Future Potential Organizations Part 2. Leadership & Organizational Development Concerns
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15170/MM.2024.58.04.02Keywords:
tuture potential organizations, organizational development, organizational change, management development, cultureAbstract
THE AIMS OF THE PAPER
In the first part of our study, we introduced the concept of future potential organizations, and the specificities of change management in order to achieve future potential embedded into a management paradigm shift. Future potential organizational functioning requires the following 3 paradigm shifts: 1. The primacy of the common good over the interest of the company. 2. Not to think in terms of an organization, but to take on the role of a synergy broker. 3. Maximum empowerment, even self-management. In this closely related paper addition to the conclusions derived from the literature review, we have made an attempt to redefine the organizational development challenge and the respective responding toolkit that can help organizations seeking to become future potential in an increasingly unpredictable and rapidly changing world to find the path to development.
METHODOLOGY
Synthesis of our decades of experience as organizational development consultants in various sectors of the domestic and international competitive industry as well as in non-profit fields, and of conclusions deriving from continuous consultations with the circle of consultants working according to the Reinventing Organizations paradigm.
MOST IMPORTANT RESULTS
The necessary paradigm shifts need to be carried out in a highly volatile, unpredictable and fragile VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous) and BANI (brittle, anxious, nonlinear, incomprehensible) (Cascio, 2020) world and market environment with a lot of uncertainty and anxiety, fraught with contradictions and increasingly unclear complexity. The turbulent environment, the adaptation that sometimes requires rapid changes in direction – and at the same time the performance pressure – places significant overload on organizations, they do not have the time and resources for large, comprehensive development processes lasting long periods of time (del Pilar Barrera-Ortegon et al. 2024). Therefore, it is necessary to proceed step by step, speed up many things, show success already in the short term, constantly paying attention to where the limits of their capacity lie (Makarenko et al. 2023).
RECOMMENDATIONS
In this turbulent environment, the desired goals can be achieved with an agile, sustainable organizational development method that thinks in sprints, where at the end of each sprint series a new intermediate state must be created that shows immediate results, as they give faith and resources for the next stage; is self-sustaining, as we may not be able to move on to the next station immediately; consistently leads towards the set of goals set out in the vision.
We propose the 3 basic organizational development procedures described before, which provide a paradigm shift with a completely different approach from the previous operation and lay the foundation for the future potential organization.
References
Brown, F. W., & Dodd, N. G. (1998), “Utilizing organizational culture gap analysis to determine human resource development needs”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 19(7), 374-385. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437739810242531
Cascio, J. (2020), “Facing the Age of Chaos”, Medium. https://medium.com/@cascio/facing-the-age-of-chaos-b00687b1f51d
Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2015), Organization development and change (10th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage.
del Pilar Barrera-Ortegon, A., Medina-Ricaurte, G. F., & Jimenez-Hernandez, P. R. (2024), “Organizational Elements to Confront Turbulent and Fragile VUCA to BANI Scenarios”, In R. Perez-Uribe, D. Ocampo-Guzman, C. Salcedo-Perez, & A. Carvajal-Contreras (Eds.), Organizational Management Sustainability in VUCA Contexts, 20-43. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-0720-5.ch002
Fiedler, F. E. (1967), A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: Free Press.
Hage, J., & Finsterbusch, K. (1989), “Three Strategies of Organizational Change: Organizational Development, Organizational Theory and Organizational Design”, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 55(1), 29–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/002085238905500105
Hanelt, A., Bohnsack, R., Marz, D., & Marante, C. A. (2020), “A Systematic Review of the Literature on Digital Transformation: Insights and Implications for Strategy and Organizational Change”, Journal of Management Studies, 58(5), 1159–1197. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12639
Hastings, B. J., & Schwarz, G. M. (2022), “Leading Change Processes for Success: A Dynamic Application of Diagnostic and Dialogic Organization Development”, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 58(1), 120–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/00218863211019561
Kuhn, T. S. (1984). A tudományos forradalmak szerkezete. Gondolat Kiadó
Laloux, F. (2014), Reinventing Organizations: A guide to creating organizations inspired by the next stage of human consciousness. Nelson Paker
Makarenko, E. N., Chernysheva, Y. G., Polyakova, I. A., Kislaya, I. A., Makarenko, T. V. (2023), “Capabilities of Business Analysis in Developing Data-Driven Decision Solutions”, In Popkova, E. G. (Eds). Smart Green Innovations in Industry 4.0 for Climate Change Risk Management. Environmental Footprints and Eco-design of Products and Processes. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28457-1_4
Maslow, A. H. (1954), Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row.
Mathews, B., & Linski, C. M. (2016), “Shifting the paradigm: reevaluating resistance to organizational change”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(6), 963–972. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2016-0058
Michael, B., Neubert, M. J., & Michael, R. (2012), “Three Alternatives to Organizational Value Change and Formation: Top-Down, Spontaneous Decentralized, and Interactive Dialogical”, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 48(3), 380–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886312438941
Pinelli, M., & Maiolini, R. (2017), “Strategies for Sustainable Development: Organizational Motivations, Stakeholders' Expectations and Sustainability Agendas”, Sustainable Development, 25(4), 288–298. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1653
Roof, R.A. (2018), “Future-Oriented Identity: Necessary Leader Transformation Through Spiritual Engagement”, In: Marques, J., Dhiman, S. (eds) Engaged Leadership. Management for Professionals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72221-4_8
Rowland, H. (2007), “Organizational development: the new buzz word”, Strategic Direction, 23(1), 3–4. https://doi.org/10.1108/02580540710716509
Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2007), Wikinómia. Hogyan változtat meg mindent a tömeges együttműködés. HVG Kiadó.
Vanderslice, V. J. (1988), “Separating Leadership from Leaders: An Assessment of the Effect of Leader and Follower Roles in Organizations”, Human Relations, 41(9), 677–696. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872678804100903
Whelan-Berry, K. S., Gordon, J. R., & Hinings, C. R. (Bob). (2003), “Strengthening Organizational Change Processes: Recommendations and Implications from a Multilevel Analysis”? The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(2), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886303256270
Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001), “Crafting a Job: Revisioning Employees as Active Crafters of Their Work”, Academy of Management Review, 26, 179–201. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4378011
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 The Hungarian Journal of Marketing and Management

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.