1.

David Kolb

 developed a model of experiential learning, which unpacked how

learning occurs, and what stages a typical individual goes through in
order to learn.

2.Teori Douglas McGregor

 Douglas McGregor published his book The Human Side of Enterprise.

In it he described his Theory X and Theory Y, which looked at
underlying management assumptions about an organization’s
workforce.

3.Prinsip Psychodynamic

 The word ‘psychodynamic’ is based on the idea that when facing

change in the external world, an individual can experience a variety of
internal psychological states.

4.

Self actualization
needs

Self asteem needs

Love and belonging needs

Sefety needs

Psychological needs

5.Lewin principles

 NO CHANGE ≠ STATIONARY
 Lewin (1951) argued that the state of no change does not refer to a
situation in which everything is stationary.
6.Gradualist Paradigm

 Gradualist paradigm posits that organizations adapt to opportunities

and threats by engaging in a process of continuous change.
Their response is evolving and, over time, these continuous changes
cumulate to transform the organization

7. PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM PARADIGM

 The essence of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm is that systems

(organizations) evolve through the alternation of periods of equilibrium,
in which persistent ‘deep structures’ only permit limited incremental
change, and periods of revolution, in which these deep structures are
fundamentally altered.
This pattern of change is very different to that presented by the
gradualist paradigm, which argues that organizations can be
fundamentally changed by a continuous stream of gradual adaptations.

8.Kinds of change ;

 Tuning is a change that occurs when there is no immediate requirement

to change. It involves seeking better ways of achieving and/or defending
the strategic vision:
for example improving policies, methods, procedures; introducing new
technologies; redesigning processes to reduce cost, time to market and
so on; or developing people with required competences.
Most organizations engage in a form of fine-tuning much of the time.
This approach to change tends to be initiated internally in order to
make minor adjustments to maintain alignment between the internal
 elements of the organization and between the organization’s strategy
and the external environment.
 Adaptation is an incremental and reactive response to a pressing
external demand for change.
It might involve responding to a successful new marketing strategy
adopted by a competitor or to a change in the availability of a key
resource. Essentially, it broadly involves doing more of the same but
doing it better in order to remain competitive.
This kind of change is not about doing things in fundamentally different
ways nor is it about doing fundamentally different things.
While tuning and adaptation can involve minor or major changes, they
are types of change that occur within the same frame – they are
bounded by the existing paradigm.
 Reorientation involves a redefinition of the enterprise. It is initiated in
anticipation of future opportunities or problems.
The aim is to ensure that the organization will be aligned and effective
in the future. It may be necessary to modify the frame but, because the
change has been anticipated, it involve a relatively gradual process of
continuous frame bending.
 Re-creation is a reactive change that involves transforming the
organization through the fast and simultaneous change of all its basic
elements.
An example is how the car industry reorienting (or recreating)
themselves towards hybrids and all electric cars and away from vehicles
powered by diesel. Some of them anticipated early (such as Tesla) while
the others are late or change after they met a problem (such as VW and
Toyota)

9. INNOVATION AS A SOURCE OF CHANGE

 Innovation can be both an internal and external source of change.

Innovative organizations can benefit from more efficient operations or
new market opportunities but organizations that are less innovative
than others can lose out.
 Organizations can proactively engage in creative, sustaining or
efficiency innovation in order to secure some benefit

10. BIG-BANG DISRUPTION

 Downes and Nunes (2013) coined the phrase ‘big-bang disruption’ to

describe unplanned and often unintentional disruptions that come from
nowhere but are instantly everywhere.
The source of these big-bang disruptions are rarely firms from within
the industry they disrupt. They tend to be outsiders who have different
business models supported by different technologies
 The effects of ‘pervasive big-bang disruptions’ are much more
extensive. They can disrupt the whole economic and social system,
presenting opportunities for some and devastating threats for others.

11.Vigilance

 Organizations need to develop a ‘culture of vigilance’. Hickman and

Silva (1984) observe that most ailing organizations are blind to their
own problems and argue that, in most cases, they are not suffering
because they are unable to resolve their problems; they are suffering
because they cannot see their problems.
Sometimes people stumble across an idea after experiencing a problem.
Jay Sorenson dropped a cup of coffee in his lap because the paper cup
was too hot, Then he invented the insulated cup sleeve and started a
company to sell it. Since the venture was launched, over 4 billion Java
Jacket cup sleeves have been sold.
 While personal characteristics (such as intuition), or chance discoveries
(such as the insulated cup sleeve), can lead to the identification of new
business opportunities, the individual’s circumstances can also be
important.
For some entrepreneurs, the decision to start a business comes before a
business opportunity has been recognized, and this decision is often
triggered by an external event such as redundancy or the realization
that they have few opportunities for job satisfaction or career
advancement.
  Vigilance can be dinted by cognitive biases. Schmitt et al. (2016) argue
that senior managers are often exposed to more information than they
can effectively process, so they develop mental models, or subjective
representations of their environment – which enable them to cope with
this information overload.
Problems can arise when managers become too committed to their
mental model that they only attend to selected elements of the
environment.
 Where they had an internal orientation, they focused on securing
incremental changes that reinforced the existing business model,
whereas where they had an external orientation, their change agenda
focused on discontinuous renewal and the disruption of the
organization’s traditional business model.

12.Playmaker

 Individual who influence the organizational agenda are referred to by

Pitt et al. (2002) as ‘playmakers’, a term they borrow from football,
where it refers to the restless, energetic midfield role that links play,
energizes the team and ‘makes things happen’.
They argue that these playmakers do not always have to be exclusive
elite. Top managers can encourage other organizational members to
perform playmaker roles by seeking out relevant opinions from those
who are close to the realities of the operating environment.

13.Differences betwen diagnosis and pragnosis

 Organizational diagnosis is a process of research into the functioning of

an organization that leads to recommendations for improvement
(Postma and Kok, 1999) It is rarely a one-of activity.
The process of organizational diagnosis is, in many respects, similar to
the diagnostic processes used in medicine and engineering.

14.OD and CEO

 In the late 1940s, studies on autocratic & democratic leadership resulted

that participation and involvement could improve outcome, which
 created a new approach to managing change, known as ‘organization
development’ (OD),
 In twentieth century, the relatively stable economic environment began
to be disrupted by a series of factors, such as hikes in oil and other
commodity prices, the development of new technologies, and the growth
of low-cost competitors based in emerging economies.
These disruptions demanded organizations to adjust quickly to changes
in the external environment. This shifted the need away from localized,
relatively slow, incremental change strategies to organization-wide
transformational strategies.
Survival becomes imperative. Burnes and Cooke (2012) cite French and
Bell’s (1990, p. 351) description of how this shift affected the values of
those leading change: top managers now focus less on people-oriented
values and more on ‘the bottom line and/or the price of stock’

15.

 Collaborative evolution: An incremental collaborative change strategy

that can be effective when the change target (organization, department
or work group) is aligned with its environment and the need to
implement the change is not urgent (so there is time to involve others),
and when key stakeholder
 Charismatic evolution: Another incremental strategy that can be
effective even when the need for incremental change is urgent, as long as
charismatic leaders can communicate a compelling vision and others
trust them to deliver that which they have promised.
 Forced evolution: A directive approach that draws on leaders’
legitimate authority to persuade others to accept the change. This
strategy can be effective when there is a need for incremental
adjustment, there is no pressing demand for immediate change but
there’s not sufficient support for the change.
 Dictatorial evolution: A top-down push strategy that can be used when
there is an urgent need for incremental adjustment and key
stakeholders are resisting the change. The effectiveness of this coercive
 approach will depend on the balance of power between those wanting to
impose the change and those resisting this move.
 Collaborative transformation: Even in turbulent times, such as the
years following the 2008 credit crunch, organizations can anticipate the
need for transformational change in sufficient time to be able to adopt
this change strategy. But this approach will only be effective if change
recipients recognize and accept the need for change.
 Charismatic transformation: When there is a sudden and urgent need
for transformational change and insufficient time, leaders may still be
able to win their support for the change if they can communicate a
compelling vision and if employees trust them to deliver the promised
outcome.
 Forced transformation: leaders have anticipated the need for
transformational change but do not have the support of important
stakeholders, they may judge that a more directive approach is needed.
But, same like forced evolution, because the need for change is not
urgent, they can avoid a rushed, heavy-handed approach. However, this
strategy will only work if key stakeholders recognize and respect
leaders’ authority.
 Dictatorial transformation: Transformational changes, such as mergers
and major restructuring, often not supported by key stakeholders
because those affected by the change anticipate few benefits or fear
harmful outcomes. In such circumstances, those leading the change may
feel that their only option is a strategy that relies on implicit or explicit
coercion.