Organizational Change without Pain - Essay Example

Organization Change We live in a world which is rapidly changing. Technological advances have completely transformed many facets of our lives. Today, organizations are experiencing change at every level. As changes continue to occur in every part of the world, the company is pushed towards rapid change. This is because the clientele of any business demand top quality products. They also require competence in the provision of services. This means that the organization has to initiate rapid change. Change of markets may also dictate rapid change for the organization (Pam 1999, 35). The organization that wants to stay ahead in the game can no longer look at the past to predict the future. A myriad of challenges continue to confront our organizations. To survive these challenges, rapid change is the only solution. This is because there are fewer resources for most organizations than before. Money, for most organizations, is not as plentiful as before. The reshaping of businesses is therefore dependent on rapid change. To meet the requiments of industry in the face of these challenges, the organization must anticipate and engage in rapid change (Amis et al. 2004, 26). There are several drivers of change in the organizational culture. The most important is the conviction of the top leadership that the way forward is through change. The management that wants to do business as usual is not in for rapid change. The leadership that realizes that change is the way forward, and that maintaining the status quo is the death for the organization, is the one that can rapidly change. This is because the popular cliché that every thing stands or falls, on leadership is right. If the headship and the management do not embrace change quickly, then the company can die. (Pam, 1999, 35) The recent past has proved that the top management of an organization can destroy it or make it, the organization. The organizational world has seen some very good companies destroyed by the management. This is when the top management is apathetic to change. Ford was almost destroyed by management. This is when they failed to embrace and implement rapid changes in the company. The story of Eastern airways is another sad and telling example. It is an example of what an organization can turn to when it despises the market forces that demand change. This is a powerful corporation that has had to have the government intervene to rescue it from the brink of collapse (Amis et al.2004, 26). The top management has to realize that there are two things that drive forward rapid change. These two are drivers that power rapid organizational change. One of these is the understanding of the opportunities and challenges that are associated with change. The other factor is to apply the change agenda as a process, being careful in its management and implementation (Kotter, 1995, 38). For the management to understand the challenges and opportunities that face it, it must first consider the impact of the intended change. After consideration, the organization must prepare for the change.Challeges will naturally come especially in the face of implementing change. The management that anticipates challenges and, adequately prepares for them, brings true improvements into the organization. The paper is going to highlight a few challenges that face the organization during the change process (William 2009, 645). One of the challenges that face the organization in light of change is sustaining the enthusiasm and energy of employees during the change journey. This is because most employees feel demoralized and unsure about their own future. Employees feel uncomfortable about their new work. Handling affairs in the new environment causes discomfort for them. So the management must find ways to energize the employees and give them change. The management should also help employees feel the need for change (William 2009, 645). Another challenge that faces organizations is ensuring that it does not backslide to old ways and that it adapts to change. The organization must be prepared to ensure that the employees are resilient and have the power to continue to change. This is because, if it does not, then the change intended is not going to materialize. This will mean a lot of money and other resources have been wasted. The organization must pursue change strategy to the full level. Another challenge that faces the organization today in the face of rapid change is the priotization of organizational projects and resources. This is because everywhere resources are limited. The projects that are most important to the organization must be given the first chance in the organization. This is because if thus is not done, the organization might end up allocating resources to the wrong goals. This will mean that a lot of resources have been wasted. Priotization will ensure that projects that don’t add to the organizations profits are discarded (William 2009, 645). Another challenge that stands in the way of rapid change is the failure to appreciate the change as a science and to integrate it as an art. Change has the scientific dimension that should not be ignored. It also has the creative aspect that is central to it. The merging of the scientific and the artistic is crucial to the realization of change in any organization. The organization that understands this does not lag behind when change calls (Feldman 2000, 54). Rapid change offers a few significant advantages to the organization. One of these advantages is that it improves perfomance.Employee performance goes up. This is very important for an organization. This is because the profitability of an organization is tied to the performance of its ‘employees. Thus, rapid change brings about improved performance for the company. Another advantage of rapid change is that it saves money for the organization. The organization is able to save money. Money thus saved can be used to improve the organization. It can be used to fund projects that stall every now and then in the organization. Money saved is money gained (Feldman 2000, 54). Another important advantage of rapid change is that increases employee morale. It motivates employees. This is very good for the organization. The morale of the employee is the fuel that feeds the organizational engine. If the morale is high, performance is going to be great. This will mean that more customers are satstified (Tushman, Michael, O Reilly and Charles 1996, 8). Another aspect of change is the aspect of continuous change. Continuous change is the ever going change in any organization. Change for the organization is continuous. The management has to keep changing their modus operandi almost after every three years. This is because if they do not do this, they run the risk of becoming obsolete. Most management prefers the major project that brings in a noticeable change after months of careful planning and strategic action. The often undervalued subtle changes do more to an organization than is acknowledged. Once a major change has been undertaken by a company, the company should not rest on their laurels. To do so would be to kill the organization. In fact, for the new processes to stay in place, change has got to be ongoing because, if this is not done, the organization will begin to experience a gradual decline. In any organization, there is always that small room to edge in new improvements every now and then. The company or organization benefits more and by the end of the day, the transformation in the company is very real and great (Tushman, Michael, O Reilly and Charles 1996, 8). Kaizen is one such approach to continuous, incremental change in an organization.Kaizen has got its origins in Japan. The word kaizen is made up of two words, kai and zen. Kai in Japanese means change. Zen in Japanese means good. So kaizen means change for good.Kaizen runs on the philosophical thread that anything can be improved. This thinking contrasts with the thinking of many managers who think that as long as things are good, then no changes are needed. Incremental change or continuous change faces some challenges (Bardach 77,105). One of the challenges to incremental change is that most people resist it. This is because change of any kind threatens the status quo.The management must be prepared because this change often jerks people out of their comfort zones. This means that the majority of people will interpret incremental change negatively, especially during the initial stages. The management must help the employees cope with continuous change (Bardach 77,105). Continuous change brings with it a sense of instability in the organization. This is because, in a rapidly changing organization, some people feel unstable. Change by itself has a sense of unpredictability. When it is continuous, this sense increases. The management should be aware of this and learn how to enable employees to manage this change. The management should also learn to let go of the illusion of power. This is because it is a great impediment to the implementation of continuous change (Kotter 1995, 38). Continuous change has several advantages .One of the major advantage of this type of change is that it is able to bring major improvements without the organization realizing it. The organization looks back after some time and realizes that it has made very great changes without feeling it. In a way, the improvements are almost painless. Another advantage is that the employees are able to change with the organization. This is because this is change that is very easy to sell to the employees in a company. The employees feel that they are involved in the improvement of the organization. This change also prepares the management to be always on the watch for change. The management learns to be expectant of change. This is very good for the organization because if the management does not welcome change, then an organization is wasted, it is destroyed. The third dimension of this paper is to look at painless change. This is because the world is changing. Everybody knows that. The fact is that the idea of change is changing. Change does not have to be abrupt and painful. It does not have to destroy some people on the way. A lot of people get destroyed when corporations embark on change. This is because change creates initiative overload. It also creates organizational chaos. This two, initiative overload and organizational chaos create a lot of resistance in employees. Painless change is the introduction of gradual reforms in an organization. The reforms are not abrupt. They happen gradually and without the suddenness that is so common with the other types of change. This outlook in changing the organization is informed by the philosophical mantra of dynamics stability. This principle involves the introduction of continuous but small changes in the organization. Existing models are not overhauled. The modeling places are only configured. According to Abramson (2000, 77), dynamic stability involves the act of tinkering with the organization. Tinkering involves changing the aspects of the organization in small bits here and there. Abramson (2000, 77) maintains that some of the greatest companies have achieved great success by tinkering. He quotes companies like Hewlett Packard and 3M. Abramson (2000, 77) argues that another way to accomplish painless change in an organization is through kludging. Kludging is tinkering that is done by people who have a college education. It’s larger in it’s’ scope than tinkering. The people doing the tinkering also come from outside the corporation. The process of painless change is best operated under what Abramson calls the four guidelines. One of these guidelines is the rewarding of shameless borrowing. This is where an organization is not afraid to borrow from other organizations. Those who bring in creative ideas from other organizations are rewarded instead of being victimized. Abramson (2000, 78) says that for an organization to effect painless change it must also tinker and kludge internally. This is in addition to rewarding those who borrow, and bring new ideas into the company. The organization must also employ a chief memory officer. This is the individual who help the organization to remember the past. To effect painless change, the organization must also hire generalists. This is because Abramson (2000,78) maintains that generalists are not afraid to effect change. One of advantages of painless change is that the organization meets economies of scale without sacrificing the people involved. Thus, the company is able to perform well and yet retain one of the most valuable resources it has, its employees. In most organization, when change is implemented it is either rapid or continuous. These have the effect of disorienting the employees for some time. Those employees who fear change might be lost in such mêlée. This is one of the traps avoided by painless change. Another advantage of painless change is that it does not lead to employee burnout (Bardach 77,105). The change that is most applicable in today’s world is painless change. This is what the author of this paper would recommend. This is because it achieves the same results as the other changes. It has also been used by companied and brought positive results. 3M and Hewlett Packard have utilized it to achieve outstanding results. They are not companies like Eastern airlines that tried to bring rapid changes and were destroyed. Even in the world of politics the politicians who try to bring any change except painless change suffer for it. President Obama is steaming in the heat of his own making. This is because he is trying to bring rapid changes in the healthcare system, in America. References Abramson, Eric, 2000, Change without pain, Harvard Business Review July-August 2000, pp77-78. Amis, John, Trevor, Slack and Hinings, 2004, The Pace, Sequence, and Linearity of Radical Change Academy of Management Journal 47 (1):26. Bardach, Eugene, 1977, The Implementation Game, MIT Press, MA, 105 Feldman, Martha 2000 Organizational routines as a source of continuous change, Organizational science Nov/Dec 2000 Vol 11, no.6, pp 54. Kotter, John, 1995, Why Transformation efforts fail Harvard Business Review, March-April 1995.38. Pam, Swain, 1999, Organizational learning The Learning Organization Vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 35. Tushman, Michael L, O Reilly, Charles, 1996, Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change California Management Review; summer 1996; 38, no. 4, pp. 8. William, Judge, 2009, Organizational change capacity: the systematic development Of a scale, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 645. Read More