Leadership and Change Management through Product Innovation - Coursework Example

Contents Introduction Literature Review 3 Linking Theory with Practice 4 Limitations of Transactional Leadership 7 Reflection: Skills needed for becoming Effective Transactional Leader 7 Conclusion 9 References 10 Leadership and Change Management Introduction The leaders are supposed to bring changes and therefore, leadership and change management are intertwined in their very natures. The leadership is a synonym for action that is taken in order to bring change and nowadays, nobody is going to play leader with the help of talking but he or she is supposed to take concrete steps to get done what he or she wants to do (Alvesson, 1992). The era of organizational change when things moved slowly is gone and currently businesses have to be run at the speed of thought. Modern organizations tend to motivate their workforce to become biased towards action and they should plan and execute the planned action as soon as possible (Baker & Hart, 2007). Additionally, it is commonly believed that an inaccurate plan executed today is much better than that of perfect nature which will be worked on tomorrow. The previously quoted statement will make the readers realize that leaders are supposed to create urgency every now and then in order to get things done or people will most probably succumb to laziness and lethargy (Cefis & Marsili, 2005). The organizations operating in the current time have to remain awake to the fact that they have to adapt to external environment in order to survive. The traditional machine metaphor is not going to work in the changing organizational world of the modern era. The organizations have to think like organisms and ensure their survival against all costs. The changing customer preferences are the most dynamic force and because of this reason, the companies have to design new products and services to stay afloat in the industry which is sporting cutthroat competition. The notion of participative management has become very popular in the recent years. Participative management is a valuable tool in terms of jolting creativity and initiative in the employees of a particular organization (Cummings, 1978). However, the leadership has to communicate openly without keeping a lot of secrets and it also has a responsibility to take everyone onboard before changing the direction of the company. Change Initiative: Product Innovation This assignment will present a change initiative that will work with the help of bringing product innovation and then each department will be adjusted with reference to new product design’s needs and in this way, the employees and management will have a pretty much stable idea about the strategic direction of the company. Literature Review and Linking Theory with Practice This part of the assignment will link theory with the need to conduct change management through product innovation. The main idea is to bring company into an ideal position where it can become capable of satisfying customers with better products which will be well aligned with their current preferences. Why Select Change Management through Product Innovation The change will be brought via product innovation so that everyone will understand why it is important for them to change and as organizational leadership always wants the business to grow and therefore, case in the favor of aligning the company with current consumer preferences will make much sense to the top management. Skills Needed to become Successful Change Bringer and Transactional Leader This section will be discussing the logic behind selecting modern change management philosophy to modify operations of the company. At this stage, it is suffice to say that I plan to create sense of trust and unity of purpose among the participants of the company. Conclusion This part will conclude the assignment by registering key attributes and finds of the study. Literature Review The leadership is repeatedly defined as an art and science of influencing others and compelling them genteelly into doing what they did not want to do initially. The use of force and coercion is not encouraged in the modern conceptual framework of leadership because it leads to creation of suppressed negative emotions in followers and they retaliate on getting first change to sabotage the change initiative (Fang & Qi, 2011). Additionally, humans love to have a say and reasonable level of authority in the processes of organizations for which they are working. Leaders have to learn how to run an organization in a democratic fashion. The delegation of responsibility has been known to be the defining attribute of modern leadership and it is important because firstly, it makes followers feel valuable and useful and therefore, their commitment towards any change initiative increases manifold (Flint, Woodruff, & Gardial, 1997). Secondly, the leaders will not have to take every decision on their own and in this way, their workload diminishes considerably. Finally, as everyone is supposed to be in support of the change initiative and it is no doubt the profoundest duty of the leader to get everyone in confidence before launching a change initiation so that no one can blame others if something goes wrong (Gilley, Gilley, & McMillan, 2009). The leadership is considered as a socially integrative action and that is why, it is imperative to take everyone’s vote before going through with the plan. However, change managers have to realize the importance of organizational top management’s support and if the top leaders are not willing and interested in the change then the middle managers have to keep their mouths shut for their own sake. The middle managers have to play it safe in order to save their own skin because if they tend to bring change without the exclaimed support from leaders then they will eventually be thrown out of the organization as everyone will identify them as enemies of the ways in which they have operated for years. People want and need to stay attached to the old ways because they have developed a comfort zone by doing and managing the routine (Grundy, 2006). The employees, leaders and organization as a whole need a strong vision, reason and logic in support of the need to bring change before they can really commit themselves to the practice of new ways (Kim, 2002). The change initiators have to put forth a rosy picture of the organization and cultivate positive feelings within the organizational masses and it has to be done after getting “go ahead” from the top management (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, 1996). After getting support from top management, the change manager has to gather people who are willing to change and designate them as change agents. After getting change agents emplaced, the manager needs to build and construct key messages which should be used in order to keep everyone posted about the progress of change initiative. The transactional leadership is selected because of its ability to move things from one stage to another and it is focused on moving on a step by step basis. Linking Theory with Practice The organizations do not want to change and they like and rather love to maintain their status quo and keep doing what they are doing for number of years (Rus, Knippenberg, & Wisse, 2010). However, external environment has the power to cause the organization to change in matter of days. The intelligent and smart change managers create a case in the support of transformation initiative by crunching out numbers, facts and figures from prevalent customer behaviors, demands and preferences (Sniehotta, Schwarzer, Scholz, & Schüz, 2005). They conduct constant customer surveys in order to calculate the level of shift in customer behavior. The companies have to keep designing new products and bettering the existing ones in order to keep things interesting for the target segments of the market (Solansky, 2008). The companies do not mind changing to become better at growing their customer base but then change managers do not need to rock the boat but keep on pushing the process forward on a step by step basis. The change in product design needs a modification in production processes and therefore, the change manager has to build a different and unique case in support of the change for each and every department of the organization (Stein, 2007). The change initiatives should be as slow as possible because it will give the internal and external stakeholders an opportunity to catch their breath and it also helps them in the process of not getting panicked. The conventional theory of change management urged managers to create guilt in people for being lethargic and their inability to develop should be highlighted and they will eventually try to fall in line. The model of change management which required the managers to work in order to create guilt in people is somewhat offensive in nature because it is forcing people to change but modern theory of change management needs managers to implant the seed of motivation in people to become better than their current state of existence (Baker & Hart, 2007). The need to experience betterment should be aggravated in people by offering them nonmonetary and monetary benefit. As a change manager, I have decided to use modern philosophy of change management and I will begin the process by helping the course of innovating in becoming a norm in the organization. The top leaders of the organization are supposedly willing to see betterment and growth in business and therefore, I will not be required to build a case for conceptualizing of new products and services. It will nonetheless allow me to gauge the intellectual ability of human capital. Then, I will request the marketing and sales department to run series of customer surveys in order to see what they really expect from us as an organization. The survey results are compiled and then they will be analyzed and finally, we will work out new products in order to become adequately capable of entertaining changing customer preferences. After establishing a viable link of new products and services with the needs and wants of the customers, I will present a case in front of the top management. The change initiative will be broken down for each department so that a synergetic affect can be created within the organizational effort. The growth in sales and subsequent development in margins will surely cause the top management to respond to the change initiative in a favorable manner. The proposed change plan is devised in the light of the organizational need to become better equipped with the ability to serve customer needs effectively and efficiently then, the top management will have to give it a shot due its potential benefits to the organization. In short, the plan is very simplistic in nature because it is a planned effort to bring the organization to a level where it can become capable of fulfilling customer needs in a better way. The key steps of the change initiative are identified and described briefly as follows: - The marketing and sales department will run customer surveys in order to determine the needs and wants of the customers The conceptual products and services will be designed in the light of survey results The case will be presented to the top management in support of the change initiative which is programmed to happen via product innovation Operational plans will be distributed to each department and synergetic linkages will also be created within departmental efforts. The creation of guilt during the organizational change management is a residual of authoritative leadership that is being treated with distastefulness in all parts of the world. The modern change management engages the hearts and minds of the employees and gives them the opportunity to make themselves useful and beneficial to the organization. The roots of modern organizational change can be found in the need of managers to plant the seed of organizational commitment in the employees and therefore, they intend to link organizational development and change with their individual developmental requirements. In this way, they create a win-win model of change management for all involved parties (Kim, 2002). Given all the potential advantages of modern approach to change management, I have decided to use it in order to make my change project a success in the near future. Finally, I do not require using my brains to manage every aspect of the change management process because I will get participation from every department and at the end of the day, we will change for better in a collective manner and teamwork will remain the essence of this initiative. Limitations of Transactional Leadership The modern leadership and change management philosophies are based on the profound presence of trust amongst leaders and their followers and therefore, if I cannot maintain my linkages with my team then I cannot be able to implement my plans so I have to learn to stay contacted with my followers through constant communication and I have to keep them apprised about the direction of change initiative as well. The limitations of the selected approach lie within my potential to implement change initiative with the help of participative leadership and management but if I somewhere feel that I am no longer capable of leading the team because followers need a firmer hand then I will yield my position to a suitable individual. Reflection: Skills needed for becoming Effective Transactional Leader Leadership needs the person to have a jell-pack of skills in order to become good at it. The leaders must have a sellable vision which considerable number of followers is willing to buy (Vera & Crosson, 2004). Then, the leaders should have the willingness, ability and courage to remain truthful to the followers. The change leaders must know how to build strong cases and win support for them from top to bottom of an organization. The leaders should avoid unethical and illegal conducts at all times but should also remain willing to risk being a criminal when things are not working for them and more especially for the cause of the moment. The effective leaders should have capable and competent followership and they must ensure focusing of quality of people rather than giving value to their number (Whitener, Brodt, Korsgaard, & Werner, 1998). The leaders must also have comprehensive communicative skills whereas; they must inspire greatness in the followers as well. The leaders are supposed to be socialists because they are expected to be working for the betterment and development of people and they must learn the art of suppressing their needs and wants for helping the purpose of causing the greater good. Leadership is not reserved for any gender and both females and males can transform into great leaders as long as they keep on impressing people to do amazing things in life. The core of leadership is the willingness to see things from the sidelines rather than playing a centric role in every affair of the moment. The effective and famous leaders are famous for acting humbly and considering the success of teams as a team effort. The change leadership is the most difficult part and phase of change management literature because one has to risk a lot in order to become effective at it. However, the entrepreneurship and new product development are identified as core elements of organizational evolution into a better entity (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, 1996). There are two forces at work in this world of material and substance. The first one is called entropy and it is natural in its origins. Entropy causes everything to decrease into its constituting elements and therefore, everything is naturally programmed to die after a specific period of time. Second force is called evolution and it is known to be powered with the human desire and willingness to become better and the force historically worked in order to help humans to evolve from being jungle people to being civilized individuals. The change management is the one and the same thing because its purpose is to assist an organization or a society in the process of moving from one stage to another one which is expected to be a better outcome than the current situation. In order to bring change, the leaders will have to have excellent communicative skills so that they can communicate with their followers effectively. The certain level of sincerity is required on the behalf of leaders because followers are notorious for smelling deceit and will leave the group if they do not believe in the vision of the leader. The communicative skills are valuable because they help the leader in selling his or her vision. The skill of transactional leadership needs the leader to work in order to move things as slowly as possible so that people can catch their breath once in a while whereas, it is very important to keep pressing the need for change at every step of organizational modification process. The transactional leaders emphasis on team processes and will love to work through and along with people. Conclusion This research effort is conducted with the help of performing a literature review of past studies in the field of change management and leadership. As both of the featured constructs are intertwined and interrelated in an inseparable way so they had to be analyzed in a collective manner as well. The changes are brought by leaders like Nelson Mandela and Gandhi. The leadership is a notion that has to be used in terms of influencing people so that they can change in order to embrace the process of evolution. The change is embedded in every aspect and feature of the universe in which we of all people live. The leaders bring changes so that society or an organization can be bettered. However, there is always a problem of resistance to change as people always want to cling to the things, routines and cultures of the past and need strong logic in the favor of need for change before they can become part of any development process. In the prearranged case, we have decided to use new product and service development as a vehicle for bringing change. The organization for sure wants to create and retain new and existing customers and this need will be highlighted as a core need to change the ways in which an organization operates. References Alvesson, M. 1992. Leadership as Social Integrative Action. A Study of a Computer Consultancy Company. Organization Studies Vol 13 No.2, 185-209. Baker, M., & Hart, S. 2007. Product Strategy and Management . Prentice Hall, New York. Cefis, E., & Marsili, O. 2005. A matter of life and death: innovation and firm survival. Industrial and Corporate Change Vol 16 No. 4, 1167-1192. Cummings, T. 1978. Self-Regulating Work Groups: A Socio-Technical Synthesis. Academy of Management Review Vol. 3 No.3, 625-634. Fang, H., & Qi, H. 2011. Exploration on product brand innovation under creative management. 6th International Conference on Product Innovation Management, 276 - 279. Flint, D. J., Woodruff, R. B., & Gardial, S. F. 1997. Customer value change in industrial marketing relationships: A call for new strategies and research. Industrial Marketing Management Vol. 26 No. 2, 163–175. Gilley, A., Gilley, J., & McMillan, H. 2009. Organizational change: Motivation, communication, and leadership effectiveness. Performance Improvement Quarterly Vol 21 No.4, 75–94. Grundy, T. 2006. Rethinking and reinventing Michael Porters five forces model. Strategic Change Vol 15 No.5, 213–229. Kim, S. 2002. Participative Management and Job Satisfaction: Lessons for Management Leadership. Public Administration Review Vol 62 No.2, 231–241. Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., & Bommer, W. 1996. Transformational Leader Behaviors and Substitutes for Leadership as Determinants of Employee Satisfaction, Commitment, Trust, and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. Journal of Management Vol. 22 No.2, 259-298. Rus, D., Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. 2010. Leader power and leader self-serving behavior: The role of effective leadership beliefs and performance information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology Vol 46 No.6, 922–933. Sniehotta, F., Schwarzer, R., Scholz, U., & Schüz, B. 2005. Action planning and coping planning for long-term lifestyle change: theory and assessment. European Journal of Social Psychology Vol 35 No.4, 565–576. Solansky, S. T. 2008. Leadership Style and Team Processes in Self-Managed Teams. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies Vol 14 No. 4, 332-341. Stein, M. 2007. Oedipus Rex at Enron: Leadership, Oedipal struggles, and organizational collapse. Human Relations Vol. 60 No.9, 1387-1410. Vera, D., & Crosson, M. 2004. Strategic Leadership and Organizational Learning. Academy of Management Review Vol 29 No.2, 222-240. Whitener, E., Brodt, S., Korsgaard, A., & Werner, J. 1998. Managers as Initiators of Trust: An Exchange Relationship Framework for Understanding Managerial Trustworthy Behavior. Academy of Management Review Vol 23 No 3, 513-530. Read More