Incongruent organizational systems rewards

Incongruent Organizational Systems Rewards, information
systems, patterns of authority, career paths, selection criteria,
and other systems and structures are both friends and foes of
organizational change. When properly aligned, they reinforce

desired behaviors. When misaligned, they pull people back
into their old attitudes and behavior. Even enthusiastic
employees lose momentum after failing to overcome the
structural confines of the past.
Unfreezing, Changing, and Refreezing
According to Lewin's force field analysis model, effective
change occurs by unfreezing the current situation, moving to
a desired condition, and then refreezing the system so it
remains in this desired state. Unfreezing occurs when the
driving forces are stronger than the restraining forces. This
happens by making the driving forces stronger, weakening or
removing the restraining forces, or both.
The first option is to increase the driving forces, motivating
employees to change through fear or threats (real or
contrived). This strategy rarely works, however, because the
action of increasing the driving forces alone is usually met
with an equal and opposing increase in the restraining forces.
A useful metaphor is pushing against the coils of a mattress.
The harder corporate leaders push for change, the stronger
the restraining forces push back This antagonism threatens
the change effort by producing tension and conflict within the

organization.
The second option is to weaken or remove the restraining
forces. The problem with this change strategy is that it
provides no motivation for change. To some extent,
weakening the restraining forces is like clearing a pathway
for change. An unobstructed road makes it easier to travel to
the destination but does not motivate anyone to go there. The
preferred option, therefore, is to both increase the driving
forces and reduce or remove the restraining forces.
Increasing the driving forces creates an urgency for change,
while reducing the restraining forces lessens motivation to
oppose the change and removes obstacles such as lack of
ability or situational constraints.
CREATING AN URGENCY FOR CHANGE
The opening story to this chapter described how Alan
Mulally began the change process at Ford Motor Company by
warning staff that the company would die if it didn't change
quickly. The fact is, organizational change requires
employees to have an urgency for change.25 "I think there
are two attributes for every successful company," says
Warren Erhart, CEO of White

Spot, western Canada's oldest (since 1928) and most
successful restaurant chain. "One is a sense of urgency, the
other is a dedication to continuous improvement." Erhart
explains the importance of these two attributes: "We know
that success is fleeting. We have to keep working at it and
keep focused all the time."26
A few months after he became CEO of Nokia Corp, Stephen
Elop sent employees a scorching e-mail, warning them about
the urgency for change. "I have learned that we are standing
on a burning platform," wrote Elop. "And, we have more than