Organizational ChangeOrganizational change as a concept means the convergence of different trends that result in a paradigm shift within a given organization where the new order replaces the old order. It is as simple as changes happening in the respective operations of particular organizations. Management theorists explain organizational change in different perspectives and derive arguments depending on the type of change (William et al. , 1995). The assertion that organizational change experiences irreconcilable differences in the western and eastern persecution is patently not true. I disagree within this assertion asserted by theorists in management and beg to differ in this paper.
The paper details how the western and eastern perceptions of organization change merge and explain things similarly with one voice other than the contention that they are different. The paper looks into some of the similarities and correlations that exist between the two areas of concerns regarding their perceptions on change. Giuseppe et al. (2000) defines the concept of Organizational change as a concept in the management and Organizational studies field. The description of the concept includes changes in experiences, beliefs, psychology, attitudes, and values of a particular organization.
Another dimension defining the concept is, “the changes in specific value collection and norm application that people and groups share in an organization setting and that are subject to controlling the way interactions happen between the members of the organization and the stakeholders of the organization” (William et al. , 1995). The concept may also apply as changes in ideas and beliefs about the description of goals that organization members should pursue and other respective changes in ideas about the appropriate standards of behavior in an organization setting in achieving the respective goals. In explaining organization change for both western and eastern concepts, there is no doubt that the two do not have any considerable differences in the context of need driven change.
In this view, it is apparent that the two conceptions are reconcilable as opposed to the theorists of their difference. Need driven change means that the organizational change features because of a particular pressing need that both region experience in their respective organizations (Nancy et al. , 2002; Giuseppe et al. , 2000; Michael et al. , 2003; David 2005; Elizabeth et al. , 2004; William et al. , 1995). Technology is apparently developing in both the western and eastern regions.
Though there is a contention that eastern regions advance in technology from borrowing from the western industrialized regions, the issue is that even the western region also advance in the technological field. The advances are bringing about the changes within the organization. These changes incorporate changes in the working processes as well as the efficiency of the organization. Technological changes are evident in organizational changes conceptions in both the eastern and the western, this fact cannot change, and it is overwhelming the structures of the given organizations (Nancy et al. , 2002; Giuseppe et al. , 2000; Michael et al. , 2003; David 2005; Elizabeth et al. , 2004; William et al. , 1995). In reconciling western and eastern perspectives regarding change, analyzing the types of changes in an organization setting is ideal.
Both eastern and western organizational changes experience strategic changes. Strategic changes are thriving in both eastern and western regions. This therefore, brings out the reconciliation of changes as they happen in both regions meaning that they do not have any notable difference (Elizabeth et al. , 2004).
Globalization has come in, and organizations have to change their strategies in their respective operations whether in eastern or western regions. Though it is deemed that westerners are the founders of changes and disseminate them to the eastern, both changes relatively have a similar ground that is, change of strategies to conform to globalization.