Change Debate - Rapid and Continuous Change versus Painless Change - Essay Example

Your Name: Course: Instructor’s Name: Institution: Date: Change debate: rapid and continuous change versus painless change Change is always moving faster and history clearly details accounts of uncontrollably change. Its specific definition is still debatable as different authors have come up with their own definitions. For instance, Carmen Blain (2005) refers change as a continuous process that involves re-adaptation and re-adjustment to enable man to respond to constantly changing situations behaviourally. Another scholar Ruggiano (2010) admits the fact that change is constantly moving though it does not necessarily have to cause man to readjust and adopt it. Change impacts animals and plants as well as organizations and their employees and in most cases this change is difficult to manage. Over the last few years, the rate of change facing organizations has rapidly accelerated and so far, there is no study that has documented that this trend will end. This is today becoming a custom and not an exception and organizations are required to come up with strategic methods that will enable them to cope with the contemporary business environment that is characterized by competitive pressures, rising customer demands and regulatory pressures. Some of the measures to be adopted include initiating coping mechanisms such as new policies and technologies. However, some commentators argue that organizations must develop a capacity for rapid and continuous change, while others assert that organizations should attempt to introduce painless change. This essay thus, seeks to evaluate these propositions in order to get a more relevant claim that fits the contemporary business environment (Ruggiano, 2010). Change means shedding off the old practices and embracing new practices. It is often accompanied by a state of discomfort and stress, as it requires that an individual abandons the old practices and embrace new approaches. Considering the fact that introducing change to an organization often requires a great deal of attention, however for it to take place and become established, it is required that a new habit is developed. In the human body system, habits are often entrenched in the neural connections in the brain, meaning therefore that this will involve letting go the internal state of the equilibrium. Therefore, organizational change although it may appear as an external factor involving changing products, job relocations, introduction of modern technologies or change of places, actually happens inside the people’s heads first. This is the key element that determines change in an organization. In many organizations, often two types of work are carried out. The first task is the ordinary delivery process, which is the organization’s main business, while the other task involves the change activities, which involve readjustments and transformations to ensure the organization’s activities are compatible with the contemporary business environment. Significant change in the organization takes place when an organization transforms its overall strategies, removes or adds a major practice and wants to alter the nature of its operations. It also occurs after the organization evolves through certain life cycles as people do. Research documents that after an organization encounters change, it goes to a period of slow death, which is sometimes known as deep change. However, this often takes place when the organization finds its contemporary state more satisfying and competent, which makes it unnecessary to readjust to the perceived change (Blain, et al, 2005) The business world today requires that organizations embrace change in order to remain effective. Therefore, utility managers have to take up more roles, apart from their traditional managerial roles. They now have to become transitional leaders and effect change into the organization. It is necessary that all organizations embrace change to be able to respond to contemporary customer demands, regulatory pressures and competitive pressures. Globalization has introduced competitive pressures into the business world, whereby organizations have to compete with others in terms of production and consumer preferences, which is a major reason why organizations have to adapt change. The other reasons include discontinuous technological advancements, which make it necessary for organizations to transform and adopt modern technologies. Organizations basically pursue change in order to improve their competitive capacities and grow (Ruggiano, 2010). Documented research reveals that change is usually hard to embrace since it is prone to some form of resistance as most people find their traditional systems more effective than the perceived change. The Roman Centurion are documented in history to have complained about change, the Ludites on the other hand revolted about mechanization and held demonstrations in the streets of Paris rejecting the calculating machine that had been introduced by Pascal. Most wars have also been closely associated with change. After an organization establishes new strategies, it is expected that difficulties will arise regarding people’s perspectives towards the change. This change is bound to face resistance due to various reasons including cultural traditions which deter people from embracing modernity (Kloppenborg and Baucus, 2004). Response to change is different whereby some tend to seize it, others accept it while others reject it totally. Change initiatives fail due to various factors and among them is resistance. This often leads to costs and delays in the change processes that are difficult to anticipate. However, resistance has a positive attribute as helps provide information that can create more effective change processes in the future (Fuschs, et al, 2010) Organizational change has generated much interest among practitioners and researchers with regard to which mode of change between rapid and continuous change or painless change is more relevant to the business environment today. However some argue that rapid and continuous is more relevant while others claim that painless change is the best. In this study, we shall first examine each individual mode then consider which one is more relevant (Ruggiano, 2010). This is also referred to as transformational change, and involves changing the existing organizational culture, strategies and structures. It is fast and aims at causing major breakthroughs. It involves rethinking and redesigning significant organizational processes radically, with the main objective of attaining large scale developments in the overall organizational performance speedily (Ruggiano, 2010). An example of a radical change includes reengineering, which involves redesigning the organization’s workflow with the application of modern technologies aimed at achieving a competitive advantage over other organizations. Achieving this objective therefore requires that the organization undergoes a great deal of change in its structure, production processes and management methods. This will automatically the way the organization runs its daily activities (Fuchs, et al, 2010). It is also known as incremental change and is aimed to slightly modify and improve the organizations overall operation. This type of change does not challenge the organizations existing cultures and assumptions, but modifies them to effect change. It often causes little disruption and has a relatively low risk. It is actually slow and may take a significant time to produce enough change (Kloppenborg and Baucus, 2004). Painless change basically aims at introducing small scale improvements to the organizational processes. An example of an incremental change may include implementation of another computer system aimed at improving efficiency. Indeed, there has been and still are, major controversies regarding which type of change suits the contemporary business environment. Some commentators propose rapid and continuous change while others stand for painless change (Sackmann, et al, 2009). For the proponent of painless change, the claim is that big changes made at all once often result into failures and put the organization at a higher risk and that any arising issue has to be tackled in a series of smaller steps, which will in turn reap bigger benefits. On the other hand, the proponents of radical and continuous change claim that the more relevant type of change organizations have to adapt to deal with the contemporary business environment is radical change. This is because the contemporary business environment is characterized by continuous developments and competitive pressures which the organization has to deal with in order to achieve its objectives. Since painless change is slow, the only way to deal with the modern changing business environment is through embracing rapid and continuous change (Kloppenborg and Baucus, 2004). According to the above propositions, it is clear that indeed the contemporary business environment is characterized bay changes in all its sectors. Painless change seems ineffective in achieving these strategies and therefore the best way to deal with change and remain effective in the present business environment is through adopting rapid and continuous change (Sackmann, et al, 2009). The contemporary business environment is characterized by rapid technological advancements, competitive pressures, changing consumer preferences, economic declines, and shift to knowledge based workforce and deregulation pressures. These challenges create great opportunities for modern and innovative programs, development of the existing organizational programs and the introduction of new markets. Basically, organizations need to grow and make profits from their processes and therefore this means that they have to employ efforts to achieve these strategies (Ruggiano, 2010). They have to continue flourishing in an environment of continuous change therefore; they have to successfully pilot instant changes, while at the same time helping the organizational personnel develop the capacity to prosper as the present and future challenges arise. It is usually difficult to develop a successful business change strategy under the incremental change approach. Painless change as discussed above is expected for small scale improvements, which are almost invisible and often difficult to measure (Fuchs, et al, 2010). It is not meant to cause any evident change to the organization’s structures and processes. It actually modifies them. However, in the contemporary business environment whereby change seems to be the dominant factor, painless change proves to be ineffective in achieving any organizational transformations, that will give the organization a competitive advantage over the others, since this type of change is slow and seeks to only modify the organization’s operations slightly, without necessarily having to challenge the existing cultures and processes (Ruggiano, 2010). Therefore, the most relevant type of change required in the business environment today is the rapid and continuous change. According to Murmann, et al (2005), radical change is a qualitative modification of the organization’s rules of management, and determines how members cognitively interact and behave with their world. However, this type of change is often difficult to achieve. While this type of change seems to be the most preferred by many organizations today, both change and continuity are typically simultaneously evident in any organization, and radical change is even necessary for the organization’s continuous adaptation over the long term. For an organization to remain effective in the contemporary business environment, radical transformations are required (Boeker, 1997). Concluding From the above essay, it is evident that change is constant, it has been there since ancient times and there is no clear evidence to suppose that it will cease. However, change affects all spheres including the business world. The business environment today is characterized by technological advancements, shift in the workforce from non skilled to skilled and mounting competitive pressures. Organizations have no option but to embrace these changes in order to remain influential and achieve their strategies. There are two types of change organizations can implement to effect change. These are painless change and rapid and continuous change. The type of change that organizations should adapt to effect change in the contemporary business environment has been a major subject of controversy among commentators (Sackmann, et al, 2009). Others support painless change on the basis that it is less risky while others call for rapid and continuous change which enables the organization to deal the modern changes and remain effective. The essay indeed supports that rapid and continuous change should be opted since it is fast and focuses on significant improvements. It can deal with the contemporary changes in the business environment. Therefore, organizations should develop the capacity for rapid and continuous change, which is more applicable to today’s business environment. Work Cited Boeker, W. Strategic Change: The Influence of Managerial Characteristics and Organizational growth. Academy of Management Journal, 1997 40 (1), pp. 152-170. Carmen Blain, et al. Destination Branding: Insights and Practices from Destination Management Organizations. Journal of Travel Research, May 2005; 43: 328 – 338. Johann Peter Murmann, et al. Evolutionary Thought in Management and Organization Theory at the Beginning of the New Millennium: A Symposium on the State of the Art and Opportunities for Future Research. Journal of Management Inquiry, Mar 2003; 12: 22 – 40. Matthias Fuchs, et al. E-Business Readiness, Intensity, and Impact: An Austrian Destination Management Organization Study. Journal of Travel Research, May 2010; 49: 165 – 178. Nicole Ruggiano. Grant and Contract Management within an Intergenerational Shared-Site Organization: A Case Study. Journal of Applied Gerontology, Aug 2010; 29: 455 - 474. Sonja A. Sackmann, et al. Sustainable Change: Long-Term Efforts toward Developing a Learning Organization. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, Dec 2009; 45: 521 – 549. Timothy J. Kloppenborg and Melissa S. Baucus. Project Management in Local Nonprofit Organizations: Engaging Students in Problem-Based Learning. Journal of Management Education, Oct 2004; 28: 610 – 629. Read More