The Leadership is Leaving, Now What? Change Management in a Science Park

ABSTRACT

This teaching case describes the organizational change process of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro Science Park (PTEC-UFRJ), an organization that plays a leading role in the innovation ecosystem of both the university and its surrounding state. The change process began in 2019, rooted on the leadership’s view that the Park’s economic sustainability depends on strategic redirection and transformation of employees’ attitudes and behavior, along with the redesign of PTEC-UFRJ’s internal processes. However, PTEC-UFRJ has the peculiarity of having its leadership appointed by the University Dean’s Office. In this context, management initiatives directed to supporting the change process are fundamental to secure its achievements and ensure its continuity. The case describes the decisions and actions took by PTEC-UFRJ’s executive director in order to guide the strategic change in the Park and the challenges faced. In view of the results and objectives already achieved, the most important point is to discuss PTEC-UFRJ’s future perspectives, the role of leadership and organizational policies, and practices that guarantee the sustainability of the organizational change

Palavras-chave:
teaching case; organizational change; leadership; science park; PTEC-UFRJ

RESUMO

Este caso para ensino descreve o processo de mudança organizacional do Parque Tecnológico da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro - PTEC-UFRJ, organização que desempenha papel fundamental no ecossistema de inovação da universidade e do estado em que se localiza. A mudança vem sendo implantada desde 2019 com base na visão de uma liderança que entende que a sustentabilidade econômica do Parque depende de redirecionamento estratégico e transformação das atitudes e comportamentos dos colaboradores, além de revisões nas configurações internas de processos e responsabilidades. No entanto, o PTEC-UFRJ apresenta a particularidade de ter sua liderança escolhida pela Reitoria da UFRJ. Nesse contexto, iniciativas gerenciais adequadas para sustentação e continuidade das mudanças são aspectos fundamentais para assegurar as conquistas alcançadas. O caso relata as decisões e ações que o diretor executivo do PTEC-UFRJ tomou no sentido de orientar a mudança estratégica no Parque, frente aos desafios enfrentados. Tendo em vista os resultados e objetivos já atingidos, o mais relevante é discutir as perspectivas futuras, o papel da liderança e as políticas e práticas organizacionais que garantam a sustentação da mudança.

Palavras-chave:
caso para ensino; mudança organizacional; liderança; parque tecnológico; PTEC-UFRJ

INTRODUCTION

In January 2023, while preparing to return from vacation, Vicente reflected on his next year managing the Science Park of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (PTEC-UFRJ). That would possibly be his last year as executive director and, in his view, there was a set of actions to be implemented that would consolidate the results achieved by the team over the last three years.

The numbers were very good. Revenue, which in 2019 was R$ 9.4 million and, due to the pandemic, had fallen below R$ 7 million in 2020, was expected to exceed R$ 16.5 million in 2023. The number of resident companies was the highest in its history - 28 - in addition to the 15 companies that joined the Associated Companies Program, implemented in 2022.

However, it wasn’t the numbers that worried him. This would be an election year for the renewal of the University Rectory and a possible change of leadership at PTEC-UFRJ could leave the team insecure, slow down projects, discontinue cultural changes and, in some way, threaten the improvements in management already achieved.

THE UFRJ SCIENCE PARK - CONTEXTUALIZATION

PTEC-UFRJ is an innovation and entrepreneurship environment linked to the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ). Its declared mission is to generate connections that enhance the transformation of knowledge into innovation, strengthening UFRJ and contributing to the sustainable development of society.

The Park began its activities in 2003, with the inauguration of the Oceanic Technology Laboratory (LabOceano), the result of a partnership between Petrobras and Coppe. The implementation of the Science Park was due to vision and personal commitment of Maurício Guedes, technical-administrative employee at Coppe. Maurício was the first executive director of PTEC-UFRJ, in a management that, in the words of an employee, “put the Park on its feet.” In November 2015, he was succeeded by Prof. José Carlos Pinto, also from Coppe.

The Park has been operating since its creation by offering infrastructure and providing services that favor innovation through connection and strengthening relationships between resident organizations and other stakeholders, notably UFRJ. Some of the services offered to companies are: coordination with research groups at the university; articulation with entrepreneurial initiatives by the university’s student body; coordination with other companies residing in the Park, in the university’s incubators and with institutions of interest; support in the development of corporate social responsibility and sustainability programs; holding monthly events and workshops; opportunities for experimentation and prospecting in the markets of China (in the TusPark partnership), the United States (in the County of Oklahoma partnership), and, within Brazil, through the Porto Digital-PE and Tecnopuc-RS ecosystems (Soft Landing program). When installing in the Science Park, resident companies also benefit from the ISS tax reduction offered by the city of Rio de Janeiro.

From 2014 onward, the so-called ‘Petrolão Scandal’ in Brazil significantly affected the Park, anchored, since its foundation, in the oil and gas ecosystem. The departure of resident companies, due to strategic decisions associated with the national and international political context, had a substantial financial impact and led to the perception of the pressing need for diversification of resident companies. In this sense, in 2018 AmBev opened its Brewery Technology Center and SENAI/CETIQT began work on the Biosynthetics Innovation Institute. The success in initiating the diversification of the Park is seen as the main hallmark of José Carlos Pinto’s management.

In November 2019, at the end of José Carlos’ administration, Vicente Ferreira, professor at the Coppead Graduate School of Business, took over the direction of PTEC-UFRJ. Four months later, the Covid-19 pandemic emergency was declared.

To face the challenges of the pandemic situation, a new form of membership in the Park, that of an associated company, was created in August 2021. In this format, organizations do not physically install themselves in the Park, but have access to services such as connection with the UFRJ ecosystem and its laboratories, students, and professors, in addition to the Park’s support for participation and organization of events and discounts on training programs and interaction with the University.

In December 2022, the Park was home to 28 resident companies - large, medium, and small -, six laboratories linked to UFRJ and 15 associated companies. Its income comes from rent and provision of services to resident and associated organizations, in addition to possible participation in public financing agreements and notices. Figure 1 shows the main numbers for PTEC-UFRJ in 2022.

Figure 1
Main numbers from PTEC-UFRJ - 2022.

The Park’s administration is independent from the UFRJ management bodies. The Park’s governance is made up of: Board of Directors, Executive Board, Architecture and Urban Planning Advisory Committee, Articulation Management Committee, New Business Application Evaluation Committee, and Performance Monitoring Committee. The executive director must be a university employee, appointed by the Rectory and approved by the Board of Directors, but without a defined mandate, that is, he or she can be dismissed at any time. In December 2022, the Park had 73 employees, including two career civil servants from UFRJ, 64 employees governed by the CLT, three interns, three scholarship holders, and one young apprentice.

LEADERSHIP’S VISION OF CHANGE

When taking over as director, Vicente’s main focus was to continue the diversification of resident companies, by attracting new companies to PTEC-UFRJ, as well as the search for greater operational efficiency in the Park’s processes. Before, however, there were questions he asked himself… Would the team have the same perception that he had, of a performance below the Park’s potential? What are employees’ expectations and attitudes toward the future? Would the group’s culture and values support his ideas? To transform the Park, Vicente wanted to understand the type of team he needed and would like to have.

To build this perception, he started by meeting individually with some of the employees. However, Vicente wanted to not only meet some of the group’s key employees, but also allow its members to get to know him and the others. He decided to implement a broader process, involving all employees, in order to promote the exchange of information and break down the barriers inherited from the hierarchical management style that characterized the Park. The good reception of this action transformed it into the Employee Training Program, carried out weekly since its implementation in December 2019, and which is based on the sharing, by the employees themselves, of knowledge on different topics - not necessarily directly related to the specific tasks performed by each at work. The program consists of presentations made by each employee to other members of the Park on topics that each considers relevant for good performance and productivity at work - such as previous professional experiences, use of software, quality techniques, and others.

This initiative was complemented by a formal diagnosis, with the support of a consultancy, focusing on the attitudes, behaviors, desires, and expectations of employees in relation to the Park, the group and leadership.

This initial work represented a true ‘unfreezing’ of the previous situation, revealing cultural aspects that allowed both the mapping of the group’s expectations and potential and the identification of ‘hidden problems’ related to culture and performance failures in internal processes, related to individual and group behavioral aspects. In this aspect, communication difficulties, conflicts, and lack of engagement emerged as points for future actions.

IMPLICATIONS FOR STRUCTURE AND PEOPLE MANAGEMENT

From these first movements, the change was leveraged by the review of internal processes and their responsibilities. This review led, at a later stage, to internal personnel reallocations and review of responsibilities. This work resulted in a new organizational chart, formalized in 2021. One of the main changes was the valorization of the people management area, previously part of the Administration and Finance Department, which became a coordination directly linked to the Executive Board. The executive director also joined the Corporate Articulations group - a movement that reinforces the understanding that the strategic core of the Park’s activity is the integration between the various stakeholders of the innovation ecosystem: companies, UFRJ, government, and society (see Figures 2 and 3).

Figure 2
Organizational chart and governance structure of PTEC-UFRJ 2020.

Figure 3
Organizational chart and governance structure of PTEC-UFRJ 2021.

At the same time, in 2020 the first strategic planning review meetings began. The departure of resident companies, associated with the challenges and changes in work brought about by the pandemic, made it urgent to act to reevaluate and redirect the Park’s strategies. A new front of change was opening.

With regard to people management, when Vicente took over, there was no formal system for evaluating employee performance at PTEC-UFRJ. There was a distribution of bonuses at the end of the year, but on a personal basis. In other words, the director made the distribution in a discretionary manner, without the criteria being pre-established. In practical terms, everyone received some value as a bonus, but no one knew how much they would receive, nor by what criteria a certain value was assigned to them.

Vicente implemented a feedback process focused on performance, which he recognizes is still incipient, but which prepares the group for a future, more complex and structured performance evaluation process. The feedback process, started in 2021, is quarterly and involves all Park employees at two levels:

• (1) each employee with their immediate manager discusses their development plans, difficulties faced and improvements that can be implemented in their activities, as well as management’s expectations regarding their performance;

• (2) each employee has an exclusive meeting with the executive director to present their vision of work at the Park, their expectations regarding the future, and suggestions for improvement. In terms of formal performance targets, there is currently a single global performance target assigned to the group as a whole. This goal is directly derived from the strategic planning objectives. Without reaching this target, there will be no bonus for the year. Everyone needs to work toward a common goal.

A Continuous People Development Policy (PCDP) is also being drawn up, covering the following actions: mapping and assessment of competence, job and salary policy and review of the ongoing employee training plan. Within the scope of training and development, in 2022, 3103 hours of training were carried out, distributed between internal training, postgraduate license, and courses paid for by the Park.

In 2022, the Park began studies to create its Position and Salary Plan. In the same year, organizational climate research was carried out using external consultancy instruments and the Great Place to Work Journey, which identified high levels of satisfaction and happiness at work and trust in the institution, as well as the importance of intensifying management practices feedback.

LEARNING FROM THE PANDEMIC

The pandemic imposed the need to quickly make the necessary adaptations to continue activities. At the end of March 2020, remote work was implemented for the entire team, with the exception of the Park maintenance team, which remained on an in-person work schedule throughout the period.

The pandemic phase highlighted the strength of the bonds and motivation of the team, who ‘wore the Park’s shirt.’ The difficulties and the need to articulate appropriate responses highlighted the group’s tacit knowledge in overcoming challenges both related to carrying out tasks and responsibilities and in the implementation of activities that allowed maintaining a good atmosphere in the team, interaction between group members, well-being and quality of life, such as Sextou Virtual (Friday happy-hour virtual meetings after work hours, for informal conversations and celebration of birthdays and other dates). Weekly meetings of the Employee Training Program were also maintained.

The successful experience consolidated the viability of remote work. The team’s mastery of virtual collaborative tools has allowed the working format at the Park to currently be hybrid, and each employee can work in person or in a home office, however many days a week they deem most appropriate.

For Vicente, this period explained and reinforced the team’s skills and served as an opportunity to build trust between the team and leadership. At the same time, as the emergency extended over time, concern about the departure of resident companies also increased. The old projections and perspectives had been overturned by the reality of the pandemic and the financial difficulties not only of the Park itself but of its surroundings and its stakeholders. It was necessary to review, rethink, and redirect the focus and strategic actions of PTEC-UFRJ.

REVIEW OF STRATEGIC PLANNING

When Vicente took over as executive director, PTEC-UFRJ had already formalized its Strategic Planning 2016-2045. The turbulence of the environment and PTEC’s own mission - the promotion of innovation - suggested that the planning time horizon was inadequate and that it would be necessary to review it before the projected time. The reality of the departure of resident companies resulting from the difficulties faced as a result of the Petrolão developments, the economic difficulties of the state of Rio de Janeiro, and the reality of remote work - reflected in lower demand for physical spaces in companies - made this review urgent.

Still in 2019, Vicente found that employees were not aware of the content of the Strategic Planning, or even, in some cases, of its existence. Initially, the decision was made to intensify the dissemination of the plan among employees, as a way of aligning the actions of the different areas. However, the degree of revision necessary to the plan was realized as its limitations were identified. Initially, Vicente formed a group of six functional managers and some leading analysts from the areas to review the strategic plan. The first obstacle perceived was the realization that the plan did not correspond to what the managers and leading analysts understood to be the reality and challenges of the Park. However, the group acknowledged that it did not have the technical skills to carry out the work of revising the plan.

Vicente chose to take a step back and offer training on strategic planning for the group, taught by Coppead. After the training, the lead analysts, without the participation of area managers, divided themselves and formed groups with the other employees to disseminate information and collect their opinions and perceptions about the challenges of PTEC-UFRJ. The work in these groups brought information to the planning review group to support the development of the new mission, values, vision, and strategic objectives. Therefore, the understanding of those responsible for preparing the new plan is that even indirectly, “everyone participated in the strategic planning.” This stage of training, work in groups and elaboration of the mission, values, vision, and strategic objectives extended throughout 2020, the most critical year of the pandemic. In 2021 and 2022, the group of leading managers and analysts, with support from Coppead, dedicated themselves to listing and developing the Park’s strategic projects.

Thus, the PTEC-UFRJ Strategic Plan 2020-2030 presents a new wording of the mission and vision, formalizes the Park’s values, and presents an articulated value proposition for its various target audiences. The apparently long cycle of the Strategic Plan reflects the maturity time of the technological innovation projects hosted by the Park. To articulate the feasibility of the vision, five strategic objectives were proposed, as shown in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1
Mission, vision, values, and target audiences of PTEC-UFRJ.

UFRJ Technology Park
Mission	Generate connections that enhance the transformation of knowledge into innovation, strengthening UFRJ and contributing to the sustainable development of society.
Vision 2030	Be the most effective connection mechanism between the uni-versity’s innovation ecosystem and the external environment.
Values	Excellence in management; Diversity; Commitment.
Target audiences	Internal public (Park functional management, Board of Directors, committees, and service providers); Resident companies (large companies and SMEs); Associated companies (large companies and SMEs); Investors; University (institutional, researchers, researchers in new areas of knowledge, and students); Government and society.

• Note. Source: PTEC-UFRJ (2023).

Table 2
Strategic objectives of PTEC-UFRJ 2020-2030.

PTEC - Strategic Objectives 2020-2030
Final objectives
• Promote the continuous increase in the ecosystem’s innovation capacity; • Expand the Park to discontinuous spaces and innovate in its relationship with companies; • Increase diversity in the Park in terms of economic sectors, company size and culture.
Organization and management objectives
• Increase the Park’s dynamism and operating autonomy; • Be recognized for your excellence in management.

• Note. Source: PTEC-UFRJ (2023).

For Vicente, the Park will only be able to fully achieve its growth objectives by changing the positioning of employees, breaking the bureaucratized way of working and adopting a new orientation: “We are all corporate articulations.” This means “taking the Park outside,” instead of the more passive stance, characteristic of the more traditional public management that the Park replicated. To confirm the commitment to the new orientation, the performance indicators of the corporate articulations area became the team’s global performance indicators (percentage of the Park’s occupied area and volume of resources for scientific cooperation above the contractual obligation of the companies installed).

EMPLOYEES’ VIEWS ON MANAGEMENT CHANGES

Maurício Guedes’ role and legacy are strongly recognized by the group. The leadership of the first director left its mark not only on the successful structuring of the Park, but also on the group’s culture. The employees, ultimately, credit him with the very existence of the Park, but at the same time, they express that the management, in this first phase, was hierarchical, with little communication beyond those defined by the organizational chart, even though the group was relatively small. They believe that this is due to the fact that the Park reflected, at that time, the traditional way of working in public management. They consider that this structure is, to a certain degree, incongruous with the Park’s own mission, which is innovation.

Regarding the management of the second director, employees recognize that it was important for the financial organization of the Park and highlight the successful movement toward the diversification of resident companies. However, there had not yet been a focus on cultural change, people were used to working in a certain way and there was no attempt to train and engage the team. In the words of one collaborator, “the Park was passive.”

So, when Vicente took over as director, what happened, in the employees’ view, was “a shake-up,” which many liked, as it was a chance to show who was really interested. For some, this opportunity to stand out was especially valued, considering that the Park has a reduced structure and that the chances of promotions and growth are not as broad (a relevant factor in the decision of employees to leave PTEC-UFRJ). The opportunities occurred mainly through four initiatives:

• (1) The Employee Training Program - weekly meetings of the entire group, in which one or more employees lead a presentation lasting approximately one hour on topics related to the tasks performed, or some other topic in which they are interested. It is seen by many as a chance to become known, to highlight their potential and even to express their interests in new responsibilities and challenges;

• (2) PAT Consulting - consultancy focused on behavioral aspects, supported by projective techniques, which worked as a true ‘catharsis’ and allowed employees’ attitudes, predispositions, personality traits, visions, and expectations about themselves, the group, and work in the organization to emerge;

• (3) Review of internal processes - opportunities to assume new responsibilities emerged from the review of internal processes and responsibilities, which resulted in the review of the organization chart, in addition to the automation of some administrative procedures, such as purchasing;

• (4) Continuing Training Plan - short training, individual or for the team, or at postgraduate level, at UFRJ itself.

Employees point to Vicente’s management style as the main instigator of the changes made. For them, the opportunity to change arose because Vicente is someone from the management field, with practical experience and a professor of administration. The question they ask is: What will happen if the direction changes? Some employees believe that the group still does not have enough autonomy to continue the work, and fear that with their departure “some areas will maintain the pace, but others will not.”

At the same time, employees believe that certain initiatives served an important role, but may have already expired and need to be reviewed - as is the case with the Employee Training Program.

Vicente returned from his vacation with these dilemmas in mind, wondering how to minimize the team’s insecurity, maintain the pace of projects and preserve the cultural changes made. Ultimately, he wondered how to find ways so that the change process he led was sustainable, so that his contribution to the Park would not be lost in a change of leadership and so that the next changes would be adequately balanced with the team’s performance.

DATA SOURCES

The information contained in the case comes from data obtained through interviews with employees, former employees, and managers of the Park. In addition, secondary sources were consulted, such as documents and publications from the Park, identified in the references.

DIDACTIC OBJECTIVES

The use of cases for teaching aims to develop participants’ analytical, argumentation, and decision-making skills (Mauffette-Leenders et al., 1997), enabling the student’s active involvement in the teaching-learning process. The present case aims to discuss the process of organizational change, particularly regarding the role of leadership and managerial actions for its support and continuity. The case was especially written for application in graduate courses and should be discussed based on the literature on organizational change and leadership. The case can also be discussed in undergraduate administration courses, in leadership and organizational behavior subjects, in final periods in which students have some experience in organizations.

The structure of the case and the teaching notes follow the recommendations of Chimenti (2020), Alberton and Silva (2018), and Roesch (2006).

Students must debate, among other aspects, the role of the leader and the management policies and practices appropriate to the process of organizational change in its different phases - in addition to aspects such as the barriers and drivers of change and the role of organizational culture in this process. One of the Park’s distinctive characteristics is the fact that leadership is exercised by a person with no direct link to the organization, for a mandate without a defined term - which poses special challenges to sustaining and consolidating change and highlights the role of leadership in that process. The case-specific educational objectives are:

• (a) Describe the real situation faced by PTEC-UFRJ in the face of the challenging economic scenario deepened by the COVID-2019 pandemic;

• (b) Discuss the opportunities presented by a disruptive scenario (pandemic) as a driver of change, based on the active role of leadership;

• (c) Understand the role and relevance of the leader-employee relationship in the change process and in team engagement;

• (d) Identify practices, tools, and management policies appropriate to support the change process in its different phases;

• (e) Identify potential organizational drivers and barriers to change;

• (f) Discuss the consolidation of a change process.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

In view of the didactic objectives, we propose the following questions to guide the case’s discussion. These can be enriched with other questions that the professor see fit to the class, or be directed to specific themes that the professor chooses to develop with the class:

• (1) How would you describe the role of Vicente’s leadership and his relationship with the team in the PTEC-UFRJ change process? How was team engagement built?

• (2) Which aspects of organizational culture represent barriers and which represent potential drivers for change in the Park?

• (3) What management practices, tools, and policies can support the process of change in the Park?

• (4) How to consolidate the change process, ensuring the achievements obtained in a future change of leadership?

• (5) What risks could the non-consolidation of the change represent for the Park?

PREPARATION FOR THE CASE

Before analyzing the case, it is important that the professor explains the relevance of the case as a learning strategy that seeks to bring theoretical knowledge developed in class closer to concrete situations faced by organizations and their managers and employees. The professor must inform students about the stages in applying the case, highlighting the importance of individual preparation for productive debate and learning. It is essential that students have access to the case text and bibliography in advance so that they can prepare for the discussion, familiarizing themselves with the situation presented and developing their arguments for engaged participation in the debate. It is suggested that students be encouraged to seek to expand the information presented in the case by visiting the PTEC-UFRJ website, in addition to finding out about science parks and their role in innovation ecosystems. Finally, it is worth highlighting that the literature on organizational change, leadership, and their interactions is vast, as they are complex and multifaceted phenomena. However, considering that the main purpose of teaching cases is to bring students closer to situations of organizational practice, basic reading aimed at solving managerial challenges is recommended - which can be expanded at the professor ‘s discretion to suit the specific learning needs of the class. Thus, to structure the case analysis, we suggest Kotter's model (1995) with its eight steps for implementing change (the professor can find a reflection on the limitations of this model in Hughes, 2016). Robbins and Judge (2014b) and Rodrigues and Narducci (2021) present an overview of the change process, its barriers and drivers, and impacts on employees. As a complementary reading on resistance to change, Silva and Vergara (2003) present a relevant alternative view on the phenomenon, with the potential to guide management practice, especially in the aspect of communication during change processes. Additionally, professors and students in advanced training can find in the study by Mehboob et al. (2022) an in-depth analysis of the importance of positive cognitive evaluations of change by employees, as a way of promoting support and success in change processes. On the topic of leadership, in Robbins and Judge (2014a) students will be able to find a concise analysis of literature findings on different leadership styles and their effectiveness in different contexts. Along the same lines, the article by Souza and Wood (2022) discusses the multiple ways of studying leadership, with emphasis on recent empirical and theoretical studies of Brazilian scientific literature. The article by Dias and Borges (2015) delves into the characteristics of transformational leadership. For professors or students in advanced training, the article by Schermuly et al. (2022) relates leadership styles to employee empowerment, a very relevant aspect for change processes. For a view on management initiatives to support change processes, with an emphasis on aspects of organizational behavior, we suggest Maheshwari and Vohra (2015). Finally, Andersen (2022) presents a vision based on consulting experience on the role of the leader in supporting employees in the process of changing their mindsets.

PLAN FOR CASE APPLICATION

We suggest four stages for conducting the case analysis, totaling a 120-minute class: (1) opening (10 minutes); (2) discussion in small groups (40 minutes); (3) plenary discussion (55 minutes); (4) closing (15 minutes).

• (1) Opening: the professor can start the discussion of the case by asking students about the factors that led to the need for change, from the perspective of the PTEC executive director, as well as about the perspectives and opportunities for the Park at the present, in a way to align perceptions about the factors driving the change process. You can also ask students about information obtained in relation to PTEC-UFRJ or other science parks, as a way of enriching the information for discussing the case. At this stage, the professor can basically discuss the challenges faced by PTEC-UFRJ that led to the actions described in the case.

• (2) Small group discussion: in groups of up to five people, preferably in separate discussion rooms, students must debate the answers to the questions presented by the case, based on individual answers, in order to construct group proposals. It is suggested that the composition of the groups seeks to guarantee, as far as possible, diversity of views, experiences, and knowledge, with a view to enriching perceptions about the case and stimulating the development of students’ technical and behavioral skills.

• (3) Plenary discussion: after discussion in the groups, it is suggested that each group presents its analysis orally, as a way of encouraging everyone’s participation in the debate. The professor must encourage argumentation that leads to a richer perception of the case by the whole class, exploring the convergences and divergences of the points of view of the different groups. The plenary discussion should cover the questions for discussion 1 to 5.

Question (1) How would you describe the role of Vicente’s leadership and his relationship with the group in the PTEC-UFRJ change process? How was team engagement built?

The fundamental role of leadership in organizational change processes is well established in administrative literature. No process aimed at transforming an organization is successful without the support of key leaders, as it requires decisions regarding investments, prioritization of projects, definition of organizational policies and practices, and, in some cases, strategic reorientation. Leaders also play a crucial role in spreading new values and new behaviors in the organization, especially when they use personal example (see the bibliography on leadership indicated in the ‘Preparation for the case’ section). Furthermore, in change processes one of the most relevant phenomena is resistance - therefore, leaders need to ensure the support of employees for the success of the change, gaining trust, adopting a collaborative stance, empathy, and appreciation of subordinates, and at the same time provide the tools that prepare them to act in the new context. With these challenges in mind, transformational leadership presents itself as one of the most promising for the context of change. Transformational leadership (Dias & Borges, 2015; Robbins & Judge, 2014a, pp. 263-268) is characterized by the following elements: idealized influence (promotes a vision and a sense of mission, instills pride, gains respect and trust); inspirational motivation (communicates high expectations, expresses important goals in a simple way); intellectual stimulation (promotes intelligence, rationality, and careful problem solving); individualized consideration (gives personal attention, treats each employee individually, guides, advises). Vicente’s leadership style presents these elements, having generated trust, positive perceptions of change, and engagement, at least among a significant number of employees.

Considering the steps for implementing Kotter's change (1995), some examples of actions taken by Park leadership are highlighted in Table 3.

Table 3
Stages of organizational change by Kotter (1995).

Change implementation steps	Examples of actions
(1) Establish a sense of urgency.	Vicente initiates individual meetings with employees to learn about their perceptions, carries out a formal diagnosis with the help of a consultant (PAT), and identifies hidden problems relating to PTEC’s culture and processes.
(2) Form a powerful guiding coalition.	Internal duties are reviewed, the organization chart is revised, and the people management area is created to enhance its role. The strategic importance of corporate articulation is also reinforced, with Vicente joining the Articulation Management Committee.
(3) Creating a vision	Meetings are held for the participatory review of PTEC’s strategic planning, with reformulation of its mission, vision, values, target audiences, and stra-tegic objectives.
(4) Communicating the vision.	The participatory formulation of strategic planning involved, albeit indirectly, all employees, who became aware of PTEC’s vision and strategy. The performance indicators in the corporate coordination area were transformed into global performance indicators for the team.
(5) Empowering others to act on the vision.	Training was implemented through informal and formal actions, such as: training in strategic planning, Continuous Training Plan, Employee Training Program, implementation of a feedback process focused on performance, and beginning of the elaboration of the Continuous People Development Policy (PCDP).
(6) Planning for and creating short-term wins.	There is a perception of recognition, on the part of employees, for those who dedicate themselves. A system for performance evaluation was estab-lished, with feedback meetings between the people evaluated, the direct managers, and Vicente.
(7) Consolidating improvements and producing even more changes.	A formal feedback process was implemented focusing on performance and pre-established indicators, which allows individual and team paths to be corrected. Development of job and salary policy.
(8) Institutionalizing new approaches.	Reinforcement was given through recognition and reward for individual and team performance. Regarding organizational success, the results of the Park’s performance indicators are widely publicized

The information from the case indicates that the first six steps were taken and included strong action from Vicente. Some important initiatives have not yet been fully implemented, such as performance evaluation and some strategic projects, but are in the elaboration phase or in its first stages of implementation.

(2) Which aspects of organizational culture represent barriers, and which represent potential drivers for change in the Park?

The hierarchical and bureaucratic culture represents a barrier (Robbins & Judge, 2014b; Rodrigues & Narducci, 2021). Even though there has been a strong movement for change and the employees are not public servants (apart from the director and a manager), the bureaucratic culture of the university strongly influences interactions and the way in which employees construct their perceptions regarding work. Employees realize this risk when they say that the group does not yet have the autonomy to walk the change process alone and when they ask themselves what will happen if Vicente leaves the management of PTEC-UFRJ. As drivers, we can point to the engagement evidenced throughout the change process, the resilience, commitment, and cooperation of employees in quickly solving complex challenges, evidenced by the speed with which the Park adapted to the conditions of the pandemic while being able to maintain the development of projects such as the review of strategic planning and weekly training. The commitment to maintaining the informal interaction represented by Sextou Virtual also shows the cohesion and strong bonds of the group.

(3) What management practices, tools, and policies can support the process of change in the Park?

The sustainability and success of the change process depend on the positive perception of the change by employees, in order to generate commitment and engagement (Mehboob et al. (2022). Practices and policies aimed at people management must reinforce desired behaviors and discourage unwanted behaviors from managers and other employees. Thus, training, leadership development, recognition and reward, selection, and other practices must express in their criteria the values sought by the organization in the new situation. Maheshwari and Vohra (2015) point out that critical people management practices during a change process must be considered on the following fronts:

• (a) Culture - people management practices and policies must create a supportive culture, as new attitudes and behaviors require trust, adaptation, and time to be manifested;

• (b) Leadership - management literature recognizes that success or failure in implementing change processes depends on leadership’s ability to gain support from employees, since resistance is an expected effect and represents a strong obstacle to change. Resistance can be reduced, and commitment encouraged with the appropriate leadership style. Leaders must be encouraged to provide a vision for change, make their objectives clear, and lead by example. More democratic styles, focused on the development of subordinates, are better suited to the challenges of the change process;

• (c) Cross-function integration - refers to individuals, processes, and information from two or more separate organizational functions being brought together to complete tasks. Cross-functional teams increase employee participation, shared responsibility, perception of organizational challenges and allow for more appropriate solutions in complex contexts. However, the success of cross-functional teams depends on training, coordination, and performance measurement - as well as trust between members. Therefore, people management practices in terms of training, performance management, and building trust among team members can facilitate cross-functional integration and result in positive employee perception during change processes;

• (d) Training - successful implementation of change involves not only training and developing employees in using new tools and processes, but also establishing an environment conducive to future continuous learning. Training allows employees to have clarity about how to achieve organizational objectives, helps employees overcome knowledge assimilation barriers, and allows the development of behavioral skills that contribute to a culture of support and openness to change;

• (e) Communication - communication is a fundamental factor for the effective implementation of organizational change. If change communication is not clear and well managed, it can result in rumors and increase resistance to change. Therefore, during change processes, open communication is vital, as it allows problems to be identified and increases the likelihood of identifying the most appropriate solutions to them. People management practices must reinforce open, transparent, and multi-directional communication, fostering an atmosphere of trust and collaboration and a positive perception among employees regarding change.

The authors also highlight the need for investment in information systems aimed at people management that support the establishment of clear goals for the change effort, help with communication and training efforts, and increase opportunities for employee participation.

(4) How to consolidate the change process, ensuring the achievements obtained in a future change of leadership?

In the final stages proposed by Kotter's model (1995), leadership must make the necessary reviews and adjustments to the initiatives adopted and, subsequently, stabilize the change.

Step 7, evaluation and adjustments, presents an important challenge, as the stabilization of new practices and policies should, ideally, be done after their review. Practices that represented important actions driving the Park’s change process, such as the Employee Training Program, for example, are criticized by employees.

In stage 8, stabilization itself, the new desired behaviors must be reinforced, and practices and policies institutionalized that reinforce the new status quo. Thus, managerial practices and policies - especially those for human capital management, such as recognition, reward, training, performance evaluation, and others - must cease to be discretionary and become part of the organization’s system of rules and standards, with care of not generating rigidity that contributes to the ‘bureaucratization’ of communication and behavior. Feedback mechanisms must be created that allow monitoring and correcting the direction of actions in the organization. Considering Kotter's model (1995), PTEC-UFRJ does not yet appear to be ready to stabilize most of its achievements, as sensitive management practices and policies have not yet been fully implemented, evaluated, and adjusted.

(5) What risks could the non-consolidation of the change represent for the Park?

The main risk of not consolidating the change is the loss of the results obtained, returning to the more bureaucratic and reactive culture that the Park presented. For example, with the end of the pandemic and a change in leadership, certain innovations such as flexibility in adopting remote work may be abandoned. Additionally, there may be a loss of support and trust in leadership and marked resistance to future change initiatives. On the other hand, it is always necessary to measure the appropriate pace of change, given the context, strategic objectives, and team performance. Change also has several associated costs, in some cases linked to team turnover, and this balance needs to be struck.

(4) Closing: the professor can close the discussion of the case seeking to integrate the proposals of the different groups, building a joint understanding of the main challenges and perspectives for consolidating change in the Park, and whether the new situation resulting from the change process will allow PTEC-UFRJ to respond to the challenges that arise in the post-pandemic context.

REFERÊNCIAS

• Alberton, A., & Silva, A. B. (2018). Como escrever um bom caso para ensino? Reflexões sobre o método. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 22(5), 745-761. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2018180212
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2018180212
• Andersen, E. (2022). Mudar é difícil. Veja como torná-lo menos doloroso. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2022/04/change-is-hard-heres-how-to-make-it-less-painful?language=pt
  » https://hbr.org/2022/04/change-is-hard-heres-how-to-make-it-less-painful?language=pt
• Chimenti, P. C. P. S. (2020). Reflexões sobre casos de ensino memoráveis. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 24(5), 376-379. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2020200102
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2020200102
• Dias, M. A. M. J., & Borges, R. S. G. (2015). Estilos de liderança e desempenho de equipes no setor público. REAd. Revista Eletrônica de Administração, 21, 200-221. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-2311.0542014.53468
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-2311.0542014.53468
• Hughes, M. (2016). Leading changes: Why transformation explanations fail. Leadership, 12(4), 449-469. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715015571393
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715015571393
• Kotter, J. P. (1995). Liderando a mudança: Por quê os esforços de transformação falham. Harvard Business Review, 73, 259-267. https://hbr.org/1995/05/leading-change-why-transformation-efforts-fail-2?language=pt.
  » https://hbr.org/1995/05/leading-change-why-transformation-efforts-fail-2?language=pt.
• Maheshwari, S., & Vohra, V. (2015). Identifying critical HR practices impacting employee perception and commitment during organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(5), 872-894. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2014-0066
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2014-0066
• Mauffette-Leenders, L. A., Erskine, J. A., & Leenders, M. R. (1997). Learning with Cases. University of Western Ontario.
• Mehboob, F., Othman, N., Fareed, M., & Raza, A. (2022). Avaliações da mudança e ressignificação do trabalho como base para inculcar o apoio à mudança: Uma manifestação bifacetada. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 24(2), 207-229. https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v24i2.4165
  » https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v24i2.4165
• Parque Tecnológico da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. (2020). Relatório de sustentabilidade do Parque Tecnológico da UFRJ 2019. https://www.parque.ufrj.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Relatorio-de-Sustentabilidade-Parque-2019-PT.pdf
  » https://www.parque.ufrj.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Relatorio-de-Sustentabilidade-Parque-2019-PT.pdf
• Parque Tecnológico da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. (2022). Relatório de sustentabilidade do Parque Tecnológico da UFRJ 2020-2021. https://www.parque.ufrj.br/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Relatorio-de-Sustentabilidade-PTec2020-2021.pdf
  » https://www.parque.ufrj.br/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Relatorio-de-Sustentabilidade-PTec2020-2021.pdf
• Parque Tecnológico da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. (2023). Planejamento Estratégico do Parque Tecnológico da UFRJ 2020-2030. UFRJ.
• Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2014a). Liderança. In S. P. Robbins, & T. A. Judge (Eds.), Fundamentos do comportamento organizacional (pp. 249-275). Pearson.
• Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2014b). Mudança organizacional e gestão do estresse. In S. P. Robbins, & T. A. Judge (Eds.), Fundamentos do comportamento organizacional (pp. 370-390). Pearson.
• Rodrigues, D. F., & Narducci, V. (2021). Mudança e cultura organizacional. FGV Editora.
• Roesch, S. M. A. (2006). Notas sobre a construção de casos para ensino. Encontro Nacional da Anpad, 2006, Salvador, 30. http://www. anpad.org.br/eventos.php?cod_evento=1&cod_edicao_subsecao=149&cod_evento_edicao=10&cod_edicao_ trabalho=5497
  » http://www. anpad.org.br/eventos.php?cod_evento=1&cod_edicao_subsecao=149&cod_evento_edicao=10&cod_edicao_ trabalho=5497
• Schermuly, C., Creon, L., Gerlach, P., Graßmann, C., & Koch, J. (2022). Leadership styles and psychological empowerment: A meta-analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 29(1), 73-95. https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518211067751
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518211067751
• Silva, J. R. G., & Vergara, S. C. (2003). Sentimentos, subjetividade e supostas resistências à mudança organizacional. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 43(3),1 0-21. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75902003000300002
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75902003000300002
• Souza, R., & Wood, T., Jr. (2022). Múltiplas lentes de estudo e abordagem da liderança. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 62(6), e2021-0392. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020220607x
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020220607x

Edited by

Editor-in-chief:

Marcelo de Souza Bispo (Universidade Federal da Paraíba, PPGA, Brazil)

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5817-8907

Associate Editor:

Sidnei Marinho (Universidade do Vale do Itajaí, Brazil)

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0396-5898

Data availability

RAC encourages data sharing but, in compliance with ethical principles, it does not demand the disclosure of any means of identifying research subjects, preserving the privacy of research subjects. The practice of open data is to enable the reproducibility of results, and to ensure the unrestricted transparency of the results of the published research, without requiring the identity of research subjects.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  25 Mar 2024
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  12 May 2023
• Reviewed
  05 Feb 2024
• Accepted
  05 Feb 2024