The Success of a Change Process in the Organization - Essay Example

Examining the Change Process: HOW can change occur in an organization and WHAT different methods can be used to bring about this change? (Name of Student) (Course Name) (Due Date) Introduction This paper examines the process that an organization must go through in preparation for change. The success of a change process depends on the degree to which the people who work for the organization buy-in to the ideas through persuasive communication and convincing arguments for the necessity of change rather than through a hard sale by management with no attempt to convince the workers that the change is necessary, and why it is necessary to change. The change process requires responding to the feelings, fears and questions of the people whose jobs will be impacted by the advent of the changes, and about the consequences on their personal well being of the impending changes in the work environment, and involves deploying the processes, tools and techniques for managing these concerns. Individuals going through the change process may exhibit a variety of behaviours which include conventionality, compliance, dependence, approval, opposition, competition or power struggles. Successful implementation of the suggested changes indicates the degree to which the suggested changes were communicated and accepted by the people. After identifying the need for change it is necessary to communicate this information directly and succinctly to the people who will be tasked with modifying their jobs to suit the changes, as well as explaining the effort employees may need to expend to relearn their tasks, as this helps to unfreeze the mindset of the employee from the accustomed way of doing things (Kondalkar, 2009:203). A well informed employee has the opportunity to explore the proposed changes in discussion with management who in turn can then engender in the mind of the employee a sense of the need for kaizen (continuous improvement), and continuous positive culture change (Kotter, 1995; Kotter, 1996; Anderson and Anderson, 2010). This paper also notes the problems associated with implementing change and the failures of change efforts regardless of the strategic approaches towards transformation, including but not limited to: changes in organizational culture, total quality management initiatives, re-engineering, value management, changes in structure, human resources realignment, and reformulation of corporate strategy (Kotter, 1996). Defining the Change Process When an organization is planning to improve its performance (in any aspect of the processes, systems, tools, roles, structure, policies, values or mission), there is the respective need for the people who must do their jobs in accordance with the changes to be fully involved in the change process. Before changing any existing practice or adopting a new practice the first step is always to prepare the people whose work will be impacted by the changes by communicating to them clearly why the change is necessary, and persuading them through explanation and open discussion to buy-in to that planned change. Otherwise there will be no beneficial outcome if a new service or new equipment is not used by the people who must operate it. In any organization change is inevitable, and to manage change the organization needs to deploy the processes, tools and techniques for managing the people-side of change, thus preempting the onset of resistance from those who are unwilling to try or just mistrust the new approaches. The onset of change may require building a new organizational culture which must be clearly communicated by the chief executive to all employees. The building of a new culture requires that management be aware of the behavioural norms that govern the way people approach their work and interact with each other, and these norms may aim to fulfill the higher order needs of staff such as achievement and goal setting; personal growth; cooperation; integrity; or support and encouragement. The motivation for change may arise from any section of the organization. Change may be required in human resources for communications and training, Six Sigma or Total Quality Management; or it may be required in IT for managing continuous process improvement, hardware and software version control, or Restructuring and Organizational Development, or Business Process Re-engineering; and change may be necessary for scope and schedule changes in project management. Individuals going through the change process may exhibit a variety of behaviours which include conventionality, compliance, dependence, approval, opposition, competition or power struggles. All these individual responses to change have an implication for the change process and need to be managed expertly if the changes are to be successfully integrated into the organizational performance. This paper will use scholarly literature and the analysis in the previous assignment, to suggest ways in which the organization can engage staff to relinquish old arrangements, to accept and undertake new ideas through a whole-organizational change process. Whatever the motive for change, the process has to be deliberately managed through definite stages in a change process that is directed at the personnel who must participate fully in the change process. Successful management of the change process is celebrated organization-wide as it leads to successful implementation of the suggested changes, and indicates the degree to which the suggested changes were communicated and accepted by the people with a high degree of buy-in. The outcome is that a successful change process will help in value addition and achievement of project goals resulting in marked improvements in organizational performance, profitability, and return on investment, operational efficiency and competitive advantage. For the change process to proceed smoothly Prosci (2009) suggested a P-P-P-P discovery exercise, where the Project (what project?), the Purpose (why we are changing?), the Particulars (what we are changing?) and the People (who will be changing?) are clearly identified so as to help management clearly define the parameters of the change, and how change management assists in the project to achieve its objectives. The change process is as illustrated in the Figure 1. The figure shows how management can influence workers to accept change and thereby buy-in to the suggested changes. FIGURE 1: Source: Salon (2007) As shown in figure 1 the first requirement is for information. The person whose work must adjust to the new procedures needs to know what is going to change and why the change is necessary. The second stage requires convincing the employee of the need for change starting from his current frame of reference and building up towards a logical defense of the proposal to institute some changes. This establishes whether or not the employee is ready for change. If not, the task becomes that of supplying him with clearer information about the proposed change. The third stage determines whether the changes should be done urgently with immediate effect or if the change requires preparation and training. In the event that the employee has the time and enthusiasm to do what is necessary to effect the necessary job adjustments he can enter stage four of the change process: he must be facilitated with the tools, models and means to ease his process of adjustment. He can also be partnered with fellow employees who are doing the same or similar adjustments to their work schedules and responsibilities. The fifth stage entails garnering the enthusiasm for change and walking through the actual change working with others, using the appropriate tools of adjustment and competing for rewards that serve as incentives for facilitating the speed and quality of change and making the change itself exciting. Within a specific department such as Information Technology, the stages in the change process are the same but with particular reference to the operational context and scope of the department. Stage five would then look like is illustrated in figure 2 below. FIGURE 2 Source: Silhouette Solutions (2009) The process of effecting the changes will start with design and end with delivery. In the process all the necessary analyses, modifications, tests and re-tests will be done until the end product is delivered to the satisfaction of the stakeholders. Dealing with the inevitability of change Sustaining an organization's competitive advantage in a constantly changing business environment is the main challenge facing businesses and success can be achieved through continuous strategic repositioning, and not just cost-cutting measures of down-sizing and restructuring. It is a challenge that requires the best of leadership skills to lead change and mange the process of change as the organization transforms and improves (Carr, et al. 1996). Though it is widely held that the process of individual change starts from external imperatives (Dufresne, 1992; Papp, 1994; Yochelson and Samenow, 1994) and that the competitive pressure from rivals persuades organizational management to act to implement change in order for the organization to remain competitive (Kotter, 1996; Hiam, 1997), it is the view of Donaldson (1994) that the best initiatives for change, and the management of the change process ought to be from within the corporate structure of the organizing seeking change. Many organizations are impacted by external forces and implement changes according to the type of force encountered (Hiam, 1997). They react to competition by initiating organizational design changes. Financial performance issues are addressed with changes in corporate strategy. Technological innovation challenges are addressed by changing work force size and composition. The challenges of globalization usually result in corporations making changing their leadership styles. When the challenges have to do with building new business relationships then the organization reforms its vision, values and culture. Kotter (1995) analyzed the multifarious approaches that corporations had adopted over a decade and a half, listing the many reasons why most transformation efforts had failed, and proceeded to prescribe what he termed the eight stage process as a road-map for ensuring success in organizational transformation. Kotter (1996) critically looks at the problems associated with implementing change and discusses the many strategic approaches towards successful transformation, including but not limited to: changes in organizational culture, total quality management initiatives, re-engineering, and value management, changes in organizational structure, human resources realignment, and reformulating corporate strategic visions. Most of the approaches had mostly failed to be effective in bringing about desirable results because they were driven by poor leadership. Ingredients for a Successful Change Process In order to have a successful change process it is imperative that the reasons for change are clearly articulated and communicated to the organization's employees (Kotler, 1996; Joyce and Woods, 2001) in order to preempt resistance and defensiveness from the employees. After identifying the need for change it is necessary to communicate this information directly and succinctly to the people who will be tasked with modifying their jobs to suit the changes, as well as explaining the effort employees may need to expend to relearn their tasks, as this helps to unfreeze the mindset of the employee from the accustomed way of doing things (Kondalkar, 2009:203). A well informed employee has the opportunity to explore the proposed changes in discussion with management who in turn can then engender in the mind of the employee a sense of the need for kaizen (continuous improvement), and continuous positive culture change (Kotter, 1995; Kotter, 1996; Anderson and Anderson, 2010). Ken Blanchard authored an article titled A Personal Approach to Change in which he opines there is no success in the change process without a proper understanding of the feelings and emotional journey of the employees affected by the proposed changes. When employees are confronted with the suggestion for change in their work environment they react in different ways. Hiam (1997: 120) reproduced Blanchard's article detailing the six stages suffered by employees impacted with change, based on Hall et al. (1996) studies at UT Austin, which explored why school innovation projects which passed the pilot studies fail when attempts are made to implement them in the schools, a phenomenon they termed the concerns based adoption model, in which six stages of concern are identifiable. The first stage of concern is the "What is it?" level where they seek to simply be informed about the changes and comprehend the reasoning behind the suggested changes. Managers who avoid the information dialogue and try to perform a hard sell for the proposed change without communicating the basis for the changes usually hit a road-block of cooperation, and elicit resistance and resentment from the affected employees. The second stage concerns the question of "How will it personally affect me?” It is essential that employees understand what effect the changes will have on them personally in doing their jobs, and to what extent they may require to modify their own operational schedules and skill sets to align their work with the changes. It also addresses whether or not they will be able to keep their current position and whether any appraisal may negatively impact their chances at advancement. All these are personal safety considerations and address personal comforts at the workplace. It is important that managers explain and discuss these concerns openly and honestly from the onset in order to allay any fears and dispel any misapprehensions that the employee may have about his or her personal safety and job security. The third stage is a management question of "Who is the most suited to lead this process?" as to who will be tasked with steering and guiding the change process, and requires that the most appropriate leader be given the responsibility to lead the change initiative. An individual or a team can be tasked with producing plans, schedules and training sessions in order to get the change process on track. The fourth stage addresses the consequences, as people evaluate "What are the benefits of change and what are the overall impacts of the change?" reviewing the changes in terms of whether it was all what it was hyped up to be, and how to operationalize the new tasks and deal with problem areas. This stage is only reached if the successive previous stages were dealt with satisfactorily. The fifth stages is when employees have fully bought in to the new way of doing things, and are impressed with the overall benefits of changing, and hence tend to ask "What can I do to convince my fellow employees, and spread the good news?" They become enthusiastic participants in making the implementation a success. This stage of collaboration moves the change process forward as the enthusiasm becomes infectious and begins to spread and people start taking initiatives for improving the implementation efforts of the change. The sixth stage sees individuals working towards new ways of improving over and above the proposed changes, asking "What can we do to improve the system beyond the proposed changes?" They seek new and better ways of doing what needs to be done in order to get better results than what will have been proposed. The synergy value of these process stages comes from the sum of the individual employees' efforts to buy-in to the proposed changes and then taking up the flame and running with it while spreading the enthusiasm to others who may have lagged behind. Any attempt to circumvent these crucial transformational stages would normally derail the change process for lack of adequate buy-in. All change processes succeed at the individual level of acceptance and collaboration, and without individual participation the implementation is impossible. References Anderson, L.A and Anderson, D. (2010). “The Change Leader's Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization's Transformation.” Pfeiffer, San Francisco, pp 400 Carr, D.K, Hard, K.J. and W.J. Trahant. (1996). “Managing the change process: a field book for Change agents, consultants, team leaders, and reengineering managers.” McGraw Hill, p. 248 Donaldson, G. (1994). “Corporate restructuring: managing the change process from within.” Harvard Bus. Sch. 1994, p. 227 Dufresne, K. (1992). “The change process: a self-reflective study: a project.” Keene State College Press, p. 52 Hiam, A. (1997). “The portable conference on change management.” HRD Press (Amherst, MA and Minneapolis, MN, p. 444  Joyce, P. and Woods, A. (2001). “Strategic management: a fresh approach to developing skills, knowledge and creativity.” Kogan Page, USA. 2001, p. 578 Kotter, J.P. (1995). “Leading Change: Why transformation efforts fail.” Harvard Business Review, March-April, 1995. Kotter, J.P. (1996). “Leading Change.” Harvard Bus, Sch. Press. p. 187 Kondalkar, V.G. (2009). “Organization Effectiveness and Change Management.” PHI Learning, New Delhi, p. 446 Papp, P. (1994). “The Process of Change.” Guilford Press, p. 248 Salon. (2007). “How you can influence and provoke change extracted from." Retrieved 15th January, 2011 from http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/images/Change Process.jpg Scheer, A-W. (2003). “Business process change management: ARIS in practice.” Springer- Verlag, p. 290 Silhouette Solutions. (2009). DATRICA. Retrieved 15th January, 2011 from http://www.silhouettesolutions.com/products.htm Yochelson, S. and S. E. Samenow. (1976). “The Criminal Personality: The change process.” Crown Publ., NY. p. 592 Read More