Organizational change

Introduction
• how organizations really work;
• models and approaches to organizational
change;
 HOW ORGANIZATIONS REALLY WORK

• Some people talk about organizations as if

they were machines.
• This leads to talk of organizational structures,
job design and process reengineering.
 HOW ORGANIZATIONS REALLY WORK

• Some others describe organizations as political

systems.
• They describe the organization as a see thing
web of political intrigue where coalitions are
formed and power rules supreme (hidden
agendas, opposing factions and political
maneuver)
 HOW ORGANIZATIONS REALLY WORK
• Gareth Morgan’s (1986) using metaphors to explain
about organization:
– machines;
– brains;
– political systems;
– cultures;
– organisms;
– psychic prisons;
– flux and transformation;
– instruments of domination.
 Organizations as machines
• Gareth Morgan says, ‘When we think of
organizations as machines, we begin to see
them as rational enterprises designed and
structured to achieve predetermined ends.’
• Routine operations, well-defined structure
and job roles, and efficient working inside and
between the working parts of the machine
(the functional areas)
 Organizations as machines
• The key beliefs are:
– each employee should have only one line
manager;
– labor should be divided into specific roles;
– each individual should be managed by objectives;
– teams represent no more than the summation of
individual efforts;
– management should control and there should be
employee discipline.
 Organizations as machines
• Assumptions about organizational change:
– The organization can be changed to an agreed end
state by those in positions of authority.
– There will be resistance, and this needs to be
managed.
– Change can be executed well if it is well planned
and well controlled.
 Organizations as political systems
• we are drawing clear parallels between how
organizations are run and systems of political
rule.
• We may refer to ‘democracies’, ‘autocracy’ or
even ‘anarchy’ to describe what is going on in a
particular organization.
• It recognizes the important role that power
play, competing interests and conflict have in
organizational life.
 Organizations as political systems
• The key beliefs are:
– You can’t stay out of organizational politics: you’re
already in it.
– Building support for your approach is essential if
you want to make anything happen.
– You need to know who is powerful, and who they
are close to.
 Organizations as political systems
• The key beliefs are: (cont.)
– There is an important political map which
overrides the published organizational structure.
– Coalitions between individuals are more
important than work teams.
– The most important decisions in an organization
concern the allocation of scarce resources, that is,
who gets what, and these are reached through
bargaining, negotiating and vying for position.
 Organizations as political systems
• Assumptions about organizational change:
– The change will not work unless it’s supported by
a powerful person.
– The wider the support for this change the better.
– It is important to understand the political map,
and to understand who will be winners and losers
as a result of this change.
– Positive strategies include creating new coalitions
and renegotiating issues.
 Organizations as organisms
• This metaphor of organizational life sees the
organization as a living, adaptive system.
• Organizations are seen as sets of interrelated
sub-systems designed to balance the
requirements of the environment with
internal needs of groups and individuals.
 Organizations as organisms
• The key beliefs are:
– There is no ‘one best way’ to design or manage an
organization.
– The flow of information between different parts of
the systems and its environment is key to the
organization’s success.
– It is important to maximize the fit between
individual, team and organizational needs.
 Organizations as organisms
• Assumptions about organizational change:
– Changes are made only in response to changes in the
external environment (rather than using an internal
focus).
– Individuals and groups need to be psychologically
aware of the need for change in order to adapt.
– The response to a change in the environment can be
designed and worked towards.
– Participation and psychological support are
necessary strategies for success.
 Organizations as flux and transformation

• Viewing organizations as flux and

transformation takes us into areas such as
complexity, chaos and paradox.
• Sees the organization as part of the
environment, rather than as distinct from it.
• Gareth Morgan says, ‘In complex systems no
one is ever in a position to control or design
system operations in a comprehensive way.
Form emerges. It cannot be imposed.’
 Organizations as flux and transformation

• The key beliefs are:

– Order naturally emerges out of chaos.
– Organizations have a natural capacity to self-
renew.
– Organizational life is not governed by the rules of
cause and effect.
 Organizations as flux and transformation

• The key beliefs are: (cont.)

– Key tensions are important in the emergence of
new ways of doing things.
– The formal organizational structure (teams,
hierarchies) only represents one of many
dimensions of organizational life.
 Organizations as flux and transformation

• Assumptions about organizational change:

– Change cannot be managed. It emerges.
– Managers are not outside the systems they
manage. They are part of the whole environment.
– Tensions and conflicts are an important feature of
emerging change.
– Managers act as enablers. They enable people to
exchange views and focus on significant
differences
MODELS OF AND APPROACHES TO
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
 Lewin, three-step model:
organism, machine
• Developed his ideas about organizational
change from the perspective of the organism
metaphor
 Lewin, three-step model:
organism, machine
• communicating the gap between the current
state and the end state to the key players in
the change process;
• working to minimize the resisting forces;
• working to maximize or make the most of
driving forces;
• agreeing a change plan and a timeline for
achieving the end state.
 Bullock and Batten, planned change:
machine
• exploration;
• planning;
• action;
• integration.
Kotter, eight-steps: machine, political,
organism
Kotter, eight-steps: machine, political,
organism
 Beckhard and Harris, change formula:
organism
• The change formula is a concise way of
capturing the process of change, and
identifying the factors that need to be strongly
in place for change to happen.
Beckhard and Harris, change formula:
organism
 Beckhard and Harris, change formula:
organism
Can be irrelevant when:
• Staff are not experiencing dissatisfaction with the
status quo.
• The proposed end state has not been clearly
communicated to key people.
• The proposed end state is not desirable to the
change implementers.
• The tasks being given to those implementing the
change are too complicated, or ill-defined.
Nadler and Tushman, congruence model:
political, organism
 Nadler and Tushman, congruence model:
political, organism
• The work. This is the actual day-to-day
activities carried out by individuals. Process
design, pressures on the individual and
available rewards must all be considered
under this element.
 Nadler and Tushman, congruence model:
political, organism
• The people. This is about the skills and
characteristics of the people who work in an
organization. What are their expectations,
what are their backgrounds? How does the
work now align with individual skills?
 Nadler and Tushman, congruence model:
political, organism
• The formal organization. This refers to the
structure, systems and policies in place. How
are things formally organized? How does a
change in the task line up with the way work is
organized right now?
 Nadler and Tushman, congruence model:
political, organism
• The informal organization. This consists of all
the unplanned, unwritten activities that
emerge over time such as power, influence,
values and norms. What informal activities
and areas of influence could be affected by
this change in the task?
 William Bridges, managing the transition: machine,
organism, flux and transformation

• Clear distinction between planned change and

transition.
 William Bridges, managing the transition: machine,
organism, flux and transformation

• recognize what is happening;

• assertively tell staff what will happen while
acknowledging their feelings;
• be prepared to answer questions about the
future again and again and again;
Carnall, change management model:
political, organism
 Stacey and Shaw, complex responsive processes: political, flux and
transformation

• Change, or a new order of things, will emerge

naturally from clean communication, conflict
and tension (not too much).
• As a manager, you are not outside of the
system, controlling it, or planning to alter it,
you are part of the whole environment.
 Stacey and Shaw, complex responsive processes: political, flux and
transformation

• decide what business the organization is in, and stretch

people’s
• thinking on how to get there;
• ensure that there is a high level of connectivity
between different
• parts of the organization, encouraging feedback,
optimizing information flow, enabling learning;
• focus people’s attention on important differences:
between current and desired performance, between
style of working, between past and present results