The Most Appropriate Organizational Change in the Modern Business World - Literature review Example

Managing Organisational Change Insert Name Course Name Tutor’s Name 03, 11, 2010 Outline Introduction The most appropriate organizational change in the modern business world Conclusion References Introduction Organizational change is an inevitable composition of any organization that seeks to remain relevant in the dynamic market place. The intensification and evolution of information technology can be mainly attributed to the essence of change in any organization. In fact, the spread of information technology has increased the scope of the market place and competitors as well. Any organization therefore has equal market opportunities that are subject to their internal and external infrastructure. An organization that has fostered innovative strategies in its market has higher chances of remaining relevant. In this sense, it is imperative for any organization to learn its clientele behaviour and be in a position to change as their preference change. This is the only way that an organization can remain relevant in its business and be able to counter its competitors with minimal effort. There are several approaches that an organization has at its disposal regarding changing strategies. Depending on several factors such as the organizational culture, information strategies, and organizational infrastructure, enhancing a change in an organization will be as unique as the organization. There are several approaches that have been developed as a framework for organizations to use while approaching change, these frameworks covers the fundamental approaches but not a step by step procedure for implementing change. Since every organization is unique in its own, it is important to note that the approaches used in implementing change may vary depending on the uniqueness of the organization. More so, there are several changes that different organizations needs to change with regard to its speculated market changes or other internal and external factors that may necessitate re-alignment of the organization. Basically an organization can choose to incorporate rapid and continuous change or alternatively painless change. These approaches are both aimed at enhancing change in an organization but the result of these approaches are different. The rapid and continuous change may affect employee’s performance because of the anxiety created by the continuous change. On the other hand, the painless change may be slow and thus risking the relevance of the organization in its market place. The merits and demerits of these strategies will aid in the decision making process, this means that the organization will have to balance its options based on the consequences of the approach chosen. The most appropriate organizational change in the modern business world Since there are several approaches of change in the modern business world, it is essential to determine the most effective and workable approach to use in the process of incorporating changes in organization. The merits and demerits of the approach can therefore provide fundamental and useful information regarding the appropriate approach that an organization can incorporate in the course of changes (Burke, 2002). It is essential to comprehend the significance of change in order to have adequate information on the most suitable approach that any organization can incorporate in its market niche. As stated by Connor and Lake (2008), the need for changes in an organization can be triggered by changing customer behaviour, increasing competitors in the market, changing prices of products and services in the market, speculated market trends and increasing cost of production among other factors. Fuller, et al., (2000) argues that organizations require continuous but practical changes in their operations in order to remain relevant in their market. Organizations essentially foster changes as one of the major survival tactics. It is technically hard for any business in any market niche to remain relevant while maintaining the same strategy of operation for a number of years. In essence, there are two major forces that trigger organizational changes, these forces can be either internal or external, and sometimes both of these factors contribute to the need for organizational change (Palmer, 2008). The effectiveness of the changes that an organization incorporates mainly depends on the organization’s management or leadership. The other factors that determine the success of the changes incorporated is the balance or alignment of information strategy, organizations’ structure and organizations’ culture (Strauss, 2005). Information strategy determines the flow of communication process within and outside the organization, the efficiency of information strategies determines the overall communication process in the organization. Organizations structure entails the processes that the organization executes its functions; the structure encompasses administration through to accounting and payroll services. Organization’s culture is the accepted behaviour within the organization. These factors differ with organizations and thus the need to comprehend how the organization runs in order to integrate successful transformation strategies (Kaplan and Benson, 2000). According to Sanchez and Heene (2002), the most appropriate means of enhancing change in an organization is through a slow and painless strategy. The rationale behind this strategy is further reiterated by Cummings and Worley (2008), they warn that anxiety as a result of change will not only influence the performance of the organizations employees but also lead to increased employee turnover. By nature, people are reluctant to change which is contrary to the norm. Notwithstanding this, changes are inevitable and thus the more flexible an organization is the higher the likelihood that it will survive any market changes. Because of the varying market conditions, sometimes depending on the changes required, rapid change can be inevitable. Some external and internal conditions can lead to unprecedented changes which then lead to quick response in order to maintain business performance. It is therefore important to note that organizational change depends entirely on the environment, which is through external changes. As stated by Strauss (2005), organizational changes ought to be strategized and fostered by the leadership of the organization. In this sense, the leadership of the organization is responsible for the kind of change that the organization will undergo in the transformational process. There are several models that have been developed in the theoretical perspective that can provide fundamental basis for the leadership of an organization to adopt in order to ensure that the change process is painless and more so effective. Since the major reason for change in an organization is to increase its efficiency which then translates to increase of production and more customer value, it is imperative to ensure that the transformational process is as effective as possible in order to leverage its re-alignment with the market needs. According to Leban et al., (2005), one of the theoretical models developed by Kurt Lewin is the Lewin model. There are three stages in this model, the initial one is unfreezing, changing process and refreezing to accommodate the new system. The Lewin model is however suitable for organizations or circumstances that require quick alterations because of inwards or outwards forces that are inevitable and crucial for the organizations progress. An example of this situation is when Caterpillar was affected by recession and had to reduce its workforce, in the process it lost over thirty thousand workers but later increased sensitivity to the remaining workers by promising them better payments and no future retrenchment. This is a typical Lewin model in practice. The major disadvantage of applying this model to foster changes is the consequences of the changes in terms of workers’ commitment to the company despite the promises offered to them by the company’s management. It was challenging to win back the mutual trust of the employees as compared to the time before the retrenchment process affected the company (Sanchez and Heene, 2002). Wong-Mingji and Millette (2002) gives a more sound approach to organizational change, a comprehensive approach. This approach aims at the viewing the entire system and thereafter delineates major steps that are vital for a successful change process. Unlike the Lewin model, this model approaches the transformational process cautiously through the organizations leadership. This process therefore ensures that transformation process experiences less rejection and more success because of the way in which it is implemented. The initial step that the management or the leadership of the organization does is to identify where there is need for change. For instance, when the performance of employees is reduced as a result of pay or condition of work improvement, increased employee turnover, decline of organizations sales, court injunctions and labour strikes among other reasons, there is need for change. After the management has realised the need for change, the next step will be to set objectives that the transformational process must accomplish. Some of the major objectives of transformational process includes but not limited to the following; increasing market share, improving on the employees motivational level in order to enhance organizations’ performance, to settle striking employees, to settle court issues among others (Leban et al., 2005). As further emphasised by the comprehensive approach to change, it is vital for the management to fully comprehend the causes of change. This is significant as it will make certain that the right decision is made. The next step will then involve the selection of the best possible technique for enhancing change. The selection of the possible technique will depend on the diagnosed causes that fostered the change. Some of the issues that will be addressed include better employee payment, increase of motivation strategies through reward schemes and increase of promotional strategies (Strauss, 2005). The last step after the transformational process is completed is the re-evaluation process which then determines if the process was successful or not. These two models discussed reveals that the painless approach of change is generally more effective as compared to the rapid and continuous approach as evident in the Lewin model. It is apparent that any organization requires slow incorporation of changes especially when such changes have a direct effect on the employees of the organization. For instance, the Caterpillar case lead to more anxiety among the workers who were not retrenched as a result of recession effects on the organization. Despite the incentives that the company provided its employees, it was generally difficult for the company to win back its employees trust. This was mainly because of the ineffectiveness of the approach that was used. On the other hand, a more comprehensive approach entails the diagnosis, setting of change objectives, initiating the transformation process and re-evaluation of the success of the transformation process. This approach therefore experiences less challenges because of its painless and considerate approach as evident from the management process. It is also imperative to note that despite the need for painless transformation in an organization, different circumstances could necessitate rapid changes to some aspects of the organization. Nevertheless, caution ought to be practised in order to prevent the overall intention of change itself. In order for an organization to prevent any rapid changes, it is imperative for the management of organization to ensure that the employees are always involved in the decision making process. The success of the strategy that will ensure painless transformation depends on the competency and integrity of the organization’s management or leadership. In this sense, it is clear that the success of the process rests with the leadership (Cummings and Worley, 2008). There are a number of ways in which organizations’ leadership can inspire successful transformation in any aspect of the organization. Wise leadership will always offer training services that explains the need for transformation and the benefits that the company will get as a result of successful transformation. More so, the leadership will ensure that the employees of the company are treated with respect and value that they deserve. As elaborated by Kaplan and Benson (2000), the human resource department is responsible for the training, motivating and appraisal of an organizations workforce. Human resource department is therefore a key department in ensuring that the transformation process is successful and all inclusive. In a painless transformation, it is important to ensure that the entire workforce is integrated and trained to undergo the transformation process. Leadership and management that instil fear through negligence of employee participation and forced rapid and continuous organization change will only increase anxiety which will translate to decline performance by the employees (Cummings and Worley, 2008). In this type of transformation, the effects will be reduced employee morale and performance. This will then translate to decreased company productivity. In essence, the reason for transformation will be lost since all the organizations sphere was not involved in the transformation process. It is consequently important to incorporate competent human resource management in the process of transformation to aid in the development and motivation of employees in the transformation process. Conclusion This essay has explicitly provided the fundamental reasons why an organization will benefit from a painless transformational strategy as compared to a rapid and continuous change. The rapid and continuous change as evident in the caterpillar case, employees of the organization remained anxious and less motivated despite the efforts of the organization to hike their payments and promise them not to cut back again. On the contrary, a more comprehensive approach to organizational change is imperative in enhancing a painless change strategy that considers the welfare of the organization’s human resource. It is however worth noting that a different environment provides varying approaches for organizations to use while fostering change. In some instances mostly as a result of external factors such as recession or sudden unpredicted changes in customer behaviour, rapid changes are inevitable. It is however the duty of the organization’s leadership to ensure that the process is done in a humane way. References Burke, W.W. (2002). Organization change: Theory and practice. La Jolla, CA: SAGE. Connor,P. E., & Lake, L. K. (2008). Managing Organizational Change. California, CA: The University of California. Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2008). Organization development & change. Washington, DC: Cengage Learning. Fuller, C., Griffin, T., & Ludema, J. (2000). Appreciative Future Search: Involving the Whole System in Positive Organization Change. Organization Development Journal, 18 (4), 23- 45. Kaplan T. F., & Benson A.F. (2000). The human resources role in managing organization change. New York, NY: FPMI Communications Leban, B., Klein, A., & Stone, R. A. (2005). Managing Organizational Change. Greenwich, CT: John Wiley & Sons. Palmer,I., Dunford, R., & Akin, G.(2008). Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Sanchez, R., & Heene, A.(2002). Managing for an Uncertain Future: A Systems View of Strategic Organizational Change. International Studies of Management & Organization, 27 (3), 231-242. Strauss, P. (2005). Managing Change. The CPA journal, 62 (4), 34-45. Wong-Mingji, D.,& Millette, W.(2002). Dealing with the Dynamic Duo of Innovation and Inertia: the "in-" Theory of Organization Change. Organization Development Journal, 20 (3), 123-134. Read More