she missed the communication regarding the faulty operations of the concerned departments.
Cheryl was in need to communicate regarding the faulty and unethical operations of the
design and the manufacturing section of the department as that had the potential to aware
them and force them to resolve their faulty actions. This would have created minimum
amount of concern among the members of the management and at the same time would have
been significant in the increment of the organizational efficiency and the transparency inside
the organization.
As stated earlier, the organization was significantly facing the lack of quality in the
products that are manufactured in the firms of it and that were detrimental factor for the
organization in the market competition with the other organizations. However, even under
such situation, Cheryl was observed to introduce the idea of the offshore manufacturing and
the outsourcing of the required infrastructure. But the CEO of Lakeland Wonders missed to
formulate the process for the monitoring of the quality in the existing firm and in the firm of
the mid-market. This, however, was still forcing the organization to experience the lack of
desired quality.
Conclusion:
On a concluding note, it can be said that Lakeland Wonders, as a renowned wooden
toy manufacturer in the United States market, faced significant amount of issues for the
quality of the products as other competitors was observed to design the products in a better
manner. The CEO of the organization proposed several changes which had the potential to
revive the company’s growth. However the change initiative proposed by Cheryl was

1ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
significantly rapid in nature but in order to achieve the desired growth in the market, the
several stakeholders of the organization were in need to come up and help each other.

2ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
References:
Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2015). Making sense of change management: A complete guide
to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. Kogan Page Publishers.
Carter, M. Z., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., &Mossholder, K. W. (2013). Transformational
leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous
incremental organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(7), 942-
958.
Castellani, D., &Pieri, F. (2013). R&D offshoring and the productivity growth of European
regions. Research Policy, 42(9), 1581-1594.
Christopher, M. (2016). Logistics & supply chain management. Pearson UK.
Ellram, L. M., Tate, W. L., & Petersen, K. J. (2013). Offshoring and reshoring: an update on
the manufacturing location decision. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 49(2),
14-22.
Fleisher, C. S., & Bensoussan, B. E. (2015). Business and competitive analysis: effective
application of new and classic methods. FT Press.
Hargrave, T. J., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2017). Integrating dialectical and paradox perspectives
on managing contradictions in organizations. Organization Studies, 38(3-4), 319-339.
Hornstein, H. A. (2015). The integration of project management and organizational change
management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2),
291-298.

3ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN LAKELAND WONDERS
Jacobs, G., van Witteloostuijn, A., & Christe-Zeyse, J. (2013). A theoretical framework of
organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(5), 772-
792.
McMillan, M., Rodrik, D., &Verduzco-Gallo, Í. (2014). Globalization, structural change, and
productivity growth, with an update on Africa. World Development, 63, 11-32.
Plugge, A., Bouwman, H., & Molina-Castillo, F. J. (2013). Outsourcing capabilities,
organizational structure and performance quality monitoring: Toward a fit
model. Information & Management, 50(6), 275-284.