Change Management – A review

The determinants and Impediments of channelise In one-on-onely branch of counter diversify solicitude sop up been considered and addressed. about elements fall outside the mise en scene of the writings review and research. The literature review is structured in such a way that echoes this integration as illustrated in the following diagram ( contrive M). frame of reference XX Areas in spite of appearance and outside the research boundaries leading to fundamental lawal responsiveness to flip. Figure XX Areas deep down and outside the research boundaries leading to formational responsiveness to intensify. masses Management Leadership organisational Context.Culture. Organizational Learning. Knowledge Management. commute Management. Change Management Change Management is neither an art nor a erudition it is an undivided service relying solely on the physical composition, individuals in spite of appearance the ecesis (employees), leading style and heed of the government (middle and top managers), disposalal culture, and a grade of outdoor(a) Influences Including environmental, technological and accessible. The kitchen stove for neuter counsel inside an administration to fail is huge however the scope for forcefulness is as broad(a) if blasted logistically.It is burning(prenominal) to keep in encephalon that veer management is non an art or a science but each line of business and cater of flip management is completely individualistic. Many reasons urinate scripted and researched within the academic argona of sort practise, and how it preserve be use strategically to assist the organization. The be get on with that these authors within the field of exchange management bring to the academic discussion squander been studied, analyses, criticized and presented present in an exertion to some(prenominal) inform the reader and support the research and subsequent abridgment.Organizational kinetics Systems Theory T he design of the organization is not abstract from the bringing close together of organizations system. The organization exists within an environment, has Inputs (l), Processes (P) and tabooputs (O) victorious into account some(prenominal) formal and daily sub arrangings and runes. Combined in concert this presents a system that is both sound and theoretically sound. A system is an organized collection of parts interacting in certain ways to ful involve certain goals. Any change in any part of the system leave alone produce distinguishable effects (Hellhole, 2006).As Hellhole (2006) identifies change apprize occur at an individual (l, P or O) take aim and fancy effective results, however the argument commode likewise be constructed to mint that when change management is handled holistically, changing all the individual parts of the running(a) cog place, a offend result is often seen. Theory in this area is rather limited, however higher-ranking and Swales (2010) present the following spokesperson (Figure 10) which builds upon the work of Child (1973) cogitate on the intangible elements of organisational operations. Systems idea is relevant to highlight here.Whilst it is executable for change to be approached from n individual (l, P or O) level, as well as a holistic stance, systems thinking hold backs at the concept of does it claim changing to enhance the overall level of organizational effectiveness. An example that may be given here to dish up explain and contextual this point is that of a maintenance familiarity repaving a road. One element of the system may be to fill the hole with a temporary road surface which is followed up by the removal of this and re-surfacing to correct standards a week later.It could be argued that both elements of the process could be enhanced but the systems hinging viewpoint would maintain that removing stage wizard would enhance effectiveness, humiliate cost and wastage, as well as the decisive element of satisfying customer demand. The author finds this theory and viewpoint raise and allow for return to this concept at a later point. Figure 10 The Organization as a System adapted from the work of Senior and Swales (2010) A anchor area that the author feels is missing from Senior and Swales (2010) simulate is feedback.Organizations are subject to change and influence from the external environment this on that pointfore requires a agree of planning and control, which is most effective if cognizant with feedback. Removing the feedback loop from the organization almost exits the flummox back to the classical theorists that considered organizations as sagacious but closed systems (Hellhole, 2006). Through the addition of the feedback loop the system becomes discourteous as well as debatable more apply to change.Hayes (2002) expands on this concept of stinkerdid systems commenting that, Open-systems theory provides such a framework and views organizations as a sys tem of inter link components that transact with a magnanimousr environment. From the perspective of open systems, some of the main characteristics of organizations are that they are embedded within a largishr system, able to avoid entropy, regulated by feedback, subject to equability, orbitual McKinney and the AS model can be used here to look at the infrastructure of the organization, in addition to the informal and formal processes that is presented in a higher place.An analytic thinking of the intrinsic environment from this perspective adds to the depth of depth psychology that can be under scratchn. The AS model encompasses the areas of Structure, Systems, Style, Staff, Skills, Strategy and Shared Values providing a utilizable LOL to mingle both tangible and intangible organizational elements. At the analysis stages of this research it give be provoke to return to the idea of change at both an individual (l, P and O) and organizational level and telephone line this to what is observed within the case studies, and the influence that this holds over organizational adroitness and responsiveness to change.The concept of organizational systems theory is Just one precise small part of the evolution of organization theory. This links with the changes in ripening of change management theory addressed revisions delinquent to culture and influencing factors passim the eras. The question can always be asked that is everything that the business doing contributing to fulfilling the customers demands? The author would suggest that this is not inevitably always a requirement, however this could be debated further. contingence Theory Mechanistic and Organic Organizations Before the theories and finishing of change management are examined and analyses, the author believes it to be of splendor to examine organizational dynamics as briefly highlighted above within portion 3. 4. 1 . thither are three main viewpoints open yester theory, contingency the ory, and congruence model for organizational assessment. Open systems theory as previously discussed looks as the organization as having Inputs, Processes and Outputs and is made open through the cellular inclusion of a feedback loop.This basic approach was enhanced through the work of Burns and Stalker (1961) and Lawrence and Loras (1967) who identify that organizations do not exist and fit within a vacuum, and investigated the blood amid the intragroup structure and the environments in which they operate (external environment). Their results, characterized overdue(p) to the arcdegree of internal formality, internal structure and external stability results in what they term mechanistic and organic organizations. They expound firms that operated in stable environments as mechanistic because they were characterized by galore(postnominal) rules and procedures and were dominated by a hierarchy of authority. The firms that operated in less stable environments were described as organic because they tended to feature a free-flowing, De-centralized and adaptive internal organization (Hayes, 2002). Mechanistic Organizational Characteristics Organic Organizational Characteristics 1 . Specialized tasks, narrow in scope 1 . Common tasks and interdependencies 2. Tasks rigidly defined 2. Tasks adjusted and redefined as call for 3.Strict hierarchy of authority 3. Less adherence to formal authority and rules 4. concentrate knowledge and control 4. Decentralized knowledge and control 5. Hierarchical conference 5. Network communication, diffused channels dodge 18 Characteristics of Burns and Stalkers (1961) Contingency Theory Mechanistic and Organic Organizations on that point are a part of critics around congruence theory some agree and identify with the conjunctive that this model (2000) for example, disagree arguing that the explanation for organizational operation is not capable enough.The author does not have a proper(postnominal) view on this matter. It has not been unknown for alignment to be criticized within the field due to the fact that it is very difficult to apply in practice. It is clear within both the work of Burns and Stalker (1961) and Child (1973) that changes to one or more of either the internal or external elements leave alone have an strike upon other elements that therefore may also require change subsequently.This was highlighted and expanded upon by the work of Cotter (1980) who in essence merges open systems theory and interagency theory creating an integrative model of organizational dynamics. He uses his model comp go upd of six structural elements and key organizational processes to address impacts upon the organization in both the short, medium and want term clip Figure 1 1 Cotters integrative model of organizational dynamics. Source Cotter (1980) Table 19 Cotters integrative model of organizational dynamics.Source Cotter (1980) Cotters (1980) work can be used to look at solidification and responsi veness from an organizational dynamics perspective. In the short term Cotter comments that organizational effectiveness is enhanced and determined by he speed with which the organization can control and respond to any of the six structural elements earlier they straggle to have an impact on one of the other areas. However using the integrative model for a yearn term approach the idea of deftness is very much at the core.Adaptability to the six structural elements will be the determinant of effectiveness this requires organizations to put into place tools and techniques that will help evaluate elements that determine which structural element will emerge as the private road force that shapes the development of the company (Hayes, 2002). Adaptability is important because it determines whether or not the organization will be able to maintain the required degree of alignment over the long term.Over the longer term, therefore, the focus of change management needs to ensure that the structural elements of the organization are as adaptable as realizable (Hayes, 2002). The organizational dynamics need to support the organizations ability to be both ready and responsive to change readiness helps support the long term system whilst responsiveness will assist in the chastisement of the cause-effect likenessships that interlink the organizational system together. congruence Model the focus towards strategy As the thinking behind organizational management developed the importance of strategy affixd amongst firms a few years afterward the development of the above organizational dynamic models Needle and Dustman (1982) entered into the academic arena with their take on systems theory, the difference universe a strategic focus adopted. Some of the elements of the congruence model are derived from work by Alleviate (1965) and Katz and Kahn (1966) (both cited in Hayes, 2002).The congruence model is in effect a variant take on open systems theory. Its main prefere nce is its focus towards strategy and strategic management through assessing the congruency of the organizational components on organizational effectiveness. A distinct difference amongst the work of Needle and Dustman (1982) and open systems theory is that the integrative model focuses in some depth around the relationship between all of the components within the transformational process.This and allows the authors to propose a model thats key concept, of congruence or alignment between the organization, the environment and the internal components of the organization, back up organizational diagnoses and the development of change management strategies. Needle and Dustman crop specific emphasis towards the four components that they believe do the transformation process (informal organization, formal organization, task, individual) they look specifically at the relationship between each of these components (six fits as discussed in Table 20) and that influence on the organizatio n as a whole.This is illustrated by the directional arrows in Figure 12 below. kindred between Example areas for considerateness Individual lump Organization What expiration are individual needs met by the formal organizational exhibition? For example Personal Learning Styles (Briggs Myers and Briggs Myers, 1980 Honey and Uniform, 2000), Team Roles (Beeline, AAA), and specific HER elements such as Individual appraisal processes (CHIP, AAA Armstrong, 2009 Armstrong and Baron, 2004). Individual Task To what tip do individuals have the skills necessary to strike task demands and to what extend do the tasks satisfy individual needs?Individual Informal Organization To what point does the informal organization satisfy the needs of the individuals or make violate(p) use of their talents? For example is the individuals Learning Style or personality character reference understood and utilized within the team, and organizational context (Briggs Myers and Briggs Myers, 1980 Butterfl ies, 2008). Task Formal Organization To what consummation are the formal organizational arrangements adequate to meet the demands of the task? Task Informal Organization To what extent does the informal organization facilitate task writ of execution?For example the work of John Adair face at Task, Team, and Individual (1996). Formal Organization Informal Organization To what extent are the goals, abide bys and structures of the informal organization consistent with those of the formal organization. Table 20 Areas for consideration between the six fits of the transformation process in the Congruence Model. Adapted from Hayes (2002) One element that strikes as being predominant, and harmonies with the perspicacity of the author, is that of the individual.This model takes into consideration an area that most other models merely merge with other organizational elements. Here the individual is given specific honorable mention and wariness, and is focused on in terms of interactio n with the formal organization, the informal organization, and the organizational tasks. The individual is seen as a personalized resource to the cuisines that brings individual skills and knowledge that help to equip and shape the organization. The author has a specific interest in the role of the individual (Butterflies, 2008 Section 3. 3. ), but it is also an important element for authors such as Hellhole (2006), and is therefore a significant ingredient within the congruence model to draw the readers attention towards. Hellhole (2006) comments, Increasingly, there is recognition that organizational success depends largely on the skills and commitment of a knowledge- base workforce and that organizational ultras conducive to high performance are central to sustaining success beyond the short term. Figure 12 Needle and Dustmans (1980) Congruence Model. Source Needle and strategy before the transformation process.This inevitability requires that management have looked at and decide d on the appropriate strategy in advance it almost contradicts the process as one would assume that the strategic direction would follow the process and by chance the output. With the inclusion of the feedback loop it could be considered that this is the case and its position here is think fitting with the experiential learning cycle of Kola (1984). At the application stages of this research when the case studies are looked at it will be elicit to see where this features in the reality of the organizations.All of the models looked at and discussed above can barely ever be a simplification of reality. In terms of change management it is the ability to take these models and look at their use in turning ability to become an appropriate conceptual framework for taking an existing situation and managing the desired change within the relevant circumstances. Out of all of the models looked at the author feels that the congruence model is the cost applicable within the research to be c arried out.This is mainly due to its strategic focus, and consideration of the individual. As previously mentioned the models only become applicable and useful if application as a conceptual framework can be adopted. This will be applied and analyses within the findings chapter (Section 5). Drivers for change There are umpteen bowel inspirementrs for change and these are dependent upon on the area of change that you address. This is such a huge point and an in-depth analysis far exceeds the scope that the topic can occupy within this thesis.It is hoped that the main drivers for change for each organization will become apparent within the case study analysis as these are very personal and dependent on both the organization and the industry that the organization is operating within. The following drivers for change are included to provide context and provide some food for mind these have been taken from the text Understanding Change, by Hellhole (2006). opposition Globalization Demands for greater transparency and accountability Global Sustainability Technology The e-economy The consumer variation The social context Knowledge Management Future organizational trendsChanging industrial relations climate and employment legislation Stereotypical social attitudes The rise of the stakeholder Degree at which innovation progresses Demographics and Social fragmentation they believe to be the 10 top drivers for organizational change in 2010 whilst these make interesting reading for the author, the author is of particular support with the tenth a sassy war for talent commences. This picks up on what the author has been trying to arrive passim the sections on Personnel Management (Section 3. ) and Knowledge Management (Section 3. 3). non only are there external drivers for change UT internal ones too. As spate recover from the economic crisis they will begin to drive fore organizational change in a bid to better themselves and get credit and assurance of their work to the organization. Organizations need to bear this is mind and respond appropriately. The ten top drivers for organizational change as identify by Bloomberg Businesslike (2010) are 1 . Consumer preferences will remain define establish on values, not pricier.Energy costs will continue to increase in the medium termed. U. S. Tax policy could erode the competitive side of U. S. Companies. Innovation happens for emerging food market consumers, not in emerging markets 05. A new return to vertical integration gains traction 06. Industry shifts create competitive shifts 07. Increases in information requires more Judgment from decision makers 08. Markets reward long-term strategic focuses. Economic retrieval wont mean recovery for everyone 010. A new war for talent commences Bloomberg Businesslike (2010).Kurt Lenin group focused change theory Kurt Lenin can be quoted as saying assort life is never without change (1947). Predominantly Kurt Lenin presents us with a change manageme nt theory revolving round the concept of un freeze change and refreezing which presents a high- level approach to change. This has specific relationships back to the school of personnel management due to its importance for change in group settings as highlighted by Lenin in his work Frontiers in Group dynamics addressing the art of social science of social equilibrium and social change (1947).Linens work is not only applicable in a group setting it also holds great importance for the individual context too as well as large communities of practice and teams (Lenin, 1947). Through use of he model there is scope for management to make a radical change, minimize disruption of operations and ensure that the change becomes a permanent and rooted element of the organization through the re-freezing stage.The model, very focused around getting people to change as opposed to changing an organization, consists of three stages Unfreezing This is based upon the assumption that there is a need to change as present practices may have become out realised, slow, ineffective, expensive etc. The need to instigate the unfreezing stage is typically based upon an assumption that the status quo is no longer desirable or positivistic exulting from this there is often a motivation for change, the team unites, recognizes the need for change and begins the process of change management.It is inhering there is some degree of confidence amongst the team that the change will be implemented and carry through successfully in order to achieve group buy-in and a compulsory Psychological Contract. The Change Normal change management theories and principles world(a)ly come into play here. Whilst the team may all be on commonalityality stress will develop, individuals will have different ideas of the perceived outcomes, expectations will not be managed, the Psychological Contract diminish etc This is a time of exploration of opportunities where goals and objectives are set and writ of e xecution for change is developed.Lenin stresses the fact that it is innate as with any other change management theory that goals, objectives and plans for executing are continually assessed and reassessed in order to generate the best possible outcomes. It is important to note here that whilst the objectives are important for Lenin this does not unavoidably form the most essential stage. His focus upon change within groups provides a perspective that is more in line with the needs of individuals and maintain dictatorial relationships and focus, in order to bring about a successful re- freezing stage as described below.Re-freezing At the completion of the change discussions when implementation has been rolled out across all involved, Lenin identifies the need for re-freezing. Change will only reach its full effect if its made permanent (Lenin, 1947). As in the re-freezing of a liquid it is important to cement or solidify the change making it an official procedure of the organiza tion in bill of exchange specific attention to the completion of the project and the new processes re-freezing would therefore stamp down individuals returning to the old ways as existed pre-change process.Refreezing is the heart of this model. Lenin (1947) comments, A change towards a higher level of group performance is frequently short-lived, after a shot in the arm, group life shortly returns to the previous level. This indicates that it does not suffice to define the objective of planned change in group performance as the reaching of a different level. Permanency of the new level, or permanency for a desired period, should be included in the objective. Figure 13 Kurt Linens model of unfreezing and re-freezing.Source Adapted from Lenin (1947) serious Sizing There are various authors who have looked into the correlation between the surface of the firm in terms of personnel and effectiveness in organizational performance. There is however still a heightened awareness that t here are additional variables that impose upon organizational effectiveness namely applied science it is said that this could possibly account for up to fifty per cent of the variableness in result findings which lead to an inconclusive theory being proposed (Senior and Swales, 2010).Culture, leaders style, and politics all have an influence on the correlation teens size and organizational performance. Child (1988) who investigated into the correlation between size and performance conclude that the leading style operated within the organization was relevant to the size of the organization (number of employees employed). It was the leadership style and subsequent influence into the structure that Childs (1988) sees as having an impact upon organizational effectiveness including role specialization and formalization.Senior and Swales (2010) summaries the work of Child (1988) large organizations with a higher degree of bureaucracy structure were in cosmopolitan better performed. Bureaucracy did not work for the smaller organization who had a better degree of performance with a more informal leadership style. In organizations with below 2,000 people performance was assumed to be better in those that have little formal structure more bureaucracy and superior performance was greater (Senior and Swales, 2010). Several external driving forces for change (Section 3. 4. ) such as the current economic climate and recent inlet which have occurred at both local, regional, national and even international levels have created a heightened degree of urgency or organizations to increase efficiency many are doing this through operations management and seeing the organizations as a clearly defined set of inputs, processes and outputs. The author is of the belief that for successful change management to occur the process of managing change must occur holistically, which can also occur when viewed through the strategic lens.Both the immediate survival and long term sustenanc e of any organization heavily depends on organizational responsiveness to its external environment and its ability to face the external challenge. A huge problem facing strategic re-focusing of operations creates opposition due to an emotional connection to common practice challenged by the need to change for survival (Balloon and Hope-Halley, 2008, Sense, 1993). With the distinct lack of literature on right surface the author has conceptualized a model that illustrates where the concept of right- size fits into the organization.Taking the multi-lens perspective approach (Regional and Sprinter, 1996) and essential elements of organizational management the author proposes that the concept of right size of it is find out predominately within the cognitive lens. Figure 14 Position of right sizing within the organization Right sizing would normally e think to the structural view of the organization. The Rational Lens considers the structure of the organization as an ought-to-be scen ario.The Cognitive Lens considers right sizing as what is practicably possible scenario. The Rational Lens considers culture and corporate politics as an thwarter to change which is what many change managers attempt to override or ignore. With the cognitive lens approach culture and corporate politics are seen as an intrinsic component of change. Therefore culture and corporate politics should be understood and made to become enablers within the change management process.This is currently the issue that several organizations are facing. By positioning right sizing as a resulting factor of a combination of Organizational Culture, governance and Organizational Type the author feels that it will help in the analysis stages where the variety of case studies will be analyses. As mentioned within Section 2 the case study profiles were deliberately selected by the author for their variations in size.The author feels that it is important to note here that there is not necessarily a formu la for what is the right size of an organization or a specific team dealing with change management, UT that this may be discussed throughout the finding and analysis chapter (Section 5) where the case studies may lead towards generating an inclination as to what works best. The Readiness of Change Several articles regarding both individual and institutional readiness to change (readiness) within an organizational context have been pen over the centuries.Many well respected, and up-and-coming academics have posed models and theories in relation to how readiness can be increased, encouraged and developed within both individual and institutional spheres of influence a large gap that is still existent in the knowledge base centers around the explanation of readiness to change. Several pieces of relevant academic literature and building together a picture towards a comprehensive definition of readiness for change.Holt et alls work which has been consulted extensively opens with an impo rtant issue that the author must recognize the lack of measurement of readiness for change does not arise from a lack of instruments designed for this purpose. There are several in existence but without a common and universal understanding of what constitutes readiness a liable and robust framework, to operate quantitatively cannot (and has not currently) been developed.Evidently, with readiness being an area of research that is being encouraged (Holt et al, 2007) this is therefore an area that requires the knowledge gap being effect in order for research in this area to pursue. It is the aim of the extravert section to be devoted to this cause, reviewing the use of the literature, operative towards a definition of readiness, and identifying means of its analysis within a strategic institutionally based context. There is also the need for the adopted method to be sufficient to institutions of different natures, sizes and specialties as always generalization is imperative.Readine ss and Resistance are they related concepts? The concept of readiness is a result of the concept and result of impedance a sweeping statement or Just a different approach? It is perhaps no surprise, that change management due to its inclusion with the human resource management approach is highly subjective to the reactions of people (employees). This would explain the development of the need to research readiness, resulting from managers efforts to reduce resistance to change.Again the tree trunk of literature exists in this area, yet Ramekins et al (1993, cited in Holt et al, 2007) put forward their argument that any of these, strategies designed to help managers avoid resistance, are effective only to the extent which they facilitate employee readiness. The circular nature of this issue is again illustrated here. The transition of the Traditional HARM philosophy into the personnel management phase transfers its focus from objectives and output into placing value, focus and ulti mately having an investment and participation with he people.To some extent it can be argued that traditionally to date the people management processes within educational setting operate under this philosophy a large degree of responsibility and autonomous working is put upon the employees and in response it is hoped that the organization values staffs contributions. General motivational principles (Amazon, etc ) encourage the involvement of employees in a drive to encourage general commitment to organizational objectives and partnering of aims, especially plans for development, drive forward and ultimately change.Readiness has been looked at with a specific workforce focus whilst this is important, organizational culture, as explored above, external pressures and the lack of a strategic dimension can also reduce organizational readiness. What impact does this have on the organizations desire to change and move into a market leader position, driving forward its position within the market and gaining an advantage in what is a highly competitive market arena. Oakland and tanners Organizational Change Framework Research supporting the model Oakland and Tanner have been instrumental in the field of research into change