The Discussion
Planning and managing change, both technological and cultural, is one of the challenging jobs of organizational leadership. From the review of the literature and the
case study, the Lenovo-IBM merger and acquisition change process resulted in two important issues, which are the challenges of changing organizational culture, and the
role of leadership in the change process. Correspondingly, this section discusses how the Lenovo-IBM change process handled the two issues and particular outcomes
based on theory and case study.

The Role that Leadership Played in Organizational Change
Organizational leadership is simply about creating a vision and having subordinates who follow the vision and believe in the leaders (Hrebiniak, 2013). Also, change
creates a further challenge for leaders because they should not only formulate the new strategy to manage the change process but also keep subordinates focused and
engaged throughout the change process. One becomes a leader only when there are people who look up to him or her for direction (Kotter, 2005). First, during the
change, leaders must acknowledge that their support is critical to the change process. Hence they do everything to support the change. In effect, the change
experienced at Lenovo was successful mainly because the leaders took the initiative and promoted it at different levels. For instance, the leadership guaranteed
sufficient financial resources to acquire the IBM PC division, which was remarkable support (Stahl & Koster, 2013). Here, it was already a clear indication of the
company’s commitment to change by sealing the deal as early as possible. During the change, leaders should act as advocates at the top level, and transfer this zeal
and determination to the employees. As sponsors, organization’s leaders do not allow the lack of consideration to kill the change initiative because they can use their
political power to garner employees’ support (Kavanagh & Ashkanasy, 2006).

Moreover, the leaders created new policies and processes that eased the transition during the change. It is imperative to create new methods of operations when change
alters business process (Higgins, 2005). The suggested methods are meant to create unity and free-flowing processes where employees encounter the slightest hurdles
when adjusting to the changes. Most importantly, it is expected that employees would adapt to the new ways fast. From the case study, first, the management announced
that the respective companies’ policies would remain intact to prevent cultural clashes between the Chinese and American business associates (Peng, 2008). Also, the
leaders appointed a new CEO, who confirmed that the new Lenovo would not interfere with anyone’s compensation plans as earlier feared. Here, the leadership ensured a
calm working atmosphere where subordinates still feel that they are part of the new system even when many business aspects are changing (Kavanagh & Ashkanasy, 2006).
Often, leaders create new policies to effect the changes and employees are expected to adapt to them. In contrast, Lenovo’s leadership system was not in a rush to
alter the policies; instead, the company implemented a parallel management system where IBM still operated independently, albeit under Lenovo’s ownership (Zhou &
Huang, 2014). The effects of this leadership initiative cannot be underestimated because it ensured that IBM management team and employees remained calm and conducted
their activities as usual.

Furthermore, the leadership is tasked with limiting resistance to change. According to Michalski (2011), organizations are complex corporations, hence leaders must
convince all stakeholders before they can effect change. Bhatti (2011) reiterates that leaders must always take bold steps to handle staff issues constructively during
the change process. For instance, they must acknowledge that subordinates are entitled to their opinions, and where possible, use other people’s perspectives to
improve the change management process (Nohria, 2000; Kotter, 2005). The parallel management model ensured that Lenovo and IBM operated separately in the initial phases
of change while only integration certain functional departments, such as law, human resource, and finance departments. Here, leaders acknowledged the fact that in the
earlier stages of change, many harbors the feeling that everything is difficult, different, and completely uncomfortable to handle (Ford & D’Amelio, 2008).
Additionally, the leaders adopted other strategies, such as the “Lenovo Expression Workshop”, which taught Chinese managers about management of people and strong
communication. On the other hand, the “East Meets West” program taught the firm’s executives about the foundations of the American and Chinese cultures (Stahl &
Koster, 2013).Therefore, every aspect of the change process is attributed to initiatives taken by the organization’s leadership team.

The Challenges of Changing Organizational Culture
An organization’s culture is simply its DNA, which comprises the goals, processes, communication practices, assumptions, values, people’s attitudes, and so on. What is
considered right or wrong within the organization is also categorized as a cultural practice, as well (Coghlan & Jacobs, 2005). It includes the things and practices to
which employees and the management are accustomed. Common practices that make up the culture are ways in which people greet one another, share information, and hold
conversations, share meals, among others. According to Burnes (2004), the Kurt Lewin change management process is effective when an organization experiences
restructuring, be it technological or cultural. Should the culture change, then the organization alters many things that members hold dear. Aiken & Keller (2009) point
that business practices in every country are defined by cultural norms that regulate business practices, such as negotiations, modes of dressing, communications, among
others. As such, the culture controls what an employee or the manager does in a certain situation because that is what they believe to be the best business practice.

An attempt to change culture means that people are convinced to forgo what they are accustomed to, and adopt new practices within rather limited time (Bayerl et al.,
2013). From the case study, the IBM-Lenovo change process involved various cultural challenges. There was bound to be a clash of the Chinese and American cultures
about communication and particular ways of doing business. For instance, without a common language and means of communication, it was obvious that the firms would not
have a unified, global management (Peng, 2008). Communication is vital in an organizational setting because, through it, people share information. The change process
involved American managers who had little or no knowledge of the Chinese language, whereas just a few Chinese leaders mastered the English language. The first cultural
challenge was, therefore, to have a common language, and the company chose English. From a Chinese perspective, English may be such a difficult language to learn
because it differs with the Chinese language significantly. Changing the culture simply means that managers and employees are subjected to rigorous lessons of the
foreign language, which may take long to master (Penrod & Harbor, 2000). In the meantime, some business processes may halt, or inappropriate decisions may be made
because it is difficult for the American and Chinese associates to consult one another (Stahl & Koster, 2013).
A more challenging aspect of culture is the divergent communication styles. Aspects of communication, such as the use of body language and non-verbal cues differ from
one culture to another (Masood et al., 2006). In this case, the language barriers between American and Chinese associates seemed obvious initially; yet, less apparent
were the largely opposing preferences concerning the styles of communication. Specifically, Stahl & Koster (2013) note that conference calls were tricky because they
provided no visuals to help members to understand the nuances and true meanings of other people’s verbal comments. In effect, the IBM leaders did most of the talking
while their Lenovo counterparts did most of the listening (Zhou & Huang, 2014). Simply put, the company faced the challenge of changing a communication culture in
which the two were completely worlds apart. Undoubtedly, it would take a very long time for Lenovo associates to master the American communication styles, and vice
versa (Peng, 2008).

Furthermore, attempts to alter organizational culture may cause unnecessary resistance to change. One of the reasons people resists change is because it not only
interferes with the comfort zone but also presents a lot of uncertainties (Kitchen & Daly, 2002). According to Amagoh (2008), the change affects people’s autonomy and
may bring the feeling that people have lost control over their work. When called upon to adopt new styles and modes of communication, employees and managers may do so
grudgingly, partly because they were comfortable with what they are being asked to let go. Usually, change is effected to bring something different to the workplace.
Humans being habitual creatures, automatic routines are part of many people’s lives; yet, change jolts many into accepting what seems so uncomfortable (Rotman &
Loorbach, 2009). When change comes with too many differences, the people it affects may feel confused or distracted. The point, however, is that change disrupts the
routines to which employees and managers are accustomed, which are the organization’s culture. It is advisable that change leaders should seek to reduce the number of
unrelated differences that may arise because of a central change (Eisenstat et al., 2008). The more the differences, the higher the likelihood that organizational
members will resist the change.

Also, changing the culture means that the organization ‘loses’ its face (Eisenstat et al., 2008). By definition, change simply means that people depart from the past.
In effect, the employees and managers associated with the routines that are being outmoded are in the offing to be defensive about (Michalski, 2011). In fact, when
change comes with a big strategic shift, the people associated with the previous strategic direction are likely to develop the perception that they were wrong. To
minimize resistance to change, leaders can maintain dignity by acknowledging or celebrating the elements of the bygone that are worth veneration, and in as much as
possible, convince everyone that there is a need for change (Mason 2001; Manson, 2007). Else, the change process will simply clash with what people consider being
their DNA in the workplace, and cause unprecedented resistance.

References
Aiken, C. and Keller, S. (2009) ‘The irrational side of change management’, McKinsey Quarterly, 2 (10), pp. 100-109.
Amagoh, F. (2008) ‘Perspectives on organizational change: systems and complexity theories’, The Innovation Journal: The public sector innovation journal, 13 (3), pp.
1-14.
Bayerl, P. S. and et.al. (2013) ‘The role of macro context for the link between technological and organizational change’, Journal of Organizational Change Management,
26 (5), pp. 793-810.
Beer, M. and Nohria, N. (2000) Cracking the code of change. If you read nothing else on change, read these best-selling articles, 15.
Bhatti, O.K. (2011) ‘Strategy implementation: An alternative choice of 8S’s’, Annals of Management Research, 1 (2), pp. 52-59.
Brug, J., van Lenthe, F.J. and Kremers, S.P. (2006) ‘Revisiting Kurt Lewin: how to gain insight into environmental correlates of obesogenic behaviors’, American
journal of preventive medicine, 31 (6), pp. 525-529.
Burke, W.W., Lake, D.G. and Paine, J.W. eds. (2008) Organization change: A comprehensive reader (Vol. 155). John Wiley & Sons.
Burnes*, B. (2004) ‘Kurt Lewin and complexity theories: back to the future’, Journal of change management, 4 (4), pp. 309-325.
Burnes, B. (2004) Managing change: A strategic approach to organizational dynamics. Pearson Education.
Burnes, B. (2005) ‘Complexity theories and organizational change’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 7 (2), pp. 73-90.
Coghlan, D. and Jacobs, C. (2005) ‘Kurt Lewin on reeducation foundations for action research’, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41 (4), pp. 444-457.
Cummings, T.G. and Worley, C.G. (2014) Organization development and change. Cengage learning.
Dievernich, F.E., Tokarski, K.O. and Gong, J. (2015) Change Management and the Human Factor. Springer.
Eisenstat, R.A., Beer, M., Foote, N., Fredberg, T. and Norrgren, F. (2008) ‘The uncompromising leader’, Harvard business review, 86 (7/8), p. 50.
Ford, J.D., Ford, L.W. and D’Amelio, A. (2008) ‘Resistance to change: The rest of the story’, Academy of management Review, 33 (2), pp. 362-377.
Ford, M.W. and Evans, J.R. (2001) ‘Baldrige assessment and organizational learning: the need for change management’, Quality Management Journal, 8 (3), pp. 9-25.
Helms-Mills, J., Dye, K. and Mills, A.J. (2008) Understanding organizational change. Routledge.
Higgins, J.M. (2005) ‘The eight ‘S’s of successful strategy execution’, Journal of Change Management, 5 (1), pp. 3-13.
Hrebiniak, L.G. (2013) Making strategy work: Leading effective execution and change. FT Press.
Kavanagh, M.H. and Ashkanasy, N.M. (2006) ‘The impact of leadership and change management strategy on organizational culture and individual acceptance of change during
a merger’, British Journal of Management, 17 (S1), pp. S81-S103.
Ke, W. and Wei, K.K. (2008) ‘Organizational culture and leadership in ERP implementation’, Decision Support Systems, 45 (2), pp. 208-218.
Kitchen, P.J. and Daly, F. (2002) ‘Internal communication during change management’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 7 (1), pp. 46-53.
Kofter, J.P. (2007) ‘Leading Change why Transformati0n Efforts Fail’, Harvard Business Review, 92, p. 107.
Kotter, J.P. (2002) Leading change, 1996. Heart of Change.
Liu, X., Akram, S. and Bouguettaya, A. (2011) Change management for semantic web services. Springer Science & Business Media.
Manson, S.M. (2001) ‘Simplifying complexity: a review of complexity theory’, Geoforum, 32 (3), pp. 405-414.
Mason, R.B. (2007) ‘The external environment’s effect on management and strategy: a complexity theory approach’, Management decision, 45 (1), pp. 10-28.
Masood, S.A., Dani, S.S., Burns, N.D. and Backhouse, C.J. (2006) ‘Transformational leadership and organizational culture: the situational strength perspective’,
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 220 (6), pp. 941-949.
McElroy, M.W. (2000) ‘Integrating complexity theory, knowledge management and organizational learning’, Journal of knowledge management, 4 (3), pp. 195-203.
McKenzie, C. and James, K. (2004) ‘Aesthetics as an aid to understanding complex systems and decision judgment in operating complex systems’, EMERGENCE-MAHWAH-LAWRENCE
ERLBAUM-, 6 (1/2), p. 32.
Michalski, A. (2011) The McKinsey 7-S Framework: Invented in the 1980s and still a possibility for success today. GRIN Verlag.
Peng, S. 2008. Achieving Successful Cross-Cultural and Management Integration: The Experience of Lenovo and IBM. Thesis Submitted to Auckland University of Technology,
2008.
Penrod, J.I. and Harbor, A.F. (2000) ‘Designing and implementing a learning organization-oriented information technology planning and management process’, Case Studies
on Information Technology in Higher Education: Implications for Policy and Practice, 4, pp. 7-19.
Petrescu, R. (2010) ‘Organizational Change Process–Steps to a Successful Change’, Annals of University of Craiova, Economic Sciences Series, 3 (38), pp. 197-202.
Pettigrew, A.M. (2000) ‘Linking change processes to outcomes’, Breaking the code of change, pp. 243-265.
Pettigrew, A.M., Woodman, R.W. and Cameron, K.S. (2001) ‘Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research’, Academy of management
journal, 44 (4), pp. 697-713.
Pryor and et.al. (2008) ‘Challenges facing change management theories and research’, Delhi Business Review, 9 (1), pp. 1-8.
Rotmans, J. and Loorbach, D. (2009) ‘Complexity and transition management’, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 13 (2), pp. 184-196.
Schein, E.H. (2010) Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.
Shareef, A., Mahmood, A. and Ishaque, A. (2012) ‘Perceived leadership styles and organizational commitment’, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in
Business, 4 (1), p. 616.
Stahl, G., and Koster, K. 2013. Lenovo-IBM: Bridging Cultures, Languages, and Time Zones.