CCT 355
E-Business Technologies
Change Management Simulation Assignment
Group Members:
Timur Khamitov (995666989)
Kevieon Barker (995420343)
Tarek El Saad (994959265)
Date:
2nd November 2009
Introduction
Fill here.
Division of Labour
Kevieon Barker

Responsible for interviewing stakeholders from the Marketing department and the
Manufacturing department.

Identifying the most effective time to implement tactics

Implementation of tactics
Tarek El Saad

Responsible for interviewing stakeholders from the Administrative department

Identifying the prominent problems within the case study

Analysis of results from the Change Simulation
Timur Khamitov

Responsible for interviewing stakeholders from the R&D Department and the Manufacturing
department.

Consolidating information from the Change Theory and the Change Simulation game.

Building a preliminary plan using available tactics
Organizational Problems
Too much focus on military products
The R&D department placed extensive focus on the production of military products. Many stakeholders
within the R&D and Manufacturing departments believed that their ability to innovate and produce
state of the art technology played a huge role in the success of the organization. Stakeholders within the
R&D department believed that a continuing focus on military products was the right direction for the
company.
Problems resulted as the R&D department focused too much on the big ‘R’ of research and not enough
of development. Many stakeholders within the Marketing department, namely Cathy Lalonde,
recognized that the future of the organization lay within their ability to create technologies for the
commercial market. Stakeholders from Marketing recognized that that the military market had limited
growth remaining, but the commercial market possessed enormous potential for growth. The market
for military products ‘dried up’ and there was not much more room for development in military
products.
Many stakeholders within the Manufacturing department also believed that a focus on military
contracts was the way to go. They believed that focusing on a customer appeal approach diverted the
organization from the primary goal and distracted them from doing what they did best - developing
military products. Manufacturing utilized the attitude of “If it isn’t broke, don’t fix it”, and they believed
that military contracts resulted in their success so why change to a customer appeal approach. This
attitude created a belief that resulted in a resistance to change. The R&D and Manufacturing
departments should have been less focused on the fine-tuning of military products and more on
developing user friendly consumer products since the commercial market possessed room for potential
growth.
Lack of Communication
Previously, R&D used to deal with customers directly, but with the roles reversing and marketing dealing
with customers, R&D was unable to adjust to the role reversal where marketing would relay customer
information. Problems resulted as the R&D department simply did not listen to stakeholders from the
Marketing department. Scott Bell, the VP of the R&B Department, was not used to the new commercial
approach and posed as the biggest obstacle to change by being a ‘resister’. If Scott Bell was reluctant to
listen to changes, no-one in the R&D department would be willing to listen either. There was a need to
“break down walls” to facilitate for better communication between departments. Department
structures were very isolated and there was a necessity to get people to communicate more so that they
can solve problems together.
As identified above, there was too much focus on military products and problems resulted as Marketing
and R&D departments conflicted with the new customer appeal approach. Stakeholders in the
Administrative department recognized that due to the breakdown of communication, lower level
workers were left in the dark and the need for a commercial focus did not reach workers at lower levels.
There was a prevalent communication gap between upper management and low level employees, and
workers at lower levels were excluded from the decision making process. The lack of communication led
to worker confusion and people in the organization simply did not share information.
Solution
Utilization of Cross Functional Teams
A team approach will help communication problems bringing people together and getting them talking.
There was a need for a group of people to lead change since there was no one person who can be a
change agent.
Need One More solution here
Conclusion
In real life you only have one choice. Elaborate here.