Any person involved in business knows that things are constantly changing. That the organization, market, competitors, products, services and economic conditions never stand still. In its purest sense, this Law is about the constant movement of energy from one form to another. It is the constant movement to and fro of physical energy into non-physical.
Any person involved in business knows that things are constantly changing. That the organization, market, competitors, products, services and economic conditions never stand still. In its purest sense, this Law is about the constant movement of energy from one form to another. It is the constant movement to and fro of physical energy into non-physical. Managers are acutely aware of change and as such most will agree that the organization must be in a process of constant change or it will start to decline. The decline comes about as a result of the corporation standing still and all around it continuing to change. This can be best illustrated by imagining an organization that "goes to sleep" for ten years and is then "awakened" to deal with circumstances as they now exist. The people have all been asleep, systems and processes remain the same and the company's products and services are as they were ten years ago. What will be this organization's experience? If we could place a series of cameras within a manufacturing centre for just two years and then play back the images in fast motion we will witness this Law in operation. The equipment used will be updated, technology will change, people will come and go, individual jobs will alter and some functions will be taken over by technology. There is a Deeper Meaning for Business All of the above is well understood and accepted and corporations do what they can to keep up to date and initiate constant change and continuous improvement programs. What is not so readily accepted or practiced in organizations is our understanding of how thought can influence change. Obviously thought must precede change. For example, you cannot install a new piece of manufacturing plant without the necessary efficiency studies, researching available technologies and decision-making. All of this thought and the action that follows creates the end result for the corporation. Any flaws in the thought process preceding the installation of the new plant will manifest as a cost to the corporation in one way or another. The Importance of Aligning Employee Thinking If employee and corporate thinking is not aligned on any given issue, the organization will pay a price. The ingredients for successful change are three-fold: 1. How well the change has been thought through 2. The intentions behind the change 3. Employee thinking with respect to the change A large corporation may see benefit in implementing a new CRM system for the sales team. At the highest level within the organization, the intention is to provide a tool by which management can monitor the sales team. This in itself is not necessarily a negative thing, however employees thinking will be influenced according to the culture and preceding track-record of the management team. A lot of planning, reviewing various products and negotiations will take place before the product is implemented. For a large corporation, this is a multi-million dollar exercise. In the event that employees think about this new tool in a negative sense, it will not be used as the company intended. This will take a serious amount of time and effort to sort out. In the end, the corporation may choose to make specified use of the system compulsory and part of the employee evaluation program. In this example the company has not only perpetuated distrust by the workforce but it has also paid a significant cost for the intent behind the change. Testing the Intent When organizational change is just a seed idea senior management need to put the proposed change to a simple test that could save the corporation millions of dollars in cash and lost productivity. The simple test is this: • Is this proposed change for the greater good of all? When asking this question decision-makers need to consider the answer in relation to the corporation, customers, employees, the wider community and the environment. If the answer to this question is no for any of these stake-holders, then the change must be re-considered. To commence implementing change that is not for the greater good of all will result in either immediate or deferred repercussions to the organization due to the implications of The Law of Cause and Effect. In Conclusion To sum up how the Law of Perpetual Transmutation relates to corporations, we can now identify four key areas of which mangers need to be acutely aware. They are: 1. The organization must be in a state of constant change just to keep up with external factors 2. Any proposed change needs to be thought through to the desired end result and all details in between before starting any implementation 3. The proposed change must pass the "Intent Test" at the earliest possible stage 4. Employee and corporate thinking needs to be aligned through educating the workforce on the nature and benefits of the proposed change Through adopting this simple process and translating the above points into policy, a corporation can make changes more effectively and permanently. They can also save enormous amounts of money that is now wasted on change that is doomed to fail before any implementation takes place because of a deficiency in one or more of this criterion.
Pages to are hidden for
"The Law of Perpetual Transmutation As It Relates to Corporations"Please download to view full document