OML 8030 Module 1 Classic Change Models Seminar Paper: Lewin, Kotter and the 70 Percent Myth Example

Unfreezing a Box Plant: What Lewin and Kotter Offer, and What the Failure Statistic Does Not

Student Name

Doctor of Business Administration, Thomas Edison State University

OML-8030: Seminar in Leading Change for Innovation, Sustainability, and Competitive Advantage

Mentor Name

Month Day, Year

Unfreezing a Box Plant: What Lewin and Kotter Offer, and What the Failure Statistic Does Not

Introduction

Our plant has made boxes for food and retail customers since 1962. Three changes are now underway at once. Large customers require recycled content and carbon reporting, so we are shifting to fully recycled containerboard. The family owners approved rooftop solar to cut energy costs. And to compete with larger rivals, we are replacing two older converting lines with automated ones that need fewer operators but more technical skill. Every consultant who visits quotes the same figure, that 70 percent of change efforts fail, and recommends a model. This paper examines two classic models and the figure itself.

Lewin's Contribution

Lewin (1947) described group life as a quasi-stationary equilibrium, a level of behavior held in place by opposing forces. Production levels in a factory, for example, reflect forces pushing them up, such as pay incentives, and forces holding them down, such as group norms about a fair day's work. Change requires altering the balance of these forces. Lewin observed that changes made by lecture or individual persuasion often faded, while changes made through group decision lasted longer. In his account, lasting change meant unfreezing the old level, moving the group and then stabilizing it at the new level so it would not slide back. The three-step summary later attributed to him is simpler than his original account of forces and group processes.

Kotter's Eight Stages

Kotter (2012) proposed eight stages drawn from companies he watched attempt transformations. Leaders first build urgency and assemble a guiding coalition, then craft a vision and strategy and communicate it widely. Next they remove obstacles so many people can act, secure visible early wins and use the credibility gained to push further. Finally they anchor new ways of working in the culture. He argued that skipping stages creates only an illusion of speed and that errors in any stage can stall the whole effort.

The 70 Percent Claim

By (2005) critically reviewed the change management literature and noted that many authors stated that around 70 percent of change programs fail. He found the claim widely repeated but without valid empirical support, and he argued that the field lacked a valid framework for managing change despite the many models on offer.

Hughes (2011) went further, tracing five published sources often cited for the 70 percent figure. Not one of them, he found, supplied trustworthy data for the figure. Some were opinion pieces, some reported surveys with unclear definitions of failure and some cited each other. He concluded that the figure is a myth that may serve consultants by creating urgency but misleads managers.

Why the Myth Matters

At our plant, the failure statistic has had real effects. Some supervisors cite it as a reason to expect the automation project to fail, and a consultant used it to justify a costly change management package. Recognizing it as unsupported does not mean change is easy. It means we should judge our own progress with our own measures rather than with an imported number.

What the Classic Models Offer

Both models remain useful as frameworks for thinking. Lewin's force field helps us see what holds current practice in place: operators' pride in running the old lines, a bonus system based on footage rather than quality and fear of losing jobs to automation. Changing those forces, for example by guaranteeing no layoffs from automation and redesigning the bonus, may matter more than any announcement. Lewin's finding about group decision supports involving crews in designing the new line layouts. Kotter's stages offer a checklist that reminds us to build a coalition that includes the union steward and the maintenance lead, not only managers.

Limits of the Models

Neither model was tested in the way modern research would require. Kotter's stages come from consulting observation, and research has found only partial support for them as a sequence. Linear models fit poorly when, as at our plant, several changes overlap and conditions shift. Later modules turn to research on readiness, leadership and evidence-based practices to fill these gaps.

The Union's Part

The plant's operators belong to a union local, and the contract covers job classifications that automation will change. Neither Lewin nor Kotter says much about unions, but both point toward involving them early. Lewin's group decision findings suggest that classifications and training for the new lines will hold better if worked out jointly. Kotter's guiding coalition would be weak without the steward, whose word carries more weight on the floor than mine. We have invited the union's representatives to join the planning group, shared the vendor's staffing estimates and agreed to negotiate new classifications before the first line arrives rather than after. This also changes a restraining force in Lewin's sense: fear that automation is a way around the contract.

Applying the Models With Care

For our three changes, I will use Lewin's force field to map what drives and restrains each change, involve groups in decisions where they will carry out the work and treat Kotter's stages as prompts for discussion, not a script. Progress will be judged by our own milestones, such as first-pass quality on the new lines, energy savings from solar and the share of production on recycled fiber.

Limits

This paper relies on two classic sources and two reviews. Other models, such as Beer's or Kanter's, might fit better. The plant is invented.

Conclusion

Lewin explained change as a shift in the forces that hold group behavior in place and showed the power of group decision, and Kotter offered a detailed sequence for leaders. By and Hughes showed that the oft-quoted 70 percent failure rate is not supported by evidence. For a packaging plant changing on several fronts at once, the classic models are useful thinking tools, provided they are used with judgment and progress is measured on the plant's own terms.

References

By, R. T. (2005). Organisational change management: A critical review. Journal of Change Management, 5(4), 369-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697010500359250

Hughes, M. (2011). Do 70 per cent of all organizational change initiatives really fail? Journal of Change Management, 11(4), 451-464. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2011.630506

Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.

Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100103