Organisational Behaviour Chapter 10

Managing change Objectives: Classify sources and drivers of change Discuss different approaches to managing change Outline the strengths and weaknesses of change management theories and approaches Differentiate the characteristics of planned versus emergent change © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Drivers of change - PESTEL When it comes to deciding on and managing the change process, organisations need to know what is driving the change in order to decide on what can be done about it. Perhaps the best known approach to this is the PESTEL analysis: – Political – Economic – Social (or sometimes, Societal) – Technological – Environmental – Legislative (or Legal) © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Drivers of change - SWOT Strengths – The features of the organisation which enable it to thrive and which are seen as being superior to similar features in similar organisations. Weaknesses – Those features of the organisation which are known to be less effective than the same features in similar organisations. Opportunities – Those things happening outside the organisation which could enable it to be more successful, more competitive or more innovative. Threats – Things happening outside of the organisation which the organisation (or significant parts of it) is not presently set up to confront successfully, and which will need radical change if the organisation is to survive those threats. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Individual resistance and defences to change Individual defensiveness can be caused by: Insecurity when facing an unknown future. Many change processes, particularly those involving changes in structure can lead to strong feelings of insecurity. Workgroups may be broken up and new ones created, staff may need to work in a different location. However, the most potent source of insecurity is any real or perceived threat to continued employment – an all to real threat in difficult economic times. New working methods or processes. Change often requires staff to learn to use new technologies or adapt to new working methods. This can pose a threat for several reasons, not least a worry that it will be difficult to learn new ways of working, Restriction of opportunities. Opportunities for advancement may exist in the present system but may not exist in a changed one. For example, a restructuring may well take out layers of management and consequently make the next step up the ladder much more difficult. Loss of informal contacts. Work is often made easier and more pleasurable through the informal contacts and friendships individuals form. If a change process removes these networks, then, until new groupings can emerge, individuals will feel uncomfortable. Threats to leadership. If an individual has developed a leadership role, whether formal or informal, this may be threatened by changes © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Collective and organisational resistance and defences to change Powerful groupings within the organisation: These may be groups whose own prescription for change was not adopted, or who wanted to retain the status quo. Rules, procedures and norms changing. This can lead to confusion about what is done and who does it. It can lead to instability, itself leading to loss of productivity and efficiency. The change process itself. Most change processes do not achieve the outcomes they are designed to bring about. Retaining old practices and procedures. Change will often require a period where old working practices have to run alongside the new ones. For example, where contractual terms need to be honoured or where products which are being discontinued still need to be produced to fulfill past orders. This can be expensive and it can slow down the change process. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Hard versus Soft contexts of change Two contrasting change contexts (describing the degree of certainty and predictability of the change context ): 1.Hard Complexity – in situations of relative stability and predictability where problems are easy to define and the solutions are clear. 2.Soft Complexity – uncertain and unpredictable situations where the nature of the problem is not readily apparent or agreed on. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Hard versus Soft contexts of change © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Lewin’s Field Theory Lewin proposed that the behaviour of individuals is influenced by the context of a given situation, which he refers to as the ‘field’ The individual’s behaviour is influenced by forces within the field which favour a particular set of behaviours It can be inhibited by countervailing forces which set up obstacles to that behaviour The emergent behaviour is an equilibrium between those opposing forces The forces which favour the desired behaviour will be promoted and the forces opposing it will be reduced. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Lewin’s Field Theory Lewin’s Force Field Analysis Desired State Forces opposing changeForces driving change © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Lewin also models the way individuals, groups and whole organisations change. He uses the metaphor of freezing and unfreezing. When we are in a situation we are familiar and comfortable with we are said to be ‘frozen’. In order to change we need first of all to ‘unfreeze’, that is, we have to move out of the situation we find comfortable into a much less familiar state which seems to have little form or context. We begin to internalise the new situation, learn to operate effectively within it and slowly, we begin to ‘refreeze’. Lewin’s Change Process © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Lewin’s Change Process Frozen stateUnfreezingRefreezing © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

The contextual features of the change process The cultural norms of the organisation. Since culture is a key determinant of how members of the organisation will behave, then it will clearly have an impact on how management plans to implement change. Management style, itself a component of an organisation’s culture, will play a key part in selecting the approach to planned change. We would expect to see an authoritarian management style take a much more directive approach than in an organisation which has a more consultative style of management. The time constraints within which change needs to be achieved will be critical to the approach used. An organisation faced with an urgent need to change will adopt a different approach to one where the timescale for change is longer. The nature of the change will also be important. A change involving only a small part of the organisation, or just a few of its staff will require a different approach from one where the whole organisation is likely to be involved. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Kotter’s eight stage approach to leading change Establish a sense of urgency. It is important that all those involved understand and recognise the need for change. Create a guiding coalition. There needs to be a cohesive team with enough power and resources to bring about the desired change. Develop a change vision. Those charged with leading the change must develop a vision of the change which can inspire and attract people. Communicate the vision for buy-in. It is one thing to create a vision, but another to make sure it is communicated in such a way as to enable people to commit to it. Empower broad-based action. Try to remove obstacles to change. Generate ‘short-term wins’. When people can see that their actions have resulted in a successful conclusion, they will be motivated to look for more success. Never let up. Use the credibility won by short-term wins to bring about more and more. Incorporate the changes gained into the organisation’s culture. Culture usually changes by embedding behaviours until they become internalised. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Kanter’s two kinds of change Bold strokes which are major changes of strategy because of changing market or general economic issues. They tend to have a big impact on the organisation in a short space of time. These changes are thought to be so important that the co-operation of staff throughout the organisation is not considered critical to the implementation of the change. Long marches which tend to be longer term and may consist of smaller change initiatives. However, this type of change needs the wider support and participation of members of the organisation at all levels if it is to succeed. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Kanter’s ‘Ten commandments for executing change’ Analyse the organisation and the need for change Create a shared vision and a common direction Separate from the past Create a sense of urgency Support a strong leader role Line up political sponsorship Craft an implementation plan Develop enabling structures Communicate, involve people and be honest Reinforce and institutionalize change © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Organisational Development (OD) ‘A long-range effort to improve an organisation’s problem-solving capabilities and its ability to cope with changes in its external environment with the help of external or internal behavioural-scientist consultants, or change agents as they are sometimes called.’ (Wendel and French) © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Organisational Development (Beer) A system-wide process of data collection, diagnosis, action planning, intervention, and evaluation aimed at: – Enhancing congruence among organisational structure, process, strategy, people and culture. – Developing new and creative organisational solutions. – Developing the organisation’s self-renewing capacity. It occurs through the collaboration of organisational members working with a change agent using behavioural science theory, research and technology. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

The guiding principles behind OD Groups are the main drivers of change. Decision making should take place where the relevant information is, not at some level of hierarchy distanced from the problem. All components of the system should monitor their activities against goals. However goals are for providing feedback on progress, not rigid strategic aims. By this we mean that if it is proving problematic to achieve a goal, then it is legitimate to alter the goal. OD should foster open communication, mutual trust and confidence between groups laterally and vertically through the organisation. People will support what they are involved in creating, therefore those affected by change should be able to own and participate in the change process. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

How OD works: Action research Plan Reflect Collect Act The Action Research Cycle © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

How OD works: two key features First, Action Research is not linear, it is iterative. At each stage there has to be the opportunity for feedback and the potential to modify the plan based on the feedback. The second point is that the researchers are the same people who will implement the solution. In other words Action Research is carried out by practitioners who are researching their own organisational lives. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)

Senge’s five disciplines for the learning organisation Systems thinking: this requires that people in the organisation understand how the component parts of the system integrate and how their acts an omissions impact on those other component parts. Personal mastery: this discipline implies a commitment by the individual and by management to develop skills and understanding as far as possible, not only to carry out job tasks but to be able to take on new or a greater range of tasks in the future. Mental models: these are the schemata which were discussed in the chapter on Individual Differences. They are the internal mental frameworks we use to build a coherent picture of our world. In a learning organisation it is important that everyone shares a similar view of the organisation and that they also share similar values bout the organisation. Shared vision: there must be a vision of what the organisation wants to achieve which must be shared by its members. Team learning: individual learning needs to be shared with the team, so dialogue, trust and openness are crucial. © Mike Maughan, Organisational Behaviour, Palgrave (2014)