Change Management in Biogen Idec and Aster Group - Term Paper Example

? Change Management in Biogen Idec and Aster Group Introduction The Biogen Idec Incorporated took birth as a result of the merger of Biogen and Idec, from Switzerland and California respectively. Evidently, the company believes in developing through strategic alliances. As Green (2007, p. 89) points out, the company decided to introduce a change, that is, to introduce a number of centers of excellence across Europe, in an effort to speed up its decision making processes to meet European standards. Thus, there were three centers of excellence, in Switzerland, UK, and Holland. The Aster Group provides homes and housing related services in England. For excellent leadership and performance, it secured the “Beacon Company” award in 2006. In fact, the company was forced to change and diversify due to a number of factors. First of all, as Green (2007) notes, the company wanted to shift from a local authority culture to an autonomous not-for-profit nature. Also, the Housing Corporation decided to reduce the number of approved organizations from 350 to 70. So, to retain business, the company had to go a long way from its 110th position. The way to achieve the same for Aster was to merge and seek new alliances. Starting at the Top However, one can observe slight differences in the way both of the companies introduced change. In the case of Biogen Idec, the company set up a project team, which looked into the various factors associated with the change. Various heads including “international business, commercial operations, human resources, and international legal affairs were part of the project team, and every aspect of the change” was identified and analyzed (Green, 2007, p.90). Admittedly, the company was performing well in accordance with the Change Management guideline which indicates that it is necessary to understand the need for change through Diagnosing Change (Change Management, n. d.). On the other hand, in Aster, the change started from the new chief executive of the company, who tried to introduce a culture that just “keeps moving all the time”. In other words, observing the challenges ahead, the chief executive decided to move away from its local authority structure and develop a group structure. Thus, the company worked with Testway – and both chief executives considered open discussion as an important factor to ensure proper collaboration. As acquisition and merger were a part of the change strategy, a board was developed, which included important leaders of both the firms. And as there were more mergers and acquisitions, more and more personnel were included in the board according to requirements. Anyway, as Gossas commented, the leadership led the change in both of the cases (Ahiberg & Naucler, 2007). Involving all the Layers In Aster Group, first of all, replacing the previous autocratic management style, the new chief executive introduced the culture of open communication and feedback. This resulted in better cooperation from the part of managers and other staff. Thus, at first, he managed to secure the belief and support of the managers and staff. Then, he encouraged the people to contribute their own opinions and suggestions for the future course of action. Here, as Jones, Aguirre, and Calderone (2004) point out, the leadership was giving adequate attention to the human factor, because, for making all the employees committed to the vision of change, the leadership role was effectively handed over to the managers. According to the writers, after allowing autonomy in day to day operations, the board focused on long term strategic issues; and anyway, both the companies followed the golden rule that change should start at the top. Also, by enlightening and enabling all the layers, the leadership ensured the involvement of every layer. Increased Autonomy to Units and Affiliates In fact, both the companies changed their management styles to introduce various autonomous or semi-autonomous units. To illustrate, the board of Aster Group decided to hand over management to the managers and to focus on long term strategic issues. Also, as the Group grew, each independent business was given semi-autonomy in their day to day operations, and long term strategic guidelines and budget came from the board. Very similarly, the Biogen Idec introduced centers of excellence in various nations and took away regular operations from the international headquarters. Thereafter, affiliates were allowed maximum independence, and self-sufficiency was promoted. Also, they were enabled to gain resources at a local level. Handling the Human Factor through HR Admittedly, there arise a lot of issues during changes like mergers, acquisitions, and group formations, because many managers and employees are likely to remain unaware about the organization’s mission and vision, the new roles and responsibilities. While some welcome changes whole-heartedly, some are apprehensive. So, the very first thing in change management for a firm is to develop a common purpose, values, and shared understanding of objectives. Thus, the HR has the duty to develop adequate leadership skills in the management to communicate well across the group. As people from different organizations with different cultures come together, it is for the HR to train the managers and staff to acknowledge differences, understand the impact of their management style on others, and develop practical ways to implement the values of the organization. Here, one should remember the fact that to sustain change through learning, there are five disciplines proposed by Green (2007, p. 248), which organizations should master: personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, team learning, and systems thinking. As seen in the case study, the Aster Group developed three working parties: Direction, Improvement, and People. “Direction” aimed at periodically reviewing the Group’s strengths and weaknesses and “Improvement” aimed at introducing service improvement practices. Thirdly, there was the “People” group, which aimed at conducting regular surveys across Aster Group to find out issues in order to make a better workplace. Evidently, this role goes to the HR to identify problem areas and solve problems, as the merged companies possess different cultures, different backgrounds, and different attitudes. Also, just like Biogen, the various units were marked by various working cultures, backgrounds, and attitudes. So, the same set of policies and procedures would not fit the various units. Therefore, there is semi-autonomy in HR functions in all these units. Though it seems that the leadership of Biogen Idec was more authoritarian in nature as compared to Aster Group, it becomes evident from the case study that after the project team evaluation of the situation and option formation, employee representatives were involved in the decision-making process and provided a detailed picture of how the change in the headquarters would affect the employees. There was an issue that remained to be addressed for both the firms – to retain the employees, especially the key ones, during the changes. As the centers of excellence were set up, the project team conducted an assessment of the possibility of the key employees leaving the company. However, instead of offering a higher package, Biogen only introduced tax simulations in case of relocation to new places. It is pointed out by Cosack, Guthridge, and Lawson (2010) that instead of throwing financial incentives to key employees during times of change, companies should introduce a mix of financial and non-financial incentives which are tailored to their concerns. Thus, through proper communication, proper managerial involvement, employee involvement, interaction, and semi-autonomy of units, Aster managed to introduce change. Also, the leadership was successful in giving directions and guidelines at every point. Changes started from the top and moved towards the lower layers. Very similar was the case of Biogen Idec. It also took the responsibilities of day to day operations away from the international headquarters and started centers of excellence for those operations. Also, all the new affiliates were offered autonomy to the maximum extent possible. References Ahiberg, J., & Naucler, T. (Jan. 2007).  Leading change: an interview with Sandvik’s Peter Gossas. Retrieved from https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Leading_change_An_interview_with_Sandviks_Peter_Gossas_1894.  Change management (n.d.). Retrieved from http://changingminds.org/disciplines/change_management/change_management.htm Cosack, S., Guthridge, M., & Lawson, E. (Aug. 2010), Retaining key employees in times of change. Retrieved from https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Retaining_key_employees_in_times_of_change_2654 Green, M. (2007). Part II - Chapter 03: Organizational Case Studies. Change Management Masterclass: A Step by Step Guide to Successful Change Management.  Retrieved from ProQuest. (Document ID: 2034757221). Green, M. (2007). Part III - Chapter 09: Integration. Change Management Masterclass: A Step by Step Guide to Successful Change Management. Retrieved from ProQuest. (Document ID: 2034757281). Jones, J., Aguirre, D., & Calderone, M. (2004). 10 principles of change management, strategy + business. Retrieved from http://www.strategy-business.com/article/rr00006?pg=all Read More