TWC Session 4

The two main topics that were discussed in class: Drivers of World Change and Change Management, Change Leadership. The first talks about the different types of "Drivers" or factors that causes world change. Such examples are climate, technology, competition and globalization. The latter discusses about the different ways of change management, issues in recognizing and responding to changes.

The concept of Evolutionary Change versus Revolutionary Change, which should we aim to achieve? Revolutionary change is usually a drastic change, or some might say a disruptive change. This causes disruption in the lives of everyone because it is a irreversible change in the expected future, such an example is the innovation of Email, compared to the use of letters or otherwise known these days as Snail Mail. Evolutionary change is a continuous improvement of an issue or particular aspect. No drastic change, but rather small amendments to it. Which is more important? Which should we strive to achieve?

My initial response, as well as the class's, was Revolutionary change! Of course right? It drastically changes and improves the lives of everyone. However, after some consideration, i feel that actually both are important in the progression of our society as a whole. Since i have mention Email and  letters earlier, i will use it as an example. Yes Email has brought much convenience to our society and lives, but i think that through evolutionary changes that the Email system is so sufficient. So i feel that there is none that is better or more vital, we should aim to have a balance in both changes to obtain optimum results.

The next point is the 2 models mentioned in Responding to Change. The first model is the traditional view: where it is freeze-unfreeze-refreeze. The modern approach is the continuous monitoring and renewal of ideas. The traditional view is not so practical, or does no provide optimal results due to the fast pace society that we presently live in. The world is rapidly changing and for firm or even countries to keep up, one has to adopt the modern approach. In terms of companies, let's compare the IT firms. Ask anyone who is most dominant company is in the market and the answer is Apple. Apple, under the leadership of Steve Jobs, has been adopting the modern approach. Apple has accustomed their products to suit the needs/wants of the masses, as well as appealing to the consumer's "cool" factor, having the slickest and newest designs. The other firms are playing catch up, and for those who do not change their model of approach, they will not be able to be on par with Apple.

i have two key phrases from today's session:
- best result is Evolutionary Change of Revolutionary Change
-Adapting to the fast pace world is the only way of survival

Perhaps for further discussion, we could have had a case study on Responding to Changes, as to how a firm/country did respond to change and whether it was successful, and what could have been done to alter the results.

i rate the session 8/10!

jeremy (: