Change Requires Leadership
Dr. Alan Kendricks took over six months ago as the Medical Director for Cardiology Associates. The Chief of the Cardiology Division, Dr. Altamonte, put great faith in Dr. Kendrick’s ability to lead Cardiology Associates in the “right direction.” (Groysberg, Kaftan & McCalla, 2007, p. 3) Upon taking leadership position, Dr. Kendricks identified that, for Cardiology Associates to experience prosperous growth, changes must occur. During the previous six months, Dr. Kendricks attempted to implement changes throughout the organization. Several Cardiology Associates’ team members resisted the Medical Director’s change initiative for a variety of reasons.
Identifying that his “direct” and “confrontational” approach was not effective, Dr. Kendricks adopted a more “collegial” approach to persuade team members to embrace his change initiative. (Groysberg, Kaftan & McCalla, 2007, p. 3) Overtime, the friendly …show more content…
Kendricks’ change initiative faced several challenges. First, complacency was widespread throughout Cardiology Associates. As previously mentioned, Cardiology Associates had been financially successful, particularly over the past three years. Last year, the organization’s revenue experienced a healthy increase from the previous year. On the surface, it appeared that Cardiology Associates was experiencing financial growth. Additionally, Dr. Kendricks’ predecessor, Dr. Griffiths, was a hands-off director. Under Dr. Griffith’s reign, many team members enjoyed the freedom to perform their duties with minimal influence from the top. With financial success and freedom under Dr. Griffiths, many Cadiology Associates’ took on a “if it ain’t broke – don’t fix it” mentality. Due to complacency, Dr. Kendricks faced a laborious task of trying to convince the organization’s members that change was necessary. According to Kotter’s Leading Change, “complacency-filled organizations, change initiatives are dead on arrival.” (2012, p.
Dr. Alan Kendricks took over six months ago as the Medical Director for Cardiology Associates. The Chief of the Cardiology Division, Dr. Altamonte, put great faith in Dr. Kendrick’s ability to lead Cardiology Associates in the “right direction.” (Groysberg, Kaftan & McCalla, 2007, p. 3) Upon taking leadership position, Dr. Kendricks identified that, for Cardiology Associates to experience prosperous growth, changes must occur. During the previous six months, Dr. Kendricks attempted to implement changes throughout the organization. Several Cardiology Associates’ team members resisted the Medical Director’s change initiative for a variety of reasons.
Identifying that his “direct” and “confrontational” approach was not effective, Dr. Kendricks adopted a more “collegial” approach to persuade team members to embrace his change initiative. (Groysberg, Kaftan & McCalla, 2007, p. 3) Overtime, the friendly …show more content…
Kendricks’ change initiative faced several challenges. First, complacency was widespread throughout Cardiology Associates. As previously mentioned, Cardiology Associates had been financially successful, particularly over the past three years. Last year, the organization’s revenue experienced a healthy increase from the previous year. On the surface, it appeared that Cardiology Associates was experiencing financial growth. Additionally, Dr. Kendricks’ predecessor, Dr. Griffiths, was a hands-off director. Under Dr. Griffith’s reign, many team members enjoyed the freedom to perform their duties with minimal influence from the top. With financial success and freedom under Dr. Griffiths, many Cadiology Associates’ took on a “if it ain’t broke – don’t fix it” mentality. Due to complacency, Dr. Kendricks faced a laborious task of trying to convince the organization’s members that change was necessary. According to Kotter’s Leading Change, “complacency-filled organizations, change initiatives are dead on arrival.” (2012, p.