Question about Human Resource Management(DIAGNOSTIC CHANGE) - Essay Example

Topic: Diagnostic Change Affiliation: Change in the organizational setting is critical to account for. Firms engage in diverse and dynamic operations, all of which require that change be factored in from time to time. This is due to the fact that the environment within which organizations operate keep changing and aligning organizational operations with such changes is fundamental. Areas of change encompass customer base, market targeting, competition, and the strategic approaches taken by an organization in pursuing in its set goals and objectives.

In accounting for change in the organizational setting, the need to diagnose change comes to light. This is in line with managing change for the purpose of enhancing organizational performance. While there are many models established to explain diagnostic change, this paper discusses Congruence Model and 5 Star Model (Jones & Brazzel, 2006, p.195). The assessment and evaluation of these two diagnostic models of change will follow their respective use, application, and contribution to change management.

The congruence model operates on the basis of four elements of diagnosing change, namely: tasks, people, structure, and culture (Jones & Brazzel, 2006). The primary reliance on this model rests on how well an organization manages the compatibility of the four highlighted elements. Higher compatibility among these elements translates to effective and efficient change management. However, critics of this model have argued that the degree of congruence is hard to establish subject to organizational diversity and operation dynamics (Luscher & Lewis, 2008).

For diagnostic change purposes, the congruence model best applies in an organizational setting where collaboration is maximized and organizational hierarchy does not necessarily imply bureaucracy and authoritarianism. In terms of readiness for change, the model best suits the culture factor. In other words, the aforementioned tasks, people, structure, and culture elements (Galbraith, Downey, & Kates, 2002) ought to create an organizational culture that is congruent with the model. Notably, this model is suitable for diagnosing both short term and long term change.

On the other hand, the 5 Star Model focuses on key organizational aspects relative to strategy, structure, processes and lateral capability, reward, and people practices (Jones & Brazzel, 2006). These aspects critically influence operations and performance within and across organizations. The diagnostic factor of this model provides that organizational functionality is integral to the underlying change. This implies that readiness for change has to account for the key operations, components, processes, procedures, and players within and across the organization.

Critics of the 5 Star Model argue that any underlying inefficiency and/or ineffectiveness could result in organizational confusion, friction, gridlock, internal competition, and low performance (Cummings & Worley, 2009). While this may or may not hold depending on the approach taken at an individual organizational level, the fact that the model essentially accounts for wholesomeness of firm operations cannot be disputed. Change is a progressive activity that requires proper functionality within and without the internal environment.

The five key components of this model are critical when it comes to diagnosing organizational change. Notably, this model is best aligned with the operations of large corporate firms. It exhibits applicability limitation in less sophisticated firms. Reference List Cummings, T. & Worley, C. (2009). Organizational Development & Change, New York: Cengage. Galbraith, J., Downey, D. & Kates, A. (2002). Designing Dynamic Organizations, New York: AMACOM. Harrison, M. & Shirom, A. (1999). Organizational Diagnosis and Assessment, London: Sage. Jones, B. & Brazzel, M. (2006). The NTL Handbook of Organization Development and Change: Principles, Practices, and Perspectives, London: John Wiley & Sons.

Luscher, L. & Lewis, M. (2008). “Organizational Change and Managerial Sense-making: Working through Paradox”, The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 51 No 2 pp. 221–240.