MBA 765 - Relections on Module 4

How may the implementation of action steps differ in the closure stage from the prior stages?
Implementation during closure usually includes an organizational change in culture and leadership. Additionally, the leader will be attempting to shake everyone up in order to revive them and get them excited. During implementation, communication and open dialogue will be critical in this stage. The previous stages that required implementation had new and excited personnel. The leader was trying to keep them focused and limit the chaos and uncertainty of entering uncharted waters. Communication was important, but it is critical in the closure stage. Change is disrupting to most people and even more on an organization. People will want to know what is going on, why this is happening, are we going to lose our jobs, etc. If the leader does not communicate effectively, timely, and openly, then people will make up their stories and start leaving the organization. Talent leaving the organization would be devastating. Also the leader must think about the trust factor.

What types of personal and professional risks do leaders run into while attempting to complete the closure process?
The risks are not remaining objective and getting too emotionally involved in the closure process. This could lead to depression and lose of all motivation to complete the task at hand. The other danger/risk is how the leader implements and completes the closure is how the leader will be viewed by workers, the community, and other leaders. It is important that the leader looks at all of the stakeholders and their perspectives in order to sculpt out the best strategy for closure.

What type of closure implementation activity would you find to be the most personally difficult? Why?
I would find shutting down a business the most difficult activity to engage in. Shutting the doors on a facility would displace employees and I would feel powerless to help them. At least with bankruptcy the business is on life support and there is chance to save the business.

In what ways might the closure stage actually not be final?
Acquisition, mergers, and definitely IPO really mark closure with a new beginning for the organization. So closure would not really be final. Also there are times where the closure strategy would never enter into completion, due to plans falling through.

Should particular kinds of stakeholders be given priority in obtaining the remaining organizational assets? Why?
I would say no, but legally certain stakeholders are given priority over others. Typically the lien holder get their money up front. These include the banks and bond holders. The common share stockholders typically do not receive any funds after a company goes bankrupt or out of business. During takeover and mergers everyone is typically taken care of, but I suspect some stakeholders are given priority over others. The remaining assets should be equally distributed to all of the stakeholders that invested money and time with the organization. But many times powerful stakeholders with selfish and self gaining agendas dominate the decision making processes.