paper

Page 1 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

3

Organizational change

This chapter tackles the issue of organizational change. How does the process of organizational change happen? Must change be initiated and driven through by one strong individual? Or can it be planned collectively by a powerful group of people and, by sheer momentum, the change will happen? Perhaps there is a more intellectual approach that can be taken. Are there pay-offs to understanding the whole system, determining how to change it, and predicting where resistance will occur? On the other hand, maybe change cannot be planned at all. Something unpredictable could spark a change, which then spreads in a natural way.

This chapter addresses the topic of organizational change in three sections:

1. how organizations really work; 2. models and approaches to organizational change; and 3. summary and conclusions.

In the first section we look at assumptions about how organizations work in terms of the metaphors that are most regularly used to describe them. This is an important starting point for those who are serious about organizational change. Once you become aware of the range of assumptions that shape people’s attitudes to and understanding of organizations, you can take advantage of the possibilities of other ways of looking at things, and you can begin to understand how other people in your organization

Page 2 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

may view the world. You can also begin to see the limitations of each mindset and the disadvantages of taking a one-dimensional approach to organizational change.

In the second section, we set out a range of useful models and ideas developed by some of the most significant writers on organizational change. This section aims to illustrate the variety of ways in which you can view the process of organizational change. We also make sense of the different models and approaches by identifying the assumptions underpinning each one. When you understand the assumptions behind a model, you can start to see its benefits and limitations.

In the third section, we come to some conclusions about organizational change, and stress the importance of being aware of underlying assumptions and having the flexibility to employ a range of different approaches.

HOW ORGANIZATIONS REALLY WORK

We all have our own assumptions about how organizations work, developed through a combination of experience and education. The use of metaphor is an important way in which we express these assumptions. Some people talk about organizations as if they were machines. This metaphor leads to talk of organizational structures, job design and process reengineering. Others describe organizations as political systems. They describe the organization as a seething web of political intrigue where coalitions are formed and power rules supreme. They talk about hidden agendas, opposing factions and political manoeuvring.

Gareth Morgan’s (1986) work on organizational metaphors is a good starting point for understanding the different beliefs and assumptions about change that exist. He says:

Metaphor gives us the opportunity to stretch our thinking and deepen our understanding, thereby allowing us to see things in new ways and act in new ways… Metaphor always creates distortions too… We have to accept that any theory or perspective that we bring to the study of organization and management, while capable of creating valuable insights, is also incomplete, biased, and potentially misleading.

Morgan identifies eight organizational metaphors:

1. machines; 2. organisms; 3. brains;

Page 3 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

4. PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

cultures; 5. political systems; 6. psychic prisons; 7. flux and transformation; and 8. instruments of domination.

We have selected four of Morgan’s organizational metaphors to explore the range of assumptions that exists about how organizational change works. These are the four that we see in use most often by managers, writers and consultants, and that appear to us to provide the most useful insights into the process of organizational change. These are:

• organizations as machines; • organizations as political systems; • organizations as organisms; • organizations as flux and transformation.

Descriptions of these different organizational metaphors appear below. See also Table 3.1, which sets out how change might be approached using the four different metaphors. In reality most organizations use combinations of approaches to tackle organizational change, but it is useful to pull the metaphors apart to see the difference in the activities resulting from different ways of thinking.

Page 4 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

Table 3.1 Four different approaches to the change process

Metaphor How change is tackled Who is responsible Guiding principles

Machine Senior managers define targets and timescale. Consultants advise on techniques. Change programme is rolled out from the top down. Training is given to bridge behaviour gap.

Senior management Change must be driven. Resistance can be managed. Targets set at the start of the process define the direction.

Political system A powerful group of individuals builds a new coalition with new guiding principles. There are debates, manoeuvrings and negotiations which eventually leads to the new coalition either winning or losing. Change then ensues as new people are in power with new views and new ways of allocating scarce resources. Those around them position themselves to be winners rather than losers.

Those with power There will be winners and losers. Change requires new coalitions and new negotiations.

Organisms There is first a research phase where data is gathered on the relevant issue (customer feedback, employee survey etc). Next the data is presented to those responsible for making changes. There is discussion about what the data means, and then what needs to be done. A solution is collaboratively designed and moved towards, with maximum participation. Training and support are given to those who need to make significant changes.

Business improvement/HR/OD managers

There must be participation and involvement, and an awareness of the need for change. The change is collaboratively designed as a response to changes in the environment. People need to be supported through change.

Flux and transformation

The initial spark of change is an emerging topic. This is a topic that is starting to appear on everyone’s agenda, or is being talked about over coffee. Someone with authority takes the initiative to create a discussion forum. The discussion is initially fairly unstructured, but well facilitated. Questions asked might be ‘Why have you come?’ ‘What is the real issue?’ ‘How would we like things to be?’ The discussion involves anyone who has the energy to be interested.

Someone with authority to act

Change cannot be managed; it emerges. Conflict and tension give rise to change. Managers are part of the process. Their job is to highlight gaps and contradictions.

Page 5 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

Metaphor How change is tackled Who is responsible Guiding principles A plan for how to handle the issue emerges from a series of discussions. More people are brought into the net.

Gareth Morgan’s metaphors used with permission of Sage Publications Inc.

MACHINE METAPHOR? The new organizational structure represents an injection of fresh skills into the Marketing Function.

Fred Smart will now head up the implementation of the Marketing Plan, which details specific investment in marketing skills training and IT systems. We intend to fill the identified skills gaps and to upgrade our customer databases and market intelligence databank. A focus on following correct marketing procedures will ensure consistent delivery of well-targeted brochures and advertising campaigns.

MD, Engineering Company

Page 6 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

Organizations as machines

The machine metaphor is a well-used one that is worth revisiting to examine its implications for organizational change. Gareth Morgan says, ‘When we think of organizations as machines, we begin to see them as rational enterprises designed and structured to achieve predetermined ends.’ This picture of an organization implies routine operations, well-defined structure and job roles, and efficient working inside and between the working parts of the machine (the functional areas). Procedures and standards are clearly defined, and are expected to be adhered to.

Many of the principles behind this mode of organizing are deeply ingrained in our assumptions about how organizations should work. This links closely into behaviourist views of change and learning (see description of behavioural approach to change in Chapter 1). The key beliefs are:

Page 7 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

• PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

each employee should have only one line manager; • labour should be divided into specific roles; • each individual should be managed by objectives; • teams represent no more than the summation of individual efforts; • management should control and there should be employee discipline.

This leads to the following assumptions about organizational change:

• the organization can be changed to an agreed end state by those in positions of authority; • there will be resistance, and this needs to be managed; • change can be executed well if it is well planned and well controlled.

What are the limitations of this metaphor? The mechanistic view leads managers to design and run the organization as if it were a machine. This approach works well in stable situations, but when the need for a significant change arises, this will be seen and experienced by employees as a major overhaul that is usually highly disruptive and therefore encounters resistance. Change when approached with these assumptions is therefore hard work. It will necessitate strong management action, inspirational vision, and control from the top down. (See the works of Frederick Taylor and Henri Fayol if you wish to examine further some of the original thinking behind this metaphor.)

Organizations as political systems

When we see organizations as political systems we are drawing clear parallels between how organizations are run and systems of political rule. We may refer to ‘democracies’, ‘autocracy’ or even ‘anarchy’ to describe what is going on in a particular organization. Here we are describing the style of power rule employed in that organization.

Page 8 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

The political metaphor is useful because it recognizes the important role that power-play, competing interests and conflict have in organizational life. Gareth Morgan comments: ‘Many people hold the belief that business and politics should be kept apart… But the

Page 9 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

person advocating the case of employee rights or industrial democracy is not introducing a political issue so much as arguing for a different approach to a situation that is already political.’

The key beliefs are:

• you can’t stay out of organizational politics: you’re already in it; • building support for your approach is essential if you want to make anything happen; • you need to know who is powerful, and who they are close to; • there is an important political map that overrides the published organizational structure; • coalitions between individuals are more important than work teams; • the most important decisions in an organization concern the allocation of scarce resources, that

is, who gets what, and these are reached through bargaining, negotiating and vying for position.

This leads to the following assumptions about organizational change:

• the change will not work unless it’s supported by a powerful person; • the wider the support for this change, the better; • it is important to understand the political map, and to understand who will be winners and

losers as a result of this change; • positive strategies include creating new coalitions and renegotiating issues.

What are the limitations of this metaphor? The disadvantage of using this metaphor to the exclusion of others is that it can lead to the potentially unnecessary development of complex Machiavellian strategies, with an assumption that in any organizational endeavour, there are always winners and losers. This can turn organizational life into a political war zone. (See Pfeiffer’s book, Managing with Power: Politics and influence in organizations (1992) to explore this metaphor further.)

Organizations as organisms

This metaphor of organizational life sees the organization as a living, adaptive system. Gareth Morgan says: ‘The metaphor suggests that different

Page 10 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

environments favour different species of organizations based on different methods of organizing… congruence with the environment is the key to success.’ For instance, in stable environments a more rigid bureaucratic organization would prosper. In more fluid, changing environments a looser, less structured type of organization would be more likely to survive.

This metaphor represents the organization as an ‘open system’. Organizations are seen as sets of interrelated sub-systems designed to balance the requirements of the environment with internal needs of groups and individuals. This approach implies that when designing organizations, we should always do this with the environment in mind. Emphasis is placed on scanning the environment and developing a healthy adaptation to the outside world. Individual, group and organizational health and happiness are essential ingredients of this metaphor. The assumption is that if the social needs of individuals and groups in the organization are met, and the organization is well designed to meet the needs of the environment, there is more likelihood of healthy adaptive functioning of the whole system (socio-technical systems).

The key beliefs are:

• there is no ‘one best way’ to design or manage an organization; • the flow of information between different parts of the system and its environment is key to the

organization’s success; • it is important to maximize the fit between individual, team and organizational needs.

This leads to the following assumptions about organizational change:

• changes are made only in response to changes in the external environment (rather than using an internal focus);

• individuals and groups need to be psychologically aware of the need for change in order to adapt;

• the response to a change in the environment can be designed and worked towards; • participation and psychological support are necessary strategies for success.

Page 11 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

What are the limitations of this metaphor? The idea of the organization as an adaptive system is flawed. The organization is not really just an adaptive unit, at the mercy of its environment. It can in reality shape the environment by collaborating with communities or with other organizations, or by initiating a new product or service that may change the environment in a significant way. In addition, the idealized view of coherence and flow between functions and departments is often unrealistic. Sometimes different parts of the organization run independently, and do so for good reason. For example the research department might run in a very different way to and entirely separately from the production department.

The other significant limitation of this view is noted by Morgan, and concerns the danger that this metaphor becomes an ideology. The resulting ideology says that individuals should be fully integrated with the organization. This means that work should be designed so that people can fulfil their personal needs through the organization. This can then become a philosophical bone of contention between ‘believers’ (often, but not always the HR Department) and ‘non-believers’ (often, but not always, the business directors). (See Burns and Stalker’s book The Management of Innovation (1961) for the original thinking behind this metaphor.)

Organizations as flux and transformation

Viewing organizations as flux and transformation takes us into areas such as complexity, chaos and paradox. This view of organizational life sees the organization as part of the environment, rather than as distinct from it. So instead of viewing the organization as a separate system that adapts to the environment, this metaphor allows us to look at organizations as simply part of the ebb and flow of the whole environment, with a capacity to self-organize, change and self-renew in line with a desire to have a certain identity.

This metaphor is the only one that begins to shed some light on how change happens in a turbulent world. This view implies that managers can nudge and shape progress, but cannot ever be in control of change. Gareth Morgan says: ‘In complex systems no one is ever in a position to control or design system operations in a comprehensive way. Form emerges. It cannot be imposed.’

Page 12 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

The key beliefs are:

• order naturally emerges out of chaos; • organizations have a natural capacity to self-renew; • organizational life is not governed by the rules of cause and effect; • key tensions are important in the emergence of new ways of doing things; • the formal organizational structure (teams, hierarchies) only represents one of many dimensions

of organizational life.

This leads to the following assumptions about organizational change:

• Change cannot be managed. It emerges. • Managers are not outside the systems they manage. They are part of the whole environment. • Tensions and conflicts are an important feature of emerging change. • Managers act as enablers. They enable people to exchange views and focus on significant

differences.

What are the limitations of this metaphor? This metaphor is disturbing for both managers and consultants. It does not lead to an action plan, or a process flow diagram, or an agenda to follow. Other metaphors of change appear to allow you to predict the process of change before it happens (although we believe that this is illusory!). With the flux and transformation metaphor, order emerges as you go along, and can only be made sense of during or after the event. This can lead to a sense of powerlessness that is disconcerting, but probably realistic! (See Chapter 10 on complex change for further reading on this metaphor.)

STOP AND THINK!

Q 3.1 Which view of organizational life is most prevalent in your organization? What are the implications of this for the organization’s ability to change?

Q 3.2 Which view are you most drawn to personally? What are the implications for you as a leader of change?

Page 13 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103

PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

Page 14 of 14

1/14/2019https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/api/v0/books/9780749472597/print?from=94&to=103