Change Management of Schools of Thought - Assignment Example

ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE By Location Organisational change Introduction In order for any organisation to experience growth, change is an eminent factor when it seeks to move from its current state to the state that it desires its future to be. Essentially, the business environments that exist today require that organisations go through change under the guided leadership of competent leaders in order for the process to have impact (Jones & Brazzel 2006, n.p). Researchers suggest that in order for businesses to continue staying afloat in a relatively competitive world, they should adopt technological changes that result from globalisation. In most cases, the process of change is met by some sort of resistance because employees tend to uncertain about the new concept being introduced as its outcomes tend to be uncertain (Pardo del Val & Maartinez Fuentes n.d, p. 5). Change should be a gradual process that should focus on having all team members on board, but those that seek to maintain the status quo are usually outshined by the same. John Kotter, a leading thinker in management, asserts that an eight step model is the surest way for leading changes in an organisation with a high chance that the organisation that applies it assured of success. The eight step model will be discussed later within the paper so as to capture an in-depth analysis of the same. Resistance within an organisational setting is something that a leader should anticipate, meaning that being prepared for this is likely to influence the speed of implementing the changes desired. Once change has been implemented, managing it becomes the next task as poor management of change is likely to foster undesired results. In essence, the need to implement change results from the aspect of globalisation and new technology innovations made every day that seek to make business practices be more effective, which is what every business organisation seeks to achieve (Aquinas 2010, p. 244). The implication of this is that organisations should operate at their local level but apply international strategies so that their products and services can go global which a concept that McDonalds understood well (Vignali 2001, p. 98). With this, the essay will delve into the perspectives of John Kotter on change, the three schools of thought on change and their relevance today. Change management schools of thought In an organisational setting, change management refers to the process of helping individuals and teams within an organisation to transition towards the future that that the organisation desires (Burgess 2004, p. 169). According to many, change tends to be deliberate and structured for the good of an organisation while in certain situations it might be spontaneous. Essentially, the former planned form of change is referred to as planned change while the change that is usually spontaneous is known as the emergent approach which is applied when a need arises (Ramanathan 2009, p. 31). Many leaders agree that the emergent approach to change can also be included in the planned approach because of the unpredictability situations. The planned approach to change was established by Lewin in the 1950s, through the making of predictable steps so as to foster the change process and managing it for the good of an organisation (Eriksson-Zetterquist & Styhre 2011, p. 235). Within the concept of change management, three schools of thought emerged as a way of explaining the process of managing change and explaining the behaviour of individuals that have to be changed. The three are the individual perspective, group dynamics and open systems school of thought (McCabe 2010, p. 186). i. The individual perspective school In this school of thought, the focus is on the behaviour of those that the change targets where there are a further two sub groups, which are the behaviourists and the Gestalt-Field psychologists as the other group (Jones & Jenkins 2007, p. 25). According to this school of thought, behaviour tends to be a learnt aspect in which people behave as per their own will irrespective of the consequences that their behaviours may attract. However, when a person is rewarded for a certain good behaviour, then chances are that they are likely to behave in the same way because the behaviour is deemed acceptable. On the other hand, behaviour that is not rewarded may result in an individual ignoring the same, meaning that when seeking to change behaviour, it is pertinent to also change the factors that influence it (Hallgrímsson 2008, p. 9). As compared to the behaviourist approach where focus is on behaviour, the theorists under the Gestalt-Field dwell on the actions, responses and interpretation in which an individual places on themselves. Here advocacy is on individuals taking responsibility for their own actions and should be able to identify what wrong or good behaviour is in order for them to behave as required. When applied to influencing organisational change, behaviourists assert that the process of brining change is through the changing of the factors that stimulate the external factors that individuals are subjected to. Gestalt-Field theorists on the other hand, facilitate the change process by helping individuals to adjust their understanding of the situations that they find themselves in and an understanding of themselves in order for change to be implemented (Jordan 2007, p. 88). ii. The open systems school of thought Contrary to the individual perspective concept, the open systems school focuses on the organisation rather than the groups and individuals that are within it (Grieves 2010, p. 23). In essence, the idea here is that an organisation is made up of sub-systems that are relatively interconnected meaning that when change is implemented on sub system, then it is highly likely to affect the other subsystems. The result of this would be that the entire organisation might be affected in terms of performance, meaning that the implementation of change should be systemic across all the sub-systems involved if success is to be achieved. Based on this, the process of implementing change would require the ascertaining of what the organisations sub-systems are and developing an effective way of changing them so as to improve on the overall performance of the organisation. This can be a form of planned approach because it requires the careful calculation of the steps that an organisation has to take in the process of influencing change. To many leaders, the open systems theory is the ideal approach because there is limited competition for recognition as compared to the other approaches as this tends to complement the subgroups to be better and increase the overall organisational performance. iii. The group dynamics school In this school of thought, the focus tends to be on teams or groups within an organisation by attempting to change individual behaviour as per the norms and practices that exist within a particular group (Gane 2007, p. 205). Therefore, this concept relies on individuals to conform their behaviours into those that are acceptable within a group rather than having to deal with changing of behaviour on an individual basis. The change to the individuals will be influenced by the pressures from group members for them to conform, meaning that an organisation should focus on changing the norms that govern a group to ensure that they are not oppressive. Analysis and synthesis Change is an important part of an organisation because without influencing change, then an organisation is likely to lose its competitive edge and will not be able to meet the needs of their customers effectively (Henry 2008, p. 138). In most cases, change tends to be on the technological aspect of a business because these tools help in influencing efficiency for a business and also increase the production levels. Technology also helps in making communication in an organisation to be more effective so as to foster collaborative efforts and on time completion of tasks. Change also results from the shifting ideas that consumers might have about their needs, hence making it imperative for organisations to enhance their products so as to meet these needs. Organisations that embrace change understand that this aspect brings along opportunities for growth because change allows team members to learn new skills and also put their creativity at work (Chawla & Renesch 2012, p. 102). When employees in an organisation tap into their creative side, then they bring up new ideas that would be beneficial to an organisation in terms of achieving and maintaining a competitive edge. Theorists insist that leaders should be able to prepare their team members for the process of implementing change and to include them in this process so as to avoid meeting resistance while the process is underway (Aquinas 2010, p. 252). The preparation aspect includes ascertaining and analyzing the training tools that can be used so as to help the team members to obtain the necessary skills that they need in order for the process to work (Chaunda & Byrd 2012, p. 117). Additionally, it is important to ascertain the individual capabilities of the team members so as to develop a plan that is better suited for them, as per their unique needs. In such a setting, it would be difficult to apply the group dynamics approach to influencing change because this would be a general application as it would not be able to address the unique needs of each individual. The individual perspective approach is the most ideal as it requires the study of behaviour and reactions of individuals before a leader embarks on the process of implementing change rather than forcing the same on them. The beauty of this concept is that individuals are able to adapt to the changes with ease because the organisation will make the environment to be conducive for them to make the same. On the other hand, the open system can also be applicable when an organisation is seeking to implement change because it less time consuming and allows for team members to learn from their peers. In the case of individual perspective, having to study and communicate to each individual separately is time consuming and can also attract cost implications especially if training is required (Boonstra 2013, n.p). An organisation should be keen as not to incur major expenses in the process of implementing change because this can also bring detrimental effects to a business. Many argue that the process of training employees about the changes that should be made, technology wise, can be a loss especially if the employees are trained and then later quit working at an organisation. However, training employees in anticipation for change can be a way of retaining employees and influencing organisational loyalty. This is because the team members of an organisation will feel valued by the organisation and also their inputs as worth for the good of an organisation. Resistance to change In the process of bringing change to an organisation, it is important for leaders to understand that they are likely to meet resistance along the way and develop strategies for managing the objections that they meet (Zoogah & Beurgre 2012, p. 176 ). First, it is important for them to understand why people object to change in the first place as this can help in planning for a strategy that addresses the concerns that people have before the process begins. The typical reaction to change may include denial as the first reaction, then anger, confusion, depression, that might result to a crisis (Widiger & Sticker 2003, p. 436). However if change is managed effectively, then the team members are likely to experience acceptance and gain new confidence that is only achieved after some time. Reasons why people resist change For one, if the team members in an organisation fail to understand why change has to be implemented in the first place within the same, then chances are that they would be reluctant to accepting the process (Kleynhans 2006, p. 29). Therefore, leaders should strive to make it clear from the onset why change at time is important so as to help convince employees why it is necessary. Secondly, people tend to have a fear of the unknown especially if the concept being introduced is new and can only do so if they have absolute faith that it would work (Phillips & Gully 2012, p. 497). Moreover, people can resist change if they lack the competence required in handling a new concept to which not many can outrightly admit as the reason as to why they resist change (Nelson & Quick 2012, p. 302). Comfort of the old ways also influences people to be resistant to change because of the emotional connections that they might have had with the past especially if it involves the changing of departments (Smit et al 2007, p.221). In this case, it is important for leaders to try and understand the emotional connection that the employees have with their old ways and make the process of implementing change to be as gradual as possible (Weerakkody, Janssen & Dwivedi 2009, p. 45). In other cases, people may be not readily accept change if they were not consulted when an organisation was seeking to apply new ways of doing things (Shimomura & Kimita 2012, p. 223). This means that when team members feel that they were left out at the beginning of the process then they are highly likely to be resistant to the change that an organisation seeks to implement. Moreover, poor communication from leaders to team members can also lead to resistance because communication has to be seam less so as to avoid breakdowns (Truss, Mankin & Kelliher 2012, p. 284). Due to this fact, team members can feel as though they the management is sidelining them especially if they are not informed of what their responsibilities would be once the change has been implemented. People can also be adamant to change because of being afraid of changing the routines that they are used to, which is relatively leaving their comfort zones. Comfort zones create a sense of security, which explains why people can be reluctant to starting to do things differently as they may not be competent enough to handle new routines (Kirk 2010, p. 1017). However, leaders can try using benefits and rewarding of employees if they engage in behaviour that is focused towards change, but this may not be so if effective if the rewards are not satisfying to the customers. In such a scenario, then the individual perspective approach can be applicable because acceptable is rewarded while the one that is unacceptable is ignored. This would mean that employees would have no alternative other than to conform due to the existing dominant behaviour in the organisation. In such situations, it would be important for a leader to consider the psychological needs of the team members as a motivation strategy that can be used in implementing change. Maslow developed the hierarchy of needs theory in 1943 where he stated that people can be motivated so as to influence them to achieve certain organizational goals (Sapru 2008, p. 216). His was a five-stage model that included addressing the psychological, safety, self-esteem and social needs before addressing the growth needs that are the self actualization needs (Winnick 2011, p. 121). Once the needs have been met, a leader would find it easy to administer change within an organisation because the team members would feel as though the company values them hence influencing organisational loyalty. The implication of this is that at times it is necessary for an organisation to place the needs of its employees first before embarking on the process of bringing change because this can make the process more seamless and the adaptation process to be fast (Ballantyne, Berret, Wells & Musso 2011, p. 13). Additionally, if the needs are not met as per this hierarchy, then this is highly likely to attract dissatisfaction and discomfort among the team members making it pertinent for them to be addressed in this way. Kotter’s eight step model for change As per his research, a majority of the transformation or change attempts have failed miserably owing to the fact that organisations do not focus on being consistent, working effectively with their team members and them changing themselves. Based on this overview, Kotter developed the eight step model that was to help in the process of influencing change within an organisation. Step 1: Creating the sense of urgency- It is important for an organisation through its leaders, to take the slightest opportunity available to excite the team members about what the change the business desires can bring to an organisation (Sabri, Gupta & Beitler 2007, p. 176). The advantage that this brings is that it helps people within the organisation to sign up for the process of change simply because they understand the need. Step 2: Build a team/coalition that will guide the process of change- Here, a leader has to come up with a competent team that will be able to spearhead the process effectively, meaning that having the wrong individuals may not bring out the results that an organisation desires (Wang 2014, p. 614). Step 3: Develop a strategic vision and initiatives- A vision is what guides an organisation towards change that should be accompanied with a plan that is strategic so as to achieve this. Step 4: Find people willing to walk the journey- It is important for leaders to have a group of people that buy the idea of change as they can help in influencing other team members to accept the process (McDonald & Stockley 2010, p. 71). Step 5: Empowering action through communication- Once employees have understood the vision that has been communicated to them, this step requires the training and equipping of these employees towards the task ahead. Therefore, this includes the engaging of a broader group of people in the organisation to be part of the change that is being sort (Speier-Werner 2006, p. 130). Step 6: Produce short term gains and highlight them to members- this encourages team members to work harder because celebrating the short-term gains can motivate them to do more (Vogelsang 2013, p. 441). This also communicates that the efforts they make are valid because the evaluation process can help yield more results for the future. Step 7: Sustain acceleration- In this step, sustaining the momentum that the process of change being implemented begins with is key because once it dies then team members would relax and drift from the path of achieving the desired goals (Cameron & Green 2012, p. 126). This can be through recruiting more employees when the workload exceeds, promoting deserving employees, and developing new structures that will be able to sustain the vision. Step 8: Instituting new approaches- Here, the focus is on creating new crops of leaders can help in succession of leadership so as to sustain the process in case the leaders that begin the process are not available (Chakrabarti 2010, p. 214). In conclusion, the process of implementing change in an organisation is as important as the process of managing the same because the failure to do so might steer the organisation towards the wrong direction. Changing behaviour can either be done through the groups dynamics, individual perspective or through the open systems approach, but it is important for a leader to analyze the situation before they can apply any of them. However, my thoughts are that the individual perspective approach and the emergent approach are the ideal ways for implementing change because they focus on the needs of the individuals and spontaneous implementation of the same (Bess & Dee 2007, p. 813). In the process of influencing organisational change, leaders will meet some form of resistance, but it is important for them to understand the reasons as to why the people are resisting so as to handle the same effectively. Lastly, addressing the needs of the people whose behaviour is to be changed as per Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is needful because this is a sure a way to foster the desired results for an organisation. Bibliography Aquinas, PG 2010,Organisation structure and design: applications and challenges, New Delhi, Excel Books. Ballantyne, S, Berret, B,Musso, JD & Wells, ME 2011, Planning in reverse: a viable approach to organisational leadership, Lanham, Md, Rowman & Littlefield Education. Bess, JL, & Dee, JR 2007, Understanding college and university organisation: theories for effective policy and practice, Sterling, Va, Stylus Pub., LLC. Boonstra, JJ 2013, Cultural change and leadership in organisations a practical guide to successful organisational change, Chichester, West Sussex, Wiley-Blackwell. Burgess, P 2011, Reboot!: what to do when your career is over but your life isnt, Victoria, B.C., Friesen Press. Cameron, E & Green, M 2012, Making sense of change management a complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organisational change, London, Kogan Page. Chakrabarti, R 2010, Grit, guts, and gumption: driving change in a state-owned giant, New Delhi, Penguin Books India. Eriksson-Zetterquist, U, Müllern, T & Styhre, A 2011, Organisation theory: a practice-based approach, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Gane, M 2007, Forest strategy strategic management and sustainable development for the forest sector. Dordrecht, Springer. Grieves, J 2010, Organisational change: themes & issues. New York, Oxford University Press. Hallgrímsson, T 2008, Organizational change and change readiness: Employees’ attitudes during times of proposed merger. Henry, A 2008, Understanding strategic management, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Jones, BB & Brazzel, M 2006, The NTL Handbook of Organisation Development and Change Principles, Practices, and Perspectives, New York, NY, John Wiley & Sons. Jones, R & Jenkins, F 2007, Key topics in healthcare management: understanding the big picture, Oxford, Radcliffe. Jordan, K 2007, The quick theory reference guide: a resource for expert and novice mental health professionals, New York, Nova Science Publishers. Kirk, SA 2010, IT outsourcing: concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications, Hershey, PA, Business Science Reference. Kleynhans, R 2006, Human resource management, Cape Town, South Africa, Pearson/Prentice Hall South Africa. McCabe, S 2010, Corporate strategy in construction understanding todays theory and practice. Chichester, U.K., Wiley-Blackwell. McDonald, J & Stockley, D 2010, Pathways to the profession of educational development, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. Nelson, DL, & Quick, JC 2012, Organisational behavior: foundations, realities, and challenges, Mason, Ohio, South-Western. Pardo del Val, M & Martinez Fuentes, C., Resistance to change: a literature review and empirical study Phillips, J & Gully, SM 2012, Organisational behavior: tools for success, Mason, OH, South-Western Cengage Learning. Ramanathan, TR 2009, The role of organisational change management in offshore outsourcing of information technology services: qualitative case studies from a multinational pharmaceutical company, Boca Raton, Fla, Dissertation.com. Sabri, EH, Gupta, AP & Beitler, MA 2007, Purchase order management best practices: process, technology, and change management, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, J. Ross Pub. Sapru, RK 2008, Administrative theories and management thought, New Dehli, PHI Learning. Scott, CL & ByrD, MY 2012, Handbook of research on workforce diversity in a global society: technologies and concepts. Hershey, PA, Business Science Reference. Shimomura, Y & Kimita, K 2013, The philosophers stone for sustainability: proceedings of the 4th CIRP International Conference on Industrial Product-Service Systems, Tokyo, Japan, November 8th - 9th, 2012, Berlin, Springer. Smit, PJ et al 2007, Management principles: a contemporary edition for Africa, Cape Town, South Africa, Juta. Speier-Werner, P 2006, Public change Management: erfolgreiche Implementierung neuer Steuerungsinstrumente im öffentlichen Sektor, Public Change Management. Wiesbaden, Dt. Univ.-Verl. Stricker, G, Widiger, TA, & Weiner, IB 2003, Handbook of Psychology, Volume 8, Clinical Psychology Volume 8, Clinical Psychology, New York, John Wiley & Sons. Truss, C, Mankin, D, & Kelliher, C 2012, Strategic human resource management, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Vignali C., 2001,"McDonald’s: “think global, act local” – the marketing mix", British Food Journal, Vol. 103 Iss 2 pp. 97 - 111 Vogelsang, J 2013, Handbook for strategic HR: best practices in organisation development from the OD network, New York, American Management Association. Wang, VCX 2014, Handbook of research on education and technology in a changing society, IGI Global Press. Weerakkody, V, Janssen, M & Dwivedi, YK 2009, Handbook of research on ICT-enabled transformational government: a global perspective, Hershey, PA, Information Science Reference. Winnick, JP (2011, Adapted physical education and sport, Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics. Zoogah, DB & Beugre, CD 2012, Managing Organisational Behavior in the African Context, London, Routledge Press. Read More