Directions: Please answer the following questions thoroughly and in complete sentences. 1) What is your analysis and evaluation of the design of this intervention? When analyzing interventions it is important to consider certain criteria. The intervention within Airbus was pertinent to the organizations needs. The ICT workforce had gone through several reorganizations, which left them feeling tired of change and ultimately unable to produce results needed by the company.
Donnan utilized an intervention strategy that would result in high performance and results by aligning all parts of the organization’s design (Cummings & Worley, 2015). The intervention, according to Cummings & Worley, resulted in “bottom line savings” and measurably better results in reference to “delivering on its products, services and cost promises” (p. 335). It is hard to establish the extent to which an intervention is based on causal knowledge of intended outcomes. Determining whether one intervention method is better than another in this regard is difficult.
The results of this case study as presented paint a pretty significant picture as to how successful this intervention was, however there is nothing specific to compare it to. Donnen had experienced large group interventions in the past as a participant, design team member and logistics team member. Based on her own experience, she was aware of the importance of aligned leadership and determined that this specific intervention would be best. Finally, it is important for organizations to recognize the importance of employees’ ability to continue the ability to manage change.
For the ICT employees, this can be measured by how often they have these summits to maintain the change momentum. Following the 2010 initial summit, they have had summits each year since. 2) What large-group intervention theories and models were applied in this case? The Whole Systems Transformation (WST) model was applied. This model was discussed in the case study as having a combination of several large group intervention qualities. The ICT intervention was aimed at helping the executives “engage a large, critical, and representative segment of the organization” (Cummings & Worley, 2015, p.330).
It differed from other methods in that this intervention really began with the executives becoming aligned in order to motivate change within the organization as a whole. 3) Do you believe that the interventions made a difference in this organization? Yes. ?If your analysis is positive, what do you think were the critical intervention features that led to success? The specific feature of this intervention that lead to success was the transformation of the executive team, their alignment and commitment to the transformation.Because all executives were on the same page, the change initiatives were easily transferrable to the organization’s members.
This resulted in the commitment across the board to sustatin the changes implemented. 4) What do you think of the summit’s agenda and flow? I thought the agenda of the summit was appropriate. The purpose and outcomes were presented first so everyone could understand why the summit was happening. Each day consisted of collaborative activities, question feedback and personal communication. It all catered to the purpose of implementing the ICT vision as one mind and one voice.
5) Do you think the right activities were planned and executed given the objectives of the intervention? Yes. By incorporating the teams of employees from all levels made it clear that the organization wanted to work together with everyone to establish a commitment to transformation and maintaining change. The elephant questions, personal commitments and opportunities for feedback really engaged the ICT workers and gave them the appropriate tools to communicate this new vision of change throughout the rest of the organization, furthering the ability of transformation and change management.