To Prof. Metildah Management

Dealing with changes in the workplace could be a challenge that every business could be facing these days. Some changes could be good for the organization, others include difficult changes and decisions to make. This work will be the first part of a complete analysis of changes made in the organization that we represent, Toyota.

In this analysis we will be examining two types of change agents and the role that haves the manager in the combat of resistance and championing changes. We will include the definition and explanation of understanding the vision and organization culture when the organization are having these changes; this will include how the organizational culture will cope with the changes in the organization and as a final part of the complete work will talk of the changing model and will develop a communication plan for the changes. In this first part of the work we will only talking about two types of change agents and the role that haves the manager in the combat of resistance and championing changes.

Let talk about who we are. Toyota is an organization that is passionate about doing great cars and trucks. We have over 50 years being part of the life in America.

Our story in America include 10 plants and an organization that produces over a million and quarter vehicles per year. We have over 39,000 jobs and a company that is committed to support education, safety and the environment in America (“Toyota”, 2015).

Managing changes for an organization as Toyota it's not easy. We are making changes in organization worldwide. The new project includes the change an integration of the system with our parent company. All our processes were manual, understanding that this involves big changes to the organization. Among the changes there will be trainings, policies and processes change, and a big challenge get people used to the change. All departments, this including, finance, procurement, planning, HR, parts & service, IT and dealers entered the process. They all have been affected by these changes. The project includes changes to the codes of the vehicles. The integration project began in 2013 and are 364 days left to end the integration of all systems.

Continuous Changes

A continuous change is the current process of change that a well-run organization is subject to the extent that aims to eliminate the problems and optimize efficiency. One of the principles of Toyota is the continuous improvement. This involves re-visiting constantly the processes to identify areas of opportunity. Continuous change happens all the time or be permanent; is the exchange rate implicit in the term of continuous improvement, step by step. The changes are not necessarily small, they can get to involve large commitments of time, people and money. But they are part of a regular flow, and each step builds on the previous one. The aim is to maintain a fit between all components of the organization (strategy-structure, work, people and culture).

It is normal to see differences in the organization occasionally. This type of continuous or incremental change helps restore consistency and can have a greater impact on more people, which does not mean that drastically alter the company's strategy, structure and operating environment.

Discontinuous Changes

A discontinuous change is that which is sudden and threatens the life off an organization since the company is not prepared for it. The company has no skills to handle the situation and can hinder the growth and development of the company since it was not prepared for it. A discontinuous change modifies the structure of things and disorganizes authority as well as the power structure. The integration of the systems is a discontinuous process of change since the process is an abrupt process that intends to change the traditional way of doings things for the Toyota Company. The company intends to change training, policies, and processes of the finance, procurement, human resource, procurement, IT parts & service, and other departments. These changes will affect the organization in terms of leadership and power structure. The company has not prepared for it. Further the company has been affected a lot by the change since they do not have the skills to handle the issue. The process can slow down the growth of the company since all the systems have been affected, and the company has to start from scratch. Employees are finding it hard to accept the integration process as the process is abrupt to them.

There are discontinuous changes that have occurred to vehicles. The vehicles have been required to change their codes. Codes are important as they allow the identification of specific cars according to their unique features. The change is also very abrupt to the production process of vehicles. The changing of codes has caused a lot of confusion for the production departments since they are used to the former way of doing things. These changes have caused disruptions and have led to reduces production as well as sales. The change has even in the departments have resulted in disorganizations in terms of roles and what is expected of them. People have been reshuffled so as to allow the proper conduct of roles effectively. The fact is that the integration process is designed to last for a short period which will ensure that the process is rushed. The rush of making critical decisions especially for the change process can be dangerous since it can backfire. These discontinuous changes are unexpected and, therefore, are a shock to Toyota. A continuous change would be predictable and expected while a discontinuous change the company is not aware of the change and the company is astonished (Kotter, 2014).

There are many potential environmental pressures or agents that take place when an organization are in amidst of a change process. Among the six types of environmental pressure change that a manager faces, such as; pressure to carry out fashionable management changes, pressure that force or mandate on organization from outside agencies, broad changes in geopolitical relationships in need of changes in organizational operations, pressure associated with declining markets, hypercompetitive business pressure, and the pressure to maintain corporate reputation and credibility with the stakeholders (Akin, Dunford & Palmer, 2009).

In this particular case (Toyota) the two types of change agents in their organization are; worldwide change and integration of all system with the parent company. This particular pressure change represents the image of the Navigator and Coach, the changes are seen as strategic and a necessary response to internal and external pressure. Toyota faces constant pressure to integrate and improve their communication for a better integration of their common values, teamwork and produce collaboration among their worldwide plants. Managers within the organization faces multiple pressures given the variety of influences and competing interest that are necessary to be taken in order overcome the pressure.

Differentiate between the two types of change agents

Usually in development programs and organizational changes, often hire external agents of change, or can even be internal, as has been said, and may even be a combination of internal-external, whose functions range from encouraging, facilitating and coordinating the change until its implementation. Usually it acts as the catalyst that activates the change in system organization. For the integration project in Toyota they have brought employees of TMS (Parent company) experts in each area also outside professionals to interface systems and train employees. With this type of training external change agents, it is needed to drive the change process perspective. The home agent is obviously someone who works for the company and have some knowledge about the problem in question or why change is necessary and should work together with the external agent, as he best knows the organization will lead to the outside in the process of change, both have a role to spearhead the implementation of change (Gilley, Quatro, & Hoekstra, 2007, pp. 3-10).

In this type of intervention, the objectivity of the stranger and his training intermingle with the knowledge that the person has within the organization and its human resources. This mix of knowledge often results in a level of increasing confidence between the parties. The combination of the inside-outside team ability to communicate and develop a more positive relationship can reduce the resistance to any change coming.

However, each method has its advantages and disadvantages, same as set out below:

The agent of external change sometimes be considered as someone outside the organization, which does not inspire confidence in the staff and perhaps do not give the necessary information on the issue of the organization, however, it could be reversed, since as he is known and is an outsider, it will be easier to furnish such information because they consider it not "unconditional" address, however, he will have the advantage of not being a victim of "blindness workshop" , since it is not accustomed to flawed processes and cycled work of the organization.

What is advantageous for one, is a disadvantage for the other, that is, the inner confidence will have to be "home" to this you can expose problems because they know "who knows" that is, but with the requirement that you can go to the address and point to who has expressed some complicated or sensitive issue and believe they may retaliate against them. On the other hand, the staff could consider that it is more like an activity that has always tried and in the end, everything will remain the same, so you could downplay the change even if it is well intentioned. However, the home agent can be a key player, as has information about the organization and the acceptance by workers that could serve the external and thus facilitate the process (Chalke, 2007).

So that the best approach would be a combination of Internal-External, because as noted, the forces become one weakness of the other and vice versa, so that training and experience will be external very useful, as is knowledge of the organization and internal acceptance by staff will be crucial to bring the process of change most likely to succeed.

In conclusion, a point that is really important in the change process is to enjoy the credibility of the change agents through employee participation. We must assess the specific situation of the change agent before his appointment to identify whether what will be the internal agents, or hiring, if the agent is external.

Reference

Chalke, S. (2007). Change Agents: 25 Hard-learned Lessons in the Art of Getting Things Done . : Zondervan.

Gilley, J., Quatro, S., & Hoekstra, E. (2007). The Manager as Change Agent . : Basic Books.

Kotter, J. P. (2014). Choosing strategies for change. Boston, Mass: Reprint Service, Harvard Business Review.

Palmer, Ian, Richard Dunford, and Gib Akin. Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach, 2nd Edition. McGraw-Hill Learning Solutions, 2008. VitalBook file

Pathak, H. (2010). Organizational change. S. I.: Pearson.