Introduction In modern conditions, organizational changes represent a prerequisite for maintaining organizational efficiency and competitive advantage, as well as the successful adaptation of business companies to a rapidly changing environment. At the same time, according to expert estimates, about 70% of all ongoing organizational changes fail (McCabe, 2020). Researchers associate these failures not only with mistakes in planning and implementing changes but also with the human factor. It is much more difficult to change the consciousness and behaviour of company employees than technology, equipment, or organizational structure. The presented case clearly shows how errors in personnel management and in building internal organizational processes and communications can lead to critical problems in organizational behaviour and, as a consequence, significant decline in organizational performance. Key Organizational Development/Change Management Problems In the process of the evolution of management thought, the concepts of organizational behaviour have also developed. The emergence of the general theory of systems, put forward by von Bertalanffy, led to the formation of a number of concepts within which the organization was viewed as a purposeful, self-regulating, open system. Then, Bernard studied this concept as a system of employee interaction, the life cycle of which depends on its productivity, that is, the achievement of goals and efficiency, by which he understood the degree of satisfaction by the organization of the motives of its individual members (Konopaske et al., 2017). Wiener took a cybernetic approach to the study of social systems, with particular emphasis on the concept of feedback (Konopaske et al., 2017). Woodward viewed the organization as a complex system consisting of two interdependent subsystems: technical and social, as especially evident from the case (Miner, 2015). Other researchers, sharing the concept of socio-technical systems, showed that planning for technological change should be combined with a change in social relations (Miner, 2015). Trist mentioned the necessity to take into account a socio-technical system (Miner, 2015). Technological requirements impose a number of restrictions on the choice of the form of organization, but, on the other hand, the choice should take into account such social and psychological aspects that do not depend on technology. Any attempt to optimize only one of these parameters – technical, social or economic – will not lead to optimization of the system as a whole. In the case under consideration, the combination of these two factors – technical and social – was not satisfactory in the manager’s activity. Marc, trying to solve the problem of falling productivity and entrenched practice of absenteeism, did not take into account that the organization is a social system in which workers are included in a complex of interpersonal relations and social interaction:  1. Labour productivity is determined not only by management standards, but also depends on group standards, which may differ from the officially established ones.  2. Non-financial motivation is often no less significant than economic methods of staff incentives.  3. Group values and norms are o