Essays on Organizational Change and Capacity for Rapid Continuous Change or Painless Change Assignment

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper 'Organizational Change and Capacity for Rapid Continuous Change or Painless Change' is a great example of a Management Assignment. In the scholarly realms, organizational change in the context of dynamics embedded institutional set-up has been subjected to diverse discourses. This argument is supported by Apfelthaler, Muller & Rehder (2002) who cite that there are heightened uncertainties and dynamism in the contemporary business environment at the international spectrum. As a result, the feasibility of organizations is being confronted by enormous challenges amid instabilities in the global market and interdependence amongst players at the global level. Consequently, institutional leaders and other stakeholders therein are gradually recognizing the fact that the wisdom that has received extensive acceptability in the recent past in regard to paradigms defining organizational operations and transformation is becoming deficient in significance at an accelerated (Glover, Jones & Friedman, 2002).

As a result, this analysis is a profound effort to examine the applicability of developing a capacity for rapid and continuous change or the more mild ‘ painless change’ . What is organizational change? Various scholars have offered a diverse definition for the term.

Nevertheless, Kezar (2001) infers that the definition of change in organizations has some variance which is determined by the particular model that the interested individual utilizes in analyzing. There exist some basic definitions that have been brought forward by various proponents, for instance, according to Burnes (1996), organizational change can be perceived to refer to comprehending variations in the organizational level at the widest level. This is usually amongst groups, personalities at the shared level across the wider institution. On the other hand, Van de Ven & Poole (1995) define the change in organizations to infer to the examination of disparities over a specified time in a singular or multiple aspects of an entity.

However, Kezar (2001) is critical of these definitions and notes that they have a deficiency in capturing the presumptions which are intrinsic in the diverse models of change theories. Organizational change perspectives Lawler (2000) determine that diverse books have been written in the realms of behavior in organizations and cultivating effectiveness all aimed at generating a practical model of managing change. In the effort to manage organizational change, Durant (1999) cites that different organizations have been confronted by heightened rapidity in regard to change more than they had experienced before.

The epoch of the 1980s saw many institutions struggling with business concerns that were new to them. Consequently, by the apex of 1993, many organizations had formulated and implemented extensive mechanisms, which were a determinant factor of the success of these organizations in solving their financial woes or had gone underground altogether. Durant (1999) continues to determine that after this period, many institutions commenced with initiating operations that would enhance their efficiency, performance and assist them in attaining and maintaining a competitive niche in the global market.

This was after a prevalent view that the environment which was external to the organization, and which played a major role in determining the tide of change, has eventually relaxed and normalcy in professionalism could be restored. This generates the paramount need to understand the most strategic approach which will be efficient in managing the changes in the organizations, failure of which will result in ultimate underperformance and failure.

REFERENCES

Abrahamson, E., (2000). Change without Pain. Harvard Business Review, 78(4), 75-9.

Amenakis. A, Harris, S. G., & Feild, H. S. (1999). Making change permanent: A model for

institutionalizing change interventions. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 12, 97-128.

Apfellthaler, G., Muller, Helen., Rehder, R., (2002). Corporate global culture as competitive

advantage: learning from Germany and Japan in Alabama and Austria? Journal of World Business, 37 (2), 108-18.

Burnes, B. (1996). Managing change: A strategic approach to organizational dynamics.

London:Pitman.

Clampit, P.G, Williams, M.J, & DeKoch, R.J (2002). Embracing uncertainty: The Executive’s

Challenge. Journal of Change Management, 2, 212-228

Durant M.W, (1999). Managing Organizational Change. Columbia: Credit Research

Foundation.

Eisendardt, K.M & Bourgeois, L.J (1998). Politics of Strategic Decision Making in High

Velocity Environment: Towards a mid-range Theory. Academic of management journal, 31(4), 737-70.

Galvin D.A & Roberto M, A (2005). Change through persuasion. Harvard Business Review.

83(2), 1-9.

Glover, J., Jones, G., & Friedman, H. (2002). Adaptive leadership: When change is not enough

(part 1). Organizational Development Journal, 20, 15-32.

Kezar,A. J. (2001). Understanding and FacilitatingOrganizational Changein the 21st Century.

New York: John Wiley & Sons

Lawler, E. (2000). Designing change capable Organizations. California: CEO publication

Lawler, E. E. & Galbraith, J. R. (1994). Avoiding the Corporate Dinosaur Syndrome.

Organizational Dynamics, 23 (2), 5-17.

Malone S. A, (2007). Creating Organizational Capacity for Continuous and Adaptive Change.

Retrieved March 10, 2012, from www.midwestacademy.org/Proceedings/2008/papers/

Malone_38.pdf

Smith K.L, & Torppa C.B, (2010). Creating the Capacity for Organizational Change: Personnel

Participation and Receptivity to Change. Journal of extension, 48(4), 1-9

Van de Ven, A. H. &Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in

organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510–540.

Whittngton, R. & Mayer, M. & Smith, A. (2002). The shape of things to come. People

management, 8(20), 28-34.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us