Chapter 7 summary Môn Managing Organizational Change | Trường Đại học Quốc tế, Đại học Quốc gia Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh

lOMoAR cPSD| 58504431
Vietnam National University HCMC
International University School of Business
Managing Organizational Change
Lecturer: PhD. Mai Ngoc Khuong
Summary Chapter 7 Core text Group 1:
1. Từ Mỹ Duyên – BABAWE17493
2. Trần Lê Thuỳ Duyên – BABAWE18498
3. Nguyễn Nữ Hoài Thư – BABAWE18621
4. Trần Thị Ánh Tuyết – BABAWE18679
5. Nguyễn Hoàng Mai Vy – BABAWE18135 lOMoAR cPSD| 58504431
The context and how it relates to change are crucial to everything, as we shall see,
but how the context is seen varies significantly from something that can be managed
and planned for in more linear predictable ways to something that is by its nature
chaotic, fluid, and ultimately unknown. This paper discusses some of the change-
planning models that have been developed as a result of, or in reaction to, some of
the early foundational work of Kurt Lewin, who is the proponent of the necessity of
employee engagement in planned programs of change. He recognized that the
uncertainties and ambiguities of change create tensions and anxieties, especially
amongst those on the receiving end of change, and that the fears and concerns that
people feel about change can prevent the achievement of desired outcomes.
Lewin's "field theory" (1947: 5-42), which postulates that people exist in a
psychological field of factors that influence and constrain conduct (their "life space"
or the world as they see it), was created in an effort to better understand the forces
that shape individual and group behavior. According to Lewin's field theory, there
are two types of forces that influence human behavior in social systems: driving
forces that work to bring about change and restraining forces that work to keep things
as they are. These two opposing forces are in an equilibrium if their strengths are
identical, or what Lewin (2009) called a "quasi-stationary equilibrium". He said that
in order to effect change, one of two things must happen: either the driving forces
must be stronger or the opposing forces must be less. To determine the most effective
ways to increase organizational performance, Lewin also stresses the necessity of
researching and comprehending workplace customs and behavior. Lewin's well-
known three-step model of planned change is based on his understanding of group
dynamics, field theory, and action research. He contends that three broad steps—
unfreezing, moving or altering, and refreezing—must be taken in order to handle change effectively.
According to Cummings and Worley (2009), the Organizational Development (OD)
approach to change management has dominated discussions in North America for
the past 60 years and continues to be "the primary approach on organizational change
across the Western world, and increasingly internationally" (Burnes and Cooke,
2012: 1395). One of the approach's leading founders, Warren Bennis (1969), offers
a definition that seems surprisingly applicable to modern change, asserting that OD
is: A response to change, a complex educational strategy intended to change
organizations' beliefs, attitudes, values, and organizational structure in order to help
them better adapt to new technologies, markets, and challenges, as well as the
dizzying rate of change itself. OD programs gave a set of common objectives that lOMoAR cPSD| 58504431
set out to: Improve an organization’s health and effectiveness through whole system
change; Systematically introduce planned interventions; Apply top-down strategies
and get all employees committed to change; Introduce change incrementally and
base planned change on empirical data; Use a specialist change agent to manage
change; Achieve lasting, rather than temporary, change within an organization.
A matrix model created by Pugh (1986) may incorporate OD interventions at various
levels. It allows the OD consultant to evaluate the problem and choose the right kind
and amount of assistance. This matrix can result in a somewhat mechanical approach
to change management, despite the fact that it does offer an intriguing diagnostic
tool for planning change. The OD model's simplicity, which makes it simple to use
and comprehend, is one of its main strengths, but it is also one of its main weaknesses
because it offers a unidirectional model of development. In other words, the model
has a propensity to solidify what is a dynamic and complicated process and
encourage stable (refrozen) cultures and structures that are not favorable to continual
change by painting an image of the necessity to design in stability (refreezing).
Dexter Dunphy (1981), who has experience in organizational development, created
a model with his colleague Doug Stace for identifying critical contingencies that
managers may utilize to choose the best change approach given the current situation
(Dunphy and Stace, 1990: 81-92). Although the model put forth by Dunphy and
Stace is clearly influenced by Lewin's work and attempts to address some of the
issues with the universality of OD (by pushing for paripatory routes and rejecting
authorian/directive approaches), as noted by David Wilson (1992: 31), "the addition
of an extra variable - whether or not the organization is out of fit with its environment
- merely adds to the list of driving and restraining forces." The model's ability to take
a picture of an organization at a certain point in time and then identify a plan for the
entire process of managing change on the basis of evaluating the current conditions is another issue with it.
In order to successfully implement change in companies, Kotter's (1996) eight-step
model on leading change emphasizes the significance of assembling a strong
coalition with a combination of management and leadership abilities:
1. Establishing a sense of urgency: companies need to examine their market
position and make a realistic assessment of their competitive situation.
2. Forming a powerful coalition: it is important to bring together a group of
people who have enough power to lead the change effort and sustain the
transformation even in the face of resistance. lOMoAR cPSD| 58504431
3. Creating a vision: developing a vision and a strategy for achieving that vision
is a central element of change management
4. Communicating the vision: communication is a key element mentioned in all
the major bestpractice guidelines by change agents
5. Empowering others to act on the vision: getting employees committed to this
vision is not enough by itself as old ways of doing things, structures and, for
example, existing performance appraisal systems, can all inhibit and prevent behavioral change.
6. Panning for and creating short-term wins: major change takes time and
therefore waiting until the end of the program before rewarding individuals or groups is a mistake.
7. Consolidating improvements and producing still more change: as the change
progresses and short-term wins are achieved the credibility of the change program may strengthen.
8. Institutionalizing new approaches: embedding the new approaches and
behaviors into the culture of the organization.
According to Kotter, in order to maintain effective day-to-day operations (an
operating system), contemporary organizations must maintain two complimentary
systems that should collaborate in order to recognize opportunities and build
strategies (a strategy system). When creating the structures and reporting
mechanisms that support operational efficiency, the operating system has a focus on
control performance and effectiveness. The strategy system searches outside of
routine business operations for fresh possibilities and inventive ways to engage staff
members' extramural strategic thinking. Here is the five guiding concepts Kotter
promotes: Many change agents, not just the usual few appointees
(volunteers), A want-to and a get-to, not just to a have-to, mind-set (desire
to engage), Head and heart, not just head (give meaning to work, appeal
to emotions), Much more leadership, not just more management, Two
systems, one organization (network and hierarchy inseparable)
To conclude, various strategies for bringing about organizational change have been
examined, ranging from traditional OD with a focus on diagnostics, planned
interventions, and top-down approaches to the more situational and contingency
models of contingency theorists and the sequential stages frameworks as
demonstrated by Kotter. Additionally, these models have a strong inclination toward
linearity, particularly the ones that advocate for the change agent to carry out a
predetermined order of actions. Using ordinary clock time to arrange and regulate a lOMoAR cPSD| 58504431
forward movement from a predetermined moment in the present to a desired future
state is how managing change is described.