Introduction
Organizational change is a prerequisite for success in today’s business environment. As the organization continues to thrive and grow, leaders have to continually implement changes to the processes, employees, and goals. Organizational leaders should possess knowledge, skills, and discipline to implement change to address business issues as they arise. Ivancevich et al. (2014) observe that implementing organizational change is not easy. As change agents, leaders should be aware of the internal and external factors that slow down change. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the organizational change in Eldobase Pharmaceuticals*, a small pharmaceutical company struggling to attain its sales targets. The paper uses an extensive literature review on organizational change to make recommendations for improvement.
Description of the Issue
Eldobase Pharmaceuticals* is a small-scale pharmaceutical company competing in the same market with small to large-scale pharmaceuticals. In the past two years, the company has experienced declining sales. The company lost some of its essential clients last year, and since then, the performance seems to get worse. The sales manager responded by letting go of the poorly performing sale representatives thinking this would solve the issue. The remaining sales representatives now have a lot of responsibilities, and they are still not meeting their targets. The management is concerned, and it wants to address the root cause of the problem. On the other hand, employees are not motivated. They feel that they are overworked and the management does not support them.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Diagnosis of the Problem
The most visible issue is that employees are not achieving their sales targets. Managers have been wondering why employees are not meeting their goals, and it is easy to label employees as lazy and unmotivated. Oathman & Suileman (2013) explore different reasons for poor performance. The two main reasons for poor performance are the lack of motivation and high workload. Studies show that more than half of the employees felt overworked and overwhelmed at their work. Managers keep pushing employees to work harder by adding more responsibilities and in the end, they push employees too far. At Eldobase, managers tried to solve the issue of poor performance last year by letting go of poorly performing employees. The remaining employees had to deal with increasing workload hence the deteriorating performance. Oathman & Suileman (2013) add that as employee responsibilities increase, there is a need for on-the-job training to help employees handle new responsibilities and pressure.
Another cause of the productivity problem is a poor attitude. When employees are unmotivated, they find it hard to achieve their targets because they do not enjoy their job and some do not even care if they reach their goals and objectives. According to Oathman & Suileman (2013) in most cases, lack of motivation among employees and poor work attitude is caused by underlying problems in the external environment. Managers should examine the organizational culture, team dynamics, and work environment as they influence employee attitude and motivation. Managers should not be quick to dismiss poorly performing employees and replace them with new employees because chronic employee disengagement cannot be solved through simple solutions. New and skilled employees hired to replace poorly performing employees are more likely to face the same roadblocks as the old employees; eventually, the problems will weigh them down.
Having identified the two primary causes of poor sales, managers have to address each cause adequately to solve the problem. Eldobase cannot afford another year of poor sales. Both employees and managers stand to lose if the company cannot achieve the sales target; thus there is a need for comprehensive change within the organization.
Discussion of Appropriate Methods for Change
Ivancevich et al. (2014) assert that the change process is complicated and advises managers to view change as an integral responsibility. Failure to plan for change leads to poor implementation of change. Additionally, managers can design a theoretically sound change process, but it will not achieve the desired results when employees are not on board (Ivancevich et al., 2014). According to Lonzo (2018), many factors influence organizational change, and they should be considered in the change process. The environment, personnel, corporate history, external and internal forces affect change.
Organizational change is a process as described in the change theories. Ivancevich et al. (2014) describe Kurt Lewin’s change model made up of the three steps of unfreezing, moving and refreezing. In the unfreezing stage, the organization creates awareness of the status quo. The purpose of the unfreezing stage is to explore old behaviors, ways of thinking, processes, and relationships that are hindering the organization from succeeding (Ivancevich et al., 2014). Communication is essential during the unfreezing stage so that employees are made aware of the imminent change. Managers have to explain why the status quo has to change, the benefits of the change, and communicate the urgency of the change.
In the second phase, the organization begins to move now that it has ‘unfrozen’ old habits. Lewin describes the second stage as the point of ‘transition where the organization moves into a new state during the implementation of change’ (Ivancevich et al., 2014). As change becomes real, employees will have a hard time accepting changes, and this phase is marked by uncertainty and fear (Cares, 2018). Managers have to help employees transition by addressing their concerns and fears through education, support, and communication to remind the employees why the change is necessary.
Lastly, the refreezing stage is the final phase in Lewin’s model. Refreezing is the act of reinforcing and solidifying the new state after the change (Ivancevich et al., 2014). Changes made to the processes, goals, structure and other aspects of the organizations must be accepted and refrozen as the new norm. Managers have to evaluate the changes to ensure that effort is not lost and the change is maintained. Lewin suggests the use of positive reinforcement to reinforce change. Managers should also be there to support individual effort until the new changes become the norms.
Lewin’s change model simplifies the change process by classifying it into three stages. Additionally, contemporary organizational change researchers argue that there is a need for continuous change, and Lewin’s three stage of unfreezing, moving, and refreezing is not constant. Nonetheless, Lewin’s theory offers the foundation for organizational change. Organizational change arises out of problems facing the company whereby the organization has to unfreeze the old ways of doing things that led to the challenge and implement better ways of doing things (Ivancevich et al., 2014). Eldobase Pharmaceutical is struggling with weak sales, and the two leading causes of poor sales have been identified. Organizational change is necessary to address the issue so the organization can achieve its sales targets.
Lewin’s change model will guide the change process at Eldobase (Lozano et al., 2015). Lewin’s three stages will be renamed as preparation, implementation, and institutionalization stages as shown in the conceptual framework below:
Figure 1: Illustration of the Change process
Impediments and Limiting Conditions
Lewin’s three-step model of change entails both the drivers and barriers to change. Lozano et al. (2015) describe drivers of change as factors that will push the organization into a state where change can occur, whereas barriers to change, push the organization in the opposite direction where change will not happen. In most cases, managers or rather, change agents focus on the change process such that they forget to identify the barriers.
Ivancevich et al. (2014) describe resistance to change as the primary limiting condition. Even in situations when the change will benefit the entire organization, there is bound to be resistance to change from some members due to fear and uncertainty. Resistance to change occurs in more than 50% of organizations that want to implement change, and managers at Eldobase should be aware that some employees and even leaders will resist change (Ivancevich et al., 2014). Resistance is a natural reaction to the unknown, and an individual’s capabilities and readiness determine it. Lozano et al. (2015) advise change agents to manage resistance rather than fighting it. When employees resist change, it could be a sign that they are not ready for the new responsibilities and processes that come with change (Lozano et al., 2015). Resistance is often caused by feelings of inadequacy, disappointment, anxiety, and frustration.
According to Hermann & Guenther (2017), it is easier to manage resistance to change by identifying barriers and limiting conditions in each stage of change. Additionally, it is easier to address the barriers to change when they are defined in their respective stages. The first barrier in the preparation stage lies in the creation of the sense of urgency. The change agent has to create a sense of agency by engaging in an honest discussion with employees and leaders about the issues affecting the organization. When initiating change, the change agent has to create a clear vision for the change process as it affects the results. A poor vision and decisions will not bring employees on board. The main impediment during this stage is building a sense of urgency and getting people on board. Employees and managers at Eldobase have their day-to-day activities, and they might not respond to the need for change because they have work to do.
At the preparation stage, the change agents have a difficult task of convincing employees to accept change because their plan is still at a conceptual stage. The change agent has to articulate the change message well; otherwise, poorly articulated change message will discourage employees from taking part in the change process. The organizational culture and employee beliefs can also be a limiting factor. Some cultures do not encourage change and creativity such that it will be hard to convince employees about the need for change at the initial stage.
Some of the impediments in the implementation phase include lack of support from the executive, lack of commitment, poor communication, and lacking change management and leadership skills. The implementation is crucial as it involves the implementation of new processes, policies, and procedures. When management fails to support the change process fully, they show employees that the change is not crucial. Employees want to see managers implement what they said in the preparation phase. For example, there is a need to restructure job descriptions and roles at Eldobase to motivate employees to reach their sale targets, but if the managers fail to follow through employees will not be driven to implement other aspects of the change process.
Poor communication is another barrier during the implementation. Some change agents often rely on unstructured communication and poor quality of information that adds to the change resistance (Zupljanin & Balaban, 2017). Employees require clear information to address their insecurity, fears, and uncertainty brought by the change. For instance, after restructuring employee roles at Eldobase, the change agents have to communicate the new employee roles clearly; otherwise, employees will revert to old habits.
Some of the limiting conditions in the last phase include requesting too much from employees and setting extreme deadlines. Managers should not rush change as it will lead to more confusion and frustration among employees. Change cannot become permanent when many activities are interacting with each other and when employees are under immense pressure to perform (Wiedner et al., 2017). Lastly, failure to align change with organizational culture will limit the success of the change process. Organizational culture determines assumptions, roles, and goals among other factors that determine organizational success. Once employees embrace change as a part of the culture, it will become institutionalized.
Evaluation of Change
The change agent must plan on how to evaluate change. As change takes place, it is essential to monitor and evaluate change. When change is not assessed, it is difficult for the organization to tell whether the change process achieved the desired goal or not (Wiedner et al., 2017). One strategy for measuring change is through key performance indicators (KPIs). KPIs assess organizational performance in relation to its business objectives. The main issue is poor sales targets, and managers can use the output as KPI to measure the success of the change process. If employees begin meeting their monthly, quarterly and yearly sales targets, it is a sign that the change process was successful.
Fort (2016) outlines the features of an effective evaluation system. First, it should provide a framework and information to support planning. Change agents and teams should develop the evaluation system as early as possible as it influences the planning efforts. For example, if the change agent at Eldobase Pharmaceuticals plans to use questionnaires to seek employee feedback after the change process, the change agent will have to administer surveys before and after the implementation of change for comparison purposes.
Another feature of an excellent evaluation system is that it should confirm that the actions taken are sufficient to address the organizational problem. The change process is meant to be a long-term and comprehensive solution to the problem of poor sales at Eldobase Pharmaceuticals. Some reasons have been identified as the factors causing poor sales, and the change process aims at addressing all those reasons (Getachew & Zhou, 2018). The evaluation method used, whether it is KPIs or data from surveys should confirm that the change process addressed all the underlying issues.
Lastly, the evaluation method should justify the need for change. The evaluation should provide the validation for the change process at Eldobase by showing the positive results brought by the change. According to Fort (2016), it is crucial to set the baseline to be used to evaluate the success of the change process. It is impossible to determine whether the change process was a success or not without a benchmark.
Proposed Outcome and Benefits of Change
The primary purpose of the change process at Eldobase Pharmaceuticals is to improve performance. The company has experienced declining sales in the last two years. The goals of the change process are to address the two leading causes of poor sales. Employees at Eldobase have a high workload, and they are not motivated. By the end of the change process, employees will have reasonable workload and issues within the work environment that affects motivation will be addressed. By the end of the change process, employees will be in a better position to meet their sales target.
Another proposed outcome of the change process is increasing efficiency at work. Operations within the organization will be assessed to identify ways of improving them. For example, employees will be trained on strategies for reaching out to customers, following up, and closing the deals. Employees will also be trained on how to take advantage of modern technology to improve their processes and communication.
The change process also aims at improving employee attitudes. Employees at Eldobase are not motivated because of various reasons. Most employees have not met their sales targets in the last two years, and they are always dealing with pressure from the management to perform. The change process will overhaul the organizational culture by addressing issues affecting employees to create a work environment that inspires employees to do better.
Organizational change has many benefits that go beyond the specific issue affecting the organization. The main problem at Eldobase Pharmaceuticals is poor sales, and yet the change process will address issues of employee workload, employee attitude, and motivation, managerial support, work environment among other concepts. According to Benn et al. (2014), change process aims at addressing as many issues as possible to ensure the organization achieves the goals of the change process.
Change process also encourages innovation. The change process brings together employees and managers to work together towards solving an issue. Managers welcome creative employee ideas that will solve effectively solve organizational problems and help the business grow. Organizations that engage in constant change are more likely to grow in comparison to organizations that are averse to change (Benn et al., 2014). Change process improves the organizational culture for the better. Employees are more likely to enjoy their work as they will feel that they play a more significant role in the organization’s success.
Role of Management in Effecting Change
The change process is led by the change agent/s. The change agent can be from within the company or external consultants on the issue. When organizations rely on internal change agents, managers tend to play the role of the change agents (Ivancevich et al., 2014). Regardless of whether the managers are the change agents, they play a crucial role in effecting change.
The first role is communicating change. Managers communicate the need for change and all the other aspects of the change process. Managers communicate with the aim of building awareness as to why the change is necessary, the role of employees in the change process, and the benefits of change. According to Ronningbird (2018) the aim of communication is to answer the questions of “why, why now, and how” the change will impact employees and the organizations.
Managers also play a supporting role. Managers support the change agent and change teams in implementing change. The change agent consults with the managers during the design and implementation phases to get a clear picture of what should be included in the change process and how to implement change (Ivancevich et al., 2014). Managers liaise with the change agent during the implementation to make sure that everyone is fulfilling their roles including the management. Ronningbird (2018) adds that part of the liaison role is helping the change agent/ team to reinforce change. The last phase of the change process is institutionalization, and this cannot be achieved without the involvement of the managers (Ronningbird, 2018). Managers have a significant influence on employees, and when they act as strong advocates for change, employees are more likely to commit to the change process.
Managing resistance is also another crucial role in the management. Leaders manage resistance by determining the causes of resistance and addressing those issues immediately before they can delay the implementation of change. Managers also help employees deal with resistance by leading by example. When managers adopt change, employees will join in on the change process because they have seen their managers do it. Addressing resistance has a positive effect on employee desire to be a part of the change process and the institutionalization of change.
Lastly, managers act as coaches during the change process. Managers share their knowledge with employees during the change process to help them deal with the changes. For example, one of the issues that affect performance is the lack of managerial support. Thus, managers at Eldobase Pharmaceuticals will have to provide constant support to employees to help them meet their sales targets.
Brief Summary of Biblical Implications
Organizational change is necessary for businesses to stay competitive. But for Christian organizations, it is essential to consult the Bible before planning and implementing change. Christian organizations cannot implement changes that might go against Christian principles for the sake of profitability. Provers 3:5 urges Christians to trust in the Lord and avoid leaning on the understanding; thus the Bible should be the basis of organizational change.
Organizational change should be guided by biblical values to create a positive work environment. Organizational change is not only reserved for business organizations, as churches and Christian organizations change. The Bible has directions to guide organizational change. The Bible advises leaders to listen to the experiences of those that will be impacted by the change the most, in this case, employees. Leaders should not design the change process to meet their needs; rather it should be about employees and the entire organization.
Acts 15 has teachings on leading change in a church, with an emphasis on the role of each member. Each member within the organization has a role to play during the change. Acts 15 describes the Pharisees as the experts in Mosaic laws, which can represent the ones who actively resist change and respected church leaders (management) who support the change. God’s will and Biblical values should be a part of the organizational change. Employees will be motivated to accept change when the change process is guided by the Christian values of respect, trust, equity, and love.
References
Benn, S., Edwards, M., & Williams, T. (2014). Organizational change for corporate sustainability . Routledge.
Caves, L. (2018). Lifelong Learners Influencing Organizational Change. Studies in Business and Economics , 13 (1), 21-28.
Fort, T. (2016). Mission Shift: Using and Evaluating Strategic Communications to Implement Organizational Change. The Foundation Review , 8 (4), 7.
Getachew, D. S., & Zhou, E. (2018). Multilevel Organizational Change Readiness: Towards Comprehensive View in Developing Countries Context. International Journal of Organizational Innovation (Online) , 10 (4), 201-208.
Herrmann, J., & Guenther, E. (2017). Exploring a scale of organizational barriers for enterprises' climate change adaptation strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production , 160 , 38-49.
Ivancevich, J. M., Matteson, M. T., & Konopaske, R. (2014). Organizational behavior and management. McGraw Hill.
Lozano, R., Ceulemans, K., & Seatter, C. S. (2015). Teaching organisational change management for sustainability: designing and delivering a course at the University of Leeds to better prepare future sustainability change agents. Journal of Cleaner Production , 106 , 205-215.
Othman, A. E. A., & Suleiman, W. (2013). An analysis of causes of poor attitude to work. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 97 , 194-200.
Rønningstad, C. (2018). Us and Them–First-line Management and Change Resistance. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies , 8 (2).
Župljanin, S., & Balaban, M. (2017). Organizational Change and Improvement Performance of Companies. Economic analysis , 48 (1-2), 98-107.
