The course concept that caught my attention during this course was the reframing change concept. The concept shows how different organizations hinder or delay progress by not implementing the necessary changes in their operations. This may include the number of staff employed, the age of prospective employees and the ownership of certain concepts and their application. The author does not go for a lengthy transition process. The process structure is summarized and it is demonstrated in brief. It is then established and implemented without much fuss. This paper will examine the strategies of different organizations and how effective their implementation has been. This is done by carefully going through strategies and proposals that may or may not have been opposed on the basis of change. This will be used to demonstrate that fear and apathy are behind a majority of failed transitions (Gallos, 2016).
Change strategy
Realignment
According to Gallos (2016), the first step in organizational change is restructuring. The restructuring process is made successful by redefining the roles of different players. The organization then prepares them for their new roles by training them. The author further states that the process is met with resistance because previously established power roles are threatened by the new dynamics. Employees react by silently rebelling against the changes. Some ignore the training and carry on with their old ways of practice. Others sabotage the implementation by supporting it publicly but opposing it on the grassroots. Gallos further comments that the final group of people make the plan fail by only implementing the changes that suit them. This arrangement makes well-laid plans fail because the team does not support their implementation. Such a situation can be turned around by Kotter's model of change.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Stakeholders’ Participation
Other scholars suggest a multi-frame approach that considers other factors apart from retraining and restructuring of present roles. Schreyögg and Noss (2000) points out that Emphasis is placed on involving the entire body of stakeholders who will spearhead the change. This will be done through public participation and conclusive consultation with the organization's employees. The authors further stresses that this will involve some level of political bargaining that will ensure that the participants benefit directly from the changes. A process of realignment will also follow where the employees will go through an exercise that will allow transition through symbolic letting go. It is also based on Kotter's model of change.
Encouraging personal change
Another approach to change is focused on human nature. Everyone wants to change as long as it does not negatively impact them. This is shown by the clear clamor for change during political races and the contrast of implementation after the race is over. According to Bolman and Deal (2017), no one wants to get inconvenienced or to feel discomfort in order to bear the fruits of change. This school of thought encourages flexibility and a willingness to explore creativity and experimentation. The author further cites that this allows for personal as well as corporate growth because the players are always ready to adapt to any changes in the nature of their engagement. However, Bolman and Deal further argue that change is opposed due to the discomfort and uncertainty it brings. The predictability of a position is lost in the face of change and this creates apathy and a loss of clarity. Changes can be managed by handling the soul and spirit instead of the mind.
How to manage organizational change
Literature offers various methods of handling change effectively. The best method of reframing change in my current organization is through the adoption of Kotter's model as it is described by Gallos. This is because my organization produces equipment that is rapidly evolving and the team is slightly accustomed to change. However, this type of change is more sensitive because it threatens the only constant thing that the employees enjoyed. The first step that the organization can champion change is by creating a sense of urgency. In this case, the company is threatened by cheap imports that are purported to be of better quality. The organization is, therefore, suffering after profits dropped by a significant 22%. This is paired with the huge losses that the company is experiencing from discarding substandard products. The new move to assign workers target numbers and to ensure the quality of their work is expected to help the organization to avoid the possibility of downsizing (Bolman &Deal, 2017).
This scenario automatically sets up the workers. The sense of urgency that is unfolded helps them to be more receptive to the training and the restructuring that is underway. It gives them a collective responsibility as well as the fear and motivation to stay afloat. Once this step is done, the organization can then evaluate the progress of the move. This can be done by randomly assessing the employees for their individual contribution to the changes. This will categorize workers into three. The first group is those workers who fully adopt and support the change. They implement the prescribed changes adequately. The second group of individuals support the venture but they are limited by policies and infrastructural support. The last group do not support the change. They are fighting behind the scenes to oppose the changes and revert to the status quo.
This calls for the implementation of steps 4,5 and 6. The third group of people who oppose the changes can be won over by making them part of the vision. Then the second group can be assisted by revisiting and renewing the policies so that the employees all thrive in a conducive work environment. Finally, the first group of people who believe and support the change can be rewarded. This can be done by providing stipends or bonuses for targeted met. The best of the best can also be promoted or given other work incentives. These are the necessary methods to effect change sustainably.
References
Bolman L.G. & Deal T.E. (2017). Reframing Change in Organizations Retrieved April 1, 2018, from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119281856.ch18.
Gallos, J. V. (2006). Organization developmenta Jossey-Bass reader , No. 658.406 O7.
Schreyögg, G., & Noss, C. (2000). Reframing Change in Organizations: the Equilibrium Logic and Beyond. In Academy of management proceedings, Briarcliff Manor: Academy of Management journal 2000 (1), 1-6.
