BADM 532 Final Paper

Appalachia Service Project – Change Paper

Andrew Amodei

BADM 532: Leading Organizational Change

3/7/15

  Amodei 2

Appalachia Service Project began in 1969 as the result of the deep calling God placed on

Rev. Glenn “Tex” Evans. Tex served the Henderson Settlement in Frakes, Kentucky for 13

years. During those years, Tex witnessed a great need for home repair assistance. He began with

a few teenagers from his youth group repairing homes in and around Frakes. ASP was born.

Over 40 years later, Appalachia Service Project serves 550 families every summer with 140

summer staff and many year round staff. ASP has an annual budget of over one million dollars

and is one of the most successful nonprofits in the country. ASP is growing. The leadership at

ASP set goals to serve 1000 families and operate at $1.5 million by 2020. Growth means change.

In order to serve 1,000 families, ASP will need to use over 200 volunteers every summer, change

its leadership structure, redefine its overall operating model, renovate and build new facilities,

and deepen its financial base. In the midst of this change, ASP does not want to lose its culture

and values. In as much as ASP is a construction ministry, it is also a ministry based upon

building relationships with families and community leaders (Mondros, J., 1997). Volunteers and

staff build relationships where they serve in Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and

West Virginia. Leadership development is paramount to ASP’s mission. However, growing to

over 200 college students every summer means changing how and where staff training occurs.

This paper will serve as one component of an overall strategic plan for ASP. It will focus on the

steps required in diversifying summer training as ASP expands its ministry to more families in

Appalachia.

  Amodei 3

This summer one hundred and forty college students will gather in Jonesville, VA over

the course of two weeks to prepare for their service with Appalachia Service Project. The

summer staff will learn construction techniques as well as ASP’s culture and values. ASP

essentially does what Edger Schein describes as leadership development. “When we are

influential in shaping the behavior and values of others, we think of that as “leadership” and are

creating the conditions for new culture formation” (Schein, 2010, p. 3). The facility in Jonesville

serves as the primary training center and main hub for ASP. ASP headquarters is in Johnson

City. Year-round staff operates from the Johnson City office. Supplies, vehicles, and distribution

originate from this location. However, Jonesville is the place from which ASP deploys its

materials and staff.

Every year site coordinators are trained by year round staff in leadership management,

project management, construction techniques, and ASP’s mode of operation. These site

coordinators gather with the remaining volunteers to choose who will join them in one of the 32

sites where ASP will conduct home repair over the summer. Site coordinators and their teams

will deploy to churches, schools, and civic buildings to welcome groups of 80 plus volunteers

from youth groups and civic clubs for the next eight weeks. They will be responsible for home

assessment, materials preparation, negotiating with contractors, meal prep, and coordinating the

volunteers. ASP is very successful in its mission and ministry. Its goals are ambitions, but

needed. This is where ASP has a problem. Jonesville only houses 140 people (Kotter, 2012,

147).

  Amodei 4

A Sense of Urgency

It would seem that the capacity issue at Jonesville and the goals ASP set for itself would

be enough to create a sense of urgency. However, when complacency exists, urgency can be

fleeting (Kotter, 2012, p. 40-41). Kotter reminds us, “Never underestimate the magnitude of the

forces that reinforce complacency and that help maintain the status quo” (Kotter, 2012, p. 44). If

Appalachia Service Project desires to serve 1,000 families, it will require approximately 23,000

volunteers each year. Twenty-three thousand volunteers will represent an increase of 6,000

volunteers compared to the number serving today. ASP enables these volunteers through year-

round and summer staff. In order to deploy twenty-three thousand volunteers, ASP will need 46

site coordinators and 200 summer staff. Jonesville’s capacity cannot meet the demand in light of

ASP’s goals. Its costs $120,000 to conduct staff training over two weeks and $23,000 of the

whole cost is specific to the operation of the Jonesville center during training. The cost of

expanding the Jonesville training facility and the long-term effectiveness of its strategic location

call its future relevancy as a single training center into question.

In order for ASP to recognize the urgency required to begin the change process more

lofty goals will need to be set and those currently in positions of authority will need to articulate

the urgency is real (Kotter, 2012, p. 44). The sense of urgency is not only the logistical situation

in one location. Staff training sets the tone and morale for the entire summer. ASP is concerned

about the quality of its service to families in need and the quality of the experience had by

volunteers from around the country. Those experiences depend upon the way in which summer

staff lead throughout the summer. Summer staff is prepared for leadership in staff training. While

in Jonesville, ASP communicates its values and its mission. Changing staff training could not

  Amodei 5

only impose financial and logistical problems, but it could also change the way in which ASP

replicates the DNA put into motion by Tex Evans over forty years ago.

In addition, ASP operates out of a biblical mandate. Isaiah 61 reads,

He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor and the day of vengeance of our God, to comfort all who mourn, and provide for those who grieve in Zion—to bestow on them a crown of beauty instead of ashes, the oil of joy instead of mourning, and a garment of praise instead of a spirit of despair (Isaiah 61:1-3).

These are the same words Jesus read when he began his ministry in Nazareth (Luke 4:16-30).

Jesus’ ministry was not only about salvation, but about healing and wholeness – which work in

and with salvation. ASP is an extension of Jesus’ ministry beyond the local church. ASP’s values

are those of the very ministry that Jesus began. Those values and the culture is what makes ASP

successful. In as much as changing staff training is about reaching numeric goals and reaching

more families, if the culture is lost and quality of service goes down, ASP may reach its goals but

staff retention and community partnerships will deteriorate. Efficiency matters, however, the

simplest and most cost-effective solution may not be best.

There are a few options to change training. First, ASP is poised to purchase land beside

its Johnson City office off the Bristol highway. ASP could build a facility with a capacity for 200

or more and move all training from Jonesville, VA to Johnson City, TN. The costs should

correlate with moving from 140 staff to 200 staff with operations remaining similar or increasing

slightly due to utilities that are more efficient and the centrality of Johnson City’s location. The

problem with this option is that it is not scalable. The effort it will take to grow by 6,000

volunteers per year will not stop once ASP reaches it’s goal. Does ASP build a facility that

houses 300 or more? At what point does the Johnson City site not support the number of staff

  Amodei 6

required for the number of volunteers coming each summer? It is great to have a 2017 or 2020

goal. However, what does ASP look like in 2050?

Second, ASP could build a new facility in Johnson City and conduct training there, but

keep a certain portion of training in Jonesville. Splitting the summer staff would create a burden

on year-round staff for those two weeks, but the cost would only increase by the cost of the

facility. ASP breaks even from staff training within the first ten days of each summer. However,

what does a split model do to the culture of ASP? There is a romantic denouement to staff

training where each site coordinator gets to choose his or her staff for the summer and then leave

for their mission field together as a team. Splitting sites would mean pre-assigning site

coordinators and take some of the pool of potential team members away from those sites. The

community building aspect of summer staff training would not be lost entirely, but it would not

be the same. ASP would need to script the experience and be intentional to be sure that both

training sites operate with the same culture and values.

Third, ASP could focus its training on site coordinators entirely. ASP would need to

devise an assessment for their summer staff. The assessment would give site coordinators the

information required to choose their team. Staff would need to create online tools in order to give

some training to summer staff before their prep weeks with their site coordinators. Instead of two

weeks in training, site coordinators would spend one week with year-round staff finalizing team

choices and engaging in leadership development. After that week, the summer staff would meet

in Jonesville to hear where they were going and then leave for training under the supervision of

their site coordinator. This is, by far, the most efficient solution. However, the communication of

ASP’s culture and values are left in the hands of college students with minimal training and

  Amodei 7

experience. Community building would be subject to the experience on site, rather than the entire

ASP community.

Option 1 makes the most sense in the short term. However, it is not scalable. ASP could

be in the same position in Johnson City as it is in Jonesville within ten years. Option 2 has its

difficulties, but it is scalable. Option 3 is the most efficient, however, it is too risky in terms of

ASP’s culture. It seems that Option 2 is the most reasonable solution with the most longevity.

There may be something to incorporating part of option three, however. Developing an

assessment tool to help site coordinators select their teams in order to streamline the process may

work best. Jonesville could be the place from which Kentucky, Virginia, Tennessee, and West

Virginia staff are deployed, while Johnson City deploys to North Carolina and Kentucky. ASP

also owns centers in Guyan Valley, West Virginia and Chavies, Kentucky. By the time of the

completion of the Johnson City center, ASP will have four sites from which it can conduct year-

round ministry and staff training. Creating a scalable model will enable it to look to serving

2,000 families in the future.

In addition, ASP recently started a new venture: College Service Project. College Service

Project is currently at NC State and at The University of Wisconsin, Madison. College Service

Project serves local communities by extending the culture of ASP into regions where previous

summer volunteers go to school during the year. In addition, CSP engages with persons who

have no experience with ASP, encouraging them to volunteer locally and potentially come on

staff with ASP. This is important because ASP should be asking the same question of CSP that

they are of the ASP core program. How do we retain our values and culture in multiple locations,

across multiple groups, and through leaders with a dissimilar experience? Creating a scalable

training model will not only allow ASP to change how it creates pathways for growth in the

  Amodei 8

future, it will also help ASP sustain growth and maintain quality across the country in the

present.

Create a Guiding Coalition

Many stakeholders need to be a part of a guiding coalition. “A guiding coalition with

good managers but poor leaders will not succeed” (Kotter, 2012, p. 61). ASP has its year-round

staff, board of directors, previous summer staff, and a vast network of volunteers and community

partners. It would seem that the board, alongside year-round staff would be enough to create a

team to script the steps for this change and implement it. That would be too bold. A true guiding

coalition for this change requires input from long-standing volunteers, staff, board members, and

community partners. However, the right people need to be a part of the guiding coalition

(Collins, 2011). The culture and impact of ASP is felt far beyond the Johnson City office the

purview of its board. Those who truly hold the culture of ASP are previous summer staff and

volunteers. Certainly, the CEO needs to be a part of the process. The current CEO is what

Sayeed and Shanker describe as a transformational leader. “Transformational leadership is based

on trust and commitment created and sustained in the organization (Jung & Avolio 1999, as cited

by Bin Sayeed, O., & Shanker, M., 2009, p. 595). The only qualifier, or disqualifier, amongst

those persons listed is that if persons in the right position have too much ego, they should not be

a part of the coalition (Kotter, 2012, p. 61).

The team to evaluate, recommend, and implement the change may be split into two

groups. First, the evaluation of the change in training needs to be assessed by key board

members, the CEO, CFO, Ministries Coordinator, site coordinators, summer staff, and long-

standing volunteer group leaders, key county commissioners or civic leaders, and recent families

  Amodei 9

served. This first group would prepare the recommendations for the needed change and put

emphasis on what is most important. The financial and logistical impact of the change needs to

be assessed. For example, deploying materials from multiple sites would be daunting. What is

the cost of gas? Does ASP have enough vehicles for multiple site deployments? What is the year-

round maintenance cost of a multi-site deployment model? Where are the hidden costs?

However, what is the cost of not creating a scalable model?

Staff and board members would comprise most of the second group. It would be best for

the CEO and other key staff to be a part of both groups. This group is the one that implements

the change. It would likely need to take place in phases over a number of years. On the one hand,

ASP will not get everything right the first year of multiple-staff training centers. There will be

mistakes. During the years where the model is adapting, ASP does not need to move beyond two

centers. However, in order to grow into its new model ASP will need to unfreeze its mode of

operation. “To change any elements of the culture, leaders must be willing to unfreeze their own

organization” (Schein, 2010, p. 381). The organization will need to refreeze before it can

multiply. Once the organization comes into homeostasis, it will not have to unfreeze in order

create a third or even fourth site. In fact, it is possible it will only need to unfreeze to adapt to

CSP and start multiplying the CSP model across the country.

One of the primary issues for both sets of teams is trust. “When employees promoted up

from these groups are asked to work together on a guiding coalition during a change effort,

teamwork rarely comes easily because of the residual lack of trust” (Kotter, 2012, p. 64). These

teams will need to spend time together apart from the project due to its longevity. Time will be

on their side. They will need to use time as an asset to build their team around the same values

and culture they wish to communicate because of the change process. The teams should be

  Amodei 10

building trust among one another and as a group that will communicate with the rest of the

organization. “A new condition of these times is the need for a high level of trust in institutions.

Without it they cannot serve and may even lose much of their present autonomy” (Greenleaf,

2002, Kindle Locations 774-775). ASP already has an enormous amount of trust in the

communities it serves. The question will be, “Can ASP continue to provide quality service after

its mechanism for doing so changes?” Trust will be paramount to the change process internally

and externally.

Develop the Vision and Strategy

The vision is fairly clear: create a scalable model for staff training that retains the values

and culture of Appalachia Service Project in order to provide quality leadership development and

service to the families in Appalachia. “Vision refers to a picture of the future with some implicit

or explicit commentary on why people should strive to create that future” (Kotter, 2012, p. 71).

ASP’s sense of urgency guides the mission and strategy.

There is nothing wrong with pursuing a vision for greatness. After all, the good-to-great companies also set out to create greatness. But, unlike the comparison companies, the good-to-great companies continually refined the path to greatness with the brutal facts of reality (Collins, 2011, Kindle Locations 1238-1240).

The strategy for implementing this change, however, is not so clear. The first team will set the

stage and direct the steps of the implementation team (Stephenson Jr., M., 2007, p.269). Given

that ASP already operates in three centers with Johnson City as a ‘roving facility,’ the first team

needs to identify what is needed for groups to be trained and what facilities need to have in order

to accommodate groups throughout the year. It would be wrong to build based on the current

model and later discover that the money spent on a new center in Johnson City was not used as

efficiently as possible. It is also possible that the team will discover they do not need to maintain

  Amodei 11

four centers. However, the centers that remain open must accommodate year-round use and

allow for staff training to take place. The following chart illustrates the change model:

Communicating the Vision

Implementing the vision will only work after the change process takes root across the

expanse of ASP’s support base. Current and former board members, summer staff, site

coordinators, previous staff, religious leaders, civic leaders, University chaplains, and year-round

staff will need to understand the need for the change, how it will effect them, and why it is best

for the future. Failure to communicate this well will result in a lack of enthusiasm for the change,

and may taint the change at best. At worst, it will effect current leadership and create a lack of

confidence destabilizing the organization. There are two aspects of the change that will ‘sell’ the

change. It is about serving more families and making better leaders. Some iteration of the

previous sentence may need to be the tag line for a few years. If it is ever about money,

efficiency, ‘streamlining’, ‘growth’, or other language that may be differentiated from the core

values of the organization the change process will be suspect. Instead, communicating the desire

to serve more families because there are so many families in need is the message.

Communicating a desire to become even better at leadership development will excite previous

leadership and help with recruitment. ASP could use this change process to revamp its training

regimen and improve its leadership development overall.

Evaluate  Training  • How  we  train  summer  staff  

• How  we  train  site  coordinators  

• What  markers  during  training  communicate  our  values  and  culture  

Evaluate  Centers  • Do  they  fully  accomodate  volunteers  as  needed?  

• Do  they  accomodate  a  scalable  staff  training  model?  

Close  or  Renovate  Existing  Centers  as  Needed  

Create  an  Archetype  that  is  Tested  for  Summer  Staff  Training  

Replicate  the  Archetype  Once  

Freeze  the  Model  

  Amodei 12

ASP received a $100,000 grant from the Lilly Foundation to establish the “Lilly Fellows”

program. It would be a relatively easy step to say, “We’ve learned a lot from engaging with our

Lilly Fellows. Now we want to use what we’ve learned with all of our summer staff.” The Lilly

Fellows program is using an interdisciplinary approach. The means of mentorship and practical

education is meeting a need that most nonprofits fail to address. Burlingame explains, “Some are

making progress toward the goal of a truly interdisciplinary approach that will better prepare

tomorrows leaders for a civil society. Bringing traditional disciplines and education to a "liberal

education" is still professional together provide the way to proceed from where I sit”

(Burlingame, 2009, p. 65). Not only does this look like a win for the board and ASP’s leadership,

also, it will encourage more giving. Without mentioning financial goals, ASP can reach them by

honing in on its core values and culture through a new, scalable training model.

Communicating the change should not simply be setting an objective for implementing

the change. This particular change process should be seen in the way ASP views itself. This will

take time! “The development of a transformational vision often requires those on the guiding

coalition to spend a few hundred hours collecting information, digesting it, considering

alternatives, and eventually making choices” (Kotter, 2012, p. 89). Every event where ASP

recruits volunteers, fundraiser, national board meeting, community gather, and new home that is

built should communicate ASP’s culture and values. ASP will need to develop simple jargon, use

metaphors (stories), large and small forums, repetition, key leadership, explain nuances and

inconsistences, and allow for question and answer sessions to effectively communicate the

change process (Kotter, 2012, p. 92). There should be a straight line to, “This is why we prepare

our volunteers the way we do – to be of better service to our communities and build more

capable leaders.”

  Amodei 13

Empowering Broad Based Action

Communicating the change is one thing. Implementing the change is another. This

particular change is not a shift in culture; it is a reinforcement of culture in order for ASP to

move into the future. ASP ambassadors (previous staff and volunteers), College Service Project

Partners, and year-round staff will be the ones to implement and put the change into action. The

ambassadors and CSP partners are important because they start communicating the values and

process for the new training regimen. Creating a scalable model, by default, means that more

people will need more authority than they did before. The way in which the change process will

end will be determined by the degree to which those in authority are willing to give more

authority to those charged with implementing the change process. The ripple effect of allowing

persons to have more power will help solidify the change. ASP needs to determine what

structural, organizational barrier may prevent the dissemination of power to year-round staff, site

coordinators, and other persons that do not exist within the organization as of yet (Kotter, 2012,

p. 106-107).

Some people will not be able to adapt (Kotter, 2012, p. 111-118). Implementing the new

training structure will change the way information is relayed and processed. It will also change

the different roles that staff plays during implementation and because of its success. Some staff

are very good at what they do as of this moment. However, their leadership capacity and agility

to implement this change may not be to the level required in order for the organization to evolve.

Some staff will not be able to continue and that others will need coaching in order to be

successful. Part of broadening the base to implement the change will be assessing and focusing

on staff development in the same way that ASP desires to improve its ability to develop leaders

within its summer staff. Some staff members are artifacts. They are synonymous with what ASP

  Amodei 14

is. They are a part of its culture. They are ASP. They are also a part of ASP’s past. While these

persons may be for change, their ability to change may be limited. It is not as simple as removing

them or changing their role. These key players will need to be a part of the change in order for it

to be successful.

Generate Short-Term Wins

Moving from a centralized staff-training model to a scalable, multi-site staff-training

model will take several years. It will not be a success after one summer. Because of staff

turnover, board member changes, and human nature, short-term wins need to be celebrated.

Short-term wins are tricky. Benchmarks of success need to be established by the first group that

establishes the strategy. Each benchmark, “win,” should lead toward the next, culminating in

overall success (Kotter, 2012, p.126). Without short-term wins, staff and stakeholders will

fatigue under the pressure of what seems like constant change. However, if benchmarks can be

established that allow people to see the larger picture, they are more likely to be energized by the

change process.

Evaluate  Centers  and  Training  Program  

Close  or  Renovate  Centers  

Create  the  Archetype  (Model)  

Implement  the  Model  (Year  1)  • Evaluate  for  Year  2  

Year  2  of  Training  •  Implement  Changes  from  Year  1  

• Celebrate  Number  of  Families  Served  

Year  3  • Celebrate  Number  of  Families  Served  

• Gather  Stories  from  Staff  from  Year  2  

• Evaluate  Staff  from  Years  2  and  3  

Year  4  •  Share  Stories  with  Key  Constituents  

• Update  on  Number  of  Families  Served  

Year  5  • Adjust  the  Model  as  Needed  

•  Freeze  Staff  Training  

Year  10  • Replicate  The  Model  

  Amodei 15

Taking the strategy and looking at it differently should help create benchmarks. First,

evaluating the program and existing centers will take two different groups and some time. This

will be a non-visible part of the process. The groups responsible will need to report to the board

and the year-round staff. It would be best if both these groups can give the report at the same

time. This is good for two reasons. On the one hand, it minimizes meetings and streamlines the

process. On the other hand, it enables staff and the board to see the two evaluations in light of the

same goal and process. ASP is evaluating in order to serve more families and improve leadership

development. The lens through which the evaluations are seen will become the lens through

which the board and staff see the change process. Upon completion of the reports, those

responsible need to feel a sense of accomplishment. They need to understand how their work

enables the overall mission. They need to be celebrated.

Second, take action on center renovations and closures. Negotiating sale of centers,

liquidation of stock, and reassigning key staff will take time as well. At the same time, the model

for staff training needs to start materializing. It is important to understand that an archetype of

the model is one training center. Establishing what an archetype is in order that it may be

replicated creates the overall model of operation. This process may create the need to reassign

staff, evaluate staff, and create new staff positions. Paramount to the process should be the

question: “Who is overseeing the total project?” Is it the CEO? Is it another person? Evaluating

centers and the overall program can occur with current staff, but driving that information towards

a common goal may take an additional person that is a part of the executive team. The

benchmark on this second phase is marking that ASP is ready to go to two sites for its staff

training. Readiness in this case, is the goal. Once ASP is ready to implement the change, it needs

  Amodei 16

to be celebrated that the organization has already come a long way. No one person or group will

be the focal point of this “win”. Rather, the board should celebrate the whole team.

Third, the new model is implemented. This alone is worthy of celebration at the

conclusion of summer. With each succeeding year there will be reason for celebration that will

be organic wins. However, reaching the goal will mean that culture has been maintained and is

not completely scalable without a loss of culture or values. Year 2, then, is a celebration because

more staff are being trained and more families are being served. Year 3, serves in the same way,

but at that point, it will be with two years of experience. Those two years will allow stories to be

collected from summer staff and families. Mistakes can be corrected at this point. By the fourth

year, the model should be close to a point of freezing. However, all along the way, more families

are being served and more staff are being developed as leaders. Each of these points of success

allow for celebration. By year five, the model should be ready to freeze. At this point, it is a

success because the model is able to add the archetype of a training site, go to three or more

training sites, and impose the lessons learned to CSP. The result is that the whole organization

has changed. This happened because ASP grew to the point of success in one location and

needed to evolve to serve more families.

Consolidate Gains and Produce More Change

Organizations will fall back into ‘the way we have always done it’ unless they are able to

overcome resistance to change (Kotter, 2012, p.138). It is likely that during the five-year period

of change, cohorts of staff or volunteers will romanticize the way it ‘used to be’. This is where

leadership needs to be resilient and maintain a non-anxious presence in the midst of change. Dan

Heath makes an amazing point in terms of resistance. Resistance to change will come due to fear.

  Amodei 17

Fear, and the resistance to change, is not the result of laziness, but exhaustion (Heath, 2010, p.

11). This is why celebrating short-term wins is so important. They are energizing. They are a

rallying cry for the change. Communication will be key. All stakeholders need to understand the

objectives: serve more families and develop more leaders. The goal is year ten. Ten years after

the change process began; ASP should not be able to remember conducting staff training in a

single location. The new model will enable the organization to grow broader and deeper, serve

more families, and produce more leaders. How? After refreezing the training model ASP will be

able to replicate the process to a third site. Change will enable ASP to serve more families and

develop more leaders. Because the model is sustainable, the organization will be able to set new

goals. Instead of only doing home repair, they will be able to engage in more communities

because of their expanded reach. There will always be a place for ministry that aids in temporary

needs. However, once the model for expansion is set, ASP will be able to look toward combating

systemic poverty through community engagement. They will be able to do more new home

builds. Because the archetype will be set for training and deployment, it will be applicable to

new home builds, more College Service Project partners, and new home builds across

Appalachia. One change begets another.

Anchoring New Approaches in the Culture

The irony about this change process is that it is partially about allowing the culture of

ASP to be more readily spread to its staff and other ventures. However, the success of the

process will change the culture. Perhaps the most significant change will be a more agile, less

reactive culture to one that is more measured and moldable to the processes that enable the

organization to serve more families and develop leaders. This change will be felt in the rhythm

  Amodei 18

of the year. Instead of an off-season and summer season, staff and volunteers will feel a year-

round focus on the core mission more so than they already do. These changes are not changes in

workflow. They are changes in culture. Changes in culture are changes in behavior. It is for this

reason that a change as significant as going to a multi-site training system while expanding the

ministry otherwise requires reinforcement of new behaviors within the organization. The

executive team must model these behaviors!

“Because changing anything of significance in highly interdependent systems often means changing nearly everything, business transformation can become a huge exercise that plays itself out over years, not months. [This stage] can become a decade-long process in which hundreds or thousands of people help lead and manage dozens of change projects” (Kotter, 2012, p.150).

This is where ASP may be at a deficit. They have a high turnover rate in their employment. A

change of this magnitude needs stable leadership. Those who will be hired during the process or

just prior need to have the desired attributes and behaviors instead of those that ‘fit in’ with the

current cultural norms. Job descriptions, expectations of staff and the way in which employees

engage in the community will need to change. Part of what will help with this transition is

naming the behaviors of the old culture (Kotter, 2012, p. 155). The mantras, manuals, and

artifacts associated with the previous culture will need to die. They will need a funeral. It must

be deliberate. Unfortunately, some of those artifacts will be long-standing staff. It is unlikely that

the organization will need to replace them. They will likely be unwilling to change and resign. It

will be painful. Because of the pain, it will be easy to slip into a state of anxiety and depression

allowing for old cultural habits to reemerge. Staff and board members should resist this

temptation. The change is about serving more families and developing more leaders. No body

grows without enduring pain and healing. The deepest of characters is riddled with scars. The

change in culture will come last (Kotter, 2012, p.159-165).

  Amodei 19

Appalachia Service Project has an amazing opportunity to live into the vision of its

forebears. Whether it is Tex Evans or Rueben Job, the legacy of the organization is about seeking

to help those who are in sub-standard housing and developing future leaders for the church and

society. In order for the organization to continue to thrive change is inevitable. There is far more

to explore than a paper such as this is capable of addressing. The financial analysis alone is a

massive undertaking. It may take two more years of research before ASP could be able to

implement the first phase of the change process. However, there is already a sense of urgency

and goals have been set. So long as the organization can remain focused on serving more

families and developing more leaders, it will be able to endure the challenges any change process

presents. Its leadership is strong and there are amazing possibilities with those who are the helm.

It is possible for Appalachia Service Project to grow to serving 2,000 families, extend its

leadership development into many more college campuses outside of Appalachia, and combat

systemic poverty. To do so the organization will need to change.

  Amodei 20

Works Cited

Bin Sayeed, O., & Shanker, M. (2009). Emotionally Intelligent Managers & Transformational Leadership Styles. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(4), 593-610.

Burlingame, D. (2009). Nonprofit and Philanthropic Studies Education: The Need to Emphasize

Leadership and Liberal Arts. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 15(1), 59-67. Collins, Jim (2011). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap...And Others Don't

HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. Greenleaf, R., & Spears, L. (1998). Introduction. In The Power of Servant-Leadership: Essays.

San Francisco, Calif.: Berrett-Koehler. Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2010). Switch: How to change things when change is hard. New York:

Broadway Books. Kotter, John P. (2012). Leading Change. Harvard Business Review Press. Kindle Edition.

Lindsell, H. (1991). Matthew. In NRSV Harper Study Bible (Expanded and updated. ed.). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House.

Mondros, J. (1997). Grassroots and Nonprofit Leadership: A Guide for Organizations in

Changing Times Berit Lakey, George Lakey, Rod Napier, and Janice Robinson. Philadelphia: New Society, 1995. 224 pp.

Schein, E. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Stephenson Jr., M. (2007). The "Permanent Things" and the Role of the Moral Imagination in

Organizational Life: Revisting the Foundations of Public and Nonprofit Leadership.Administrative Theory & Praxis, 29(2), 260-277.

  Amodei 21

Grade  Sheet  for:        

Criteria   Point  Value  Awarded  

   

Introduction  of  the  paper  

10%      (0  –  30  points)  

28  

Demonstrated  understanding  of  the  issues  facing  the  organization  and  the  analysis  of  the  8-­‐step  change  model    

35%  (0  –  105  points)  

103  

Integration  and  discussion  of  outside  academic  research.    Recommendations/  conclusions  based  on  analysis  

35%  (0  –  105points)  

99  

Academic  Support  (8  Sources)    

10%  (0  –  30  points)  

28  

Clarity  of  writing  (grammar,  paper  flow)  

10%  (0  –  30  points)  

27  

Total  Points  

Grade  

285  

95  

 Comments:   Nicely done, Andrew. I can tell that this is a topic/discussion in which you are invested.