Organizational Change Management - Annotated Bibliography Example

Organizational Change Management Annotated Bibliography and Essay 3/8/2010 Student Part 1 Annotated Bibliography Michel W Durant, 2007 “ Managing Organizational Change”, Credit Research Foundation, Greensborough NC .1-7Discussing the salient features of the organizational change and its management . This concept refers to the continuously changing context in the organizations. Another most important thing is that he has given reasons of failure for the change management. The two reasons high lighted by him are non-serious commitment of management and lack of skill and willingness of people to adapt to the new environment. Strengths of the article are its review of literature based upon the organizational vision and leadership as the most important aspect of organizational change management. He has discussed three stages of change in an organization called Unfreezing change and Refreezing. He has also given different phases of change from the Kubler-Ross grief model that is denial, resistance, exploration and commitment and compared them with the organizational changes and its different stages. Although t, the article is widely trusted upon by the change practitioner but they have criticised it for it oversight of the factor of measuring the change in other organizations. The employees must be involved in the organizational change. The desired behaviour of the employees is the real back bone of an effective change program. Overall, this article is comprehensive contribution in the organizational change management studies. 1- Davenport, Thomas H., Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa and Michael C. Beers.1996 “Improving knowledge work processes” published in. Sloan Management Review 37, no.4 53-65. In their longitudinal study of organizations have chosen the management approaches based upon reengineering of their work process reflecting the type of knowledge, organizational culture and the requirements of business that the organization is involved in. the knowledge about primary acquisition of business creation of new works, packaging techniques and application of new ideas is the key to success for organizational success. The routine business should be replaced by the professionals, technicians utilising their top skills and expertise within the organization. They strongly concluded that the organizational change management can only be successful when the knowledge based changes are brought about in the organizations is employed continuously. They have referred to the scholarly article of Drucker who had noted that knowledge is the only base of great management in this century. The manual production process was the matter of previous century. As per this essay the organizations must explore their core competencies merely on the basis of knowledge and should maintain only professional workers while desiring to maintain a good control over the maintenance and management of strategic organizational changes. This article is very strongly supportive of change management through the knowledgeable skills and expertise, but does not offer a holistic over view of the change management. The article has given insights into the knowledge based changes in the organizations. 2- Pisano, Gary P. 1994. Knowledge, integration, and the locus of learning: an empirical analysis of process development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School. 144. In a dilated discussion on the change management process by the way of learning by doing and doing by learning, this article is indicative about how the organizations create new routines, implement them and then replicate them. Learning before doing and learning after doing is candidly defined by the author. The feed back process of change process in the organizations is discussed by the author. As strength his study analyses the approach about the organization knowledge environment. This article again emphasises upon quality of knowledge for change management, its introduction and control. The change becomes permanent and sustainable only when people are proactive and the change process is knowledge based. Therefore, this valuable article is a good contribution about the analyses of change management process based upon knowledge, new techniques, technology and a process of breaking away from the routine activities in the organizations. However, the weakness of the article is its non-attention to the control mechanism of the change management process in the organizations and factorization of other ingredients as required in the change management. Article has clearly brought learning by doing and doing by learning as the core concept of organizational change management. 3- Bellardo, Lewis J. 1997.Changing organizations: NARA as a case study in changing organizations: two archives transformation case studies. Washington: National Archives and Records Administration,. 5 pp. (Presentation, NAGARA, Sacramento, California, July 17, 1997; BPR214; In an exploratory study of the NARA with the perspective of change management, the author emphasises upon the stronger role of leadership in the organizational change. He ahs brought about the basic role of communication which involves and includes people at its all forums. He has used all the ways and means of communication process with the people in the organizations using news bulletins, video tapes, E-mails, internal websites and use of internet. The author has variously defined the communication process in the organization for involvement of people for the sake of good change management. As strong evidence while, giving examples from the organizations like NARA as a case study he has vividly brought about the role of leadership in making the organizational change a success. He has ably included the organizational vision as a basic ingredient for the introduction of change process in the organization. Although, he has synthesised his ideas by saying that change process comes through new ideas involving the people by the management of the organizations, yet the people as a prime factor of change have been vied on the receiving end of the organization only. The communication as a process should have been a two way traffic. In the article communication as an effective tool has been the core concept to be effectively utilised by the organizational management for the change process. 4- Clark, Charles E., Nancy C. Cavanaugh, Carol V. Brown and V. Sambamuthry. 1996. Building a change-ready IS organization at Bell Atlantic. In their expository research of the change process in the telecom sector in 1996, the authors has given appropriate and valuable ideas about the change management process in the back drop Federal legislation that was aimed at deregulating the telecommunication sector in the country. The organizations were also responsible for creating a new and dependable organizational leadership which was a responsive and responsible to the people within and outside telecom organizations. These organizations had to provide leading in formation technology cross cutting into different cultures and establishing centres of excellence for their business to grow and compete with each other. As strength authors have ably explained the story of change in the organizations dealing with telecommunication sectors in the back drop of paradigm shift from government ownership to the private ownership of the telecommunication sector. The new vision of telecom organizations was to attract the customers by the way of giving customised and high quality goods and services to them. However, the authors have failed to introduce the reader to he incremental transformation of the vision and mission statement of the organizations that potentially motivated and changed the people within organizations who have actually made the organizational changes as a successful process as a follow able and replicable example for other organizations. The change has been management led and external in nature but people can not be divorced from success of this process at any cost. The authors have made a point for the successful change management as a result of changes in the external environment of the organizations. Part 2 Challenges to the Organizational Change Management Introduction Organizational Change is not possible without involving people in the change process as basic stakeholders (Clark, Charles E., Nancy C. Cavanaugh, Carol V. Brown and V. Sambamuthry 1996). Various successful International Organizations like telecom sector and Mitsubishi Corporation have introduced successful changes in their organization by people (McIlduff, E., & Coghlan, D. 2000). Change in the organizations can be successfully brought about by the good decision makers in the organization (Brown, K. M. 1999). It is almost difficult for the people to change themselves and they are often bent upon to keep themselves unchanged (Booth-Butterfield 1996). People change themselves only when they think that a change can bring about happiness and more satisfaction in their lives through motivational process Prochaska, Prochaska, & Levesque, 2001). However, change is a continuous and unseen process that has to be defined in categorical terms (Ross A. Wirth, 2004). People and organizations can not be separated from each other when organizational change is studied (Michel W Durant 2007). This essay is aimed at discussing the change process in the organizations through people (Bellardo, Lewis J. 1997). Different decision making levels in the organizational change process and the change management strategy is the focus of this paper. Paper is organised into the parts and sub-headings in order to bring out the clear discourse on organizational change process for convenience. Decision making for the organisational change The organizational change needs a clear and futuristic strategy. This is done at the first level of decision. The first level of decisions makes assumptions about the good or bad about a change and its process to be introduced in the organization. Different and alternate business scenarios are discussed amongst the management members of the organization (Michel W Durant 2007). The strengths and weakness are weighed against the possible opportunities available at hand and in future. An initial SWOT analysis is done at this stage. Organizational mission statement is revisited and revised (Davenport, Thomas H., Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa and Michael C. Beers 1996). The core competencies of the organization are judged and reassessed. Futuristic predictions are made about the core business of the organization (Pisano, Gary P 1994). The CEOs usually call periodic meetings with the management to decide about basic change introduction system in the organization. After having done this basic and spade work the structural changes are decided. Initially the structural changes are made and efficiency schemes are introduced for enhanced efficiency, productivity and quality of the organizational outputs (Bellardo, Lewis J. 1997). At all these change levels the decisions are made in consultation and in collaboration with the people of the organization. When all these decisions are arrived at, then the incremental improvements are brought about at every level. The incremental improvements are seen for the response and then little adjustments are suggested and again changes are made in order to get the successful change process. A final change decision is made according to the results of the above process and it mainly depends on the risk bearing capacity of the organization and its relationships ability with the other organizations through its people and their stronger support for the change. There is a glaring example of IBM, who did not foresee the needed organizational changes in mid 80s and the failure resulted into the lay off of thousands of employees in the previous years. The change process in the organizations has to be people base because without involvement of people the change process can seldom succeed. Recent examples of crumbling of American Banks and Financial Institutions along with business failures in Dubai owe a part to the failed change process in the organizations. Organizational Change Management Strategy Change is not only to be introduced but it also has to be managed for positive results for the organization (Clark, Charles E., Nancy C. Cavanaugh, Carol V. Brown and V. Sambamuthry 1996). The control mechanism in the organizational change has to be perfect and elaborate. A clear vision and management skills are needed for the change to remain alive, positive, comprehensive and successful for the organizations (managementhelp.org/org_chng/org_chng.htm). The implementation, persistence and pursuance of the change process are all encompassing and intellectual cum leadership activity (Pisano, Gary P 1994). A success example of change management is that of Ford Motors Company and Mitsubishi Motors Conglomerates. Both of these organizations have implement and persistently pursued the change management in their respective manners of nine months and relaxed ways. This change management strategy is further discussed as below. Stages of Organizational Change 1- Pre-contemplation stage; this is the initial stager when the inertia about the change has to be broken and it is commonly understood that the change is almost impossible to be brought about (Booth-Butterfield 1996). 2- Contemplation; people and the organization start thinking about the change and then there is a quite serious discussion about the changes to be brought in the organizations for the larger benefits of its people. 3- Preparation – The organizations take the first step towards change and put up all the relevant, mental, physical and financial resources. 4- Action – the definitive action is taken for the change to be introduced in the organizations by the very involvement of people, management and the ownership of organizations. 5-Maintenance – this is the final stage when the changes already brought about in the organizations are persistently pursued and maintained so that, the full benefits of changes should be usefully employed for organizational interests. However, this is only conceptual categorization and compartmentalization of the introduction and maintenance of change process; practically it is not possible to do so (Ross A. Wirth, 2004). The airtight staging of change process is second to a meaningless thing both in theory and practice (Schein 1995). Actually the change is brought about, pursued and maintained for the management purpose sheer by the way of happiness and satisfaction of the people in the organization who are the makers and stake holders in the change process (Prochaska, Prochaska, & Levesque, 2001). Organizational change is vital for survival, growth and sustainability. Motivation is the basic factor for change. The organizational change has to be management led if it needs to be successful. A good decision making brings about good changes in the organizations. The anti-people changes are bound to fail and the pro-people changes are sustainable and successful (Ramsey, P. L. 2001). Genesis of Change Management Challenges Since organizational changes have become necessary evil, so the introduction, implementation, pursuance of a controlled a change management strategy has become an imperative for the survival of organizations. Changes are naturally occurring in and outside the organizational environments (Vaill, Peter B., 1991). The trends in the lifestyles of the people are changing fast. And if the organizations don’t keep pace with the changing environment by the involvement of people it becomes almost impossible for them to survive. So, the management of organizational change process id faced with a dilemma. If the management of change process is not proper then the organization are faced with the question of survival (Larkin, Sandar and T.J Larkin, 1996). For first challenges is that the organizational changes must occur. The second challenge is that the change process should be controlled and positively tract down. The changes must be positive and negative too. The positive change is a well conceived controlled and visualised process which needs to be introduced and vigorously pursued for the organizational benefit. As said earlier a good change is hard to occur (Kantar, R. M. 2009). Mostly the people in the organizations do not readily become prepare for the change. They have to be convinced through motivational process and logical arguments. So often when the organizations change their business the employees are afraid of losing their jobs. In mid 1980s the privatization of telecom sector needed quality, productivity and efficiency in the productive sectors of telecommunication, businesses and factories (Snowden, D. J. 2002). The goods and services of the telecom organization had to be customised and put on an array of wider variety for the customer satisfaction. The most of the employees in these organizations considered as id they will be laid off on the pretext of business failures. But practically it did not happen. In America and Europe the telecom sector transformed itself entirely and ventured into the mobile phones also (Smith, M. K. 2001). These products and services became more attractive for the people all over the world and the telecom business employed thousand times more people and gave higher salaries and perks to their employees. Similarly, Mitsubishi Corporation of Japan increased its core competencies and involved itself in many other products and services other than manufacture of jeeps and cars. This organizational change in the Mitsubishi Corporation on the lines of Ford motors increased its business many times and this change became highly productive both for the people and organizations (Schein, E. H. 1995). Similarly, Microsoft Corporation kept its pace with the changed environment within and outside the organization and kept on capturing the market in the software which remained unparallel to any other organization in the field. However, IBM remained as a glaring example of organizational failure. There are numerous organizations that have disappeared by the way of degeneration like plant and animal species becoming extinct due to their inadaptability with the environment (Ramsey, P. L. 2001). Therefore, change has become a monster for some organizations. Those organizations that can successfully react and adopt the change process, no only survive but also grow in business. The second challenge is that the change process has to be controlled and kept in the positive direction until and unless the desired results are achieved (Buchel, Mary, 1996). For this management strategy the change process has to be visualised, introduced, and kept under vigilance and tract in a very progressive incremental, intelligible, interactive and democratic manner (Jensen, B. 1996). There are certain decisions about the organizational change that need to be taken at the grass roots level involving all the stake holders including employees of the organizations, even their families and other affiliated organizations so that the mission statement has to be very clearly understood at all the levels of organizational tiers (Burke, W. Warner and Bill Trahant, 1996). Then the operational decisions about the change management process are taken by the management of the organizations involving all the managers of the organization (Brown, K. M. 1999). Such decisions are made at the tactical level. Then the final and strategic decisions about the organizational change are made at the leadership level but this has to be very clearly understood that the management of organizational change always remains to be management led (Booth-Butterfield, S. 1996). Conclusion Organizational change is unavoidable process. Its management is faced with multiple challenges. The change has to be directed, controlled and a conscious effort at the level of management. People in the organizations are generally adamant accept new changes. They are usually afraid of negative consequences of organizational change. The change management is a process that keeps itself abreast with the ecological, financial, social and political changes in the outside environment of organizations. Therefore, introduction, direction, pursuance and maintenance of change is also the responsibility of management. Its failure at any stage is the failure of the management. The negative changes have also to be stopped by the organizational management. The decision making process and the quality of decisions determines the success of organizational change. However, it has been proved that only those changes become successful and sustainable that is based upon the motivational strategies of people by using all possible communication techniques. The organizational change has to be knowledge based, innovative, technologically advanced, aimed at efficiency, productivity, quality and variety enhancement of the core competencies of any business organization. The environment around the organizations is always starred with new changes. These changes have to be imbibed and translated into new organizational visions. There core businesses are either enhanced according to their core competencies or these organizations have to change their businesses. But this is a very sensitive process. And it has to be very intelligibility implemented and checked for its feed back and positive results. Most of the organizations failed and disappear only because of the reason that their change management strategy was not successful. Therefore, the organizational change must be sustainable managed to give positive results. It can therefore, be concluded that organizational change is not only unavoidable but can also be also positively manipulated by successful organizational change management strategy. Sources 1- Michel W Durant, 2007, “ Managing Organizational Change”, Credit Research Foundation, Greensborough NC 2- Davenport, Thomas H., Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa and Michael C. Beers, 1996 “Improving knowledge work processes”, Sloan Management Review 37, 53-65. 3- Pisano, Gary P. 1994.Knowledge, integration, and the locus of learning: an empirical analysis of process development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School 4- Clark, Charles E., Nancy C. Cavanaugh, Carol V. Brown and V. Sambamuthry. 1996 Building a change-ready IS organization at Bell Atlantic. (BPR205). 5- Burke, W. Warner and Bill Trahant, 1996, Travelling Through Transitions, Training and Development, 6-Buchel, Mary, 1996 Accelerating Change, Training and Development, 7-alpin, Timothy, 1996Connecting Cultutre to organizational Change, Hr Magazine, 8-Snowden, D. J. 2002, Complex acts of knowing: Paradox and descriptive self-awareness. Jornal of Knowledge Management Electronic Jornal Centre 9- Booth-Butterfield, S. 1996, Stages of Change Retrieved http://www.as.wvu.edu/~sbb/comm221/chapters/stages.htm 10-Brown, K. M. 1999, Tran-theoretical model/stages of change Retrieved March 12, 2002, from http://hsc.usf.edu/~kmbrown/Stages_of_Change_Overview.htm 11- Jensen, B. 1996. Was change management ever necessary? Retrieved January 17, 2002, from hhtp://www.simplerwork.com/library/c27.htm 12- McIlduff, E., & Coughlin, D. (2000). Understanding and contending with passive aggressive behaviour in teams and organisations. Journal of Managerial Psychology 15, 716-736. Retrieved August 20, 2002 from Emerald Insight. 13-Prochaska, J. M., Prochaska, J. O., & Levesque, D. A. (2001). A trans-theoretical approach to changing organisations. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 28(4), 247-261. 14-Ramsey, P. L. 2001. Learning to be complete: the challenge of cultural dynamics. Reflections, 15-Schein, E. H. 1995. Kurt Levin’s change theory in the field and in the classroom: Retrieved 2002 from http://www.sol-ne.org/res/wp/10006 16- Smith, M. K. 2001. Kurt Levin: Groups, experiential learning and action research. URL: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-lewin.htm 17-Kantar, R. M. 2009. Why Change. ISBN 2346543 Book marks 18- Larkin, Sandar and T.J Larkin, 1996, Reaching and Changing Frontline employees, Harvard Business Review, 19-managementhelp.org/org_chng/org_chng.htm 20- Vaill, Peter B., 1991. Managing as a performing Art, Jossey- Bass publishers, San Francisco Read More