Instead, the same variables and relationships that generate convergent change should also generate reorientations.
Because the amount of inertia destroyed in the change effort is also a function of the level of inertia, larger reorientations are needed to destroy inertia in older, more experienced organizations.
Wondering whether the extended reorientation matched the qualitative description of punctuated change provided by Tushman and Romanelli that "reorientations are relatively short periods of discontinuous change" (p.
While this idea was not featured in the punctuated change theory (Tushman and Romanelli, 1985), it has been proposed by others (Grusky, 1961; Starbuck, 1965; Levinthal and March, 1981), In such a case, the higher the level of accumulated experience with reorientation, the less organizational competence is destroyed in subsequent reorientations.
The result implies that the organization's leaders have a challenging job in managing organizational change: Not only must they track performance and fit, to initiate and guide reorientations, but they must also suspend the practice of monitoring, evaluating, and responding during the trial period.
As a case in point, I found that to survive in constantly changing environments, the organization had to follow a trial-period routine, undergoing regular reorientations spaced far enough apart to maintain competence.
First, without the two new routines (fit and trial), or with response times that are too short or too long, organizational reorientations destroy competence or appropriateness and so lead to eventual collapse.
One explanation for differences between model results and empirical findings is that these two phenomena -- reorientations in unchanging environments and the role of low competence in explaining post-reorientation failure -- are simply overlooked in the existing research, perhaps as a result of the situations chosen for empirical study.
Beverly Virany, and Elaine Romanelli 1985 "Executive succession, strategic reorientations, and organization evolution.
Following Tushman and Romanelli, the model I develop here focuses on top-down reorientation rather than emergent, bottom-up change.
The remaining loops relate performance and organizational change through the key processes of convergence and reorientation.
If the level of performance is high enough to avoid pressure to change, there is no impetus for change, and, without a reorientation, strategic orientation remains at its (well-matched) initially chosen value.
Since reorientation is a "change in the organization which fundamentally alters its character and fabric" (Tushman and Romanelli, 1985: 179), the decrease in inertia is determined by the change in strategic orientation.