LingHe Simulation - INSEAD CALT

T12 0.427
T16
T15
-0.723
0.629
No te: T2: short breaks; T3: directive; T4: electronic mail; T6: neutralize resisters; T7: task force; T9:
external consultant; T11: face to face meeting; T12: bulletin board; T13: internal magazine;
T14: workshop; T15: management training; T16: memorandum; T17: social network; T18:
gather information; T19: pilot test; T20: process mapping; T23: top management meeting; T25:
staff meeting discussion; T27: “sandwich”
Although factor analysis did not result in the five groupings with the same tactics as initially
formulated (see higher), the first two factors, together explaining 31.176 % of the variance,
include all Diagnostic/Gather Information and Communication tactics, as well as two of the
Implementation tactics (Workshop and Pilot Test) that are moreover ranked the highest in the
factor groups. The remaining three factors, together explaining 24.684% of the variance, include
all Provide Information tactics and two out of three Compulsion tactics (Directive, Neutralize
Resisters).
By and large, the first factor group may be called “collecting information regarding change attitudes”
and includes Pilot Test, Gather Information, Social Networks, Process Mapping, Staff Meeting
Discussion and The “Sandwich”. Authors conclude that managers tended to recognize the need
to prepare and inform themselves about the organization, with attention given mainly to its
formal structures.
The second factor group includes most communication tactics plus the Workshop and
Short Breaks tactics, and might therefore be called “Intensive Communication” tactics as they imply
individual and top management communication, understanding informal influence channels,
providing external expert opinion and interactive demonstration.
The third factor group combined Directive and Neutralize Resisters, a clear use of compulsion
(or formal authority), as well as Electronic Mail. It is interesting to note that the latter finds itself
together with all other information-providing tactics in the bottom three factor groups with least
explanatory power, an indication that one-way (mass) communication was not well regarded
among participating managers as a way to influence people’s opinions, attitudes or behaviors.
Management Training could possibly be regarded in a similar vein, as this tactic implies that the
subjects are supposed to comply with what the trainer requires them to do. Overall, tactics that
were impersonal if not authoritative appeared to score relatively poorly among participating
managers.
13