TKC was in dire straits. It had poor product lines, a bad customer fulfillment reputation, high central overheads and demotivated staff. These drivers, coupled with the enthusiasm of new owners, led to radical changes within the company. Focusing primarily on customers, the company recognized it needed to refresh its product lines, change its fulfillment practices, and focus on customers and their needs. The change approach was one of top down, but emergent as different opportunities presented themselves over the course of a number of years (Green, 2007). So, while TKC was in a downward spiral, the Biogen Idee was in a totally different situation.
Biogen Idee Situation
Biogen Idee was already experiencing success as an organization. A key aspect was its ongoing commitment to constantly reviewing and refreshing its global development, manufacturing and commercial capabilities in pursuit of its vision of making advances in human healthcare. It investigated the issue of whether or not its European structure and way of doing business was right. It was also very clear in adhering to its core values in making those challenges and subsequent decisions, with quality, integrity, honesty and team as a source of strength being paramount. So, the combination of having a clear vision about excellence in its field coupled with an emerging dissatisfaction with the status quo led it to start a review process into its European structure, which was the first practical step on the road to change. The approach that Biogen Idee took was a relatively planned one, given that the nature of the change was one of restructuring, which had a number of employment law implications. The process was well planned and structured, but the solutions (Green, 2007). Despite the fact they were experiencing success, they wanted to test the waters to develop their situation even further, improving the services they provided and becoming a leader in their field. Their situational contrast from TKC was drastic
TKC was at risk of losing their business entirely, while Biogen Idee was experiencing success. This definitely altered the outlook as far as change management was concerned. One was strictly looking for improvement in already successful processes, while the other was looking to "stem the bleeding". While Biogen Idee could easily revert back to the status quo and remain a viable organization, for TKC - the change would pretty much turn around the business or lead it into financial ruin. Now, what about each organization's approaches?