How to Enhance Organisational Performance - Coursework Example

Managing Change Report Name: Students ID: Unit Code: Date: Time: Instructor: Introduction Change has come to be routine in administrative language. In the present day, organisations are operating in very dynamic settings. As a result, they experience everyday change in lots of forms, such as executing new business strategies, introducing new policies, restructuring, mergers and acquisition, repositioning or implementing the latest technology. In order to enhance organisational performance, companies ought to be proficient at planning, executing and handling change continually, not as a mere unusual event. Even though change is imperative to organisational success, if it is not planned, applied and executed well, the process can brutally ruin a company’s performance and its ultimate capacity to compete (Andrews et al. 2008). But change means dissimilar things to different people. It is very much influenced by the perception of the individual in question. Whereas for some change is welcome, others feel threatened by change and see it as a waste of time or some form of disruption. Nonetheless change affects us all. William Bridges notes that “It is not the changes that do you in, it is the transition.” This very well implies that change is not indeed about the operational changes that are made to organisations. It refers to the manner in which individuals are led and treated all through the change process. The ultimate drive of organisational change is success. The organisation ought to mesh better with the environment, in which it evolves, and have a more well-organized and effective operational method (Holbeche, 2009). This report is based on the projected organisational change. It aims to facilitate decision making and implementation at all levels to execute the change as promptly and effectively as possible. Purpose for Change The company has come to be more and more apprehensive with their effectiveness in the market. Consequently, there has been the need to shed layers of middle management and welcome new employees to critical departments of the organisation in order to be more competitive. Such across-the-board changes are premeditated to have huge probable repercussions for the labour force and for the administrative staff in charge for them. Therefore, failure to comply with the provisions of this report possibly will cause uncertainty and distraction within the workplace. This may well impinge on employee morale, motivation and subsequently productivity. By taking on a step-by-step, fair approach, managers will make sure that each one affected person will be treated impartially and in the same way (Todnem, 2005). Change communication As in any other business discipline, the impact of communication cannot be overemphasised in managing change. Change involves, individuals, teams, stakeholders, along with other groups (Jabri, 2012). Each participant has their particular communication needs. Change communications management includes timely and appropriate generation, collection, dissemination, storage, and ultimate disposition of information. The key aspects to be considered in change communications management include; Careful communication planning that specifies the method and frequency of communication which vary depending on the needs. The communications plan will also include information regarding communication standards that will be observed, such as email protocol, use of agendas and minutes for meetings, as well as formats for reports (Jabri, 2012). Setting the correct expectations with each and every one stakeholder. The change agent (manager) will set the pitch for the entire communication. This will allow the change agent to keep control of the change and make sure all stakeholders obtain essential information (Jabri, 2012). Face-to-face primary communication within the change team to set up the team operations as well as learning the customer’s expectations should be supported. Cultural considerations in communications are important due to the globalisation of the work environment. There are some points to keep in mind in order to smooth the progress of healthier cross-cultural communication. Careful usage of certain terms and phrases as well as cultural nuances must be reflected (Wiggins, 2009). Change Strategy Central to the success of organisational change is the reception of the change by employees. Resistance to change is, however, likely to occur. The resistance may be individualist based on the individuals’ reactions that may be very intricate and differ to a great extent. Involving all parties involved in the change can reduce the resistance to change (Whelan-Berry & Somerville, 2010). The involvement should be extensive and span all levels of the change process. However, the managers will be required to play a major role in boosting and rewarding innovation even as they support the change. In a developing way, five strategies have been advanced to stand resistance to change, for it to be implemented successfully. These are (1) Directive strategy, (2) Expert strategy, (3) Negotiating strategy, (4) Educative strategy, and (5) Participative strategy. However, no one strategy has been touted as a totally effective means of getting commitment, greater performance or as a means of influencing change. Even with all kind of support from the top, the change process is to be expected to consume much time. For that reason, there is every need to think through the kind of change strategy that is best suited to chase the company’s new direction. Quite a number of factors ought to be well thought-out in deciding on how to implement the needed changes as each method will be suitable to varying situations (Oreg, 2006). Brown and Cregan (2008) stress that any strategy that is erratic with the strains of the circumstances, that is, the people, the cultural situation as well as the business setting, will without doubt bump into difficulties. This will result in failure to offer the long-term gains of the initiated changes. However, change managed well will make sure all stakeholders are involved and are able to acclimatise to new strategies, structures, processes and systems. At the same time, business continuity will be maintained to warrant the company’s capacity to operate effectively, perform at an upper level and position itself for growth (Thames & Webster, 2009). From this revelation, the negotiation strategy seems to be the most suitable. The proposed changes are likely to affect some senior managers and will therefore face a high resistance. This strategy takes in the disposition to negotiate with the senior managers and employees affected by the change. It also creates room for adjustments and refreshment stands that have to be made. Moreover, this approach does not do away with the administration’s duty to direct and initiate the change. The negotiation strategy concedes that those affected have the right to have some contribution to the proposed changes, or that they have certain power to fight back if they are not understanding. As a result, the resistance to the proposed change is may well be substantially abridged. Though, such negotiation will enlarge the whole series and the pre-implementation time may possibly be elongated (Whelan-Berry & Somerville, 2010). Roles and Responsibilities Administrators The administrators and decision makers play an important role in the organisational change process. Their specific roles for the effective implementation of the required change include: (1) Preparing the alternatives for taking forward the change, (2) Delineating the benefits and insinuations of each alternative (the level of detail will depend on the measure of the change to be made), (3) Seeking consent for the change process to be carried forward, (4) Establishing a management team to consist of human resources, employee relations, communication and subject matter specialists as required, and (5) Ensuring that, where applicable, the correct methods are used to engage with all people involved and in range of the change (Wiggins, 2009). Individuals in Scope of the Change Process The individuals (senior managers and new employees) have a key role to play in making sure that they have the facts required to make informed choices and to support the progressive effect of the change. They can do this by: (1) Making themselves cognisant of and owning the alternatives exposed to them, (2) Engaging in an active way in the change process (this possibly will involve taking part in meetings and answering to discussions), (3) Giving careful consideration to the options available and being open to re-training and evolving into different roles where required (Oreg, 2006). Change Process In the literature, one of the leading perspectives to the ‘planned approaches’ to change is that of Lewin. Kurt Lewin, a social psychologist, equated the change process as going from one solid state to another. Lewin acknowledged that whenever change is steered too hurriedly and devoid of due concern to the individuals involved, is likely to “shatter the equilibrium” and lead to (virtually expected) resistance (Bumes, 2004). He suggested a 3-stage model: Unfreezing Old Attitudes “Unfreezing” involves preparing for the change and may involve: (1) Leadership and guidance on the motives for change, (2) A simple, convincing case as to why the change is obligatory, and (3) Why the “status quo” is not a suitable position in the longer term. This essentially helps the individuals to appreciate the realities of the condition and the need for change, even they do not like the probable effects for them individually (Whelan-Berry & Somerville, 2010). Introducing the Change As soon as the organisation appreciates the need for change, then the changes can commence. For the period of change the individuals in the organisation will watch main leaders for indications as well as the information about “what is in it for me”. The key to victory is for management to be candid, open, and honest, never endeavouring to hide bad news (Bumes, 2004). Re-freezing Attitudes around the New Approach “Re-freezing” is the route by which the “new way” comes to be consistent behaviour and practice. But this will on no occasion come about by merely telling people to change. The one operational way is leading by example and creating a setting that continually and openly strengthens the new actions and therefore the preferred change (Wiggins, 2009). Evaluation and Close down The evaluation sets the original settled aims and objectives alongside the contemporary, post-change state. This usually involves criteria such as: performance ratings (peer/supervisory); behaviours (absenteeism or turnover figures); financial/production (turnover/production/ profit/market share/sales); worker attitudes and satisfaction. The outcome from the evaluation ought to summarise; areas where change has been fruitful; commendations for areas for development and proposals as to how developments can be realised using internal resources; areas lacking monitoring; abortive components of the change weighed against original intents; and proposed continuing evaluation plan (Thames & Webster, 2009). Ultimately, organisational change is a continuing process. It has got to be evaluated and monitored continually. Failure to do this may possibly result in a deliberate slide back into the ‘old methods’. Therefore, the change agent contracted is supposed to make presentations to management on response and headway as regards the change and market success; provide of personal counselling; create an environment of openness and trust through ‘management by objectives’ or ‘management by walking about’, if possible (Brown & Cregan, 2008). References Andrews, J. Cameron, H. and Harris, M. 2008. All change? Managers’ experience of organizational change in theory and practice, Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 21, no. 3. Brown, M. and Cregan, C. 2008. Organizational Change Cynism: the role of emplyee involvement. Wiley InterScience, vol. 20. Bumes, B. 2004. Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: a re-appraisal. Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 41, No. 6, pp. 972-1002. Holbeche, L. 2009. ‘Organisational development – what’s in a name?, Impact, vol. 26, pp.6-9 Jabri, M. 2012, “Managing Organizational Change: Process, Social Construction and Dialogue”, London: Palgrave Macmillan. Oreg, S. 2006. Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, vol.15, no.1, pp. 73 -101. Thames, B. and Webster, D. W. 2009. Chasing Change: Building organizational Capacity in a Turbulent Environment. Canada: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Todnem, R. 2005. Organisational Change Management: A Critical Review, Journal of Change Management, vol.5, no.4, pp.369 – 380. Whelan-Berry, K. S. and Somerville, K. A. 2010. Linking change drivers and organizational change process: A review and synthesis. Journal of Change Management, pp. 175-193. Wiggins, L. 2009. Managing the ups and downs of change communication, Strategic Communication Management, vol.13, no.1, pp.20-23 Read More