“It is not the strongest of the species that survive nor the most
intelligent but the one most responsive to change”
– Charles Darwin
In a world of new technologies, transforming economies, fluctuating
consumer preference and dynamic competition, it is not a question of
whether firms should change but rather when, where and how they should
change. While change could be seen everywhere not all is of a
strategic nature. Much of it is ongoing operational kind. From an
organisation context change can be considered from 3 perspectives:
§ Crisis – When a need arises to respond to a situation that will
cause a loss or damage to the organisation. This type change is
usually reactive. It may involve finding temporary solution to a
problem.
§ Non-crisis – Such change is in response to a problem situation that
does not have a degree of urgency. The change here is again reactive.
§ Opportunity – This type of change is directed at creating a new type
of alignment to gain competitive business advantage. This type of
change is proactive. Such changes have an impact on the way the firm
does business and on the way the firm has been configured.
Most of the time, change is due to external forces originating from
The Business plan on the multidimensional external forces that brought changes to Nokia
... states that Innovation is a necessity for a firm which compete in environment where change is pervasive, unpredictable and continuous. There is ... with all early signs and different types of uncertain data. One of the main changes in operations which Nokia had to ... explains Innovation theory by basing it hypothetically on two of types of innovation, Incremental and Complexity theory. Both of theories ...
customers, competitors, technology, economic forces and the internal
arena. On the other hand there are internal forces too that drive
change. If for example top managers select a goal of rapid expansion,
internal business processes or actions need to be changed to meet the
growth. Demands by employees, labour unions or product inefficiencies
all can generate a force to which management must respond with change.
An overall model for planned change is depicted in Figure 1. Four
events make up the change sequence: (1) Internal and external forces
that drive the change; (2) organisation managers monitor these forces
and become aware of the need for change; (3) the perceived need
triggers the initiation of change and (4) the change is implemented.
Text Box: Environmental Forces
[IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE]Text Box: Initiate changeText Box: Implement changeText Box: Need for change
[IMAGE]
Text Box: Internal Forces
Figure 1: Model of Change Sequence Events[1]
There are different types of organisational change such as strategy,
technology, products, structure and culture as shown in Figure 2.
Depending on the external and internal forces of change organisations
may embark on different forms of change. With some forms of change
affecting another. Eg. A new product may require changes in technology
and a new technology may require new people skills or a new structure.
[IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE]Text Box: Culture/People[IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE]Text Box: ProductsText Box: TechnologyText Box: StrategyText Box: Structure
Figure 2: Types of Organisation Changes[2]
No matter the type of change the organisation has to select an
approach to it. Many managers struggle with the question of how bold
they should be. Depending on the type of change at times in order to
The Business plan on Managing Change in Organisation
Today, teams and organizations face rapid change like never before. Globalization has increased the markets and opportunities for more growth and revenue. However, increasingly diverse markets have a wide variety of needs and expectations that must be understood if they are to become strong customers and collaborators. The ability to manage change in an organisation, while continuing to meet the ...
fundamentally transform the organisation a break in the past is
needed. The distinction between disruptive and gradual change has been
mentioned in the strategic management and organisational behaviour
literature such as Greiner 1972; Tushman, Newman and Romanelli 1986)[3].
Organisations need to have a balance between strategic (revolutionary)
and operational (evolutionary) change. Yet it is also mentioned that a
strategic change can be pursued by both revolutionary and evolutionary
means. With this introduction to organisation change, now lets look at
how the organisation structure has an impact on these two types of
change.
Hierarchical Organisation Structure and Culture
===============================================
In a hierarchical organisation, people of similar skills are grouped
together in order to achieve economies of scale. This is a strong
vertical structure where information is flown up and down vertically
and decisions are made at the top and pushed down the hierarchy. Max
Weber (1864-1920)[4] developed the concept of bureaucracy where
organisations had such rigid roles and responsibilities with following
characteristics:
§ Specialisation hierarchy – Each functional area has a clearly
defined set of competencies, where the lower ranks are supervised and
dictated by the higher ranks.
§ Rules – There are general guidelines established and they are
stable.
§ Specialisation of labour – Jobs and tasks are broken into
well-defined routines.
§ Centralized decision making – Decisions are made at the top by a few
group of high ranking people and passed down the chain. Ideas are not
flown up the hierarachy.
Organisation culture can be defined as the set of key values, beliefs,
understandings and norms shared by members of an organization (Daft,
Management, 2003, p88).
In a bureaucratic culture, the organisation
does not encourage innovation and employees are not rewarded for it.
The following is observed in a typical bureaucratic culture that
inhibits the ability to change:
* Employees are satisfied with average levels of performance and
The Research paper on Managing Change and Leading People
“Impact of Organisational culture on role and responsibilities of the managers within the organisation” (Word count 2900 / Word limit 3000) Haque, A. U. 139________ According to Schein (2004) the core concept of organisational culture is developing an atmosphere and the procedures are created to ensure that employees are properly managed. Glendon and Stanton elaborate the that visible ...
they wont strive for higher performance since there are no
incentives as well, for it.
* Too mechanical, no incentives for innovation or experimentation.
Implementing Change in a Hierarchical Organisation
==================================================
Earlier we discussed the two types of change: evolutionary and
revolutionary in nature. We first take the example of implementing
evolutionary change in a hierarchical organisation. Such change is an
incremental and should blend with the people and processes. Therefore
it is necessary to consider the organisation structure, culture and
High
[IMAGE][IMAGE]
Oval: Hierarchical
Organisations
Text Box: Grid Strength
Low
Low Group Strength High
Figure 3: Group-Grid Matrix
how they affect such a change programme. The Group-Grid model[5] shown
below is a means of analysing how the relative strength of the group
and grid factors constrain and enable organisation change. The group
dimension indicates the extent by which the people in the organisation
are controlled by the social unit. The grid dimension indicates the
extent by which the behaviour of people is controlled by work role and
structure. If we take a hierarchical organisation it would fit into
the top-left portion of this matrix: Strong Grid and Weak Group.
Revolutionary change is associated with creating a new type of
alignment and is such that it transforms the organisation. Firms are
complex and there are many elements that potentially can change. The
major organisational change levers are:
* Organisational structures
* Organisational culture
* Organisational processes
* Organisational systems
Such changes are those that do not build on the status quo but
overthrow it. Thus revolution leads to a clear break with the past.
Such a ‘big bang’ approach is needed when organisational rigidity is
so deeply rooted that smaller pushes do not bring any result. The
types of resistance that can be found in a hierarchical organisation
The Essay on How To Change Your Culture
Changing your organizational culture is the toughest task you will ever take on. Your organizational culture was formed over years of interaction between the participants in the organization. Changing the accepted organizational culture can feel like rolling rocks uphill. Organizational cultures form for a reason. Perhaps the current culture matches the style and comfort zone of the company ...
when implementing such change can be categorised into the following.
Psychological resistance to change
———————————-
Many employees resist changing due to the uncertainty and ambiguity
that is associated with the old ways of doing business. According to
Chris Argyris[6]: organisations that are usually hierarchical and
control-centred and one of the tasks of managers is to impose limits
on the actions of those below them. People, however, are independent,
active entities, and they tend to become more independent and active
as they grow older and wiser. The paradox of organisations is that the
most knowledgeable and experienced employees are those who are likely
to feel most inhibited and frustrated. This sense of inhibition leads
to disbelief and distrust. As employees become accustomed to formal
routines, their ability to learn recedes. New job descriptions are not
seen as a challenging opportunity to learn but as unwelcome
interference.
Especially in hierarchical organisations, when there are multiple
departments involved in the change process, certain departments might
have the misconception that change is being pushed by a group of
people for their own personal benefits.
Employees lose their commitment to their work, seeing it as merely a
means to a personal end. All change is regarded as threatening.
Employees develop what Argyris calls “defensive routines”, which
impede or prevent change. Many of these routines are selfish, as
people try to protect their status and power.
Alvin Zander[7], who was a close colleague of Kurt Lewin and leaned
heavily on his work, offered six primary reasons for resistance to
surface:
* If the nature of the change is not made clear to the people who
are going to be influenced by the change.
* If the change is open to a wide variety of interpretations
* If those influenced feel strong forces deterring them from
changing.
* If the people influenced by the change have pressure put on them
to make it instead of having a say in the nature or the direction
The Term Paper on Organisational Change Organisation Employees Workers
To fully examine this question, it would be important to first look at what forms change can take within an organisation and to establish why an organisation sets out to make these changes. The process of change can be threatening and traumatic for both individuals and groups within a company. In my opinion, managers need to encompass certain specific leadership qualities in order to reduce ...
of the change.
* If the change is made on personal grounds
* If the change ignores the already established institutions in the
group
Cultural Resistance to Change
—————————–
In most hierarchical organisations culture is such that it is
bureaucratic and with no incentives for change. The organisational
shared values and beliefs could form the ‘genetic code’ of the
company. A research at Harvard on 207 US firms[8] have shown the
relationship between corporate culture and external environments. The
study found that a strong culture itself was not responsible for
business success unless the culture encouraged adaptation to the
external environment. In a bureaucratic organisation, the following
could be observed:
* Employees become too rigid, relying to procedures and routines,
having an adverse effect, for example on customer service or new
product development
* When its necessary to react to changes in the external
environment, it is too slow and inflexible.
* Employees tend to be satisfied with average levels of performance.
They wont strive for higher levels of performance or to learn new
technology
* Too mechanical, no incentives for innovation or experimentation.
Therefore hinders experimentation and learning
Corporate Culture is:
Up to date
Not up to date
Strong
‘Accelerator’
‘Fossilisation’
Weak
‘Mild Breeze’
‘Flat Tyre’
Figure 4: Effects of Corporate Culture
The figure 4[9] above shows how strong and weak cultures affect
organisation change. In a typical hierarchical organisation I would
expect the culture to be strong and not up to date giving rise to the
fossilisation effect.
Political Resistance to Change
——————————
In a hierarchical organisation the decision making power lies only
within a certain level of management. By implementing change there is
the prospect of losing power, prestige or pay. Certain departments
The Essay on Organisation Culture A Gung-Ho Culture Rules
Brazilian-managed beverage giant InBev NV isn’t a household name in the U.S. now, but if it proceeds with its unsolicited bid for Anheuser-Busch Cos., its high-octane corporate culture could easily overwhelm the iconic U.S. brewer. |[pic] | |Bloomberg News/Landov | |A production line at InBev’s brewery in Leuven, Belgium | That culture is on display each workday at the 7:20 a.m. sales ...
themselves could run the risk of losing power to other departments.
This is sufficient for them to block the change.
Field Force Analysis
——————–
In order to analyse change and the leadership strategy Kurt Lewin
developed a model called Force-field analysis[10]. Driving forces can
be though of as problems or opportunities that provide motivation for
change. Restraining forces are the barriers to change such as middle
management resistance, lack of resources etc. Such barriers to change
have been explained in the previous sections under the sub-headings
of: psychological resistance, cultural resistance and political
resistance. When change is to be introduced the top management should
analyse both the pressures for change and the restraining forces. The
following diagram illustrates how a typical Force-field analysis for a
hierarchical organisation would like.
[IMAGE]
Text Box: StructureText Box: Economy[IMAGE][IMAGE]
Text Box: PeopleText Box: Customer
Demands
Text Box: Competitive Forces[IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE][IMAGE]
Text Box: Culture
Text Box: Procedures
Figure 5: Force-field Analysis
In this example the driving forces are the external or internal
factors that cause the change. Eg. Change due to competitive forces,
customer demands or economic situation. The restraining forces are the
organisation structure, people, culture and processes.
Insert
Business system and organisation structure, culture, process
Figure 6: Organisational System
A classic example of an organisation whose market leadership position
was lost due to not adapting to market changes is British retail giant
Marks & Spencer. This company had a bureaucratic culture where a
hierarchical organisation structure was being enforced. The roots of
the culture can be traced back to the founder himself who enforced a
top-down approach to management and there was one-way communication.
The management had no idea as to what the customers wanted as they
were closer to the employees who had no decision making power. There
was a clear separation of roles and learning was not encouraged.
Structure, culture and organisation change strategy are inter-related.
When Marks & Spender wanted to change due to increased competition it
found that the organisation culture and structure did not support it.
It would
Implementing Change in a Hierarchical Organisation
==================================================
Types of People
—————
Kurt Lewin[11] has categorised people into 3 segments based on their
change orientations:
* Functional – These are the people who anticipate change, have
problem solving skills and make things happen. They are quick to
adapt to changes.
* Non-functional – This is the type of people who will agree to
change but without commitment or support. They will be sitting on
the fence without actively getting involved in the change process
and moan and groan when change takes place.
* Dysfunctional – This is the type of people who will try to
sabotage the change process. They will provide utmost resistance
to any type of changes and blame the management for implementing
something not useful.
I would expect in a hierarchical organisation to have majority of
Non-functional and Dysfunctional type of employees.
Overcoming Barriers to Change
—————————–
In order to determine the best approach for overcoming change, it is
necessary to understand certain critical factors such as:
§ Amount, type and source of resistance to change
§ The power of the resisters
§ Time frame for the change
§ The need for commitment of others
§ The short and long term effects
Based on the answers to these questions various methods could be
adopted to overcome the forces of change.
In order to illustrate a situation where a hierarchical organisation
implemented change by successfully overcoming barriers, I would like
to take the example of my own company, say ‘CA’. CA is a large
software company based in the US with over 120 branches in 48
countries. Due to external factors such as competitive forces and
customer demands, the following change was necessary:
§ To make the Technology Services department of ‘CA’, a more services
oriented arm, which will offer value added services such as consulting
and project management in addition to traditional product
implementation.
§ To align the consultants from Technology Services arm to 4 different
types of practises and to develop a comprehensive training plan
§ Develop a proper methodology for technology implementation and
consulting services to be performed.
I would consider this to be an evolutionary change meant to ensure
that the organisation could stay competitive in a changing
environment. Shown below is a Force-field analysis of the driving
forces of change and the factors restraining change.
Insert diagram of Field-force analysis.
Most of the resistance is of a personal nature. Following are some:
§ Fear of unable to learn new skills
§ Fear of new challenges to be encountered
§ Fear of inability to achieve new goals set by management
§ Fear of complying with new standards and processes
§ Fear of the managers, taking added responsibility
Being a hierarchical organisation, each consultant would be under a
particular brand focus. There was no cross brand training for the
consultants. There were no proper processes followed in implementing
solution or to measure the success of projects.
Key Elements in a Change Plan
—————————–
In implementing the proposed changes, I would say that a carefully
crafted plan was used. Since there was no real sense of urgency (i.e.
revolutionary type of change), the plan was to be executed over a
period of time. I would like to comment on some of the elements that I
found to be important in implementing such change:
1. Strong leader
The leader appointed to spearhead the change had sufficient authority
and power to push the changes down the hierarchy. She also had the
power to gather necessary support from other relevant departments.
[IMAGE]
Figure 7: Leadership Styles[12]
The leadership style adopted was similar to ‘coaching’ as based on the
diagram above. There was a few top managers who were involved in the
decision making process but the ultimate decision was with the leader.
Since the leader already had a strategy in mind and the solutions to
the existing problems were uncovered beforehand, this type of style
was successful. The crucial aspect was that the leader was able to
sustain the change programme over a period of time until the overall
objectives were achieved. Some of her characteristics for success
included:
* Creating awareness of the crisis involved
* Showing a need for change
* Developing a clear vision, charting the roadmap and winning
everybody’s commitment to it
* Establishing common shared goals
* Being visible, credible and responsible as a leader of change
2. Communication
The leader was able to communicate the vision of the Technology
Services unit to the team members and to educate them of the benefits
of the proposed changes. There were quarterly web-casts organised that
was compulsory to all team members. During these web-casts the
accomplishments of the previous quarter were highlighted and the plans
for the coming quarter were detailed. This would prevent any
misunderstanding of the goals or to create any kind of ambiguity. It
was also mentioned the countries and individuals who contributed most
to the change initiative. This was an effective tool for getting
everybody to participate and be part of the success.
3. Quick Wins
The overall change management initiative was long drawn and the
results were gradual. The changes were to be implemented over a period
of years. This could have potentially deteriorated the motivation of
the people concerned. The change leader was careful in her plan to
include ‘quick wins’ so that outcomes of their efforts were visible in
the short term and the appropriate people were rewarded handsomely.
This created motivation among the rest of the staff to strive for
better performance, which would ultimately help the organisation
achieve desired results. The ‘quick wins’ also helped to look at areas
of refinement and improvement, which were taken into consideration in
the future phases of the project.
We have looked at how a hierarchical organisation implemented change
and what were the critical success factors. As mentioned in the
previous sections, there are some major challenges when implementing
change in such an organisation. Depending on the external environment,
change may have to be continuous. Uncertain environments need changes
to be implemented rapidly and it is continuous.
Organisation Structure and Environment
======================================
In uncertain environments change is rapid and complex. The following
are things that happen in such an environment[13]:
* Increased differences among departments – Each department has its
own unique goals, tasks and time horizons. These create barriers
among departments.
* Increased co-ordination to keep departments working together –
Horizontal co-ordination to link departments and overcome
differences in departmental goals and orientations.
* Adapt to changes – Flexibility and the ability to change to
environment changes is crucial. Changes in products and technology
require co-ordination among departments, which could be achieved
with horizontal information processing and project teams.
The relationship between environment and structure is shown in the
diagram below[14]. This illustrates that vertical structures fit
stable environments and horizontal structures fit uncertain
environments.
Insert diagram here
Figure 8: Relationship between Environment & Structure
In order to determine the right structure, it is necessary to look at
the contingency factors such as organisation strategy, environment,
production technology and departmental interdependencies[15]. The
structure should fit these contingency factors as shown the diagram
below.
Insert diagram
Figure 9: Relationship of Strategic Goals to Structure
It is important that organisation structure and culture support
changes, as it is the only way organisations in a volatile world can
survive and that’s the only method for continuous improvement.
Change and the Learning Organisation
====================================
Learning results in new knowledge, understand and insights. As Argyris
explained, it can be defined as “Organisational learning is a process
of detecting and correcting error”. However, there is no single view
of what the learning organisation looks like. It could be thought of
as one in which everyone is engaged in identifying and solving
problems, enabling the organisation to continuously experiment, change
and improve, thus increasing its capacity to grow, learn and achieve
its purpose[16]. To create such an organisation, there are 3 important
factors:
* Team based structure – In order to facilitate horizontal
communication and collaboration self-directed teams could be
formed. People within the team have responsibility and authority
to make decisions to various challenges or opportunities that
arise. This is a clear deviation from the hierarchical structures.
* Employee Empowerment – The creativity and talents of the employees
can be uncovered by giving them freedom and skills to make
effective decisions and be responsible or them.
* Open Information – Information sharing is important so that all
employees are well aware of organisation strategy and even daily
tasks.
Conclusion
==========
In this coursework I have described what is change and how change is
implemented in hierarchical organisations with emphasis on some of the
difficulties encountered in that process. It is mentioned that such
organisations fit into the strong grid-weak group. In such
hierarchical organisations, the following can be observed that inhibit
flexibility in implementing change:
* Employees become too rigid, relying on standard procedures and
routines.
* Employees tend to be satisfied with average levels of performance.
They wont strive for higher levels of performance or to learn new
technology
* Too mechanical, no incentives for innovation or experimentation.
Therefore hinders experimentation and learning.
There is no right or wrong structure. If the external environment is
volatile then the structure has to be adaptable to cater for the
necessary changes. In such environments change is continuous.
Therefore traditional models such as unfreezing the old culture,
changing and refreeze for stability, may not be applicable in modern
days where change is continuous.
This gives rise to learning organisations where everyone is engaged in
identifying and solving problems. There are certain adjustments that
need to be made in order to develop a learning organisation: team
based structure (where hierarchical structures are replaced with
horizontal ones), empowering employees and information sharing. Such
organisations are according to Gavin[17], skilled at: systematic
problem solving, experimenting with new ideas, learning from own
experience and history and transferring knowledge quickly through the
organisation to others.
———————————————————————
[1] Source: Daft, Management, 2003, p376
[2] Source: Daft, Management, 2003, p387
[3] Source: Bob De Wit and Ron Meyer, Strategy – Process, Content,
Context, 2004, p170
[4] Source: University of Leicester, Implementing Strategies, p0.13
[5] Source: University of Leicester, Implementing Strategies, p1.4
[6] Source: Morgen Witzel, Financial Times, A Life Unlocking Defences:
Chris Argyris, August 2003
[7] Source: http://www.newfoundations.com/OrgTheory/Bolognese721.html
[8] Source: Daft, Management, 2004, p46
[9] Source: Bob De Wit and Ron Meyer, Strategy – Process, Content,
Context, 2004, p209
[10] Source: Daft, Management, 2003, p383
[11] Source: Lecture Notes, University of Leicester, MBA Module 3,
Andy Cope
[12] Source: Lecture Notes, University of Leicester, MBA Module 3,
Andy Cope
[13] Source: Daft, Management, 2003, p358
[14] Source: Daft, Management, 2003, p359
[15] Source: Daft, Management, 2003, p357
[16] Source: Daft, Management, 2003, p55
[17] Source: University of Leicester, Implementing Strategies, p1.4
