Boston Essay -- essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It was a bright, sunny day at Fenway Park, home of the Red Sox, in Boston. Entering the park for this could-be historic game, the smell of freshly cut grass mingles in the air with the scent of â€Å"Fenway franks†, the parks signature foot-long hot dogs. The game pits the Boston ace, Pedro Martinez, against the one-time red Sox star, now New York Yankee star, Roger Clemens. The Red Sox fans boo as Roger begins to toss his warm-up pitches off to the side. He is getting older, but his fastball still has enough zip behind it to make a SNAP as it hits the catcher’s glove. Meanwhile, the Boston infield is taking ground balls, and the outfielders is shagging flies on the outfield grass, and left fielder Darren Lewis is practicing fielding fly-balls off of the Green Monster, the tall left field wall, with the manually operated scoreboard in it.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Pedro emerges from the dugout to thunderous applause from the Red Sox fans, a smattering of boos from the Yankee faithful that have made the trip from the big apple, and the familiar guitar from AC/DC’s â€Å"Thunderstruck† blaring from the PA system. Just before Pedro's last warm-up, the catcher yells â€Å"throwin’ it down!† to signify that this is the last warm-up pitch. Pedro winds up, and hurls the ball, right into the catchers waiting glove. The catcher then fires the ball to the 3rd baseman, who in turn twirls and tosses it to the 2nd baseman. He tosses it the 1st baseman, Brian Daubauch...

Models of Organizational Change Essay

Organizational change is occurring at an intense rate within modern organizations, as demands to stay current with technology and marketplace trends are ever increasing. Although knowledge exists amongst management and leadership regarding the need for change, the ability to deliver the expected results of proposed changes often fails. Recent literature actually suggests that failures are frequently attributed to the level of employee involvement and commitment, and that employees actually â€Å"play a major role in the success or failure of change within organizations† (Shin, Taylor, & Seo, 2012, p. 727). There are various theories of organizational change, many of which have corresponding models that can be applied to change processes. Although such theories have differing strategies, most share common elements, to include a clear vision for the organization, the role of the leader in the initiative, the communication process between key stakeholders and employees, and overcoming opposition to change. That said, it is the intention of this paper to evaluate two specific models of organizational change, and to appraise how each model incorporates those common elements within their framework. Kurt Lewin: Three-Phase Change Theory and Model Kurt Lewin proposed a three- phase change theory in the 1940’s; however, his theory, together with a corresponding change model, has major implications for modern organizational change initiatives. The three phases of the model are as follows: unfreeze-transition-freeze, and are meant as a straight forward approach to organizational change. What is more, Lewin’s model has been utilized by many well-known corporations, and has a proven track record of success. Role of the Leader in Lewin’s Model According to Lewin, the role of the leader in implementing the three-phase process is mutifactoral, as at each phase, leadership is central. For example, during the unfreezing phase, the leader creates a sense of urgency, which is accomplished by generating awareness and understanding of the need for change. It is also during this phase that communication between the leader, key stakeholders, and employees is essential in order to reach the next phase of transition. During the transition phase, the leader is responsible for the development of organizational structure and process changes that will ultimately be shaped by new behaviors, values and attitudes (â€Å"Kurt Lewin 3 phases change theory,† 2012, para. 3). Once the transition phase reaches the point of successful re-structuring, the final freeze stage must occur, and also be maintained. This is the point at which the leader must ensure that adaption to the change has crystallized, as the possibility for the organization to â€Å"revert back to old ways† (â€Å"Kurt Lewin 3 phases change theory,† 2012, para. 3) exists, unless the changes are continually reinforced. Three-Phase Change Model: Overcoming Resistance Although one may expect immediate resistance to change, this is generally not the case. In fact, during the unfreezing stage, â€Å"most staff and management are willing to change† (â€Å"Kurt Lewin 3 phases change theory,† 2012, p. 4); however, there are still others that will require greater provocation. The leader’s role to resistance is in generating motivation. This is done by dismantling the status quo through educational initiatives, and the provision of tangible examples of proven success. Additionally, lines of communication must remain open, allowing for the building of a guiding coalition, and the formation of an unwavering cohesiveness. Overcoming resistance also entails the leader’s personal involvement, attention to empowerment, staying open to negotiation, and use of milestones as a means for illustrating successes. As the freezing stage nears, the leader must remain cognizant of any barriers to maintaining the change. Furthermore, a forward outlook is essential, which will be sustained through effective communication, ongoing observation, training, and even â€Å"performance and reward systems† (â€Å"Kurt Lewin 3 phases change theory,† 2012, p. 5). Three-Phase Change Model and Communication Communication is truly the most central component to Lewin’s model. It is highlighted at each of the three phases, with lack of communication being a barrier to successfully transitioning between phases. That said, it must not be discounted the impact that strong lines of communication have on successful change initiatives, as high percentages of change failures are often attributed to poor communication, thus hindering the transition process (Shin et al., 2012, p. 727). Harris’s Five-Phase Model Ben Harris developed a five-phase organizational change model in the mid 1970’s. According to Harris, the phases are sequential; however, they often overlap one another (Lunenburg, 2010, p. 4). The five-phases are as follows: planning & initiation, momentum, problems, turning point, and termination. Five-Phase Model: Role of the Leader Unlike Lewin’s three-phase model, Harris’s model is less dependent upon concrete leadership initiatives at each phase. For example, per the five-phase model, the role of the leader is accentuated most at phases II-IV; posited by Lunenburg when he acknowledged â€Å"the importance of leadership at various phases of program implementation† (Lunenburg, 2010, p. 5). During planning and initiation, the leader introduces the proposed change, goals, activities, and necessary resources. , and â€Å"mounts interest among individuals† (Lunenburg, 2010, p. 5), which is dissimilar to Lewin’s creation of a sense of urgency at the unfreezing stage. During momentum, strong leadership is emphasized for the development of goal-directed activities, and the organizing of processes meant to serve as the point at which employees experience personal growth through involvement. At the problems phase, leaders must stay focused on imminent issues, including the complexity of plans, differences between involved parties with regard to perceptions and goals, demands of responsibility, conflict, and individuals not fulfilling duties and expectation (Lunenburg, 2010, p. 5). It is up to the leader to direct the actions necessary for the completion of this phase in order to move on to the turning point. During the turning point phase, the leader continues to act as facilitator for the continued growth of problems, or he moves the group forward if problems have been overcome. Solid leadership is crucial here, as the point at which the change coalition should see results of initial planning, and experience the momentum of the change process. Similar to Lewis’s transition phase, emphasis at this phase is placed on â€Å"behaviors, values, and attitudes† (â€Å"Kurt Lewin 3 phases change theory,† 2012, para. 2). At termination, the leader must attempt to break down any barriers to the success of the change. This phase comes with a twofold strategy, which on one hand addresses potential change failure, and on the other hand, the possibility for change success. It is also the point at which resistance to change becomes most evident; therefore, the investment of leadership is vital to this phase. Harris’s Five-Phase Model: Overcoming Resistance There is very little focus within Harris’s five phases on leaders’ overcoming staff resistance to change. In fact, of all five phases, it is not until termination that attention to resistance is even highlighted. Unlike Lewin’s model, which does not allow for transitioning between phases if opposition is met, Harris’s model affords for a five-phase transition, even in the face of potential failure. This is a good example of a five-phase model weakness, and three-phase model strength. Harris’s Five-Phase Model and Communication Harris’s model does not specifically stress the importance of communication as does Lewin’s model; however, it is implied in the description of the leader’s responsibilities at each phase. Noticeably, each of the five phases alludes to the need for leaders to effectively and consistently communicate with staff in order for certain activities and goals to be accomplished. The difference; however, between Lewin and Harris, is that Harris allows for the transitioning between stages even when barriers to success persist. Conclusion As organizations face the ever-increasing demands of technology, together with the challenges of staying current with marketplace trends, the need for change will remain imminent. With various strategies in existence for the execution of change initiatives, leaders must stay abreast of the specific demands of their fields, while also maintaining solid lines of communication and solid leadership within their organizations. It is also important that change models with proven effectiveness be implemented, and that they are well-matched to the situation. Relative strengths and weakness of any change model will always exist, but through solid and effective leadership, the potential to overcome such weakness and the likelihood of change success is altogether probable. References Kurt Lewin 3 phase change theory universally accepted change management. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.change-management-consultant.com/kurt-lewin.html Lunenburg, F. (2010). Approached to managing organizational change. 1, 12, 1-10. Retrieved from http://www.nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal%20Volumes/Lunenburg,%20Fred%20C%20Approaches%20to%20Managing%20Organizational%20Change%20IJSAID%20v12%20n1%202010.pdf Shin, J., Taylor, M. S., & Seo, M. (2012, June 1). Resources for change: the relationships of organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employee’s attitudes and behaviors toward organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 727-748. Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.library.gcu.edu:2048/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=5a0184b6-033b-45ea-a35a-e84a3a89923d%40sessionmgr110&vid=8&hid=116

Totem And The Coyote Columbus Story By Thomas King

The two stories ‘Totem’ and ‘The Coyote Columbus Story’ written by Thomas King are about the Aboriginal people of North America. Thomas King revisits the history of the Native American people in his stories and tells them in a symbolic and metaphorical manner, with his simple touch of humour. The stories â€Å"Totem† and â€Å"The Coyote Columbus Story† are based on historical events, where in they describe the real historical events which have occurred, rather than the ones written down otherwise. The story â€Å"Totem† illustrates the cultural biased society’s attitude towards the Aboriginal people of North America. The story â€Å"Totem† by Thomas King captures several such incidences and tells them in a bit magical and symbolic way. It tells us the story about Aboriginal people and their three centuries of history shared with the European. â€Å"The Coyote Columbus Story† by Thomas King talks about the sailo rs who claimed they had found the land of India and China, which was North America in reality, and corrects their claim in this story by retelling the true events which had actually happened. The events in this story take place at the time when Columbus arrived in North America, unlike in â€Å"Totem† where its events take place in a post-Columbus period. Thomas King says that the Canadian history has been altered and he feels he should tell them correctly. He incorporates four core elements in his story â€Å"Totem† to illustrate his point: the totem pole, Walter Hooton and his workers,Show MoreRelatedThomas King: Not Just a Reaction to Colonialism1459 Words   |  6 PagesA Coyote Columbus Story shows the Native point of view of the beginning of colonialism. When introducing Christopher Columbus into the short story, Coyote says [t]hat is the one who found Indians (King Coyote 123). In many of Kings stories, he writes narration without quotations, but this particular short story doesnt contain a single quotation. The style in which it is written is not similar to many other post-colonial texts. Rather than depicting historical facts directly and accurately