Which metaphor for change do you see as more useful: Lewin's force field analysis model or Vaill's permanent white water model? Explain

What will be an ideal response?

Answer: Possible response: I see Lewin's model as more useful. Lewin's model sees change as the "abnormal" condition and no-change as the "normal" position — with change as a struggle between forces of stability and instability. Conversely, Vaill sees change as "normal" and no-change as "abnormal." I see Lewin's dynamic happening in many situations in my own life. For example, I won't change my behavior about staying up late until the driving forces (oversleeping, being tired the next day) overcome the restraining forces (I like things the way they are) and force me to change. That said, I do think Vaill's idea that we live in a world of permanent change is a useful one, especially for managers. No one in today's world should get too comfortable, or assume that things are predictable and under total control.