Navigating Change Through Formal Structures and Systems (discussion)

faahaad2004

SEU_MGT521_Module6PPT_CH05.pptx

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Navigating Change Through Formal Structures and Systems (discussion)

Chapter 5: Navigating Change Through Formal Structures and Systems

Chapter Overview

This chapter discusses the basics of how organizations structure themselves.

It outlines how change leaders can diagnose the strengths and weaknesses of existing systems and structures.

It examines how the formal structure and systems can foster, impair and facilitate the acceptance of change initiatives.

It lays out ways to manage systems and structures to gain approval for change initiatives. Formal approval, coalition-building and renegade approaches to change are discussed.

It reviews ways to develop more adaptive systems and structures to increase the likelihood of continuous improvement.

How Do Structures and Systems Relate to Change Management?

Existing formal structures and systems need to be understood when assessing the need for change.

Need to understand how Structures and Systems facilitate or hinder change

Need to understand how Structures and Systems can be used to gain approval for change

Need to understand how Structures and Systems can be used to gain acceptance and promote for organizational change

Need to understand how to create more adaptive Structures and Systems

The Change Path Model

Making sense of formal systems and structures

Assessing their weaknesses and strengths

Leveraging them to gain approval

Leveraging them to gain acceptance

Creating more adaptive systems and structures

Awakening

Chapter 4

Acceleration

Chapter 9

Institutionalization

Chapter 10

Mobilization

Chapters 5 through 8

Making Sense of Organizational Structures and Systems

Work Differentiation

To what degree are tasks subdivided into separate jobs?

Departmentalization or Integration

On what basis are jobs grouped together?

Chain of Command

To whom do individuals and groups report?

Making Sense of Organization Structures and Systems (cont.)

Span of Control

How many individuals report to an individual manager?

Degree of Centralization vs. Decentralization

Where does decision-making authority lie?

To what degree are there rules and regulations to direct employees and managers?

Standard

Operating

Procedures (SOPs)

Mechanistic vs. Organic Organizational Forms

More Mechanistic More Organic

Tasks are broken down into separate parts and rigidly defined/assigned

Flexible tasks that are adjusted & redefined through teamwork and participation

High degree of formalization, strict hierarchy or authority/control, with many rules

Little formalization, low reliance on hierarchical authority, more decentralization

Narrow span of control with reliance on hierarchies of people in specialized roles

Wide span of control

Knowledge and control reside with upper management, limited lower-level authority

Highly decentralized decision-making authority located throughout organization

Communication is vertical (boss/worker relationship)

Communication is free-flowing—up, down, and horizontally integrated

Simple, straight-forward planning process

Sophisticated environmental scanning, planning and forecasting process

Uncertainty and Complexity and Internal Alignment

	Simple Environment	Complex Environment
Stable Environment	Centralized, simple mechanistic structure Use of rules, policies, procedures, and hierarchy Few departments Low need for integrating roles Efficiency and stability focused, little imitation	Centralized structure, more sophisticated information and control systems Use of rules and policies, procedures and hierarchy, but adapted to the complexity Many departments, some boundary spanning Modest need for integrating roles and systems Some environmental scanning, imitation and planning activity
Dynamic Environment	Decentralized, organic structure, participative and team focused Fewer rules, policies, procedures Few departments, much boundary spanning Few integrating roles Much environmental scanning, imitation and a strong planning orientation	Decentralized, organic structure, participative and team focused, sophisticated information and control systems Fewer rules, policies and procedures Many departments, boundary spanning Many integrating roles Extensive environmental scanning, imitation, sophisticated planning and forecasting systems

Information Processing View of Structure

D. Slack Resources

E. Self-Contained Tasks

F. Vertical Information Systems

G. Lateral Relations

Methods to Lessen the Need to Process Information

Methods to Increase the Capacity to Process Information

Mechanistic Methods

A. Rules and Policies

B. Hierarchies

C. Goals and Visions

Information Processing View of Structure (cont.)

Strategies to Decrease Information Processing Needs:

1. Addition of Slack Resources

2. Creation of Self-Contained Tasks

Vertical Information Strategies to Increase Processing Capacity:

1. Hierarchical Referral (Ask the Boss)

2. Rules, Policies and Plans, including Vision and Goals

3. Increase the Vertical Communication Capacity of Information Systems

Horizontal Information Strategies to Increase Processing Capacity:

1. Increase the Horizontal Communication Capacity of the Information Systems

2. Create lateral relations:

a. Direct Contact

b. Liaison Role

c. Task Force

d. Formal Teams

e. Formal Integrating Roles

f. Managerial Linking Roles

g. Dual-Authority Relationships

Information Processing Capacity of Structural Design Choices

FIT

Organization’s Information Processing Requirements

Organizational Effectiveness

Formal Structures and Systems (Adapted from Bolman & Deal’s Re-framing Organizations)

There is no one best way to organize

Structural decisions should follow strategic decisions

All structures present leaders with dilemmas they must manage

Once structural choices are made, formal systems and process need to be aligned

Structures shape and impact people’s behavior

Toolkit Exercise 5.2—Impact of Existing Structures and Systems on the Change

Think of a change situation you are familiar with.

How did the organization use structures and systems to deal with uncertainty and complexity? Was this effective?

How did existing structures and systems affect the ability of the change leader to bring about desired change?

What systems/structures were involved?

How did these systems/structures influence what happened? Was this due to how they were formally designed? Or was this related to how they actually came to be used in practice?

Who influenced how the systems/structures were used and how did this affect the outcomes that ensued?

How to Develop an Understanding of Structures and Systems?

Follow the paper trail—search available documents.

Ask those who know.

Develop process maps.

Attempt to draw the relevant structures and describe the relevant systems—then check again with those who know to confirm and/or refine

Three Approaches to Change

Using systems and structures to obtain formal approval for change—the traditional, hierarchical approval approach

Strategies based on creeping commitment and coalition building

Strategies involving simply forging ahead without formal approval—the renegade approach

Using Structures and Systems to Increase the Probability of Approval

Ask if approval is necessary. Don’t initiate activities that trigger unnecessary formal approval systems

If approval is necessary, show how change is aligned with the organization’s vision and strategy

Use good processes to legitimize the change. Show how benefits of change exceed the costs and risks of doing nothing

Using Structures and Systems to Increase the Probability of Approval (cont.)

Show how the change will improve system and structural alignment.

Frame the change in ways that increase organization comfort. For example, move in increments by positioning it as a trial.

If time is critical, demonstrate urgency and focus on external pressures for change.

Using Structures and Systems to Increase the Probability of Approval (cont.)

In all cases:

When there is a decision maker you need to influence, identify her/his attitudes to the change and attempt to work with them.

Demonstrate how the change project relates to the strategy or vision of the organization.

Use good existing processes to legitimize the change proposal.

Positioning Change for Formal Approval

Nature of approval

process?

Do I need approval?

Time

Important?

Need

support?

Incremental

Major?

Whose approval do I need?

Create awareness of crisis,

threat or opportunity

with approvers.

Show costs & benefits.

Use existing process

to legitimize

Whose approval do I need?

Engage others explain

cost/benefit & ask approval.

Use existing process

to legitimize

Whose approval do I need?

Engage others approach

incrementally, studies &

pilot tests.

Show costs & benefits

and seek approval to

proceed

Use process to legitimize

Involve others

who will be

affected &

influential parties

Do it

yourself

Yes

Small

Big

Reference?? – I would like to clean up this flowchart for ease of reading

Toolkit Exercise 5.3—Gaining Approval for the Change Project

Consider a change project in an organization you are familiar with.

What is the approval process for minor change initiatives? For more major change initiatives?

If the change requires capital approval, how is this obtained?

If the project needs dedicated staff, what are the processes for adding people and selecting and developing staff?

Does the project alter the way work is organized and performed? What systems are used to define jobs, and assess performance?

Who approves the change? What approval power do they have?

Can perceived risks be reduced by the way the change leader stages the project and manages the approval process?

A Checklist for Change Initiative Approval

What does the paper trail say about formal structures and systems that have to be considered when leading the change?

What are key points in the process that we need to be conscious of (e.g., timing of meetings, getting on the agenda, cycle time, types of decision made and where decisions are made)?

How are the relevant systems and structures interconnected? How do they influence one another?

A Checklist for Change Initiative Approval (cont.)

Develop a process map that tracks the change idea from start to finish.

Where does formal authority and decision making lie?

What decision parameters are normally applied and are there zones of discretion available to decision makers?

What are the power and influence patterns around particular systems and structures? Who has direct and indirect influence on how they are applied?

How should the systems and structures be managed to reduce resistance? Can they can be managed to create leverage that will advance the change?

Mastering the Formal Approval Process

The likelihood of gaining formal approval increases when:

You have a well placed sponsor.

You know your audience and their preferences.

Power and influence patterns and the implications of the project for the firm and those involved in the approval process are understood.

Mastering the Formal Approval Process (cont.)

The likelihood of gaining formal approval increases when:

You do your homework with respect to your detailed knowledge of the change project, its scope, objectives, costs, benefits, and risk areas.

Needed approval and support is obtained in advance.

The change project is effectively presented by appropriate individuals.

You have a good sense of timing of when its best to bring it forward.

Using Creeping Commitment and Coalition Building

Use data, pilot programs, and other incremental system-based approaches to acclimatize organizational members to change ideas.

Know the key stakeholders and their interests.

Coalition building is valuable because of the role such coalitions might play later, during the formal approval process.

Using Creeping Commitment & Coalition Building (cont.)

Create opportunities for direct involvement that will build interest and support within key groups.

Use the above initiatives to build momentum to move the organization towards adoption.

Coalition building contains risks that need to be managed.

Avoid tactics that seriously harm relationships, diminish your integrity and/or compromise your long-term objectives.

Bypassing the Formal Approval Process

Assess how systems and structures can be leveraged to advance change without prior approval

Understand your power and authority

Assess whether change is manageable, defensible, and within your scope of authority

Keep key people sufficiently informed to avoid accusations you acted underhandedly

Don’t create unnecessary enemies or use tactics that do long-term damage to your reputation

The renegade approach can be used to generate supportive data, refine the change, and build momentum that is difficult to stop

It is often easier to gain forgiveness than permission

Using Structures and Systems to Promote Change

Look back at the questions raised in Toolkit Exercises 5.2 and 5.3. Could the existing structures and systems have been approached and used differently to advance the desired change?

What role could incremental strategies that were nested within existing systems and structures have played?

Would they have really moved the process forward or simply avoided the real changes that needed to be addressed?

What role could more revolutionary strategies have played?

Would they produce issues related to their alignment with existing systems and structures?

How would you manage the challenges created by this?

Using Alignment to Aid Approval and Acceptance

Gaining approval is less daunting when you can show how the change aligns with mission, vision and strategy

Frame changes in ways that show value, and reduce the incongruence with existing structures and systems

Demonstrate there is little to fear, that the level of disruption can be managed, and benefits outweigh costs

Reduce perceived risk by breaking a big change into smaller stages

Don’t assume that approval equals acceptance

Using Alignment to Aid Approval and Acceptance (cont.)

By minimizing initial incongruence, you can learn, adapt and modify systems and structures as you proceed. Linked incremental changes produce significant long-term effects

Use existing systems and processes, where appropriate, to advance the changes—the way they are used will influence the way the change is perceived

Listen carefully and communicate effectively and empathetically, using formal processes to help in this regard

The involvement of others can facilitate acceptance & approval

Be patient—it takes time to build acceptance and commitment

Developing More Adaptive Structures and Systems

Systematically and deliberately scan the external environment

Have a shared perception of the gap between the current and desired level of performance

Have a concern for measurement of performance

Develop an experimental mindset where people try new things

Create an organizational climate of openness and accessibility

Developing More Adaptive Structures and Systems (cont.)

Engage in continuous education at all organizational levels

Use a variety of methods, appreciate diversity and take a pluralistic view of competencies

Have multiple individuals who act as advocates for new ideas and methods

Have an involved, engaged leadership

Recognize the interdependence of units and have a systems’ perspective

Summary

We investigated formal systems and structures to see how they influence change and how they can be worked to advance change.

We explored systems and structures related to the approval process and how to work with, through, and around them.

We explored how formal systems and structures can be used to advance acceptance of the change.

We addressed the desirability of adaptive change in formal systems and structures.