MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
Managing Organizational Change
Organizational Change代写 The organizational change affects people. A change management plan can support a smooth transition and ···
Overview Organizational Change代写
The organizational change affects people. A change management plan can support a smooth transition and ensure employees are guided through the journey. Beer and Nohria (2000, p. 2) found that change is easier said than done with more than 70 percent change initiatives fail due to negative employee attitudes and unproductive management behavior. Similarly, Macredie, Sandom and Paul (1998, p. 5), noted that transformative and successful organizations need to keep up with change management or face extinction.
Nonetheless, organizational change is better explained using theories and models including Kurt Lewin’s model, Dunphy and Stace’s model, Kotler’s model among others. Organizations fail in change initiatives like Dover Colliery case because managers tend to lack plan and rush changes and hence lose focus while become overwhelmed by employee resistance.
Case Study Organizational Change代写
The coal miner’s case explains how arbitrary changes by the management can face resistance from human resources. It is an Australian coal mine where the chief executive officer made a decision without consultation to introduce performance appraisal to all underground coal miners and hence directed the managers to implement the changes. One manager was made responsible for the implementation of the change and he canvassed the views of mine managers and went ahead to carry out research on performance management systems that the company could use to appropriate for services.
With all the disregard of the need involve miners as the main stakeholder, the appraisal scheme that lacked direct link to payments, performance, and other human resource outcomes was implemented. Contrary to the expectations, the change was vehemently opposed by coal miners and they declined to voluntarily take part in appraisal process.
Case Analysis Organizational Change代写
The case analysis can take various dimensions including using theories and concepts. For the purpose of this analysis, various theories of change management will be used to analyze coal miners’ cases. Theories set the platform on which change interventions in organizations take place. In essence, change interventions can be categorized into three parts. Top-down change management assumes that change managers need to properly plan for smooth implementation. It also assumes that resistance is normal for change to occur but the management should focus on transforming the culture of an organization, transformational change management.
On the other hand, depends on the transformational leader posing like a model of change so as to challenge people to see things from broader perspective and setting a conducive environment for the change. Lastly is the strategic change management which contrasts the top-down models. It aims to provide a certain recipe to introduce a new behavior at work while giving workers time to witness the benefits first hand and hence use it as evidence to introduce change.
The above approaches are applied in change management depending on the circumstances of the change. All of the emphasize on the need for leadership, communication and consultation with employees in the change process. According to Burnes (1996a), the problem is matching the model to the organizational context.
1.Kurt Lewin’s Model of Change Organizational Change代写
The change according to Kurt Lewin (1951) should be planned through decision-making, implementation, and social change. The main concern with Lewin was the response from target group. He found that individual behavior varies from one group to the other. Thus, the uniformity of group’s behavior is determined by the shared goals and aspirations that make people function as single voice. According to Lewin, group behavior needs to be changed so as not to revert to old habits.
On the same note, Burnes (2004, p. 311), observed that for any change that intended to people, it should begin by resolving social conflicts including religion, race, marital, industrial etc. Regarding Lewin’s model, planned change can be achieved through learning where individuals are allowed to understand and reframe their thinking about the change.
In this theoretical context
The resistance to change in the coal miners’ case is due to a lack of planning for change and disallowing learning about the logic for the change by individuals that make up the group. The company chief executive officer failed to involve all mine managers and miners in decision-making and implementation processes of appraisal system. According to Lewin, each individual in coal mining had distinct behavior but collectively, the miners had an identity that they are serving and need to be remunerated accordingly. It was a collective role to see that they are treated fairly and respected as workers contributing to the overall success of the company. Most importantly, they required consultation on any issues touching on their affairs.
Generally, the management proposal to introduce performance appraisal was for the good of the workers. However, the change of group conduct through learning so as the individuals can change their views on the initiative was overlooked. The change initiators were required to unfreeze; that is, breaking employees away from the old thinking or ways of doing things through proper communication and motivation. The management could have involved workers in brainstorming, decision-making and problem-solving. This way, the worker would have owned the change process and allow it for implementation with little or no resistance.
2.Dunphy and Stace’s Model of Change Organizational Change代写
The model investigated change from the organizational transformational perspective. According to Dunphy and Stace (1993), organizations need a change model that is situational. The model would then be used to determine how change strategies vary in order to achieve the best fit in the change management. They further found that situational variables in the contingency model of change dictate the structure and performance of organizations and that organizations are distinct and hence cannot face similar situation variables. They grouped change strategies into incremental and transformational which can be participative or forced evolution and charismatic or dictatorial transformation respectively. As such, the decision for certain change is dependent on the situation analysis.
In this context, the coal miners’ case lacked collaborative and consultative leadership make change decisions based on the situations of workers.
Instead, they used forced evolution strategy in a wrong situational context. The introduction of performance appraisal is part of incremental change strategy. It was not an emergency change and hence the company was in fit as well as time to carry out research, do consultation and involve all the coal miners in the implementation process. The change situation was that performance appraisal though good, directly affected various groups of coal miners exposed to different forms of risks and logically there was need for their inputs through participation. This could have allowed negotiations on various terms of change to arrive at a consensus.
3.Kotler’s Model of Change Organizational Change代写
The model by Kotler aimed at mitigating criticisms levels against a planned model of change. According to Kotler, organizational change should be bottom-up rather than a top-down approach. The change should also be open-ended and continuous process of adapting to changes (Burnes 1996b, p. 13). According to Kanter,Stein and Jick (1992), change should not be rapid to allow for initiators to effectively identify, plan and implement the necessary organizational changes. Also, the change should not be a linear process that an open-end and continuous process that vary depending on organizational circumstances and conditions.
Additionally, for change to be successful, laid down plans and initiatives should not be flexible.
Change managers should instead focus on the complexities involved in the implementation while assessing the best alternatives for optimal results. Burne’s (1996b) suggestion was that change process needs to consider the organizational readiness and ways toward achieving that change effectively. As such, any plan for change is secondary.
Moreover, some researchers have observed that the emergence approach is not only about changing organizational structure and practice but also about learning process at the time of change implementation (Dawson, 1994; Wilson, 1992; Mabey & Mayon-White,1993). Thus, the success or failure of change is dependent on the organizational ability to learn and adapt to various situations.
Since the emergence approach lacks sequence for leading and managing change
Kotter’s model (1996, pp. 133-145) gave eight steps to follow in change process including ‘establishing a sense of urgency; creating the guiding coalition; developing a vision and strategy; communicating the change vision; empowering employees for broad-based action; generating short-term wins; consolidating gains and producing more change, and anchoring new approaches in the culture’. These steps should not be a checklist but rather a proposal by Kotler that an organization can deviate from depending on the prevailing circumstances and conditions at the time of change.
In this context, the coal miners’ case depicted a complete lack of key elements and assumptions as stipulated by the emergent approach.
As proposed by the model, the need for change should have come from coal miners themselves in the sense that, the first own up the performance appraisal before the management initiates implementation process. Instead, the change originated from the top management and trickled down to miners. The process was also not open-ended since the managers declined to consider the inputs of coal miners. An open-minded change, in this case, means that the management is willing to take up the opinions of coal miners before initiation of change, in the process of implementation and after the integration of it in the system. The managers were very rigid in awarding points and miners were not allowed a chance to negotiate for additional even when bias was evident.
The appraisal system was adopted from another organization as it was without consideration of the prevailing conditions of the company and its workers.
The managers forgot that business organizations are distinct in worker behaviors, environment, structure, management among others. The differences necessitate the adoption of strategies in line with prevailing conditions. The need for change to be a continuous process where it adapts to organizational conditions and circumstances was missing in coal miners’ case. The change was rushed and hence no effective identification, planning and implementation of change.
Evaluation Organizational Change代写
Organizations have a range of complex issues and continuous change for employees. The miners’ case focused on the impact of these changes on employees. The changes include how culture, and environment influence change and determine employee response through roles. The nature and pace of change have a significant effect on the workers’ work and the way they discharge their roles in the company (Galor and Moav, 2002, p. 1133). In the context of coal miners’ case, below are the implications of organizational change management in as far as employees’ responses to change is concerned.
Organizational communication is critical in making organizational change possible. The information needs to be presented consistently in a form that is positive, candid, supportive and timely. Managers have the roles to create good communication between the company and workers by ensuring that all information is understood. The lack of communication in the coal mine case resulted in resistance to change. The management has a responsibility to ensure that every change that has direct or indirect impact on the employees is well-communicated in an informative and consultative manner.
Therefore, there are two questions that the management needs to ask, that is; whether the worker has the motivation for change and whether they are equipped with the ability to change. At the time of communicating change, the intention should be to increase motivation and equip ability to adapt. There are four essential steps to change communication. First, the management needs to share a vision with workers. It can be done by explaining the reason and benefit of the change. Workers need to know how intentioned change will benefit them as well as the company. Therefore, managers should not inform workers about the coming change but should explain why the change is necessary. Clarification of the need for change makes the workers learn and understand it and work towards shared vision.
Secondly, the management needs to tell the story, that is the vision.
It enables workers to see the bigger picture of where the company is at the moment, where it needs to be and what it take to achieve its vision and transition. The company can use any form of communication to explain itself to employees and how they can help in achieving the objective. The third step is to make workers the key pillars in the achievement of change. The company should enable workers to change agents rather than recipients. This is achieved by making it clear what their role is to contribute towards the change. Lastly, the managers need to chart the path in the implementation of change. The change agents need to be equipped for effective communication of change. Once workers come to shared vision and believe in the change, they will lead to attaining it.
2.Conflict Management Organizational Change代写
Conflict in organizations is inevitable due to differences in values, perspectives and opinions (McNamara, 2010, p. 1). A conflict can occur when an employee is not performing to the standards when his/her values and beliefs are threatened or the working environment or condition inflicts discomfort or fear. Nonetheless, conflict in an organization has both positive and negative outcomes as outlined in table 1 below.
|Advantages of conflict||Disadvantages of conflict|
Generally, conflicts in organizations like in the case of coal miners’ cases can result from poor communication, lack of understanding, and lack of trust. Poor communication occurs when workers are surprised with changes and management fail to have proper consultation and involvement in decision-making. Lack of understanding comes from managers failing to share motivation for change and vision. As a result, trust is eroded and resistance to change ensue.
References Organizational Change代写
Beer, M. and Nohria, N. 2000. Cracking the code of change. Harvard Business Review, May-June 2000, 1-8.
Burnes, B.1996a. Managing change: A strategic approach to organizational dynamics. London: Pitman Publishing.
Burnes, B. 2004. Kurt Lewin and complexity theories: Back to the future? Journal of Change Management, 4(4), 309-326.
Burnes, B. 1996b. ‘No such thing as … a “one best way” to manage organizational change’. Management Decision, 34(10), 11-18.
Dunphy, D.C., and Stace, D.A. 1993. The strategic management of corporate change. Human Relations, 46(8), 905-918.
Dawson, P. 1994. Organizational change: A processual approach. London: Paul Chapman Publishing
Galor, O., and Moav, O. 2002. Natural selection and the origin of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(4), 1133.
Kanter, R. M., Stein, B. A., and Jick, T. D. 1992. The challenges of organizational change: How companies experience it and how leaders guide it. New York: Free Press.
Kotter, J.P. 1996. Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lewin, K. 1951. Field theory in social science. New York: Harper and Row.
Macredie, R. D., Sandom, C., and Paul, R.J. 1998. Modeling for change: An information systems perspective on change management models. In R. Macredie & D. Anketell (Eds.), Modelling for added value (pp. 3-16). London: Springer.
Mabey, C., and Mayon-White, B. 1993. Managing change. London: The Open University.
McNamara, C. 2010. Basis of conflict management: a Field guide to leadership and supervision. Accessed from http://managementhelp.org/intrpsnl/basics.htm.
Wilson, D.C., 1992. A strategy of change. London: Routledge.