Change Management: Sagitec and Massachusetts Retirement System Board - Case Study Example

Change management By + Change Management: A case of Sagitec and Massachusetts Retirement System Board Introduction In 2009, The Board of the Massachusetts Retirement System decided to look into its IT infrastructure, which was getting older. The Board decided to pursue the feasibility of improving the IT infrastructure. They came up with a five-year strategic technology arrangement that would revolutionise the organisation’s IT infrastructure. This action would enable MRSB to improve customer service, decrease operating costs and realize long-term business goals that would emerge due to the improvement in technology (Baye, 2000). During that time, the Board had employed forty-five employees who served more than140000 active and retired members. There was anticipation from both personnel and members of staff that the improved technology would solve the IT problems. The effective replacement of the organisation’s then 30-year-pension administration system was the top most important aspect of the MRSB plan. The project kicked off in the year 2010 after the initiation of procurement in 2009. The requirements of the new system were interesting and comprised of the following: Ensuring that the internal security controls were reliable enough to secure data. The plan would also involve integration of the systems to enable a continuous sharing of data and information. Additionally, the improvements would provide all information in electronic form to and from native governmental bodies and internal system changes. Finally, the changes would entail an application of web self-service to enable remittance of information to and from members and employees (Blokdijk, 2008). The State Retirement system received several bids for the project. After a thorough examination of the applicants and in line with the legal procurement process, MRSB awarded the tender to Sagitec solution, a leading firm in IT consultancy serving a public pension industry located in Denver, Colorado. Sagitec was the ideal choice for streamlining the organisations information technology. The firm had an excellent reputation for success having executed their Neon spin pension administration software on time and within the budget for many retirement agencies. In 2010, with extensive enthusiasm in the whole organization, MRSB and Sagitec jointly launched the project. The commencement of the project and emergence of challenges The project began energetically with all participants eager about the outlook of the new software that would enhance their aptitude to deliver service to customers, react to legislative and business rule changes, and develop their infrastructure as time progresses. The employees of the MRSB were getting used to their new obligations. The good thing is that everyone felt confident about the achievement of the newly implemented project. Realization of the impacts of large-scale change did not take long. Signs of fatigue started chipping in from the staff. They began showing defeat and pessimism about the success of the project. Doubts about whether the new project was going to solve welfare problems initially pledged started cropping in. They asked themselves whether there improved determination was going to bear fruits. The disappearance of the overall morale in the office started worrying the SRS’s high-ranking management team. The executive director was concerned about ability to maintain daily operations and the mounting dissatisfaction and frustration that endangered the ability of retaining the employees. Additionally, two architects of the project were only capable of working on part time basis making the project susceptible to failure. It was evident that things were not right. Looking for help to manage the change MRSB executive leadership took action to alleviate any more hazards related to the human aspect of the project. They jointly with Sagitec instigated change management strategy that would give direction to the organisation to a successful conclusion. Hiring a competent change management consultant to serve on the project was the identified preliminary stage of change management strategy. The consultant worked diligently with project managers to form an incorporation strategy aimed at reaching landmarks in time and within the budget. Jointly, they charted transition-related perils and created a detailed plan that created a balance between the need for strong leadership, project management, and change management. Reasons for the change management Change management is the procedure, tools and techniques to manage the human side to attain desired business objectives (Brake, 2009). Human aspect is ignored when significant evolutions occur in organisations. Convincing people to take part in the project design, to monitor the innovation on the project, and to agitate for the new system is often a challenge. Change comes naturally with enthusiasm on the prospects of the results. Mismanagement or nervousness can jeopardize the change. Change management is available to aid current state of business to a new state of business (Cameron and Green, 2004). Getting an insight of people’s reaction to change, and effects of group dynamics on projects is important. Persistent leadership patterns that worked earlier or in progress at workplaces are destroying the success of projects. Organisational strengths and its leadership merged with less complex but powerful reorganisations earning massive results. Deep rooted organisation customs blind people on the capability of realizing interconnections. Process Needs assessment was the introductory stage of the change management process. The evaluation entailed allocation of online surveys meant for staff. It also involved cross-examination of the high-ranking leaders of the MRSB. Focus groups were held within the whole project environment. The assessment clearly looked into a full supplement of issues and likely setbacks faced by the project and the organization. The various features of retirement system that the Needs Assessment focused on with an adjustment as an organisation was as follows: Willingness of each department This was to recognize areas with the most abilities to fall into risks at the departmental level and enable managers to compare different units. It also involved the evaluation of the previous determinations. This included looking at the earlier impact of the primary change determinants and the organisation’s experience with the process. Arrangement of the organisation to forecast goals and vision The facts acquired after this alignment process would initiate a project that would restructure the organisation in order to show its present position and come up with a structure for the organisation. It happens on many occasions when an organisation only comes up with incremental amendments forgetting to re-look and re-vamp it to meet the current operations (Green, 2007). Strengths and Faults The ideas developed here were to find out the advantages of practical project enactment and evolutional management. All the interventions were to focus on standard abilities so that each person would feel accepted in the organisation. Similarly, its design was to make them feel that they can be excellent in the new surrounding and system. Getting to know the root origin that resulted in the faults will help the leaders and others with the lookout for the reason of the present ways of operating. Needs Assessment The Needs Assessment found out the following various issues that were leading to the cause of diminishing staff morale and the troubles of the transition of the retirement system. Inadequate resources Initially, the Board was hesitant to implement the project due to high costs. However, upon thorough analysis of the future benefits of the projects, the Board decided to implement it. Decision-making powers were spread among the different departmental managers who were handy in helping department members accomplish there work. Communication problems There was no structure to back up the existing two-way communication in the organisation. There was information asymmetry as the top management in the organisation were the only ones aware about the project. There was insufficient communication regarding project development. Unpredictable decision-making There was a problem in the leadership unit when it came to working on one front. Whenever the employees had a query that needed answers, they were forced to move from one leader to another for their problems to be solved. Postponement of projects There was slow decision making due to the inability to understand the project. It took too long to explain some of the decisions to different stakeholders. Employees who were in fear of being redundant continued reserving their power within the organisation’s old structure. In addition, more money was spent and time taken from the primary resources due to the postponement (Harrington et al. 2000). Bad outlooks There was no motivation for the staff whenever they did an extra work. The exclusion of employees from important meetings made them feel inferior and that maybe their contribution was not necessary. Training arrangements were poor and employees were unable to deliver expected results in an effective and efficient way. The staff members became demoralised and gave up contributing to the project. The employees believed that only the executive were to work on the project and, therefore, became less concerned. Furthermore, the employees were in a panic mode as most of them feared being fired if they would not learn or deliver on the new project immediately (Hoppenstedt, 2005). Inability to transfer knowledge The people who were optimistic in the project succumbed to pressure from those who were against the project. For instance, one major resource leader had to depart from the project team in the process leaving with important knowledge that had not been shared with the employees. Strategies to manage change The Consultants were able to identify problems and risks associated with the project. The project team drew an action plan that would help mitigate the identified risks and problems. They started a three-way strategy for doing away with the project challenges. The key areas included: Prepare leadership for adoption system The leaders were trained in managing changes via the life cycle of the project. New managerial skills were implemented to realize improvement in the whole communication unit. The result of this was that there was a realization of the united vision, mission, and values while examining the peoples’ ability and advancement in the whole sector. The training and development session of leaders went on, and re-structuring of the organization did not stop. There was still undone work that could be finished in future. Organization re-designs Implementation and re-organization were the second steps that preceded leadership preparation for adoption of projects (Johnson and Scholes 1999). Change management strategy entailed restructuring the organization in order to: a) Form a new structure that enabled the system to equal the dynamism of the organisation to the alertness of the Information Technology solution. b) Construct an inter-training and knowledge transmission to facilitate the formation of pure career paths for employees that certifies robust succession planning. c) Re-organise and clearly define the command chain. d) Allow distribution of decision making among leadership that is the directors and managers in order for the managers to be more reactive and active towards restructuring pension landscape and workforce changes. e) Inform employees of their duties in a clear manner, as well as define performance appraisal, career paths and opportunities, and existing training requirements (Jones and Recardo 2013). Results The MRSB like many other organisations had not appraised the state of its organisation structure to identify if that structure still attended to the needs of the organization. In the absence of weight brought about by major systems change like the new IT solution, organizations tend to relax and operate in their comfort zones. Organisations capability to manage workflow and advance the knowledge and skills of the staff fails when business processes are discreet. An advanced IT solution is ideal in the reassessment of the organization’s structure (Lane, 2004). MRSB currently has a rationalized structure that gives room for human resource department to be more active in the supervision of the workflow, work volume and actively developing staff members. The other departments are restructured to support financial and legal services with each department headed by a director, which permits a more manageable workload for executives and deputy directors and a more close interaction among leadership and the staff. Ability to serve customers should be priority and sustained since it is a core value and strength for building an organisation. Improve communication Advancement in communication is another trait of change management strategy. This trait focuses on making channels for two-way communication among staff members and executive leaders (Manwani 2008). This involves the execution of consistent monthly meetings, formation of a changing network group, and the formation of an internal newsletter. The change network group supervised the change management activities and acted as a communication channel between executive and employees and across departments. The internal newsletter is for allotting project information, storing change management activities and other relevant information (Murthy, 2007). Findings As MRSB has executed more ways to include staff members in planning, development and application of the change management plan, confidence has improved, and staff members feel appreciated as part of the organization. The change management inventiveness aided in the reinstallation of transparency in Massachusetts retirement system. Trust between the leadership was also improved. The sharing of challenges alleviated nervousness among employees and encouraged them to share views. This led to enormous innovation, a better IT system, and a boost in confidence among employees. Examples of success include the complete elimination of misinformation and spread of rumours, and many employees looking for a chance to take part in project development  (Pugh and Mayle, 2009). Staff departure from the organisation to more attractive opportunities has reduced which is essential to the organisation. The future for SRS and change Management MSRB is now on the course for an optimistic future. The organisation is well equipped with IT solutions that satisfy their strategic business goals for years to come. The organisation is nearer to its vision than before, and employees have a feeling of retiring as professionals. The implementation of change management to previous structures has yielded success to the organisation. The current system can now provide room for service upgrade and new IT solutions and sprout as a fresh organisation capable of utilizing new technology. MRSB is confident that change management is vital for improving service delivery and organisational structure. Summary Change management is an important process in the running of organisations. Even though firms may face challenges while implementing a new project, the long term benefits of new projects outweigh the high costs and difficulties that an organisation may face. The MRSB project kicked off with excitement and much support from the staff that were anxious for a new system. However, this started fading off with time when difficulties in the project started chipping in. The project became difficult to run. There was a realization of the need for professional support, and, therefore, the project executive from the MSRB and Sagitec put into action a proper Change Management (CM) plan. This CM plan got through in supporting both the Sagitec and the MRSB mitigate project risks and problems such as employee demoralisation. The organisation was able to implement the project and in the end achieved an improved system. References Baye, M. (2000). Managerial economics & business strategy. Boston: Irwin/McGraw-Hill. Blokdijk, G. (2008). Change management 100 success secrets. Brisbane, Australia: Emereo. Brake, T. (2009). Global Management. London: Dorling Kindersley. Cameron, E. and Green, M. (2004). Making sense of change management. London: Kogan Page. Green, M. (2007). Change management master class. London: Kogan Page. Harrington, H., Conner, D. and Horney, N. (2000). Project change management. New York: McGraw Hill. Hoppenstedt, W. (2005). Global management. Wien: Lit. Johnson, G. and Scholes, K. (1999). Exploring corporate strategy. London: Prentice Hall Europe. Jones, D. and Recardo, R. (2013). Leading and implementing business change management. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Lane, H. (2004). The Blackwell handbook of global management. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Manwani, S. (2008). IT-enabled business change. Swindon: British Computer Society. Murthy, C. (2007). Change management. Mumbai [India]: Himalaya Pub. House Pvt. Ltd. Pugh, D. and Mayle, D. (2009). Change management. Los Angeles: SAGE. Read More