Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin Organizational Change

14-2 Lewin’s Force Field Analysis Model  Developed by Kurt Lewin  Driving forces Push organizations toward change External forces or leader’s vision  Restraining forces Resistance to change -- employee behaviors that block the change process Driving Forces Restraining Forces

14-3 Why People Resist Change 1. Direct costs -- Losing something of value due to change 2. Saving face -- Accepting change acknowledges own imperfection, past wrongdoing 3. Fear of the unknown -- Risk of personal loss -- Concern about being unable to adjust 4. Breaking routines -- past practices/habits are valued by employees due to comfort, low cognitive effort -- Organizational unlearning is part of change process 5. Incongruent organizational systems -- Systems/structures reinforce status quo 6. Incongruent team dynamics -- Norms contrary to desired change

14-4 Creating an Urgency for Change  Inform employees about driving forces  Most difficult when organization is doing well  Customer-driven change  Urgency to change without external drivers Persuasive influence Positive vision

14-5 Minimizing Resistance to Change  Highest priority and first strategy for change  Improves urgency to change  Reduces fear of unknown  Problems -- time consuming and costly Communication Learning Involvement Stress Mgt Coercion Negotiation

14-6 Minimizing Resistance to Change  Provides new knowledge/skills  Coaching, other forms of learning  Breaks old routines, adopt new roles  Problems -- potentially time consuming and costly Communication Involvement Stress Mgt Coercion Negotiation Learning

14-7 Minimizing Resistance to Change  Employees participate in change  Saves face, reduces fear of unknown  Task forces, future search events  Problems -- time-consuming, potential conflict Learning Involvement Stress Mgt Coercion Negotiation Involvement Communication

14-8 Minimizing Resistance to Change  When communication, learning, and involvement are not enough to minimize stress  Potential benefits More motivation to change Less fear of unknown Fewer direct costs  Problems -- time-consuming, expensive, doesn’t help everyone Learning Involvement Coercion Negotiation Stress Mgt Communication

14-9 Minimizing Resistance to Change  Influence by exchange -- reduces direct costs  Use when people lose something and won’t support otherwise  Problems Expensive Gains compliance, not commitment Learning Involvement Stress Mgt Coercion Communication Negotiation

14-10 Minimizing Resistance to Change  When all else fails  Assertive influence  Firing is a radical form of “unlearning”  Problems Reduces trust May create more subtle resistance Encourage politics to protect job Coercion Learning Involvement Communication Stress Mgt Negotiation

14-11 Diffusion of Change  Begin change as pilot projects  Effective diffusion considers MARS model Motivation – Reward diffusion Ability – Train employees to adopt pilot project Role perceptions – Translate pilot project to new situations Situational factors – Provide resources for other pilots

14-12 Action Research Approach  Action orientation and research orientation Action – to achieve the goal of change Research – testing application of concepts  Action research principles 1. Open systems perspective 2. Highly participative process 3. Data-driven, problem-oriented process

14-13 Four-D Model of Appreciative InquiryDesigningDesigning Engaging in dialogue about “what should be” DreamingDreaming Forming ideas about “what might be” DiscoveryDiscovery Discovering the best of “what is DeliveringDelivering Developing objectives about “what will be”

14-14 Large Group Interventions  Future search, open space, and other interventions that involve “the whole system” High involvement with minimal structure  Limitations of large group interventions Limited opportunity to contribute Risk that a few people will dominate Focus on common ground may hide differences Generates high expectations about ideal future

14-15 Parallel Learning Structure Approach  Highly participative social structures  Members representative across the formal hierarchy  Sufficiently free from firm’s constraints  Develop solutions for organizational change which are then applied back into the larger organization