Organisational Development and Change Management - Essay Example

?Organisational Development and Change Management Organisations constantly change in response to the changes taking place in their immediate businessenvironment and the global environment in general. According to the passage “Finegan, A, 2010, ‘Wicked Problems in Land Management – Case Studies from Climate Change and Disaster Recovery, AIPM”, climate change has been described as ‘a wicked problem’ because of its even further exacerbating features (Browne, 2006). However, climate change has not been addressed with the seriousness it deserves, due to laxity (on the side of causal organizations) and lack of global remedial interventions. This paper aims to analyse this passage using course themes and to discuss viable options for meaningful change and stakeholder engagement. The paper will further provide a framework on how to reach consensus on what many say is a global problem and a commentary on the current state of the global players, and their resistance to or acceptance of the problem. The highly dynamic and fast-changing global environment calls for organisations and nation states to be flexible and dynamic in order to address the global crisis that is climate change. A slow response to climate change by global players only worsens the situation for it may eventually result in a myriad of economic hardships that may stunt growth and development. Organisations need to downsize, reengineer, go global, and adapt new technologies among other things, in response to environmental changes or risk organizational failure (Essential tools, n.d). Organisational development largely depends on the organisation’s ability to adapt to climate change and respond to disasters; in this regard, organisations are turning to organisational development practitioners for solutions to respond to climate change and disasters (Nguyen, 2007). In an attempt to survive the turbulent wave of the fast-changing global environment, many organisations today are increasingly involved in organisational redesign and transformation. Thus, organisational change can be regarded as the systematic process to change the culture, system and behaviour of organisations; this change is very crucial if the organisation has to adapt to the environmental changes for sustainability. Most organisations are faced with the daunting task of developing the management style and culture that can help them cope with the challenges and opportunities they face in their daily operation. Managers today consciously seek to understand the aspects of change and theories of change to make decisions that will steer their organisations toward desired future states. Organisational development leads to greater organisational effectiveness, especially in areas such as financial performance and work life quality. Every organisation has process specialists who initiate organisational development; in this regard, OD is a planned strategy that aims to help the organisation in order to move from the current state to future desired states where they become highly adaptive to change. All organisation members to be affected by organisational changes must be involved; thus, OD is a collaborative approach to change that seeks to improve performance (McLean, n.d.). Organisational development is a system approach that deals with the interdependent subsystems of the total organisations based upon scientific approaches. Organisational development thrives on behavioural science knowledge, combining research, and experience to bring about the desired organisational effectiveness. On the other hand, organisational change refers to all the alterations in the human resources, operational structure, or technology of an organisation to enhance the organisational effectiveness (Tripon and Dodu, n.d.). Change is a constant factor in the organisation often accompanied by uncertainty, threats and opportunities; in this respect, managers should be adequately prepared to manage change when it arises. Organisational change has three tiers, namely, structure, technology and people; furthermore, managers can bring about organisational change by altering the organisational structure, technology and human resources. Normally, people experience change in three phases, from the current state through the transition state to the future state; the human resources occupy the current state in fear of the future state, which, because of its uncertainties, is left to the project teams. The transition state is always filled with stress and anxiety as the organisation undergoes the unfamiliar alterations that affect the human resources and therefore must be gradual (Woodward and Hendry, 2004). As a constant, change is inevitable in organisations and can never be eliminated; both external and internal forces within and without the organisation are responsible for organisational change. For instance, some of the external forces causing the need of change in organisations include legislation, competition, shareholder demands and consumer demands among other things. Some of the internal forces causing change in the organisation include takeovers and mergers, technological advancements and outsourcing, among other things. The concept of change management deals with the interventions on the responses of the human resources in order to change and achieve the desired organisational outcomes. Managers use change management to anticipate, activate, and accelerate people’s engagement within the organisation; change should not be rapid but introduced gradually through a sequence of steps. Initially, managers need to have a clear perspective of the desired future state/change and state explicitly the need for change (Browne, 2006). It is also imperative for managers to communicate the proposed change to avert any misconceptions in addition to addressing people’s concerns and fears regarding the proposed changes. For any change to succeed, the managers should develop a clear action plan to outline the future direction of the organisation, in order to move away from the status quo. As the organisation transits from the status quo to the new state, the managers are obliged to ensure an atmosphere of certainty by providing direction for the organisation. It is also important for managers to get feedback from employers on the progress of the new system in the face of the new changes. This feedback enables the managers to evaluate the effectiveness of the organisation in value formation because of the new status due to the changes. There are specific tasks undertaken by managers in effective change management, and these can be summarised as motivating change, creating the vision for change, building political support, managing the transition and sustaining the momentum. Managers need to be very proactive in change management to set a good example to the rest of the workers by creating new cultures in place of the old ones and appraising employees who embrace the new organisational values. There are three major theories that guide organisational change today, and these include Lewin’s Change Model, Action Research Model/Cycle and the Positive Model. Lewin’s change model is a three-phase planned course of change described as Unfreeze-Change-Refreeze process of change; it occurs because of the struggle between the factions that strive to maintain the status quo and the ones that push for change. The first stage of change, unfreeze, entails preparing the organisation’s members to accept change by discouraging the status quo and communicating the need for change before invoking the change process itself. The top management can point at a number of things such as declining sales figures, poor financial results, worrying customer satisfaction rates, among other things, as the motivations for change. In the change stage, people in the organisation begin to resolve some of the anxiety created in the unfreeze stage by looking for new approaches of doing things and acting in support of the new direction. The transition from unfreeze to change takes time because people need to be convinced to embrace change; this is not an easy task as a lot of explanation is needed to justify the need for change. After the changes have been effected and people have accommodated the alterations, the organisation is ready to refreeze; this stage helps both the organisation and the people to internalise the changes in the organisational structure. The second model of organisational change, Action Research Model, also known as participatory research or collaborative inquiry, involves learning by doing and stresses the value of co-learning as the primary aspect of research process. This method involves action, evaluation, and critical reflection; based on results achieved, the changes are implemented leading to an improvement in organisational practice. Action Research model is an eight-step course of change, and these steps include problem identification, consultation with behavioural science experts, data gathering and preliminary diagnosis and feedback to group; the rest of steps are joint diagnosis of the problem, joint action planning, action and data gathering after action. The positive model of change is an inquiry into the best organisational practices; members of the organisation focus on the positive aspects of the organisation to help achieve better results in the organisation. The positive model is a five-step process that entails initiating the research, finding out the best practices of the organisation and identification of the themes; the remaining steps involve envisioning the preferred future state and designing ways to achieve it. Unlike the other two models, the positive model of organisational change focuses on what works rather than what is not working using the Appreciative Inquiry approach; in this model, everyone is motivated and committed to making the change because of being involved in creating the positive version. However, all the three change models agree on a number of things, namely, change is preceded by diagnosis/preparation, members’ participation and the need for evaluation at the end of each process. The three models differ in their perspectives of the role of OD specialists and fixing problems versus building on strengths approaches. A closer examination of the three models reveals the four basic activities that practitioners and organisations carry out in joint organisational development, thus leading to the general model of planned change. The general model of planned change is the most effective model of solving wicked problems because it combines approaches from the other three models. The general model entails four stages, namely, entering and contracting, diagnosing, planning and implementing change; the fourth and last stage is evaluating and institutionalising change (Hrpeople, 2008). The first stage of entering and contracting helps managers examine the problem facing the organisation and to make intervention decisions through a planned change program to mitigate the problem. The diagnosis stage entails putting all the organisational challenges in perspective and choosing an appropriative model for action research; this is one of the most important activities in OD. The next stage entails planning and carrying out change interventions; here, the organisation and practitioners jointly strive to move the organisation to the desired future state. Four major OD interventions can be executed in any organisation, and these touch on human resource, organisational structure, staff welfare in addition to Corporate Social Responsibility and business ethics. The final stage is evaluating the progress of change interventions and making it part of the organisational culture; managers evaluate the success of the interventions made and whether to adopt the changes permanently. There are about six different types of planned change based on three main parameters, namely, magnitude of change, degree of organisation and domestic versus international settings. Under the criterion of magnitude of change, there is incremental and quantum change; incremental changes involve fine-tuning the organisation in limited dimensions within the context of its existing operational framework. Quantum changes, on the other hand, are fundamental changes that alter an organisation’s organisational framework, and they involve several organisational dimensions. Depending on the degree of organisation of the client system, we can have over-organised and under-organised change efforts; over-organised systems such as highly mechanistic bureaucratic organisations, change is aimed at loosening constraints to task performance. On the other hand, under-organised systems undertake planned change to increase organisation through clarification of roles and structuring, among other things, to enhance task performance. Planned change also varies based on cultural differences in organisational settings; many cultures prefer OD processes that encourage openness, participation and increased effectiveness. Planned change has not been devoid of criticism as several criticisms have been raised concerning the conceptualisation of planned change; critics have observed the limits to our knowledge regarding this concept, inadequacies in our method of evaluation and ignorance of contextual differences as some of the weaknesses of planned change. Planned change critics argue that it should be guided by information concerning features of the organisation that are open to change and the intended outcomes. This information must also be accompanied by causal mechanisms and contingencies that determine success of the change interventions. Planned change is also deficient of knowledge about contextual differences that characterise different organisational settings, and it is not a rationally controlled orderly process as it is often claimed. Other criticisms have been directed to the practice of planned change, especially regarding the skills of the OD, the accuracy of diagnosis and feasibility of organisational expectations. Effective change depends on the accuracy of the diagnosis that identifies the state of the organisation and its underlying problems; however, given that diagnosis requires time and money, some organisations are hesitant to make such investments. Models of planned change can be used to address many problems affecting organisations in the highly competitive and dynamic global environment to increase organisational effectiveness. Case studies from Climate Change and Disaster Response reveal how wicked projects in land management can be solved through planned change; many projects in land management, especially those that relate to climate change and disaster recovery, involve multiple stakeholders, poorly structured complexities, uncertain environments, and considerable risks (Browne, 2006). Such projects can be regarded as wicked projects, and the system’s approach can be used to resolve the complex problems that constraint future organisational projects in the rapidly changing global environment. Climate change and disaster recovery are emerging issues of critical importance to any global organisation, and OD interventions can be very effective in addressing these concerns. Wicked problems undermine the global initiatives to promote the establishment of a healthy and sustainable global environment due to their catastrophic impacts on the environment. Global organisations are bedevilled with the challenge of addressing the risk of running wicked projects that result into the risk of climate change and environmental degradation. The elusiveness of wicked problems further aggravates the dilemma facing global organisations as they are made up of a dense web of interconnecting factors that constraint organisational action. Lack of a global law-making institution with a jurisdictional and legal authority that matches the scope of the climate change qualifies it as a major wicked problem in organisational development (Browne, 2006.). Climate change may result into economic disruptions that stifle organisational development, and organisations must plan to adapt to climate change and disastrous events that may jeopardise organisational effectiveness. The basic requirements for addressing wicked problems have been identified as extensive consultation, management of conflict, avoidance of simple trade-offs and adoption of new practices that are sustainable. The Soft Systems Methodology is a soft people-based systems thinking approach that provides a collaborative response to addressing wicked problems. This approach provides a cultural view of the organisations, especially to its people components who are believed to attribute significance to their condition and to define their own purposes for the institution. Ultimately, Organisational Development and Change management are essential parts of every organisation, especially in today’s highly dynamic global environment. Organisations are increasingly concerned with the need to reposition strategically to be able to respond to changes in the turbulent global environment. Survival in the market is very crucial for organisations, and managers are especially concerned with how to move their organisations from the current states to the desired future states. Organisational development calls for planned organisational change and change management; planned organisational change introduces the relevant alterations that are crucial to achieve the desired future states while change management helps the person component of the organisation adjust to the new changes in the organisation. Organisations are mostly bedevilled with the wicked problem of climate change, which has the capacity to disrupt the global economy, while Soft Systems Methodology is an effective way of solving such wicked problems like climate change. Reference List Browne, N., 2006. “Leading Change – Guidelines for Managers”. ebook browse. [Online] Available at: http://ebookbrowse.com/a-guide-to-leading-change-version7-june-24th-2006-doc-d142953246 [Accessed 23/05/2013]. Essential tools, n.d.“Change Management and Organisational Development”. [Online]Available at: http://www.essentialtoolsseries.com/SpringboardWebApp/userfiles/estools/file/Chapter%202.pdf [Accessed 23/05/2013]. Finegan, A., n.d. Wicked Projects in Land Management - Case Studies from Climate Change and Disaster Recovery. [Online] Available at: http://leishman.conference-services.net/resources/266/2110/pdf/AIPM2010_0075.pdf [Accessed 23/05/2013]. Hrpeople, 2008. The Organisation Development Process. [Online]. Available at: http://hrpeople.monster.com/training/articles/142-the-organisation-development-process [Accessed 23/05/2013]. McLean, G., n.d. “Organisational Development”. Bkconnection.com. [Online]Available at: http://www.bkconnection.com/organisational-development.asp[Accessed 23/05/2013]. Nguyen, T.K., 2007. “OD in voluntary organisations: Guiding the future of people working together”. Organisational Development Journal, Vol 25 (2). Tripon, C. and Dodu, M., n.d. Change Management and Organisational Development. [Online] Available at: http://www.apubb.ro/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/OD_Suport_de_curs_masterat.pdf [Accessed 23/05/2013]. Woodward, S. and Hendry, C., 2004. Leading and coping with change. Journal of Change Management, Vol. 4 (2), 155–183. Read More