Running head: Unit 2 Assignment 1
Unit 2 Assignment 1
December 1, 2012
Dr. Douglas Buck
The process of changing organizational culture is a long-term and difficult process. There is an undeniable resistance to change the former way to the new and evolving way of doing business. As businesses continue to expand in the global markets, it will require a strong leadership commitment to change the vision of what the goal of change will be in order to sustain continuous innovation. In the excerpt of Vineet Nayar’s, “Recasting the Role of CEO: Transferring the Responsibility for ...view middle of the document...
Nayar recognized that as CEO he was only one person and that he did not necessary have or know all the answers that were coming his way. His knowledge only pertained to a certain area of expertise. His goal was for his organization to “see the CEO differently, not as the source of all change but as a kind of stimulator and enabler of change” (Nayar).
In order for an organization to be progressive they must be open to change their organizational culture and processes. The intent of these changes is to keep innovation revolving. Nayar understood that need and realized that in order to instill change and keep continuous innovation going that the balance of responsibility would have to come from the employees, the ones that create the “value zone”. The value zone is known as those that actually provide the most value to the clients in other words they are the one actually doing the work and generating ideas that keep clients satisfied. What Nayar did was invert the traditional hierarchy of management. So often many leaders operate under the autocratic or commanding style of management which does nothing to facilitate the continuous innovation. They create a disconnect to their value zone because they make decisions unilaterately not considering the whole picture. Nayar understood this and realized that his role was to enable his employees to do great things and make great decisions. In all practically leaders must let go to succeed. In Nayar’s paradigm he deemed transparency as a vital role to keep continuous engagement revolving. “If the business is transparent, all staff can see what has to be done to continually improve customer satisfaction and business performance, especially financial performance. The more specific definition of their role in the business ensures greater bonding with the business and with the teams required to achieve the business objectives and particularly the performance visualized” (The Management Practice 2006). When there is greater transparency and authenticity it can bring significant benefits to an organization. “Being open should not be a mantra or philosophy, but a considered and rigorous approach to strategy and leadership that yields real results” (Li, xiii). Nayar’s overall concept was to provide employees who are actively and productively engaged in the value zone more control over the decision making of the organization. By inverting the traditional hierarchy he gave employees total engagement which allowed them to feel that their efforts were appreciated and they perceived that the organization has commitment to trust, transparency, and management accountability because of the active and open engagement platform. Nayar’s visionary management style “move people towards a new set of shared dreams. “Visionary leaders articulate where a group is going, but not how it will get there – setting people free to innovate, experiment, take calculated risks” (Murray, nd).
To keep innovation...