Changes in Organization - Coursework Example

Reflections Summary Name: Unit: Course: Professor: Submission Date: Change can be a complex process, especially when an organization is not well prepared to manage it. Fortunately, there are several alternatives in form of theories and models that can be used to make the transition easier. I will go through these alternatives giving my viewpoint on their implementations and efficiency as a whole. From the lectures that cover on “Finding the balance between the social and the technical” we learn various theories. In the Socio-Technical System (STS) we learn of the need for the reconciliation between technology efficiency and human needs. We learn that both entities depend on each other and must be treated as such. The Contingency Theory on the other hand emphasizes that situation variables are the key factors to consider in the operation of an organization. These situation variables are mainly the environment, the technology and size of a company. I think this theory is the most appropriate for a modern organization. Nowadays, situational factors are constantly changing, for instance, technology has brought forth the internet which has broken geographical barriers, and global warming has led to strict policies being formulated; only the companies that change to align with these advances manage to survive. The contingency theory has given birth to the situational model of change. The model is highly dependent on the scale of change and the style of leadership applied to realize the change. Through this model we get four strategies of change, namely participative evolution, forced evolution, charismatic transformation and dictatorial transformation. Forced evolution and dictatorial transformation are used when the company is out of fit and are all based on directive style of leadership with the latter applied on a large scale change. The remaining two strategies are executed through collaboration and they are less urgent since the companies that use them are still in fit and their key stakeholders favor the change. In my view, companies should not wait until they are in dire situation to execute change. Change should be incremental; all key groups should be convinced on why the change is necessary before it is exerted. Nokia was once the largest phone manufacturer, but they ignored the rise of Apple and Google in the mobile operating system market until it was too late. The company started making desperate changes when it was already out of shape. This dictatorial transformation could be said to be one of the factors that led to its demise. When learning about planned approaches to change, we are given three types of planned changes which include, downsizing, technological change and finally mergers and acquisitions. Subsequently, we are given ways in which these planned changes can be successfully executed. Lewin’s 3 step model gives the most appropriate approach. It involves three processes namely unfreezing, making changes then refreezing. When applying a planned change, an organization requires having a need for change which calls for unfreezing the traditional way of getting things done. After this, the change is implemented then the refreezing process is initiated to cement the changes made. When the internet started to be widely adopted, companies were required to change in order to embrace the new technology therefore; they unfroze the traditional operations to look for new ways of embracing the internet. E-commerce was born and it represented the change that companies were seeking for. The refreezing process started when the companies started having IT departments to maintain the e-commerce platforms and marketing departments that enlightened people of how they could take advantage of the internet to conduct business. Organizational development taught me a lot about using theories, technology and change agents to plan for long term organization objectives that are aimed at improving problem solving within the company. The concepts learnt in this chapter make it easier for one to prepare an organization for change. Kotters 8 –step model strengthens organization development by giving a sequence of 8 processes that one needs to effectively apply change, the steps include, creating urgency, group change, vision, communication, empowerment, short term wins, consolidate gains, and finally changing the future. From my perspective, Kotters model may involve many steps but it is efficient to those that follow it through. The affected parties need to understand that change cannot be achieved overnight; it’s a series of small incremental milestones that collectively sum up to the grand change. Kotter enforces this notion by emphasizing that short-terms wins are the way to go. Consolidation of this wins and planning for their succession are the factors that will eventually realize successful change. When learning about managing present to desired state, I learnt that change is affected by many internal and external factors. It is also a punctuated equilibrium in the sense that initiatives made to realize change are gradually integrated into daily routines but after a while, their performance declines and new radical strategies are once again needed for survival. However, Dawson claims that change is non –linear and is usually a complex affair that involves balancing many aspects such as culture, context, politics, time and sociality. In line with this, Dawson came up with a processual framework to that broke the change process into 3 main aspects which include context of change, substance of change and politics of change. Jabri on the other hand thinks that the change process should be dialogue driven followed by implementation. He uses the Lewin’s model as his foundation and builds on it with three processes which begin with understanding change through dialogue, then proposing the appropriate interventions and finally making them persuasive. In my opinion, Jabri’s approach is more natural and straight forward than Dawson’s. Communication can reveal many previously unknown forces that resist change and can also be used to propose interventions to tackle these forces. The combinations of Lewin’s unfreezing and refreezing model further strengthens Jabri’s alternative. On the lecture of power and politics and their relation to organizational change, I am enlightened on the different types of power and their respective consequences. Stephan Likes presents a third face of power which can be used to manipulate others to volunteer into doing things that go against their own desires. Foucault presents a fourth face by stating that power is obtained through knowledge. Knowledge is contextual in that different environments demand different kind of knowledge. The lecture material claims that organizations can develop power by creating dependence in others as well as making strategic networks. The power can be used to control information, agendas, decision making and building coalitions. Politics on the other hand refer to the behavior of swaying the distributions of merits and demerits in a way that favors those in power. Buchanan suggests that organizational change is a political process that only favors those that apply politics efficiently. He and Badham argue that politics have two faces and people have to explore both the good and the bad side of them. I think that as much as politics play a role in organizational change, those in power should always prioritize on what’s good for the company and not personal desires. Politics have a way of side-tracking people from the goal and trapping them in meaningless power plays that only slow down the change process. In the chapter of changing organizational culture, the lecture defined culture as the habits and ways of acting that people identify with. It was made clear that culture differences from norms in that the former is based on everyday knowledge and shared meanings while the latter focuses on unspoken assumptions and negotiated interactions. As far as organizations are concerned, culture is important since it molds employees to act in a certain way that is upheld in that company. Cultures may vary from innovative driven to procedural adherence. In this modern era, the innovative culture is preferred to its alternatives. This type of culture can be achieved through norms such as idea generation, risk taking, tolerance to mistakes and supporting change. In contrast, promoting internal competition and punishing mistakes act as counter-effective measures for innovation. Strong cultures have been seen by many as hindrances of creativity; however, innovative companies such as Apple and 3M apply such cultures. Due to this, the chapter insists that these strong cultures increase cohesiveness that is a necessary attribute for the implementation of new ideas. As I conclude, I would suggest companies to tackle changes through increments when the organization is still in good shape. Also, when dealing with planned changes, the best model would be the Lewin’s 3 step solution. It not only effectively implements a change, but it solidifies it by refreezing the alterations. Moreover, Jabri’s expansion of this model through dialogue forms a more comprehensive method of managing change. Kotter’s 8-step model gives the best procedure of preparing a company for coming changes. But, when an organization is discussing the need this change, it should not get lost in political battles. Ultimately, to foster the best team to handle changes, a company needs to have an innovative culture deeply rooted into its employees. Weekly Lecture Notes In week 2, we learn about the balance between the social and technical aspect of change. Several theories are discussed including the STS, contingency theory and the situational model. I think the contingency theory made the best argument due to its consideration of the situation variables that are always changing in the modern world. In week 3, we are enlightened on the planned approaches to change and linear stage models. The contents of this week included Lewin’s 3-step model, the organizational development and Kotter’s 8 step model. In my opinion, Lewin’s model was most appropriate for planned changes since it provided a means for refreezing the changes to become integrated into the organization. In week 4, Dawson’s processual approach and Jabri’s perspective of the change process are discussed. Jabri’s option made the most sense to me since it built on the already solid Lewin’s 3-step model by introducing the communication aspect into it. In week 5, the philosophy of change is examined. Moreover, a brief history is visited and a summary of all the various change theories are made in a neat table. In week 6, power and politics are the main focus. The third and fourth faces of power are described. The notes state that politics have a major part to play on the change process. However in my viewpoint, the parties involved in the change process should not let themselves get carried away by politics. In the final week 8, the organizational culture is the main focus. The notes insist on the importance of having a creativity and innovation culture embedded in organizations. Strong cultures are also said to form the cohesion necessary to implement changes a fact I agree with. Read More