Change Management, Incorporating Leadership and Team Development Theories - Literature review Example

Change Management, Incorporating Leadership and Team Development Theories Throughout history, leadership scholarsemphasized the importance of leadership traits as the main factor behind the success of organizations. However, recent emphasis has been channeled towards the value of team-based leadership, which has made management experts and scholars develop the leadership theories behind the transformational leadership style. The change in the business world, including the pressure from competition among other outside forces, change management, was developed to facilitate the changes needed by businesses. Change management is the deployment of a structured action model, in leading changes, in human resource results so as to realize the desired organizational results. The barriers to organizational change include the human disposition to stick with the status quo, the lack of adequate knowledge about the organization and competitive forces including external threats and competition. The change management process refers to the events that the project leader administers during the implementation of the proposed changes. From the case study of the senior civil engineer, the failed attempts of organizational change can be attributed to his inability to prepare for the change adequately, managing it in harmony with the other workers and reinforcing it adequately. The failure of the change plans can be explained using different theories, including the contingency, situational, the great man and the transformational theories of leadership. The lessons learnt from the case and the paper include that successful change management is collaborative in nature, allows for the leadership of all members, and prior planning is crucial to the success of the change management process. INTRODUCTION The famous historian, Carlyle Thomas, once made the statement that, “the history of the world is but the biography of great men” (Carlyle, 1841, pp. 29). Despite the fact that history accounts for the history of well-established leaders who changed the world in different ways, including Alexander the Great, Peter the Great, Winston Churchill and Nelson Mandela, leadership takes place at all levels. This is to say that the good leadership of world leaders does not render the leadership administered at other spheres, including companies, businesses, community and personal lives useless or unrecognizable. Taking into account that the challenges that face leadership are evident in all spheres of life, a leader can be defined as anyone who drives the activities of the group, institution, society or country, turning their objectives and activities into achievements. In the world of organizational leadership, organizational success and effective leadership are closely related to the strength and the quality of the leadership. The observations enumerated before lead to the question: what constitutes the institution and the function of leadership? HISTORY OF CHANGE AND CHANGE MANAGEMENT History of Change Traditional (“great man”) theories of leadership For centuries, philosophers, political scientists, sociologists, management scholars and psychologists have attempted to isolate the core of leadership. Despite the fact that almost anyone can recognize leadership after seeing it, giving a description of what it is about is a different task altogether (Northouse, 2004). Leadership is a complex notion, and the struggle to develop a more differentiated understanding of the situation has been going on for all years. The efforts to give a better understanding of leadership have entailed the efforts made by scholars, in trying to distance leadership characteristics from the analysis of the most successful leaders of the past (Kouzes and Posner, 1995). The leaders explored in an attempt to isolate the attributes of good leaders include those leading in different areas and circles, including politics, military, business and religion (Bass, 1990). The position (assumption) maintained by the traditional theories of leadership is that some people possess inherent traits and qualities that make them better leaders than others. Under the theory, leadership is an inherent nature and not a capacity which is nurtured; the people that possess it are characterized by the personality of being able to direct, guide and command a group or an activity (Northouse, 2004). The “great man” theory of leadership is also based on the assumption that relationships are supposed to be hierarchical in nature; power is organized according to ranks, and the leader sits at the top. The hierarchical nature of the “great man” leadership theory holds that superiors should exercise authority over their subordinates; the subordinates are required and expected to do what their superior directs them to do. However, due to the changing nature of society and organizations, the definition and the requirements of leadership have also changed. The changing organizational and leadership landscape The changes in the characteristics of the workforce and also an increase in the complexity of companies – that is evident from the adoption of matrix management among other organic models – has called for a change of leadership. These changes in the managerial outlook of companies and the changes of workforce characteristics have called for a change from organizational leadership to a more collaborative model (Kets de Vries, 2006). Further, the increase in the dependency of individuals and companies on technology, as well as the increased adoption of distributed work-arrangement models have presented new demands on the ways leaders interact with their followers. Due to the complexity of the post-industrial market and society, the failures of the command-control leadership model have become more and more apparent. The apparent nature and the effects of the command-control leadership model have made organizations change their leadership and organizational models, and also the ways in which human resources are managed. The distributed model of leadership is continually replacing the traditional model, where a single leader controls and manages everything. Under the distributed leadership model, the company develops a complex and intricate network of leaders. All of the leaders within the leadership network are trained or developed to demonstrate a variety of experiences and abilities, which are critical to guaranteeing that the leadership function benefits the entire company (Moghaddam, Ghanbari and Hosseinzadeh, 2011). The skills and the features required from the leaders within the network include that they should pursue a relationship-driven leadership style, as opposed to the adoption of a task-driven model (Tabernero et al., 2009, pp. 1391). The second trait required from the leaders covered by the network include that they should be those with the ability to focus on the context requiring leading. This leadership trait is supported by the situational and the contingency theories of leadership, which emphasize that leadership style is dependent on a variety of variables, including the qualities of the followers and the nature of the situation calling for leadership (Ebert and Griffin, 2010, pp. 135). The third trait required from the leaders incorporated into the system is that of being able to focus on the transformation, which is evidenced by their approach to managing and leading. In particular, the transformational approach to leadership emphasizes that leadership should be characterized by an exchange between the leader and the followers (Bass, 1985). The exchange between the two parties should be guided by the general goal of accomplishing a specific outcome, through incorporating a given set of conditions, requirements and rewards. History of Change Management Change management, as a distinct field of study, started being explored during the 1980s and was driven by major consulting companies working with Fortune 50 corporations. The early adopters of the discipline of change management included AT & T, Ford and GE (Prosci, 2014a). These early adopters of change management benefited in a significant way, from the savings made due to the adoption of highly efficient implementation of programs and cutting edge leadership models. The adoption of the field led to the development of change management systems like the John Kotler’s Eight Step Process for change leadership and the Change Acceleration Process. During that era, change management programs and models were only administrated by consulting firms, and there were few books on the subject (Prosci, 2014a). During the 1990s, the industries that were going through major and rapid changes in various areas, including human resource management and information technology began to emphasize the importance of adopting change management models and programs throughout the organization (Cummings and Vorley, 2008, pp. 6). The consequences, experiences and the expenses that resulted from the adoption of change programs without having a specifically structured approach compelled companies and human resources officers to embrace the tools of change management (Prosci, 2014a). Irrespective of the fact that change management was still a practice for large corporations, where the programs were accessed through the administration of consulting firms, change management was receiving more credibility and validity (Elearn, 2007). During the 2000s, there was a widespread acceptance of the practice of change management, as the model was continually being accepted as a business competency model for leading change. The shift in the outlook of companies and managerial staffs increased the significance assigned to change management among project teams and throughout the business world (Cummings and Vorley, 2008, pp. 7). The benchmarking data related to the usage of a methodological model shows through the significant increase in the usage of change management from the 2003 level of 34 percent to a 72 percent usage level of 2011. The utility of change management was incrementally validated through the research done to explore the impacts of adopting change management models among companies like IBM, Prosci and McKinsey (Prosci, 2014a). The market for change management systems and that of training services in the area expanded rapidly during the 2000s; as many as 320 consulting firms were offering services and training on change management as of 2011. Some of the companies offering the services were fully established, using the change management models they had fashioned; others offered training and some change management products. Many of the less established firms were those that had specialized on the delivery of consulting services before. The same decade ended with the formation of the first change management association (the Association of Change Management Professionals) offering services around the world (Prosci, 2014a). LITERATURE Definition of change management Change management is the deployment of a structured course of action and sets of tools, during the leading of the human resources aspect of change, towards the realization of a desired outcome (Campbell, 2009, pp. XV). The process of change management focuses on the human resources aspect of the change process; the process targets the leadership of an organization, notably the executive staffs, senior leadership staffs, middle-level management, line and departmental supervisors (Campbell, 2009, pp. XVI). In the case that the change management process is administered effectively, the people working in an organization feel a sense of initiative and engagement throughout the change process (Baratta, 2010, pp. 3). The change of employee behavior, according to the behaviorist theory, promotes their ability to contribute to the change process. Baratta (2010, pp. 4) emphasized that the effective administration of the change management process also encourages the employees of an organization to work in a more harmonious manner, towards the realization of the common objectives of delivering results and registering organizational benefits (Baratta, 2010, pp. 4). The effective administration of the change management process increases the levels of competitive advantage for the organization (Einbinder et al., 2010, pp. 63). The change management process enables an organization; to more effectively and quickly put in place the changes that help the organization in meeting the changing needs of the market. The changes in markets and other variables require the leaders to adopt the approach proposed by the contingency and the situational leadership theories. The approach guided by the two theories takes into account that meeting the demands of the changing dynamics requires a flexible leadership approach. Barriers of change Aparecida da Silva, Damian and Dallavalle de Pádua (2012) discussed that there is a variety of factors that act as barriers to the change process, but they maintained that the main barriers to the process of change are human in nature. The first barrier to change is the resistance to change, which refers to the unwillingness of people to change; people prefer and are more inclined to stick with the status quo. The resistance to change is often traced to the fact that the employees of the organization will feel that the changes will make their lives worse; for example by complicating the ways of doing their job (Agócs, 1997). This is the case, because employees feel that “internalization and globalization, accelerated technological changes, growing scarcity of resources…and the circumstances of global financial crisis” are the major forces behind the change management process (Michalak, 2010, pp. 26). The resistance to change may take different forms, including that it may be indirect, where the employees use passive aggressive behavior to hinder the change process. In a more direct manner, people resist change by criticizing or withdrawing their support from the people leading the change process. Michalak (2010) maintains that the lack of adequate knowledge about the current situation of the company, particularly about processes, culture and systems, is a barrier to organizational change. The failure to examine the current state of the organization makes it difficult to transition from the current status to the one which is planned (Aparecida da Silva, Damian and Dallavalle de Pádua, 2012). The third barrier to organizational change is the lack of integration, due to the difficulties that come along with the initiation of the change process. This barrier is worsened by the fact that the changes being sought are usually changing, as time goes by. Following the implementation of a new system, the business processes covered by the organization change as well (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). The unplanned changes that result from the lack of integration include that employee turnover increases, and the many integration points of long-term change process increase the probability of failure for the process. Alston and Tippett (2009) discuss that competitive forces are another barrier to the change process, taking into account that many changes in the organization are driven by external forces, such as external threats, competition, market conditions, technological changes, and changes in economic forces. In adjusting the business processes of an organization to the demands presented by changes in the external environment increases the vulnerability of the change process to failure (Hess, 2009). The last barrier to organizational change is the complexity of organizational systems, processes and products, which makes the change process more difficult; the complexity of the change process becomes a major barrier to organizational change (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). Change management process  The process of change management refers to the chain of the events/ activities that the project leader or the change management team follows, in administering the change or in managing the changes of the given project (Queensland Government, N.D, pp. 1). The change management process covers three stages (sets of events): stage 1 (preparing for the changes), step 2 (managing the changes), and stage 3 (reinforcing the changes) (Queensland Government, N.D, pp. 1). The change management Process Source: (Prosci, 2014). CASE STUDY Work post: Senior civil engineer Place of Work: Ministry of education of Bahrain, in the construction department at the Directorate of Services. Change area (no. 1) where change plans were attempted: The use of the hardcopy mailing system, where daily printed mails are sent to engineers on a daily basis by hand and the engineers are required to sign in the mailing hand book. Change plans attempted and failed: A trial to change the hard copy mailing system used by the department, to an online mailing system. The senior civil engineer initiated the change at a personal level, by starting to use the online system (Microsoft Outlook), but the planned change failed due to the lack of support, for the other members of the department (They prefer to maintain the usual routine). Change area (no. 2) where change plans were attempted: the lack of a written flowchart system; the flowchart system offers a standard guide for employees. Due to the lack of the system, employees ask the head of the department and senior Engineers about work procedure every time Change plans attempted but failed. Established a flow chart system, which guided employees, showing them how to deal with the requests forms received from all the schools and the other directorates, but the change was not embraced. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Solution suggestions for the case study, using the theories mentioned in the literature review From the proposed (but failed) change (no. 1) where the use of an online mailing system (Microsoft outlook), the change plans failed because the senior civil engineer did not adhere to the change management process (Kouzes and Posner, 1995). The failure of the proposed change can be explained using the thinking of the great man theories, which can explain why the senior civil engineer felt that they had the intrinsic characteristics to drive the change of behavior throughout the department. Further, the failure of the proposed changes can be explained using the behaviorist theory of leadership, taking into account that the senior civil engineer did not appeal to the leadership traits of the rest of the workers at the department. Further, after the proposed change failed, the senior civil engineer should have adjusted his strategy according to the directions given by the situational and the contingency theories; he could change his autocratic style of change implementation to a more democratic one, which could have been better accepted by the workers of the department. Further, after failing to receive the support of the workers in the department, he should have incorporated the three stages of change management into his proposed change plan. In preparation for the change, he would have needed to engage the other workers in defining the change strategy to use. After preparing for the change, he should have managed the change process, together with the other members of the department, in developing change plans and in implementing the plans. In reinforcing the change, he should have consulted the entire department for feedback, so as to diagnose strategy gaps and manage resistance and then implement the necessary corrections (Northouse, 2004). At he same time, allowing the other workers to experience the benefits of the change process could have helped in increasing the acceptance of the change. Further, the adoption of a transformational approach in leading the change would have allowed the senior civil engineer to incorporate the other workers into the change process, and that would have allowed him to gain more support from them. By adopting an autocratic style in leading the change, the employees felt that the change plans were imposed on them. In attempting to change the operations of the department, to include the use of the flowchart system, the senior civil engineer employed the approach explained by the transactional theory of leadership. The transactional leadership style is guided by the assumption that people adhere to the chain of command and that they are motivated by rewards and punishments. In the case of the proposed changes, encouraging the workers to use flow chart systems seemed enough reward for the employees. In addressing the situation, the senior civil engineer should have used the change management process and also engaged the employees throughout the change process. New lessons from the case study a) Instead of presenting answers, change management is better positioned when questions are asked, so that employees can contribute towards the development of solutions. b) Change management is made better by providing workers with the opportunity to lead. c) The senior civil engineer’s work should have showed more support for the workers, instead of forcing them to change. d) People resist change processes when they are not allowed to accept the mission (Michalak, 2010). e) Prior planning before initiating changes is as important as the change process itself. REFERENCE LIST Aparecida da Silva, L., Damian, I. and Dallavalle de Pádua, S., 2012. Process management tasks and barriers: functional to processes approach. Business Process Management Journal, 18(5), pp.762 – 776. Agócs, C., 1997. Institutionalized Resistance to Organizational Change: Denial, Inaction and Repression. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(9), pp. 917–931. Alston, F. and Tippett, D., 2009. Does a Technology-Driven Organization’s Culture Influence the Trust Employees Have in Their Managers? Engineering Management Journal, 21(2) Baratta, A., 2010. More Perfect by Design: The Science of Designing More Perfect Business Processes. Bloomington, IN: iUniverse. Bass, B. M., 1990. Bass & Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Applications. New York: The Free Press. Campbell, M., 2009. Communications Skills for Project Managers. New York: Amacom. Carlyle, T., 1841. The Works of Thomas Carlyle, Volume 3. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Cummings, T. and Vorley, C., 2008. Organization Development and Change. 9th Edition. Mason, OH: South-Western. Ebert, R. and Griffin, R., 2010. Business essentials.8th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. pp. 135–136. Einbinder, L., Lorenzi, N., Ash, J., Gadd, C., Einbinder, J. Eds., 2010. Transforming Health Care Through Information: Case Studies: Case Studies. Third Edition. New York: Springer Science. Elearn. 2007. Management Extra: Change Management. Oxford: Pergamon Flexible Learning. Hess, M., 2009. Culture and Governance, Intercultural Management Congress proceedings. Lodz: Clark University. Kets de Vries, M.F., 2006. Leaders on the Couch: the Zen of Creating Emotionally intelligent Organizations. Paris: Fontainebleau. Kotter, J.P. and Schlesinger, L.A., 2008. Choosing Strategies for Change. Harvard Business Review, 86(7/8), pp. 130–139. Kouzes, J.M. and Posner, B.Z., 1995. The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Michalak, J., 2010. Cultural Catalysts and Barriers of Organizational Change Management: a Preliminary Overview. Journal of Intercultural Management, 2(2), pp. 26–36. Moghaddam, A., Ghanbari, A. and Hosseinzadeh, A., 2011. Relationship between the Leadership Method and Self Efficacy of the Staff. American Journal of Scientific Research, (40), pp. 160–172. Northouse, P., 2004. Leadership theory and practice. 3 Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing. Prosci. 2014. Change Management: The Systems and Tools for Managing Change. [Online] Available at: http://www.change-management.com/tutorial-change-process-detailed.htm [Accessed 27 April 2014]. Prosci. 2014a. Change Management: Change Management History. [Online] Available at: http://www.prosci.com/change-management/change-management-history/ [Accessed 27 April 2014]. Queensland Government. N.D. Change Management Best Practices Guide: Five (5) key factors common to success in managing organizational change. [Online]. Available at: http://www.psc.qld.gov.au/publications/subject-specific-publications/assets/change- management-best-practice-guide.pdf [Accessed 27 April 2014]. Tabernero, C., Chambel, M. J., Curral, L. and Arana, J. M., 2009. The role of task-oriented versus relationship-oriented leadership on normative contract and group performance" Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 37 (10), pp. 1391. Read More