Organization Capacities for Change in Middle East Countries - Research Paper Example

Organizational Capacities for Change and Organizational Development Name: Tutor: Course: Date: Abstract The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development of government sector in the Middle East particularly United Arab Emirates (UAE). Organizations in the 21st century alongside their management are facing unrelenting demands for change (Sargent, 2011). UAE government sector is literally being challenged by the rest of the world to continuously change in terms of social, economic, technological and market competitiveness. The e-government strategy in the UAE as model of organizational change has a tremendous role in revolutionalising current governmental systems (Westland & Al-Khouri, 2010). The aim of the paper was to explore the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development in the government of UAE. This paper was based on a study by Westland and Al-Khouri (2010) who examined e-government potential to develop public confidence and trust in the UAE. The paper obtained that organizational capacities for change were responsible for planned change and organizational development as enhanced employee skills, citizen participation and empowerment. Organizational capacities for change and organization development initiatives are relevant facets in creating responsible and competitive organizations (Smith, 2002). Table of Contents Abstract 2 1.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Background of the Study 4 1.2 Aim of the Study 6 1.3 Research Questions 6 1.4 Problem Statement 6 1.5 Scope of the Study 7 2.0 Literature Review 8 2.1 Organizational Capacities for Change 8 2.3 Theories of Organizational Change and Development 9 2.4 Organizational Capacities for Change at the Macro-level: Creating a Culture of Change 10 3.0 Methodology 11 4.0 Findings and Discussion 12 5.0 Conclusion 13 Reference list 15 1.0 Introduction The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development of government sector in the Middle East particularly United Arab Emirates (UAE). To start with, the paper contextualizes organizational capacities for change by exploring its definitions and the dimensions. This was in consideration of organizational change through change management as the process of continuously reviewing organizations capabilities, structure and direction to serve the needs of employees, the organization and the ever-changing marketplace needs. Secondly, the paper examines organizational development aspects in terms of organizational culture, participation and citizen empowerment. Change management is a high-risk undertaking for managers and organizations (Burke, 2004). Internal resistance to new initiatives is the result of implementation failure to manage change. Thirdly, the paper explored the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development by considering a study by Ramezan et al. (2013) in Iranian innovative industry. LaClair and Rao (2002) suggest that about 50-70 percent of change management initiatives fail to impact the organizations that are intended to be reformed. They fail to meet the meet the targets and expectations of the tactical and strategic management. The study by Westland and Al-Khouri (2010) on e-government progress in UAE explored the relationships between organizational capacity for change and organization development in the public sector. 1.1 Background of the Study Organizational Capacities for Change (OCC) Public sector organizations have been associated with inefficiencies, bureaucracy and unreliability (Lerner, Latini & Stoltz, 2011). Such organizations have been forced to develop continuous strategic responses of the changing market by learning on what creates successful change and sustain success (Nawar, 2005).The development of Information Communication Technologies (ICT) such as mobile phones, internet and social media has increasingly changed the performance of many organizations in the public and private sector. Some of the organizations have focused on a narrow path of issues such as motivation and culture that will not bring change. Organization development was initially centred on growing the humanistic ideals at the place of work such as trust and confidence, commitment, participation, citizen empowerment and employee development (Carnall, 2004). The current thinking about organizational development is the attention that has been given to the broader business operational environment where businesses align with their larger environment (De Lima, 2009). Organizations change to become relevant and competitive in the dynamic market, by continuously review their Organizational Development agenda and focusing on their responsiveness to the environment, human fulfillment and overall productivity (Ray, 2011). The change involves; organizational culture, norms and values, human resources and skill sets and finally formal procedures and systems (McLagan, 2003). ICT technologies are one of the most significant innovations for change in organizations today (Carnall, 2004). United Arab Emirates (UAE) has in the last two decades made progress in increasing use of e-government and other ICT technologies to increase the level of technology diffusion and participation (Lerner, Latini Stoltz, 2011). According to a study by United Nations in 2010, UAE ranks at 49 in terms of e-government development and maturity making her one of the leading Arab countries in e-readiness (UN, 2010). The government sector needs to change through restructuring with efficiency of operations, improved competency and advanced technologies based on organizational change management. Sirkin, Jackson and Keenan (2005) argue that organizations will need to consider factors like the number of people need to execute the change and the time it takes to complete the change initiative. Resistance to change is not merely a result of inertia or necessarily reflecting opposition (Golembiewski, 2003). Most workers in a bid to have a sincere commitment to change apply productive energy in a competing but hidden environment. Personal immunity to change is stalled by resistance which is actually internal conflict (Burke, 2004). UAE has embraced change to improve its government capabilities designed to manage change. The sector has designed practices and programs that are critical in the field of change management. Resilient and well performing organizations not only generate products and services for society but also provide opportunities and employment for self actualization (Ghanem, 2009). However, many organizations in the UAE especially in government are vulnerable to global competition, limited supply of human skills and resources and constrained domestic market (Cameron & Ouinn, 2009). The understanding on the subject of capacity development interventions, practical experiences and wealth of analytical frameworks may shed light on organizational change and how it affects the development of such organizations. 1.2 Aim of the Study To explore the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organization development in the government sector, UAE. 1.3 Research Questions 1. What are the attributes and dimensions of organizational capacities for change and organizational development? 2. Is there any relationship between organization change and organizational development in the government sector of UAE? 1.4 Problem Statement The public sector in the UAE and other Gulf states has experienced changes that centre on effectiveness, accessibility and efficiency of public service delivery (Arab News, 2004). Experiences suggest that UAE has challenges bordering a broader organization development agenda that drives government organizations towards efficiency and productivity (Kegan & Lahey, 2001). They use of one-size-fits-all approach has undermined the emergence of flexible organizations responsive to changing and complex circumstances within their broader and institutional environment. Irwin and Cichocki (2011) argue that some of the changes advised are more likely to promote an active involvement of people, become widely acceptable over the other strategies and increase their enthusiasm and commitment of the change process. However, limited studies have explored the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development. Studies on organizational development also pose challenges on how to associate the social infrastructure and human capital to organizational performance and development. The participation of staff has a number of advantages drawn from identified changes within the organization but they require additional resources and take longer time to support the change (Smith, 2002). Though UAE has aided the development of government sector, its failure or success in organization development is measured on their ability to deliver results and expectations of citizens (Al-Khouri, 2012). Therefore, developing organizational capacities for change has narrow definition and involves strengthening the management capabilities in areas like trust and confidence, employee motivation, and citizen participation (Hebda et al. 2007). The study explored the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organization development in the public sector of UAE. 1.5 Scope of the Study The aim of the study was to explore the relationship of organizational capacities for change on organization development in the government sector, UAE. It was based on secondary research of Westland and Al-Khouri (2010) and Ramezan, Sanjaghi and Baly (2013) who delved into the discourse of organizational capacities for change. The former was a descriptive study on the attributes of organizational capacities for change in UAE based on e-government readiness while the second was an empirical analysis of the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development based on an innovative industry in Iran undertaken in 2013 (Sekaran, 2000). Organizational capacities for change attributes are drawn from the progress of the UAE e-government strategy 2011-2013 (Al-Khouri, 2012). 2.0 Literature Review 2.1 Organizational Capacities for Change Organizational change capacity is the overall capacity for an organization to prepare and respond to the volatile and unpredictable environmental context (Kanter, 2003). Change is a constant that is currently influencing events and activities in a world that is increasingly becoming more interrelated and complex. Organizational change is the state of transition between the current and future state of an organization (Golembiewski, 2003). It is a strategic change on interaction between context ideas, content of a change and the process. Some analyses have disregarded this fact and perceived organizational change as an individual fact lacking meaning, substance of change and analysis of form (Bartunek & Moch, 2010). The success of organizational change depends on effectiveness of its implementation and the quality of the solution which leads to use of innovation or change likely to improve the performance of an organization. Judge, Naoumova and Douglas (2009) argue that change can be inappropriate or bad for the context resulting in negative effects given the lack of interdependence between the process of change and the content. Organizational change being dynamic promotes a strategy for the evolvement of the organization (Kanter, 2003). Change is done gradually and forced from outside through employees who apply the implementation and leaders who create the vision of change. Major organizational change with time goes through more changes at an inferior level (Lawler & Worley, 2006). The dimensions of organizational capacities for change are human capital; trusty worthy leaders, trusting followers, capable champions and involved middle management and social infrastructure; systems thinking, communication systems, accountable culture and innovative culture (Judge 2010). 2.2 Organization Development Organizational development is a strategic leadership level effort to increase the health and effectiveness of the entire organization. Based on knowledge of behavioral sciences, such efforts constitute planned interventions of organizational procedures and processes. Pablo and Reay et al. (2007) argue that organizations aim at planned changes to pursue broader organizational development goals. Employees and management usually experience changes in the event of planned changes which may affect them positively or negatively (Weiner, 2009). However, Sargent (2011) suggests that in some instance, organizations enhance the ability of employees to handle changes by putting interventions and succession measures in a bid to sustain performance. According to Ray (2011) organizational development is direct associated with organizational performance affecting frontline employees, middle level managers and top level managers and help build capacities for organizational change (De Lima, 2009; Sargent, 2011). For prosperity of a nation, government departments are required to undergo a sustained change by formulating and implementing government policies aimed at citizen empowerment, participation, trust and confidence on the government (Burnes, 2011). 2.3 Theories of Organizational Change and Development Organization change is an instrument of organization development though they are two completely different concepts. Organization change is effective for the organizational system needed in reaching the ultimate goal of a process (Lawler & Worley, 2006). From observation organizational development as opposed to simple organizational change is a process that demands a longer time span (Kegan & Lahey, 2001). In a coherent totality, many organizational changes gathered have a multidimensional and a complex process (Irwin & Cichocki, 2011). For different reasons, management introduce most organizational changes are intentional and planned changes that consist of response to strategic changes, environmental or internal pressures that develops the organization. Changes taking place at organization level except for the revolutions that take place at a macro level often evolve in a shorter time span (Kotter, 1996). The systematic paradigm in the case of organizational changes has a leading role in organizational development that measures the effects of a change. The theoretical space of organizational change draws more from managerial perspective since organizational development is a representation of the management team point of view. Implementing a planned change and a description of the process are two major ways of advancing the organizational change issue (Moran & Brightman, 2000). Burke (2010) argue that there are transactional and transformative changes also termed as first and the second order changes that confirm that identity of an organization remains constant . Organization has certain features that can only be modified inferring that its fundamental nature remains the same and can be described as incremental, adaptive, continuous, transactional or evolutionary (Kegan & Lahey, 2001). Second order changes describe an organizational identity that is essentially changed and fundamental nature. Second order changes as described by French and Bell (2009) are basically discontinuous, radical, revolutionary or transformative and are connected to organization development (LaClair & Rao, 2002). In the second order changes, it draws a lot from organizational development meaning that any effort of change is influenced by organization culture (Bartunek & Moch, 2010). Material or symbolic goods are products of the activities of production that are modified through management and communication. They are influenced by the organizational cultural dimension, values and norms that structure and direct activities of company employees (Hamdan, 2000). Leavitt theory argues that any change whatsoever can affect organizational culture in all dimensions of that social system since they are all manifested in the organization (Rothwell, Prescott & Taylor, 2008). The organization’s post change state given the new organizational reality has to be absorbed by norms, values and organizational culture (Neely, 2002). 2.4 Organizational Capacities for Change at the Macro-level: Creating a Culture of Change Organization culture that is change-facilitative allows organizations to embrace learning, openness and fluidity by emphasizing on execution, predictability and stability (McLagan, 2003; Lawler & Worley, 2006). Organizational culture is the epitome of organizational development associated with the responsibility for one’s own actions, level of employee involvement, tendency to outdo self professionally and team work (Smith, 2002). It is not only a driving force for change but also a main source of resistance to change and a pillar for the organization development effort. There is a difficulty in organizations to break free from familiar operating procedures and rules and organizational traditions owing to the status quo and power of custom. Reinforced cultures forestall flexibility and agility that organizational members are required to embrace while in unstable environments (French & Bell, 2009). Though traditional approaches may be appropriate in some circumstances, organizational members need to know the limitations and advantages of various changes, a broader context for the change and a shared purpose. Stakeholder orientation is a requisite to be embraced by functional leaders with emphasis on information sharing and learning at all levels. Balasubramanian and Lee (2008) note that government systems have in the past depended on tangible organizational changes, technology and processes ignoring the importance of skills, competencies and employee engagement to produce desired results and competitive advantage by way of innovation and creativity (Moran & Brightman, 2000). Inclusive and sustainable industrial development in the UAE is also desired to sustainably improve global living conditions (French & Bell, 2009). The government has pushed the public sector to take a strategic and prospective approach that focuses on long-term capabilities such as skill gaps between developing and developed economies, and demographic shifts associated with ageing of the population, automation and robotisation and the next-generation technology particularly in 3D printing and nanotechnology sectors (Smith, 2002). 3.0 Methodology The paper was an explorative study on secondary data of UAE e-government strategy 2011-203 which describes the progress of government in providing benefits to citizens, business, suppliers and other public sector bodies. Ray (2011) argues that organizational development is directly correlated to organization development. The paper in exploring the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development used, the empirical study of Ramezan, Sanjaghi and Baly (2013) that employed the organizational performance model of Balasubramanian and Lee (2008) and the organizational capacities for change model from Judge and Douglas (2009). The OCC model had 8 dimensions (effective communication, accountable culture, systems thinking, trusting followers, innovative culture, capable champions, involved mid management and trustworthy leadership) (Ray, 2011; Judge, 2010). On the other hand, organizational development had six dimensions (team collaboration, knowledge management, strategic performance, organizational growth, organizational communication and stakeholder’s satisfaction) (Judge, 2010). There study was conducted in 2012 using 130 qualified employees from a knowledge based organization in Iran. Regression analysis as well as parametric and non-parametric tests was done. 4.0 Findings and Discussion The findings on UAE e-government strategy point to a change initiative that demands both social infrastructure and human capital. It showed that the effectiveness and success of ICT-enabled connected governance was driven by trusty worthy leaders, trusting followers, capable champions and involved middle management. The results were greater participation, citizen empowerment and participation brought about by proper organizational infrastructure like systems thinking, communication systems, accountable culture and innovative culture (Judge, 2010). Under systems thinking it obtained that budgetary procedures, structural arrangements and rules of the various departments. Senge (1990) argues that individuals interact with constituents of system based on larger number of organizational interactions. Organizational change capacity is therefore influenced by organizational infrastructure that promotes systems thinking. Communication between departments, agencies of local and central government requires efficiency and reduced costs. Communication systems such as corporate announcements, telephone calls, face-to-face meetings and e-mail networks facilitated the implementation of e-government strategies. According to Worley and Lawler (2006) an effectively delivered and designed dual communication on change initiatives to built organizational change. Citizens hold the government responsible for democratic participation and openness. The study on e-government readiness also found that innovative and accountable culture increased convenience, greater citizen awareness and efficiency of other public bodies. It can be learned that as an organization attempts to be innovative, it should try to be accountable in terms of budget and timelines. Reward and control systems are required for effective organizational capacity for change. According to Hampden-Turner (1992) organizational culture offers solutions during ambiguity, motivates individuals and defines appropriate behavior while governing values, internal relations and company information processing. Openness and personal service to business and citizens is a UAE government culture to drive innovation and organizational change. On the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development, the study by Ramezan et al. (2013) found that there was a strong positive relationship only if associated with organizational development. The study also organizational development was predictable and explainable with organizational capacities for change using non-parametric and parametric relationships. The paper was significant in assessing adaptations of the government sector to change and its impact on organizational development. 5.0 Conclusion The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between organizational capacities for change and organizational development. It also examined the attributes of organizational capacities for change and those of organizational development. Organizational development explored citizen empowerment, values, competencies and participation in order to drive transformative and transactional changes in UAE (Sargent, 2011). Organizational capacities for change constitute human attributes such as trustyworthy leaders, trusting followers, capable champions and involved middle management while the social attributes include systems thinking, communication systems, accountable and innovative culture (Ray, 2011). Organizational development is directly connected to organizational capacities for change and promotes a strategy for the evolvement of an efficient government sector. It shows that change is done gradually and forced from outside through employees who apply the implementation and leaders who create the vision of change. Major organizational change with time goes through more changes at an inferior level (Hebda et al. 2007). The organizational change associated with the government sector of UAE draws more from managerial perspective since organizational development is a representation of the management team point of view. Implementing a planned change and a description of the process are two major ways of advancing the organizational change issue (Bischoff, Sallstrom & Trimborn, 2010). It shows that changes taking place at organization level except for the revolutions that take place at a macro level often evolve in a shorter time span in UAE government sector. Based on the findings of Ramezan et al. (2013) and AL Khouri (2012) it can be established that organizational capacities for change has a positive relationship with organizational development (Ray, 2012). Reference list Al-Khouri AM 2012, eGovernment Strategies The Case of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). European Journal of ePractice. 4(1), 130-149. Arab News, 2004, UAE minister tells officials to face globalization challenges. Retrieved November 10, 2011. Balasubramanian N & Lee J 2008, Firm age and innovation, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol.5: 55-67. Bartunek JM & Moch MK 2010, First Order, Second Order and Third Order Change and OD Interventions: A cognitive Approach, in The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, vol. 22, no. 4, p. 483-500. Bischoff AL Sallstrom LS & Trimborn P 2010, Change and Renewal - Organizational Development, GRIN Verlag. Burke W 2004, Organization Development, second edition, Addison- Wesley Publishing Company. Cameron SK Ouinn ER 2009, Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Carnall AC 2004, Managing Change in Organizations, Prentice Hall International Ltd, UK. De Lima JA 2009, Managing change: Winning hearts and minds, balanced scorecard report. Harvard Business Review, 11(1), 16. Ghanem, SM 2009, The Future of U.A.E. Industry, Cultural and Scientific Association Al-wais Prize Annual Book, pp 19–68. Goold M & Campbell A 2002, Designing effective organizations: How to create structured networks. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. French, W & Bell HC 2009, Organization Development (Behavioral Science Interventions for Organization Improvement), Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Golembiewski TR 2003, Approaches to Planned Change (Orienting Perspectives and Micro- Level Interventions), Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick. Hamdan, SA 2000, Industrial Activity in the State, Industrial Affairs, no. 61, 16th Year, March 2000. Hebda JM Vojak BA Griffin A & Price RL 2007, Motivating technical visionaries in large American companies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 54(3), 433- 444. Heilpern JD & Nadler DA 1992, Implementing Total Quality Management: A process of cultural change. In D. A. Nadler, M. S. Gerstein & R. B. Shaw (Eds.), Organizational architecture. Designs for changing organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Irwin C & Cichocki P 2011, Organization Design: A Guide to Building Effective Organizations, Kogan Page Publishers. Judge WQ 2010, Focusing on Organizational Change. John Wiley and Sons. Judge W Naoumova I Douglas T 2009, Organizational capacity for change and firm performance in a transition economy. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 20 (8): 1737–1752. Kanter RM 2003, Leadership for change: Enduring skills for change masters. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Kegan R & Lahey LL 2001, Real reasons people won't change. Harvard Business Review, 79(10), 145-154. Kotter JP 1996, Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. LaClair J & Rao R 2002, Helping employees embrace change. The McKinsey Quarterly(4).56- 76. Lawler EE & Worley C 2006, Build to change. Palo Alto, CA: Kantola Productions, Stanford Executive Briefings. Lerner HF Latini JM Stoltz KS 2011, Creating a Lasting Change: Lessons from transforming a Middle Eastern Government. Hamilton Press. McLagan PA 2003, The change-capable organization, Training & Development, 57 (1): 51-57. Moran JW & Avergun A 1997, Creating lasting change. The TQM Magazine, 9(2), 146-151. Moran JW & Brightman BK 2000, Leading organizational change. Journal of Workplace Learning, 12(2),66-74. Nawar AH 2005, The Economic Role of Free Zones in the UAE, Economic Affairs Journal, Abu Dhabi, November. Neely A 2002, Business performance measurement. London, UK: Economist Books. Pablo AL Reay et al. 2007, Identifying, Enabling and Managing Dynamic Capabilities in the Public Sector. Journal of Management Studies. 44(5) 687-708. Ramezan M Sanjaghi ME & Baly 2013, Organizational Change capacity and Organizational Performance: An empirical analysis on an innovative industry. Journal of Knowledge- based Innovation in China. University of Tehran. Vol. 5 Iss 3 pp. 188-122. Ray R 2011, Influencing Change: Building Capacity Evaluation, World Bank, Washington DC. Rothwell WJ Prescott RK & Taylor 2008, Human Resource Transformation: Demonstrating Strategic Leadership in the Face of Future Trends, Davies-Black Publishing. Sargent L 2011, Managing Organizational Change: Negotiating meaning and power-resistance relations. Organizational Science, 22(1) 22-41. Sekaran U 2000, Research methods for business. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Sirkin HL, Keenan P & Jackson A 2005, Hard side of change management. Harvard Business Review,83(10), 108-118. Smith ME 2002, Success rates for different types of organizational change. In Performance Improvement (pp. 26-33): International Society for Performance Improvement. Westland D & Al-Khouri AM 2010, Supporting e-government Progress in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of E-Government Studies and Best Practices. Doha. Vol. 2. pp. 1-9. United Nations e-government Survey 2012. http://unpan3.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2012-Survey/unpan048065.pdf Read More