The Role of Leadership in Managing Change in Organizations - Example

Name Course Lecturer Date The Role of Leadership in Managing Change in Organizations Change is an invariable factor in today’s society that is embedded in both our individual and professional lives which takes place both in our world and outside of our world regardless of whatever occurrences might be taking place. Change occurs both nationally and internationally and the surroundings within which organizations are planned and operate their businesses. The modern world is becoming more multifaceted everyday and changes that seem to be taking place in distant places far away from us seem to be affecting us every day and this has made us more aware of how linked we are to one another. The changes taking place in the modern world are also constantly demanding that organizations must recognize their nature which is holistic and how their constituent parts relate and affect one another. Change is gradually forcing not only organizations but individuals as well to begin seeing the bigger depiction of how occurrences are affecting them and vice versa. Leadership in situations of change is about desiring to progress further than the limitations of the traditional roles. It is a role that has considerable demands because it involves transitioning into a wider variety of accountability causing major changes in the life of both the leader and his followers as well as in the life of the organization and its parents if any. This paper looks at the role of the leader in managing organizational change. In doing so, the paper will look at the changing role of the leader. In this paper, factors such as those of change in mindsets and the approach that is needed in order for the organization to progress beyond the traditional management roles. The paper will also look at how these changes influence the organizations which must also transform in order to accommodate or support the change in leadership. In addition to this, this paper will look at real organizations in the context of organizational change management. The paper will look at three major areas of focus namely; the objective and the mode of leadership, proficiency and tools and the culture that a leader must create both inside the organization and in the extensive venture. Discussion Part 1 “Leading organizational change” has been used so broadly that it is hardly possible for many people to really understand the real meaning of the phrase. There are three instances where “leading organizational change” has been applied namely: In actions that do nothing to add value such as “restructuring and reengineering” which according to Nanda are activities that only endeavor to basically change the way in which the pie is divided among the “stockholders” and subsequently among workers (Nanda), a situation that is bound to bring divisiveness and which any person sitted at the opposite side of the dividing table is likely to resist. The second instance is one that has been referred to as transforming leadership which involves interacting with others in a manner that encourages elevating one another to eminent heights of inspiration and integrity (Burns) . According to Nanda, Roosevelt and Gandhi are two of the leaders who demonstrated transformational leadership, Roosevelt through the new deal and Gandhi through his “non-violent campaign against British rule in India” (Nanda). Organizational settings where success if achieved through the means of joint effort. According to Nanda, this third type which encorages organizational leadership that encourages productive output by means of specific organizaed groups is hardly the best when it comes to leading organizational change (Nanda). Case in Study: Due to the geographical distance between amenities in silicon Valley California and Bangalore, India, and the differences that exist in the programming aptitudes of the relevant members of staff of these two regions, one software company divided up programming projects into sections that could be handled separately in order to save on costs of communication. The tasks that required more advanced knowledge were taken to Silicon Valley while those that required less advanced knowledge were taken to Bangalore (Nanda). But then, in the process of carrying out those projects, situations changed and new technological innovations in bandwidth capacity led to a possibility of internetworking at lower costs and at the same time, the staff in Bangalore had by then become as proficient as those in Silicon Valle (Nanda)y. The CEO of the company had recommended an allocation for restructuring believing that there was a need to speed up development in order to avoid high cost of communication. The restructuring plan required the formation of a team which led to a struggle on how to manage change. This is one of the situations where change management was needed critically but instead of addressing the challenges at hand namely: Improving the proficiency of workers in Bangalore, the CEO took a less effective path of restructuring which probably ended up costing his organization more money than he would have spend training the workers in Bangalore. In the end, they ended up. He also cost his company a lot of time to carry out the same task than sit would have taken them if a more strategic plan had been adopted As shown above, leading change has been viewed differently by different people and there are clearly different and diverse types of change that organizations experience and create (Flamholtz and Randle). Change could be “transformational, incremental or extensive and it could be premeditated or even procedural” (Flamholtz and Randle). The causes of change are also different and they could emerge from within the organization (internal) or from without (external), or by a combination of both. All factors considered, change is change. It is homogeneous, and most of the literature on organizational change treat it as such. Organizational change basically defined is about creating something fresh in a fastidious manner regardless of the nature of that thing or the circustances. The end result is always a changeover or an transformation. Therefore change and transformation are two different things. Change is something that is different from the norm whereas transformation is changing over from one form to another. Change has always being perceived to be a difficult thing to attain or to go through and this is because it involves changing behaviour from the onset to the end regardless of the people involved whether CEOs, managers or employees. It shifts people from their familiar territory to unfamiliar territories thus creating resistance. Various factors contribute to resistance to change such as ideals and custom. Ideals an dcustoms can either promote or demote the willingness of those involved in adopting change. Case in Study: Universities serve as the best example of demonstarting resistanc in that they consist of “faciulties, students and administrative staff”. some universities have culture that promotes change while others don’t. ideals related to ranks, publications, priviledges grants awards could stand in the ways of change. Silmilarly, organizations such as IBM, HP, disney, J&J, Wal-Mart among others could have similar ideals with regard to the founders of the companies and whatever ideals they entrenched in the company that could have been upheld over the years (Flamholtz and Randle). A company like Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (3M) for instance has a culture that promotes change and novelty and which supports employees to pursue new ideas with regard to products and which also rewards their efforts if they are fruitful. “Extended success” is another factor that could lead to resistance to change since it tends to generate lethargy due to a mentality the boat should not be rocked or it might capsize (Flamholtz and Randle). Case in Study: Eastman Kodak was once a grand corporation and it is that grandeur that led to its downfall and subsequent stagnation due to a culture of inaction as other corporations invented the instantaneous “photography 36mm cameras and VCRs” (Flamholtz and Randle). Inaction might seem like the best thing in certain circumstances but it is the greatest barrier to change and novelty. Another factor that could be an impediment to change is the “height of investment” regardless of whether anything meaningful is taking place because it tends to an apathy to anything that might require more money to execute. This leads to companies continued use of old management systems that are not up to date with what they need simply because they want to avoid expenses and any possibility of menace. The belief is not unfounded at all due to the fact that much has already been spend on the existing systems but a continual use of an outdated system on the other hand is an impediment to development and achievement (Flamholtz and Randle). For instance, a certain $50 company had a computer system that was “considered state of the art” but within five years, the system became outdated but the company still continued using it believing that it would cost more money to purchase an up to date. With time, they could not find the right expertise to work with it and spend more money in finding such expertise. Another factor that could lead to resistance to change is company culture due to its likelihood to create “haughtiness, hypercriticism and fear of failure” (Uhl-Bien et al). Case in Study: A big entertainment company came to be described by insiders as a “one-mistake company” because anyone that made a single mistake in that company would have his /her employment terminated regardless of the type of mistake and whether it was made in the process of seeking to improve or not. This in turn led to employees just following orders blindly for fear of challenging order and getting sucked (Flamholtz and Randle). Resistance to change can occur both at the company and personal levels. For instance, IBM as a company was aware of the competitive threat that existed with regard to PCs and established that belief ending up it hard to adapt to change. This was partly because of the belief of some of its employees as well as the general culture that existed in the company leading to ten years of a lack of innovation and a turmoil that saw 250,000 employees lose their jobs and a change in top leadership which led to a new IBM. According to Janis, “groupthink” a terms normally used to describe the behavior of a group to build up a common attitude towards things that is not open to any ideas from outside is one of the biggest barricade to change (Janis).The following part will look at the role of the leader in dealing with all the above factors of change Role of Leadership in managing Change in an organization The leader There is clearly a demonstration that leaders need to display well build up competencies not only within the immediate organizations that they serve but in their industries as well in order to manage change effectively. The ability of a leader to create a forceful image for the organization to enable it to join forces and come up with new and sensible decisions regarding the business in the midst of the change is a basis for strong leadership order. However in order for a leader to manage organizational change effectively, He or she should be in a position to broaden his scope of capabilities to be able to transition smoothly into the new role of managing change. A leader who evolves is not only proficient at becoming a leader for himself; he also develops a strong interest in building capacity and the capabilities of the organization that he is leading. A leader who is efficient develops his instruction approach and particularly when he is dealing with organizational change. His role is to use his fine built up commercial experience and individual understanding, combined with the pragmatic vision to widen his role. An evolving leader should also understand the essence to expanding a well thought-out plan with regard to succession. Leading Change There is nowhere else where the skills of an evolved leader are more needed in than in an organization where change is taking place. Many researches all over the world have shown that change is inevitable and that it is happening more rapidly than many people expected in the last two or three years. The ability of a leader who can show the way in times change in a practical and efficient way is very much needed for the success of any organization. Leaders of organizations should therefore a very detailed understanding of industry performance forces on a very broad scale than any other person in the company and find ways of distribution and develop the insight that this perception offers. The role of the leader I n organizational leadership has multiple dimensions and it encompasses leading change internally (within the organization), leading change in the industry and leading change in the partnership arena (with regard to dealers and clientele and as part of an ending-to-ending tune-up tactic). The biggest challenge that leaders must deal with when it comes to leading change that is accelerating is to deal with the risks that are involved. The consequences of change can sometimes be quite costly if the right alleviation measures are not put in place. According to a report by IBM in the year 2008, only about 40% of project aimed at transformational change in organizations succeesded and that it is only when leaders wo have mastererd change are involved when organizational change can truly take place. It is therefore the role of leaders to ensure that they master the processes for change for change to occur successfully (IBM Global Business Services). Mastering change is about being able to constantly relate approaches of formal chnange management across all the stages of a venture or agenda and taking into account factors such as the allocation of the required budgetary resources, talent and huma resources. The study by IBM also showed that the main elements of change management positioned arranged from the most needed for purposes of attaining suceess in change management are inthis order: “the softer skills in change management together with management, communication and a change in organizational culture” (IBM Global Business Services). The role of the leader in organizational change management agenda is to be visible in the tactical, procedural, profit-making and human resource management activities of the organization with regard to approaches that affect the organization. The leader is therefore required to expand his own capability, ability and an intensity of knowledge in order to enable his role to move the organization beyond the challenges of organizational change, Consequently, the leader should also develop the potential of his staff mambers to prepare them for leadership roles and also have change agents within th eorganization to help in the process of change. Leading organizational chnange is also about leading by example and adopting training skills that are capable of helping everyone in the organization to achieve their preferred performance level. Structuring various skills Another role of the leader in organizational management is to guide and support alteration and improvement. The leader should do this by making a change in the agenda of the business and then executing it through to perfection. This he should also pass on to his team or group of teams at all levels. Leading change also requires that a leader should change the culture of the organization so that all the members of his staff can become practical and knowledgeable intermediaries of change. This enables the pitch and standards for change to be set throughout the organization. Unifying Teams Another role of a leader in managing organizational change is to create healthy associations at the members of his Board of directors who are his practical peers. Once that is doen then he is expected to make sure that he gets the support of all the functional teams in the organization. This mean s that he has to practically and personally co-position various within the organization to play various roles in the processes of change. This enables an enhanced level of dialogue within all groups within the organization. Building Active partnerships The leader must also ensure that there is steadfast, expenditure effectual service delivery for there to be success in the organization. This factor is very important since it ensures that the drive for transformation succeds regardles of the economic times. The leader need to ensure that he/she invents new forms of sourcing for purposes of achieving more at lower costs while keeping in mind that change is costly (Sherif). A leader is required to restructure his sourcing strategies and bring down his suppliers to manageable levels that will not require a big overhead to maintain. This in turn creates the resources that will fund innovation and development with intentionally selected associates which also allows him to rely on expert skills that balance the ones that he has within his organization (Uhl-Bien et al) Case in Study: The Tata Group of India is one of the greatest and higly successful business groips in the world and one of the most significant groups in India. Founded in the 1990s, it was a typical example of a “paternalistic” company. This was partly due to the market situation in India at that time which was characterised by shortage of resources and people had to wait for some time until somethignthat they needed could be produced, Competition and efficiency were low and the environment was not conducive for business at all. Whatever resources that Tata had enabled the co pany to maintain its employees but that was just about it. The situation was very discouraging in terms of competition; but the 1990s saw a wind of change sweep through India that mandated Tata to adapt new ways of doing business for the sake of getting accustomed to the a new period of competition by adopting new values an d aligning the activities and behaviors of its workforce and external partners with the goals and objective of the company (Flamholtz and Randle). Building relationships that are based on Trust Leading organizational change is about driving goals in a dual way and distributing risk and incentives in an equal way. Leading chag eis about wearing away the boundaries tghatg exist between the organization and other partners and it is the role of the leader to do so. Building confidence and Vision (Barnard) It is the role of the leaders to create a vision for change and then distribute and share it with the rest of the partners of the organization. This enables the rest of the teams to become more confident in that vision. Th erole of the leader is to work with partnering suplliers to convey intended benefits through the application of state of the art capabilities in expertise, improvement, business skill or best performance. This is change managemen tbased based on the sourcing model. According to (Marcketti and Kozar), leaders should possess professional and specialist service administration capabilities that take both “short and long term” view of industry prerequisites in order for them to effectively manage change. Communication Grant is of the opinion that the the curent leadership setting requires thatsystems for change should also necompass a common language in order for change to take place smoothly. He goes on to say that this encoyrages a common base of specislised systems of knowledge leading to a shared meaning and the recognition of individual comprehension sphere of influence (Grant). Case in Study: Australian Westfield Group, a manager of shopping centers which builds, refurbishes and manages shopping buildings in New Zealand , United State, Australia and the United Kingdom is a good exmple of a company whose leaders were able to transform it from a local company in Australi to a global conglomerate (Flamholtz and Randle). The co-founder, Frank Lowywho was the executive chairman in the year 2001 together with his son son Peter Lowy who was the then Group Managing Director were sitted at Amstel Hotel in Amsterdam Discussing a plan on how Westfield could acquire Rodamco NV, a Dutch based company whose stock was listed under Amsterdam Stoc Exchange and which owned several properties in the real Estate industry in Northern America. As they continues discussing the imminent business venture, of a company based in Australia that invested in Australian currency wanting to buy European stock in Euros in a desire to own a shopping center whose value was in dollars, they had an reveletion (Flamholtz and Randle). They became aware of the fact that This would turn Westfield into a global organization and that the profitable and viable real estate industry would then follow in their footsteps. This led both investors as well as other investors in the industry to realize that Westfield needed to begin to transform itself from within to become a global leader and rise from being a mere Australian company. The example of the growth of Westfield is one that gives insight into how the leaders of a company managed growth and development as well as globalization through varipus stages and challenges that are related to expanding in a diversified world. Today, Westfield is in another stage of operating numerous global companies across the four countris and beyond. This is because the eladers of Westfield were able to recognize change and take a step towards managing it (Flamholtz and Randle) Conclusion The role of a leader in organizational management is to ensure a smooth transtition by putting the right measures in place. These measures include: resources, agents of change and a plan among other factor discussed herein. List of References Barnard, C. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press., 2008. Burns, J. Leadership. New York: Harper and Row, 1978. Flamholtz, E. and Y. Randle. Leading Strategic Change: Bridging Theory and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Grant, R. "The knowledge-based view of the firm." Choo, C. and N. Bontis. The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 133-148. IBM Global Business Services. Making change Work. New York: IBM, 2008. Janis, I. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972. Marcketti, S. and J. Kozar. "Leading with relationships: a small firm example." The Learning Organization Vol 14 No. 2 (2000): 142-203. Nanda, A. Implementing Organizational Change. Boston: Harvard Business School, 1996. Shrif, K. "An adaptive strategy for managing knowledge in organizations." Journal of Knowledge Management Vol 10 No. 4 (2006): 72-80. Uhl-Bien, M., R. Marion and B. McKelvey. "Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era." Uhl-Bien, M. and R. Marion. Complexity leadership: Conceptual foundations. Charlotte, NC: IAP/Information Age Publ., 2008. Part 1. Read More