These proposed changes would affect all segments of the active duty military, their reserve components, anyexisting and future weapons systems, the civilian DOD workforce andall logistic and administration components of the Department of Defense. The next set of changes would be on the level of second order change, would transform the organization and basically alter the nature of the organization. With second order change, the need for major organizational change found eight commonly occurring recommendations in order to cope with the newly proposed environment. They are as follows: 1) Delayering (reducing the number of vertical levels in the organization); 2) Network/alliances (involving internal and external strategic collaboration); 3)
…show more content…
The needs of the Department of Defense will dictate three areas of the R&R battalion 's mission: 1) the amount of people the state will be able to recruit into their ranks as new soldiers; 2) the amount of currently enlisted soldiers it will be allowed to retain as to the end strength number and 3) how many soldiers or what percentage of soldiers the state will need to lose to attrition, as a result of the mandated end strength for the Army as a whole. All these factors will play into the mindset of key leaders from the state level and the recruiting command structure. As far as managing the change, the image of the leader will have to vary, from the director, navigator and caretaker role, as far as having and maintaining control of the change to that of the coach, interpreter and nurturer and helping to shape the changes needed to sustain the organization at the required or acceptable levels, according to DOD standards and …show more content…
The level of resistance that came out of the recruiting battalion was primarily caused by the complete 180 degree turn, after having to recruit feverishly for over 10 years to fuel a wartime Army to a peacetime Army, with an emphasis on nation building, homeland security and disaster relief operations. With this new direction in the state mission requirement, the frustration levels of the field recruiters in the state of Georgia was heightened and the resistance to change began.Those changes lead to varying degrees of resistance, from passive (agreeing verbally, but not following through, also known as malicious compliance) to procrastinating or dragging one 's feet to feigning ignorance of the job or mission requirements. The situation continued to get worse as new commanders, who were not familiar with recruiting activities, would make changes to the operational procedures without fully understanding the ramifications of these actions. The battalion suffered from a number of problems in regards to change, but most notable were the following problems: 1) dislike of change; 2) discomfort with uncertainty; 3) perceived negative effect on self-interests; 4) attachment to the established organizational culture; 5) perceived breach of psychological contract; 6) lack of conviction that change is needed; 7) lack of clarity as to what is expected; 8) belief that the change is inappropriate and
The needs of the Department of Defense will dictate three areas of the R&R battalion 's mission: 1) the amount of people the state will be able to recruit into their ranks as new soldiers; 2) the amount of currently enlisted soldiers it will be allowed to retain as to the end strength number and 3) how many soldiers or what percentage of soldiers the state will need to lose to attrition, as a result of the mandated end strength for the Army as a whole. All these factors will play into the mindset of key leaders from the state level and the recruiting command structure. As far as managing the change, the image of the leader will have to vary, from the director, navigator and caretaker role, as far as having and maintaining control of the change to that of the coach, interpreter and nurturer and helping to shape the changes needed to sustain the organization at the required or acceptable levels, according to DOD standards and …show more content…
The level of resistance that came out of the recruiting battalion was primarily caused by the complete 180 degree turn, after having to recruit feverishly for over 10 years to fuel a wartime Army to a peacetime Army, with an emphasis on nation building, homeland security and disaster relief operations. With this new direction in the state mission requirement, the frustration levels of the field recruiters in the state of Georgia was heightened and the resistance to change began.Those changes lead to varying degrees of resistance, from passive (agreeing verbally, but not following through, also known as malicious compliance) to procrastinating or dragging one 's feet to feigning ignorance of the job or mission requirements. The situation continued to get worse as new commanders, who were not familiar with recruiting activities, would make changes to the operational procedures without fully understanding the ramifications of these actions. The battalion suffered from a number of problems in regards to change, but most notable were the following problems: 1) dislike of change; 2) discomfort with uncertainty; 3) perceived negative effect on self-interests; 4) attachment to the established organizational culture; 5) perceived breach of psychological contract; 6) lack of conviction that change is needed; 7) lack of clarity as to what is expected; 8) belief that the change is inappropriate and