The spectacular collapse of energy conglomerate Enron has added further fuel to the continuing heated debate on revolutionary vs evolutionary change in organisations and whether it is effective to base an entire corporate strategy on perpetual corporate revolution, radical innovation or creative deconstruction. Enron grew in a matter of years into one of the largest companies in the world and became an icon of radical change. Yet its corporate image was tarnished by involvement in debacles such as energy deregulation in California . Enron has now become the largest company in the world ever to file for bankruptcy. Did Enron fail in spite of or because of its radicalism? Was it in spite of or because of its radicalism that it might appear that Enron executives may have exposed the company to high levels of risk, hidden from shareholders, in the pressured drive to increase share prices? Such questions may never be answered definitively but there is no question that Enron's failure is being used as further justification for the gradualist approach to achieving lasting change in organisations. ...