Leadership Theories for the CrysTel Change InitiativeAbstractTo see the success of the CrysTel Initiative, a new frontier in understanding organizational change is needed to translate the implemented changes successfully in real organizational benefits. This can be achieved through a systematic analysis of “cross-linkages,” connections between departments or business units and the organization as a whole. This article will present three leadership theories believed to be most effective for CrysTel's change initiative. Each style will be compared with others chosen and with some not chosen. The strengths and weaknesses of each style will also be presented, as well as recommendations for further success. Simulation. “Building a culture to support change” Achieving organizational change that produces real results is not just a managerial challenge; it is also a cognitive challenge. As Peter Senge stated in an article on leadership "deep organizational change requires a change in people. Redrawing the lines and boxes in the organizational chart without addressing how people within the organization interact could be like rearranging Deckchairs on the Titanic" (1996) ). Leaders find it easier to deal with tasks rather than the complex dynamics of human interactions. The result is a focus on the short term and local rather than the long term and global outcomes of change. Because managers fail to manage what they pay little attention to, a paradox is pervasive in all forms of organizational change: changes that are successful in improving performance in one part of the company often do not translate into improvements in company-wide performance . This is the challenge faced in the simulation addressed in this paper. A leader can choose from a variety of approaches, each effective in different circumstances. This article will present three leadership theories believed to be most effective for CrysTel's change initiative. Each style will be compared with those chosen and some not chosen. The recommendation is to use a combination of all three theories to address the environment in CrysTel. You will be presented with the strengths and weaknesses of each style, challenges with the recommended approach, and recommendations for further success. Leadership Theories Contingency Theory The contingency model was coined by Fred Fiedler in 1967. This model states that leader effectiveness is based on situational contingencies defined by two aspects: leadership style and situational favorability (Miller et al., 2004). This model uses an instrument to measure an individual's leadership orientation. Scores are ranked and leaders are defined as low LPC leaders or high LPC leaders.