Introduction the problem would generally be addressed. According to

Introduction                                                                                               

It
falls upon leaders to examine the current state of their organizations in
contrast to where they need them to be headed so that they can assess whether
or where change is required within their organizations. While the process of creating
change can be difficult, the use of effective change models, techniques and
approaches can ensure success. In the case where a president of a Fortune 500
corporation found that his organization acted in accordance with the listed
items in the “Psychopathic Disorder Checklist” and wished to change these
characteristics, he would have to come up with some form of framework to
approach the challenge of effecting change. This paper examines the kind of
framework that would be required in the creation of change within such an
organization, the areas where the leader would be expected to start, who would
be involved, and how the problem would generally be addressed.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

According
to hare (1993), psychopathological behavior can be exploitative and often has
little regard for social responsibility. Some of the characteristics of the
psychopathic include the use of violence, charm, deceit or other methods to
ruthlessly prey on others so as to get what one needs. Symptoms include
egocentricity, a lack of conscience or even a sense of guilt, pathological
lying, disregard for the law, a lack of empathy, the repeated violations of
social norms, as well as a history of making victims out of others. Jacobs, Witteloostuijn,
and Christe-Zeyse (2013) warn that organizational change is a risky,
multifaceted endeavor with most change initiatives not only failing but also
incurring high opportunity and process costs that far outweigh the benefits of
having change in the first place. The leader who is intent on spearheading
change in his organization should be aware that both the external environment
and the internal dynamics of the organization act hand-in-hand to influence the
meaning of whatever managerial practices are implemented.

To
best handle the fact that a change process must be handled correctly, an astute
leader must institute a framework for changing the characteristics within his
organization. In this case, an input-throughput-output model would be best
suited to ensure the role of organizational members was recognized in creating
change, especially because such a process would have to affect in a large part
the corporate culture at the organization. The input would be related to the
antecedents of – or period before – the change even as the throughput would refer
to the process of change, while the output would be concerned with the after –
the consequences of organizational change. The reasons for changing the
characteristics of the organization as it is would mainly be influenced by the
fact that an organization’s identity matters not only to its internal audience
but also to its external one. In instances where stakeholders perceived code
violations or the fact that some of their expectations are not being met, the
organization might be on the fast track to losing its legitimacy where key external
audiences are concerned (Jacobs, Witteloostuijn, and Christe-Zeyse, 2013).

In
the case of our Fortune 500 Company, the leader must examine the corporate
culture that has helped propagate such callous practices as those that warrant
the company to act in accordance with each of the items on the Psychopathic
Disorder Checklist. Culture, according to Bolman and Deal (2008), is what makes
it possible for the sharing of similar values, outlooks, ideas, goals, and
traditions in certain groups of people. And since people are at the center of
companies, they take to these organizations the strategies that they themselves
have adopted to suit their needs. In essence, a company’s culture almost always
stems from the example set up by its leaders. It is remarkably easy for things
to go wrong, particularly because managers will often operate on the basis on
intuition, and rely a lot more on hunches, firsthand observations, and judgment
that is obtained from experience.

Transforming
a corporation into one that is more conscientious is likely to be a hefty
challenge due to the fact that companies exist for the sole purpose of making
money. As they do not have innate moral impulses, they are systematically
driven to achieve profit-making objectives, and acting in a manner akin to that
of a psychopath may have numerous short-term benefits, particularly toward the
fulfilment of their objectives. The fact that corporation directors and
officers are obligated to act in the best interest of their companies where
money making is concerned only goes on to show why a leader bent on instituting
change would have quite a few hurdles in his path (Niose, 2011). It would
behoove the leader, then, to constitute a project team so that he could oversee
the process of effecting change in his organization by ensuring that negative
employee attitudes were addressed and handled, and unproductive management
behavior was identified and adjusted accordingly.

Effective
organizational change can only be accomplished where the change is clearly
defined and aligned to the company’s goals. The project team in charge of this
process would be well advised to critically review the changes required to the
organization’s objectives and performance goals. This way, any changes
contemplated would be financially, ethically, and strategically sound, with the
bonus of having quantifiable efforts and inputs, and value that could be easily
determined. The impact of the change would then have to be determined, as would
those who would be (most) affected, as well as how such change would be
received (Courtney, 2016). Changing the culture at our Fortune 500 Company
would help it become more competitive by boosting its appeal and level of trust
from its customers, and enhance its corporate image and identity as a company
that had now evolved to become socially responsible in the manner it conducted
business. Virtually all employees would be affected in one way or the other, particularly
if training was required to ensure that they, as brand ambassadors in their
various capacities at the company, would need support to adjust to different
skills.

For
change, particularly that which concerns mindsets, to be effective, employees must
be shown the point for it and agree with it, and the reward and recognition
systems that are part of the system must be aligned with the new behavior
expected of them. They must also have the skills to adapt to the change as
required and, whenever possible, employees must see the people they look up to
modeling such change actively (Williams, 2010). As such, the leader must
develop a communication strategy that well communicates the change journey as
well as the timeline for how the change will be incrementally communicated, and
provide effective training, whether structured or informal, that can teach the
appropriate knowledge and skills to the employees (Courtney, 2016). Requiring that
the managers under the company’s president stay true to the newly defined path
of being good behavior models would help accelerate the uptake of proper
corporate behavior within the ranks in the company.

The
last two steps of ensuring that change was effected in the organization would
be seeing to the implementation of a support structure and measuring the change
process. A support structure would be able to assist the employees emotionally
and practically adjust to the change required of them even as they built proficient
behaviors and skills necessary to achieve their objective. Given the nature of
a psychopathic organization, support such as counseling services would be
necessary, as would mentorship or even an open-door policy with management
which would facilitate the fielding of relevant questions as they arose.
Eventually, there would be need to figure out if the change process actually
aided the company in achieving its business goals, whether it was successful,
and whether there might have been anything else done differently (Courtney,
2016).

A
business leader who is intent on changing his organization’s culture so that it
reflects that of a company that, while competitive, still cares about its
stakeholders and is committed to playing fair and well within the law must be
aware of the fact that such an endeavor would be highly resisted. It is
significantly easier for a company to embrace negative externalities that may
be bad for society but very good for the business as they are either
cost-saving or cost-neutral. With long-term goals for the business in mind,
however, the astute leader will understand the need for ensuring that his
company is well-adjusted and has a great corporate image as it bears a lot more
positive results in the long-term than a company that is deemed to be psychopathological.

 

References

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E.
(2008). Culture in action. In Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice
and leadership (4th ed., pp. 279-291). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.

Courtney, F. (2016). 6 Steps to effective
organizational change management. Pulse
Learning. Retrieved from https://www.pulselearning.com/blog/6-steps-effective-organizational-change-management/

Hare, R. D. (1993). Without conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us.
New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Niose, D. (2011). Why corporations are psychotic.
Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/our-humanity-naturally/201103/why-corporations-are-psychotic

Jacobs, G., Witteloostuijn, A.V., & Christe-Zeyse,
J. (2013). A theoretical framework of organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management,
26(5): 772-792. doi:
10.1108/JOCM-09-2012-0137

Williams, R. (2010). The psychology of change in
organizations. Psychology Today.
Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201010/the-psychology-change-in-organizations