Change and Its Management through the People in Organisation - Assignment Example

People and Organisations Introduction on Change, discussion of issues, evaluation and recommendation for the CEOs Ahmed almaamari “Change is one of the few certainties in life”. Organisations have to adapt to change. But change is not easy to realize. It is the people within an organisation who are supposed to change themselves in order to bring about a positive and visible change in the organisation (Snowden, D. J. 2002). This report is intended at discussing the change as a process, the change management, the theoretical framework in which the change can be studied and managed in the organisations. The people as the prime factor of change in the organisation have been kept under special focus. Change has also been reported in this paper as an instrument to improve efficiency, productivity, and quality and customers satisfaction. There are too many buzz words in the business world that aim at describing the change in people and change in the organisations. But this report restricts itself to the objective definition of change only. Change and its management through the people in organisation While defining change management it is necessary to understand its meanings. This is actually a structured approach that is meant on the transition of individuals and their teams within the organisations from a status quo to the futuristic goals. The change management suggests that controlled manner is adopted for bringing about and promoting the change within the organisations. There is always a pre-defined or pre-determined framework of change that is religiously followed with a reasonable space for changes and flexibility. In the change management the people have to be given the central place. Because people are the most critical factor that have to accept or reject the change and have also to move foreword with the changed circumstances for the desirable futuristic goals. The major decisions that have to be made before a change management framework is decided for adoption in an organisation are given as below. First of all the organisations have to decide about the level of the organisational change. There are generally for levels of organisational change to decide about. These levels have different circumstances also to see whether such a decision is to be made or not. Decision making levels discussed The first level comes at the stage when clear cut futuristic strategy for the goals and objectives has to be decided about. The assumptions about good and bad are made. Alternate scenarios for the businesses are made. Possible strengths are determined. Mission statements are revised. At second level the organisations through heir people decide that what sort of business has to be the core business within the organisation. This is decided according to the core competencies of the organisation and their people’s skills and propensities. This level is decided on the basis of predictions only. Usually the CEOs decide about such matters. Usually the (SWOT) strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threat analysis are done before taking change decisions at this level. At third level the structural changes are decided. Some times independent actions are taken. Modest improvements are made in the productivity, efficiency and quality production process. But again at this level of change management, the people are centred for the change implementation. At the forth level of decision the incremental changes are suggested. In this manner people are shifted in a gradual manner from one to other department and small changes are suggested and implemented in a gradual but incremental manner. However, the incremental change process has its own benefits and disadvantages too. Taking a final decision about the change framework is very critical. It depends upon the risk bearing capacity of the organisation, the motivational level of the people, the leadership capabilities of the management etc. for instance in mid 1980s IBM did not think itself into the future and predicted no change in the future computer demands , therefore it had to lay off thousands of its workers from its organisation. Similar case happened with the American businesses and banks in the recent decade. When the change in the organisations is not brought about through people, the businesses collapse and then they need to be bailed out. However, what ever the level of change has to be decide about, the goals which are attainable, measurable, precise, time bound and specific and realistic have to be set before a targeted change. Change management strategy The change management strategy has to be very clear and goal specific. The system for the measurement of change and its result oriented analysis has to be clear and elaborate. The intention needs to be intact while implementing an organisational change. All those organisation that have involved the employees from the beginning to the end are also at the high bench mark of success in implementing the change. The focused implementation and persistent pursuance of change with the people has to follow a particular sequence. This is a very important factor. For instance, Ford Motors Company has been implementing the focused strategy of change management which is people centred. They have fixed nine month for the completion of the whole process. The Mitsubishi conglomerates have a relaxed change management programme (McIlduff, E., & Coghlan, D. 2000). Their people centred change management is loose but vigorous. Still there are the companies like Unisys who make up their change strategies on the basis of their past programmes success rates. While General Motors have tailored some pilot projects to initiate and implement the changes in its organisation. Theoretical models Now let us see the theoretical frame works under which the organisational changes can be brought about in the organisation. People’s behaviour centric approach Sociology defines groups as collectivity of individuals behaving and interacting with each other. There are sub-group within the groups and the individuals within the groups and sub-groups behave individually and collectively under different circumstances. The change management processes within the organisation require identifying the similarities and dissimilarities within the groups and sub-groups and their clear and proper identification. This theoretical paradigm requires the management to tailor out the decisions in such a smart manner that the motivational level of all the people in the organisation should boost up and the differential behaviours should sink down. This approach is very tricky and psycho-sociological in nature. The management decisions can mould and bring at board all the dissenting people also to accept the positive changes and they can themselves become the pro-active change agents within the organisation with well tailored efforts. Internal to the individual theory employs the cognitive process that is aimed at exhibiting and changing the individually held habits. While external trans-theoretical model is aimed at change by motivation, on the pattern of Lewin/Schein change theory. This model brings in the change for motivation in the behaviour of individuals. However, for purposeful interventions the changes in the external environment are also suggested. The trans-theoretical model of change This model is based upon the stages of change and can only be understood if it is read in collaboration with the Levin’s change theory. This model is based on the presumption that change can only be brought about if it is collectively aimed at many or all the individuals in an organisation (Brown, 1999). Two change scientists Prochaska and DiClemente analyzed 18 psychoanalytical behaviour change theories and made their own experimental and environmental interventions by putting the elements of these theories side by side (Brown, K. M. 1999). They identified five stages of change and mixed their approach with Levin’s theory of how the actual change occurs in individuals in the first place. Different Stages of Change 1- Pre-contemplation stage; at this stage the individuals seldom think about changing themselves (Booth-Butterfield 1996). At this stage the individuals hardly think to change and want to keep he status quo. 2- Contemplation at this stage people start thinking g about the change and start analyzing their environment for seeing whether it is possible and feasible for them to think. 3- Preparation – a definite stage comes when people start readying themselves. The preparation stage is very important because this stage take the individuals a lot of time to settle for the preparation and some people go back from this stage. 4- Action – “at this stage most of the people push themselves into the action and start feeling the change and results for themselves. It is the crucial stage and people seldom go back when they feel they have taken the action. 5-Maintenance – this is the last and solid stage when the people would have felt the desired results of the change and then they try their best to maintain the change for the better future and better life. Although it is not possible to airtight all the above mentioned stages of changes , however it is theoretically correct to understand the change process in the above manner for the sheer convenience purpose (Ross A. Wirth, 2004). It is therefore, desirable that the change process should be understood in the correct perspective so that right interventions can be made by the decision makers to affect the peoples and their corrective behaviours. The theoretical framework can be further analyzed in the following manner. According to Kurt Levin, the change can be theorized on the basis of three stages. These three stages are the unfreezing leading to change and then refreezing model. His Stage 1 refers to the motivation of the people for change, stage 2 refers to the actual change brought about in the people in the organisations and the stage 3 refers to the process where the change process is completed and precipitated. There is a lot of rhetoric associated with all the stages given by Levin and explained by Schein (1995). However, again it seems necessary to compartmentalize the change process as has been done by Levin. However, motivation and Personal reflection on the conditions of change are relative to the success, happiness and identity. (Prochaska, Prochaska, & Levesque, 2001). Change in Pepsi Cola Company has been a vital step for survival growth and sustainability. The stakeholders in the company change themselves through motivation and clear cut goals and objectives put before them. The management is the key area of change since it will guide the others. Some of the issues that the management of Pepsi Cola do is creating a very effective decision making process which will transform the individuals in the organization. The company has adopted several models of change which are geared towards making the organization to achieve success. Changes have also involved looking at the ways in which the organization is being run and operated. Pepsi Cola has put very good procedures of control in place including employing the latest technology so that they can be able to meet the challenges which are expected when they are operating. The introduction of machinery has further influenced the employees in that they need to be trained further so that they can be able to handle the new machinery in place. by the way of involvement of people in the decision making process. As a good leader , every successful CEO is required to be very vigilant and proactive in the change process and he/she must ensure that the change is built in the decision making process. So, often it is observed that people centric decisions for change, taken through a motivational and consultative process are successfully implementable. However, this is also seen through this paper that only those changes are successful that are incremental and gradual. The abrupt and crash programmes of change in the organisation seldom succeed because of mental unpreparedness of the people in the organisation. There is always a political economy of the change process in the organisation and the stake holders are its people (Kantar, R. M. 2009). Hence, the people’s involvement in the revised mission plans, changing or expanding business must always see the interests of people. The change introduction is although a difficult process but it’s afterwards management is even more difficult. Therefore it is recommended that change must come through the people, it should by for the people, and by the people in organisation. The decision makers should only generate the ideas and steer the change in an intelligent manner. 1-Snowden, D. J. (2002) Complex acts of knowing: Paradox and descriptive self-awareness. Jornal of Knowledge Management Electronic Jornal Centre 2- Booth-Butterfield, S. (1996). Stages of Change Retrieved http://www.as.wvu.edu/~sbb/comm221/chapters/stages.htm 3-Brown, K. M. (1999) Tran-theoretical model/stages of change Retrieved March 12, 2002, from http://hsc.usf.edu/~kmbrown/Stages_of_Change_Overview.htm 4- Jensen, B. (1996). Was change management ever necessary? Retrieved January 17, 2002, from hhtp://www.simplerwork.com/library/c27.htm 5- McIlduff, E., & Coughlin, D. (2000). Understanding and contending with passive aggressive behaviour in teams and organisations. Jornal of Managerial Psychology 15, 716-736. Retrieved August 20, 2002 from Emerald Insight. 6-Prochaska, J. M., Prochaska, J. O., & Levesque, D. A. (2001). A trans-theoretical approach to changing organisations. Administration and Policy in Mental Health,28(4), 247-261. 7-Ramsey, P. L. (2001). Learning to be complete: the challenge of cultural dynamics. Reflections, 8-Schein, E. H. (1995). Kurt Levin’s change theory in the field and in the classroom: Retrieved 2002 from http://www.sol-ne.org/res/wp/10006 9- Smith, M. K. (2001). Kurt Levin: Groups, experiential learning and action research. URL: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-lewin.htm 10-Kantar, R. M. (2009). Why Change. ISBN 2346543 Book marks Read More