Dinda Nabillah

2261201046
Organizational change (Perubahan organisasi )
This chapter addresses the topic of organizational change in
three sections:
1 how organizations really work
2 models and approaches to organizational change
3 summary and conclusions.
In the first section we look at assumptions about how
organizations work in terms of the metaphors that are most
regularly used to describe them.
Morgan identifies eight organizational metaphors:
1 machines
2 organisms
3 brains
4 cultures
5 political systems
6 psychic prisons
7 flux and transformation
8 instruments of domination.

These are the four that we see in use most often by managers, writers and
consultants, and that appear to us to provide the most useful insights into the
process of organizational change. These are:
1. organizations as machines 3. organizations as political systems;•
2.organizations as organisms 4. organizations as flux and transformation.
 In reality most organizations use combinations of
approaches to tackle organizational change, but it is
useful to pull the metaphors apart to see the
difference in the activities resulting from different
ways of thinking
 Organizations as machines
The machine metaphor is a well-used one that is worth
revisiting to examine its implications for organizational
change. 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

Organizations as political systems

When we see 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
Organizations as organisms
This metaphor of organizational life sees the organization as a
living, adaptive system. Gareth Morgan says: ‘The metaphor
suggests that different environments favour different species
of organizations based on different methods of organizing
congruence with the environment is the key to success.’
Organizations as flux and transformation
Viewing organizations as flux and transformation takes us into areas such as
complexity, chaos and paradox. This view of organizational life sees the
organization as part of the environment, rather than as distinct from it.
So instead of viewing the organization as a separate system that adapts to the
environment, this metaphor allows us to look at organizations as simply part of
the ebb and flow of the whole environment, with a capacity to self-organize,
change and self-renew in line with a desire to have a certain identity.This
metaphor is the only one that begins to shed some light on how change happens
in a turbulent world.
What are the limitations of this metaphor? This metaphor is disturbing
for both managers and consultants. It does not lead to an action plan, or
a process flow diagram, or an agenda to follow. Other metaphors of
change appear to allow you to predict the process of change before it
happens (although we believe that this is illusory!). With the flux and
transformation metaphor, order emerges as you go along, and can only
be made sense of during or after the event. This can lead to a sense of
powerlessness that is disconcerting, but probably realistic!
Models of organizations as open, interconnected,
interdependent sub-systems sit within the organism metaphor.
This model is very prevalent in the human resource world, as it
underpins much of the thinking that drove the creation of the
HR function in organizations. The organism metaphor views
change as a process of adapting to changes in the environment.
The focus is on designing interventions to decrease resistance
to change and increase the forces for change.

There are many approaches to managing and understanding change to choose

from, none of which appears to tell the whole story, but most of which are
convincing up to a point.
But how can managers and consultants use these ideas in
real situations? We have distilled some ground rules for those
working with complex change processes, although the
literature we have researched studiously avoids any type of
prescription for action. In complex change, the leader’s role
is to:
• 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 styles of
working, between past and present results
The implications of this mode of thinking for those
interested in managing and enabling change are
significant:
• 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.
 terima kasih
selesai sudah presentasi ini seperti anda yang selesai
tanpa memulai