Organizational Change in MacDonalds Company - Case Study Example

Running Head: Individual assessment Name: University: Lecturer: Course: Date: Title: Individual assessment: Organizational change in MacDonald’s company Introduction This is an individual assessment on the case study of MacDonald’s fast food company. In this discourse the analysis of organizational change that the company has initiated in the aim of improving the relationship with customers and improving the brands will be done. Personal assessment of managing change within this organization will be expounded based on the various change management theories. In this essay, the explorations of various change management strategies and the agents that facilitate the process will be on focus. Further, I will attempt to elaborate on the outcomes of the change management as effected by MacDonald’s in the case study. Finally, the discourse will establish my personal take on change management and the future ramifications of the same and in the context of the case study. Perspectives of handling change and its agents in the organization It is evident that one of the reasons that McDonald’s prompted the need to effect change was competition emanating from other companies dealing with the same products. Amid this challenge, customers’ expectations were momentous and the previous mechanism could not handle this type of pressure. Additionally, the company experienced dwindling revenues as compared to its competitors. It was time for change. When an organization is faced by such dynamics it is imperative to perceive change as inevitable. MacDonald’s began to implement changes although gradually (D’Aveni and Richard, 1994). MacDonald’s used the 7s model while implementing changes. In the process of change implementation, it is imperative to hold the interests of the employees. We are all human and in the process of change the only way to manage it is to ensure that the employees do not feel threatened by the process. At the outset, it is imperative to know that other than pressures emanating from without, the prime change agents within the organization are always the employees as they are responsible for executing the changes. Therefore, MacDonald’s ought to have managed the employees to welcome change by the following strategies. In the case study, the employees are seen as core in every proceeding of the company. The organization change that Macdonald’s implemented was planned to affect the employees directly in terms of reinventing the recruitment criteria, skills development through rigorous capacity building and new remuneration and reward system. These changes would create a condition of uncertainty amongst the employees. While implementing changes in an organization targeting the employees, it is imperative to keep an open mind. This is helpful to the organization as the notion that change will be detrimental to the organization is discarded and welcoming change as positive move is enhanced. Besides, it is imperative that one to be flexible in the context of change and be ready to abandon old ways. Talking to the staff members and colleagues enhances trust while at the same time cultivating motivation towards change. Moreover, it is critical that the employees are given the necessary support. This is impacts well on the organization as the helpful skills from the employees are tapped besides the positive contribution and varied perspectives. When the employees own the process, changes are effected smoothly devoid of hindrances since every member plays an active role (Larkin et al, 1996). They are on the other hand aware that the process requires time and it needs patience to yield the desired objectives. Other than changes targeting the employees, MacDonald’s wanted to overhaul the whole system. There were myriad of complaints emanating from the employees. They ranged from delays to wrong orders. However, this was not the failure of the staff alone but the whole operational system. The company had embarked solely on the supply chain but it failed to achieve its target as more and more complaints were received. The customers reduced dramatically. To correct this undoing, the company needed not just effect blind changes but ones that yielded real results. To manage change in this context, it is imperative that all the stakeholders are aware of the changes that are about to occur. Good management of change requires that the people who take part on the day to day running of the company have accurate information on the process of change. Effectiveness in communication on the reason for changing from the old ways and what the company stands to gain if the changes were to effected should serve as the overview of change (Strebel,1996). All the suppliers, customers, share holders, inter alia ought to have this information. Other than provision of accurate information, the operational system of the MacDonald’s needs to be simpler than before for the customers to avoid delays and inaccuracies prevalent in the system. The redtapism that typified the company in the case study can easily reduced by effecting less complicated changes. Impacts Of Assumptions On The Process Of Change Different notions and misconceptions characterize the process of change. Firstly, there is an assumption that all change is a one time project of the company. While initiating changes in the organization it is imperative to know that some employees might embrace the process on the assumption that there will no more changes. The process of change is continuous and unending. This should be known to the employees from the start to prepare them for future inevitable changes. According to Peter Vaill in the organizations things are never going to settle again. He uses the analogy of a canoe in the still waters to depict the static nature of organization in the previous days (Vaill, 1991). In the contemporary years the organization is always faced by the turbulence of external forces that requires the organization to keep change as there is no longer permanent whit water (Vaill, 1991). The organization like a canoe in rapid waters will need to adapt all the time. Thus the assumption that change is occasional is misguided and may prove unfruitful to the organization. An assumption that the top management or the organization to blame for the changes that it effects. It should be clearly, illustrated that change emanates from external forces such as competition that makes it mandatory for the organization to counter them. In the case study, MacDonald’s implemented changes responding mainly to external competition. For the stakeholders to hold such a conclusion, it is always imperative to understand the complexity of the process. Competition, shifts in technological knowhow and markets pressures make the company responsive and contributes positively to the global economy. The assumption that the operational system of the company was the only factor that failing the company could be misleading as other factors were in play. Were it no for external pressures and competition the company could probably be the best prior to change implementation. It is therefore not satisfactory to conclude that the company would have been better placed if its operational system was effective and refuse to implement other changes. Changes in personal change management Various theories learnt in class have really helped me understand the dynamics of change. The notion that the employees play a central role in organizational change is paramount. Initially, it was my belief that the process of change would entail complete employment of new strategies of operation. In this context, the extent that one may go as a change agent was still vague to me as recruiting a whole new staff would work well with me. This has changed and replaced by the notion that the process is gradual. The process of gradual change has been conceptualized. It is the leadership in the organization, in addition to the vision oversees the smooth transition. Therefore creating a vision is process that has enriched my knowledge as a change agent. This perspective holds that all future objectives should help introduce the company’s vision upon which all the group’s energy would be directed. Moreover, it is imperative that the vision serves as a motivation that expounds where the organization ought to be in future. Thus, all the objectives aim at bridging the gap between the present and future. As a change agent, I have learnt that change is a value especially in the contemporary global economy. Further, as change agent, I have assumed the perspective that not all change yield fruits immediately. One of the perspectives that Green, the manger of MacDonald’s adopted was to let change take effect gradually. Some radical changes may prove damaging to the organization as much of the employees’ input might be lost along the way. Employees need to be supported by the agent of change during the process of implementing change in the organization. It should be understood by the agent that change is an emotional stage since the worker and other stakeholders may have developed emotional attachment with the organization. The process of change is emotional to most employees and all efforts should primarily be centered towards the employees’ welfare. The employees might resist change as a reaction to its introduction and hence it is imperative to make known to them how these changes might affect them directly or indirectly. Leadership styles during the process of change are paramount. According to Greenberg, he embarked on fireworks approach to leadership. Future change management perspectives Through the above learned perspectives of initiating change, MacDonald’s strategies might be of tremendous help future implementation of change. These strategies can be summarized in three main steps. Firstly, all the stakeholders should unlearn the past behavior and learn the new way of operating. The process of delearning of what initially was perceived as effective should help the employees and other members to prepare themselves to embrace change. This should be done slowly introducing bits of change as way adapting to new ways. MacDonald’s manager, Greenberg, ensured that all the staff members, customers, employees and shareholders learnt this process progressively. To convince the workers that the current ways of doing things is ineffective, the change agent should present facts and communicate the external pressures that compel the company to change (Galpin, 1996). This stage is known as unfreezing according the organizational change theory. MacDonald’s company underwent this process successfully. Secondly the MacDonald’s introduced new behaviors in the organization. This should be seen as a stage where all the stakeholders appreciate and recognize the essence and the urgency of change. All ideas and culture of the organization that are ineffective need to be replaced by new ones (Burke, 2008). At this stage, trainings are imperative to make the staff conversant with the new processes. Besides, it is at this stage that most changes are incorporated. The rampant product differentiation and media alerts that MacDonald’s deployed to alert the stakeholders of the upcoming changes would fit at this stage. Customers approved this move as the ineffectiveness of the company was under intense scrutiny from the public and the media. Additionally, the employees should learn and develop new skills to allow them to perform in accordance with the expectations and the objectives of the organizations. Al these should be in line with the new organizational goals. All old policies and rules must pave way for the new ones. Thirdly, MacDonald’s appraised the effect of change on the performance of the initiated changes. Review of reward system and remuneration mechanisms is done to motivate the employees. Besides, the evaluation of changes and effect of performance ought to be done here to ensure that they are working as planned. Conclusion Based o the case study, MacDonald’s Food Company implemented changes as a compulsion from external pressures that had compromised the company’s performance. Essentially, most of the changes that were implemented bridged this gap and helped it to regain its glory. Organizational change ought to be entrenched in the company’s values to mitigate the risk of overhauling the system now and then. References D’Aveni, Richard A., (1994) Hyper competition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering, New York: The Free Press, Larkin, Sandar and T.J. Larkin, (1996) Reaching and Changing Frontline Employees, Harvard Business Review Pg. 74, 95 - 104 Strebel, Paul, Why Do Employees Resist Change? Harvard Business Review, Pg.74, 86 - 92. Galpin, Timothy, (1996) Connecting Culture to Organizational Change, HR Magazine Pg. 41, 85 - 90. Vaill, Peter B. (1991) Managing as a Performing Art, Jossey - Bass Publishers. San Francisco. . Read More