organisational change management

Student number 610033217

1

The concept of change is one that has been around for many centuries. It was introduced

around 500 BCE by Greek philosopher Heraclitus, who famously declared that the only thing

constant is change. Due to its complex nature, change has ever since been a main interest of

experts in management studies. This essay will begin by exploring the concept of

organisational change management (OCM). It will then look into the planned approach of

change management, its unintended consequences, and finally, consider alternatives to

effectively manage change within a corporate environment.

Change, as defined by Van de Van and Poole (1995), is an empirical observation of difference

in form, quality or state over time in an organisational entity. The current society is

dominated by rapid high technological advancements, significant changes in legislation,

unpredictable economic conditions, and rampant social developments. It may be observed

that these external influences share one theme, wherein they can occur at any point in time

and at variable degrees. This means that these factors affect the market and economy as a

whole. This then increases competition between organisations where business entities feel

more susceptible and vulnerable. In order to prevent these events from negatively

disrupting operational activities, managers of organisations devise changes in structure,

processes and culture to make themselves more adaptable (Hayes, 2002). As Marsteller

(1992) observes, uncertainty is what led to long-term future planning.

Aside from unforeseen cicumstances, managers may also make decisions which becomes the

internal triggers of change. This comprises but is not limited to redesigning of jobs, change

of location, installation of new systems, and merging with other organisations. Despite the

source of change, the underlying force for an organisations desire to manage change is to

move from its present state to its desired future state effectively, efficiently, and sustainably.

An organisation that practices a certain degree of control may enable it to predict trends of

changes more accurately, which in turn puts managers in a stronger position to make

informed decisions to mould their future direction and performance (Rees and French,

2013). Adjusting to change however is complicated, where according to a McKinsey &

Company survey in 2008 only 30% of change programmes were successful (Keller and

Aiken, 2010).

One concept that has been the centre of research is the planned approach to change

management, which was pioneered by Kurt Lewin and has been prevalent within the

corporate environment for 50 years (Burnes, 2004). One may support the good intentions of


2

the planned approach, where it aims to safeguard an organisation from unanticipated

circumstances. Specifically, this includes looking at past experiences and breaking these into

reducible action plans, for organisations to be ready to respond to signs of potential change.

According to Sturdy and Grey (2003), it is this assumption of controllability which

emphasises the belief that change can and should be managed. However upon putting this

into practice, many experts have claimed that this intentional approach leads to detrimental,

unintended consequences due to its linear and rational characteristics. This will be further

explored using Lewins 3-Step Model, a systematic model showing interrelated processes for

change.

This model follows the course of unfreezing, moving, refreezing (Robbins, 2013).

Specifically, managers identify the need for change, and then employees form the will to

abandon old habits in order to adopt the new behaviour required of them. This newfound

state is then maintained by positive reinforcements of organisational policies and practices

(Burnes, 1996). Based on this model, one may already note the mechanistic view this poses

on organisations. It assumes that employees are able to simply adopt new routines without

considering associated elements, such as their opinions and well-being. It also shows a more

management directive approach to change, and less employee developmental or proactive

role. In addition, the main problem with this traditional view of change is that it over-

simplifies a complex process by listing logical steps on how to manage subjective and

intangible features. This step-by-step characteristic of planned change management leads to

a misconception that makes change seem more feasible to tackle. This notion of thinking has

however constituted the dominant view of OCM, which presides that there is one best

practice to managing change. It immediately assumes that it is applicable to every business

unit and employee in the organisation. In practice, this may not be the case as individuals

have their own sets of beliefs, values and practices. This unitarism view on organisations has

become one of the problematic features of OCM (Sturdy and Grey, 2003). From a personal

standpoint, one may argue that the increasing negative reputation of change is not due to the

concept itself. The need to adapt and manage change may be done with positive intentions,

however it is the process of implementing change which makes it a sensitive topic.

The planned approach to change management suggests a top-down method, where

managers seem to be pressured to constantly review the organisations work practices. In

order for managers to successfully convince employees to share and work towards the

common goal, a manager needs to establish credibility. A lack of credibility occurs when

employees view management as lacking trustworthiness and competence (Kim et al, 2009).


3

As a result, employees develop an attitude of cynicism wherein they are pessimistic about

the success of change efforts. As previously observed by Dawson (2003), employee cynicism

increases as workers feel that management looks at three-letter acronyms such as JIT, BPR

or TQM as the ultimate solution for all corporate ills. In addition, there are those who

question the use and practicality of change programmes. This is because in the first place,

cynical employees will be less emotionally attached to their organisations, as their

discontent leads them to believe that they will not be around for the long haul (Kim et al,

2009).

Another critical repercussion of planned change is employee resistance. Resistance against

change programmes spring from reasons such as the fear of taking risks, wherein employees

feel that there is information asymmetry between them and senior managers. Carnall (1999)

categorises this incapacity to tolerate ambiguity as an emotional block to change. On a

similar note, due to humanistic instincts of self-preservation, employees may act on self-

interest. As Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) explain, even changes that appear to be positive

and rational, employees may perceive this to cost them more losses than garner them

substantial gains. Other resistance to change includes reluctance to lose control, and

hesitation to give up old habits (Oreg, 2003).

Most managers try to reach out to employees through lengthy motivational speeches to

avoid resistance, as employee demonstration of resistance can greatly affect job

performance, the working environment, and perhaps threaten the authority of senior

management. However, it may be argued that resistance is not necessarily a protest or

negative reaction towards change programmes. When employees voice their concerns

regarding certain aspects of the change initiatives, it could be viewed as them getting

involved and participating in enacting change. Managers should therefore devise certain

communication aids that will promote employee participation.

Resistance may be viewed as a superficial reaction to change management, as experts

identify that it involves a much deeper issue, the culture of an organisation. As Weick and

Sutcliffe (2011) argue, researchers still differ on whether culture should be seen as

something an organisation is such as its beliefs, attitudes and values, or as something an

organisation has, referring to its practices and controls. One may pinpoint how this

definition of culture has a positive relation with the traditional view of OCM, where culture

becomes something that can be managed or controlled. However the former definition gives


4

culture a root metaphor, which sees organisations as manifestations of human

consciousness (Smircich, 1983). Until today, there are innumerable conflicting definitions of

change. Nevertheless, the main discussion regarding organisational culture is the issue that

managers seem to utilise this concept to implement change, which according to Harris and

Ogbonna (2002), may lead to unintended ramifications. One of these is the ritualisation of

culture change. Since change is a long process, some managers choose to implement this

piecemeal so as not to add more pressure to employees. This may however result to

employees developing change fatigue where their perceived significance towards the

change programme slowly diminishes. A more damaging one identified is known as the

hijacked process where change initiatives might open the opportunity for others to satisfy

their own purposes. This means that non-specialist change agents may veer away from the

original plan and create an easier path for themselves, or even open the programme up for

sabotage from employees who may feel that they have been done injustice to.

Finally, after the enactment of change initiatives, one needs to evaluate its results because

despite it seeming successful, the intended long-term goal may not have been realised. For

instance, Harris and Ogbonna (2002) found that most change initiators aim to influence

employees values and beliefs, but an in-depth look shows that employees merely practice

behavioural compliance. This may pose as a future threat, since superficial conformity is

short-term thus there will be a tendency for employees to revert back to familiar habits. This

usually happens when the change adopter becomes a passive recipient of corrective

solutions.

Drawing out from a collective reading and personal analysis of culture, one may argue and

define the parameters between organisational culture, organisational environment, and

social culture. For instance, an employee who leaves the work premises will use an

ingrained social culture to interact with others or to go about doing their non-work related

activities. To a certain extent, it may be argued that organisational culture based on this

reasoning is therefore dependent on the atmosphere that an organisation creates. This

viewpoint is backed by Ogbonnas (2007) claim that minor adjustments can be made by

altering the climate of the organisation, while retaining the deep fabric of culture to be

without apparent change. One of the benefits of distinguishing organisational culture in this

manner is that it avoids the positivist notion that culture is directly linked to financial

performance. This allows managers to therefore direct their attention on the symbolisms of

culture evident within the workplace, instead of trying to manage different individuals to

adopt a common culture as a single entity.


5

Due to the aforementioned consequences of change, various alternatives have been explored

by experts in order to achieve an effective and sustainable management of change. Change

may come in varying magnitudes either significantly or discreetly. It may also be

anticipatory or reactive to external events. However, as Sturdy and Grey (2003) argues, no

one seems to consider that stability or continuity is possible, or perhaps even desirable. This

therefore leads to our first alternative to the planned approach of change management.

Continuity, as adopted by Kolb (2003), is defined as the connectedness over time among

organisational efforts and a sense of ongoingness that links the past to the present, and the

present to future hopes and ideals. One may argue that to a certain extent, the structure of

an organisation is a significant factor in reinforcing continuity. For instance, a large public

organisation will be at a disadvantage as they constantly go through new leadership which

usually comes with different managing styles. On the other hand, a family-owned

organisation will be able to pass down its practices. For instance, Ferrero once said that

behind its trademark and turnover, is a story of a brilliant Piedmontese family that ensures

the companys structure is founded on solid family values (Ferrero, 2009).

One may argue that Ferrero is an exceptional example of a family-owned company that

broke through business conventions of international success. Ferrero did not respond to

societys rapidly changing external events by competing for the highly qualified produce of

the labour market, or adopting the trending strategic model. Instead, it develops its core

assets in-house (Ferrero, 2009). One advantage of this approach to change is that it shows

how an organisation realises the value of its people, who served as the backbone in shaping

Ferreros current standing. As Kolb (2003) confirms, continuity is not possible without

appreciation of the past, as neglecting this may cost a company the established goodwill,

wisdom and support of long serving employees. This is because employees work on the

ground and have first-hand experience, therefore they may be able to give an insightful

perspective on how certain changes can be tackled. For instance, they can aid in

distinguishing between a radical change or something that a company has gone through in

the past. Allowing employees to be involved, counters the problem of change fatigue with

the planned approach, wherein managers are now viewed as colleagues instead of change

masters.

One unintended by-product of continuity however is the view that the organisation has sunk

into a state of stagnation. Taylor (2011) argues that this should not be the case, as stability


6

enables progress through its search for new meanings and understandings. Continuity

therefore is about realising forces that bring stability in a changing environment, which

allows an organisation to propel ahead effectively and efficiently. That being the case,

change initiators need to understand that although change and continuity represent

competing principles, they also complement each other in the sense that one begets the

other and vice-versa (Graetz and Smith, 2010). One may note that there is still much to be

learned about continuity, as there is not enough information regarding its application and

success results to conclude this as a recommended replacement to the planned approach to

change.

Another alternative to planned change that is currently gaining popularity among managers

is the concept of creativity. Creativity, as defined by Zhou and Shalley (2009) is both an

outcome and a process, wherein the conceptualisation and development of novel ideas or

procedures occur. Sharing similar principles with continuity, creativity also allows for the

involvement and participation of employees in implementing change initiatives. According

to Elsbach and Hargadon (2006), one way of improving employees output is to use work

design to make tasks more interesting, challenging and motivating. One organisation that

has understood and applied this concept successfully is Google. Google is known to have a

fun and innovative work environment in order to bring out the most creative ideas from

employees. As Amabile et al (1996) notes, research shows that employees produce quality

work when they perceive themselves to have the freedom to choose the method in

accomplishing the tasks that they are given.

One may agree with Starko (2013) that creativity in the workplace results to a number of

benefits. Creativity enables employees to look at situations from different perspectives,

either through brainstorming with colleagues or simply by using creative thinking

techniques. This results to flexibility in decision-making and independence in judgment.

When employees are able to hone their skills, cynicism will eventually subside as they feel

valued by the management. In turn, these employees will become a long-term asset for the

company. Most importantly, Starko (2013) highlights that creativity aids in coping well with

novelty. This means that employees will be able to visualise different scenarios and consider

the more suitable approach in escaping entrenchment. Similarly in the long run, when

presented with new reasons for change, highly creative employees will then be able to sort

through and find order in chaos. This also means that instead of showing signs of

demotivation and change fatigue, employees may instead take the initiative to use creative

thinking techniques in tackling the situation at hand. As a result, managers will be impressed


7

by the perseverance, drive and commitment from employees. Despite the attractive

advantages of using the creative approach, there may be dangers of employees abusing this

opportunity. For instance, Elsback and Hargadon (2006) discuss the folly of free time,

wherein this may inadvertently cause employees to use work time for personal purposes.

This may therefore deter the employee from focusing on the change programme goal.

Another inadvertency of creativity is the erosion of traditional, established values and

practices. This may occur due to the limitless and endless possible ideas that creative

thinking techniques may generate, which may lead to over-reliance of such models.

As this essay has thoroughly considered, organisations may still benefit from the good

intentions of a planned approach. Unfortunately, despite the numerous studies that have

been conducted, there still seems to be difficulties in implementing certain change

initiatives. To a certain extent, managers can only predict and prepare for the future to

lessen the impact of the unforeseeable circumstances. Therefore, in order to attack the

dynamism of change, organisations need to react accordingly. This means that instead of

using the traditional stagnant approach as the first choice to tackling change, managers may

consider the notion that not everything new is always good; and old, bad. The 21st century is

dominated by increasing concerns on good working conditions, ethical practices and the

like. Managers may therefore counter the unintended repercussions by using alternatives

such as continuity and creativity techniques. One may argue that there is however a

literature gap regarding the effectiveness of these concepts, as they are still trying to prove

useful for application in the corporate environment. Regardless of the approach used, it is

important to keep in mind the main goal of OCM, which is to allow an organisation to

manage its core assets, employees and resources, effectively and efficiently to reach its

future goal sustainably.

organisational change management

Documents