2.0 INTRODUCTION
Just
like conflict, change is inevitable in the life of an organisation. Change
heralds new opportunities and poses formidable challenges.
1
Organisations
that learn and cope with change will thrive and flourish and others which fail
to do so will be wiped out. Under these circumstances, it becomes imperative to
discuss the various change models used by experts in the field of
organisational change and management.
2.2 CHARACTERISTICS
OF EFFECTIVE CHANGE
PROGRAMMES
Distinguishing
between change that inevitably happens to all organisations and change that is
planned by members of an organisation is important. Our focus is primarily on
intentional, goal-oriented, organisational, purposeful attempts by managers and
employees to improve the functioning of teams, departments, divisions or an
entire organisation in some important way.
Effective
planned change efforts are often characterised by some common characteristics.
For example, effective change programme may involve:
•
Motivating change by creating a readiness for the change
among employees and attempting to overcome resistance to change
•
Creating a shared vision of the desired future state of
the organisation
•
Developing
political support for the needed changes
•
Managing the transition from the current state to the
desired future state and
•
Sustaining momentum for change so that it will be carried
to its completion.
The
initiatives required to address each of these aspects of a change programme are
summarised in Figure 2.1.
2
Motivating
change
•
Creating
readiness for change
•
Overcoming
resistance for change
Creating
a vision
•
Energising
commitment
•
Describing
a desired future state
Developing
Political Support
•
Assessing
change-agent power
• Identifying key stakeholders
•
Influencing
stakeholders
Managing
the Transition
•
Activity
Planning
•
Commitment
Planning
•
Management
Structure
Effective
Change
Management
Sustaining
Momentum
•
Providing
resources for change
•
Building
a support system for change agents
•
Developing
new competencies and skills
•
Reinforcing
new behaviours
FIG. 2.1: INITIATIVES CONTRIBUTING
TO EFFECTIVE CHANGE
MANAGEMENT
Similarly,
the conditions necessary for successfully carrying out effective change
programmes include the following:
•
The organisation’s members themselves must be ready to act
as the key sources of energy for change.
3
•
Key members of the organisation must recognise the need
for change and be attracted by the potentially positive outcomes of the change
programme.
•
A
willingness to change norms and procedures must exist.
In
brief, change must come from within the organisation. People must be aware of
the need for change, believe in the potential value of the changes proposed,
and be willing to change their behaviours in order to make the team, department,
or the organisation effective. In the absence of these beliefs and behaviours,
effective organisational change may be problematic. In addition, effective
change must rely on a contingency perspective- that is open to trying different
things at different times.
2.3 SYSTEMS
MODEL OF CHANGE
Organisation-wide
Change: Meeting the challenge posed by the organisation change often means not
doing things piecemeal. To be successful, change usually must be
organisation-wide. The Systems Model shown in Figure 2.2 provides a useful way
to think about organisational change.
|
People
|
Culture
|
|
Task
|
Technology
|
|
Design
|
Strategy
|
FIG. 2.2: A SYSTEMS MODEL OF
CHANGE
The
Systems Model of Change describes the organisation as six interacting variables
that could serve as the focus of planned change: people, culture, task,
technology, design, and strategy. The people variable applies to individuals
working for the organisation, including their individual differences-
personalities, attitudes, perceptions,
4
attributions,
needs and motives. The culture variable reflects the shared beliefs, values,
expectations, and norms of organisational members. The task variable involves
the nature of work itself— whether jobs are simple or complex, novel or
repetitive, standardised or unique. The technology variable encompasses the
problem solving methods and techniques used and the application of knowledge to
various organisational processes. It includes such things as the use of
information technology, robots, and other automation, manufacturing process
tools and techniques. The design variable is the formal organisational
structure and its system of communication, control, authority, and
responsibility. Finally, the strategy variable comprises the organisation’s
planning process and includes decisions about how the organisation chooses to
compete. It typically consists of activities undertaken to identify
organisational goals and prepare specific plans to acquire, allocate, and use
resources in order to accomplish those.
As
Figure 2.2 indicates, these six variables are interdependent. A change in
anyone usually results in a change in one or more of the other. For example, a
change in the organisation strategic plan might dictate a change in
organisation design to an adaptive or network form. This change, in turn, could
result in the reassignment of people. At the same time, the redesign may also
lead to a change in the technology used by the organisation, which affects the
attitudes and behaviours of the employees involved, and so on. All these
changes would occur within a particular organisation culture, which might
either support or resist them. Moreover, the change itself may either modify or
reinforce the prevailing culture. An advantage of the systems approach to
organisacional change is that it helps employees and managers understand and
think through such interrelationship. The system approach reminds management
that it cannot change part of the organisation, without, in some sense changing
the whole.
5
2.4 LEWIN’S
FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS MODEL
We
have earlier discussed that the environment forces companies to change the way
they operate which is relatively easy to visualise. What is more difficult to
see is the complex interplay of these forces against other organisational
dynamics. Psychologist Kutt Lewin developed the Force Field Analysis model to
help us understand how the change process works. Although developed over 50
years ago, Lewin’s Force Field Analysis model remains the prominent way of
viewing this process.
One
side of the Force Field Model represents the driving forces that push
organisations towards a new state of affairs. There are several driving forces
in the environment like information technology, global and local competition
and demographics. Along with these external forces are driving forces that seem
to originate from within the organisation, such as competition across divisions
of the company and the leader’s need to impose his or her image on the
organisation.
The
other side of the Lewin’s model represents the restraining forces that maintain
the status quo. These restraining forces are commonly called “resistance to
change” because they appear as employee behaviour that block the change
process. Stability occurs when the driving and restraining forces are roughly
in equilibrium; that is, they are of approximately equal strength in opposite
directions.
Kurt Lewin suggests that efforts to bring about planned
change in an organisation should approach change as a multistage process. His
model of planned change is made up of three steps— unfreezing, change, and
refreezing— as shown in Figure 2.3.
6
|
|
Unfreeze
|
Change
(Movement
|
Refreeze
|
|
|
|
Old State
|
(Awareness
of
|
from old state to
|
(Assurance of
|
New State
|
|
|
need for
change)
|
new state
|
permanent
change)
|
|
|
|
|
|
FIG. 2.3: LEWIN’S PROCESS OF
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
Source:
Lewin Kurt, Field Theory in Social Science, New York, Harper and Row (1951)
Unfreezing is the process by which people become aware of
the need for change. If people are satisfied with current practices and
procedures, they may have little or no interest in making employees understand
the importance of a change and how their jobs will be affected by it. The
employees who will be most affected by the change must be made aware of why it
is needed, which in effect makes them dissatisfied enough with current
operations to be motivated to change.
Change
itself is the movement from the old way of doing things to a new way. Change
may entail installing new equipment, restructuring the organisation, implementing
a new performance appraisal system-anything that alters existing relationships
or activities.
Refreezing
makes new behaviour relatively permanent and resistant to further change.
Examples of refreezing techniques include repeating newly learned skills in a
training session and role-playing to teach how the new skills can be used in a
real-life wok situation. Refreezing is necessary because without it, the old
ways of doing things might soon reassert themselves, while the new ways are
forgotten. For example, many employees who attend special training sessions
apply themselves diligently and resolve to change things in their organisation.
But when they return to the workplace, they find it easier to conform to the
old ways rather than make waves. There usually are few, if any, rewards for
trying to change the organisational status quo. In fact, the personal sanctions
against doing so may be difficult to tolerate.
7
2.5 THE
CONTINUOUS CHANGE PROCESS MODEL
Perhaps
because Lewin’s model is very simple and straightforward, critically all models
of organisation change use this approach. However, it does not deal with
several important issues. A more complex and more helpful approach is
illustrated in Figure 2.4.
|
1.
Forces for
|
|
2.
Recognise and
|
|
3.
Problem
|
|
change
|
|
define
problem
|
|
solving
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change
Agent
|
5.
Measure,
|
|
4.
Implement
|
|
Transition
|
|
evaluate,
control
|
|
the
change
|
|
Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FIG. 2.4: CONTINUOUS CHANGE
PROCESS MODEL OF ORGANISATION
CHANGE
Source: Armenakis et
al., “Making change permanent: A model for institutionalising change
interactions”, JAI press (1999).
This approach treats planned change from the perspective
of top management and indicates that change is continuous. It is also important
to note that as change becomes continuous in organisations, different steps are
probably occurring simultaneously throughout the organisation. This model
incorporates Lewin’s concept into implementation phase.
In this approach, top management perceives that certain
forces or trends call for change, and the issue is subjected to the
organisation’s usual problem solving and decision making process. Usually, top
management defines its goals in terms of what the organisation or certain
processes or outputs will be like after the change. Alternatives for change are
generated and evaluated, and the acceptable one is selected.
8
Early
in the process, the organisation may seek the assistance of a change agent- a
person who will be responsible for managing the change effort. The change agent
may also help management recognise and define the problem or the need for
change agent may be involved in generating and evaluating potential plans of
action. The change agent may be a member of the organisation, or an outsider
such as a consultant, or even someone from headquarters whom employees view as
an outsider. An internal change agent is likely to know the organisation’s
people, task, and political situation, which may be helpful in interpreting
data and understanding the system; but an insider may also be too close to the
situation to view it objectively. (In addition, a regular employee would have
to be removed from his or her regular duties to concentrate on the transition.)
All parties, then, often receive an outsider better because of his or her
assumed impartiality. Under the direction and management of the change agent,
the organisation implements the change through Lewin’s unfreeze, change and
refreeze process.
The
final step is measurement, evaluation and control. The change agent and the top
management group assess the degree to which the change is having the desired
effect; that is, they measure progress towards the goals of change and make
appropriate changes if necessary. The more closely the change agent is involved
in the change process, the less distinct the step becomes. The change agent
becomes a “collaborator” or “helper” to the organisation as she or he is
immersed in defining and solving the problems with members of the organisation.
When this happens, the change agent may be working with many individuals,
groups, and departments within the organisation on different phases of the
change process. When the change process is moving along from one stage to
another it may not be readily observed because of the total involvement of the
change agent in every phase of the project. Throughout the process, however,
the change agent brings in new ideas and viewpoints that help members look at
old problems in new ways.
9
Change
often arises from the conflict that results when the change agent challenges
the organisation’s assumptions and generally accepted patterns of operations. .
Through
the measurement, evaluation and control phase, top management determines the
effectiveness of the change process by evaluating various indicators of
organisational productivity and effectiveness on employees’ morale. It is hoped
that the organisation will be better after the change than before. However, the
uncertainties and rapid change in all sections of environment make constant
organisation change a certainty for most organisations.
Transition
Management is the process of systematically planning, organising, and
implementing change from the disassembly of the current state to the
realisation of a fully functional future state within an organisation. Once
change begins, the organisation is in neither the old state nor the new state.
Yet business must go on. Transition Management ensures that business continues
while the change is occurring, and thus it must begin before the change occurs.
The members of the regular management team must take on the role of transition
manager and coordinate organisational activities with the change agent. An
interim management structure or interim positions may be created to ensure
continuity and control of the business during the transition. Communication
about the changes to all involved, from employees to customers and suppliers
playa key role in transition management.
Beckhard suggests ten organisational prerequisites, which
must exist before transformational change can be achieved in an organisation.
These are summarised in Table 2.1.
TABLE 2.1: BECKHARD’S TEN
ORGANISATIONAL PREREQUISITES FOR
TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE
10
|
Priority
|
Prerequisites
|
|
1.
|
Ensuring senior
management commitment to
the imposed
|
|
|
changes, which
needs to be
visible to all
participants
|
|
|
throughout the organisation.
|
|
2.
|
Producing
a written statement about the future direction of the
|
|
|
organisation that makes clear
its new objectives, values and
|
|
|
policies.
|
|
3.
|
Creating
a shared awareness of condition to produce a common
|
|
|
perception that change must be
implemented.
|
|
4.
|
Assembling a
body of key
managers and other
important
|
|
|
opinion-formers to
gain their commitment
to the change
|
|
|
process so that this may be disseminated
more widely.
|
|
5.
|
Generating
an acceptance that this type of change will require a
|
|
|
long time to
implement fully even though there may be short-term,
|
|
|
dramatic
changes as part of the overall process of transformation.
|
|
6.
|
Recognising
that resistance to change is a part of the normal
|
|
|
process of adaptation, so that
the manager can be aware of this
|
|
|
and equipped to manage this
reaction effectively.
|
|
7.
|
Educating
participants about the need for change and training
|
|
|
them with the necessary competence
to be effective to overcome
|
|
|
resistance and gain commitment.
|
|
8.
|
Persevering
with the change process and avoiding blame where
|
|
|
an attempt to implement a facet
of this process fails. Such
|
|
|
negative action will generate
resistance and reduce necessary
|
|
|
risk-taking behaviour.
|
|
9.
|
Facilitating the change process
with necessary resources.
|
|
10.
|
Maintaining
open communication about process, mistakes and
|
|
|
subsequent learning.
|
2.6 CHANGE
AND TRANSITION MANAGEMENT
If the concept of change can be examined from an internal,
external or proactive set of viewpoints, then the response of managers has to
be equally as widespread. Buchanan & McCalman suggest that this requires a
framework of ‘perpetual transition management’. Following from Lawler’s concept
of the lack of a visionary end state, what appears to be required is the
ability within managers to deal with constant change. This transition
management model, although specifically related to large-scale organisational
change, has some interesting insights into what triggers change in
organisations and how they respond. It suggests that four
11
interlocking
management processes must take place both to implement and sustain major
organisational changes. The processes operate at different levels, and may involve
different actors in the organisational hierarchy. The four layers are:
•
Trigger layer: Concerning the identification of needs and
openings for major change deliberately formulated in the form of opportunities
rather than threats or crises.
•
Vision layer: Establishing the future development of the
organisation by articulating a vision and communicating this effectively in
terms of where the organisation is heading.
•
Conversion layer: Setting out to mobilise support in the
organisation for the new vision as the most appropriate method for dealing with
the triggers of change.
•
Maintenance and renewal layer: Identifying ways in which
changes are sustained and enhanced through alterations in the attitude, values
and behaviours, and regression back to tradition is avoided.
2.7
MODEL
OF PERCEPTUAL TRANSITION MANAGEMENT (BUCHANAN BE McCALMAN, 1989)
|
THEORY
|
PRACTICES
|
|
|
Interlocking Processes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trigger
layer
|
Opportunity,
threat, crisis.
|
|
|
|
Clarify, express, communicate
|
|
|
Vision
layer
|
Define
the future (including structure)
|
|
|
|
Challenges, excitement,
innovation
|
|
|
Conversion
layer
|
Persuade,
recruit disciples
|
|
|
|
Detail the structure
|
|
|
Maintenance and
|
Sustain
and enhance belief
|
|
|
Reinforce and justify
|
|
|
renewal layer
|
|
|
Regression avoidance (ritual)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FIG. 2.5
|
|
12
Source: Buchanan, O.A., McCalman, J, High Performance Work
System: The Digital Experience, Rouderedge, London (1989).
Transition
management suggests that organizations have to plan for, divert resources to,
and implement four sets of interlocking processes. These are designed to
implement, to sustain, and to build on change and its achievement in an attempt
to address the issues associated with change over time. The argument here is
that these layers— trigger, vision, conversion and maintenance and renewal- are
necessary processes that occur in change management. The respective emphasis
and priority attached to each of them will alter over time, but recognition of
their existence goes a long way in determining the management action needed.
The
model of perceptual transition management starts out with a number of
questions. How do we explain successful change? How do we explain changes in
organisations that were doomed from the start? How do we explain changes that
are initially successful but wane or fizzle out halfway through? Effective
large-scale changes demand a series of management actions linked to the four
interlocking layers or processes.
In
terms of trigger layer, it is necessary to understand what is causing a need
for change in the organisation. These triggers need to be expressed in a clear
way and communicated throughout the organisation. For example, poor trigger
identification and communication processes are best seen when the first that
employees know of the difficulties facing the organisation is when they are
called in to discuss redundancy terms. People are generally willing and able to
deal with change but many managers do not understand this. They are afraid that
change is associated with some form of failure and feel the need to hide the changes.
People will accept change when they know it is necessary and accept the
explanation for the need for change.
13
It is
necessary for these triggers to be expressed and communicated throughout the
organisation in clear and identifiable terms. For example, the trigger in many
organisations is often a crisis, but it does not necessarily have to be a
threat. People will respond to challenge of a crisis but may react negatively
to a threat. Expressing any potential crisis as an opportunity for change may
assist the process itself In this sense, the language in which the triggering
mechanism is transmitted ‘to the internal organisation has to be clearly
expressed as opportunity, and communicated widely. The chances of successfully
implementing change .are significantly improved when everyone concerned has a
shared understanding of what may happen and why.
If the
trigger for change has been clearly recognised and expressed, it is also a
requirement for management within the organisation to define the future. This
does not call for crystal ball gazing but for the establishment of the vision
layer. The requirement here is for definition and expression of where the
organisation intends to go. Just as shared understanding and awareness of the
triggers for change help smooth the process, so do shared awareness and
understanding of the new vision and the desired organisational goals.
Management must realise the future in terms of three criteria. The first is
that change is seen to provide an effective response to the events triggering
change. Second, there is identification of the desired future condition of the
organisation in terms of its design, its products and its goals. Finally, it
must provide challenge and stimulation. Change is assisted by a climate of enthusiasm
and participation; resistance is the result of fear, prejudice, anxiety and
ignorance.
The
third layer of perceptual transition management is related to gaining recruits
for change. By this it is meant that those who have to work through the change
process need to be converted to the ideas and concepts and own them. Defining a
future that no one can ‘buy into’ will
14
slow
or hinder the change itself. Everyone involved in making change work has to
feel part of it and accept the reasoning for the vision and how this is to be
realised. It is at this point that the vision has to be detailed and aspects
such as future structure and patterns of work explained. There is a need at
this point to recruit disciples to the vision. This is time-consuming, as it
requires detailed explanation. Failure to do so results in negotiations,
renegotiations or decay. Managers at this stage need to get involved in two
activities. First there is the planning team- the main core change unit. The
most appropriate mechanism here will depend upon the organisation and its
consultation systems. Second, it is also necessary to talk to people about the
change at every opportunity, formal or informal. This establishes a shared
understanding of the change problem through debate.
The
last question that perpetual transition management attempts to resolve is
related to the decay associated with the management of mid-term change.
Maintenance and renewal attempt to address the ‘moving goalpost’ features of
change. There are four main examples of this. First, the events that triggered
change in the first place fade in the memory or lose their relevance over time.
Second, articulation of the vision becomes less expressive when the
organisation moves on. Third, replacements feel less committed to the idea and
have to be taken through the reasons for, and responses to, the triggers.
Fourth, the change that took place settles down and becomes the norm in the
organisation. To avoid this sort of decay process there is a requirement for
the organisation to allocate resources to maintaining and renewing the original
vision in an evolutionary framework. In this sense, management takes part in a
process that is described as one of the permanent transitions. It is this point
that can be regarded as the crucial concept. Getting managers to recognise that
change is a constant feature in modern organisations, and one which they have
to deal with, goes a long way towards addressing some of the factors which lead
to resistance to change.
15
2.8 ORGANISATION
CHANGE AND STRATEGIES
There is large number of strategies for organisation
change but action research seems to be appropriate.
Action
research
Action research refers to a change process based on the
systematic collection of data and then selection of a change action based on
what the analyzed data indicate. Their importance lies in providing a
scientific methodology for managing planned change.
The process of action research consists of five steps:
diagnosis, analysis, feedback, action, and evaluation. You’ll note that these
steps closely parallel the scientific method.
Diagnosis: The change agent, often an outside
consultant in action research,
begins by gathering information. This diagnosis is analogous to the physician’s
search to find what specifically ails a patient. In action research, the change
agent asks questions, interviews employees, reviews records, and listen to the
concerns of employees.
Analysis:
The
information gathered during the diagnostic stage is then analyzed. What problems do people key in on? What patterns do
these problems seem to take? The change agent synthesizes this information into
primary concerns, problem areas, and possible actions.
Feedback: Action research includes extensive
involvement of the change targets.
That is, the people who will be involved in any change program must be actively
involved in determining what the problem is the participating in creating the
solution. So the third step is sharing with employees what has been found from
steps one and two. The employees, with the help of the change agent, develop
action plans for bringing about any needed change.
16
Action: Now the ‘action’ part of action
research is set in motion. The
employees and the change agent carry out the specific actions to correct the
problems that have been identified.
Evaluation: Finally, consistent with the
scientific underpinnings of action
research, the change agent evaluates the effectiveness of the action plans.
Using the initial data gathered as a benchmark, any subsequent changes can be
compared and evaluated.
Action research provides at least two specific benefits
for an organization. First, it’s problem focused. The change agent objectively
looks for problems and the type of problem determines the type of change
action. While this may seem intuitively obvious, a lot of change activities
aren’t done this way. Rather, they’re solution centered. The change agent has a
favourite solution—for example, implementing flextime, teams, or a management
by objectives program– and then seeks out problems that his or her solution
fits. Second, because action research so heavily involves employees in the
process, resistance to change is reduced. In fact, once employees have actively
participated in the feedback stage, the change process typically takes a
momentum of its own. The employees and groups that have been involved become an
internal source of sustained pressure to bring about the change.
The
politics of change
No discussion of resistance to change would be complete
without a brief mention of the politics of change. Because change invariably
threatens the status quo, it inherently implies political activity.
Internal
change agents typically are individuals high in the organization who have a lot
to lose from change. They have, in fact, risen to their positions of authority
by developing skills and behavioural patterns that are favoured by the
organization. Change is a threat to
17
those
skills and patterns. What if they are no longer the ones the organization
values? This creates the potential for others in the organization to gain power
at their expense.
Politics
suggests that the impetus for change is more likely to come from outside change
agents, employees who are new to the organization (and have less invested in
the status quo), or from managers slightly removed from the main power
structure. Those managers who have spent their entire careers with a single
organization and eventually achieve a senior position in the hierarchy are
often major impediments to change. Change, itself, is a very real threat to
their status and position. Yet they may be expected to implement changes to
demonstrate that they’re not merely caretakers. By acting as change agents,
they can symbolically convey to various constituencies— stockholders,
suppliers, employees, customers— that they are on top of problems and adapting
to a dynamic environment. Of course, as you might guess, when forced to
introduce change, these long-time power holders tend to implement first-order
changes. Radical change is too threatening.
Power
struggles within the organization will determine, to a large degree, the speed
and quantity of change. You should expect that long-time career executives will
be sources of resistance. This, incidentally, explains why boards of directors
that recognize the imperative for the rapid introduction of second-order change
in their organizations frequently turn to outside candidates for new
leadership.
