Understanding change management in organizational context: revisiting literature

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Understanding change management in organizational context: revisiting literature

Anup Chowdhury *

Department of Business Administration

Nikhil Chandra Shil

Department of Business Administration

East West University, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Abstract

Every organization operates in dynamic and volatile environment and for this reason organizations should adopt the approaches to managing change. This conceptual study presents the tools for managing changes in the organization. The findings of this study offer a number of practical implications. It is expected to increase our understanding about the change management process in organizational context and this study will be of value to the academic researchers and practitioners. The study may be equally useful to the entrepreneurs who are engaged in initiating their new businesses.

Key words: change management, organization, literature review

РОЗУМІННЯ УПРАВЛІННЯ ЗМІНАМИ В ОРГАНІЗАЦІЙНОМУ КОНТЕКСТІ: ПЕРЕГЛЯД ЛІТЕРАТУРИ

Кожна організація працює у динамічному та мінливому середовищі, і з цієї причини організації повинні застосовувати підходи до управління змінами. У цьому концептуальному дослідженні представлені інструменти управління змінами в організації. Результати цього дослідження мають низку практичних наслідків. Очікується, що воно розширить наше розуміння процесу управління змінами в організаційному контексті, і це дослідження буде корисним для наукових дослідників та практиків. Дослідження може бути корисним для підприємців, які займаються створенням нових підприємств.

Ключові слова: управління змінами, організація, огляд літератури

Introduction

In an increasingly complex and dynamic business environment, organizations are continually striving to change and adapt their operations to circumstances as they evolve (Burnes, 2011; Al- Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). Changes in an organization may be considered as any alteration in activities. It promotes employee cooperation and organizational efficiency. In any organization, organizational change enhances leadership branding which increase security and the desired outcomes of change (Shulga, 2021). According to Kakabadse (1984) change is about renegotiating certain dominant values and attitudes in the organization in order to introduce new systems. Doronina (2018) argued that change management boosts employee values. Laughlin (1991) mentioned that organizational change only occurs when something or someone sparks the change process by creating some form of `disturbance'. The purpose of change is to review and renew organisation structures and processes (Waterman, 1988). Hayes (2002) also felt that organisations attempt to make themselves more adoptable by changing their structures, processes and cultures. Organizations are, therefore, required to make significant investments for implementing various changes to adapt to the changing context (Errida & Lotfi, 2021). Management specialists define change management approaches in different ways. However, managing change is a complex process and risky endeavor (Jacobs et al., 2013). The present study deploys an earnest effort to revisit the literatures related with change management within organization.

Objective of the study

The objective of this paper is to archive change management techniques in organizational context based on the findings presented in various published research papers on the areas and propositions presented in various theories related to change management. More specifically, the present study attempts to define change management approaches and point out the factors responsible for changes within organization. management organizational change

Methodology

This conceptual study is based on various secondary sources of data and applies a desk review fashion of scholarly pursuit of knowledge. It skimmed relevant literature and explored theories from published works. It also created references so that it would be beneficial for the potential researchers in the area of change management.

The research questions

The study will seek answers of the following research questions:

In what ways have change management implemented in the organizations? Specifically,

a) How has the organizations adopted changes within the organizations?

b) In what ways is change management linked to the organizational actions?

c) How has change management contributed to amicable solutions within the organizations?

Change management- notable perspectives

There is a large body of literature from several disciplines about change management and what makes it succeed (Teczke et al., 2017). Change management is defined as the process of continually renewing an organization's direction, structure, and capabilities to serve the ever-changing needs of external and internal customers (Moran and Brightman, 2001). Harrison and Pitt (1984) argued that change encompasses both structure and power. However, changing does not depend on size and age but occurs thoroughly in all businesses (Hussain et al., 2018). Therefore, change is a broader concept and the key points of change are (Stewart, 1996):

a) Change is a natural phenomenon.

b) Change is continuous and ongoing.

c) The purpose of change is to aid survival and growth.

d) Survival and growth are dependent upon adaptation to a changing environment.

e) The environment can be and is influenced and shaped by the decisions and actions of the organisation.

f) Learning from experience is essential for successful adaption and change.

g) Individuals and organisations change in both common and unique directions.

According to Lewin (1952), all behavior in an organization is a product of two forces: those striving to maintain the status quo and those pushing for change. To change, one can reduce the forces to maintain the status quo or increase the forces pushing for change. Lewin (1952) showed a change model (Figure 1) that passes through three steps: unfreezing, changing and refreezing. This three-step model was for many years the dominant framework (Todnem By, 2005).

Figure 1: Lewin's three steps organizational change model

Source: adapted from Hussain et al., 2018

Unfreezing means reducing those forces that maintain the organization's behavior at the status quo. Successful organizational change may be planned and this requires the system to be unfreezed (Hussain et al., 2018). Moving to the new behavior (changing) is a step in which new ideas and practices are learnt. This process involves helping an employee think reason and perform in a variety of new ways (Teczke et al., 2017). At this stage new behavior, values and attitudes are developed through changes in organizational structures and processes. Refreezing tends the organization to a new state of equilibrium and this is done by the supporting mechanisms that reinforce the new organizational state, such as organizational culture, norms, policies and structures.

Kanter et al. (1992) claimed that every organisation operates in a same dynamic and volatile environment and for this reason all organisation should adopt the same approach to managing change. On the other hand, Dunphy and Stace (1993) opposed this view. They argued that every organisation faces different challenges and operates in a different direction and they suggested a situational or contingency approach to change. Wood (1979) defines the main theme of the contingency approach is that there is no one best way of organizing; it is possible to identify the most appropriate organisational form to fit in the context in which a business has to operate.

Therefore, change management becomes an everyday accomplishment for all actors, in the sense that all are living with and managing change continuously (Beeson and Davis, 2000). Wiggins (2008) cites flawed maps of change, complex problems, superficial solutions, misunderstanding resistance, and misuse of knowledge about change management process as the main challenges in the change management process. In change process two factors play important role, the employee's resistance (Stanley et al., 2005) and the openness to change (Wanberg & Banas, 2000). Resistance to change probably effects the change process which will lead to the negative outcomes (Bordia, Hunt, Paulsen, Tourish, & DiFonzo, 2004) while the openness of change of employees have to be focused during change process.

Managing change- considerable factors

Langstedt and Manninen (2021) examines how the values of work units relate to changes that make work more dynamic or more structured. Drawing on a mixed-methods design, the authors argued that values and conflict with change objectives relate to challenges when implementing the changes. Anyieni et al. (2013) further argues that change management means to plan, initiate, realize, control and stabilize change processes on both corporate and personal levels. Dawson (1994) claimed that a range of external and internal factors demand change in an organisation. External forces for change include factors such as governmental laws and regulations, technology, social and economic change, and changes in international agreements on tariffs and trade. Internal factors comprise implementation of organization's technology, revision of administrative structures and modifying other aspects, such as lines of communication and reward system. He mentioned that these internal and external forces to change are often interdependent. He argued that changing the human aspect of an organisation is a popular change strategy and it involves modifying attitudes, beliefs, values, technical skills and behaviors. These changes may bring about unintended and/or undesirable reaction from the workforce. Nickolas (2006) argues that the task of managing change includes its impact on people, and many managers find this difficult.

Another key element is to have the suitable and updated technology, from the start of implementation, through monitoring during the process, and in the final evaluation (Senge et al., 1999). Kotter (1996) argued that economic and social forces driving the need for major changes in organisations are technological change, international economic integration, maturation of markets in developed countries and fall of communist and socialist regimes. Kotter and Schlesinger (1979) mentioned that managers must deal with new governmental regulations, new products, growth, increased competition, technological developments, and a changing workforce. These events forced organisations towards change. They felt that most companies or divisions of major corporations must undertake moderate organisational change once a year and major changes every four or five.

Kanter et al. (1992) argue that the first step to implementing change is building coalitions of stakeholders, including employees and sponsors, such as local authorities whose support is essential. Kast and Rosenzweig (1985) also argued that the development of a process of change is an integral part of the managerial system and the drive for organisational change originates from many sources in the environmental supra-system as well as from organisational subsystems such as, goals and values, structural, psychological and managerial. They mentioned that organisational change is occurred by its environment and they pointed out that the general environment for any organisation in society incorporates technological, economic, legal, political, demographic, ecological and cultural factors. Modifications of goals and values of the organisation can also be considered as impetus for organisational change. New method for processing materials and/or information that is the changes in technical systems also stimulate the organisation to change. They added that adjustments in organisational structures are also considered as another source of change. They claimed that structural changes are used in large organisation to reduce operating unit size and offset bureaucratic tendencies. They further observed that changes in morale and motivation of individuals and/or groups have a significant impact on organisational change. These types of factors are psychological. Finally, they pointed out that managerial role is vital for change and in the managerial process managers are faced with accelerating change in both the external environmental supra-system and other internal organisational subsystem.

Findings and discussion

There are concrete reasons for accelerated growth in the change management industry. Products, technology, or ideas that used to take years to design, develop, test, and deploy are now being squeezed down to months or even weeks (Teczke et al., 2017). Some thinkers argued that change prior to 1960s was mainly incremental and infrequent but in the last three decades there has been traumatic organisational change (Kotter, 1996). Others felt that radical or discontinuous change is not new and were occurred between 1900 to 1950 (Kilcourse, 1995). Therefore, in the first classification change may be incremental and discontinuous. In incremental change there is a shift in the change process perhaps associated with implementing productivity changes (Randall, 2004). Dessler (1995) mentioned that incremental changes only affect selected organisational components such as changing the organization's structure, introducing a new production technology or developing employees to reduce the interdepartmental conflict. This type of changes is made within the context or frame of the current set of organisational strategies and components (Nadler and Tushman, 1993). Weick and Quinn (2004) observed that discontinuous change occurs during period of divergence when organisations are moving away from their equilibrium condition. They added that it is the result of a growing misalignment between an inertial deep structure and perceived environmental demands. Therefore, it is evident that change management is linked to organizational activities.

Nadler and Tushman (1995) differentiated between incremental and discontinuous change by incorporating another dimension: reactive or anticipatory changes. A reactive change is the direct response to an external environment and it is the present requirement for change. On the contrary, an anticipatory change is not the direct response to an immediately pressing event and this change is initiated to gain competitive advantage or to prepare for a destabilizing event that may anticipate in the future. Combining these two dimensions of change - incremental versus discontinuous and reactive versus anticipatory they (ibid) developed another four categories: tuning, adaptation, reorientation, and re-creations. Nadler and Tushman (1995) considered incremental and anticipatory change as tuning. It is the simplest type of change to implement. This type of change requires adjustment or modification between organisation and the environment. It seeks ways to increase efficiency but does not occur in response to any immediate problem. Improving policies, methods, procedures, introducing new technologies, redesigning processes, developing people are considered as tuning. When incremental change is initiated reactively, it can be considered as adaptation. These types of changes are made in response to external events. Change in the availability of key resources, or response to a successful marketing strategy adopted by a competitor are considered as adaptation. Nadler and Tushman's change model is presented in Figure 2 below.

Strategic changes initiated in anticipation of future events are considered as reorientations. It is a major modification of the organisation. Finally, when strategic change is initiated reactively, it is referred to as re-creation. This type of changes is prompted by immediate crises and it involves transforming the organisation through the simultaneous change of all its basic elements. Here, adoptability of change management within the organization is identified. This approach may be useful to the entrepreneurs those who has stated their new businesses.

Leigh and Walters (1998) mentioned another two types of organisational change: one is strategic and the other is operational. They argued that the first is highly distinctive and relates to the future direction of the organisation affecting one or more of the goals. Strategic change deals with large scale strategic alternatives and it is a major shift in one or more of the main elements of any organisation. The elements are technical system, political system and cultural system. They mentioned operational change as day-to-day change or opportunity change which happens constantly. Mainly this type of change is about making improvements, in the short or sometimes long term, based on rapid response and adaptation.

Weick and Quinn (2004) indicated the changes as episodic and continuous. They used the term `episodic change' to group together organisational changes that tend to be infrequent, discontinuous and intentional. This type of change tends to occur in distinct periods. On the other hand, the phrase `continuous change' is used to group together organisational changes that tend to be ongoing, evolving, and cumulative. In continuous changes small continuous adjustments created simultaneously across units. Another classification of changes is minor or major. Minor changes are the changes in procedures and operations. On the other hand, major changes may be transformational changes which can originate from major restructuring (Kanter, 1991). It can be concluded that change management contributes amicable solutions to the organization.

Dahrendorf (1959) pointed out that there is a continuous change in every social system. He argued that this change occurs not only in organisational elements but also in structural form too. He argued that change in the organisational element is the first order change and change in organisational structural form is the second order change. In the change management literature first- order change is considered as incremental or continuous change and second-order change is transformational, revolutionary and discontinuous change. Newman (2000) mentioned that first- order change may involve adjustments in systems, processes or structures and it does not involve any fundamental change in strategy, core values or corporate identity. Second-order change is transformational and radical change and it alters the organisation at its core.

Smith (1982) defined the changes as `morphogenesis' and `morphostasis'. He borrowed the terms from biology and used it in the organisation theory. According to him: Morphogenesis... is of a form that penetrates so deeply into the genetic code that all future generations acquire and reflect those changes. In morphogenesis, the change has occurred in the very essence, the core, and nothing special needs to be done to keep the change changed. (Smith, 1982, p. 318)

According to this definition, second - order change in the organisation "core" and is irreversible (Levy and Merry, 1986). Levy and Merry (1986) also mentioned that second order change as a multidimensional, multi-level, qualitative, discontinuous, radical organisational change which involves a paradigmatic shift. Smith (1982) defined first order changes as morphostasis and mentioned: Morphostasis encompasses two types of changes. First there are those that enable things to look different while remaining basically as they have always been the second kind of morphostatic change occurs as a natural expression of the developmental sequence.. the natural maturation processes.

Levy and Merry (1986) described these types of changes as first-order change and mentioned that first order change is the change within the unit of a system but the systems remain unchanged and it is a minor improvements and adjustments. Levy and Merry (1986) compiled the different views of the various authors about first and second-order change. Those views are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1

Characteristics of First and Second Order Change