From Resistance to Resilience: Navigating Organizational Change
From Resistance to Resilience: Navigating Organizational Change
Embedded Files
I. Foreword | Change Isn't an Interruption, It's the Norm
I. Foreword | Change Isn't an Interruption, It's the Norm
In a small startup team, "change" is not an option; it is a constant.
Looking back at the KulaiDelicacy project, it began with two people and gradually expanded. The ultimate goal was for me to step back from multiple roles and finally be responsible only for decision-making as an investor. Therefore, the project was a process of development and evolution. Every evolution was accompanied by change, which spanned from partners to systems to outputs.
Therefore, change is not an interruption; it is the normal state of a developing project. Perhaps you can see it as a continuous evolutionary process pieced together from countless small projects.
Change is unavoidable. If you don't initiate change, you cannot withstand the impacts of the era. Famous companies like Nokia, once kings in their field, were gradually replaced and eliminated during the evolution of the times. Of course, perhaps it was successful in another way, transforming from a frontline brand to a behind-the-scenes player, completing a shift in its domain.
My own career has also been a transition from one field to another, adapting to changes in my own environment. Although the direction changes, the portable and transferable skills are continuously honed.
II. Internal Change: From "Rule by Person" to "Rule by System"
II. Internal Change: From "Rule by Person" to "Rule by System"
Resistance Faced:
Team resisting standardization: How to introduce systems and SOPs during execution.
Partner resisting the psychological hurdle of "transparency" and "process."
Key Strategies:
Phased implementation → Results first, process later.
Persuade with data → Show the visible benefits of "change."
Make rules public → Build trust to replace individual will.
In the early stages, the project relied heavily on the operator's personal experience and trust. The advantage was the rapid execution of tasks. The disadvantage, in the long run, was that reliance on "rule by person" led to emotional and ambiguous issues.
The solution is to upgrade from "rule by person" to "system governance." All large-scale enterprises today rely on system operations.
Looking at the F&B industry, the companies that are expanding rapidly all use systematic management and replicable models. Their goal isn't to be the best in the industry (most delicious) but to meet the needs of capital (most profitable). In this trend, small businesses are like swimming against the current—if you don't advance, you fall back and are eventually abandoned.
Reasons for Resistance:
Fear of being replaced.
Unwillingness to leave the comfort zone (human nature).
Fear of transparency, worrying about being bound by rules and losing freedom.
Solution Strategies:
Build consensus. If it doesn't work once, try multiple times. Only after reaching a consensus can you gain the partner's support for a top-down promotion.
In this project, I continuously made attempts in this area, such as:
Optimizing the order-taking process, moving from reliance on customer service to a system-based ordering, and using data as a persuasion tool (reducing labor needs, decreasing errors, increasing customer trust and satisfaction).
Optimizing the kitchen team's work, moving from only being responsible for cooking to unified management. This effectively centralized management and controlled costs, spoilage rates, and inventory.
Moving financial records from handwritten notes to an app, and finally establishing a complete financial system to separate public and private funds. (Although for two partners, it was all "their own money"), this invisibly added a sense of formality and strengthened the concept of professional conduct, effectively preventing personal emotions from affecting work.
Conclusion:
Moving from "rule by person" to "system management" is not about using rules to limit development. It's about building development and creativity on a set of shared principles—much like the evolution of the PMBOK® Guide, elevating from tools to concepts, like learning martial arts and progressing from forms to formlessness.
III. External Change: When Policy Shocks Reshape Everything
III. External Change: When Policy Shocks Reshape Everything
External Event:
Gambling ban implemented → Core customer base vanished → Market structure fractured.
The Core of the Change:
No longer "optimization," but "survival."
Key Decisions:
Initiate strategic contraction → Stop expansion, freeze non-essential spending.
Scale down to a two-person model → Ensure positive cash flow.
Retain core assets → System, brand, supply chain, customer database.
Exit Strategy:
The exit is not the "end," but the "final form of change."
Transfer the business/leave it to the partner.
Ensure their sustainable operation.
Achieve a "clean exit + retained experience" for myself.
Changes in the external environment are the main drivers of transformation, such as a sudden policy that hits the market and causes an exodus of people. To cope with this, without a secondary (local) market to fall back on, survival is essential.
However, in this process, I made a mistake: I let the core talent go too early.
Why survive? To make a comeback one day. When the last trained, qualified employee left (a loss of technical skill), it all became unsalvageable. In the end, I had to painfully scale back completely.
The current situation, to put it nicely, is "still alive." To put it bluntly, it's "barely surviving." Even if the market recovers one day, the fundamental technology and talent are gone. A comeback may be impossible.
But from another perspective, if the systematic management had reached a certain level of maturity, that itself would be a form of capital and confidence to start over.
While technology and talent are core, the "stage" (i.e., the system and brand) is equally critical. You cannot lack either. Systematic management and brand assets are the solid stage that allows core talent to return and perform again.
IV. Core Principles of Change Management
IV. Core Principles of Change Management
First identify → Then communicate → Then act → Then review.
Internally, rely on communication; externally, rely on strategy.
Change is not about fighting uncertainty, but about managing uncertainty with systematic thinking.
The core principle of change management is to identify, communicate, act, and review—the PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle.
This requires a strong psychological quality, not a complacent satisfaction with the status quo. Being content with the status quo is something for a business that is already large-scale or stable, not an idea for a company in its early or mid-stages of development.
V. Conclusion | Change Isn't Failure, It's Evolution
V. Conclusion | Change Isn't Failure, It's Evolution
"Maintaining the status quo" is not resilience; "continuous adaptation" is.
KulaiDelicacy's ability to leave behind a complete system and brand from a collapse is an example of a "successful retreat."
This experience proves: The ultimate ability in project management is not just to push forward, but to know when to stop.
Change is necessary; it is a manifestation of evolution. Unless the final form is reached and the environment no longer changes, one cannot stop changing. It's like human history—evolving from apes to modern humans because the environment stopped changing drastically. But in the business world, this is unrealistic.
The essence of project management is perhaps not the perfect execution of a set plan, but leading a team to continuously evolve through change.
Finally, prepare yourself mentally. Welcome change, and embrace the future.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse