Managing Change as a Matter of Great Concern for Most Organizational Leaders - Essay Example

? Managing change is a matter of great concern for most organizational leaders due to the constantly evolving business environment. Personalreflection on change was meant to set us thinking on how we could manage change better or perhaps we find some drawbacks in certain models or approaches. However, even personal perceptions would change on a regular basis because one has to keep pace with the changing business environment. Nevertheless, what can be surmised is that HR leaders play a significant role in the change management process and a transformational steward such as Steve Jobs can create such change leaders. Introduction Change occurs from time to time and change is the nature of things. Nothing in this world is constant or unchangeable. Would we like our own house for instance, if for years we had the same furniture, the same upholstery, the same colors? We like to make things different and we also know that any change around the house makes us feel better. The mind wants change but when the mind is not prepared for the change, it resists change. However, if we are informed of the change in advance we become mentally prepared for it and then we are not disturbed. This implies that change causes resistance when change is not accompanied or preceded by effective communication. Change is also a part of the life cycle of any product. When we speak of different stages in the life cycle of an organization or a product or service, change is implied. Abrahamson (2004) believes that without pain no change is possible and justifies that either one must change or perish. Why, then is change in the corporate world a topic for discussions, for theory formation and framework building? Focusing on the personal perception of change management this paper analyzes the factors that influence change as has been seen during the semester projects. The change management process studied during the semester will be reviewed along with the skills necessary for change. Change can occur in an organization for varied reasons ranging from change in the stage of the life cycle, to change during mergers and acquisitions, during downsizing, restructuring and during expansion and growth (Stanleigh, 2008). Change, in fact, is essential for progress as the human mind always seeks something new, something different, something exciting. However, I never realized that change could require so much planning to be effective. Having spent hours on the topic and having read about how changes have been implemented within different organizations, I realize that change has to be effectively managed. When I compare it with an individual’s life, I find change in our life has to be equally well managed. Change cannot be a hap hazard process. This paper will reflect on the change management process adopted by Apple and McDonald's and what planning went behind the change. Critical Review We were first analyzed the organizational change undertaken by Apple. The drivers of change at Apple were competition, finances and open unidentified markets. These were arrived at through SWOT analysis and Five Forces Model which helped to understand the initiative for change undertaken by Apple. However, it appears that Apple’s focus was on enhancing profits as the employees as well as the customers were confused with so many models available at the same time in the market. They did not have a customer-centric approach which is essential for any new product launch. They did not try to understand customer needs and communication was lacking at Apple. Communication and information must precede change. This sounds so simple to implement but what I have learnt through reading and find it extremely interesting, is that communication is not a simple term that encompasses the quality or the ability to talk. It does not merely mean to inform or speak; it also means to listen. Having the strength and courage to listen to subordinates in an organization enhances communications (Pfeffer & Sutton, 1999). Thus, listening is also a part of communication. The vision, the need for change and the expected benefits and outcome of change have to be communicated to all the stakeholders, says Kotter. Apple did not communicate its vision to the stakeholders and this was the root cause of all confusion in the organization. The stakeholders were not taken into confidence when the change was planned. Again, if the communication is not appropriate it could lead to distortion of facts and give rise to rumours within the organization (Kotter & Gill) which was exactly the situation at Apple. Therefore, change needs planning without which it is likely to fail. Apple put in a lot of efforts to ensure change was beneficial but their focus continued to be based on the financial perspective. When change is not well planned or managed, the consequences can be disastrous. It leads to waste of resources such as time, money and effort. Then I started reflecting why changes fail and I found that perhaps change requires more than managing change. Just then I came across an article by Kee and Newcomer (2008) which suggests that change fails due to lack of effective leadership. On reflection I found what they means is that change cannot be managed; change requires leadership. A leader must again, be a transformational leader so that people can be transformed. This thought occurred to me because I have witnessed in an organization that change did take place only so long as the staff received the incentives. They were least concerned about a permanent change or improvements. They worked towards it because they received their incentives and the moment the incentives were discontinued, they resisted change. This is a transactional attitude and not what is required. The leader should be a transformational leader who can encourage and motivate people at all levels, who can initiate and sustain change (Gill, 2003). When Steve Jobs too over, he did demonstrate leadership when he undertook cognitive restructuring at Apple. The first step he undertook was to communicate the corporate vision and involve employees in the change process. Jobs demonstrated transformational stewardship as suggested by Kee and Newcomer which means that the leader would have to decide who and how many people to involve at which stage of the change process. Sometimes the leader may have to involve a few selected people while at other times people from all ranks may need to be represented. This implies that no definite framework for change can be set and the leaders has to decide based on the situation, need and expected outcome. It may also depend upon the capabilities of the employees. This conforms to Higgs and Rowland’s (2005) contention that the change process is complex and that change approach based on assumptions of complexity are likely to be successful.The large scale organizational change at Apple was planned for various functions – political and legal, economic, socio-cultural and technological. Kotter’s eight-step model for change was used in the group case study. However, I find that this model has certain shortcomings and not all of its steps can be applied. Even the order may have to be changed. This can be particularly evaluated against Apple’s change process. Kotter suggests creating a sense of urgency but urgency can lead to chaos, which I found as I was browsing through the change management process at Synergon Capital. Each team worked as if they were waging a war and they worked round the clock till the deal was done (Cliff, 1999). They replaced all the old staff with new one but this cam impact continuity. Steve Jobs did not follow this principle. He maintained the old staff, took them into confidence and changed the work culture. He, being a transformational leader could make Apple accept change as an ongoing process. Organizational culture holds importance during the change process. For instance, Apple was undergoing failed revenues and failed products but the collaborative culture at Apple saw the organization through. Tasks were clearly delegated to the individuals and they were expected to complete them working responsibly in teams (Merchant, 2010). Regular and frequent meetings were held to review the progress and share problems in implementation. The organization gained success because of the teamwork culture that flew from the top to the bottom. It is necessary to have a professional manager and it is also necessary to delegate authority during the change process. Lewin’s three-stage model requires unfreezing, mobilizing and refreezing (Higgs & Rowland, 2005). The words itself convey the meaning. The employee has to first unlearn whatever he has learned. It is simple – we always learn and perceive through the impressions created in the mind. Thus, anything new that is taught would always carry the impressions from the past but this may not necessarily be beneficial or can even be detrimental to the new situation. I could now relate why Proctor & Gamble recruits people who do not have past experience in sales. They want to train and mould the new recruits the way they want which is much faster than making them unfreeze. In fact, after a certain age it may be difficult for people to unlearn the previous pattern. This can also be analyzed in another way. When a container is full it can carry no more of the object. To fill in fresh objects we need to first empty the container. The mind has to be first emptied of what it stores so that it can store something fresh and new. This is the process of unfreezing. Kotter’s eight-stage model first wants an urgency to be created and then a guiding coalition, not comprising of senior management, should be formed. This was interesting because Kotter also justifies his stand. If senior management were effective change would not be needed, he says. However, we have just seen how change is inevitable and change leads to growth and expansion. It enables an organization to achieve and sustain competitive advantage (Doyle, 2002). In the case of McDonald's when they became the subject of criticism due to health reason and obesity concerns, they had to change their strategy. These decisions to introduce the new menu were taken by the senior management and the same set of people had to revise their strategy. The business environment had changed and the management had to change its strategy as well. Drivers of change may vary but change is necessary, and hence Kotter’s stand on this does not appear to be realistic or practical. However, Kotter suggests that the change process should not be too fast. Steps should not be skipped because skipping steps is based on the assumption that they can make the change process fast but this can be disastrous. Skipping only creates an illusion of speed without producing any satisfying results, contends Kotter. The DICE factors include duration, integrity, commitment and additional effort from the employees to cope with change. It is believed that if change initiatives take long to be effective, they are likely to fail. Sirkin et al thus suggest that long projects if reviewed more frequently is more likely to succeed than short projects not reviewed frequently. Kotter also suggests that short-term results vision should be set so that the employees can see tangible results and be convinced of the benefits of change. If no short term goals are set or achieved, even the top executives that have devised the long-term goals may feel uneasy. If they see short-term goals being achieved, they too feel motivated that their strategy is working. Hence, gains have to be tangible and experienced. Again, the human mind is at work and wants to experience positive change. This also implies that managing of people is more important than the combined effort of strategy, product and service quality (Gollan, 2006). The role of HR then is crucial in effective change management (Schramm, 2007). It is not merely the leadership or perhaps the HR should have transformational leaders. The involvement of HR should be initiated much before the change process starts. Thus, short-term vision and frequent reviewing of the progress of the change process is essential to remain on the right track. Moreover, as the change process evolves, if reviewed frequently, any changes deemed necessary can be made. This is because the business environment may change over a period of time and the strategy may have been devised to suit the previous business environment. Those decisions may no more be applicable in the current situation. This also means change should have creativity and innovation as in the case on Apple. The CEO started the change process by introducing products that would meet customer needs and satisfaction instead of focusing on developing technology and then finding potential customers. Hence, when and what to change is as important as how to change. Revenues and products at Apple were failing but they could bring turnaround due to the strategic vision that was well managed and communicated to employees at all levels. Conclusion Having worked on the change management process within organizations throughout the semester, I find that change management is a complex process. My perception of change has changed as I did not expect so many complications in managing change. There can be no defined rules and the strategy in every organization would be particular to that organization. Basically change is concerned with the mind – there has to be a change in the mind-set. If the mind accepts change, mind does not resist. Resistance is expressed in various forms. Hence, either the change leader or the HR personnel in charge of change management have to be in close contact with the employees much before the change process is initiated. An understanding of human psychology would help because each individual is different and would accept or resist based on his/her knowledge and experience of the past. Each individual also has his/her own pace of progress and hence close relationships with the employees becomes necessary. Change definitely needs planning but the management must be prepared to make changes in the plan as the change process evolves as the business environment is volatile and keeps changing. Moreover, since change is inevitable in any environment, in any business organization, why should the organization wait to train its people to handle change? Organizations should always maintain a culture of change so that right from the beginning employees are susceptible to change. They would then accept change as a natural and ongoing process, and this strategy immediately reduces the level of resistance among the workers. The business environment has undergone tremendous change due to globalization and liberalization. Change should hence be accepted as inevitable and planning should be from the inception of the organization itself. Based on Apple’s strategic leadership I find that the change management should actually be called transformational stewardship. This is because the steward must act as a caretaker, guide, and provide support to all the stakeholders as and when necessary. The role of HR professionals in the change management process can be very effective. Younger, Younger and Thompson (2001) suggest that HR professionals have a much higher level of confidence in their change management skills. Thus for effective change management the HR leaders should increase their efforts and support these skills within their organization: Source: Younger, Younger & Thompson (2011). Once these factors are incorporated, the transition process can be expected to be smooth because it is the workers that create resistance. However, the ability of senior management in appointing the change agents also counts. At all levels the organizational goals should be the same and communicated clearly. References Abrahamson, E 2004 Avoiding Repetitive Change Syndrome. MIT Sloan Management Review. Winter 2004 Cliffe, S. 1999 Can this merger be saved? Harvard Business Review, 77(1) (Jan.-Feb.): 29-32. Gill, R. 2003 Change management - or change leadership? Journal of Change Management, 3 (4): 307-318. Gollan, P J. 2006 High involvement management and human resource line sustainability, Handbook of Business Strategy, pp. 279-286 Higgs, M & Rowland, D 2005, All Changes Great and Small: Exploring Approaches to Change and its Leadership. Journal of Change Management, 5 (2): 121-151. Kee, J.E. & Newcomer, K.E. 2008 Why do Change Efforts Fail? What can Leaders do about it? The Public Manager. Fall 2008 Kotter, J.P. 1995 Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review. (March-April) Merchant, N.2010 Apple's Startup Culture ,Businessweek Bloomberg, viewed on 9th October 2011, . Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R.I. 1999 The smart-talk trap in Harvard Business Review (May7-June): 135-142. Schramm, J. 2007 Managing Change, HR Magazine, March 2007 Sirkin, H.L. Keenan, P. & Jackson A. 2005 The Hard Side of Change Management. Harvard Business Review. October 2005 Stanleigh, M. 2008. Effecting successful change management initiatives. INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING, 40 (1): 34-37 Younger, J. Younger, A. & Thompson, N. 2011. Developing the skills of HR business partnership: consulting and change management. Strategic HR Review, 10 (1): 6-14 Read More