A critical discussion of Organisational Change and Resistance and Misbehaviour in the
film ‘Moneyball’.
The aim of this essay is to present a critical analysis of organisational change and resistance
to change and misbehaviour, drawing thoughts and reflections from the film 'Moneyball',
based on the book ‘Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game’ (Michael Lewis, 2003).
The essay begins introducing the rationale behind film analysis, it then reviews core concepts
and related researches on the two topics to explore the alternative ways of understanding
these from different perspectives and addressing potential limitations by questioning the
underlying assumptions, using extracts from the scenes. The essay then concludes with the
summary of main arguments and implications for future research.
A brief analysis on some of the principles that underpin film structure will provide a resource
through which to explore what the film says about the two above mentioned topics. Bordwell
and Thompson (2004) describe how meaning is attributed to a film; in this particular
perspective the film plot represents a referential meaning in its most evident manifestation:
the successful attempt to assemble a baseball team on a lean budget by employing computergenerated analysis to acquire new players. The explicit meaning is manifest through a
successful top-down theory of organisational knowledge over a clear ineffective scouting
system, who continued to suggest unaffordable players. The implicit meaning refers to a
more abstract interpretation of the film itself, namely the image of an autonomous leader able
to take personal risks against all odds; this resembles certain romanticised myths, as Wright
(1975) explains, myths respond to conceptual needs of social and self-understanding required
by the dominant social institutions of that period, or the social concepts and attitudes
determined by the history and institutions of a society are communicated to its members
through its mythologies. The symptomatic meaning is underpinned by social trends and
social ideology, the new technology available in the early 2000s meant that statistical
analyses in great detail were no longer impossible and the scope of machine-based analogies
could regain territory lost to brain-based theories, whereas earlier incomplete rationality
would have overseen decisions, a modernist stance on run-scoring ability was now preferred
and applied within a changing society.
The conceptual framework of this paper intend to discuss the two topics under the lens of
these approaches, relying on Moneyball’s metaphors to unveil this dichotomy, revealing some
of the mechanism that regulate these processes and analyse key turning events enabling these
processes to take place. Film reading can stimulate reflection on the meaning attached to the
practice of the various aspects of an organisation (Bell, 2008). Rhodes and Westwood (2008)
assert that popular culture sources, such as film, help construct a specific impression of
management and organisation in which own cultural experiences of these phenomena can be
situated in a way that more academic interpretations cannot.
It is said that contemporary society is experiencing change, affecting activities and
organisations at an ever increasing rate; change and its implications have been matter of
interest since classical age and important academic efforts have been made to capture the
complexity of these phenomena (Cwarniawska and Sevon eds., 1996; Linstead, Fulop and
Lilley, 2009). These efforts have gone under many banners: total quality management,
reengineering, rightsizing, restructuring, and cultural change; nonetheless, Grieves (2010)
argues, they find their replication in two main leading approaches: a mainstream approach
and a critical approach.
At this stage it is relevant to consider, that the several schools of thought, to whom this essay
refers, postulate theories and paradigms that may occasionally partially overlap especially if
different interpretations of organisational change are used or whether the dominant ideas are
regarded as a rather general definition that encompasses different positions and currents
within a specific perspective (Willmott and Knights, 2007;
Linstead et al, 2009).
Furthermore, it should also be considered that the beauty of theory seldom matches the
hardship of practice, resulting in model and theory that are difficult to apply or do not
respond as expected, in other words, as explained by Cwarniawska and Sevon (eds. 1996),
the complexity of these paradigms become their main limitations.
Organisational change can be interpreted under two main perspectives, a planned innovation
or an environmental adaptation (Linsted et al, 2010); the former outlines change as a
deviation from the norm, the latter indicates change as normal progression process. Under the
planned innovation approach, strategic choice, decision making and organisation
development may find their collocation; whereas under the environmental adaptation
approach may fall contingency theory, population ecology and chaos theory. This dual
approach finds its main advocates in Weber, Taylor and Foucalt, Lyotard respectively,
regarded by many authors as some of the main interprets of modern theory and post-modern
theories (O'Neill, 1986; Willmott and Knights, 2007; Linstead et al, 2009).
This contrasting dichotomy becomes evident when viewing organisational change as a state
of being rather than a state of continuous becoming, where views of the organisation are
depoliticized rather than poblitcized, ultimately where modernist seem to have an 'answer that
fits all', post-modernist recognizes change in terms of response to local factors rather than
external (White and Jacques (1995). Supporters of this dualism, identify modern theories as
aiming at universal time-space free solutions to economic and social problems through
frameworks that were often technocratic, individual, linear and rationalistic and find its roots
into social, economical and political dimensions which surfaced mostly in eighteen century
Northern Western Europe and characterised the Cold War period; conversely around the late
'70s, post-modern theories arising as a result of an anti-modernism culture embraced a critical
stance towards modernism, specifically pluralism was gradually gaining ground and edging
towards a plethora of more complex actions and contexts (Bennis, 1966). In the postmodern view, organization is less the expression of planned thought and calculative action
and a more defensive reaction to forces intrinsic to the social body which constantly threaten
the stability of organized life, however, as it frequently is the case, this view has in turn been
criticised by the neo-modernist for failing to recognise some of the values intrinsic of
capitalism.
Critics of this philosophy argue that this view carries an inherent limitation, namely failing to
fully represent and elaborate the complexity of interactions and relationships that instead a
pluralist and unitary view is able to portray in terms of the successful functioning of an
organisation. Supporters of this perspective argue that change should be seen in terms of
adaptation and improvement focusing primarily on effective and efficient organisational
performance (Burrell and Morgan, 1979; Collins, 1998) . Both perspectives differ in how
conflicts within dynamics of change are managed and communicated; problems and
resistance are seen as and hindrance be resolved in the first instance or negotiated in the
second. Therefore misunderstandings or the expression of differences, rather than stemming
from the individual, reside within the organisation and is mostly the result of misalignment
with the desired new behaviour (Kotter, 2007). Although relevant to organisational change,
this particular aspect of resistance to change will be discussed in mote details in the second
section of this essay. Change can also be considered in terms of societal adaptation;
specifically Collins (1998) discusses the notion of a radical and marxist approach in reference
to a wider social context, furthermore it is argued that an overarching orientation embracing
these four approaches is advisable in order to be compatible with specific circumstances that
the organisation may face, that is adapting to the situation. A debate may ensue in regards to
whether this approach might partly replicate paradigms of contingecy theory, and therefore
its limitations. Advocates of Contingency theory argue that besides the fact that there is no
universal way of management, an organisation's 'best way' is to adapt itself to as many as
possible external and internal variables (Fiedler, 1967; Mintzberg, 1979; Burke Litwin, 1992);
detractors of this view however argue that this is contrasting with their main assertion 'there
is no best way', besides faling to consider historical and political dimension of change
(Dawson, 1986; Clegg, 1990)
Technology, seen as an external force, is an important aspect of Contingency Theory, and in
the film 'Moneyball'. In both instances it is the source that generates change, and as such in
the film it is evident through the deliberate adoption by the team manager of technology in
response to a specific market challenge: the other baseball teams had greater number of funds
availability in terms of player transfers. In 'Moneyball', this deliberate response engenders a
dual effect: improvement of the teams's ability to face threat and modification of individual
players inside the team; furthermore this deliberate response manifest itself in the succession
of steps from the recognition of change to the evaluation of change. By replacing respectively,
terms such as 'team', 'players', and 'steps' with 'organisation', 'employees', and 'stages', it
becomes obvious the correlation with Planned Change, that is a suggested successful
succession of stages in the implementation of change (Lewin, 1951; Kotter, 1996).
In 'Moneyball' the eight-step-model that Kotter (1996) adopts in his effort to capture change,
are manifest through a number of sequential scenes.
Firstly, the Manager (Billy Beane, BB) recognises the urgency of change (minutes 11:03
"The problem is .. , it's an unfair game!") and without it the team is doomed: speaking to his
scouting specialists, he requests innovative solutions to old problems, but all they can provide
is old answers that would ensue future failures (minute 11:46 "You need to let us to the job
you are paying us to do"). Subsequently, BB forms a powerful coalition, (minute 38:11 "We
want you first") that will support the change efforts, by demanding full support from the
Team owner (minute 1:06:21 "We're not afraid, that's why we're here") and employing a
sabermetric expert that will help him create a vision and
achieved will thus communicate the vision thanks to
the resulting improvements
the resulting achievements. By
removing key adverse players and scouts, he empowers action (minute 48:00 "Adapt or die")
and is able to create quick wins that allows him to build on the change and make it stick.
The last stage represents probably the most evident limitation of this approach, at least in this
film; the other teams soon adopt this innovation, and thus BB's team is unable to reignite this
cycle of innovation to maintain its competitive advantage. Also from the film it is not
possible to understand, what the consequences of an unsuccessful stage execution would be.
To elude this impasse, many authors have referred to a more flexible model, such as the
force-field-analysis (FFA) (Lewin, 1951). This model intends change as a situation where a
driving force faces an opposing force and by applying pressure on either side a desired
equilibrium state can be obtained, in other words managing forces that either drives towards
an objective or prevents its achievement. FFA is composed of three steps: unfreezing,
changind and refreezing. In Moneyball this approach becomes manifest when BB secure the
services of a Yale economic graduates meant to provide the new knowledge (unfreezing), he
then obtains the support of a charismatic player among the team through motivation
(changing step), and finally the new behaviour is re-inforced when the team start winning
(refreezing).
The impracticalities of applying theory to practice, and a certain rigidity in these models
have been cited as the main limitations of these two frameworks by its detractors (Dawson,
1986; Linstead et al, 2009). Nonetheless, these two models, interpreting resistance to change
from a Organisational Development perspective, see change as an opportunity to be seized
and thus necessary in order to overcome or prevent obstacles and successfully implement
change. Although adopting different views, that is a rational-empirical view in the Kotter's
model (focus is on the task) and a more normative re-educative view in the FFA's model
(focus is on the process), they offer insights and solutions which can be identified in the Film.
Change is seen as an aberration and as such has to be eliminated when scouts and players
adverse to the innovation have to be removed, or as a natural process resulting from a natural
human tendency when coach's resistance is considered legitimate and change is attained
through challenging underlying assumptions resulting in negative behaviours (Grieves, 2010).
If it is widely agreed that changes may emanate from external or internal pressure, consensus
however has to be reached whether resistance to change and misbehaviour can be both
regarded as desired and necessary. Although some scholars argue that resistance and
misbehaviour play a pivotal role in balancing pressure form external and internal
environment, thus directing the organisation toward greater stability (Hultman, 1979; Clegg,
1990), it has also been contended that resistance is indicative of unhealthy relationships
among organisational groups or individuals therefore it has to be avoided in order to ensure
harmony to the organisaiton (Milton, Entrekin and Stening, 1984). Furthermore, consensus
has also to be reached on the dimension of resistance to change and misbehaviour (Ackroyd
and Thompson, 1999).
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DIMENSION OF MISBEHAVIOUR AND WOMEN
RECAP AND CONCLUSION
References
Ackroyd, S., Thompson, P. (1999) Organisational Misbehaviour. London: Sage.
Bell, E. (2008) Reading Management and Organisation in Film. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Bennis, W.G. (1966) ‘Theory and method in applying behavioural science to planned
organizational change’, in J.R.Lawrence (ed.) Operational Research and the Social Sciences.
London: Tavistock.
Bordwell, D., Thompson, K. (2004) Film Art. An Introduction. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Burrell, G., Morgan, G. (1979) Sociological Paradigms and Orgnisational Analysis. London:
Heinemann.
Burke, W., W., Litwin, G., H. (1992) 'A causal model of organisational performance.' Journal
of Management, 18(3): 528.
Clark, P., A. (1999) Organisations in Action : Competition Between Contexts. London:
Routledge.
Clegg, S., R. (1990) Modern Organisations: Organisation Studies in the Post-Modern World.
London: Sage.
Collins, D. (1998) Organisational Change: Sociological Perspective. London: Routledge.
Czarniawska, B., Sevon, G. (1996) Translating Organisational Change. Berlin: de Gruyter &
Co.
Dawson, S. (1986) Analysing Organisation. London: MacMillan/Palgrave MacMillan.
Fiedler, F., E. (1967) A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill
Foucault, M. (1980) Power/Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
Grieves, J. (2010) Organisational Change: Themes and Issues. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Hultman, K. (1979) The Path of Least Resistance. Denton: Learning Concepts.
Kotter, J., P. (1996) Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lewin, K. (1951) Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper & Row.
Lewin, K., A. (1999) 'Group decision in social change' in The Complete Social Scientist: A
Kurt Lewin Reader by Kurt K., A. and Gold, M. (eds) Washington: American Psychological
Association.
Lewis, M. (2003) Moneyball: the Art of Winning an Unfair Game. New York: W. W. Norton
& Company.
Linstead, S., Fulop, L., Lilley, S. (2009) Management and Organisation: a Critical Text. New
York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Milton, C., Entrekin, L., Stening, B. (1984) Organisational Behaviour in Australia. Sidney:
Prentice
Hall.
Mintzberg, H. (1979) The Structuring of Organisations: a Synthesis of the Research.
Englewood
O'Neill, J. (1986) 'The disciplinary society: from Weber to Foucault.' The British Journal of
Sociology, Vol. 37, No. 1 (3/86), pp. 42-60.
Rhodes, C., Parker, M. (2008) 'Images of organizing in popular culture.' Organization, 15(5):
627–37.
Rhodes, C., Westwood, R. (2008) Critical Representations of Work and Organization in
Popular Culture. Oxford: Routledge.
Weber, M. (1950) General Economic History, translated by Knight, F., H. Glencoe: The Free
Press.
Wilmot, H., Knights, D. (2007) Introducing Organizational Behaviour & Management.
London: Thomson Learning.
Wilson, H., T. (1977) The American Ideology, Science Technology and Organisation as
Modes of Rationality in Advanced Industrial Societies. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.
White, R., F. Jacques, R. (1995) 'Operationalising the postmodernity construct for efficient
organisational change management.' Journal of Organisational Change Management, 8 (2):
45-71.
Wright, W. (1975) Six Guns and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Organisational Misbehaviour
http://www.ukm.my/penerbit/akademika/ACROBATAKADEMIKA69/akademika69%5B04%5D.pdf
MONEYBALL'S paper Australian university
https://prenticetom.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/moneyball-the-management-of-change-strategiesemployed-in-the-film/
RESISTANCE to change, change is good
http://www.adaptivecycle.nl/images/temp/20120312184749!phpKWfELh.pdf
is .ith 'players with planned change goes through stages Within a lifecycle metaphor, in the film it
can be seen as
t best fitting from this ociety inequality and management's inability to to resolve this but the debate
warns such as conflicts including society inequality and management's inability dominate the
ensuing debate.
tAlso it is relevant to identify In the film 'Moneyball', change is intended
If change is considered in terms of organisational
b In the post-modern view, organization is less the expression of planned thought and calculative
action and a more defensive reaction to forces intrinsic to the social body which constantly threaten
the stability of organized life, however this view has in turn been criticised by the neo-modernist for
being overtly critical of capitalism.
Clark Peter : Context VERY GOOD
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/universityofessex/reader.action?docID=10054570
Hassard and Kelemen : ARTICLE ON KNOWLEDGE, Lot of references
http://org.sagepub.com/content/9/2/331.full.pdf?hwshib2=authn%3A1452190703%3A20160106%2
53A99046cb1-7fa2-4968-b3e4f53f1e0f3f08%3A0%3A0%3A0%3AIwUV7APZ4KhrAoFNyNJuNw%3D%3D
O'Neill: Weber vs Foucault
http://www.csun.edu/~snk1966/John%20O'Neil%20--%20The%20Disciplinary%20Society%20%20From%20Weber%20to%20Foucault.pdf
Terry Barrety: Modernism and Post-modernism in Art
http://www.terrybarrettosu.com/pdfs/B_PoMo_97.pdf
Unitary and Pluralist Perspectives EXAMPLE ARTICLE MUST REPHRASE
http://yourpersonalresearchwriter.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/unitary-and-pluralist-perspectivesof.html
Jansen: Resistance and Change
http://search.proquest.com/openview/c71488806772206f57ce948e37ee5660/1?pqorigsite=gscholar
http://org.sagepub.com/content/9/2/331.full.pdf?hwshib2=authn%3A1452190703%3A20160106%2
53A99046cb1-7fa2-4968-b3e4f53f1e0f3f08%3A0%3A0%3A0%3AIwUV7APZ4KhrAoFNyNJuNw%3D%3D
Although in theory there seem to be a clear dichotomy, in practice overlapping seems to
prevail (s often reffered as the third way?) (QUOTE).
It is worth noting that the film takes place at the dawn of modern statistical analysis.
The answer to this query, this paper argues is to be found ...
envirnmental appraoch and comaared to the its counterpart of planned a[pp[roach,
It all starts with a se
Baseball very much anchored in the past, why? cultural and vesciral roots hard to change !
and film help to understand
Finally it should be considered that as mentioned above the beauty of a theory stems from its
epistemological and ontological
Rhodes and Westwood (2008) explain that films are an expression of popular culture, this
particular propriety enable them to resonate with viewers’ experience of work and
organisation in a manner that more traditional academic media cannot.
the use of film to explain organisational change
Positivism
https://prenticetom.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/moneyball-the-management-ofchange-strategies-employed-in-the-film/
MONEYBALL – the Management of Change strategies employed in the film
http://joegirard.ca/moneyball-amazing-lesson-organizational-change/
Moneyball – An Amazing Lesson in Organizational Change
http://www.ijbhtnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_3_May_2012/3.pdf
Gender and Power in the Devil Wears Prada
http://jme.sagepub.com/content/25/1/79.full.pdf+html
ANIMATED FILMS AS A TEACHING RESOURCE
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14697010500359250
Organisational change management: A critical review
http://www.hofstra.edu/pdf/academics/colleges/hclas/cld/cld_rlr_fall07_career_cebul
a.pdf
Career Success at What Cost? Work vs. Personal Life in The Devil Wears Prada
The film portrays Manager Billy Beane's successful attempt to assemble a baseball team on a
lean budget by employing computer-generated analysis to acquire new players. The film ,
describes how innovative use of sabermetric changed underlying long established
assumptions.
kotter (2007) explains that Businesses hoping to survive over the long term will have to
remake themselves into better competitors at least once along the way. In almost every case,
the goal has been to cope with a new, more challenging market by changing the way business
is conducted. A few of these endeavors have been very successful. A few have been utter
failures. Most fall somewhere in between, with a distinct tilt toward the lower end of the scale.
This essay critically discusses mainstream theories of organisational change and resistance
and misbehaviour with reference to the film ‘Moneyball’ released in 2011. This film portrays
Manager Billy Beane's successful attempt to assemble a baseball team on a lean budget by
employing computer-generated analysis to acquire new players. The film based on the book
‘Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game’, by Michael Lewis, describes how
innovative use of sabermetric changed underlying long established assumption. It is worth
noting that the film takes place at the dawn of modern statistical analysis
Rhodes and Westwood (2008) assert that popular culture sources, such as film, help construct
a specific impression of management and organisation in which own cultural experiences of
these phenomena can be situated in a way that more academic interpretations cannot. Bell
(2008) further explains that film reading can also stimulate reflection on the meaning
attached to the practice of the various aspects of organisation, in this analysis the focus will
be on organisational change and resistance and misbehaviour.