Leading Stragegic Change - Essay Example

Running Head Leading Strategic Change Leading Strategic Change Change in one of the most important areas of management which requires specialattention and skills of managers to be implemented successfully. Changes have occurred gradually to the mechanization and automatic production lines of modern industry. Changes occurred in technology, marketing, and numerous management techniques, some of which were concerned with human problems (Block, 1987). Most of the changes were made in a rather disjointed or piecemeal manner. The approach emerging today is to use the growing body of ideas and systematic thought to consider innovatory ideas on organization and to adopt a more systematic comprehensive look at problems, so that we look at the whole instead of looking at separate parts (Beer & Nohria 2000). Sustainable strategic organizational change can be explained as a continuous change which affects all areas of business activities. This change entails developing a business process model of how activities function, analyzing relationships among business units, and implementing changes that would eliminate redundant processes and make business units more effective. Performance deficiencies result from motivational problem which is closely connected with lack of skills. To improve this situation organizations need to change employees' motivation taking into account rapid environmental changes. The purpose of change is to improve knowledge and skills, and to change negative attitude towards work. This can lead to many potential benefits for both individuals and the company (Block, 1987). In contrast to other changes, sustainable strategic organizational change does not involve radical transformations or redesign but constant changes and improvements important for every organization. It should be obvious that this model of organization development utilizes strategic planning as the primary tool to respond to the change an organization is facing. The new technology development needs skillful workers able to cope with new complicated tasks. Needless to mention, modern equipment requires skilled personnel and the service centers need a team of dedicated and well-trained service professional. Management staff also needs focusing on employee's motivation and work design programs to help worker identify their goal and professional development strategies. Bear in mind the data it is possible to say that employees feel lack of HR support in the process of personal development. The increasing need for change is created by internal need to improve technology and labor skills; attitudes of employees; size of organization; need to improve performance. For most organizations, change is necessary to ensure an adequate supply of staff who are technically and socially competent, and capable of career advancement into specialist departments or management positions. There is, therefore, a continual need for the process of staff development, and training fulfils an important part of this process. Training should be viewed, therefore, as an integral pan of the process of total quality management. Strategic management is a process geared at detecting environmental threats and turning them into opportunities (Bolman & Deal, 2003). There are 7 C's of change which involve conversation, consistency, creativity, courage, commitment, change and celebration. 3ach of these C's has a great impact on organizational performance and functions of management. Management (supervisor and above) more positive than crew leaders and employees in their responses on most questions and indexes except those relating to interdepartmental cooperation and increased motivation as a result of reorganization. Crew Leaders more positive than employees in their responses to questions relating to clear understanding of job duties and sense of teamwork within their departments. Employees more positive than crew leaders in their responses to questions regarding trust and confidence in upper management, ethical standards, and increased motivation as a result of the reorganization (Bolman & Deal, 2003). Included are all who believe, rightly or wrongly, that they have a stake in the organization's future--not merely those whom the planning team believes have a reasonable or legitimate right to such a stake. Each of these stakeholders needs to be identified and a determination must be made of how they are likely to respond to the strategic plan (i.e., what criteria they will use to judge its success), the planning process, and the implementation of the plan. In this analysis, it is necessary to take into account the various stakeholder resources, statuses, freedoms of action, relationships, and activities that may be affected by shifts or changes in the organization's strategic direction (Bernick, 2001). Managing transition (bridges) is n important part of management which helps organizations to move smoothly through change process. One of the most important factors in the successful implementation of organizational change is the style of managerial behavior. In certain situations, and with certain members of staff, it may be necessary for management to make use of hierarchical authority and to attempt to impose change through a coercive, autocratic style of behavior (Bernick, 2001). Some members may actually prefer, and respond better, to a directed and controlled style of management. In most cases, however, the introduction of change is more likely to be effective with a participative style of managerial behavior. If staff are kept fully informed of proposals, are encouraged to adopt a positive attitude and have personal involvement in the implementation of the change, there is a greater likelihood of their acceptance of the change. Following Kurt Lewin, it is possible to single out three main phases in the process of change: Phase 1 - occurs where an individual or group senses the need to do work in a different way. Problems encountered indicate the need for change. Discussions occur on changes that might be made to solve the problems. Phase 2 - of the change process begins while changes are being made in the behavior of individuals or in the organizational process. A simple example is where training is given to staff to use a computer and change from keeping manual records to recording on a computer is required. Such changes are made subject to the staff being convinced of potential better results by the new system. Phase 3 - of the change process is called re-freezing, and is when the changes are accepted as the new position by the persons most affected by the change. These actions include wide scope of activities needed to support the successful implementation of change. The implementation will focus on actors and roles. The belief is that Hilton hotels should select actors with appropriate social characteristics and systematically develop organizational roles, such as "product champions," to innovate successfully. Generally, this focuses on early adoption and management of innovations. The perception and use of information systems can be heavily conditioned by personal and situational variables. To further complicate the picture, what users say they like or want in a new information system may not necessarily produce any meaningful improvements in Hilton hotels performance (Conner, 1992). In the context of implementation, the systems analyst is a change agent. The analyst not only develops technical solutions but also redefines the configurations, interactions, job activities, and power relationships of various organizational groups (Courtney et al 19970. The senior manager is the catalyst for the entire change process and is responsible for ensuring that the changes created by a new system are accepted by all parties involved. The change agent communicates with users, mediates between competing interest groups, and ensures that the organizational adjustment to such changes is complete (Conner, 1992). In order to leverage change, companies should be used primary and secondary activities. Primary change activities are most directly related to the production and distribution of the hotels services that create value for the customer (Filipczak, 1995). Primary change activities will include inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, sales and marketing, and service. The service activity will include maintenance of the hotels' high standards and quality services. The other groups is support activities which make the delivery of the primary activities possible and consist of hotels infrastructure (administration and management), human resources (employee recruiting, hiring, and training), technology (improving products and the production process), and procurement (purchasing input) (Collins, 2001). Scenario planning is defined as a strategic planning method which allows managers to make long-term plans based on unique variables and factors affected the organization. Scenario planning can help a firm integrate its competitive intelligence efforts with strategy design, not as a narrow specialty, but as an admission of limitations and environmental complexity (Robbins, 2002). The analysis of strategic situations requires a comprehensive inquiry into the environmental causalities and equivocalities that result from competitive actions. Scenarios probe the combined consequences of environmental trends, changes in the firm's own strategy, as well as the moves of its current and future competitors. Computed scenarios help managers understand what they do not know, enabling strategy design and implementation through the coalignment of the "right" tactics to improve long-term performance (Gladwell, 1996). Through its judicious use of corporate resources, scenario-driven planning makes the tactics required for implementation clear. The conventional perspective of copycat strategy shows linear thinking at best and clumsy benchmarking--also known as shadow marketing--at worst. Its proponents assume that they can improve long-term performance incrementally, with disconnected tactical moves alone, when improvements in strategy design should be their primary concern. Boston, (Kanter, 1985). Depending on the size and complexity of an organization, two levels of strategic planning are possible: (1) overall organizational strategic planning or (2) functional/departmental/programmatic strategic planning. Functional/departmental/programmatic strategic plans deal with what to do to operate a specific organizational component in a specific overall organization. Issues like technology and service changes, location of new facilities, and expanded services to newly annexed areas are examples. Overall organization strategic planning is conducted at the next higher level and is concerned with the overall organization. Issues like new services, consolidations, joint agreements, and major reorganizations of departments are examples (Stroh et al 2002). As Douglas McGregor says, once basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter are satisfied, he wants friends and to get folksy and group (Gladwell, 1996). Once these needs for belonging are satisfied, he wants recognition and respect from his fellowmen and he wants to achieve independence and competence for himself (Robbins, 2002). One approach, widely known by managers, is set out by Abraham H. Maslow in his book "Motivation and Personality". Maslow's theory of motivation claims that human motives develop in sequence according to five levels of needs. These needs are: psychological (hunger, thirst), safety (protection), social (be accepted, belong to a certain group), esteem (self-confidence, achievements, respect, status, recognition), and self-actualization (realizing one's potential for continued self-development) (Maslow, 1970). This theory shows that needs follow in sequence and when one need is satisfied it decreases in strength and the higher need then dominates behavior. This leads to the statement that a satisfied need is not a motivator. There is a doubt whether this really applies in practice to the higher needs as it is likely that self-esteem requires continues stimulation and renewal (Robbins, 2002). In spite of its clarity it has some limitations which make it unacceptable in all situations. Few attempts have been made to test the validity of Maslow's ideas. A big problem is that people do not necessarily satisfy higher-order needs through their jobs or occupations, and this cannot really be tested. Another point is that he viewed satisfaction as a major motivator and this is not directly related to production. In addition, Maslow does not mention the time period between various needs. In 1968 Hall and Nougaim studied a company in America and used four of Maslow's needs categories. The survey of 49 young managers in an organizational setting only provided modest support to his theory, but stressed the importance of environmental factors in the development of person's needs towards the top of the hierarchy (Robbins, 2002). Another theory under analysis is Expectancy theory. According to Expectancy theory people act only when they have reasonable expectation that their actions will lead to desired goals. They will perform better if they believe that money will follow effective performance, so if money has a positive value for an individual, higher performance will follow. This theory places emphasis on performance noting that there must be a clearly recognized goal and relationship between performance and outcome. In general, this theory explains that motivation is a function of the expectancy of attaining a certain outcome in performing a certain act multiplied by the value of the outcome for the performer (Robbins, 2002). Outcomes that are highly valued and having higher expectations of being realized will direct a person to make a greater effort in his task. Outcomes with high expectations which are less highly valued (or even disliked) will reduce effort expended. Other studies on expectations and job performance emphasize the greater importance of intrinsic motivation factors (Moorhead & Griffin, 2004). All of these studies show that money, if properly used and tied to performance, can help to increase motivation - whether or not or to what extent it increases performance can only be surmised. In contrast to other theories, this theory does not take into account psychological differences of people, their needs and different behavior patterns. In all societies there is inequality between people, be it based upon physical, economic, intellectual or social characteristics. It omits such criteria as performance and absenteeism (Schein, 1992; Pascale & Sternin 2005) Appreciative inquiry implies can be explained as an organizational development process which views organizations in close connection with people, change processes and performance. The organization should focus on strategies that are consistent with its stated mission, yet provide acceptable levels of risk. Strategic development should capitalize on the most important external opportunities and internal strengths, while avoiding the most serious external threats and weaknesses (Tristen-Bloom & Whitney 2003). At the same time, however, strategies that address organizational strengths and weaknesses and stretch the organization to new heights should also be considered. Generally, more strategies will be developed than an organization has the resources to implement. Prioritizing the strategies is critical to developing a realistic implementation plan. Strategic planning provides a course of action for unplanned events (Stroh et al 2002). Plans are preparations to take specific action(s) when an event not planned for in the formal planning process takes place. As the definition states, events in the business, political, or even personal worlds of employees and decision makers can have an effect upon organizational operations (Cooperridge and Watkins 2000). While it may be true that no one person is indispensable, one person, circumstance, or event can make a difference in organizational planning and decision making. Strategy formulation and implementation, in many if not most jurisdictions, will largely depend on the degree to which the private sector is involved cooperatively in both the planning and implementation stages. This conclusion follows from the assumption that state and local governments will be called upon to be more self-reliant and more dependent on their own resources to solve local problems. The private sector, both for-profit and nonprofit organizations, already may be providing leadership for change. In actuality, such leaders may have the largest long-term stakes in the jurisdiction, unlike political leaders who are sometimes voted in and out of office every two to four years. Private sector leaders often have the major fiscal resources and untapped leadership and managerial skills that are key to improving the economic base. Private institutions and businesses may be capable of providing certain services more efficiently and at less cost than currently provided by agency employees. Rather, strategic planning consists of the processes of policy analysis and decision making on the part of key leadership on a number of the most significant strategies or actions affecting the total community (Cooperridge and Watkins 2000). These include development, service delivery, government funding techniques, and so on, for both the short and long term. The processes may encompass defining the goals and mission of the entity; identifying current and future problems and obstacles; inventorying current and future strengths, resources, and weaknesses; noting particular targets of opportunity; laying out intermediate objectives; and designing strategies or the most effective courses of action for attaining these objectives and goals. This cycle of processes may occur annually or less frequently. Recognition of planning as a political process is essential for the successful implementation of strategic decisions. Yet, strategic considerations grounded exclusively on the psychology of participation or on office politics may falter for two reasons. The first--as discussed in the following section--has to do with problem recognition and problem solving; the second has to do with haste (Hamel & Prahalad 1994). Sometimes firms fall in the trap of rushing through the strategy process, leaving out some time-consuming minutiae, such as strategy design. Ironically, then, they end up wasting the very resource they are trying to save-time (Egan, 1994). World markets have come to expect comparatively high variety both in goods (e.g., cars and computers) and in services (e.g., checking accounts, global custody and nursing homes). This means that dedicated production lines with long changeover times and long queues of dedicated customers are no longer appropriate because there is too much downtime and unproductive customer contact, respectively. World-class firms have recognized the necessity of change, but the required modifications of the processes involved are so many and interdependent that piecemeal improvements are not only inadequate but also dangerous. At the production management level, process reengineering helps to analyze what is made or served and how. At the strategic management level, scenario-driven planning helps to improve both the content (what) and the process (how) of strategy design. From my personal experience I can say that sustainable strategic change helps to identify critical success factors or key result areas, to avoid incremental thinking, and to effectively deal with change. The question of whether planning pays off is a tough one. In both the public and private sectors, there are similarities in strategic planning efforts. These include the need to adapt to a changing environment and the need for long-range planning. They also include the fact that planning complexities increase with organizational size and the need to become more efficient. Decisions about the makeup of the planning team, its meetingplace, the frequency of meetings, and the team's authority and responsibilities need to be made. Research studies indicate that a planning team should consist of between five and twelve members so as to attain the desired synergism and so as not to have the team so large that it automatically divides into two groups. As the strategic planning process is being contemplated, criteria should be established as to how the plan will be evaluated. Criteria such as reduced cost, improved quality, improved sense of direction, better teamwork, and improved service delivery might be used. The timing of any evaluations should also be considered. No matter how good a job one does in initially selecting a change strategy and tactics, something unexpected will most likely occur during implementation. Only by carefully monitoring the process can one identify unexpected events in a timely fashion and react to them intelligently (Egan, 1994). In sum, the purpose of strategic change is to provide management with a framework in which decisions can be made which will have an impact on the organization. A conscious effort to systematize the effort and to manage its evolution is preferable to an unmanaged and haphazard evolution. The basic planning problem is how to allocate the organization's limited resources. The major benefits to be expected from planning include an improved sense of direction for the organization, better performance, increased understanding of the organization and its purpose, earlier awareness of problems, and more effective decisions. Long-range planning is most often an extrapolation of the present. It answers the question of how to get the job done. For example, if you (as a city department head) plan to provide the same services with the same frequency to an expanded city, that is long-range planning. References 1. Beer, M. & Nohria, N. (2000) Cracking the Code of Change. Harvard Business Review, May-June 2000 2. Block, P. (1987) The Empowered Manager San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers 3. Bolman, L & Deal, T. (2003) Reframing Organizations Third Edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass Inc. Publishers Blesoff, Dorie Ellzey; Positive Politics at Work 4. Bernick, C. (2001) When Your Culture Needs a Makeover. Harvard Business Review, June 2001. 5. Conner, D. (1992) Managing at the Speed of Change. New York, New York: Villard Books 6. Courtney, H., Kirkland, J., & Viguerie P. (1997) Strategy Under Uncertainty. Harvard Business Review, Nov- Dec 1997 7. Collins, J. (2001) Good to Great. Fast Company, Issue 51 October 2001 www.fastcompany.com/online/51/goodtogreat.html 8. Cooperridge, D. Watkins J. (2000) Appreciative Inquiry: A Transformative Paradigm. OD Practioner Journal Vol. 32 No. 1 9. Egan, G. (1994) Working the Shadow Side. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers 10. Filipczak, B. (1995) Critical Mass: Putting the Whole System's Thinking into Practice. Training Magazine, Sep 1995. 11. Gladwell, Malcolm. (1996) The Tipping Point: Dept. of Disputation. The New Yorker, June 3. 1996 12. Hamel G. & Prahalad C. (1994) Competing for the Future. New York. 13. Boston, Kanter, R. (1985) Managing the Human Side of Change. Management Review, April 1985 14. Kleiner, A. (2003) Karen Stephenson's Quantum Theory of Trust; Strategy + Business, February 2003 15. Lewin, K. 2006. Change Model. Available from: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/change_management/lewin_change/lewin_change.htm 16. Moorhead, G. & Griffin, R. (2004) Organizational Behavior Seventh edition. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. 17. Pascale & Sternin (2005) Your Company's Secret Change Agents. Harvard Business Review; May 2005 18. Robbins, S. (2002). Organizational Behavior. Pearson Higher. 19. Schein, E. (1992) Organizational Culture and Leadership Second Edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 20. Stroh, L., Northcraft, G., & Neale, M. (2002) Organizational Behavior: A Management Challenge. Third Edition. Malawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 21. Tristen-Bloom, A. & Whitney, D. (2003) British Airways Appreciative Inquiry. The Power of Appreciative Inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Berrett- Koehler Publishers Read More