Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Management of change (Frameworks and literature review (Resistance to…
Management of change
-
Discussion
The Star model
-
IN fast changing environment, structure less important
Processes, reward and people are becoming important
Greiner's model
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The appearance of a revolution here may not be linked to the rate of growth of the industry - but rather to exterior events like the raising of funds allowing acceleration of company growth
Essential to go through the revolution stage to restabilize the structure and enjoy continuous growth
Maybe unconciously going to fast to the delegation phase, with autonomy crisis.
Things are hardly linear and we could have crisis happening at the same time, with managers requesting more autonomy and delegation while the CEO has not properly gone through the leadership crisis yet.
Therefore having the CEO keeping a high degree of centralisation of decisions while expecting decentralisation of operations
Although a bit limiting, the model helps us see where the company stands in its growth and identify the change to be made.
-
-
Need to get rid of past practices and create change: "companies unable to abandon past practices and effect major organizational changes are likely either to fold or to level off in their growth rates." Greiner, 1998
-
Leadership
-
-
-
-
Change efforts generally cost a lot more than expected in managerial efforts (Kotter & Schlesinger, 2008)
But as changes are necessary and leadership is essential, it is an expense that has to be made
Also the position of the change manager does not give him the power to make changes in a participative approach. K & S recommend that the manager should "increase his power" or find compromises
Cadlwell (2003) emphasizes on the role of leadership to create a vision for change while managers translates the vision into actions
Kotter's 8 steps model
-
Coalition not clearly defined, some project based but not in the change process as a whole, some have responsibilities within the change but the no accountability toward the project was created
-
-
-
"Without a sensible vision, a transformation effort can easily dissolve into a list of confusing and incompatible projects that can take the organisation in the wrong direction" Kotter
Communication from the leadership towards the company, with the aim of on-boarding them all in the change, keeping the big picture alive is essential
Here again we had a lack of communication, with the CEO requesting quick changes without allocating resources in time to the cross-functional team to manage the change process
Create a sense of urgency, "find ways to communicate this information broadly and dramatically"
Resistance to change
Although the company not that old, the centralised nature of the management created habits in people relying heavily on the CEO creating very little autonomy and initiatives.
How the lack of coalition and vision, but also the loss of trust by employees create the resistance as the CEO does not fully embrace the change implementation
Necessity to recreate a relationship between the change agent (CEO and other managers involved in the change) and employees
Recreate buy-in in the organisation at all levels through education on the change, early and regular communication - show the leadership involvement and how important the change is, while involving more people in the process
As the CEO and other managers are seen in a position of Power, having them not adhere to processes and procedures undermines the importance of change and therefore the sense of urgency
And be able to propose discussion with change recipients to understand their constraints and resentments and adapt the change process accordingly
But change generally need to happen rapidly and therefore leaders do not always have much time to provide satisfactory negotiation to the recipients
-
Being supportive with staff is another way brought by Kotter and Schlesinger to reduce resistance - can offer training in new feature being introduced, and feedback session
The nature of the change is not a complex one, and would certainly be easy to explain and educate people on, as well as train them on the fairly easy tools and new systems put in place
Moreover, the type of change that is being implemented here is a process which needs to be embedded in the culture, therefore a negotiation or coercion approaches would not work
In our case, there is contradiction between the approaches we should be using according to Kotter and the pace of the change which need to be fast with very scarce resources
The case study
H group
-
Was used to be centralised on the CEO, involved in all projects and taking all decisions
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pettigrew's model
-
Mainly growth of team and volume of activity - startup going from small firm to fast growing company
-
-
-
-
-
Need to learn how to work together, in between departments
the context (Why change), The content (what to change) and the process (how to change)
-
-
-
-