If we are talking about transformational change in a complex and difficult situation, there may very well be risk associated in re-investing in the effort

Season 1, Episode 5

Initiating change is already a big challenge, with all the resistance that change agents face and so on. Therefore, popular change management literature places tremendous emphasis on gaining forward momentum through early successes or quick ‘wins’ which are to be roundly celebrated. They supposedly convince organizations that achievement of the change goals is possible, all that is needed is more energy and excitement, and hopefully more quick wins. But my experiences suggest that this is where change efforts tend to stall because the organization is unable or unwilling to further invest in it. Instead, the pilot (or experiment) that was supposed to kickstart the change effort becomes its full extent, with the organization repeating the pilot from then on and thereby avoiding the risk of reversing gains. While this sounds undesirable and counter to what traditional change management considers OK, can it sometimes be said that good enough is good enough?

Works Referenced:

Abbott, A. (1989). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. University of Chicago Press.

Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management review, 25(4), 760-776.

Snider, D. M. (2005). The future of the Army profession. L. J. Matthews (Ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of management review, 20(3), 510-540.