2-1. Lewin’s theory is just focus on changing behavior, habit itself, but according to Yoon’s theory, you have to change mental model because all of your behavior and habit is come from your mental model. So, if you don’t change mental model, your superficial change would be go back to past condition very easily. Quinn’s reinterpretation is that Lewin’s theory is under control of person who is willing to change and this person knows how to change. But this is not a deep change. If you want to have deep change, you should have unconditional confidence. Unconditional confidence is that eventhough you don’t know where to go and how to accomplish; you have to take a step to the land of uncertainty.
Reinterpretation of Action Research Model(ARM) by Yoon’s theory is that this is also focusing on changing behavior not the mental model. There’s a desirable goal and they jusy have to change their past behavior to achieve the goal. This is also very passive because consultant continuously checks their behavior and gives some ways to achieve that goal. According to Quinn, ARM is under control, so people who want to change should have only conditional confidence. So this is not a deep change.
According to Yoon’s theory, positive model also doesn’t accompany mental model change. It’s just simple behavior change process. So it’s very incremental change. According to Quinn, this is also under control, so it doesn’t have to go with unconditional confidence. So it’s incremental change and not a deep change.
2-4. According to Yoon’s theory, kotter’s 8 stages is process of changing mental model. Kotter’s stages are conducted new vision that is different from simple plan. Also, this process is reinforced continuously by empowering people who are acting on vision. And this process is very cautious about institutionalizing new approaches. Kotter doesn’t declare victory too soon, so kotter’s process hardly goes back to their old habit. This is real mental model change process.
According to Quinn, kotter’s stage is deep change because they have vision and unconditional confidence. If kotter’s stage didn’t have vision, it wouldn’t be a deep change because vision is the key elements of making unconditional confidence. If you have a vision, you can eventually achieve deep change even if you made some mistakes. If you are trying to go into the world of uncertainty, It’s impossible you to commit some mistakes. Unconditional confidence is that even though you don’t know where to go or what to do, you step into world of uncertainty bravely. So kotter’s stage can be referred as deep change.
2-5. According to Yoon’s theory, mental model has to be changed to achieve deep change. Big assumption is old mental model that disturb to gain deep change. Competing commitment is that the competency between big assumption and new assumption. And new assumption has to win to achieve deep change. (New assumption is new mental model.)
According to quinn’s theory, if you want to achieve deep change, it has to be with unconditional confidence. Mental model is a result of assumption->test->big assumption->framing process. Mental model has to be accomplished by unconditional confidence. Competing commitment is that the process of obtaining mental model that has to be confident with any condition.
3-1. Unconditional confidence is that people are not able to take control but bravely conducting change based on experiences of stepping into world of uncertainty. This leads to deep change. Conditional confidence is that people are able to take control of situation and know where to go. This leads to incremental change.
I’ve demonstrated only conditional confidence, because I knew what to do and desired goal and I was in control of change process.
3-2. There is signs of slow death. These are ‘no feedback from others, taping situation, unreasonable mistake and defensive routines.’ Defensive routine is that someone who feel stuck from others and environment acts like he can’t see that world as it is and insists that only his opinion is right and externalizes the problem actually is in his own behavior and mental model.
3-3. ‘peace and pay’s problem is that it’ll definitely go to slow death. This strategy doesn’t try to change at all, just trying to maintain current status quo. ‘Active exit strategy’s problem is that people who use this strategy is selfish and self-centered. So he might be able to safe from situation but the organization which has possibility to change is failed. So when this person promoted to certain managerial level, this person can’t succeed because he can’t manage ‘win-win’ strategy.
3-9. My tyranny of competency was that I was too stick to my singing part only, so I practiced alone because I thought individual is the most important not the harmony. But two days before song competition, our team gathered together for the first time and sang together and it was awful. I realized that we had to practice together to make harmony. I suggested practicing together then we practiced hard for two days and got good results from that competition.
2. Choose three among the following 5 questions and reinterpret each in terms of Yoon’s Neo Lewin Theory and Quinn’s Deep Change Theory.
(1) Lewin theory, Action research model (problem identification, consultation with behavioral scientist, data gathering, feedback, joint diagnosis, joint action planning, action, data gathering after action) and positive model (initiate the inquiry, inquire into best practices, discover themes, envision the preferred future, design and deliver ways to the future)
Lewin Theory and Action Theory are based upon behavioral science. Lewin Theory is the most prototype-like change theory that failed to suggest more detailed change process model. Action Theory is a theory that attempts to alter the subject’s acting pattern by studying what can be observed from the outside (or, one’s habits). By definition, a deep change accompanies mental model-shift. However, these two theories only focus on alteration of behavior, not the mental model. New Lewin Theory argues that re-shaping one’s big assumptions can beget behavioral changes, but not vice versa.
Positive model, mean while, could be used to supplement the short comings of Lewin and Action Theories. By making inquiries and envisioning the outcome, the subject could manage to reduce the “resisting force,” and be more ready to come out of the comfort zone and initiate deep change.
(3) E theory and O theory (shareholder vs. org capability; top down vs. bottom up; plan vs. experiment; financial incentive vs. commitment; external vs. internal consultant)
E theory and O theory are two types of change theories that are applicable to organizational deep change process. With the letter “E” standing for “economic,” E theory focuses on the financial side of the change, and is quite authoritative. The O theory is more concerned with “soft” aspects of the organization. In other words, O theory aims to make changes bottom-up, emphasizing individual commitment.
Whichever theory one chooses to implement, the change cannot truly be a deep change. Both theories might be successful in altering the behaviors of employees (or organization as a whole); however, such change needs to accompany shifts in mental model. According to Professor Yoon’s New Lewin Theory, mere change in behavior would be like achieving half-success. Because behavior is deeply rooted within one’s mental model, it is equally important to make one’s thinking pattern molded again. Thereupon, E theory and O theory should be implemented simultaneously to reshape both individual behaviors and mental models.
(5) Mental model, big assumptions, and competing commitment
Every individual has big assumptions of his/her own that characterize the mental model. In making deep changes, there exist numerous guidelines for those changes. However, the fundamental mental shift is the key success factor, as New Lewin Theory suggests. Such shift becomes possible by challenging one’s big assumptions one by one. By tackling and tearing down the previous structure of thinking, one will be less likely to resist changes, thus increasing probability of successful deep change.
3. Choose 4 out of 9 questions and provide the short answer to each question.
(1) Differences between unconditional and conditional confidence. Examples of your own demonstrating or not demonstrating those?
The difference between conditional and unconditional confidence is whether one feels confident only under certain circumstances or not. To provide example, I tend to display a high degree of confidence when I think I have enough knowledge, experience, or qualification. If not, I become shy and withdrawn. This may be an example of conditional confidence. Making deep change successful requires unconditional confidence, for one cannot predict the outcome of the irreversible change. Hence, I would need to trust my capabilities more and have confidence in myself no matter what in order to become a “change champion.”
(3) Explain problems of peace and pay and active exit strategy
An organization that experiences slow death faces some problems caused by “peace and pay” and “active exit strategy.” Executives of the organization do not wish to make needed changes and sacrifices, because they are being hired temporarily. They do not have much commitment to pull the company out of the slow death. Such behavior may exacerbate the situation and be passed on to new executives later on. Active exit strategy is performed usually by members of “dying” organizations. They quit the organization, leaving problems unsolved, and join other organizations. This causes dying organization to face death faster.
(4) Develop a better strategy than telling-coercing-forcing strategy
The strategy that is better than telling-coercing-forcing strategy would be to suggest a detailed vision for change and performing it first. Like the story of child not willing to let go of his swing, the leader of change needs to communicate the envisioned outcome of the change. Also, he/she should have experienced his/her deep change to gain credibility and confidence required lead the entire group through changes.
(5) Interpret the mythological meanings of Campbell’s hero’s journey
Campbell’s hero’s journey is a concept that is developed upon Greek-Roman myths. From adventures of Odysseus and Hercules, Campbell notices some commonalities. The hero tends to face challenges, have firm determination for his objectives, and experiences and adapts to new environments. However, the most important aspect of hero’s journey is that the hero managed to go through his own deep change; thereupon, he fulfills the condition for being a change champion.
(Lewin theory) The major difference between Lewin theory and Neo Lewin theory is that Lewin focuses on behaviors, habits, and other visible actions to change, while Neo Lewin theory focuses more on the mental model which is sunk deep down in out unconscious level to change for the successful deep change of an individual or an organization.
(Action Research model) Action Research model also focuses on visible activities to change. Moreover, the steps for action research model focus more on getting data and feedbacks than Neo Lewin theory. All the steps can be divided into 3 steps of Lewin theory. 1st to 5th steps would be categorized as the unfreezing process, 6th and 7th as the movement, and 8th as the refreezing process.
(Positive model) Positive model is different from Neo Lewin theory in that it focuses more on finding positive aspects of current state and spreading them as the best practices to the organization, while Neo Lewin theory concentrate more on finding mental model that are outdated and problematic and solving the problem.
Comparing with Lewin theory, Action Research model and positive model, Quinn’s deep change theory concentrate more on more fundamental aspects, such as an unconditional confidence. Quinn emphasizes more spiritual sides to find the big assumptions people have in their minds that hinder the change. He also put emphasis on the personal change as the starting point of the organizational change.
To Neo Lewin theory and Quinn’s deep change theory, the real change or the deep change would be transformational change. Deep change should start internally (endogenous) and deal with mental models (2nd order change). Incremental change would only widen their current mental model rather than throwing the old mental model. Revolutionary and evolutionary changes in Neo Lewin theory and Quinn’s theory are not favorable changes. Evolutionary change could be looked as “fad follower” in Neo Lewin theory’s perspective, rather than “trend setter” who go through transformational changes.
All the other changes except the transformational change would be looked as the slow death (in different degrees) to Neo Lewin and Quinn’s theories. In Quinn’s view, 1st order change would be viewed as gaining conditional confidences.
In Neo Lewin theory, theory E can be used to break the old mental models that are rooted in old hardwares, structures, and systems. And theory O could be used to create new mental model with new culture and organizational capabilities. Both Neo Lewin and Quinn’s Deep Change would emphasize having both mission and vision to direct the theory O or theory E. Quinn, especially, would highlight that if the company does not have the unconditional confidence, any pursuit of E or O could only lead to gaining conditional confidences, which make the company unstable in this rapid changing era. Additionally, theory E helps to fill the gap between old and new mental model, while theory O helps the organization to set the vision and mission.
Unconditional confidence is the confidence that is derived from finding and pursuing the purpose, mission, or sacred goal, which is not shaken by the changes in environment or conditions. Conditional confidence is confidence dependent on the situation. The professional training is a good example of the conditional confidence.
(my own example…as I am recently evangelized… Loving the Lord with all my heart and soul is my life purpose and source of unconditional confidence, while studying to go to the graduate school would be the source of conditional confidence)
They tend to externalize the problem on others or other factors, make excuses, be excluded from feedback loops, talk about the same thing over and over…
First stage is the technical competence paradigm where I need to learn the technical skills and knowledge to show my competence to go up to the next level. when I am promoted to manager level, I need to attain political paradigm, learning how to work with others and how to negotiate. Lastly, I need to gain leadership paradigm when I become CEO, which require social and leadership skills. As a CEO, competency to change, transform would be very important to show all the organization members to promote the deep changes as an authentic leader.
Lewin theory, Action research model (problem identification, consultation with behavorial scientist, data gathering, feedback, joint diagnosis, joint action planning, action, data gathering after action) and positive model (initiate the inquiry, inquire into best practices, discover themes, envision the preferred future, design and deliver ways to the future)
Lewin’s Theory going through the 3 stages—unfreezing, moving, and refreezing—can be reinterpreted in terms of Yoon’s Neo Lewin Theory by entailing mental transformation. While Lewin’s Theory is based on fixing the undesirable consequences, reinterpreting the theory will put the basis on removing the old “mental model”. Thus, the 3 stage would be unfreezing the current ‘mental model’, moving the current ‘mental model’ to a new ‘mental model’, and finally refreezing the ‘new mental model’ to be institutionalized. Accordingly, Quinn’s deep change will occur as a result of the new mental model. Action research model also developed to kill undesirable consequences will be reinterpreted as killing the old ‘mental model’ for deep change when applying Yoon’s New Lewin Theory and Quinn’s deep change theory.
on the other hand, the positive model which took the basis on promoting desirable behaviors will be reinterpreted by Yoon’s new Lewin’s theory by developing new ‘mental model’ and driving it for deep change of Quinn.
E theory and O theory (shareholder vs. org capability; top down vs. bottom up; plan vs. experiment; financial incentive vs. commitment; external vs. internal consultant)
Neither theory E nor theory O will work for deep change without mental transformation. While theory E seeks hard approach to see fast results to value shareholders to structure organization in military manners and to involve external consultants, without theory O of soft approach to see organizational commitment to value employees, to structure organization in matrix manners and to involve internal consultants the organization will collapse.
In other words, for a successful transformation of an organization, not only theory E & O is required but also the new mental model built through the deep change which the organization has experienced due to both theory E & O should be implemented.
Mental model, big assumptions, and competing commitment
People create their own big assumption testing them on personal experiences. These result in repeated undesired consequences to occur, eventually leading to slow death. By applying the Neo Lewin’s theory, people go through “unlearning” process to break the big assumption based on their old mental model. The competing commitment between driving force and resisting force of change will result in removal of resisting force and further promotion of driving force in Neo Lewin’s theory. When the driving force succeeds to persist against resisting force, unlearning that breaks big assumption happens to establish a new mental model. This ‘new’ mental model brings Quinn’s deep change to the organization to stop slow death.
3. Differences between unconditional and conditional confidence. Examples of your own demonstrating or not demonstrating those
Conditional confidence occurs on the basis of external image. There is no integrity between inner-self and external image. People with conditional confidence seek for goal with self-interest.
on the other hand, unconditional confidence is confidence based on the integrity of inner self and external image. People with unconditional confidence pursue purposes of life that is given by the god. They try to contribute not only to oneself but also to the world around them by achieving their goals.
I demonstrated unconditional confidence with the vision to become a television program producer not because of pay or social status but because of a higher purpose of mission to “touch the world”.
List and explain shortly about defensive routines for those who have experienced slow death.
1) Lack of feedback
People experiencing slow death ignore feedbacks from others.
2) Idling tape
People experiencing slow death repeats the same routine life over and over again.
3) Externalizing the experiences
People experiencing slow death tends to find causes of problems from the outer environment where they are considered to have no control of.
4) Jealousy toward others’ success
People experiencing slow death tends to depreciate others success.
People experiencing slow death does not approve the process of his/her slow death.
Explain problems of peace and pay and active exit strategy
Peace & Pay: ignoring the problem and pretending everything is okay.
Active-Exit Strategy: self-egoistic; only considers his/her own self-interest
Develop a better strategy than telling-coercing-forcing strategy
“Personal change strategy”
Rather than “telling-coercing-forcing” others to change their behaviors, it is better to demonstrate personal change of oneself to show the positive consequences and to build trust for change.
2. Before I start to reinterpret then again, I want to start with defining what what Yoon’s Neo Lewin Theory is and Quinn’s deep change theory is and how those two theories can be related. Yoon’s Neo Lewin Theory can be clarified when it is compared to Lewin’s Change Theory. Yoon’s theory says that behavior and acts are just mere outcomes that result from the cause which is mental model, whereas Lewin says what needs to be changed is just behavior itself. Yoon claims that mental model has to be changed to change the behavior. Here, the change of metal model is the deep change in Quinn’s theory, a change that is not reversible. Deep change can be achieved only by changing mental model. The process is ‘Unfreezing the old mental model-> make new mental model-> refreezing new mental model by making supporting rules that reinforce this new mental model.
->According to Yoon’s theory, “transformational change” is the most favorable change. Because it is derived from internal cause which means the change will be done well because the people who are in the group know well what causes the problem. And second order change which is the change of mental model. By changing the mental model it can be said deep change.
2.3. E theory is about changing the group’s hardware, for example downsizing the workers. So, it’s more like incremental change whereas O theory is about changing software which is deep change according to Quinn’s theory. But to achieve the mental model changing, these theories have to work together. Since there are people who resist the change amd are afraid of getting out of their “safety zone”, removing them by using E theory is useful than just adding more acceptable people. After removing “unincentives” using O theory, offering them big purpose so they can keep up with changing process for long term. Now it’s easier to change mental model of the rest. Additionally, by using financial incentives which is E theory, it’s easier to refreeze the new mental model.
2.5. Mental model is what makes people act and behave as well as big assumption does. When environment changes, mental model and big assumption that have worked with old environment face crisis. People know that they have to be changed. But this is not easy at all because of competing commitment. Their old commitment tell them to act as old way but they know they need change. People have to have unconditional confidence to resolve this competing. Then they start to make new mental model and assumptions (shaping). Finally these new assumptions and mental model are tested in real world and get stabilized. (refreezing)
3.1. Conditional confidence works as old mental model. If you use conditional confidence when the environment changes, the split of inner self and outer self occurs whereas unconditional confidence integrates those selves. You can achieve this by having purpose not having goal. When environment changes, unconditional confidence is needed. And that is the key for deep change.
For example, the purpose of being in university is not for getting a good job for me. I am here to learn and have better view on seeing world. Most of my friends are always confused and are busy to prepare Toeic or Toefl that they need for better ‘spec’. But I have been following my purpose with my own purpose, having unconditional confidence. I am on my path on making my own dreams come true.
3.3. Peace and pay strategy never notice the need for change and even try to ignore the need for change. It’s like “the boiled frog”. They refuse to change themselves and rather face the slow death. And active exit strategy might be bit better than peace and pay strategy in terms of self surviving. Those who use active strategy always prepare for getting out from their organizations when something happens. They might save their lives by escaping from the ship but cannot save the ship.
3.4. Leaders have to prove the change by themselves so the members can feel relieved that they can come out from the safe zone and change themselves. Just telling the needs of change and forcing them to follow it are not persuasive. Demonstrating change is more effective way to change people. Using ‘walk to talk’ and being narrative to motivate them can be good ways.
3.9. I used to enjoy being a leader in group activities. I liked when everything was under my control. As I acted as strong and decisive leader, the members always cheered me up and we got to nice result in our activities. Once when I was a leader in a team project in Ewha I used the same strategy as I did before. However, things got harder and seemed like my effort does not work well. My old mental model was working as tyranny of competence. I have crossed invisible line without even noticing it. So I looked at back and saw my vitality line. This team project was different from before ones. I unlearned my old mental model and started to work with others by empowering each of the members. Things worked out well and I learned that old ways work only with old environment.