Change Management in Organizations - Essay Example

Change Management Organisation Premise The Greek philosopher Heraclitus once said that “Nothing endures but change”. Paradoxically, even after more than 1400 years later this most well known maxim about change itself still remains unchanged. This paradigm was best encapsulated perhaps by the English philosopher Herbert Spencer who said that “A living thing is distinguished from a dead thing by the multiplicity of the changes at any moment taking place in it”. Change has a considerable psychological impact on the human mind. To the fearful it is threatening because it means that things may get worse. To the hopeful it is encouraging because things may get better. To the confident It is inspiring because the challenge exists to make things better. It would be appropriate to distinguish between “change” and a “project” right at the out-set. A project is a temporary and one-time endeavor undertaken to create a unique product or service, that brings about beneficial change or added value. (1). A change, referred to in this context, includes a broad array of topics. From an individual perspective, the change may be a new behavior. From a business perspective, the change may be a new business process or new technology. From a societal perspective, the change may be a new public policy or the passing of new legislation. Successful change, however, requires more than a new process, technology or public policy. Successful change requires the engagement and participation of the people involved. (1). Types of Changes For organizations to develop, they often must undergo significant change at various points in their development. Change in organizations occurs when the organization changes its overall strategy for success, adds or removes a major section or practice, and/or wants to change the very nature by which it operates. (2). It also occurs when an organization evolves through various life cycles, just like people must successfully evolve through life cycles. (3). Ackerman (1997) has distinguished between three types of changes:- Developmental Change It ca be planned or emergent. It seeks to enhance or correct the existing aspects of an organization, focusing mainly on improvement of a skill or process. Transitional Change It seeks to achieve a state which is known and desired and different from the present one. It is episodal in nature. Transformational Change Also known as Organisational Change it is radical in nature comprising basically a paradigm shift in the organisation and its members. Transformation results in significantly different structure, processes, culture and strategy. Although the concepts and principles of change presented in this paper are applicable to all types of change, the essence of this paper is biased towards Transformational Change in higher educational institutions, particularly Northumbria University. (4). History Northumbria University was established as a university in 1992. Its deep roots in the region build on the amalgamation in Newcastle Polytechnic of three regional colleges in 1969 and the subsequent incorporation of the City College of Education (1974), and the Northern Counties College of Education (1976) and the Bede, Newcastle and Northumbria College of Health Studies (1995). (5). Northumbria is a large metropolitan university and delivers a wide range of full-time, part-time and short courses in a largely modularised curriculum. Currently it has just over 23,500 students about 16,000 of whom are full-time. (6). The Universitys academic structure includes 11 subject areas in 11 Schools plus a Virtual Graduate School. (7). The Universitys administrative functions are handled by a cluster of University Services, including: Corporate Planning, Finance, Human Resources, IT Services, Learning Resources, Student Services and the Registrars and University Secretarys Office. (8). The University’s City Centre site houses the administrative functions, the main Library, the Students Union Centre and the Student Services Centre as well as the bulk of teaching accommodation. The University has contributed considerably to the regeneration of Newcastles city centre and provides modern IT and teaching facilities in the Trinity Building and The Drill Hall. (9). The university has two further campuses in Newcastle and one in Carlisle and provides access to an increasing number of courses and qualifications through distance learning and a portfolio of franchises. (10). Principles of Change Management No universal set of principles can be established for managing change in an organization because each organization has its own peculiar dynamics to manage. However, usually the following principles are adopted as a guideline to manage change in an organization:- 1. Address the “human side” systematically. Any significant transformation creates “people issues.” New leaders will be asked to step up, jobs will be changed, new skills and capabilities must be developed, and employees will be uncertain and resistant. Dealing with these issues on a reactive, case-by-case basis puts speed, morale, and results at risk. A formal approach for managing change — beginning with the leadership team and then engaging key stakeholders and leaders — should be developed early, and adapted often as change moves through the organization. 2. Start at the top. Because change is inherently unsettling for people at all levels of an organization, when it is on the horizon, all eyes will turn to the CEO and the leadership team for strength, support, and direction. The leaders themselves must embrace the new approaches first, both to challenge and to motivate the rest of the institution. 3. Involve every layer. As transformation programs progress from defining strategy and setting targets to design and implementation, they affect different levels of the organization. Change efforts must include plans for identifying leaders throughout the company and pushing responsibility for design and implementation down, so that change “cascades” through the organization. At each layer of the organization, the leaders who are identified and trained must be aligned to the company’s vision, equipped to execute their specific mission, and motivated to make change happen. 4. Make the formal case. Individuals are inherently rational and will question to what extent change is needed, whether the company is headed in the right direction, and whether they want to commit personally to making change happen. They will look to the leadership for answers. The articulation of a formal case for change and the creation of a written vision statement are invaluable opportunities to create or compel leadership-team alignment. 5. Create ownership. Leaders of large change programs must over-perform during the transformation and be the zealots who create a critical mass among the work force in favor of change. This requires more than mere buy-in or passive agreement that the direction of change is acceptable. It demands ownership by leaders willing to accept responsibility for making change happen in all of the areas they influence or control. Ownership is often best created by involving people in identifying problems and crafting solutions. It is reinforced by incentives and rewards. These can be tangible (for example, financial compensation) or psychological (for example, camaraderie and a sense of shared destiny). 6. Communicate the message. The best change programs reinforce core messages through regular, timely advice that is both inspirational and practicable. Communications flow in from the bottom and out from the top, and are targeted to provide employees the right information at the right time and to solicit their input and feedback. 7. Assess the cultural landscape. Thorough cultural diagnostics can assess organizational readiness to change, bring major problems to the surface, identify conflicts, and define factors that can recognize and influence sources of leadership and resistance. These diagnostics identify the core values, beliefs, behaviors, and perceptions that must be taken into account for successful change to occur. They serve as the common baseline for designing essential change elements, such as the new corporate vision, and building the infrastructure and programs needed to drive change. 8. Address culture explicitly. Leaders should be explicit about the culture and underlying behaviors that will best support the new way of doing business, and find opportunities to model and reward those behaviors. This requires developing a baseline, defining an explicit end-state or desired culture, and devising detailed plans to make the transition. 9. Prepare for the unexpected. No change program goes completely according to plan. People react in unexpected ways; areas of anticipated resistance fall away; and the external environment shifts. Effectively managing change requires continual reassessment of its impact and the organization’s willingness and ability to adopt the next wave of transformation. Fed by real data from the field and supported by information and solid decision-making processes, change leaders can then make the adjustments necessary to maintain momentum and drive results. 10. Speak to the individual. Change is both an institutional journey and a very personal one. People spend many hours each week at work; many think of their colleagues as a second family. Individuals (or teams of individuals) need to know how their work will change, what is expected of them during and after the change program, how they will be measured, and what success or failure will mean for them and those around them. Team leaders should be as honest and explicit as possible. Change Drivers in Higher Education In the last 30 years the stance of education has changed from an elite system to one of mass education. (11). Society’s outlook and perspective on education has also undergone radical transformation. From a vantage point, major changes in educational field can be summarized as follows:- In the UK, only 14% of students were enrolled in higher education 30 years ago. Consequently higher levels of expenditure could be afforded for each college and university. However, the rapid intake of students in the 1980s and 1990s made it impossible to meet the same level of expenditures. (12). From a United Kingdom perspective the Government’s Competitiveness White Paper in 1998 set out the global ambitions of the UK Government and underlined the importance of universities in creating a dynamic economy through education, training, and research. Because of this recognition, higher education institutions not just in the United Kingdom, but across the world, are regarded as important instruments of economic and social change. (13). Research sponsored by the Smith Institute and the HEFCE identifies a range of wider benefits, including better health, parenting, civic engagement, and more egalitarian attitudes among graduates. Growing recognition by Governments of these wide range of benefits has put higher education on a different footing than in the past and is bringing it increasingly into the political spotlight. (12). Students today have much higher expectations of the quality and professionalism in the provision of university amenities and services; of access to suitably qualified teachers and learning support; of the value of their study to their careers; of convenience in delivery in higher education; of being treated with respect; of value for money; and of high academic standards. (11). Drivers and Considerations for Change at Northumbria Staff at Northumbria is very clear that students and their needs now constitute the main driver for change. Between 2001 and 2003 the emphasis has shifted from improving efficiency and organisational flexibility to a more direct focus on support and enhancement of teaching and learning processes. (14).During a case study visit, it was mentioned that: “Although it’s true that some of the drive to go “on-line” has come from above through academic development plans and university strategies, one of the main drivers for the development of on-line learning has been the student body. One of the greatest levers we’ve found has been student demand.” Other drivers for Northumbria to move towards further roll-out and integration include The need to harness data quality Improve and harmonize the underlying processes To provide a robust framework for staff development. (15) Drivers for further moves toward integration of systems within and beyond the University include: Awareness that the problems are being faced universally by both HE and FE (the experience with Northumbria Learning has been instrumental in identifying this) Improving the ability for partnering with other organisations. Competitiveness in the higher education market to provide a leading edge service to students. (16) Model of Adoption The model of adoption in Northumbria followed, the forming, storming, norming, and performing model. (17). Some key points that have emerged which have led to the cultural change required to support the level of success include: Stages 1 and 2 Breaking down the ICT interference factor allows focus to shift from technical to pedagogical issues. Once staff are familiar with the technology and how it works, the focus can shift to exploring how best to deploy it to the benefit of the learning and teaching situation. (Forming, storming) (17) Stage 3 Staff development for e-learning must not be viewed in isolation from other aspects of ICT and non-ICT staff development. (Norming) Stage 4 Staff development for e-learning is most effective when driven by the real needs of preparing a coherent, web based learning environment. To engage fully with the pedagogical issues and not just the technical, the collaborative involvement of whole programme teams, both academic and administrative, in workshops is greatly beneficial (Cultural change) (17) A range of approaches is essential. This involves looking at the different ways staff prefer to learn and catering for these in the staff development provision (Cultural change) The emergence of local champions, or leaders with vision is extremely helpful. These staff is at the forefront of developing the use of the VLE within their own teaching situation and are able to share and cascade their expertise to colleague. (Performing) (17) Consultation and Support Northumbria brought together a team incorporating technology, administrative and academic skills and backgrounds –thus offering a multi disciplinary approach. It took a pedagogy-led approach, and combined it with effective practice and dissemination by: Working closely with the University on L&T aims and objectives; Staff Development sessions encouraging an understanding of systems – ensuring communication beyond traditional boundaries (18) Achievements More than four years on, the implementation is perceived as a huge success with high student take-up figures seen as the most convincing positive indicator. Northumbria now has a University Wide VLE, with at peaks 800 user log-ins per hour, 2000 live modules/courses and more than 32000 students (plus approximately 875 academics and 250 non-academics) on live courses. Half these students have used Blackboard since week 1. (19) Northumbria University and its staff and students are starting to enjoy economies of scale. The successful implementation and the expertise developed have created wider benefits: The university’s ability to lead a NTI project. A capital grant of £1.7m has been awarded to Northumbria University on behalf of a new consortium, embracing education providers, employers and business support organisations. (19) Northumbria is leading a consortium of ten colleges and universities in Tyne and Wear and Northumberland and 18 businesses and business support organisations to address skill needs in ICTs and to help small firms to keep up to date with new technologies. (19) Increased library integration – establishing one port of call for students; A rapidly growing course base of Distance Learning, franchise and collaborative ventures The creation of a wholly owned subsidiary ‘Northumbria Learning’, exploiting Northumbria’s expertise to commercial advantage and to the benefit of other organisations, is seen as a particular success. Northumbria Learning Ltd is designed as a unique partnership agreement with Blackboard. The close and effective working relationship is clearly demonstrated trough Northumbria Learning’s representation on the European Blackboard Advisory Board; through the University’s trial of the Blackboard Learning Content Management System; and in a worldwide first virtual installation of Blackboard managed learning system. (20) The Future Northumbria has taken and will continue with a very clear pedagogic approach to support academics and students in adopting the MLE. This is made possible by a high level of central co-ordination, with student needs and experiences right at the centre of institutional planning, resulting in clearly articulated development priorities. This was confirmed as part of Enabling Online, and served as an encouragement of good practice. (20) Short and medium term barriers mentioned include data quality, accuracy, and timeliness. Northumbria is actively working on solutions in the development and implementation of its cohort tool. It was noted that underlying systems and system changes are becoming increasingly mission critical and exposed as the services which utilise them become main-streamed and are being used in students’ and staff daily routine. In addition, the development time for materials needs to be planned more closely now, in order to allow staff to capitalise on the opportunities offered by an enhanced infrastructure. (21) Conclusion Northumbria’s case can be taken as a guide-line for other higher education institutions which are foreseeing organizational change. Being alive to the internal and external drivers, Northumbria has planned and executed their change management strategy systematically and logically, thereby ensuring phase-wise changeover. Intelligent identification of all the requirements and prudent planning to handle all aspects has been a hallmark of change management at Northumbria. REFERENCES 1. Appelbaum, SH, St. Pierre, N & Glavas, W (1998) ‘Strategic Organizational Change: The Role of Leadership, Learning, Motivation and Productivity’, Management Decision, vol. 36 2. Barbeschi, M (2002) ‘Organizational culture of the OPCW Secretariat’, Disarmament Forum, vol. 4 3. Bartley, W.W. (1990). Unfathomed Knowledge, Unmeasured Wealth: On Universities and the Wealth of Nations. La Salle, IL: Open Court Press. 4. Burnes, B (1996) Managing change: A strategic approach to organizational dynamics (2nd ed), Division: London. 5. Champion-Hughes, R (2001) ‘Totally Integrated Employee Benefits’, Public Personnel Management, vol. 30, 3 6. Conner, DR (1994) Managing at the Speed of Change, New York: Villard Books. 7. Cameron, K.S. and Tschirhart, M. (1992). ‘Postindustrial environments and organizational effectiveness in colleges and universities’, Journal of Higher Education 63 8. Clark, B.R. (1993). ‘The problem of complexity in modern higher education’, in Rothblatt, S.and Wittrock, B. (eds.), The European and American University Since 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 9. Clark, B.R. (1998). Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation. Surrey, UK: Pergamon Press. 10. Delaney, JT & Huselid, MA (1996) ‘The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Perceptions of Organizational Performance’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 39 11. Dill, D. and Sporn, B. (eds.) (1995). Emerging Patterns of Social Demand and University Reform: Through a Glass Darkly. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 12. Durkheim, E. (1933). The Division of Labor in Society. New York: The Free Press. 13. Heydebrand, W. (1990). ‘The technocratic organization of academic work’, in Calhoun, C., Meyer, M.W. and Scott,W.R. (eds.), Structures of Power and Constraint: Papers in Honor of Peter M. Blau. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. 14. Kerr, C. (1987). ‘A critical age in the university world: Accumulated heritage versus modern imperatives’, European Journal of Education 22(2) 15. Kerr, C. (1995 [Orig. 1963]). The Uses of the University, 4th Edn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 16. Levine, DI (1995) Reinventing the Workplace: How Business and Employees Can Both Win, Brookings Institution, Washington, DC 17. McNamara, C (1999) Basic Context for Organizational Change. 18. Nickols, F (2004) Change Management 101: A Primer. 19. Rainey, HG & Steinbauer, P (1999) ‘Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of a Theory of Effective Government Organizations’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20. Senge, P (1990) ‘The Leaders’ New Work: Building Learning Organizations’, Sloan Management Review 21. Zammuto, R.F. (1984). ‘Are the liberal arts an endangered species?’, Journal of Higher Education 55(2) Read More