Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on organizational change management
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
What is organizational change and can it be managed/led?
Combinations of different experiences and education have developed a variety of assumptions about how an organisation works. The use of metaphors when describing organisation movements and change is an important way in which we express these assumptions (Cameron and Green, 2012). Gareth Morgan’s (1986) work on organizational metaphors is good for understanding the different assumptions and beliefs about change that exists. He identifies eight organizational metaphors; machines, organisms, brains, cultures, political systems, psychic prisons and flux and transformation (Morgan, 1986).
Organisations as machines, political systems, organisms, and flux and transformation are particularly common assumptions that are often used by managers, writers and consultants to make sense of how organizational change works. In reality most organizations use combinations of approaches to tackle change and not just one of the above, however these provide useful insights into the process of organizational change (Cameron and Green, 2012). This essay will try to make sense out of these assumptions to understand what organisational change is. By doing so, insights will be drawn on how organizational change can be managed and led.
It is useful to pull the above-mentioned metaphors apart to see the difference in the activities resulting from different ways of thinking (Cameron and Green, 2012). Table 1 gives a brief description of each metaphor. Each individual metaphor outlines certain limitations in the assumptions taken, and when applied under a change model, these can aid in gaining a more in-debt and realistic understanding of organizational change.
To begin with, with a machine like metaph...
... middle of paper ...
...n provide a shared direction” (Jacobs and Heracleous 2006, 211). Such ambiguity of meaning, encourages organisational members to discuss the suitability and practicality of different meanings, thus potentially creating new knowledge and shaping new behaviour influences. Yet there is a threat of fragmentation among organizational members and the associated risks to the success of organisational change management (Reissner, 2011).
A metaphor gives the opportunity to broaden our thinking and enhance our understanding, thereby allowing us to see things in new ways and act in differently. However as a metaphor always creates distortions as well, we have to accept that any theory or perspective that we bring to the study of organization change management, while capable of creating valuable insights, might also be incomplete, biased, and possibly misleading (Morgan, 1986).
S, Rawat 2001, Organisational Change and Forces Prompting Change, Academic Paper Review, Shovoong viewed on 2nd April 2011, on http://imgs.shvoongstatic.com/images/2011/_v_070420111027/scp.PNG">
As Morgan points out in his introduction, no one metaphor adequately addresses all aspects of organizational behavior or approaches to management. However, by using various metaphorical frameworks as appropriate, I can develop a well-rounded plan for transition that maintains the team’s effectiveness, boosts morale, and cements my leadership authority within the work team and the organization. In addition, Morgan’s metaphor approach also provides a useful framework for spotting possible problems and pitfalls, whether they are from human nature, organizational politics, or team inertia rooted in a comfortable common culture.
Graetz, F., & Smith, A. C. T. (June 2010). Managing organizational change: A philosophies of change approach. Journal of Change Management 10(2), 135–154.
Palmer, I., Dunford, R., & Akin, G. (2009). Managing organizational change: A multiple perspectives approach (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill
Morgan’s metaphors analyze the four frameworks that organizations may use to reframe their workforce. The one frame that feel represents my previous organization would be human resource. Bloman and Deal, authors of Reframing Organizations, stated that ‘’ From a human resource view, the key challenge is to tailor organizations to individuals finding ways for people to get the job done while feeling good about themselves and their work’’ (p. 16). When employees do not feel secure or trust their employer it leaves them disengaged and wanting to resign from the organization.
Palmer, I., Dunford, R., & Akin, G. (2009). Managing organizational change: A multiple perspectives approach (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill
Change is a part of continuing improvement process that occurs in every organization, at some point... Change management is an essential component and should be recognized and understood that it is not just a list of tasks to be checked off and considered finished. It is continuously to ensure a successful transformation. There are six contrasting images of managing change. Depending on how we view an organization will determine how we manage change and our ideas are influenced by the images, or frames that we hold, both from managing and from change.
Change is a fundamental element of individuals, groups and all sorts of organizations. As it is the case for individuals, groups and societies, where change is a continuous process, composed of an indefinite amount of smaller sub-changes that vary in effect and length, and is affected by all sorts of aspects and events, many of which cyclic are anticipated ones. It is also the case for organizations, where change occurs repeatedly during the life cycle of organizations. Yet change in organizations is not as anticipated nor as predictable, with unexpected internal and external variables and political forces that can further complicate the management of change (Andriopoulos, C. and P. Dawson, 2009), which is by itself, the focus of many scholars in their pursuit to shed light on and facilitate the change process (Kotter 1996; Levin 1947; et al).
Organizational change affects all levels and individuals of the organization in question. Although a change effort can originate in any part of the organization, it will eventually require strategic effort from the top and buy-in from the bottom in order to be sustained.
Transformation as the word implies signifies ‘a radical shift from one state of being to another’ (Anderson and Ackerman-Anderson, 2001: 39). Thus, transformational change thoroughly reforms the core values, beliefs, missions, behaviour of organisational members and builds a modification foundation of communication networks, work flows, procedures and structures within the organisation (Walton, 1999; Chapman, 2002; Dirkx and Gilley, 2004). Transformational change is often equated with revolutionary change (Torrington et al., 2014) and signals a re-examination and fundamental altering of the organisation function and how it associated with its environment (Beckhard, 1992). Transformational changes also tend to require an understanding of the nature of stakeholder influence in employee behaviour and development which always play a pivotal role in the process (Torrington et al., 2014). Hopefully, it is thus expected to make the existing organisation more capable of delivering service to clients (Sarris and Kirby, 2013). According to different typologies, ‘Discontinuous change’ presented by Grundy (1993) and Scale Type 4 ‘Corporate
However, Lewin’s central model centres on unfreezing, effecting change and then refreezing, starting from the status quo, then moving things and then continuing with the new status quo (Green, 2007). Kotter’s change model focuses on establishing urgency, guiding coalition, developing strategy, communication, empowerment, short-term wins, consolidation of gains to produce and anchor new changes (Sabri et al, 2007). Kotter does not engage with the complexity of organisational systems and potential clashing, he sees change being systematic, architectural, political and doesn’t engage strongly with the less deterministic metaphors in the latter steps (Smith et al, 2015). However, Kotter does highlight the importance of communicating the vision and keeping the communication high throughout the process although this starts with a burst of energy and in later stages its followed by delegation and distance (Cameron and green, 2009). Lewin’s change model focuses on people with the collaboration, contribution creating a force field approach to change including the power holders socially, culturally and behaviourally to drive change (Smith et al, 2015). However, Lewin’s approach ignores the metaphor of groups of people only willing to change if there is a need to do so, the model is more of a planning tool rather than an organisational development process (Cameron and green,
The idea of change is the most constant factor in business today and organisational change therefore plays a crucial role in this highly dynamic environment. It is defined as a company that is going through a transformation and is in a progressive step towards improving their existing capabilities. Organisational change is important as managers need to continue to commit and deliver today but must also think of changes that lie ahead tomorrow. This is a difficult task because management systems are design, and people are rewarded for stability. These two main factors will be discussed with reasons as to why organisational change is necessary for survival, but on the other hand why it is difficult to accomplish.
Organizations are instruments created to achieve other ends. The word organization which is derived from the Greek word ‘organon’ means a tool or instrument. Therefore, ideas such as tasks, goals, aims and objectives have become such fundamental organizational concepts. Organizations are a complex and paradoxical phenomena and there may be challenges in understanding them. Metaphor is a primal force through which humans create meaning by using one element of experience to understand another. The use of different metaphors lead to different explanations and theories of organizations helps us to think and see organizations from different perspectives. Each provides a certain view of the organization and can be convincing but it does not provide a clear picture of an organization. Therefore, by exploring the implications of different metaphors it is possible to understand the nature of an organization.
Why do organizations change? With time goes by, rapid development of science and technology had led us to a world full of competitions. Change and stay alert to keep up with the current trend is essential asset to survive in this aggressive global economy. As the framework indicated by Pettigrew, there are two key context factors makes a great deal of effects on the reason for companies to change. Those are outer context and Inner context. Outer context could refer to the surrounding environment around the firm and the global economics status, etc. Inner context could be downsizing, restructuring the Gestalt, or the problem with coherent design archetype. Under the stress of the outer and inner context, forces or triggers will bring out the revolution. Change can be seen in a short term way and also in a long term way. Short term change could be a sudden, discontinuous and frame-breaking rupture which has an impact on the whole organisation, or new forms of management ad structure of the firm itself, or the breakthrough created by the major innovations or even can refers to the impact of new product and new market opportunities. Normally, financial crisis will be an initiative as a trigger to revolution. At first of the revolution, there would probably already has small changes in normal management and structure. As a long term way to apply the change, change agents are needed to do an ongoing, continuous and gradual progression or give some simpler initiatives such as improvements to existing products and product range.
One of the first scholars to describe the process of organizational change was Lewin (1974). He described change as a three-stage process that consists of unfreezing, moving and freezing stage. During the unfreezing stage the organizations become motivated to change by some event or objective. The moving stage is like implementation when the organization actually makes the necessary change. Furthermore the freezing stage is reached when the change becomes permanent. Organizational change has also...