Change and Its Theories and Management - Essay Example

Report of Change management Change and Culture Organizations routinely face transition that the employees and leaders cope with. Upheavals in the internal or external environment lead to times when strategic change is required to improve the ability to compete or survive. When companies undergo mergers, the merger of cultures while retaining a large part of the merged company’s existing culture allows for greater success in the marketplace. When the acquired company offers the promise of growth, the culture of the company may be retained to allow it to reach the potential. Cultural change is an expensive proposition and a poorly planned attempt to follow seemingly effective cultures based on external thought leads to negative effects (Deetz, Tracy & Simpson, 2000, p. 160). Need for Change How does the decision for a change management process come about? Armstrong (2006, p. 74) warns companies to guard against HR managers, trying to prove their contribution to the business by suggesting innovative practices. This effort at ‘impression management’ may not yield practices that are relevant to the business. Pearce (2003, p. 19) suggests the use of personal reflection rather than the use of prevalent management literature. This method allows the leader to enrich the organization based on experience and insight thereby transforming instead of caretaking. Leadership and Change The attitude of leadership to a change process has a direct impact on the ability of the organization to adopt it. A new leader who joins a company in a crisis may undergo a dilemma on various grounds. Gilmore (2003, p.130-132) details the process of new leadership that takes over a company to explain possible causes for ambivalence. The perception of the past leader in the minds of the employees, the tendency to unfavorably compare the current job with the past one and the ability to be accepted among the employees are some of the factors that affect the ability to lead the organization through a change process. The new leader should focus on the strengths of the organization, listen to the employees, and acknowledge the existing structure and practices before making a change and strengthening understanding with different employee groups. Huber and Glick (1995, p. 316) stress on the view that human resources be highlighted as resources rather than costs to be curtailed in a change program to avoid the loss of talent through temporary periods of stress. Pearce and Conger (p. 296) focus on the power of shared leadership to increase the effectiveness of teams while improving the sense of satisfaction among team members. Members of teams with similar attitudes and competency sets can effectively work with the demands and ambiguity of shared leadership. Kotter (2007) highlights the processes behind business transformation: Create a sense of urgency after identifying the major existing and potential crises or opportunities and form a core group to guide the effort Visioning and communicating to direct effort Empowering appropriate decision making and risk taking and identifying immediate improvements Consolidation of improvements to build credibility and rewarding Institutionalizing changed approaches to business Theories related to Change Armstong and Stephens (2005, p. 119-121) cite theories related to Change Management. 1) Kurt Lewin’s model of Change management involved the stages of Unfreezing, Changing and Refreezing. The stage of Unfreezing involves the awareness of resistance towards change while ‘altering the present stable equilibrium’ with its existing behavior and attitudes. 2) Richard Beckhard proposed a process that envisioned the future after the change and an evaluation of the present state with the vision. This would be followed by a definition of the activities required to reach the goal and the creation of ‘strategies and action plans’ to reach the target. 3) Keith Thurley proposed approaches suited to the situation. A crisis would call for a ‘directive’ with the exercise of managerial powers while bargaining would be suitable when power lay in the hands of the employer and employed. The bargain involves mutual agreement to achieve the required change. The ‘hearts and minds’ is a top-down approach that would seek to drive the workforce in the desired direction envisioned by the management; ‘involvement and participation’ of the employed are not necessarily a part of this approach. The ‘analytical’ approach uses sequential models that predict the path and outcome of a change process through the reality of the organization may not support the model and the ‘action-based’ approach that avoids theoretical models but opts for the active search for nature of the problem and a shared view on the possible solutions. Beer proposed a model to effective change management that includes garnering commitment through a ‘joint analysis’ of problems and cultivating a shared vision to achieve business goals. Propagation of vision to create ‘consensus’ and ‘cohesion’ and providing departments the space to adapt practices to meet business goals. Formalize policies and structures after providing time for internal adaptation and being open to an ongoing review of strategies as an inherent aspect of revitalization. Communication of change is seen as a vital connection between vision and implementation. Armstrong ( p. 279) recommends the use of different communication channels to keep the employees abreast of the changes being envisaged and the use of leadership competency development through training interventions. These are important tools to motivate employee commitment towards the change process and provide a view of individual prospects with the changing scenario. Change and the Individual Caldwell (2006, p. 30-37) refers to Argyris’ single-loop learning theory that is commonly used in organizations. When a learning event occurs, the approach taken is one of correcting the operational issues. Argyris and Schon recommend the adoption of double-loop learning that questions the validity of the ‘governing variables’ to bring the strategic direction under review. Argyris observes that high-powered executives are frequently poor in the habit of ‘reflective’ thought that double-loop learning demands. The tendency to think defensively can ‘block learning even when the individual commitment… is high’. As a change agent, HR must move out of being in the role of doer into that of facilitator and guide. The HR manager bears the cross of gaining support and commitment and guiding the view of management towards finding lasting solutions rather than covering up for lapses in the original strategy. Cormier, Nurius, and Osborn (2008, p. 562) bring out the responses to change as ‘resistance, reluctance, and ambivalence’. Reservations about change or reactions to perceived coercion may be managed with the help of understanding the individual’s concerns regarding the process. Communication and agreement on common goals can help the organization to garner individual support. The authors recognize that the reaction types work as a bilateral process in which the feeling is labeled negatively. This leads to a mutual breakdown of trust and communication between the individual and the change agent or manager. Bandura (Armstrong & Stephens, 2005, p. 122) proposed a model of individual change that involved conscious behavior choices based on environmental factors and personal beliefs. HR and Change Management Armstrong (p. 74, 2006) mentions models of the role of HR in change management processes. Legge’s model considers two types of HR managers, conformist innovators who adapt to the organizational goals and the deviant innovators who focus on means-ends nexus by ‘gaining acceptance for a different set of criteria’. Ulrich (1997, p. 29-31) puts forth the opinion that HR managers need to work as ‘employee champions’ to impact employee capacity to face changing business challenges, manage customer satisfaction and reach financial targets. This role envisages HR as the facilitator for change with the effective use of learning resources and team management forums to aid employees. The responsibility of HR progresses from administrative efficiency to managing transformation and change by ‘identifying and framing problems, building relationships of trust, and creating and fulfilling action plans’. As a part of the change process, Armstrong (2006, p. 280) opines that the HR function may provide advice on maintaining the communication and expectations link between employees and management. The creation of honest and just practices in managing employees creates a heightened sense of trust in the intent and ability of the management at a crucial juncture. Rely on creating avenues for increasing stakeholder involvement and employment security features in the policy by controlling the influx of staff. Effective performance measurement and creating a higher sense of corporate ownership among employees are ways to improve the emotional bond with the company. It is necessary to recognize the place of culture in a takeover situation. Deetz, Tracy, and Simpson (p. 128) highlight the fact that employees will ‘subjugate themselves to organizational cultural values in a way they would not… bureaucratic rules.’ Organizations in the process of coming together must recognize the importance of existing cultures for certain groups. Active communication with different groups aids the leadership to acknowledge and retain existing cultural patterns and thereby increase acceptance of the changes being made. Another need for leaders is to allow and encourage ‘participatory decision-making programs’ to encourage employee creativity and guard against ‘homogeneity and groupthink’. Reflective essay Hyperturbulence in the business environment with changes in technology and business practices and changing industry boundaries with allied businesses entering traditional domains are situations that call for change (Huber & Glick, 1995, p. 172). Rhodes and Stelter (2009) highlight the need for planned change during an economic crisis instead of a knee-jerk reaction that will increase the sense of panic in the organization. Business leaders are advised to face the demands of the revised business scenario by creating ‘a comprehensive and aggressive approach’. If the leader is new to the organization that is in a state of crisis, Gilmore (2003, p130) suggests sensitivity and understanding of the feelings of the staff about problems faced in the organization before starting a change process. This provides perspective and increases the sense of bonding with the new leader. Change and the organization Prokesch (2009) refers to the LIG program at GE to help managers manage to change business demands. The change effort involved team training to reach a consensus on the barriers to change with participants being encouraged to consider the hard and soft barriers to change and weighing the long-term vision with the short term goals. Apart from providing new concepts, the program helps the participants to develop new perspectives of the business and their roles in it. This approach takes care of the organizational need to continuously learn and review the actions being planned for the future. Cameron & Green ( p. 225) believe in the power of collective ownership of changes. A delineation of the senior management from the changes being made leads to excessive program load on the HR department without concurrent belief among employees. The absence of senior involvement in the initiatives around the change program necessitates ‘selling’ to the employees with resultant loss of faith in the initiatives. HR can be an effective change agent only with the tacit and transparent support of the senior management. Change and the individual A major point of change arises when the economy is in recession and business is downhill despite the effort. Banks and Coutu (2008) suggest that an employee who sees downsizing in operation at the workplace starts ‘lighting up’. They observe that in difficult times, the person who is a preferred work partner is sociable and capable rather than someone who is bogged down by circumstance. Thus survival in changing times is made possible by sociable and communicative behavior. The individual may be encouraged to view the changing scenario in a positive light with strategic communication. Dobson (2002, p. 176) points to Bandura’s observation regarding an individual’s acceptance of the change. The acceptance is associated with the ‘efficacy expectancy’ which is an estimate of individual success. Bandura noted four sources of power influencing the expectancy as being direct experience with the situation, observation of another person’s success, ‘verbal persuasion’ and ‘judgments of personal efficacy’. In keeping with these views on personal views of self-efficacy (p. 179), the HR department needs to focus on the process that aids self-development and self-evaluation. Bibliography 1. Armstrong, Michael, 2006. Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. Kogan Page Publishers 2. Armstrong, Michael & Stephens, Tina (2005). A Handbook of Management and Leadership. Kogan Page Publishers 3. Argyris, Chris, (1991). Teaching Smart People How to Learn. Harvard Business Review. 4. Banks, Janet & Coutu, Diane (2008). How to Protect Your Job in a Recession. Harvard Business Review. 5. Caldwell, Raymond (2006). Agency and Change: Rethinking Change Agency in Organizations. Routledge. 6. Cormier, Sherry, Nurius, Paula & Osborn, Cynthia J. (2008). Interviewing and Change Strategies for Helpers. Cengage Learning. 7. Deetz, Stanley, Tracy, Sarah J. &Simpson, Jennifer Lyn (2000). Leading organizations through Transition: Communication and Cultural Change. SAGE 8. Dobson, Keith S. (2002). Handbook of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapies. Guilford Press. 9. Gilmore, Thomas North (2003). Making a Leadership Change. iUniverse. 10. Huber, George P. & Glick, William H. (1995). Organizational Change and Redesign. Oxford University Press. 11. Pearce, Terry (2003). Leading Out Loud: inspiring Change through Authentic Communication. Wiley. 12. Prokesch, Steven (2009). How GE Teaches Teams to Lead Change. Harvard Business Review. 13. Rhodes, David & Stelter, Daniel (2009). Seize Advantage in a Downturn. Harvard Business Review. 14. Ulrich, David (1997). Human Resource Champions: The Next Agenda for Adding Value and Delivering Results. Harvard Business Press. 15. Kotter, John P. (2007). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review. Read More