Summary Chapter 7 Core text | Bài tiểu luận học phần Managing Organizational Change | Trường Đại học Quốc tế, Đại học Quốc gia Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh

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
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 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.
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 forward movement from a predetermined moment in
the present to a desired future state is how managing change is described.