Impact of the Change Agency Notion on a Change Programme - Literature review Example

Impact of the Change Agency Notion on a Change Programme Impact of the Change Agency Notion on a Change Programme Introduction Organisations are constantly undergoing the process of change. This is necessitated by instances when an organisation is required to make adjustments in order to match emergent changes in the environment in which it operates. Since organisations need to remain relevant and competitive in their business environments, there is a constant need to adopt changes in the form of re-engineering, downsizing and adoption of new technologies. The success of the change programme depends on many factors, top among them being the skills and dispositions of the persons implementing the process. This paper examines how the traits and characteristics of change agents determine the outcome of a change programme in facilitating the right climate for the social construction of change within an organisation. How Change Agents Affect a Change Programme According to Jabri (2012, p. 56), the term change agency, within the context of organisational change, refers to the various activities that underscore the process of change within an organisation. According to Schein (1988, cited by Jabri, 2012, p. 58), a change agent is a person who plays the role of helping others within an organisation to perceive, understand and act upon the process of organisational change. Such a role is played within an environment that requires the input of different individuals at all levels of the organisation as opposed to the change agent working in isolation. Since both the internal and external change agents are tasked with the responsibility of managing change within organisations, their actions, motives and characteristics determine the overall outcome of a change process. One way in which change agents affect the outcome of a change programme lies in the way they carry out their primary responsibilities in the course of change within an organisation. Change agents play different primary roles during the change process. As such, the way they deliver their primary responsibilities bears a direct impact on whether the change process within the organisation becomes successful or not. For instance, during the course of continuous change within an organisation, change agents are tasked with the responsibility of managing identity, language and dialogue (Jabri, 2012, p. 86). This is so because the process of continuous change within an organisation entails freezing and rebalancing specific attributes. According to Jabri (2004, p. 143), dialogue, language and identity play a key role in the process of continuous change within an organization. For instance, the general conversational process within an organisation provides a means by which a common sense of meaning and thinking process can be created and established. Because of this, the outcome of such a change process depends on how well the change agents will handle the overall process of discourse within an organization. This means that the way change agents identify emergent trends, make them meaningful within an organisational context and reframe them determines the outcome of the process of change (Caldwell, 2003, p. 288). In order for the conversational process that is driven by change agents to be effective, it has to possess the characteristics of honesty, rationality, imagination as well as being issue-oriented (Anderson, 2012, p. 128). Also, by using expressions that communicate the current state, declarations to announce new beginnings and directives and requests, change agents can effectively ensure that dialogue within an organisation achieves its primary objectives in the course of continuous change (Jabri, 2004, p. 146). This means that the outcome of a process of continuous change within an organisation depends on how well the change agents responsible handle dialogue, conversation and identity. Also, for the case of episodic change within an organisation, the change agent plays the role of being the prime mover that creates change (Harrison, 1970, p. 114). As such, the way the change agent plays this role determines whether the programme of episodic change within the organisation succeeds or not. For instance, since language intervention is a primary method of effecting cultural change with an organisation, the outcome of episodic change depends on how well the change agents clearly and persistently present new alignments for the organisation (Anderson, 2012, p. 56). Another way in which the outcome of an episodic change programme with an organisation is determined by the way the change agents carry out their responsibilities regards change processes in a large group setting. As noted by Jabri (2012, p. 11), change in such a setting is characterised by the following attributes: a high level of abstraction, little ownership of ideas, and lack of willingness to express unique thoughts. Since these attributes are counterproductive to the process of change, the outcome of the change process depends on whether or not the change agents succeed in neutralising these attributes. In order to do so, the change agent, as the prime mover of the change process, needs to adopt approaches that are non-conventional in terms of analysis, participation and models used (Jabri & Pounder, 2001, p. 684). This implies that if change agents fail to take these factors into consideration, the outcome of the programme of episodic change within an organisation is jeopardised. Several dispositional characteristics of change agents play a key role in determining the overall outcome of a change process within an organisation. This is because different personality traits and characteristics determine how well a climate for the social construction of change and general involvement in the process within an organization is facilitated (Harrison, 1970, p. 117). For instance, the level of self-efficacy within change agents determines how well the process of change is implemented and carried out to include all participants within an organisation. Self-efficacy can be defined as the extent to which individuals believe that they can demonstrate the behaviour required to produce the results of the change process. It represents the how well individuals see themselves as being able to mobilise resources and exercise control over different situations. Since self-efficacy is associated with the ability to cope with situations arising from changing situations, a high level of self-efficacy in individuals means that they are likely to be well prepared to cope with any kind of changes occurring within an organisation during the process of change (Caldwell, 2003, p. 278). As such, a high level of self-efficacy in change agents means that they are best suited to adopt a creative approach to solving problems and are willing to contribute to organisational re-engineering, adoption of new technologies and other change processes. Also, other dispositional characteristics such as the locus of control, self-evaluation and personal resilience determine how well the change programme is facilitated within an organisation. For instance, the extent to which individuals value themselves as being in control over surrounding situations (locus of control) not only determines how well individuals are able to cope with the entire process of change but also reflects the capacity of individuals to develop a problem-focused approach within an organisation (Jabri & Pounder, 2001, p. 688). Also, unlike individuals with external locus of control, those having an internal one are associated with positive attributes of adaptation to change, job satisfaction and overall job performance (Harigopal, 2006, p. 266). This implies that an internal locus of control in change agents within an organisation plays a key role in ensuring that the process of change is initiated and facilitated in a manner that is all-inclusive and generally successful. Another dispositional characteristic in change agents which determines the overall outcome of a change process is the level of resilience exhibited. According to Harigopal (2006, p. 281), individuals who have a high ability to bounce back from negative psychological experiences also demonstrate the positive attributes of high self-esteem, optimism and general control over different situations in a business environment. Within the context of organisational change, resilience is exhibited in the form of the ability to withstand any kind of resistance to the overall change process (Ford, Ford & McNamara, 2002, p. 109). Generally, resistance to the process of change is exhibited in different forms within an organisation. This is reflected in the emotional, behavioural and attitude responses towards the process of change (Ford, Ford & McNamara, 2002, p. 106). As such, individuals act against change as a result of their emotional and behavioural inclinations to organisational change. As such, a high level of resilience means that change agents are able to manage any kind of internal resistance to change within an organisation. Apart from the dispositional characteristics of change agents, the facilitation and general outcome of a change programme within an organisation is determined by the level of skills and competencies exhibited by the change agents. For instance, it is observed that in order for change agents to succeed in their role of implementing and facilitating the process of change, they should possess key competencies (Jabri, 2012, p. 61). Skills for effective operation and relationships – such as listening and communication, the ability to be sensitive and show maturity, mastery of general knowledge on the theories and processes of change and the ability to act in a humanistic manner – are some of the key competencies which are necessary for change agents (Anderson, 2012, p. 322). This means that how well a change environment is created and facilitated within an organisation depends on whether or not individuals acting as change agents possess these key competencies and skills. Another key skill which change agents need to demonstrate in the process of change regards adaptability and alignment (Sharma, 2006, p. 121). Alignment can be defined as the ability of individuals to demonstrate a high degree of shared understanding of principles, mission and purpose of the change process. This means that individuals having a high level of alignment within an organisation demonstrate a high sense of respect for others, tolerance to contrary opinion and a readiness to develop new approaches and adapt to change. Since change agents are required to play the role of independent individuals who facilitate the process of change through constructive and open dialogue while at the same time developing overall consensus, their success depends on the extent to which they demonstrate alignment in carrying out their duties. Change agents who are highly aligned are able to build a collaborative change process within an organisation. On the other hand, vision, ambition, the ability to handle personal risk and political awareness are other key skills and competencies which determine how well a change process is created and managed within an organisation (Sharma, 2006, p. 153). It is important to note that such skills are derived from different disciplines of project management and organisational development. As such, change agents rely on different skills such as planning, managing different tasks within a single process and relationship building to successfully create and manage an environment of change within their organisations. Lastly, another attribute of change agents that determines the overall outcome of a change process within an organisation regards the attitudes of change agents towards change itself. This is determined by the degree to which individuals regard the process of change as being necessary to bringing positive attributes to the entire organisation (Vakola & Nikolaou, 2005, p. 168). As such, individuals having a positive attitude towards change believe that the process will produce positive results in the organisation. Also, a high positive attitude towards change within an organisation means that individuals view change as an opportunity to try new approaches to work (Procter & Randall, 2012, p. 369). In addition, the attitude towards change is associated with the ability of individuals to initiate the change process itself. Individuals with a positive attitude towards change take the initiative to initiate the change process within an organisation. The performance of individuals in a change process is determined by their attitude towards organisational change (Vakola & Nikolaou, 2005, p. 169). This is because a positive attitude acts as a facilitator between skills, competencies and opportunities during the process of change within an organisation (Procter & Randall, 2012, p. 377). This implies that the overall management of the process of change within an organisation depends on the attitude of change agents towards the change process itself. Conclusion In conclusion, the way in which an environment of change is created, facilitated and managed within an organisation is influenced by different characteristics and traits of the change agents involved. For both continuous and episodic change organisational change processes, the skills and attributes of the individuals determine how best the process of change is managed within an organisation. Personality characteristics, levels of skills and competence together with the attitude of change agents towards change are key general factors that determine how effectively change agents play their role during the process of organisational change. References Anderson, D. L. (2012). Organization Development: The Process of Leading. London: SAGE Publications. Caldwell, R. (2003). Change leaders and change managers: Different or complementary? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(5/6), 285-293. Ford, J. D., Ford, L. W. & McNamara, R. T. (2002). Resistance and the background conversations of change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 15(2), 105-121. Harigopal, K. (2006). Management of Organizational Change: Leveraging Transformation. New Delhi: Response Books. Harrison, R. (1970). Choosing the depth of organizational intervention. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 6(2), 182-202. Jabri, M. (2012). Managing Organizational Change: Process, Social Construction and Dialogue. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Jabri, M. (2004). Team feedback based on dialogue: Implications for change management. The Journal of Management Development, 23(2): 141-151. Jabri, M. & Pounder, J. S. (2001). The management of change: A narrative perspective on management development. The Journal of Management Development, 20(7/8), 682 - 690. Procter, S. & Randall, J. (2012). Changing attitudes to employee attitudes to change: From resistance to ambivalence and ambiguity. In Boje, D., Burnes, B. & Hassard, J. (eds). The Routledge Companion to Organizational Change. New York: Routledge. Sharma, R. R. (2006). Change Management: Concepts and Applications. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Education. Vakola, M. & Nikolaou, I. (2005). Attitudes towards organizational change: What is the role of employees’ stress and commitment? Employee Relations, 27(2), 160-174. Retrieved 15 November 2013, from: http://www.google.co.ke/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&ved=0CEwQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww0.dmst.aueb.gr%2Fnikolaou%2Fpapers%2Fvakola_nikolaou_stress_change.pdf&ei=1iuGUr2jGMO50QX6jIGAAQ&usg=AFQjCNFVwPrlqVbZE35uI4xaCLmt8wh95A&bvm=bv.56643336,d.d2k Read More