Managing Changes - Focusing on Recent Changes in Australia National University School of Music - Case Study Example

Running Head: MANAGEMENT Managing Changes: Focusing on Recent Changes in Australia National University School of Music. Client Inserts His/her Name Client Inserts Grade Course Client Inserts Tutor’s Name 19/09/2012 Introduction In any organization, changes are expected from time to time (Sengupta, 2006). This follows after major managerial decisions are made but anyhow, changes are meant for improvement of the various organizational operations where the main goal is to develop the organizations all round (Sengupta, 2006). However, there are many factors leaders need to think about first for the fact that decisions to be made so as to trigger a change do not always guarantee that the organization in question will benefit. The end effect, as a matter of fact, can lead to worsening off of the organizational goals and mission (Chhabra, 2002). This study focuses on the implications of periodical changes in a typical organization, strategies to cope up with the changes and alternatives. The study features changes that were proposed by the management of the Australian National University as at May the 3rd 2012, where the management decided to reduce the number of its workforce in its school of music (ABC News, 2012, May 3). The decision saw 23 academic staff and nine administrative staff lose their jobs (ABC News, 2012, May 3). The decision was described as rather sudden and unfounded from various outsiders’ opinions and the victims, especially the students (ABC News, 2012, May 3). Despite the plan to replace the number of the cut workforce by 20 new ones, workload must have increased due to the suggested net reduction in the workforce. Similarly, change management skills are required at all costs due to the inherent risk of changing patterns of operations and connecting the new workforce to the organizational programs, proceedings and culture (Harris & Field, 1999; Fuller & Ludema, 2000). The formula taken here is a descriptive account from an onlooker who is a potential manager and/or a leader in a similar scenario. The role of this paper is to analyse such sudden decisions, suggest best ways and options to help the management team absorb the immediate shock from the changes and their effects, and possible alternative courses of actions (Sengupta, 2006). For a leader of an organization, preparation for such changes must be underpinned in advance hand in hand with the potential strategies to cope up with the changes or better, manage the changes. For all this, the management goals and the mission of any organization must be the main focus. Overview The Australian National University is a school of music and each year it produces substantial numbers of students. While the management efforts remain on focus to maintain and improve high quality of its products, major decisions made are all aggregated into policies (Chhabra, 2002). Reduction of the number of workers is a policy that implies that while one party wins, the other loses. However, reduction of number of workers can be detrimental to both parties if not well addressed. For example, a sudden reduction of the teaching staff momentarily affects the students in session. Similarly, the reduction in the number of administrative positions means a sharp and sudden increase in the workload to the retained members of staff and this can interfere with the quality of services offered at the university to the outsiders, the management and the students. Certainly, losing of jobs by various employees translates to introduction of potential financial constrains for them and their members of their families. That has never been the intensions of any management. However, if such a change is necessary for the development of such an organization, then the management of the Australian National University did the right thing. Arguably, there are a number of options (Cummings & Worley, 2008) that the management could have considered in the first place. As the changes in the university focused on improving the quality of their products – students – alternatives could be training the incumbent members of the staff (Sengupta, 2006). But that was not to happen as the quick decisions made could not give room for such considerations. STRATEGIES TO MANAGE CHANGES Preparations and Precision Preparation for changes includes performing risk analysis and planning in advance (Kotter, 1995). In the case of Australian National University, the major aim was to improve the quality of the learning process by re-recruiting qualified trainers. However, the guarantee of the on-going students was not looked into. It is better for instance to measure the academic effect of changing (Kotter, 1995) a particular trainer to a new one on the students. A good leader would have conducted a comprehensive SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and threats) analysis so as to balance the strengths and the weaknesses such a decision faces (Griffin, 2007). Correcting views from the various stakeholders (Fuller & Ludema, 2000) including the students especially for major and radical changes is extremely important (Axelrod, 2001). In other words, changes must be agreed upon by all the affected parties (Fuller & Ludema, 2000). This is part of ‘accountability to all stakeholders’ multi-organizational culture (Fuller & Ludema, 2000). Following the various complaints that followed, it is clear that not all the affected members were include and/or represented before the radical change. For the Australia National University, the timing of the change (Axelrod, 2001; Griffin, 2007) was not good at all. The effects of the changes to be made in a particular organization depend on the time given to the preparation of models (Sengupta, 2006). When goals are planned for, long term and gradual efforts constitute an alternative rather than triggering sudden and unfounded decisions (Axelrod, 2001) to cause a particular change. Adequate time must be accorded to prepare the victims for the shock (Axelrod, 2001) thereof. For example, the sudden sacking of employees render would trigger stressful lives ahead. Therefore, incentives must be given in forms of chance to negotiate on such a decision on them so that one agrees on terms first, and compensation including all benefits that the employees could have accrued if he or she remained within the organization (Lacob & Pantea, 2008). Giving employees enough time for looking for jobs elsewhere is of substantial importance. Similarly, the retained employees will be subject to extra workload and in some cases, even multitasking can be required. That is why allowing them the chance to suggest their views for a major decision (Lacob & Pantea, 2008) becomes important. Alternatively, substantial training (Hough, 1992) for the remaining workers on how to program and budget their time well to fit in the multitasking culture would be the first priority. In general terms, it is important to ask questions such as: how will the entire workforce/students react to the new changes (Hough, 1992)? Will they worsen off or better off? Forming a Panel of Trusted Leaders in an Organization Once a change has been implemented, an organization leader has no better option than to work with the new policies. As a leader, encouraging teamwork is the best tool to counter the opposing motives and to focus well on the implementation of the new policies (Singh, 2010). In fact, changes are meant to better things for the organization and this can only be done by implementation (Herman, 2000). Of course reduction of the number of employees comes with restructuring the existing policies (Lacob & Pantea, 2008) in terms of duties and division of work. This calls for teamwork spirit (Singh, 2010). But attaining cohesiveness in working as a team towards the mission of the organization has never been easy (Singh, 2010) especially when new and irritating policies are in work. A competitive leader must establish a group of leaders preferably from all departments of an organization (Coutts, 2007). These leaders must prove qualities of corporate leadership and who are qualified academically and in influential positions. This is called forming a coalition that is strong enough to convince the entire organization workforce about the need to work with new policies (Coutts, 2007). The panel will then establish a framework of duties, procedures and practice in the new operational condition. This panel also has the role to ensure that the new employees are absorbed in the operational culture and ethics of the organization, and at their respective capacities, they should be agents of change at their respective departments (Harris & Field, 1999; Chhabra, 2002; Coutts, 2007). Working together is a business principle that should be first established and enforced to ensure success is achieved. As a matter of fact, as a leader, it would not be advisable to over possess power to lead but rather coordinate and mobilize potential leaders. For Australian National University management, it would be advisable to use student leaders as well so that to spread the spirit of togetherness and to underpin the importance of the new changes. This will essentially be an effort to eliminate the tensions that arose once the change intension was launched. It is unquestionable that the change was made for the betterment of education in the university, but it requires a leader with wise strategies to engage all the stakeholders into appreciating this. Strategies, as indicated above, are meant to erode individual concerns from different members of the organization and replace them with the bigger picture of the development of the whole university. Refreshing the panellists is also important. This could be done from time to time. This involves replacing or reshuffling some of the members of the top agents of change. This is meant to attract new ideas and insights for the needed change. Realigning the Workforce Structure With the interference with the number of employees, as in the case in Australia National University, work arrangements must be reviewed (Coutts, 2007). This is to identify the essential extra work type that does not have an attendant. Cutting the number of employees actually means that the work the sacked group of employees were doing will need replacements. Since the change resulted to a net reduction in 12 members of the staff, their immediate workload must be share and/or redistributed to the remaining employees as well as the newly recruited. The role of the manager is to identify the potentials of the remaining workforce so he or she can know what tasks to bestow to a particular personality (Coutts, 2007). Essentially, each responsibility should be assigned to a person with potential in the respective field (Chhabra, 2002). Similarly, each worker should occupy a slot where his or her effect will be felt most (Chhabra, 2002). A strategic plan for this role should be prepared in advance before the changes are actually launched (Axelrod, 2001). Some tasks could be unified or assembled especially if they are considered as to be serving similar role (Sengupta, 2006). For example, the registration of the students and issuance of apartments for the students could be simplified to a singular process that could be served by the same kind of workforce (Chhabra, 2002) say the registry or the office of the dean of students. Where need arises, training the employees further would be a good undertaking to ensure that they are able to multitask (Sengupta, 2006). Similarly, training could be designed to empower workers with additional knowledge (Griffin, 2007), which may also serve as a motivational procedure. This is rather called capacity building such that the employees under training earn a better advantage for promotion and so on (Griffin, 2007). Creating a Visionary Lead and Communicating For the implementation panel to attain enough momentum, a leader must produce well-crafted but a realistic and feasible vision (Coutts, 2007). The vision should be spiced with achievable timelines and the reasons why the proposed vision suits its particular purpose. As a leader, the immediate step for this call will be to identify all the values that are attached to the change. These are communicated directly to the established panellists who represent various sectors of the management (Coutts, 2007). This means that the employees will be informed on the specific visionary values that they should focus on achieving. Each employee is then given a breakdown of specific duties with elements of the new change so that they immediately focus on them. There should be a clear indication of positive change all round the management (Cummings & Worley, 2008). For the students, the manager of the organization must prepare some information to reassure the students that there will be no adversities in their learning programs. This includes things like quality assurance in academics and the need for tolerance (Inglis, 2005). This in recognition of the fact that such changes as the one being discussed here could lower confidence levels and in extreme cases, restlessness and turbulence (Inglis, 2005). This could be done through informatory notes on the billboards and notice boards (Coutts, 2007). Better still, the leaders of the students unions could be used to take the students through a gentle and cognitive change. Questions raised by individuals could be answered collectively through press releases and school magazines and so on. Identifying Opposition and Responding For the success of an organization, all the stakeholders must work with a common goal (Fuller & Ludema, 2000). After communicating the vision and the values hypothesized, it is not a guarantee that all the stakeholders (Fuller & Ludema, 2000) and especially the working staff and the students will respond positively. A good leader will perform an audit on the progress while concentrating on the individuals in opposition (Coutts, 2007; Griffin, 2007). The function of the manager is to identify deviant behaviour as far as the working policy is concerned (Hough, 1992). After identifying them, efforts to reclaim them should be established (Herman, 2000; Chhabra, 2002). Reclaiming here is taken to mean that, rather than fire them; they should be convinced and directed towards accepting working with the new system. However, the new terms of work need to be rational all-round the management and the members of the staff should be treated equitably with regard to the new responsibilities and tasks layout (Herman, 2000). For example, if the work rates in the Australia National University are to increase in such a way that for every member of the staff sacked without replacement means additional of duties and responsibility to a retained worker, then the additional work should be rewarded with at least some increase in the salary. The ultimate goal is to create an institution where every stakeholder feels motivated and thus enjoys his or her work (Herman, 2000). Above all, the climax is attained when the audits indicate zero resistance to the new working terms (Griffin, 2007). It is important to note that frustrated employees may only work to earn their living while their interest in the development of the organization remains minimal (Lacob & Pantea, 2008) whereof their respective productivity within the organization diminishes. Creating Short-Term Targets The idea of creating short-term targets is to create chances to test success of the entire change initiatives (Coutts, 2007). It is at the heart of any manager to realize signs of success at early stages of the change regime. Short-term targets can be solely set by the manager himself without attracting attention of other stakeholders (Coutts, 2007). When one of the short-term targets (which are segments of the long-term targets) succeeds, the manager becomes motivated (Coutts, 2007) and refuelled which helps him or her focus even more on the long term goals of the change. However, proper analysis of the risks and possible failure must be critically done (Kotter, 1995). Important to note is that a failure in terms of short-term targets may trigger a self-defeatist motive which is dangerous to the achievement long term goals (Kotter, 1995; Griffin, 2007). Motivating Successful Agents of Change In a properly managed organization, motivation of the employees is one of the core functions of the management (Griffin, 2007). Motivational plans must be included so that the progress of the implementation of change is kept in a continuous mode (Coutts, 2007). Employee’s work that yields better results should be rewarded appropriately. The rewarding programs should cover all the employees at different levels and only the best performance may be rewarded (Coutts, 2007). The idea is to keep the employees at toes in the process of enforcing change (Griffin, 2007). It would rather be frustrating if the projects of change do not perform as initially hypothesized or underperform. Therefore, equally, recognition of the stakeholders’ contribution towards positive and successful results must be recognized (Fuller & Ludema, 2000). When an employee is properly motivated, he or she tries to keep his or her loyalty to the organization at heart and thus works harder and produces even more. Where the goal is to achieve teamwork spirit in an organization as reiterated above, motivation is the right and effective strategy (Singh, 2010). Anchoring The Changes into the Organization’s Culture As a leader of an organization, the idea of changes could better be cemented into the organizational culture (Harris & Field, 1999). In each and every meeting made with stakeholders (especially the top agents of change and the employees), a manager should develop a culture of insisting on the changes he or she is looking forward to bring into the picture (Harris & Field,1999). It is important to incessantly talk of positive things the proposed change will trigger in the organization (Coutts, 2007; Cummings & Worley, 2008). Better still, it is important to acknowledge any progress achieved, highlight the responsibilities of the staff members while ensuring successful efforts for change are rewarded (Fuller & Ludema, 2000). This is to keep the workforce on toes for their respective roles and reassuring them that their efforts are very meaningful to the organization’s welfare (Inglis, 2005). CONCLUSION Making changes in an organization is a process mainly meant for positive changes for the best of the organization’s welfare (Cummings & Worley, 2008). However, sound preparations for changes, as a leader, should be given enough time (Axelrod, 2001). The reason for this is that sudden changes in the organizational structure may trigger negative effects to the operational efforts within an organization. For this note, the sudden reduction of workforce in the Australia National University could be termed as dangerous to the management. A group of employees (both the remaining and the outgoing) and the students are likely to lower the confidence levels in the management of the university in question. Whether such a change is meant to make things better, preparation to manage the changes (Axelrod, 2001) into better results should be in place. To this end, this study has suggested various undertakings that a manager could do to absorb the shock of the changes. These include: ensuring proper preparations; forming a panel of trusted leaders in an organization; realigning the workforce structure; creating a visionary lead and communicating; identifying opposition and responding; creating short-term targets; motivating successful agents of change and; anchoring the changes into organization’s culture. References ABC News. (2012, May 3). Major cuts to ANU School of Music. Retrieved http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-03/anu-school-of-music-facing-major- changes/3987288 19/09/2012. Axelrod, R.H. (2001). Terms of Engagement: Changing the Way We Change the Organizations. Journal of Quality and Participation, 24 (1) pp.22-27. Chhabra, T. N. (2002). Organization Theory and Behaviour. Delhi: Dhanpat Rai and Co. (P) Ltd. Pp.36-46. Coutts, P. (2007). Kotter’s 8 Steps to Successful Change. Sirius Meetings, pp.1-3. Cummings, T.G. and Worley, C.G. (2008). Organization Development and Change. (9th Ed.). Singapore: Cengage Learning. Pp.49-64. Fuller, C. and Ludema, J.D. (2000). Appreciative Future Search: Involving the Whole System in Positive Organization Change. Organization Development Journal, 18 (2), pp.29-41. Griffin, R.W. (2007). Fundamentals of Management. (5th Ed.). NY: Cengage Learning. pp.331- 53. Harris, S.G. and Field, H.S. (1999). Making Changes Permanent: A Model for Institutionalizing Change Interactions. In Pasmore W.A. and Woodman, R.W. (eds.) Research in Organizational Change and Development. (Vol.12). Stamford, CT: Jai Press. Pp.97-128. Herman, S. (2000). Counterpoints: Notes on OD for the 21st Century, Part 1. Organization Development Journal, 18 (2), pp.108-110. Hough, L.M. (1992). Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2nd Ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychological Press. pp. 719-82. Inglis, A. (2005). Quality Improvement, Quality Assurance, and Benchmarking: Comparing two frameworks for managing quality processes in open and distance learning. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for Staff Learning and Educational Development, Victoria University. Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), pp.59-67. Lacob, M.L. and Pantea, V.V. (2008). Managing Change in Organizations. Research Journal of Agriculture Science, 40(3), pp.3-17. Sengupta, N. (2006). Managing Change in Organizations. New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Pp.12-29. Singh, K. (2010). Organization Behaviour. Delhi: PEARSON. Pp.14-27. Read More