Plan rgnistinl Development & hnge: Queensland Railways - Case Study Example

Plan Оrgаnisаtiоnаl Dеvеlорmеnt & Сhаngе: Queensland Railways Introduction This plan for organisational development and change pertains to a case study of Queensland Railways (QR) as described by (Gollogly & Callan, 1995, pp. 97-105). QR was initially a bureaucratic public sector organisation before it underwent major transformational changes in 1991. The changes that were introduced in the organisation included structural change that involved flattening of the organisational structure, cultural change that entailed a shift from the militaristic leadership in the organisation to devolved authority, and transformation of the recruitment policy to bring outsiders into the leadership of QR. However, in spite of these changes, QR still faced a number of barriers to change such as prevalence of old cultural values, poor communication, high levels of uncertainty regarding the direction of change, and lack of proper identification of training needs among managers amongst other issues. Therefore, in this plan, acting as a consultant, I propose various activities and processes that would comprise a change process to deal with the problems experienced in QR. The plan is divided into two sections as follows. In the first section, I present a summary of information about QR as well as the organisation’s operations and hence the problems experienced therein. In the second section, there are five subsections as follows: identification of the problems to be addressed, discussion of the change approach to be used, the planned change process, discussion of how communication and readiness for change would be handled, and how to evaluate the change effort. Summary of the case (information about QR) QR was a large organisation in the transport sector in Australia, employing about 20,000 employees to facilitate transportation of passengers and goods in Queensland. It had a bureaucratic organisational structure with nine reporting levels, which were eventually reduced to seven. From the case study, it can be deduced that the mission of QR was to offer affordable transportation for passengers and goods in Queensland. Identification/diagnosis of the problem in QR Like many public sector organisations, QR was a bureaucratic organisation that was unprofitable, inefficient, highly centralised, and characterised by an old culture that was entrenched in the organisation, lack of proper planning and training of staff, low levels of skills and low staff mobility among other negative aspects. These trends, coupled with the loss-making streak of QR, made it necessary for the organisation to make a raft of changes in its operations. The changes that were introduced in QR involved commercialisation of the organisation and included structural changes that involved reducing the organisational bureaucracy, cultural change that required a shift from the militaristic leadership to devolved authority, and overhaul of the recruitment policy to bring external leadership. QR also initiated a ‘250 Managers’ program, in which external consultants offered training in communication, team building, counselling, and shared problem-solving to reduce stereotypes in the organisation (Gollogly & Callan, 1995, p. 104). But despite these changes, QR still encountered several barriers to change such as recurrence of old cultural values, ineffective communication, high levels of ambiguity regarding the course of change, and lack of proper recognition of training needs at the management level among other issues. The abovementioned challenges make it difficult for QR to bring in new dimensions of management to the organisation, to have long-term plans for the organisation and even to prepare employees for future challenges through training which would be essential for the much needed competitiveness of QR. Although change is the result of organising variation (Jabri, 2012), it appears that this variation was not well organised in QR, hence the tendency by members of the organisation to revert to the old practices that prevailed in the organisation before the introduction of the changes. To better understand the problems at QR, I will apply a force-field analysis, which is a tool that can be used to identify the various restraining and driving forces in a change process as stated by Daft & Marcic (2011, p. 277). The driving forces are the opportunities or problems that offer motivation for change within an organisation (Daft & Marcic, 2011, p. 277). On the other hand, the restraining forces are the various obstacles to change, such as resistance from the middle management, inadequate employee skills or lack of resources (Daft & Marcic, 2011, p. 277). Applied, to QR’s context, the force-field analysis is as follows: Driving forces Restraining forces The corporate change strategy together with the HRM turnaround approaches being implemented in QR have worked in other Australian organisations Maintenance of old cultural values QR is learning to live with the radical changes being implemented Poor listening and communication skills Through the ‘250 Managers’ program, QR was able to challenge stereotypes in the organisation Uncertainty regarding direction of change ‘250 Managers’ also enabled QR to enhance its members’ team building capacity. Low level of skills and knowledge of middle managers means less success in many areas of QR Source: Points taken from Gollogly and Callan (1995) My approach to change as a consultant My approach as a consultant is to remove the barriers to change in QR. These are the restraining forces identified in the force-field analysis as sticking to old cultural values, poor listening and communication skills, reservations regarding direction of change, and low level of skills and knowledge of middle managers, which hinders success in many areas of the organisation. The strategy will involve capitalising on the driving forces that have been identified while attempting to melt the restraining forces. As noted by Daft (2008), there is need to recognise that people often have rational and legitimate reasons for resisting change. Therefore, there is need to use an approach that will not bulldoze a change through the resistance. Five approaches have been identified by management researchers for aiding in overcoming resistance to change: communication and education, participation, negotiation, coercion, and support from top management (Daft, 2008, p. 368; Daft & Marcic, 2011, p. 278). Since all the restraining forces as identified above are related to some aspect of change resistance, I will apply some of the five aforementioned approaches to help remove the forces in various ways as described in the next section. Planned change process/ways of creating readiness and the interventions to be used The planned change process will directly address the restraining forces that make implementation of change in QR a herculean task. This will be done as follows. Communication and education/participation: I propose to design a communication and education program to enlighten members QR on the need to discard old cultural values. This program will also help deal with the problem of poor listening and communication skills that has hindered change in the organisation. Communication and education are employed when concrete information regarding a given change is required by users as well as others who may resist change (Daft & Marcic, 2011, p. 278; Taylor, Doherty & McGraw, 2011, p. 272). It is already evident that members of QR have stuck to old cultural practices such as adherence to hierarchies and bureaucracy, and managers in various departments have displayed an inability to listen and communicate effectively. To facilitate practical open communication, I suggest that teams comprising different ranks of employees be formed to participate in cooperative tasks and shared problem-solving on various issues as was done under the leadership of Vince O’Rourke and under the ‘250 Managers’ programme. The difference between the new plan and the systems that were used initially is that team leaders will not be managers but will rather be chosen randomly from the teams. This will promote openness and enhanced breaking up of the hierarchies and bureaucratic boundaries that have been entrenched in QR. Since resistance is not found in individuals but is created in the constructed reality in which the individuals operate (Ford, Ford & McNamara, 2002, p. 106), making individuals who work in different levels at QR to participate in shared decision-making will enable them to construct new realities through aspects such as story-making (Johansson, 2004) and hence abandon the resistance that they have been holding onto regarding the changes in the organisation. Also, by participating in activities that bring together members who work in different levels of the organisation, members will be encouraged to commit themselves to servant leadership as opposed to the existing scenario where managers are likely to be bossy and there are stereotypes about others. Negotiation: A campaign programme will be launched to create awareness on the need for QR to embrace the required change. Negotiation is basically a more formal approach of achieving cooperation towards a given change, and involves the use of formal bargaining to win acceptance of the required change (Daft & Marcic 2011, p. 279). Since members of QR have showed uncertainty regarding the direction of change being implemented in the organisation, there is need to engage them formally so as to convince them on the benefits of the change. From the case study, it is it can be argued that many members of the organisation have been reluctant to embrace change because of the manner in which it was implemented. Specifically, the ‘dictatorial transformation’ approach that was used in the transformation of QR (Gollogly & Callan, 1995, p. 101) could have ignored the input of some members of the organisation. Essentially, some employees are not aware of how long the change process will take, how it will benefit them, and whether they will remain in their jobs after the changes. The negotiation process should therefore offer incentives to the potential resistors (Combe, 2014, p. 586; Simms, 2005, p. 152) such as reassuring the employees that their jobs will be protected and improved and that such changes have been implemented successfully in many other organisations in Australia. The negotiators can capitalise on the latter point and the fact that some members are already learning to live with the radical changes being implemented in QR. By doing so, employees in the organisation will have a feeling of ownership of the change process, and this is critical in making them accept the change (Jabri, 2012). Involvement of managers in training: Since middle managers in QR have been shown to have low levels of skills and knowledge, a training programme will be designed specifically targeting them. The training will focus on the skills required by middle managers in their various fields of operation, and will include equipping them with people skills so as to increase efficiency and interpersonal relations in QR. As noted by Caldwell (2003, p. 291), middle level managers are the change managers who conduct various tasks and build support for change within specific units of an organisation. How communication and readiness for change would be handled The change plan will rely on the fact that members of QR are already learning to live with the radical changes being implemented in the organisation. Therefore, the past changes will be used as a starting point for communicating the anticipated changes. Specifically, I propose that the benefits gained from the past changes be used to reinforce and emphasise the need for further changes throughout the organisation as identified in the force-field analysis. Therefore, the plan will benefit from the point that some members of QR are already aware of the “extent to which changes are needed and the organisation’s capacity to undertake those changes” as noted by Murray, Poole and Jones (2006, p. 370). Communication about readiness for change will focus on the key objectives of the change rather than the change initiatives as suggested by Blackman, O’Flynn and Ugyel (2013, p. 2). How to evaluate the change effort and learn from unanticipated outcomes Evaluation will be based on measures such as job satisfaction, delivery of service, effectiveness of team work, and employee perceptions of their managers. This will be done on a regular basis through evaluation forms that the various members of the organisation will be required to fill. Since the changes will be going on over time and cannot therefore all be evaluated at one point (Jain & Triandis, 1997, p. 231), periodic evaluations will help determine the success or failure of the changes. Such processes will also help reveal unanticipated outcomes such as new social constructions in the organisation which may hinder the ongoing change and call for adjustments to the change plan. References Blackman, D., O’Flynn, J., & Ugyel, L. (2013). A diagnostic tool for assessing organisational readiness for complex change. Paper presented to the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management conference, Hobart, 4-6 December. Retrieved from https://www.anzsog.edu.au/media/upload/publication/131_Flynn-and-Ugyel-Diagnostic-Tool-ANZAM-2013.pdf Caldwell, R. (2003). Change leaders and change managers: Different or complementary? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(5/6), 285-293. Combe, C. (2014). Introduction to management. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Daft, R. L. (2008). New era of management (2nd ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson Higher Education. Daft, R. L., & Marcic, D. (2011). Understanding management (7th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. 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. Gollogly, K., & Callan, V. (1995). ‘Strategic and cultural change in railways.’ In M. Patrickson, V. Bamber & G. J. Bamber, Organisational change strategies: Case studies of human resource and industrial relations issues (pp. 98-106). Melbourne: Longman Australia. Jabri, M. (2012). Managing organizational change: Process, social construction and dialogue. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Jain, R. K., & Triandis, H.C. (1997). Management of research and development organizations: Managing the unmanageable. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Johansson, A. W. (2004). Consulting as story-making. Journal of Management Development. 23(4), 339-354. Murray, P., Poole, D., & Jones, G. (2006). Contemporary issues in management and organisational behaviour. Canberra: Thomson. Simms, H. (2005). Organisational behaviour and change management. Cambridge: Select Knowledge Limited. Taylor, T., Doherty, A., & McGraw, P. (2011). Managing people in sport organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. Read More