Pulling several strands together of our last 20 or 25 minutes of thinking this through actually together, I'd like you to be thinking actively about your own management or work setting as we go forward of course, that organizational design along with the way we create jobs, the way we incentivize people, the organizational design think that the people at Hauser foods, Jan Bujar in particular, can be altered, or miss directed, or aligned, or maybe, in a more positive sense, we can get a lot more. Pay no more, not really change in the job, but just the way we knit all these pieces together. How people report, how we promote up through a hierarchy, all part of the just to use the phrase "of the design of the organization, the architecture of the enterprise". With that being said, here's the last problem I'd like us to think about in this general area of putting in place an organizational design that serves you. Sometimes though, what we had serving us well, maybe even not perfectly, a couple of years ago may no longer do so. And now we run into just a classic problem of organizational life. Everybody knows about it. I'm just going to say the blindingly obvious here, that as we solve a problem this year, and build out, we hire people build out a design, create jobs, provide an incentive system that seems to solve the problems of let's say last year, go ahead five years. Market changes, the internet arrives digital everything is here, we now got to serve customers in India and China, not just the U.S. The problem we've got now is, we've built an architecture which serves the problem of last year or five years ago, and an architecture once constructed, add on a culture to go with it, a topic that another of my colleagues is going to take up, we now face the problem of call it "inertial guidance". If you think about a big flywheel, just a big steel wheel is turning, once that gets turning very hard to slow it down, it has a lot of inertial momentum to it, and thus in a sense, once you've got the architecture going for you as the manager, you can actually take off Fridays for a while because it just kind of manages itself. That's inertial guidance. That's what good architecture does. But, when the world changes, that architecture of yesteryear may no longer works that well, but now we've got just a huge impediment, that is just what we do, the flywheel rotating, the inertial momentum that's been built up that makes it difficult to change. To say the obvious we've hired people because we're doing X. We're focused on U.S, but now we want to open up in India, or let's make in Brazil. Well, they didn't come to work for you because they thought one day they might be transferred to India, but now you need people to run the office in New Delhi or Mumbai. And, if we start going down that particular avenue, the problems multiply quickly, if we don't make the change, aren't ready to have people take on these new tasks. But the people we hired, almost everything we do, militates against that kind of change. Change is one of the great enemies of organizational design. So, we're going to take a few minutes now, and think briefly about what gets in the way of the design we've created, such that as a manager, once we recognize what gets in the way we can do something about it. So let's go right here to the work of a well-known observer and consultant on organizational change. Again what does that mean? We've got a design, we want to make it better. John Kotter has identified eight forces, just to pull them out and make them more managerially relevant, that seemed to get in the way, of making changes. So take a look at number one here for instance, you the manager don't make a compelling case. Look everybody, we've got to change, because the world changing and nobody, everybody salutes, great idea, and goes back to work the way they've already always done it. Let's go down to number four. Here is found. I've seen the same thing myself, that for people who are saying, we've got to really just flatten the organization, put people more in touch with customers, maybe reorganize like we saw that Rose Company making plants independently responsible for everything, that we have to say what we want, again and again, because the first time is not believed, or its questions, second and third time they takes on a certain traction, and people are wondering, okay boss, do you really want this because the costs are going to be high making a change? So that's the number four. Just briefly take a look, I'm not going to enumerate, or expand out word wise what the other six say, but for our purposes right now, we're going to try to do an organizational restructuring or redesign. I'd like you to take a look at those eight factors, ask yourself, which of those have you seen well executed, maybe by yourself, or others that you managed with, but get them much in mind because I want them to inform where we're going the next few minutes.
