Culture and Organisational Change - Essay Example

?Culture and Change Table of Contents Introduction 3 Organisational Dynamics 3 Organisation Culture and Change 4 Psychology of Change 5 Leadership and Organisational Change 7 Organisational Politics, Power and Change 7 Organisational Learning and Change 9 Change Agents, Consultancy and Change 11 Applying Theory to Organisation Case Studies 11 11 Conclusion 15 References 16 Bibliography 21 Introduction Organisational change is considered as one of the most vital characteristics for efficient management. In today’s competitive business environment, change in organisations has become common and often used for survival and improvement of performance (Hussey, 2000). The key objective of accomplishing change is to gain competitive advantage. Change can happen by systematising the work procedures around the value chain, improving the abilities of human resources and supporting stakeholders in line for comprehending the obligation (Boonstra, n.d.). Usual change condition in an organisation is generated by the forces such as rationalising, reconsidering the methods of conducting business, increasing outsourcing, developing methods for minimising time and acquisition among others. Organisational Dynamics The worth of change in organisations is embedded in financial organisational performance. Financial approaches concentrate on shareholders and consumers as the most significant stakeholders and involve objective analogy in effective, reliable and manageable performance procedures presented on a mutual stage. Organisational change is not viable if it is not rooted in the improvement of human resources. As human resource experts are walking into the role of change leader in organisations increasingly, an understanding to change dynamics has become gradually more important. Organisational change is often considered as quick or slow and actively recognised or unwaveringly opposed by employees in organisations. These characteristics focus on emerging human resource dynamics of change which are resistance to change, willingness for change and establishment of drive for change. The hindrance to organisational change is more frequently inherent in organisation’s structure such as performance appraisal system or remuneration scheme which are not associated appropriately with expected behaviour of employees (Jansen, 2000). The essay concentrates on one emerging aspect of human resource dynamics of organisational change i.e. resistance to change. The paper considers the themes such as organisational culture, psychology of change, leadership, politics, power, learning, change agents and theories of organisational change with respect to human resource dynamic. The objective of the paper is to evaluate how human resource dynamic influences and facilitates to manage change within organisation. Resistance to Change Resistance to change is one of the major aspects of organisation dynamics which impacts upon change within organisations. Resistance among employees occur when they find it difficult to recognise or evaluate the situation of organisation. Besides, resistance also happens when organisational change threatens the present circumstances and increases the concern about fictional outcomes after change. Occasionally, the self-centredness of employees, for instance, lack of future vision, lack of aptitude and anxiety of repositioning of work structure also fuel the resistance to change. Recognising the reasons for resistance help organisations to prevent disasters and improve the organisational change procedure (Yuh-Shy, n.d.). Organisation Culture and Change Organisational culture is the sole and the most significant aspect liable for success or failure in an organisation. Organisational culture is considered as an adaptable or core metaphor for intellectualising organisation. Culture is a mechanism related with fulfilling of particular requirements of the employee force. Organisational culture is viewed as governable by management and it contributes to the overall equilibrium and efficiency of organisation. In anthropology, culture denotes to the socially conveyed outlines for behaviour individualities of a specific cultural group. It denotes to a method of work life among a particular group (Iivari, n.d.). Transforming organisational culture is one of the significant challenges for leaders. The reason is that culture includes intertwining set of objectives, roles, procedures, values, communication exercises, approaches and expectations within organisation. These cultural elements act as mutually strengthening systems and syndicate to stop any effort of organisation to change it. Changes such as introduction of new team, new production system (such as lean or agile), new knowledge management or new business procedures seem to make development in organisation, but ultimately interlock the elements of organisational culture and therefore change is unescapably drawn back into existing organisational culture (Forbes, 2011). Change of organisational culture is a large scale event and finally every organisational instrument for changing minds of employees requires to be placed in right place. On the whole, the most productive strategy is to initiate with leadership tools including vision of the future improvement (Forbes, 2011). Psychology of Change Organisational change is a complicated psychological procedure. Change does not occur over forced effort by the individual or organisation, however it happens if organisations capitalise in present situation of people, in order to change them (Beisser, n.d.). In present days, leaders need to recognise and use the information of psychology in order to effectively manage the change. Traditionally, organisations concentrated on structural aspects of change and were methodically unsuccessful to implement change due to negligence of the truth regarding change psychology i.e. change cannot take place without making specific employees to change the way of thinking, opinions and performance in an organisation. Successful changes in big organisations rely on enticing group of individuals to transform their ways of function. Employees will accept the organisational change only if they can be convinced to reflect in different way regarding their tasks. Basically, the psychology of change is to alter the attitudes of employees (Lawson & Price, 2003). Employees in organisation need to embrace change and also involve in a procedure to recognise how they view the changes in organisation. The only method by which organisations can accomplish high performance objectives is to alter the method in which employees act across an organisation. Employees change their attitude towards organisational change if they view a significant reason for change and thus tend to accept it. The adjacent organisational system such as remuneration system, or compensation system needs to be aligned with the new performance standard of employees and they must have the essential skills for satisfying organisational change requirements (Vision, 2012). In psychological research, it has been observed that disturbing psychological change of employees appears when they find that their principles are unpredictable with their activities, which is also termed as cognitive dissonance. If employees have faith in the overall purpose of organisational change and its association with their own life objectives, they become more motivated to change their individual actions. Recognising the role of their functions in organisation’s wealth is valuable for change in an organisation (Burnes & et. al., 1995). Leadership and Organisational Change The enunciation of organisational vision is vital for accomplishing organisational change. The leaders need to communicate a strong vision of the future ideal organisation. Once the vision is recognised, the leaders must inaugurate and build understanding and promise among the employees to share the vision of ideal individuality of organisation, where the functions of employees are essential. The actual transformation of organisation happens as a result of the vision of organisation’s prospect and the determination of employees to accomplish it. Thus, the leaders of organisation play a vital part for managing the human resources and motivating them by creating a feeling of earnestness, involving people in the structural change and emphasising upon them to institutionalise organisational change (Appelbaum & et. al., 1998). Organisational Politics, Power and Change Organisational change procedure is inclined by institutionalisation and the behaviour of employees within similar interest groups. According to theory of David McClelland, power is considered as one of the basic human requirements in an organisation. In organisational change, power is applied by top management such as Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), change executives and boards. In traditional organisations, activities conducted for manipulating change procedure are viewed as resistance to change. In case of organisational change, numerous players try to encourage each other. The idea of power comprises using authority on other employees which can encourage the change. In organisational change procedure, power and guidance can correspondingly direct to obedience or promise to change labours (Clegg, 1994). Power is imperceptible in an organisation and it can instinctively change the insights, thoughts and preferences of employees in such a way that they recognise the change objectives and naively approve the new organisational system while their own goals are less comprehended. Power acts as a social procedure causing changes in views, feelings and performances of groups in which disparities are involved concerning comprehension of requirements and interests. Power can be of numerous types such as position power and personal power (Clegg, 1994). Position power arrives from the official position and infers the genuine authority to apply positive and negative approvals such as recompenses and work pressures. Therefore, position power typically denotes to the prevailing organisational hierarchy that condenses management the capability to regulate the behaviour of employees and to change organisational culture. The use of position power is apparent and straight, and using position power for organisational change necessitates for recognising the level to which employees can perform the essential activities. The power entrenched in formal organisational structures and procedures are focused at command. Activities taken for the command to change the organisational culture is observed as resistance. In this perspective, resistance to change is considered as proscribed manners of employees and an attack on organisational welfares (Hardy & Clegg, 1996). Apart from position power, the personal power also impacts on the organisational change procedure. The personal power is considered as proficiency, referent power, personality and partiality. The idea of personal power is arrived from social psychology theory (Emerson, 1962). People can increase the personal power in an organisation by developing numerous relations in organisations with major power characteristics. These relations provide people the access to major individuals in order to resist organisational change. Through increasing support as a power base, change agents can grasp positive reputation, position and reliability (Boonstra & Gravenhorst, 1998). Organisational politics also influences the resistance to change. It includes deliberate activities to inspire or enhance or defend personal welfares or group benefits within organisation (Allen & et. al., 1979). Organisational politics is a negative force for change when egotisms erode organisational welfares (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2008). Political manipulation is caused chiefly by uncertainty. Each time organisations attempt to change, the political system within organisation stimulates. Thus, efforts to change the existing state of affairs include political action for both those who wish for change and those who desire to preserve change. The aptitude to recognise and act efficiently in political ground of organisation is vital for the achievement of change efforts (Margulies & Raia, 1984). Organisational Learning and Change Successful change requires adaptation of organisation by detecting any kind of indications from business environment. Adaptability helps to increase the competitiveness of organisations. Organisational capability to learn facilitates in organisation wide development and change adeptness. Such adeptness improves the competitive situation by advances in productivity, output and modernisation. Although organisational learning is a cornerstone for competitive advantage, risks are involved to believe that all learning will be helpful. Organisational learning can impose negative influence on organisational change. The major negative influences of learning on organisational competitiveness are irrational learning, achievement learning and capability tricks. The irrational learning happens when positive consequences are interpreted as learning results regardless of slight or no relation. Achievement learning includes wrong prospects or beliefs regarding the impacts of learning. Capability tricks occur when organisations decline to approve better technology regardless of its convenience. These negative impacts of learning are preventable if organisations apply learning in an apparent outline where employees are continually clever enough to distinguish, evade and manage such drawbacks (Bednar, 2000). Organisational learning refers to the cooperative, group or entire organisation, thinking and acting in a different way as a consequence of change procedure. The change management is an organisational inventiveness planned to achieve important developments in performance by altering associations between employees, technology, organisational structure and information which usually instigates with strategic change (Kiehl, 2004). One of the most significant parts of change procedure is getting it happen in the first place. The capacity of an organisation to learn is a critical resource. There are three aspects of learning which results in success of change. First aspect is responsiveness of organisations towards the requirements of employees who will be impacted by change. The second aspect is learning capability of organisation and the third aspect is organisation’s ability for action (Alas, n.d.). Organisational learning is generally been demarcated as a dynamic procedure by which organisations familiarise with the changes in cultural, governmental and economic situation (Dierkes & et. al., 2001). In today’s competitive environment, change is inevitable and organisational learning plays a significant role to guide organisations through change in such a way where employees are contented with change. Thus, every change efforts necessitate learning for employees in order to succeed and avoid resistance. However, majority of organisations face difficulties in assimilating learning vision into management exercises. The efficiency of organisational learning as a device to decrease resistance to change is improved when it is associated with part of manager (Venter, 2008). Change Agents, Consultancy and Change One of the most serious tasks of organisational change is to harness the provision of actual change promoter. The managers in organisations are often in the position of change agents who observe the requirement for change and support change procedure. Change agents have the obligation to implement change (JERITT, 2012). They play three distinct roles which are consulting, teaching and investigation. As a consultant, change agent assists organisations to produce information. The general objective is to help employees to discover resolutions to the problems in change procedure through examination of valid facts. In addition to this, change agents also function as coach. Change agents help employees by teaching about new abilities to recover, interpret data in order to resolve future organisational problems. Thus, change agents can improve the overall business operations of their organisations. Finally, change agents play the role of investigator. They train organisational employees for providing the required skills which are vital for execution of action plans (Lunenburg, 2010). Applying Theory to Organisation Case Studies Organisational theory helps to study the organisation for the welfares of recognising mutual subjects. Learning organisational theory helps to exploit the effectiveness and output of organisations and also satisfies the necessities of stakeholders. There are several theories on the basis of traditional, neoclassical and environmental viewpoint. Among them two significant theories are contingency theory and evolutionary theory. Contingency Theory Contingency theory believes that there are no best methods to arrange and direct an organisation. The reason is that an organisational leadership or working pattern which is efficient in certain circumstances may not be fruitful in other circumstances. The ideal organisational system relies on numerous internal and external environmental aspects. Contingency theory is considered as provisional theory which is also associated with philosophy of universalism. From contingency viewpoint, the approach approved by an organisation is operative if unique situation is efficient. This situation is recognised as a restriction of contingency theory (Burton, 2006). The managerial structure of organisation can have two supreme forms which are mechanical administration system and organics administration system. The mechanical organisational system is designed as bureaucracy that is categorised by high subdivision of hierarchies, interpretation of authorities and duties. On the other hand, organic management system has non-bureaucratic system, characterised by flexibility of obligations, authority and tasks. The administration system of organisation can have significant impact on employees. Case study of Nissan Change in Nissan is an example of contingency theory for organisational transformation. Nissan aims to become one of the top organisations with respect to technology, comprising innovative engine, frameworks and suspension. During 1991-1994, the core models of Nissan failed in the automobile market of Japan. Nissan was quite poor in the area of product development and promotion. In the year 1998, Nissan was affected by economic recession and sales temporarily dropped. In the year 1999, Nissan was on the edge of insolvency and required reintegration of organisational system. The major problems for change in Nissan were resistance of employees, cultural dissimilarities and huge amount of liability. In the year 2003, Nissan had developed a new program named “Nissan Revival Plan” (NRP) as a part of organisational change. It has been identified that the reason for failure of Nissan was due to its mechanical administration system which was inappropriate in the market situation of Japan. Although the Japanese management system was suitable for other automobile organisations, it was not suitable for Nissan. Through the implementation of NRP, numerous production facilities were closed down, the production capacity was decreased, number of employees had been reduced, procurement expenses had been reduced and number of associates had been dropped. As a result, Nissan had successfully changed the organisational culture and revived its financial position in automobile market (Suetake, n.d.). Evolutionary Theory Evolutionary theory defines a series of successive phases of evolution in organisational growth and cultural changes. Evolutionary theory comprises a thought that organisational change is formed by structural forces and limitations. This theory assumes that survival of organisations depends on the capability for flexibility and resources nourishment as it cooperates with the external environment. The business environmental situations can form the organisational structure. Organisations are considered as highly adaptive and organisational changes befall in reaction with the internal as well as external replications (Sisaye, 2001). The evolutionary theory believes that as long as organisations’ activities are aligned with the environment, they are measured as fit. The evolution in an organisation is instigated by four aspects which are difference, selection, maintenance and struggle. These four aspects occur in organisation instantaneously and result in transformation of organisational system and culture. Case Study of Japan Airlines The case of Japan Airline is considered as a significant instance of evolutionary theory practice of organisational change. Japan Airlines was formed as semi-governmental organisation. It was the first global aviation company in Japan after World War II. In the year 1965, Japan Airlines had developed tour packages due to cessation of constraint on foreign air travel. However, in 1987, due to denationalisation of aviation organisations and improvements of information technology and hospitality industry, the aviation industry experienced huge variation of business. Furthermore, weak maintenance of airplane, increased conflicts among employees, low organisational productivity, and high fuel costs had resulted in rapid decline of business performance of Japan Airlines. In order to recover the performance, Japan Airlines attempted to reorganise and reduce the expenses. However, the administration of Japan Airlines was inflexible and organisational structure did not support the change. As a result of structural forces and reaction for internal and external aspects of business, Japan Airlines had undergone evolutionary change in organisational structure. In the year 1987, Japan Airlines became denationalised and faced key shift in administration (Suetake, n.d.). Conclusion Organisational change is usually intellectualised and a shift from current situation to a new preferred, arrangement in order to gain better fit with the business environment. Organisational change is viewed as a retreat from existing norms and merely an ordinary reaction with the external as well as internal situations. Administration plays a vital part in organisational change. Whether change becomes a success or a failure depends on how an organisation handles the employees, as they are the crucial aspects of change. In practice, generally organisations call for change agents so that they can effectively manage all aspects of change, but there is also need for effective leadership which can inspire, stimulate and motivate employees to contribute towards the success of change. There are several power and political dynamics which impact on the change process. With appropriate leadership, organisations can develop a vision among employees so that they can support the change process and avoid resistance. References Alas, R., No Date. Organizational Change From Learning Perspective. Estonian Business School. [Online] Available at: http://www.isma.info/dosyalar/3306108-114.pdf [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Allen, R. W. & et. al., 1979. Organizational Politics: Tactics and Characteristics of its Actors. California Management Review, pp. 77. Appelbaum, S. H. & et. al., 1998. Strategic Organizational Change: The Role of Leadership, Learning, Management Decision, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 289-301. Burnes, B. & et. al., 1995. Culture, Cognitive Dissonance and the Management of Change. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 15, No. 8, pp. 14-33. Bednar, P. M., 2000. A Contextual Integration of Individual and Organiszational Leraning Perspectives as a Part of IS Analysis. Informing Science, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 145-156. Boonstra, J., No Date. Dynamics in Organizational Change and Learning: Reflections and New Perspectives. University of Amsterdam. [Online] Available at: http://www.jaapboonstra.nl/publicaties/engelstalig/dynamics%20in%20organizational%20change%20and%20learning%20-%20reflections%20and%20new%20perspectives%20door%20Boonstra.pdf [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Beisser, A., No Date. The Paradoxical Theory of Change. The Gestalt Therapy. [Online] Available at: http://www.gestalt.org/arnie.htm [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Boonstra, J. J. & Gravenhorst, K. M. B., 1998. Power Dynamics and Organizational Change: A Comparison of Perspectives. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 97-120. Clegg, S., 1994. Social Theory for the Study of Organizations: Weber and Foucault. Organization, Vol. 1, pp. 149–178. Dierkes, M. & et. al., 2001. Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge. Oxford University Press. Burton, R. M., 2006. Organization Design: The Evolving State-Of-The-Art. Springer. Emerson, R.M., 1962. Power-dependence Relations. American Sociological Review, Vol. 27, pp. 31–41. Forbes, 2011. How Do You Change An Organizational Culture? Leadership. [Online] Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/07/23/how-do-you-change-an-organizational-culture/ [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Hussey, D. E., 2000. How to Manage Organisational Change. Kogan Page Publishers. Hardy, C. & Clegg, S. R., 1996. Handbook of Organizational Studies. Sage Publications. Iivari, N., No Date. The Role Of Organizational Culture In Organizational Change - Identifying A Realistic Position For Prospective Is Research. University of Oulu. [Online] Available at: http://is2.lse.ac.uk/asp/aspecis/20050036.pdf [Accessed April 18, 2012]. JERITT, 2012. Organizational Change and Development. Adult Education Perspectives For Judicial Education. [Online] Available at: http://jeritt.msu.edu/documents/TallmanWithoutAttachment.pdf [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Jansen, K. J., 2000. The Emerging Dynamics of Change: Resistance, Readiness, and Momentum. Human Resource Planning, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 53-55. Kreitner, R. & Kinicki, A., 2008. Organizational Behavior: 8th Edition. McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Kiehl, J. K., 2004. Learning to Change: Organizational Learning And Knowledge Transfer. Case Western Reserve University. [Online] Available at: http://etd.ohiolink.edu/send-pdf.cgi?acc_num=case1080608710 [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Lawson, E. & Price, C., 2003. The Psychology of Change Management. The McKinsey Quarterly. [Online] Available at: http://www.valleyvision.org/partnership/chg%20mgmt%20article.pdf [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Lunenburg, F. C., 2010. Managing Change: The Role of the Change Agent. International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 1-6. Margulies, N. & Raia, A. P., 1984. The Politics of Organization Development. Training & Development Journal, Vol. 38, No. 8, pp. 20-23. Suetake, H., No Date. Organizational Change Theory and Case Studies in Japan. Meiji University Doctoral Course. [Online] Available at: http://www.organizzazione.unina.it/cms7/proceedings/proceedings_stream_06/Suetake.pdf [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Sisaye, S., 2001. Organizational Change and Development in Management Control Systems: Process Innovation for Internal Auditing and Management Accounting. Emerald Group Publishing. Venter, A., 2008. The Link Between Leadership Style, Organizational Learning and Resistance to Change. Welead Online Magazine. [Online] Available at: http://www.leadingtoday.org/Onmag/2008%20Archives/November%2008/av-november08.pdf [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Vision, 2012. A Psychology of Change. Philosophy & Ideas. [Online] Available at: http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/alfred-adler-adlerian-psychology/41045.aspx [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Yuh-Shy, C., No Date. Individual Resistance from Employees to Organizational Change. Ching Yun University. [Online] Available at: http://www.jgbm.org/page/19%20Dr.%20Chuang,Yuh-Shy.pdf [Accessed April 18, 2012]. Bibliography Hatch, M. J., 1993. The Dynamics of Organizational Culture. The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 657-693. Levitt, B. & March, J. G., 1998. Organizational Learning. Annual Reviews, Vol. 14, pp. 319-340. March, J. G., 2001. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 71-87. Nelson, L., 2003. A Case Study in Organisational Change: Implications for Theory. Learning Organization, The, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.18–30. Rhydderch, M. & et. al., 2004. Organisational Change Theory and the Use of Indicators in General Practice. Quality Safety Health Care, Vo. 13, pp. 213-217. Smid, G., 2006. Leadership in Organisational Change: Rules for Successful Hiring in Interim Management. Journal of Change Management, Vol. 6, No. 9, pp. 35-51. Read More