Any alteration with the existing things is called the change. Change is the only things which unchanging. Each and every moment in our life is changing with the new environment or sometimes with the new structure or sometimes with the new technology. Change is a continuous process. Though, people are always afraid with the change. But keeps going on in our life from every aspect. As like as our life the change is also a continuous process for any business or organization. Sometimes the business organization keep changing for survival, sometimes to compete with the competitors or even to cope up with the new business environment or to cope up with the new standard. Not only these are the reason behind the change, there are so many reasons. Even the political or the economical conditions are the key factors for changes in any business organizations. In a very simple word we can say - '' Change is an alteration of an organization's environment, structure, technology or people.'' Page - 230, Fundamental of management).
Get your grade
or your money back
using our Essay Writing Service!
Manager's main responsibility is to find out the appropriate solution to match or cope-up with the changes. To make the correct planning - how the organization can perform better with the existing changes. If there weren't any changes - the manager's jobs would be relatively easy. Because, there is no change between today and tomorrow. The planning would be same for today and tomorrow. The issue of the organization design would be solved. The environment would be free from uncertainty; there would be no need to adapt. However, change in organizational reality. Handling changes is an integral part of manager's job. Manager's options essentially fall into one of following three categories;
Altering structure means- authority relationships, co-ordinating mechanisms, job redesigned and span of control.
Technology means - work process, work methods and working equipment.
People means - attitude, expectations, presentation and behaviour.
Change comes with the opportunity or sometimes it could be threat for the organizations. Again the some changes could be the opportunity for some organizations and the same changes could be the threat for other organizations. Either the change would be the threat or the opportunity it depends on - how well the managers are adopting with the changes. If they are successful then they could be beneficiary otherwise they could be in great threat to lose their business. (Page -230,231/ Fundamental of management)
A manager works as a change agent for the organization. A change agent is the person, who initiates and assumes the responsibility for managing the change in the organization.
There are two main factors for changes -
The external factor
The internal factor
The external forces that create the needs for the changes - comes from the various sources outside of the organizations. As we know there are two types of business environment; one is internal (within the organization) and another one is external (outside of the organization).
Market place: Market place is one of the major factors among the external factor. How the other business organizations are operating their business. Every business organization should have to take mind how the competitors are moving - what are they trying for. For example, in 1977 Citibank first introduce the ATM card in NEWYORK region to attract the customer with the higher service level, its competitor rushed to ATMs to their customers to keep up with them. Then every bank provides the ATM service to survive.
Government rules and regulations: This is another key external factor for change. Every organization is bound to follow the government rules and regulations. For example, in March 2009 Bangladesh government made six zones its capital and declared a specific holiday in every week. Where, it was a common for whole country.
Technology: Technology also creates the need for change. Now a day's internet and e-commerce vastly changed the way of getting information and products are sold.
Economic change: Of course the economic changes effect almost the organizations. The decrease and increase in interest rates could make the huge differences.
Internal forces can also stimulate the need for change. The internal forces tend to originate primarily from the internal operations of the organization or from the impact of external changes. There could be many internal forces like-
Always on Time
Marked to Standard
Modified or redefine the company strategy is often introduce the host of change within the organization. Company strategy is the basement - so any changes in the strategy must effect the organization.
The introduction of new equipment represents other internal forces to change. Employee may have re-designed their jobs, might need training to operate the new equipment.
If the company realises there is shift or evaluation in values and the business culture these must be the internal forces to change within the organization.
The system of pension and benefit and reward, employee attitude may lead the various changes in the business. This leads the change in management policies and practices as well.
Bellow case study indicates some internal and external factors that influence to change in the organization. And a manager plays the role of changing agent successfully.
Case study - 1
In July 1995, Michael volkema was promoted to CEO at the Zeeland, Michigan, office furniture manufacturer, Herman Miller. Volkema, just 39 years old at the time, was selected because of his record of successfully managing the company`s profitable file cabinet division.
Shortly after assuming his new job duties, Volkema sat down to review the problems he faced. The company had built its reputation by producing premium office furniture. It justified its high prices on ther grounds that the furniture paid for itself in higher employee productivity. That strategy worked fine in the 1970s and the 1980s, but is wasn't working in the 1990s because businesses were cutting costs and downsizing their staffs. In 1992, For instance, Herman Miller`s sales dropped from $879 million in 1991 to $804 million. Its earnings dropped from $37 million to $17 million. The company`s expenses were also growing faster than its sales. Additionally, competitors like Steelcase were successfully attacking Herman Miller`s argument that better designs were equated to productivity gains. Compared to Herman Miller, competitors were developing more new designs, more choices, and greater style options. Customers found these attributes more appealing than the claim that employees would be more productive simply because they had" better" furniture.
One of the few bright spots in the company was a small division that built a less expensive line of furniture. The SQA (simple, quick, and Affordable) division had grown from nothing to annual revenues of $200 million in just under six years. Revenues in this division were growing 30 percent a year. What was his appeal of SQA? Many small businesses knew the Herman miller name and wanted to buy furniture, but the cost ot the traditional Herman Miller line was too high. A fully furnished Herman Miller cubicle costs $10,400, but SQA could provide comparable quality-of £8,300. It also prided itself on using technology to provide rapid delivery. Sales representatives were given laptop computers with sophisticated software so that they could design the furniture layout in 3-D at the customer`s location. Then, with just a keystroke, the sales rep could submit the work order to the factory, place the order into Herman Miller`s manufacturing process, and prompt an invoice for the customer. The order in the manufacturing process prompts suppliers to deliver supplies on an as-needed basis. Customers receive their furniture in as little as two weeks-sometimes in two days-compared to the industry average lead time of five weeks. With this system, Herman Miller`s SQA on-time delivery has increased to 99 percent, and the increased efficiencies in manufacturing and decreased inventory has led to a $56 million cut in production costs. AS a result, Volkema has been able to pass on significant saving to customers.
(Page- 230, Fundamentals of management)
Kurt Lewin's Three-Step Process:
Kurt Lewin (1951) introduced the three-step change model. This social scientist
Views behaviour as a dynamic balance of forces working in opposing directions. Driving
Forces facilitate change because they push employees in the desired direction.
Restraining forces hinder change because they push employees in the opposite direction.
Therefore, these forces must be analyzed and Lewin's three-step model can help shift the
Balance in the direction of the planned change
According to Lewin, the first step in the process of changing behaviour is to
This Essay is
a Student's Work
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.Examples of our work
Unfreeze the existing situation. The situation is considered the equilibrium
State. Unfreezing is necessary to overcome individual and group resistance. Unfreezing can be achieved by three methods. First, increase the driving forces that direct behaviour away from the existing situation. Second, decrease the restraining forces that negatively affect on the existing situation. Third, find a combination of the first two methods. Some times the motivation could be the effective tools to preparing them for change. Building trust and recognition is need for change. Make the group more intimate with the organization is the another system to bring the change.
Lewin's second step in the process of changing behaviour is movement or taking action in this step change agent needs to bring up with the terget system or the new level of system. Here the agent can take three steps for the movemen- persuing the employee to agree the new change situation and encouraging then to view the problem from a fresh prespective and finally work together for new system, relavent information, everythings thats important for the new system.
The third step of Lewin's three-step change model is refreezing. Once the change brings up in the second step then this is step to observe the implementation of change for a certain time period. It is the actual integration of the new values into the community values and traditions. Purpose of this stage is to stabliz the new situation and make a balance in between the the driving and restraing forces.
Therefore, Lewin's model illustrates the effects of forces that either promote or
Inhibit change. Specifically, driving forces promote change while restraining forces
Oppose change. Hence, change will occur when the combined strength of one force is
Greater than the combined strength of the opposing set of forces (Robbins 564-65).
The Theory of Reasoned Action and Planned Behaviour
The theory of reasoned action states that "individual performance of a given
Behaviour is primarily determined by a person's intention to perform that behaviour."
There are two major factors that shape the individual's attention. First, the individual's
Attitude towards the desired behaviour must be positive for change to occur. Second, the
Influence of the person's social environment or subjective norm is another factor that
Shapes the individual's attention.
The theory of planned behaviour includes the concept of perceived control over the
Opportunities, resources, and skills necessary to perform the desired behaviour. The
Concept of perceived behavioural control is similar to the concept of self-efficacy. A vital
Aspect of the behavioural change process is perceived behavioural control over
Opportunities, resources, and skills necessary to perform behaviour
Lewin's model is very rational, goal and plan oriented. The change looks good on
paper, as it makes rational sense, but when implemented the lack of considering human
feelings and experiences can have negative consequences. There may be occasions when
employees get so excited about a new change, that they bypass the feelings, attitudes,
past input or experience of other employees. Consequently, they find themselves facing
either resistance or little enthusiasm.
There is no right or wrong theory to change management. It is not an exact
science. However through the ongoing research and studies by the industry's leading
experts, a clearer picture of what it takes to lead a change effort effectively will continue
Over comming Top Ten Reasons for Change Resistance
# THE RISK OF CHANGE IS SEEN AS GREATER THAN THE RISK OF STANDING STILL
Change has no certinity. It is totally a risky game. To make the change requires a kind of leap faith. Nobody knows what will happen in future
# PEOPLE FEEL CONNECTED TO OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE IDENTIFIED WITH THE OLD WAY : As a social species mans are like to remains connectes to those he knows, those what have taought, those with whome they familiar. They are orried about to take the new things than the old. They dont like change their habits.
# PEOPLE HAVE NO ROLE MODELS FOR THE NEW ACTIVITY : People are heighly involves in observational learnings. They want to see some one so that they can demonstrate the new change - how the change works rather the existings.
# PEOPLE FEAR THEY LACK THE COMPETENCE TO CHANGE: Sometimes changes needed the some skills and people may think they won't be able to make the transition well with the changes. They are fear about the change. Trainning programs is needed to train up the employee of the organization. Make the employee perfect with the changes.
# PEOPLE FEEL OVERLOADED AND OVERWHELMED: Fatigue can really kill a change effort, for an individual or for an organization. When the organization wants to introduce the change they must have to think about the fatigue of the employee. This could be a great factor to people. People may resist because they are tired and overloaded.
# PEOPLE HAVE A HEALTHY SKEPTICISM AND WANT TO BE SURE NEW IDEAS ARE SOUND: Healthy skeptics perform an important social function:Â to vet the change idea or process so that it can be improved upon along the road to becoming reality.
# PEOPLE FEAR HIDDEN AGENDAS AMONG WOULD-BE REFORMERS: People sometimes fear about the hiddens aggenda behind the chnage. They can't trust to make on change in the organization. So, to make the change and reduce the resistance to change its most important to make clear the view or agenda for chnge.
# PEOPLE FEEL THE PROPOSED CHANGE THREATENS THEIR NOTIONS OF THEMSELVES: Sometimes change on the job can hit the persons sense of identity. When resistance springs from these identity-related roots, it is deep and powerful, and to minimize its force. So the change leaders must have to consider about the identity of each professionals.
# PEOPLE ANTICIPATE A LOSS OF STATUS OR QUALITY OF LIFE: Real change reshuffles the deck a bit. It could brings the winner or sometimes loosesr. People always like the job security and the quality of life with the proposed change. When the organization changes, it won't be to everyones liking, and in that case, its best for everyone to be adoult about it and move on.
# PEOPLE GENUINELY BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS A BAD IDEA: When the change becomes failure then nobody takes the responsibility. Everyone blames on the change agent. They always says - '' oh, i didn't do that. - i knew that''.
The Six (6) Change Approaches of Kotter and Schlesinger is a model to prevent, decrease or minimize resistance to change in organizations.
Â Reasons for resistance to change
According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), there are four reasons that certain people are resisting change:
Parochial self-interest: Some people are more concern about themselvess. They always think how the change will effect on them rather then the business. They are worried about their own then the business sucess. They dont try to think about the business.
Misunderstanding: Communication problem is the another factor of being resist to change. Sometimes the change agent cant give the proper massege or the inadequate of information could make the misunderstanding among the employee.
Low tolerance of change: Some people feels lac of security on their personal status on job. They think they could not be able the match with the changes. They might loose their job or stability of work.
Different assessments of the situation: Some emplyee might not be agree with the change reason. Sometimes they might be disagree with the advantage and the disadvantage of the changes. In that case, if the chage does not serve the purpose sucessfully then the other people blame on the change agent.
Six approaches to deal with resistance to change
Kotter and Schlesinger have set out the following six (6) change approaches to deal with change resistance:
Education and Communication. If there is inaccurate information or the lac of information then the best way to overcome this situation is to give the correct and full information about the change and make them aware the reasons behind the change. Preceding communication and the education could change such types of situations.
Participation and Involvement. Perticipation and the involvement is the most important key factor to minimize the resistance to change. Once the employee are involves and the parcipate with the change effort then they hardly try to success of the change. And they fell proud as being part of the change.
Facilitation and Support. People are fear about the adjustment with the change effort. But providing the facility and the support for the adjustment can reduce the resistance to change. Managerial helps and support helps the employee to deal with the fear anxiety. By providing the training, counseling with them could be best thngs to achieve the changes.
Negotiation and Agreement. Some group or some people could lose their job to to adjust with the change. They are the resist to change. Then the company could make an agreement with them with lum-sum or incentives not to resist with the change. They may leave the company in order to avoid the change experience. This approach is appropriate where those resisting change are in a position of power.
Manipulation and Co-optation. Where other tactics will not work or are too expensive. Kotter and Schlesinger suggest that an effective manipulation technique is: to co-opt with people who are resisting the change. Co-optation involves bringing a person into a change management planning group for the sake of appearances rather than their substantive contribution. This often involves selecting leaders of the people who are resisting the change, to participate in the change effort. These leaders can be given a symbolic role in decision-making, without threatening the change effort. Note this: if these leaders feel that they are being tricked, they are likely to push resistance even further than if they were never included in the change effort leadership.
Explicit and Implicit Coercion. Sometimes managers can explictly or implicitly forces the employee to adoped with the changes. Specially where the speed is essential. Managers can make threat to the employee by job losses, dismissals, employee transfers and not to promoting employees.