The Baseline of Organisational Change - Assignment Example

Change Management Report Name Institution Lecturer Course Date Table of Contents Introduction 3 Proposed organisational change 4 Main aim of the proposed change 4 Specific objective of the proposed change 4 Stakeholder analysis 6 Managing the proposed change 6 Organisational activities 12 Evaluation and sustenance of the change 12 Conclusion 13 References 14 Introduction The modern environment is so dynamic in a myriad of ways, politically, economically and technologically among several other ways. The dynamic nature of the modern environment makes organisational change inevitable and organisational change management a vital aspect of organisational management. Organisations that do not embrace the fact that change is inevitable and fail to change do so at their own peril. Business organisations that fail to have strategic changes and effective management of the same fail to realise that the contemporary market environment is so competitive and the implementation and management of positive change is one competitive strategies used by modern companies. Such changes could involve, for example, change of organisational structure to make the organisation more effective in handling its day-to-day business activities or the adoption of a new strategy, such as shifting from in-house production to outsourcing of some items such as parts of the main component of a company. The baseline of organisational change is and should be to improve efficiency, which translates to increased revenue. However, as much as organisational change is aimed at higher organisational efficiency, not everybody will accept proposed change (Samson and Daft, 2011). In other words, organisational change is often associated with change resistance whose intensity varies with organisations and the change itself. Change resistance often occurs either because of fear of the unknown (uncertainty about the future of the change if implemented), because they fear the change will negatively affect them (such as losing jobs or positions), because they feel change will be no better than the current situation, because of economic reasons or because they do not understand what the change is all about (Burnes, 2009). These are some of the reasons behind resistance to change and change management is mainly about overcoming change resistance in the effort to ensure that proposed change is implemented. This brings in the issue of communication, which is a vital part of change management. Researchers have come up with various change management models aimed at enabling change managers realize this overall goal of change management. This report seeks to develop a change management and communication strategy using change management frameworks already in literature. The implementation of this report will see the organisation being able to effectively and successfully manage change for the ultimate goal, implementing the proposed change for improved organisational efficiency. Proposed organisational change This report aims at developing a comprehensive strategy for implementing change that involves some changes in the senior management and number of employees. In particular, the change involves changing the organisational structure to eliminate assistant manager positions and instead have team leaders and supervisors to replace all assistant managers. Quality assurance department will also be integrated and made part of the production department and there will be an increase in the number of employees in the production department to increase current number from eight to ten. Main aim of the proposed change 1. The proposed change aims at improving organisational efficiency, which will consequently lead to increased organisational productivity and profitability. Specific objective of the proposed change a) Improve organisational efficiency: the elimination of the assistant manager posts and their consequent replacement with team leaders and supervisors is aimed at increasing organisational efficiency by reducing the current bureaucratic process, which slows down communication and decision making processes. Team leaders will be directly in touch with employees (team members) and department managers such that department and employees issues will easily reach department managers instead of passing through assistant managers. b) Improve quality performance: the integration of the QAD with production department will improve quality performance because quality performance will be conducted continuously as production continues. Additionally, decision making on quality issues will improve since the bureaucratic process involved during interdepartmental communication will be eliminated and the production manager will be able to make quality decisions quickly and easily with the help of the production department team. c) Improve productivity: the increase of employees in the production department will increase production owing to increased demand d) Reduce operational costs and hence increase organisational revenue: the elimination of assistant managers and their consequent replacement with team leaders or supervisors will eliminate four assistant managers from the payroll. The integration of QAD with production department will eliminate an additional assistant manager and a departmental manager from the payroll. Overall, this will save the organisation $75,500 annually. Additional four employees will cost the organisation $10,500 per year. Eventually, the organisation will save $60,000 per year, which will imply increased profits or the money can be used for various improvements such as increased investment in Research and Development (R&D). Stakeholder analysis Relevant organisational stakeholders, those who will be affected by the proposed change, include: Stakeholder Primary/secondary stakeholder How the proposed change affects this stakeholder CEO Primary Has a say in decision making regarding the proposed change Company Directors Primary Have a say in decision making regarding the proposed change Shareholders Primary Have a say in decision making regarding the proposed change HRD Primary Makes employment and unemployment decisions and will be responsible for implementing the proposed change Assistant Managers Secondary If the proposed change is successful, assistant managers will lose their positions Team leaders and supervisors Secondary If the proposed change is successful, team leaders and supervisors will have more work to do Employees Secondary The proposed change may affect employee morale and motivation since it will cause major disruptions Managing the proposed change Gilley (2005) outlines eight rules of change, which change managers should put into consideration when assessing, planning for and implementing change: a. Change is not an easy task. It is neither a cheap task nor one that should be implemented fast. b. Change is personal not organisational; organisations do not change but people in the organisation or affiliated to the organisation change. c. Therefore, people must be made aware of what the change entails before they will willingly change d. Otherwise, people will inherently resist the change initiative even if it is extremely promising to the success of the organisation e. Therefore, communication is critical during change and it should be designed to be as effective and efficient as possible. All the identified stakeholders will informed about the proposed change and the benefits of the proposed change particularly the already outlined aims of the proposed change. f. People change at different rates and change managers should be patient g. Conflict is inevitable and unavoidable during the change process mainly because some people accept change while others resist the change initiative. Conflict also occurs because people change at different rates. h. Finally, not all change is good or necessary and critical analysis of the change initiative is required before investing organisational time and resources pursuing a bad or undesirable change. This change is deemed necessary and good since it is for the benefit of the organisation although it will negatively affect some stakeholders. Hanson (2010) views change management as a four step process including assessment, preparation, execution and sustaining the change. During the assessment step, the change agent strives to understand whether the organisation and its employees are ready for change (Savolainen, 2013). The results of the assessment step determine the next step, preparation for change, which involves making necessary arrangements for the change process. This essentially involves establishing the plan for the change process that is later executed in the execution step, which involves change implementation and monitoring in order to realise desired organisational development (Hanson, 2010). Finally, implemented change must be sustained; otherwise desired organisational development will only be for a short while. For example, if the change process involved change of organisational structure and culture, the new status must be sustained through appropriate mechanisms. Sustaining is based on the argument that resistance to change will always try to restore the organisation to its former state by showing that the new status is no better or is worse off than the former status. Figure 1 On the other hand, The Australian Government Public Sector Division (2012) views change as a five-step process including design, deliver, dialogue, do and evaluate as shown in figure 2. Figure 2 What is common with the two views of change is that design, strategic planning, execution and sustenance are vital aspect of change management. These two views are used to manage the change at hand. Accordingly, researchers and change gurus have come up with various change models that can be used for planning, implementing and sustaining change. The most prominent change model is the Kotter’s Eight-Step Change Model that outlines eight steps that change managers should follow when planning, implementing and sustaining change (Sabri, Gupta and Beitler, 2007; Warrilow, n.d). i. Urgency creation: this involves creating a sense of urgent need for change in the organisation ii. Creation of a guiding coalition, which will guide involved parties through the rest of the change process iii. Vision and strategy development iv. Communication of the vision and strategy to all relevant parties v. Empowering for action, which could include training employees to enable them implement change vi. Generation of short-term wins vii. Consolidation of gains and the production of more change viii. Anchorage of the change into the organisational culture These eight steps have been reduced into three steps in the Lewin Change theory (Cummings and Worley, 2009; Conrad, 2014): 1. Unfreezing: this involves motivating involved parties to change and covers steps 1 through 4 of the Kotter’s change model. In this step, communication is critical since it aids in unfreezing current status or reducing resistance to change so that change can be successfully implemented. 2. Moving: once the organisation is ready for change (once all parties are ready for change), change is implemented, which involves moving the organisation to the new and desired status. Moving step covers steps 4 through 7 of the Kotter’s change model. 3. Refreezing: once the change has been successfully implemented, it should be sustained by stabilizing the organisation at its new state. Refreezing covers the eighth step of the Kotter’s Eight-Step change model. The Australian Government Public Sector Division (2012) outlines six fundamental principles for successful structural changes in an organisation: There is a clear and well defined change rationale and vision, which is well understood by all relevant parties; There is a clear identification of all relevant stakeholders and their consequent, appropriate consultation and information; There are transparent system and processes that have been developed to realise the change initiative There is collective and collaborative leadership that is highly empowered to effect the change People especially employees have a dedicated focus There is systematic review and adaptation of change Kotter’s eight-step change model alongside the change process model developed by The Australian Government Public Sector Division (figure 2) will be used. Timing and speed are the two most important aspect of consideration during design. This is a major change and will therefore take long before full implementation. Since all employees are employed under a two-year contract, full implantation will take about two years. After completing their two year contract term, assistant managers will not have their contract renewed. They will instead be considered for other vacancies within the organisation. Addition of two employees in the production department is expected to take place immediately upon approval by shareholders, directors and CEO. To avoid conflict between QAD and production department upon integration of the two departments, the integration will take place after full elimination of QAD manager and his assistant and consequent replacement with production manager (with QA knowledge) and production team (with QA knowledge). The proposed change is expected to cause major disruptions, which will negatively affect employee morale and motivation and hence productivity. To eliminate or reduce this impact, employees will be involved in the change process by being informed of the changes taking place and why these changes are necessary. Regular meetings with employees will be held to communicate to them the proposed change and the progress of the change process. Particularly, in order to avoid change resistance from employees, it will be stressed, at the initial stages of the change process, that these changes are aimed at ensuring that their [employees’] concerns are addressed more efficiently than using the current structure. On the part of CEO, directors and shareholders, enhanced productivity, reduced operating costs and hence increased revenue will be stressed when communicating to these stakeholders through meetings, letters and memos. This way, sufficient force proposing the change will have been secured to overcome resistance to change expected to arise from assistant managers, QAD and Production department. Organisational activities Team building and leadership training will also be conducted periodically for effective team functioning to replace the current structure. Leadership training is aimed at ensuring that positive results are achieved and that the new structure is sustained; otherwise poor results will prompt getting back to the current structure. Evaluation and sustenance of the change After full implementation of the proposed change, evaluation will be done after one year of implementation. Evaluation will be done based on productivity and efficiency. Since the proposed change is aimed at improving communication efficiency in the organisation, surveys will be used to determine if employees feel any improvement in communication efficiency and any necessary changes they feel are necessary. If there is improved efficiency, the change will then be incorporate into the organisational culture and structure. Periodic training on team building and team leadership will then be necessary to sustain the change. Conclusion Not all changes are necessary and good, but the proposed change is deemed necessary and good considering that it is aimed at improving organisational efficiency, productivity and profitability. By following the change management strategy outlined, successful change is expected for the proposed change. References Burnes, B. (2009). Managing Change: A Strategic Approach to Organisational Dynamics. Prentice Hall. Conrad, D. (2014). Interprofessional and Intraprofessional Collaboration in the Scholarly Project. In K. Moran., R. Burson. & D. Conrad (Eds.). The Doctor of Nursing Practice Scholarly Project: A Project for Success (pp. 142-159). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Cummings, T. G. & Worley, C. G. (2009). Organizational Development and Change. South-Western Cengage Learning. Giley, A. (2005). The Manager as Change Leader. Praeger Publishers. Hanson, S. (2005). Change Management and Organizational Effectiveness for the HR Professional. Cornell HR Review, pp. 1-7. Public Sector Commission (PSC). (2012). Structural Change Management: A Guide to Assist Agencies to Manage Change. Government of Western Australia. Sabri, E. H., Gupta, A. P. & Beitler, M. A. (2007). Purchase Order Management Best Practices: Process, Technology, and Change Management. J. Ross Publishing, Inc. Samson, D. & Daft, R. L. (2011). Management. Cengage Learning. Savolainen, T. (2013). Change Implementation in Intercultural Context: A Case Study of Creating Readiness to Change. Journal of Global Business Issues, 7(2), 51-58. Warrilow, S. (n.d). Leading your People through Change Putting it all Together, and Managing the Whole Messy Business. Practitioners’ Masterclass. Read More