Reflective analysis
Michelle_Michy
MODULE2CHANGEMANAGEMENT.pptxMODULE 2 CHANGE MANAGEMENT
LAST WEEK
How you define an organization in this day and age? What are the differences between a 1990 organisation and a 2019 organisation?
What do managers do in contemporary business environment? Are Fayol and Mintzberg’s theories still relevant?
What are the most important skills managers need to have in today’s business environment?
Refer to the following concepts and post your thoughts:
*Holacracy versus Hierarchy
*Zappos’s Holacracy constitution
*Jacob Morgan’s futuristic view on the ‘Future of WorK
ASSESSMENT 1
Due date: Friday 04.10.2019 by 11:55 pm
Word limit: 750 words
A reflective report covering one or two topics:
{the nature of organisations, the nature of management in today’s business environment, change, motivation, power and politics, Communication in Business, Conflict and negotiation}.
-Why the topic (s) is important and relevant to/for you
Personal experience and theories
Your learning (present and for future use)
Structure
A short introduction (75 words)
Body: discussions on the importance and relevancy of the topic you have chosen, along with theories, personal experience (600 words i.e. 3 to 4 paragraphs)
A conclusion (75-100 words).
You do not need to include an Executive Summary.
Your paper must include in-text references and a reference list. You must adhere to the APA 6th edition for both in-text citations and reference list.
Number of sources?
Any questions: [email protected]
Change(s) in your life!
Activity:
What is the biggest change that you have made in your life? and what was its impact?
How did it affect you?
your thinking - about the why and the process of change?
your behaviour - how did this change?
your feelings - how did it affect you emotionally?
Reflect - make some notes
Discuss - your change with discussion forums
Teaching Notes
We want to link the theory to the students own experience – so getting them thinking about changes in their own life is a good way in
A very useful framework is to get them to think thru aspects of change via:
Cognitive – how did you think about it? or make sense of it?
Behavioural – what did you do as a result? any new behaviours?
Affect – how did the change affect your feelings and emotions?
We want them to think about how change effects different parts of you – your brain, your heart and your actions
Get them to spend:
some reflective time (by themselves),
then with partner (explaining their change), and
finally with the class
Some may not want to do the third phase – since these can be quite personal - but hopefully some brave souls will.
So you might ask for volunteers to share their thinking and discussions with the class
5
What is Organisational Change?
Some definitions:
Barnett and Carroll (1995) suggested that organisational change refers to the transformation of a firm between two points in time.
Fox-Wolfgramm, Boal, and Hunt (1998) stated that change involves a movement away from a present state towards a future state
Juma (2014) suggest that it is a process in which an organisation changes its structure, strategies, operational methods, technologies or organisational culture to affect broader change within the organisation.
Teaching Notes
This is a big business topic and there are different definitions
The core (and hardest part) of organisational change is really about changing the behaviour of individuals in the organisation.
And this makes is a challenging task because lots of people resist change.
6
Why do companies need organisational change?
Lets look at example of organisational change
The Lego Turnaround: From bankrupt to Forbes most powerful brand
Teaching Notes
We start of with a company example
The slide reveals in 2 parts
Tell a bit of the below story:
"In the 90s the business was going OK but the profits were not all that great, so we had some brilliant consultants fly in and say, 'well guys this piece of plastic, this brick is really obsolete, it's been around since the '50s, why don't you diversify into all kinds of other toys that your competitors are doing, Mattel has a huge portfolio of various products, the brand is strong,' so we did," Mr Gram said. "We did action figures and all kinds of other toys and what happened was that actually the company almost went bankrupt. Consumers lost track of who we were," the marketing executive told an Interactive Minds breakfast in Melbourne.
Lego's Danish founder refused to put the company into bankruptcy and instead poured in $400 million to return the business to its core Lego brick which had clicked together since 1958. Lego continued to innovate but under new global CEO Jørgen Vig Knudstorp established firm structures and processes. "The rule we set after the crisis is that it has to be obviously Lego but never seen before," Mr Gram said.
When Jorgen Vig Knudstorp came in as Lego CEO in 2004, the company was struggling to give consumers what they wanted and effectively manage costs. Knudstorp finally brought fiscal responsibility to the Danish toy maker. He also tried something novel — handing over creative direction to the core fans of the brand. He made the hard call and made redundancies. the company reorganized and analysed all costs, design was finally linked to manufacturing cost and re-focused on the core business of making construction sets. The unprofitable LEGO Computer games business was shut down.
7
Managing in a changing environment
Organisation development: views from the field
What is your theory of change?
Do you think change moves in a straight line from A to B? Or is it more circular?
How do you react to change? How does your family react? How did your parents react?
How do you make sense of Figure 1.1? What are the main elements involved in a process of change?
Is the management of change necessary? Important?
Lewin’s Change Model
Lewin (1947)
11
Unfreeze
Create right environment
Change
Support change to desired state
Refreeze
Reinforce to anchor change
Lewin’s Change Model
Change, for Lewin, is the result of forces that strive to maintain the status quo and forces that push for change
An early model of change developed by Lewin described change as a three-stage process:
The first stage he called ‘unfreezing’. It involved overcoming inertia and dismantling the existing ‘mind set’.
In the second stage the change occurs. This is typically a period of confusion and transition.
The third and final stage he called ‘freezing’. This is often now called ‘refreezing’ (see p. 36 text)
What do you think about this popular model? Is still relevant?
.
Responses to change drivers
What do we mean by resistance?
Lewin was one of the first to identify resistance to change
Ford & Ford (2009) identify three ways of thinking about resistance:
Mechanistic: natural and everyday; neutral; a product of interactions
Social: exceptional; detrimental; ‘over there, in them/it’
Conversational: socially constructed meaning that can be asserted and changed
How and why do you resist change? Is it your personality? Does it have to do with how you think about change? Is it ‘bad’ or is it an important part of making sure that people are treated well? Explain your answers.
Lewin’s Change Model – some critiques/updated version
Can we really ever REFREEZE (stop) organisational changes?
With increasingly dynamic environment (ie megatrends), the challenge for managers is to ensure creative, adaptive, flexible outcomes, and to continuously improving organisational processes (Creed & Zutshi, 2012a)
Teaching Notes
Lewin is a great model - but more recent thinking is that the original third stage is no longer that relevant – change is an ongoing journey and nothing can ever really refreeze
So we now talk about maintaining or sustaining the change
http://dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30061169/creed-aresponseto-2013.pdf
Graetz et al (2011) rightly point out that the third stage (refreeze) of the model has incurred some criticism for the notion of locking in or freezing the change
Given the increasingly dynamic environment and the contemporary view of change as being emergent, the challenge for managers is to ensure creative, adaptive, flexible and continuously improving processes (Creed & Zutshi, 2012a)rather than simply following processes which, after initial change transformation, had been frozen
It is potentially dangerous to undermine organizational stability thinking that a competitive advantage might be lost by not continuously changing
16
Mobilization
Change initiatives and organisational capacity for changes
Movement
Build momentum for the change
Sustaining
Institutionalise the changes
1. Mobilization Phase
(unfreeze)
Make the Case for Change Initiative
Build Momentum for Change Initiative (with clear & attractive alternative)
Preserve and Continue to Build the Organisational Capacity for Change
2. Movement Phase
(change)
3. Sustain Phase
(refreeze)
Institutionalise Change Initiative
(e.g., with policy changes)
Build the Organisational Capacity for Change
Teaching Notes
This is to allow you to outline the central message - about the process and stages of change
17
Change at the Organisational Level
Establishing a Sense of Urgency
Forming a Powerful Guiding Coalition
Creating a Vision
Communicating a Vision
Empowering Others to Act on the Vision
Planning for and Creating Short-Term Wins
Consolidating Improvements and Producing Still More Change
Institutionalising New Approaches
Mobilization
(Unfreeze)
Movement (Change)
Sustaining (Refreeze)
(Kotter, 2007)
Teaching Notes
Kotter’s 8 Steps (from the reading) fit into these 3 phases as follows:
The point of this slide is to clarify that the three phases on the prior slide can be used to group the 8 change steps identified in their reading by Kotter. Kotter’s model describes a series of steps that are ordered to fit the classic unfreeze, change, refreeze model.]
18
Change at the Organisational Level
Beer and Nohria (2000)
This reading talks about 2 Key Theories of Change:
1. Theory E
The “hard’ approach
Focussed on shareholder value as the measure of success
2. Theory O
The “soft’ approach
Focussed on developing corporate culture and capability as the measure of success
Teaching Notes
Important to raise and chat about this second reading
19
Change at the Organisational Level (Beer and Nohria, 2000)
| Dimensions of Change | Theory E | Theory O | Theories E and O Combines |
| Goals | Maximise shareholder value | Develop organisational capabilities | Explicitly embrace the paradox between economic value and organisational capability |
| Leadership | Manage change from the top down | Encourage participation from the bottom up | Set direction from the top and engage the people below |
| Focus | Emphasize structure and systems | Build up corporate culture: employees’ behaviour and attitudes | Focus simultaneously on the hard (structures and systems) and the soft (corporate culture) |
| Process | Plan and establish programs | Experiment and evolve | Plan for spontaneity |
| Reward System | Motivate through financial incentives | Motivate through commitment – use pay as fair exchange | Use incentives to reinforce change but not to drive it |
| Use of Consultants | Consultants analyse problems and shape solutions | Consultants support management in shaping their own solutions | Consultants are expert resources who empower employees |
Change at the Individual level
Kübler-Ross change curve
4 stages in change adoption
Change adoption considerations
21
Change at the Individual Level
Change is a journey for individuals
Teaching Notes
Ask students to think about their reactions to the activity before (getting put into teams)
Did they go through this change curve?
https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_96.htm
The Change Curve
The Change Curve model describes the stages most people go through as they adjust to change.
When a change is first introduced, people's initial reaction may be shock or denial, as they react to the challenge to the status quo. This is the first stage of the Change Curve.
Once the reality of the change starts to hit, people tend to react negatively and move to stage 2 of the Change Curve. They may fear the impact; feel angry; and actively resist or protest against the changes.
Some will wrongly fear the negative consequences of change. Others will correctly identify real threats to their position. As a result, the organization experiences disruption which, if not carefully managed, can quickly spiral into chaos.
For as long as people resist the change and remain at stage 2 of the Change Curve, the change will be unsuccessful, at least for the people who react in this way. This is a stressful and unpleasant stage. For everyone, it is much healthier to move to stage 3 of the Change Curve, where pessimism and resistance give way to some optimism and acceptance.
At stage 3 of the Change Curve, people stop focusing on what they have lost. They start to let go, and accept the changes. They begin testing and exploring what the changes mean, and so learn the reality of what's good and not so good, and how they must adapt.
By stage 4, they not only accept the changes but also start to embrace them: They rebuild their ways of working. Only when people get to this stage can the organization really start to reap the benefits of change.
22
Change at the Individual Level
There are 4 Individual Stages in Adoption of change
Stage 1
Awareness
Stage 2
Interest
Stage 3
Trial
Stage 4
Adoption
Target’s old routine(s) are challenged with new routine(s)
Target becomes aware of the proposed change
Target becomes curious about the change
Target becomes more open to new information
Target begins to experiment with the proposed change
Target assesses the costs/benefits of the change and potential future success
Target replaces old routine(s) with new routine(s)
Target becomes advocate for the change initiative
Each person goes through these 4 stages at different paces.
Teaching Notes
We teach this model as it will help the students when they come to the simulation
Talk it thru with them – if possible link back to some of their Activity 1 change stories
Stage 1
Target’s old routine(s) are challenged with new routine(s).
The individual is first exposed to a change, but lacks information about the it. During this stage the individual has not yet been inspired to find out more information about the change.
Stage 2
The individual is interested in the innovation and actively seeks related information/details.
The individual takes the concept of the change and weighs the advantages/disadvantages of using the innovation and decides whether to adopt or reject the innovation. Due to the individualistic nature of this stage, Rogers notes that it is the most difficult stage on which to acquire empirical evidence.
Stage 3
Target’s old routine(s) are challenged with new routine(s) as they start to experiment with the new routine to a varying degree, depending on the situation. During this stage the individual also determines the usefulness of the innovation and may search for further information about it.
Stage 4
The individual finalizes his/her decision to continue using the innovation. This stage is both intrapersonal (may cause cognitive dissonance) and interpersonal, confirmation the group has made the right decision.
23
How to make organisational change at individual level?
Change adoption considerations at individual level
Urgency of the Change Situation
Power & Credibility of the Change Agent
Receptivity of the Change Target
(Balogun and Hailey, 2008)
24
1. Urgency of the Change Situation – Lego & Shell partnership
Lego will not renew its marketing contract with Shell after coming under sustained pressure from Greenpeace to end a partnership that dates to the 1960s.
(The Guardian, 2014)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhbliUq0_r4
July, 2014
Greenpeace launched the video against Lego & Shell partnership
October, 2014
Lego announced that the company will not renew contract with Shell again
1960s
Lego and Shell started their partnership
50 years partnership
Teaching Notes
Ref: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/09/lego-ends-shell-partnership-following-greenpeace-campaign
Video – 1’46’’
“As the next phase of toy collectibles began to appear in petrol stations – including a Shell-branded Lego oil tanker – Shell announced their plan to resume drilling in Alaska. This gave the campaign a tangible sense of urgency. We foresaw a potential PR nightmare for Lego’s alignment with Shell, and used the hook to push the petition up to 1m names. Around the same time we invited a journalist to participate and report on a creative ideas session with top designers and creative agencies. This ensured Lego heard it on the grapevine that we were planning our next big push.” (‘we’ as in greenpeace)
25
2. Power and Credibility of the Change Agent
The change agent
Anyone who has the skill and power to stimulate, facilitate, and coordinate the change effort – can be either external or internal.
Credibility Required
Disruptiveness
Disruptive actions require credibility
(Lunenburg, 2010)
Teaching Notes
The idea of this slide is that you need more credibility the more disruptive the change, while less disruptive changes can be pursued with only modest credibility.
If the students ask about examples of more or less disruptive change approaches, you can just say that they’ll experience plenty of examples in the upcoming simulation.]
Credibility is important for leading change. Without credibility, you end up “throwing parties nobody comes to”… which further erodes your credibility.“
An interesting talking point is to ask them whether bringing in an academic or a traditional consultant is more likely to boost credibility.
Answer: It depends a bit on the country. Some countries value formal education more than others. In Germany, academics are generally seen as having more credibility. In Australia, the consultants are seen as having more credibility.
Ref: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fabf/1c09ff7996dea11cbc3ccb97a7d4129eed83.pdf
26
2. Power and Credibility of the Change Agent - Discussion
Who will have higher power and credibility inside the organisation as the change agent?
Who will have higher power and credibility outside the organisation as the change agent?
If you as the change agent for an organisation has rather low power/credibility, what should you do to make the change effective?
Share your ideas in Module 2- Discussion forum
27
3. Receptivity of the Change Target
No individual, even the CEO, can move an organisation alone.
Three factors to consider:
Pre-dispositional differences in openness to change
Individual perceptions of the costs and benefits of a particular change
How people on their networks are disposed toward the particular change effort
Teaching Notes
To be effective, change agents must discern who is likely to be most receptive to the change effort and who is likely to be against it. This information is vital because the change agent will need fellow advocates for change; no individual, even the CEO, can move an organisation alone. With this information, change agents can begin to figure out what change tactics might work most effectively and with whom. Individual receptivity to a change effort is a function of at least three factors:
28
Managerial responses to resistance
Managers employ a variety of strategies to deal with resistance:
Empathy and support for peoples’ responses
Clear and effective communication about the change
Ensure the involvement and participation of the maximum number of people in the organisation and also key external stakeholders where relevant
When do you consider resistance to change at work justified and when is it not? Why do you think this?
