Organizational Culture and Change Management - Assignment Example

Organizational Culture and Change Management xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Course xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Course Instructor xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date Submitted Part A extent which OCCM theory simply records management practice of the time that the theory was developed as opposed to being in advance of practice and therefore providing new thinking It is observed that the background of Organizational Culture and Change Management (OCCM) widely serves to examine the various approaches towards organizational effectiveness basing on their various operations. The evolution defined in OCCM can be traced from the 19th century to present (Burnes 1998). Understanding the various facets of OCCM that are known to make up the field of management that enables the attainment of organizational theory while at the same time operating in a more dynamic business environment (Sheldrake 1996). It is through learning this kind of background that this study aims at defining that at all time, the various numerous key proponents of OCCM are reactive in their approaches towards organization effectiveness. Nevertheless, this does not allow individuals to say that the school of thought does not introduce features of ideology found in management that usually transcend to advance organization and the approaches to effectiveness within organizations. The classical approach (Scientific Rational approach) which was introduced by Frederick Taylor towards organizational effectiveness is widely focused on internal organizational functions putting a great emphasis on structure and system which are viewed to be key factors towards a successful organization(Burnes 1998). Here are some of the main principles defined in this school of thought: The only way that is known to be the best while carrying out organizational functions are determined through the use of scientific methods Employees should be highly motivated by financial incentives The best person for a job is that individual who is mentally and physically capable handling that specific task The scientific rational approach was widely used in the 1890s whereby industrialization of organization was at its core (McNamara 2011). With the great use of standardized and regimented task, this approach gave an innovative approach which ensured that organizational personnel understand what they are expected to do. That is the best employee is proven by experimental results. It is quite evident that that classical approach was more focused on hard approach towards to management where organization employees were seen as a source deployed as part to achieve effectiveness. Even with great resistance from those who portrayed it as one which was ill treating, scientific approach towards management was gaining its stand in organizations (McLean 2005). The advocated the participation of employees in the managing of organizations (Boddy 2008) and believed that who better to contribute to the work than those who partake in the work processes themselves, therefore removing the “science” behind the work process, and encouraging innovation as well as commitment through the use of democracy(McLean 2005). In the year 1880 to1949, Professor George Elton Mayo spearheaded what is currently known as Hawthorne Experiments which came to be in the 1920s’ to carry out research in behavioral patterns of employees within work environment. The results of these studies indicated that the Classical approach to efficacy failed to distinguish the human side to management (McLean, 2005). It is important to recognise human relation approach through: People are social and emotional beings as compared to economic-rational beings Organizational should be viewed as social constructs and not mechanistic forms Organizational should be governed rules and procedures which should be defined within both formal and informal constructs The human relation school of thought that was adopted in the 1930s’ and it has been perceived to bring significant change in the organization. There are various advents of human resource departments such as behavioural sciences such as the X, Y theory that have assisted in understanding employees’ requirement (McNamara 2011). It is evidence that both human relation and classical approach are perceived to offer “one best way” towards organizational effectiveness (Burnes 1998). Contingency theory is another important theory in the history of management. It widely places focus that management theories should be contingent in any kind of situation faced by an organization. The contingency approach highly proposes that: Organizations should be viewed as open systems Every approach should be treated as situational based There is no particular best way for all organizations Contingency proponents advocate the establishment of an organization which can cope with various uncertainties of change considering that some functions should be performed in a predictable and stable way (Boddy 2008). This approach to efficacy introduced an original outlook taken by the key writers, with content that had been overlooked by the Classical and Human Relations approach theorists. Mullins (2007) asserts that, this approach describes that performance of the organisation is depends on how well the organisational arrangement ‘matches the existing contingencies’ (Mullins, 2007, pg. 615). These contingencies included size, technology and the environment; all of which were new scope to the approach of organisational effectiveness. Another approach that is described in OCCM is the culture excellence approach which widely compels culture to be the epicentre of organizational effectiveness. This approach came about by way of successful research from American companies where results indicate that it combined both soft and hard practices which are known to bring strategies together with highly orienting management styles (Burnes 1998). This approach further endorses the excessive use of mind instead of strength where there is constant reinvention of employees which is termed to be motivational. Part B How useful OCCM theory is to contemporary “real” organisations It is observed that OCCM is the backbone towards organization sounded most of which has been established beside the commencement of theorization of management. OCCM have been known to embody organizations with more emphasis to structure, leadership and system approach normally termed to be suitable. Various approaches linked OCCM have clearly been seen to create long lasting measures in their practices in today’s organizations (McLean 2005). For instance, Max Webber theory that was adopted between the year 1864 and 1920 known as the theory of bureaucracy identify organizational administrative functions as complex and rational. Contemporary organisations are faced with increasingly changing and demanding environments which necessitate the organisation to frequently reorganize its interior environment as a way of meeting up the various essentialities of changes (McLean, 2005). McLean (2005) asserts that, the chief functions that are significant in the delivery of such working efficacy and efficiency are the administrative functions. Weber’s approach defined by the contribution of bureaucracy brought about organizational understanding of the importance of ‘formal organisations, together with the effects of roles, rules and hierarchies’. This is significant in such organisations are more able to adapt to a bureaucratic arrangement as they experience development. Further, Gilbreths (1868-1924), has constantly been involved in making significant contribution to from organisations t to contemporary organisations with their concept of ‘micro-motion study’. Abraham Maslow advocate the above approach in the year 1908 to 1970 where he identified employee needs outside their work places through designing a hierarchy that describes their needs (McLean, 2005). Through such a design, organization were able to improve various practices within the organization, where employers take intrinsic needs- such as recognition into consideration not forgetting extrinsic needs- perks company asserts and other responsibilities such as Corporate Social Responsibility (Gostick and Chester, 2007). Through proper understanding that all organisations are required to be open systems. This is defined by contingency theory whereby their theorist espouses the establishment of organisations that able to adapt to the constantly present uncertainty and changes that businesses faces daily (Boddy, 2008). Today, organisations are known to operate in a global environment so as to be successful. Thompson (2010) asserts that, the consequence of global environment is considered to be very limited control over their environment, i.e., the macro-economy In order to ensure survival, following the guidelines of Boddy (2008), organisations need to be adaptive and recognise that there are external factors that affect the organisation, they need not be complacent and encourage creativity and innovation, all of which quantifies what was espoused by contingency theorists. From historical view of culture where culture was considered as a classroom topic with less application on daily operation, it is evident that today this notion has changed to one which has actualization in all companies whether big or small (Burnes 2008). It is important to understand that organizations should understand their culture through consulting with other companies so as to achieve maximum efficiencies that are co-operated in definable objectives. It is at this point that organizations should be able to define what culture is. Culture is how organization carries out their operation. It is essential to understand that in order to achieve the alignment of desired organizational objectives; it is good that employers are able to create culture diversification. OCCM theory ensures that organizations are understood through a predesigned cultural lens with a wider focus on attitudes, beliefs and values defined by individuals. It assists in ensuring that changes within global market places are affecting the business in a more positive way thus establishing a positive competition (Markus 2004). In connection to traditional management practices, organizational culture and change management theory ensures that there is appositive shift of highly rationale theories that are perceived to be traditional to those advance theories that are more fluid and irrational. Further this theory put emphasis to a contemporary organization since it classifies organization with four dimensions of change management. These dimensions are namely power distance, uncertainty and avoidance, masculinity and individualism. Power widely defines the extent to which organizational power is dispersed whereas uncertainty avoidance defines the extent at which culture feels endangered because of certain unfamiliar takings (Burnes 2004). When differentiating on individualism and masculinity, individualism is defined as degree at which individual requirement is essential whereas masculinity defines the extent to which culture divides masculine and feministic characteristics among workers in an organization (Steinwachs 1999). Managing culture is significant as there is informal culture, which in many cases is more dominant than its formal component, which might have unpleasant effect on the organisation’s performance (Boddy, 2008). Another reason for managing organisational culture for contemporary organisations is because national culture (Burnes, 2008) may have an impact on the organisational culture; this is more evident in the global market. OCCM theory has broadened our understanding of organisations as structures, system run operatives, and most significantly, it has made us understand the people behind the machines. The usefulness of these theories cannot be overstated enough. It is in understanding that contemporary organisation decision makers can utilise all of these theories according to the situation they find the organisation in, that effectiveness can be achieved, as Burnes (1996) stated “the beginning of administrative wisdom is the awareness that there is no one optimum type of management system” (McLean 2005). It is essential for top organizational official such like manager that both change and culture are neither planned for nor predictable they should therefore be treated as elements that will continue to emerge and evolve over time. Organizational culture and change management should widely be defined and expounded as it forms the image of the company which is normally portrayed by its management practices. It’s therefore essential for these top officials to shape up changes and culture so as to meet strategic ends for proper company sustainability. . It is through proper understanding of the OCCM theory that an organization is able to widely define its missions, values and goals. Culture widely spans the range of managerial way of thinking thus appealing concern in relation to management practices. Evidently, it is clear that culture penetrates deeper into an organizational essence thus becoming more analogous to change as described by OCCM theory. References Boddy, D. 1998 Management: An Introduction. Europe: Prentice Hall. Burnes, B. 1998. ‘Recipes for Organizational Effectiveness: Mad, Bad, or Just Dangerous to Know’, Career Development International, Vol.3, No.3, pp.100-106. Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work- Related Values. London: Sage. Cited in Burnes, B (2008) Organisational and National Cultures. International Study Guide. MDP (UK) Ltd. Markus, L .2004. Techno change management: Using IT to drive organizational change. Journal of Information Technology, 19 (1), 4-20 McLean, J. 2005 Hard HRM, Human Resource Management. International Study Guide. MDP (UK) Ltd. McLean, J. 2005. Theorisation, Management Principles. International Study Guide. UK: MDP (UK) Ltd. McLean, J. 2005. Theorisation, Management Principles. International Study Guide. MDP (UK) Ltd. McLean, J.2005. Theorisation, Management Principles. International Study Guide. MDP (UK) Ltd. McNamara, C. 2011 Very Brief History of Management Theories: Scientific Management Theory. Retrieved from: http://managementhelp.org/mgmnt/history.htm Sheldrake, John. 1996. Management Theory: From Taylorism to Japanization. Oxford: Alden Press. Steinwachs, K .1999. Information and culture- the impact of national culture on information processes. Journal of Information Science, 25 (3), 193-204. Watson, T.1986. Management Organisation and Employment Strategy: New Directions I Theory and Practice. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Cited in Burnes, B. (1998) The Culture Excellence Approach, In Search of Excellence. International Study Guide. MDP (UK) Ltd. Read More