Reaction Paper on Defence Research and Development Canada Toronto

The Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) Toronto is an organization

that produce research that aids Canadian Forces. With the shift in the events challenging the
Canadian Forces with increasing complex problems covering not only national security but also
future threats including national calamities, Canadian Forces transformed from being a
peacekeeping force to a modern fighting force. With these, leaders of the DRDC was faced with
the challenge to transform the Research Center into something that would tackle large defence
problems and provide tangible, immediate solutions. As part of this endeavour, a new vision for
the center was developed- to become the world leader in integrated Human Effectiveness
Science and Technology that impacts Defence and Security. To materialize this vision, certain
changes must be done in the organization such as the organization structure.
The organizational culture had to change from one that valued individual efforts to one
that embraced multi-disciplinary teamwork. But not all people welcome culture change
especially those who were able to establish their comfort zone. One of the groups that will be
largely affected by the change is the Technical Groups. This group are dependent on defence
scientists. Their relationship is described as subordination. Technologists are inseparable with
the scientist that they are working with. With the new arrangement, the technologists will be
encouraged to pursue their own professional development needs and career paths. The
technologists are now viewed as an asset to the organization. They need to be flexible to be
able to work with different scientist.
Another group that will be largely affected by the restructure in the organization are the
scientists. The defence scientists will no longer rely in the services of the same technologist
who, in the past may have worked for them for their entire careers. Instead, they would have to
negotiate through a new decision-making body.
There are many things that need to be considered aside from the technologists and
defence scientists because the leader must assess the entire structure of the organization as
well as the individual persons designated to the positions in the organization. This is important
before embarking a major cultural change in the organization.
An organizations culture is an amalgam of intangibles such as beliefs, values and
assumptions. An established culture is difficult to alienate. Leaders must take ownership of upfront alignment work. In doing so, strategies must be used for coordination and collaboration to
achieve a meaningful result. Leaders may choose to subscribe to any strategies applicable i.e.

Change Management. In this method, there are Ten Principles that must be adapted: Address
the human side systematically; Start at the top; Involve every layer; Make the formal case;
Create ownership; Communicate the message; Assess the cultural landscape; Address culture
explicitly; Prepare for the unexpected; and, Speak to the individual. These ten principles were
present in the case of the DRDC.
Any significant transformation creates people issues. Address the human side
systematically means dealing with the peoples issues systematically by collecting data and
analysis, planning, and implanting the discipline methodically.
The leaders must embrace the new system first, to challenge and to motivate the rest of
the employees. This is in line with a leadership style called leadership by example. Leaders
must show the employees that the new system is adaptable. Only after the leadership team
went through the process of aligning and committing to the change initiative was the work force
able to deliver downstream results.
Change must cascade to every layer of the organization. All workforce must be aligned
to DRDCs new vision, mission and objectives. The case of DRDC shows that change did not
only effect the technologies but it transcended to the scientists and those in the top
management.
The fourth principle of the change management says make the formal case. This would
answer the employees question to what extent change is needed. To answer this, the company
made a new vision statement - To become the world leader in integrated Human Effectiveness
Science and Technology that impacts Defence and Security. The articulation of a formal case for
change and the creation of a written vision statement are invaluable opportunities to create or
compel leadership-team alignment.
Acceptance of the change is essential as well as ownership of it. Change would make
employees feel that they are working on a new job. But it must be recognized because holding
on to the status quo will not do any help. Ownership is best created by involving people in
identifying problems and crafting solution.
Acceptance can be best achieved if the message of change is communicated through
different channels passing through different layers of the organization. Communication flows in
from the bottom and out from the top, and are targeted to provide employees the right
information at the right time and solicit their input and feedback.
Successful change programs pick up speed and intensity as they cascade down, making
it critically important that leaders understand and account for culture and behaviors at each level
of the organization. Thorough cultural diagnostics can assess the cultural landscape and

organizational readiness to change, bring major problems to the surface, and define factors that
can recognize and influence sources of leadership and resistance.
Once the culture is identified, the leaders must identify ways to distance the old culture
to give way to the new one. Reward system may can be adopted as an incentive to those who
have gradually understood and live up to the new culture. Cultural change must be addressed
explicitly to everyone in the organization.
Change is not an easy concept. There are so many things that happen in between. With
the right implementation of the action plan, the company will meet the end it desired. But it is
inevitable that sometimes change program goes completely out of the plan. Being prepared for
the unexpected means continual reassessment of the impact of change and the organizations
willingness and ability to adopt the next wave of transformation.
Last principle says speak to the individual. Change is both an institutional journey and a
very personal one. People spend many hours each week at work; many think of their colleagues
as a second family. Technologists think that their existence is exclusive to the scientist they have
been working with. They need to know how their work will change, what is expected of them
during and after the program, how they will be measured, and what success or failure mean for
them and those around them.
Moving on, organizational structure and cultural change has been mentioned in the case
study as well as in this paper. Examining the relationship between organizational structure and
culture change, their difference hinges on two premises: First, a culture change will be required
to change the firm's structure. Second, an organizational structure can remain, but the
organizational culture can change. The first premise best describes the case of the DRDC. The
Center already has a structure that needs to be change and to be have a successful transition
of structure, change in culture must first be done.
As a concluding statement, as the main actor of the structural and cultural change, an
answer must be provided on the question What are good leaders? Changing an organizations
culture is one of the most difficult leadership challenges. A good leader has a high vision for the
organization, recognize its weaknesses, plan an action to change weaknesses to strengths and
can inspire others to deviate and change and will choose to follow him to the target goals of the
organization. The first recipe for igniting change is leadership. Leaders can create the impetus
and start the fire. There are many characteristics of a good leader, but the best of them is a
leader who is good at influencing people. A change cannot be done by one person. It is a
collaborative work. If a leader knows how to inspire his subordinates, whatever goal of the
company, most if not all of it will be accomplished.