A The forces that operate to bring about change in organisations can be thought of as winds which are many and varied - from small summer breezes that merely disturb a few papers, to mighty howling gales which cause devastation to structures and operations, causing consequent reorientation of purpose and rebuilding. Sometimes, however, the winds die down to give periods of relative calm, periods of relative organisational stability. Such a period was the agricultural age, which Goodman (1995) maintains prevailed in Europe and western societies as a whole until the early 1700s. During this period, wealth was created in the context of an agriculturally based society influenced mainly by local markets (both customer and labour) and factors outside people’s control, such as the weather. During this time, people could fairly well predict the cycle of activities required to maintain life, even if that life might be at little more than subsistence level.

B To maintain the meteorological metaphor, stronger winds of change blew to bring in the Industrial Revolution and the industrial age. Again, according to Goodman, this lasted for a long time, until around 1945. It was characterised by a series of inventions and innovations that reduced the number of people needed to work the land and, in turn, provided the means of production of hitherto rarely obtainable goods; for organisations, supplying these in ever increasing numbers became the aim. To a large extent, demand and supply were predictable, enabling . companies to structure their organisations along what Burns and Stalker (1966) described as mechanistic lines, that is as systems of strict hierarchical structures and firm means of control.

C This situation prevailed for some time, with demand still coming mainly from the domestic market and organisations striving to fill the ‘supply gap’. Thus the most disturbing environmental influence on organisations of this time was the demand for products, which outstripped supply. The saying attributed to Henry Ford that ‘You can have any colour of car so long as it is black’, gives a flavour of the supply-led state of the market. Apart from any technical difficulties of producing different colours of car, Ford did not have to worry about customers’ colour preferences: he could sell all that he made. Organisations of this period can be regarded as ‘task-oriented’, with effort being put into increasing production through more effective and efficient production processes.

D As time passed, this favourable period for organisations began to decline. In the neo-industrial age, people became more discriminating in the goods and services they wished to buy and, as technological advancements brought about increased productivity, supply overtook demand. Companies began, increasingly, to look abroad for additional markets.

E At the same time, organisations faced more intensive competition from abroad for their own products and services. In the West, this development was accompanied by a shift in focus from manufacturing to service, whether this merely added value to manufactured products, or whether it was service in-its own right. In the neo-industrial age of western countries, the emphasis moved towards adding value to goods and services - what Goodman calls the value-oriented time, as contrasted with the task- oriented and products/services-oriented times of the past.

F Today, in the post-industrial age, most people agree that organisational life is becoming ever more uncertain, as the pace of change quickens and the future becomes less predictable. Writing in 1999, Nadler and Tushman, two US academics, said: ‘Poised on the eve of the next century, we are witnessing a profound transformation in the very nature of our business organisations. Historic forces have converged to fundamentally reshape the scope, strategies, and structures of large enterprises.’ At a less general level of analysis, Graeme Leach, Chief Economist at the British Institute of Directors, claimed in the Guardian newspaper (2000) that: ‘By 2020, the nine-to-five rat race will be extinct and present levels of self-employment, commuting and technology use, as well as age and sex gaps, will have changed beyond recognition.’ According to the article, Leach anticipates that: ‘In 20 years time, 20-25 percent of the workforce will be temporary workers and many more will be flexible, ... 25 percent of people will no longer work in a traditional office and ... 50 percent will work from home in some form.’ Continuing to use the ‘winds of change’ metaphor, the expectation's of damaging gale-force winds bringing the need for rebuilding that takes the opportunity to incorporate new ideas and ways of doing things.

G Whether all this will happen is arguable. Forecasting the future is always fraught with difficulties. For instance, Mannermann (1998) sees future studies as part art and part science and notes: ‘The future is full of surprises, uncertainty, trends and trend breaks, irrationality and rationality, and it is changing and escaping from our hands as time goes by. It is also the result of actions made by innumerable more or less powerful forces.’ What seems certain is that the organisational world is changing at a fast rate - even if the direction of change is not always predictable. Consequently, it is crucial that organisational managers and decision makers are aware of, and able to analyse the factors which trigger organisational change.

Many studies of the brain processes underlying the creation of memory consolidation (lasting memories) have involved giving various human and animal subjects treatment, while training them to perform a task. These have contributed greatly to our understanding.

In pioneering studies using goldfish, Bernard Agranoff found that protein synthesis inhibitors injected after training caused the goldfish to forget what they had learned. In other experiments, he administered protein synthesis inhibitors immediately before the fish were trained. The remarkable finding was that the fish learned the task completely normally, but forgot it within a few hours - that is, the protein synthesis inhibitors blocked memory consolidation, but did not influence short-term memory.

There is now extensive evidence that short-term memory is spared by many kinds of treatments, including electro-convulsive therapy (ECT), that block memory consolidation. On the other hand, and equally importantly, neuroscientist Ivan Izquierdo found that many drug treatments can block short-term memory without blocking memory consolidation. Contrary to the hypothesis put forward by Canadian psychologist Donald Hebb, in 1949, long-term memory does not require short-term memory, and vice versa.

Such findings suggest that our experiences create parallel, and possibly independent stages of memory, .each with a different life span. All of this evidence from clinical and experimental studies strongly indicates that the brain handles recent and remote memory in different ways; but why does it do that?

We obviously need to have memory that is created rapidly: reacting to an ever and rapidly changing environment requires that. For example, most current building codes require that the heights of all steps in a staircase be equal. After taking a couple of steps, up or down, we implicitly remember the heights of the steps and assume that the others will be the same. If they are not the same, we are very likely to trip and fall. Lack of this kind of rapidly created implicit memory would be bad for us and for insurance companies, but perhaps good for lawyers. It would be of little value to us if we remembered the heights of the steps only after a delay of many hours, when the memory becomes consolidated.

The hypothesis that lasting memory consolidates slowly over time is supported primarily by clinical and experimental evidence that the formation of long-term memory is influenced by treatments and disorders affecting brain functioning. There are also other kinds of evidence indicating more directly that the memories consolidate over time after learning. Avi Kami and Dov Sagi reported that the performance of human subjects trained in a visual skill did not improve until eight hours after the training was completed, and that improvement was even greater the following day. Furthermore, the skill was retained for several years.

Studies using human brain imaging to study changes in neural activity induced by learning have also reported that the changes continue to develop for hours after learning. In an innovative study using functional imaging of the brain, Reza Shadmehr and Henry Holcomb examined brain activity in several brain regions shortly after human subjects were trained in a motor learning task requiring arm and hand movements. They found that while the performance of the subjects remained stable for several hours after completion of the training, their brain activity did not; different regions of the brain were predominantly active at different times over a period of several hours after the training. The activity shifted from the prefrontal cortex to two areas known to be involved in controlling movements, the motor cortex and cerebellar cortex. Consolidation of the motor skill appeared to involve activation of different neural systems that increased the stability of the brain processes underlying the skill.

There is also evidence that learning-induced changes in the activity of neurons in the cerebral cortex continue to increase for many days after the training. In an extensive series of studies using rats with electrodes implanted in the auditory cortex, Norman Weinberger reported that, after a tone of specific frequency was paired a few times with footshock, neurons in the rats’ auditory cortex responded more to that specific tone and less to other tones of other frequencies. Even more interestingly, the selectivity of the neurons’ response to the specific tone used in training continued to increase for several days after the training was terminated.

It is not intuitively obvious why our lasting memories consolidate slowly. Certainly, one can wonder why we have a form of memory that we have to rely on for many hours, days or a lifetime, that is so susceptible to disruption shortly after it is initiated. Perhaps the brain system that consolidates long-term memory over time was a late development in vertebrate evolution. Moreover, maybe we consolidate memories slowly because our mammalian brains are large and enormously complex. We can readily reject these ideas. All species of animals studied to date have both short and long-term memory; and all are susceptible to retrograde amnesia. Like humans, birds, bees, and molluscs, as well as fish and rats, make long-term memory slowly. Consolidation of memory clearly emerged early in evolution, and was conserved.

Although there seems to be no compelling reason to conclude that a biological system such as a brain could not quickly make a lasting memory, the fact is that animal brains do not. Thus, memory consolidation must serve some very important adaptive function or functions. There is considerable evidence suggesting that the slow consolidation is adaptive because it enables neurobiological processes occurring shortly after learning to influence the strength of memory for experiences. The extensive evidence that memory can be enhanced, as well as impaired, by treatments administered shortly after training, provides intriguing support for this hypothesis.