Download - Organizational Change(Group No.8)
PRESENTED BY:HEENA MIRCHANDANI
HIMANSHU GARG
JYOTI SATSANGI
VINEET HARIT
Organizational Change: Factors & Approaches
Meaning of organizational Change
The term organizational change implies the creation of imbalances in the existing pattern of situation.
Change is a continuous phenomenon of organizational life. The survival and growth of an organization depends to a great extent on its ability to cope with change required by forces operating within its boundaries and in its external environment
Nature of Change
Organizational change denotes any alteration which occurs in the overall work environment of an organization. Characteristics are:
Change results from the pressure of forces both outside and inside the organization.
The whole organization tends to be affected by change in any part of it.
Change takes place in all parts of the organization, but at varying rates of speed and degrees of significance.
Forces For Change
External Forces
TechnologyTechnology Marketing conditionsMarketing conditions
Social changesSocial
changesPolitical and legal forcesPolitical and legal forces
Change in operative personnel
Change in operative personnel
Change in managerial personnel
Change in managerial personnel
Deficiencies in existing
structure
Deficiencies in existing
structure
Chain effect of change
Chain effect of change
Fear of inflexibility
Fear of inflexibility
Intern
a
l
Forces
Levels of Organizational Change
Individual Level ChangeGroup Level ChangeOrganizational Level Change• Strategic change• Structural change• Process oriented change• People oriented change
Types of organizational changes
Anticipatory or proactive changeReactive changeIncremental changeStrategic change
Causes of human resistance to change
Economic factorsWorkers apprehend technological unemploymentWorkers fear that they will be idle for a major
portion of their time due to higher efficiency of new technology
Workers are afraid of demotion as they do not have the new skills required for the performance of new jobs.
Psychological factors
It is human psychology to maintain status quo. Human beings resist change by nature
Workers may apprehend boredom in new jobs because of increased automation.
Workers may be lazy and reluctant to learn new things
Workers do not have complete knowledge about the change. They may make their own assumptions about change. The assumptions may be totally illogical
Social reasons
It may be felt by workers that their status may go down as a result of introduction of new technology
Changes may require new social adjustments which are not liked by the workers.
Workers as a group oppose change as they are unfamiliar with the change
Workers resist changes which are brought about without consulting them.
Strategies to overcome resistance to change
Education and communicationParticipation and involvementEducation and trainingFacilitation and supportNegotiation and agreementManipulation and co-optationExplicit and implicit coercion
Management of change
Approaches to Change Management
ADKAR ModelLewin’s change management model Kotter’s 8 step change modelBridge’s transition model
ADKAR Model (Simple, powerful and action oriented model for
change)
Developed by Jeff Hiatt, CEO of Prosci Change Management, and first published in 2003, focuses on 5 actions and outcomes necessary for successful individual change, and therefore successful organisational change.
Lewin’s change management model
One of the cornerstone models for understanding organizational change was developed by Kurt Lewin back in the 1940s, and still holds true today.
His model is known as Unfreeze – Change – Refreeze, refers to the three-stage process of change
Lewin, a physicist as well as social scientist, explained organizational change using the analogy of changing the shape of a block of ice.
Kotter's 8-Step Change Model (Implementing change powerfully and
successfully)
Change management guru, John Kotter introduced his eight-step change process in his 1995 book, "Leading Change."
Bridges' Transition ModelThe Transition Model was created by change
consultant, William Bridges, and was published in his 1991 book "Managing Transitions."
CASE STUDYHow Cisco IT Implemented
Organizational Change and Advanced Services for Operational Success
Problem
• NDCS (Network and Data Centre Services) Pre-existing Traditional Model: With two
separate service organizations, there was much duplication and lack of focus.
NDCS engaged Cisco Advanced Services’ Network Availability Improvement Services organization (NAIS) to identify the areas that needed to be changed and recommend how to proceed.
The ORMA (Operational Risk Management Analysis )is a Cisco support deliverable that outlines a roadmap for operational excellence and availability via a best-practice approach to network design, tools, process, and expertise.
SOLUTION
An organizational restructure to Cisco’s IT NDCS group solved the business problem.
Cisco Lifecycle Methodology: Cisco IT NDCS now uses this framework for its organizational structure.
NDCS New Lifecycle Model
Cisco’s new NDCS organization includes administration on both the front end (via the Program Office) and the back end (via the Business Office), and incorporates Cisco’s Lifecycle Model
RESULTS
The restructuring, together with the NAIS ORMA report affected change in NDCS
The operational maturity comparison of 2006 to 2008 shows dramatic improvement in each of the five areas.
Cisco NDCS has achieved customer satisfaction scores of 4.856, with 5 being the best possible score
Service Level Agreement timeframe has risen from 60 percent to 90 percent since the NDCS restructuring
Before using the lifecycle methodology, NDCS had: An average of approximately 150 client-impacting incidents per quarter Total impacting outage duration of 1000-plus hours per quarter. A defective root cause percentage consistently above 40 percent .
The Cisco lifecycle methodology now provides a focus on operational excellence with these results:
Incidents have decreased to approximately 70 per quarter The total impacting outage duration has been reduced to 300 impact
hours per quarter The defective root cause percentage is now consistently below 10
percent.