Leadership and Managing Change - Assignment Example

Leadership is the most important factor in managing change.’ Discuss Change has been a constant factor in the differing business strategies and tactics and the organizations have adapted to this buzzword with all the might they could possibly offer. Change is something that will continue to make the rounds of the business ranks since it will always remain the ‘in’ thing. This paper presents a sound basis of the element of change within the business fraternities and discusses as to how change could be led and managed in an adequate manner. It has also critically judged the different aspects of learning attached with changing business policies and strategies and how the same could co-relate with the very same. Change happens with time and the way in which organizations adopt this change has always been highlighted in this paper. An earnest effort has been undertaken to present the different viewpoints regarding the varied nature of change itself. The leadership role within change avenues cannot be denied its due role and there is a pertinent need to address the same in an ideal capacity, sooner the better. (Gobillot, 2008) With the passage of time, the business world has evolved and so have the different methodologies and the ways and means through which it is carried day in day out. One needs to realize the fact that business is a consistently changing world and in this world only the people who are ready to change are successful. Thus to put it in the related context, change is the only constant in the world and in the business scheme of things, changing to suit the will and desire of the customers and/or the stakeholders as well as doing one last bit to bring in more revenues and profits for the company just plays the right trick for the business to succeed both in the short term as well as in the long run. Businesses which stagnate over a period of time and do not change because of one pressure or the other usually die out quickly. (House, 2004) The ones that have existed thus far have relied a great deal on the phenomenon attached with change and consistent upgrading of the needs as put forward by the business and its norms. The employees have stood up and got noticed, they have done their share of work in a more effective and efficient manner as well as raised their productivity levels manifolds. Therefore change is one thing that has been going on for decades now, at least in the business world and quite rightly so the most successful ones of the lot are those that have adhered to the change game and have not resisted at any given point in time. The leadership regimes have called on for change so that the revenues get exponentially increased and that the organizations achieve success with each passing day. There are efforts made by the leaders to instill the much needed confidence within the varied stakeholders to place the confidence and trust in the hands of the change gurus – a fact that is substantiated by the best in the business, time and again. From the leadership stance, a firm must change its position with the changing times otherwise it will fade off within the context of the competition and more so the customers, for which it actually exists. It must bring about certain efforts which are geared up to make it sound, look and eventually feel different from the rest of the lot and in the long run, have a selling proposition in it and in its products that help it in winning the customers time and time again. In order to earn profits on the part of a company, it is deemed very necessary for a company or a business firm to do something different than the rest of the lot so that it is considered as an entity that provides value and meaning for its customers different from the rest of the remaining lot. (Berkowitz, 2003) This value can be in the form of provision of a totally different and novel service that the company might give at a particular period of time or bring in certain activities that mesh along well with the company’s varied products which are actually being sold under the umbrella of the company’s name. Indeed the changing market structure might call for changing strategies and lines of action that would all target the people for whom the product is actually designed as well as the competitors with whom the clutter is being broken in the environs of the marketplace. Thus competition brings in more and more quality at the end of the company with regards to its products as well as more sales in the form of its varied and changed stance on focusing towards the customers rather than the product itself. Apart from that, emphasis on need must be the order of the day rather than bringing out more and more varied stock key units just for the sake of it. The different products should satisfy each and every user rather than satisfy the people sitting in the innovation labs and those who invent just to take the company one step further. This trap should thus be avoided under all circumstances. Thus profits could come out in the middle when a company is the sole and dominant player in the whole market structure. This is the perfect scenario of a monopoly. This demands competition to come in but it has to be seen whether or not the coming competition is attacked head on by the dominant player or it has left on its own so as to improve the whole category and in other cases, just for the sake of competition. Thus the monopolistic competition demands a sense of responsibility on the part of the dominant and the sole player as it has to take steps which are essential for the up and coming firms and businesses and it must be kept in mind that the new companies are there to serve the customer better and in a new manner and the customers have every right to demand the very same. They cannot be denied their due right just because a dominant player is bent upon ruining other’s sales and increasing its own in both the short term as well as the long run. A check and balance approach thus holds the key here and it is the responsibility of the government to control these measures, no matter how harsh the situations are and how stern the steps have to be taken. Managing change within an organization is one of the most significant aspects that come under its sound functioning regime. The leader realizes this hurdle immensely. Only the companies which are able to come to terms with the new norms and practices are the ones that succeed not only in the short term but also in the longer scheme of things. (Handy, 1999) This means that the company has to devise certain ways and means through which it can manage change, measure it and effectively counter the problems that come in its way all this while. The learning process, meanwhile on the part of the organization is immense since it finds out the exact mechanisms and procedures through which change is going to affect the employees’ and stakeholders’ relationship with the company’s central essence, which is the top management, making all the decisions that would eventually benefit the company in the long run. The change agents thus have to act in unison with the company’s leadership capacities and top regimes which are bent upon having further advancements and enhancements within the business and indeed the whole of the organization machinery. The statement thus becomes even truer in the light that cultural aspects are pretty much significant in the wake of a single voice for the effective portrayal of change as the same is echoed from the organization’s standpoint. (Lyons, 2002) A number of organizations around the world have time and again changed and altered their strategies so that they can reap the benefits of both the short term as well as the long one. This, they do in order to guarantee that the stakeholders remain satisfied with the workings of the organization as well as to ensure that its products and/or services are in the recall set of the target audience. However much more than this is needed to keep the organizations on track as well as serve in the best interest possible for all concerned. (Adair, 2003) This would mean that organizations have to invest in not only a change in strategy over a period of time but also carry out related activities like proper methods of hiring, removing inefficient employees, investing a little more on the units which are ready to default as well as strengthen the cash cow strategic unit of the company, all the same. Thus a culture of managing change and indeed accepting it in the truest sense is imperative not only on the part of the managers but also the organization’s employees who should know that the new culture would only benefit for their own selves and would provide more room for their growth in the immediate future. Moving on, the basis of all strategies and structural changes that usually happen from time to time is on the shoulders of the leadership role and the top management where they have to decide whether or not the adopted strategy be the source of light in the coming quarters or years for that matter. It is only upon their insistence to have the same within their ranks that the new strategic planning is done in the first place. If the top management is not ready, it is very difficult for the knowledge organization, which really is the middle management of present times, to do even an iota of struggle. The multinationals for that matter depend a lot on the parental concerns, which at times, might be located off shores and there is no easy access to them as well. But then again it is all about finding out what the goals of the real organization are and then following them like the textbook proverb. The structural changes usually happen from time to time with the consent of the leader and more so without even informing all and sundry but what is more important for the workers and employees within an organization is to know that these changes would bring in more revenue for the said multinational organization and in turn become the basis for their own respective well being and success in the industry, both financially as well as socially. Thus it is not only about just adhering to the structural changes on the part of the employees in the literal sense but also understanding that these changes would do some benefit or the other in a combined effect as well as that on a personal level. Then only is the approach developed which keeps the organization’s individual entities going and thus they remain satisfied no matter what kind of problems linger on their heads. When one speaks of the organizations’ strategies as well as structures, change guarantees that the company is present and willing to do more than just provide products and services to the end consumers. Similarly organizational culture has a huge role to play within the midst of things. A strong culture would suggest that change is welcomed with both arms and that too in an open capacity. On the other hand, a more inapt environment would find problems with the implementation of the same within the organizational entities, thus thwarting the process of change in essence. Change wants to make the people realize that the company is there and wants to do its very best by tailoring its strategies in such a manner that can only benefit them nonetheless. After all, a company or an organization without the target people is nothing more than an office set up with employees and employers working for no one, at the end of the day. Also the fact that organizations need to evolve over a period of time is testimony enough for them to grow within themselves and thus adopt and hold on to a new path altogether, one that will be their torchbearer as well as reap rich dividends for them not only in the present times but also in the future. These strategies are so much in alignment with the future goals and tactical perspectives that they fulfill what is really expected of them, both in terms of short term expectations as well as the long run. Planning is thus the key word here and for any multinational to succeed in the long run, it is of paramount significance to have a safe and sound plan ready and not only that but also be proactive in its approach towards the accomplishment of the plan nonetheless. The cultural aspects of change need to be grown so that there is no disharmony within the related ranks whenever the talk goes out loud with respect to a certain change, no matter the same is related with norms and procedures or even cutting down on jobs, etc. From a leadership role, the changing global environment demands that the organizations are ready to change whenever the need so happens. They have to be on their toes all the time as well as carry out activities; both tactically as well as from the long term perspective that satisfies all the stakeholders and not just the consumers who receive their products and/or services. The organizational changes in terms of their strategies need to be chalked out with the facilitation of both the top management as well as the knowledge organization as they are the ones who actually have the much needed solid knowledge and information as to how the relevant strategies can be incorporated into the system of the organizations in the first place. The strategies are always drawn up whilst keeping the future in perspective while tactics usually change every now and then and are of short term nature. (Northouse, 2004) Hence it is the need of the hour to ascertain the exact combination of strategies and tactics and then carry them along well with what is needed by the organization, keeping in mind the short term and long term discussion. The bottom line remains the fact that the organization is bringing in changes for the people who are connected with it, in one way or the other and that the multinational organization is not bent upon satisfying its personal whims over an extended period of time no matter the same being true for fortnight duration as well. All said and done, change will reign supreme in the relevant business circles and will continue to incorporate different lines of action within the workplace environments the world over. The leadership role must be central towards the change regimes so as to be successful at the end of the day. References Adair. J. (2003). Effective Strategic Leadership. London: Pan McMillan Berkowitz, P. (2003). The Heart of Change. School Administrator Vol. 60 Gobillot, E. (2008). The Connected Leader. London: Kogan Page Handy, C. (1999). Understanding Organizations: London: Penguin House, R. (2004). Culture, Leadership and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. SAGE Publications Lyons, M. (2002). Leadership and Followership – Career Management. Physician Executive Northouse, P. (2004). Leadership: Theory and Practice. London: Sage Word Count: 2,510 Read More