"Change is inevitable.  Growth is optional."

ORGANISATIONAL CHANGEChange management is a systematic approach to dealing with

change, both from the perspective of an organization and on the individual level. A somewhat ambiguous term, change management has at least three different aspects, including: adapting to change, controlling change, and effecting change. A proactive approach to dealing with change is at the core of all three aspects. For an organization, change management means defining and implementing procedures and/or technologies to deal with changes in the business environment and to profit from changing opportunities.

Organizational change means any change that occurs in the work environment. The change could be minor or major. Usually Organizational change re-aligns organizational systems and deal with the factors prevailing in the external environment of an organization. Sometimes, a change is effected to revamp the internal systems of the organization.

Organizational change can be described as a situation which emerge due to some management decisions that have an effect on employees.

Typically, the concept of organizational change is in regard to organization-major change, as opposed to minor changes such as adding a new person, modifying a program, etc. Examples of organization-major change might include a change in mission, restructuring operations, new technologies, mergers, major collaborations, "rightsizing", new programs such as Total Quality Management, re-engineering, etc. Some experts refer to organizational transformation. Often this term designates a fundamental and radical reorientation in the way the organization operates.

WHYSuccessful adaptation to change is as crucial within an

organization as it is in the natural world. Just like plants and animals, organizations and the individuals in them inevitably encounter changing conditions that they are powerless to control. The more effectively you deal with change, the more likely you are to thrive. Adaptation might involve establishing a structured methodology for responding to changes in the business environment , such as a fluctuation in the economy, or a threat from a competitor, or establishing coping mechanisms for responding to changes in the workplace, such as new policies, or technologies.

Change should not be done for the sake of change -- it's a strategy to accomplish some overall goal. Usually organizational change is provoked by some major outside driving force, e.g., substantial cuts in funding, address major new markets/clients, need for dramatic increases in productivity/services, etc. Typically, organizations must undertake organization-major change to evolve to a different level in their life cycle, e.g., going from a highly reactive, entrepreneurial organization to more stable and planned development. Transition to a new chief executive can provoke organization-major change when his or her new and unique personality pervades the entire organization.

HOWSuccessful change must involve top management, including

the board and chief executive. Usually there's a champion who initially instigates the change by being visionary, persuasive and consistent. A change agent role is usually responsible to translate the vision to a realistic plan and carry out the plan. Change is usually best carried out as a team-wide effort. Communications about the change should be frequent and with all organization members. To sustain change, the structures of the organization itself should be modified, including strategic plans, policies and procedures. This change in the structures of the organization typically involves an unfreezing, change and re-freezing process.

The best approaches to address resistances is through increased and sustained communications and education. For example, the leader should meet with all managers and staff to explain reasons for the change, how it generally will be carried out and where others can go for additional information. A plan should be developed and communicated. Plans do change. That's fine, but communicate that the plan has changed and why. Forums should be held for organization members to express their ideas for the plan. They should be able to express their concerns and frustrations as well.

For Whom Stakeholders are people who have some form of interest in the

change, whether they are the targets of the change, managers or other interested parties.

Sponsors are people with power who have a direct interest in the project. As described elsewhere, you need to carefully manage your sponsors to gain support and avoid opposition, especially where they are also Targets.

Targets are people who will intentionally be affected by the change. You many want them to change what they do and think, or even what they feel and believe. Deeper change, is, of course more difficult.

It is easy to focus on sponsors and targets and forget that there may be many other people who may unintentionally be affected by the change. For example when a process is changed, everyone who is connected with the inputs and outputs of the process may be affected.

You may work with a wide range of internal and external partners to effect the change, from the IT Department to external consultants and trainers. These people need to be fully on board. In particular, if they will require any significant level of resourcing to be effective in the change, they must be allowed and encouraged to estimate what they will need to be successful and supported in their bids to acquire this resource.

There are often a wide range of people who might have some more distant interest. For example if there are going to be job losses, then government and the media may have an interest.

ExamplesClients (Business Clients or Consumers) Competitors Employees (Management) Third parties (Suppliers and Business partners) Capital suppliers, Investors, Shareholders Government (local, national, International) Communities (environmental, professionals)

FORCES OF CHANGE

The forces prompting change can be categorized as, EXTERNAL CHANGE  FORCES INTERNAL CHANGE FORCES

Forces For Change • Nature of the workforce • Technology • Economic shocks • Competition • Social Trends • World Politics

Conditions That Facilitate Organizational

Change • A dramatic crisis • Leadership turnover • Stage of life-cycle • Age of the organization • Size of organization • Strength of current culture

Attitudes Towards Change: A Long-Term Perspective Assumptions: • Change involves not only learning something new

but unlearning something that is integrated into an individual’s self / social system

• No change unless there is motivation to change • Most adult changes involve attitudes/values/self

concept and can be painful and threatening • Organizational changes effected through individual

changes in key members • Change is a multistage cycle and all stages must be

planned and negotiated • Management of change is not necessarily only

rational management but also emotional management of people

Resistance To Change Individual resistance • Habit • Security • Economic factors • Fear of the unknown • Selective information processing Organizational resistance • Structural inertia • Limited focus of change • Group inertia • Threat to expertise • Threat to established power relationships • Threat to established resource allocations

Overcoming resistance to change

• Education and communication • Participation • Facilitation and support • Negotiation • Manipulation and cooptation• Coercion

Begin at the beginning in organizational changePerhaps the most asked but least

answered question in business today is “What can we do to make our business survive and grow?” The world is rapidly changing into something too hard to easily predict, with a hundred opportunities and pitfalls passing by every moment.

  Organizations need to move beyond the buzzwords into deciding what actions they need to perform that will help them grow and develop. In response to this problem, this article will provide you a framework for coping with organizational change independent of buzzwords or the latest management fad. Organizations must first decide on the framework their organizational change long before they choose a buzzword to implement.

The major decisions

Levels, goals and strategies Measurement system Sequence of steps Implementation and

organizational change 

The levels of organizational change

There are four levels of organizational change:

shaping and anticipating the future (level 1) defining what business(es) to be in and their

"core competencies” (level 2) reengineering processes (level 3) incrementally improving processes (level 4)

Level 1- shaping and anticipating the future

At this level, organizations start out with few assumptions about the business itself, what it is "good" at, and what the future will be like.

Management generates alternate "scenarios" of the future, defines opportunities based on these possible futures, assesses its strengths and weaknesses in these scenarios changes its mission, measurement system etc.

Level 2 - defining what business to be in and their "Core Competencies

Many attempts at strategic planning start at this level, either assuming that 1) the future will be like the past or at least predictable; 2) the future is embodied in the CEO's "vision for the future"; or 3) management doesn't know where else to start; 4) management is too afraid to start at level 1 because of the changes needed to really meet future requirements; or 5) the only mandate they have is to refine what mission already exists.

After a mission has been defined and a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis is completed, an organization can then define its measures, goals, strategies, etc.

Level 3 - Reengineering (Structurally Changing) Your Processes

Either as an aftermath or consequence of level one or two work or as an independent action, level three work focuses on fundamentally changing how work is accomplished. Rather than focus on modest improvements, reengineering focuses on making major structural changes to everyday with the goal of substantially improving productivity, efficiency, quality or customer satisfaction.

Level 4 - Incrementally Changing your Processes

Level 4 organizational changes are focusing in making many small changes to existing work processes. Oftentimes organizations put in considerable effort into getting every employee focused on making these small changes, often with considerable effect. Unfortunately, making improvements on how a buggy whip for horse-drawn carriages is made will rarely come up with the idea that buggy whips are no longer necessary because cars have been invented.

Implementation and Organizational Change

The success of any organizational change effort can be summed into an equation:

  Success = Measurement X Method X

Control X Focused Persistence X Consensus

Like any equation with multiplication, a high value of one variable can compensate for lower levels on other variables. Also like any equation with multiplication, if one variable equals 0, the result is zero.

Focused persistence, good project management and the sequence of implementation

The sequence of implementation is also an important factor. There are four basic options, with many variations of them. The first involves the entire organization from the start, with the whole organization intensively working at once on making the change.

  Another option is a more relaxed approach, in which divisions or business units of the organization go at their own pace. This option can often become an incremental approach like the first or second village. Many conglomerates or other companies with diverse operations try this approach.

A third option is similar to the previous one, with the focus being on individual business units doing the implementation. In this case, however, business units implement roughly the same things in roughly the same time schedule. Unisys, the computer company, is using this method on some of its organizational change efforts.

A fourth option is to create a pilot project in one division or business unit, learn from its mistakes, and then apply those lessons to the rest of the organization. Examples of this option include the Saturn car facility at General Motors and the Enfield plant of Digital Equipment Corporation. It’s important to note here that creating pilot projects is a high-risk business. In both cases, the lessons learned from these pilot projects have not gained widespread acceptance in their parent companies due to their heavily ingrained cultures.

m