Control Change Management
‘Making change successful: Which actions are needed?’
Author:
Control Change Management
‘Making change successful: Which actions are needed?’
Ing. J.G.M. Luijkx Rijksuniversity Groningen
Herestraat 111a Faculty of Economics and Business 9711 LG Groningen Msc. Business Administration O&Mc The Netherlands
06 – 251 16 831 1st supervisor Drs. C. Westra – De Jong
Abstract:
Change management is an everlasting process. To cooperate with the external and internal environment of an organization managers needs to adopt their activities and organization to the environment to survive. In transforming your organization, two items can be changed, culture and structure of the organization. Important hereby is that there must be a fit between these two, else the change initiative will not succeed.
This process of change consist of three phases: the preparation of change in which readiness must be created, the actual change, and the institutionalizing of change. During all these three phases resistance to the change and the change initiative can occur. Important is that this resistance will be determined, and readiness is created. Change management can use
communication, participation, and facilitation to achieve readiness or to determine resistance. When the change process is in the last phase, the actual change must be institutionalized in the organization. The new methods, rules, and tasks needs to be anchored in the culture of the organization. But, before change management can anchore the new way of working, change management must examine if the desired results of the change process are achieved. When these results are achieved and the change initiative is anchored in organizations culture, the transformation was successful.
Keywords: Change management, transformation, organization, culture, structure, leadership,
Preface
Dear Reader,
In front of you is my master thesis lying which is a result of a literature study. With this thesis I will end my study Business Administration with the specialization Organization and Management control at the Rijksuniversity of Groningen.
I would like to thank some people for their support during my study period at Agricultural University for Applied Science in Dronten and at the university in Groningen. First I would like to thank my parents for making possible to study and their support during this period. Also I would like to thank Drs. C. Westra – De Jong for the cooperation, support, and very useful feedback during writhing my thesis. As last I would like to thank my grand father, other family members and friends for their interest during and in my study career.
With finishing this thesis I will end my study career and start a new phase in life. I have enjoyed my student life, however I am glad that this thesis has finished. It is probably the most expensive report I ever will have written.
Hopefully you will enjoy reading this thesis.
Yours sincerely,
Ko Luijkx
Table of Content
1. Introduction in change management ... 1
2. Research methodology ... 4
2.1. Problem statement... 4
2.1.1. Research objective ... 4
2.1.2. Research questions... 5
2.1.3. Research restrictions... 5
2.2. Definition of key concepts ... 5
2.3. Literature review ... 6
2.4. Conceptual model ... 8
2.5. Structure of the research ... 8
3. Organizational transformation... 9 3.1. Strategy ... 9 3.2. Organizational Culture... 9 3.2.1. Culture by Hofstede (1991, 1994) ... 10 3.2.2. Organizational Culture... 10 3.3. Structure... 11
3.4. Changing organizational culture and structure ... 11
3.5. Change strategy... 13
3.6. Changing your organization... 14
4. Readiness to change ... 16 4.1. Active participation... 17 4.2. Persuasive communication... 18 4.3. Facilitation ... 19 4.4. Create readiness ... 20 5. Resistance to change... 22
5.1. Education and Communication ... 23
5.1.1. Communication ... 24
5.1.2. Education ... 24
5.2. Participation and Involvement ... 25
5.3. Facilitation and Support ... 26
6. Successful / Unsuccessful transformation ... 30
6.1. Successful change ... 31
7. Conclusions and Recommendations... 33
7.1. Conclusions... 33
7.2. Limitations ... 35
7.3. Recommendation for further research... 35
1. Introduction in change management
Almost every organization is concerned with a form of change management. Organizations face pressure to change from both their internal and external environments, which if ignored, may lead to their downfall (Maybe and White, 1993). Also Beer and Nohria (2000) emphasize the need for change in organizations. The authors formulate Tom Peter’s dictum “change or die” in the introduction of their book, which is generally accepted by most managers and organizations worldwide. Together with all executives, consultants, financial analysts, and academics Beer and Nohria state that change is needed in today’s world of great business commotion.
It is not surprising that corporate change is such a difficult and frustrating item on virtually every organizations agenda. Each individual in an organization must think, feel, or do something different, what makes change intensely and very personal (Duck, 2000). Balogun and Hope Hailey (2008) report a failure rate of around 70 percent of all change programs initiated. But even worse, Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector (1990) found that in one third of the major resource-intensive change initiatives they have studied, the efforts actually made the situation worse. However, in almost every case of change management the basic goal has been the same: “Make fundamental changes in how business is conducted in order to help cope with a new, more challenging market environment” (Kotter, 1995).
Change management in an organization should create progress, which can be economic value or human capability development, to implement strategy and learn from actions taken about the effectiveness of change. For example, when a company adapts its organization to the more challenging market environment, it is expected that operational management and the organization itself becomes more effective and efficient because of a better fit between the organization and its environment (Jones, 2007). However, according to Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector (1990) the ultimate purpose of change management is to create an asset that did not exist before – a learning organization capable of adapting to a changing competitive environment.
the desired future organizational state, and (3) Determine how to get in the future state, which is the actual purpose of the change initiative. Burns, Ezzamel, and Scapens (2003) have got a remark to this change process. Selecting the right systems and techniques is undoubtedly very important, as the technical aspects of the implementation process. However, the authors conclude in their article that change- management and implementation also involves important behavioral and cultural issues that must be understood and addressed.
In the literature of change management there are many different models of how to achieve change. These models have all got there own background theory and different phases to achieve the same goal, transforming your organization. But there is one important similarity in these models, every change process requires a considerable length of time, because the timing of the phases in every model is critical (Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990; Burke and Litwin, 1992; Kotter, 1996; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Burns, 2004; Cummings and Worley, 2005; Balogun and Hope Hailey, 2008). Critical mistakes in any of the phases, or if phases appropriate at one time are started too early, are unproductive and can have a devastating impact on the process.
The model of Kotter (1995), ‘Eight steps to transforming your organization’, is probably the most well-known model in the change management literature1. The first phase of the model of Kotter (1995) is ‘Establishing a great enough sense of urgency’. This step is probably the most important step, because starting with a transformation program requires aggressive cooperation of many individuals in the organization. In the model the first phase and the following four phases creates awareness and support for the need to change in an organization. The actual change or
transformation takes place in phases six and seven of the model. The eight and last phase of the model of Kotter (1995) is institutionalizing change or transformation in the corporate culture of an organization. In this phase there are two important factors for the succeeding of change if the pressure to change is removed. The first factor shows individuals in the organization how the new approaches, behaviors, and attitudes have helped to gain improvement. The second factor is for top management of the organization. Take enough time to make sure that the new generation of senior management really embraces the new approach and uses it.
Irrespective of which model has been used in the change process, there are three principles for the management of change (Maybe and White, 2003). First, the process of change must always
1
expect and even encourage conflict, so that the individuals have the opportunity to react and work out their own sense of it. This principle agrees with the article of Dent and Goldberg (1999), organizations, where groups were allowed to participate in the design and development of the changes have much lower resistance than those that did not. The second principle is that the process of change must respect the autonomy of different kinds of experience. Change managers then have the opportunity to organize without the intrusion of alien conceptions. The last
2. Research methodology
The research for this literature study is a desk research, which makes use of literature produced by other authors (De Leeuw, 1996; Verschuren en Doorewaard, 2000). The research is descriptive and can be defined as pure scientific (De Leeuw, 1996). For the research, literature has been used which is available in the field of change management and which has been part of the field course Organization & Management Control. Important internet databases to find useful academic journals and articles where EBSCOHOST, EmeraldInsight and Science Direct. This section will describe in the next order the problem statement, a definition of key concepts and a literature review. The last two sections 2.4 and 2.5 will provide a conceptual model which will explain the relationships between the different items in this topic, and an overview of the structure of this thesis.
2.1. Problem statement
According to De Leeuw (1996, p.232) the problem statement exists of three components; the research objective, research questions and research restrictions; which are the main input for a research. This section will formulate these three items.
2.1.1. Research objective
The research objective indicates the relevance of a study and can be divided in a practical
2.1.2. Research questions
After the research objective is defined, the research questions can be formulated. The research questions exists of a main research question which is the base for this research. Sub questions will give an appropriate answer to the main research question. The main research question is
formulated as stated below:
- ‘Making change successful: Which actions are needed?’ -
Before we can answer the main research question, we need to provide an answer to the sub questions. In this research we stated the following sub questions:
1. ‘How to change your organization?’ 2. ‘How to create readiness?’
3. ‘How to overcome resistance?’
4. ‘When is change successful or unsuccessful?’
2.1.3. Research restrictions
In his book, author De Leeuw (1996, p.85) classifies research limiting conditions in two classes, so called product limitations or restrictions and process limitations or restrictions. These
restrictions indicate to which degree the used research method and results are liable. In this research the process limitations are the time available for the research and the research method which has been used. For this research there has been used a literature research only. So there is no empirical research to provide this thesis with a scientific underpinning based on figures. The available time was three months to conduct the master thesis and its research. The product limitation in this research is the used literature. All used literature in this research, and its models and theory which are part of it, are of scientific value.
2.2. Definition of key concepts
Change: Organizational transformation which is an ever-present feature of organizational live both at an strategic and operational level which affects culture and/or strategy of an organization (Burns, 2004).
Readiness to change: The extend to which an individual or individuals are cognitively and emotionally inclined to accept, embrace, and adopt a particular plan to purposefully alter the status quo (Holt, Armenakis, Field, and Harris, 2007).
Resistance to change: Employees or members of an organization which are not (wholeheartedly) embracing a change that top management wants to implement in their company or organization (Dent and Goldberg, 1999).
2.3. Literature review
Organization designs are integrated systems consisting of structure, formal systems, informal processes, reward and measurement systems, and human resource practices. Effective
organizational change requires changing a combination of policies, or all of them, to create a new and integrated design (Leavitt, 1965). Also according to Kotter (1995) the focus of change should be on both structure and systems, and on culture on the other hand. Change management can involve different ‘fields of management’ in an organization (Cowan-Sahadath, 2009). In the article of Nutt, (1986) there are three fields in which change can involve. First, change can involve technical innovations as the result of the application and/or use of technology. Second, there is administrative innovation dealing with relationships and introducing new rules, roles, procedures, and/or structures within organizations. The last field in which change can involve is adaptation of managerial practices or technology by completing organizations or a degree of cooperation between two or more organizations.
For any organization to survive and succeed in the present highly competitive and continuously evolving business environment, a successful process of implementing change management is of crucial interest (By, 2005). The process of implementing change in an organization has its roots in the work of Lewin (1951)2. According to the author a successful change project should involve
2
three steps: (1) Unfreeze old patterns, (2) Implement new changes, and (3) Refreeze the new patterns to embed and reinforce these changes. Armenakis and Bedeian (1999) developed a new model in their article. The theory of Lewin (1951) was an important input for this model. The first step of the model developed by Armenakis and Bedeian (1999) considers creating readiness with the objective to minimize resistance in the change process. The second and third steps of the model must facilitate the adoption and institutionalization of the desired change in the organization. The theory of the second and third step of the model of Armenakis and Bedeian (1999) accords with the second and third step of the model of Lewin (1951).
Readiness for change focuses on the first phase of a change process in the model of Armenakis (1999), while resistance to change can occur in every phase. This model consist of three phases: (1)Readiness for change, (2) Adoption of the change initiative, and (3) Institutionalizing. In the first phase organizations’ members are informed about the change initiative and readiness for change will be stimulated. The second phase is the actual change followed by the last en third phase of the change process, institutionalizing. This phase needs the creation of new rules and norms which must be implemented to embed the change. According to Burns (2004) and Luecke (2003) it is of crucial importance for organizations that their members are able to undergo change. Armenakis et. al. (1993) describes readiness for change as the organizational members’ beliefs, attitudes, and intentions regarding the extent to which changes are needed and the organization’s capacity to successfully make those changes. This description matches the opinion of Burns and Luecke. In other words, organizational members need to be ready for a proposed change.
2.4. Conceptual model
Figure 1 will show the conceptual model for the research of this report.
Figure 1: Conceptual Model.
2.5. Structure of the research
3. Organizational transformation
This chapter describes the literature and its theory about organizational transformation. The first three sections describes the strategy of an organization, the organizational culture and the structure of an organization. Section 3.4 describes the actual change followed by section 3.5 the change strategy. The last section will provide an answer to the first sub question of this research: ‘How to change your organization?’.
3.1. Strategy
The strategy of a company is developed by senior management and shows how its organization intends to achieve their mission in a particular period. Strategy links the internal organization to its larger environment and must keep peace with the changing conditions (Burke, 1992).
Important in the formulation of strategy is how to compete with competition (Sandbrook, 2001). This competition are not the direct competitors of an organization only but also the underlying structures of that organization. According to Porter (1985), is strategy therefore directly linked to the environment of an organization, its structure and corporate culture. Before starting with change it is necessarily to formulate a clear and appropriate strategy which includes clarity about purpose of change and how this will be measured (Sandbrook, 2001). To be able to measure the effect of change it must be possible to identify the key delivery processes of change and how these processes can be supported. So, strategy indicates which types of behaviors and abilities are needed in an organization to be successful in its environment (Beer and Nohria, 2000).
3.2. Organizational Culture
3.2.1. Culture by Hofstede (1991, 1994)
In the articles of Hofstede culture is defined as ‘the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one category of people from another. When the ‘category of people’ are a type of business, an organization or part of an organization, for example employees of the organization, we mean organizational culture. The organizational cultures are a phenomena of a different order from national culture. This because being a member of an organization is voluntary and partial, while the ‘membership’ of a national culture is permanently and
involuntary. When employees are in an organization and its culture they have to adapt, to a little extend, their personal values to the needs of that organization. Because organizational cultures are composed of practices instead of values, are these cultures manageable to a little extend by changing these practices. However, the values of employees cannot be changed by the organization they are anticipating in. This because their values were acquired when the employees were children. However, the latent values of employees, which never have been showed, can be activated by their employers. These latent values can be a desire for initiative and creativity or by allowing practices which before were forbidden.
3.2.2. Organizational Culture
By organizational culture we mean the deeply held beliefs of members which are part of that organization (Beer and Nohria, 2000). Especially, the moral meaning and authority that people ascribe to the old order in that organization. Or, as Burke and Litwin (1992) states in their article; ‘The way we do things around here’. In a company, the organizational culture is for several reasons important, irrespective where it is in the organization (Kotter, 1995). First, culture is able to influence behavior of members in an organization in a strong way. Second, organizational culture is hardly changeable and reinforced by past success. The last reason why culture is so important for organizations, is the invisibility of culture. This invisibility makes it hard to change culture in a direct way. Therefore it takes shared trauma or the experience of a crisis to unlearn the deeply embedded and historically reinforce patterns of culture (Maybe and White, 1993).
organization. Also it is important to know how the new systems will have impact on the various business units within the company. If you want to change an organizations culture, management can use the organization’s reward system (Burke and Litwin, 1992). This because in most organizations the reward system is a manifestation of its culture.
3.3. Structure
The structure of an organization is the arrangement of functions and helps people to assure effective implementation of the organization’s mission and strategy (Beer and Nohria, 2000). According to Burnes (2004) determines the organizational structure where power lies in an organization, how people relates to each other, and how the hierarchy is formed in an organization. Important in organizational structure are the relationships that organizations’ employees believe they have with their environment. Beer and Nohria (2000) states that structure is socially constructed. Structure entails a set of obligations, promises, rights, and duties that bind employees of an organization together in a series of shared practices. So structure is more than intended rules of an organization, it is also a ‘moral order’ of organizations’ members. However, there is no structure that will guarantee specified behavior. Employees or members of an
organization are very clever at circumventing any structure to accomplish what they prefer (Beer and Nohria, 2000). Therefore in change management, new structures could not be effective only without accompanying behavioral and attitudinal changes (Cohen, 2000).
3.4. Changing organizational culture and structure
Making changes in an organization is always difficult if members of that organization are involved. In the management literature there are a lot of authors which have got remarks in the possibility and succeeding of making changes in the culture of an organization. This because culture is hardly changeable (Kotter, 1995; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Burns, 2004) and there will be more resistance in changing culture than in changing the structure of an organization (Burns, 2004). Structure on the other hand is more suitable for making changes if members of an organization are not involved. However, changes in structure of an organization always affects peoples functions or jobs, and therefore changes in structure affects also the members of that organization.
Because culture and structure influences each other it is important that changes in organizational culture and structure goes together and in accordance (Kotter, 1995; Burns, 2004; Jones, 2007). In the change management literature the desired end result of changing an organization is the same; the creation of a learning organization, which is able to adopt the changing environment to survive (Beers, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990; Burns, 2004). However, in the change management literature there is still not a universal model for planned change (Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990; Cohen, 2000). The traditional models of organizational changes indicates that the processes of change should be planned and managed in a cautious way (Cowan-Sahadath, 2009).
There are no reasons to change only the culture or structure of an organization. Management which is responsible for the change initiative should not manage the pieces separately, but should manage the whole dynamic (Duck, 2000). With the use of many different change levers in both the organizational- structure and culture, management is able to create a meaningful
organizational change. Also according to Burns (2004) it is of importance for the succeeding of change that culture and structure of an organization fits together3. Mento et al. (2002) states in their article that a strategic change initiative that is congruent with the established organizational culture has a high probability of success. But keep in mind, in almost every organizational change initiative, both structure and culture should be changed to succeed. In table 1 the reasons are summed up of different authors in the management literature to focus on either the organizational structure or on the organizational culture to start with change.
3
Author Conclusion Kotter, 1995
Burns, 2004
A cultural shift is needed in an organization when the existing corporate culture is not compatible with the actual change.
Kotter, 1995 Make structures compatible with the vision of an organization Cohen, 2000 Changes which requires a new set of players in place, and when
organizational structure not only alters formal power but reduces the necessity for contact with others, the focus of change should be on structure.
Cohen, 2000 When organizational change depends on behavior the focus should be on culture. Especially, when organizational members in new roles do not have the relational (prior connections) and technical skills to make appropriate decisions.
Cohen, 2000 When decision makers in a new structure are dependent on organization members who do not understand the new structure or if the do not choose to cooperate for fear of loosing power the focus of change should be on culture.
Ford and Greer, 2005 To achieve change, the development of new behavior and work
processes are always necessary, the focus of change should therefore be on organizational culture.
Galbraith, 2000 Changes in structure and systems of an organization are needed if the strategy of an organization has changed.
Table 1: Authors specialized in change management and their conclusions about cultural and structural change.
3.5. Change strategy
Before a change manager can start with a change process in an organization, and to be effective, a clearly defined business problem is necessary (Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990). This business problem needs to be developed by senior management of an organization. If it is clear what the business problem is, senior management must install a change management team which is responsible for the actual transformation process. Important for the succeeding of change, is the fact that the change management team needs to understand the long-term vision of their
The strategy describes the desired (people) results and the enablers which are needed to achieve the improvement or change in the organization. So, the strategy indicates which type of employee behaviors and abilities are needed to be successful in the marketplace (Beer and Nohria, 2000).
The change manager’s role is very important, because organizational change always require creating a new system for an organization, which in turn always demands leadership (Kotter, 1995). Duck (2000) describes managements’ role in change as the management of the conversation between the people leading the change effort and those who are expected to implement the new strategies, managing the organizational context in which change can occur, and managing the emotional connections that are essential for any transformation. Therefore a change manager must have personal competencies, like proven talent and credibility,
understandings of the vision of the company, and have the confidence of senior management or the CEO (Duck, 2000).
3.6. Changing your organization
This section will divide an answer to the first sub question of this research. The sub question was formulated as stated below:
‘How to change your organization?’
4. Readiness to change
In the article of Holt, et. al. (2007) readiness to change is formulated as followed: ‘readiness collectively reflects the extent to which an individual or individuals are cognitively and emotionally inclined to accept, embrace, and adopt a particular plan to purposefully alter the status quo’. Therefore according to Armenakis, Harris, and Mossholder (1993) must readiness be reflected in organizational members’ beliefs, attitudes, and intentions regarding the extent to which changes are needed and the organization’s capacity to successfully make those
transformations. Metselaar and Cozijnsen (2002) defines readiness, or a willingness, to change as ‘a positive behavioral intention from an employee, towards a change in the organizations’ structure, culture, or working method, resulting in an employees’ effort to support the change process’. So readiness to change, or a support to change is an positive signal from the
organizations’ members (Piderit, 2000).
According to Holt, et. al. (2007), for change to occur in an organization and in the direction that leadership desires, conflicts must be resolved such that organizational members’ beliefs and cognitions align with those of senior management. So, to change an organization a state of readiness must be created by the change management team. To create readiness, there must come energy, motivation, and support from within the organization (Armenakis, Harris, and
Mossholder, 1993). In most cases of organizational transformation, change managers and his/her team must provide these sources to create readiness. There are different ways people can react to change which is often underestimated by many managers. But, according Kotter and Schlesinger (2008), these managers do also underestimate the ways they can positively influence specific members and groups of an organization during a change initiative. However, according to Piderit (2000) is generating employee support and enthusiasm for the change initiative of vital
importance for the succeeding of successful organizational adaptation.
organization. However in the article of Armenakis, Harris, and Mossholder (1993) the authors made a ‘creating readiness model’ with the next three methods: (1) active participation, (2) persuasive communication, and (3) management of external information. The first two methods to create readiness are also mentioned by Metselaar and Cozijnsen (2002, p. 30). But the authors added an third method to this list, facilitation. Because active participation and persuasive communication are the most important methods to create readiness, the next two subsections will discuss these methods. Section 4.3 will discuss the added method of Metselaar and Cozijnsen, facilitation. The last section of this chapter will give an answer to sub question 2 of this research: ‘How to create readiness?’.
4.1. Active participation
In organizational transformation, employee participation is crucial for the succeeding of the process because it has a positive influence on the readiness for change. Participation is actually the process of involving people in decision-making and change activities within their
organizations (Burns, 2004; Jones, 2007). With participation, change management is not only able to involve employees in change, but also to make these employees responsible for the change or part of it (Burns, 2004). The ultimate aim of participation in change initiatives in general is to create commitment under the involved people (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). However,
according to Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector (1990) cannot help everyone in the design of a
transformation. At this point in the process is strong leadership from the change manager and its team necessarily. However, according Burns (2004) it is of vital importance for succeeding change that employees whose assistance is necessary and essential to make the change are involved.
There are several advantages in the participation of employees in the change process (Merchant and Van der Stede, 2007). First, employees which are involved in the process are more likely to understand the needs for the proposed change. Second, employees might try to get top
process in the best way, by changing work procedures or methods to improve total organizational performance (Jones, 2007).
There are different ways a change manager can involve members of an organization in the first stage of change. Change management can involve people in some parts of the design and/or realization of the change initiative. These people can be normal employees or employees which can be ‘potential’ resisters later on in the transformation process. The second way management can try to let participate members of an organization is to give employees decisions rights in the realization of the change initiative. An example of this is when the change manager involves its employees in activities which are rich in information pertaining to possible disagreement and efficacy messages. The manager will create a situation in which the employee will learn about the change process through their own activities, and thereby send an indirect ‘readiness’ message to its manager. The employee will think he has found new information about the change process, which is called self-discovered. The opportunity of this source of information is that individuals tend to place greater trust in information discovered by themselves. This view is also confirmed by Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector (1990), ‘it is better to let each department and individual reinvent the wheel – which means find its own way to the new organization’.
4.2. Persuasive communication
In the first stage of the change process, persuasive communication is probably the most important method to create readiness (Armenakis, Harris, and Mossholder, 1993). To create a positive influence on the members of an organization with communication, a good relationship between the change management team and these members of the organization is required (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). However, with effective and appropriate communication the uncertainty under organizational members can considerably be reduced (Burns, 2004).
change. Employees must be allowed and get the freedom to discuss the issues involved openly, to get them convince themselves of the need for change. However according to Cowan-Sahadath (2010), besides convincing members of an organization by communication, must communication also ensure that change managers are prepared to deal with concerns of the organization and its employees.
According to Armenakis, Harris, and Mossholder (1993) the ‘readiness message’ should
incorporate two issues: (1) The need to change and (2) the individual and collectively efficacy of people and parties which are affected by the change initiative. The first issue of the message is the difference between the desired end-state and the present state of the organization. It is important that the formulated desired end-state of the transformation program is appropriate for the
organization and its members. Besides the message, the form of persuasive communication used, also sends symbolic information regarding the commitment to, prioritization of, and urgency for the change effort (Armenakis, Harris, and Mossholder, 1993). Therefore oral and written communication is needed in both a formal and informal way by the change manager and his/her team.
There are different forms of communication. Communication can both be formal as informal, but there also many communication channels. In most organizations, examples of communication by telephone, e-mail, team briefings or news letters are popular. However, in a communication strategy, which can be helpful in change, face-to-face communication is preferred and the information should be personally relevant (Klein, 1996). Also to be effective, communication is not just telling people what you want them to do, communication is about genuine two way dialogue with employees (Cowan-Sahadath, 2009). Transparent and open communication are of vital interests in a transformation process.
4.3. Facilitation
support from change management, and leadership in during the transformation process is important. An important note with the approach of facilitation and support is that it can be very time consuming and expensive. Besides this approach still can fail, and if these sources are not available, the use of this method is not very practical.
Emotional support can be providing training in new skills, or giving employees time off after a turbulent period, or simply listen to your employees and providing emotional support (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). Therefore, change management needs to listen to, and deal with the concerns that employees have about the change initiative. However, it is important that change
management is also supported in the process of change (Burns, 2004). With this support change managers are able to motivate members of the organization and to manage the change initiative.
Besides emotional support, leadership is probably the most important factor in facilitation. A leader has got the responsibility to guide an organization through the change initiative by providing direction and support (Kotter, 1995). The most important task of a top manager is the creation of awareness and the need for change (Maybe and White, 1993). Leaders are encouraged to emphasize change leadership behaviors, set a (new) vision, and communicate effectively in a way that their organization understands and will want to follow the new direction of change (Cowan-Sahadath, 2009). In other words, the leader must create readiness.
4.4. Create readiness
This section will divide an answer to the second sub question of this literature study. The second sub question was stated as formulated below:
‘How to create readiness?’
For change management there are multiple ‘tools’ to create or improve the readiness in an organization. Management should communicate with the whole organization about the change initiative. Important parts of these change messages are the communication of the urgency of change, vision of the company and, the dimension of the change initiative. These messages should be send loud and clear to the whole organization and its members. The second tool management must use in a change process is getting different people involved in every aspect of the process. Management must invite employees to help in the development of the change initiative, in the realization of the change initiative. Also must change management give
subordinates decision rights in the change process. The last ‘tool’ change managers can and must use is the grant of support in the change initiative. Changes in an organization will bring
uncertainties with them. So, all members of an organization, including change management, needs to get support in the form of leadership which gives direction, and emotional support. The support for change management must come from the senior management in the organization.
5. Resistance to change
Resistance to change is a negative attitude towards a change initiative (Piderit, 2000). In the change management literature there is a mental model that is general accepted in organizational life – people resist change and management must overcome it (Dent and Goldberg, 1999). According to Dent and Goldberg (1999) the belief that people do resist change causes all kinds of unproductive actions within an organization, because people do not resist change, per se. Burns, Ezzamel, and Scapens (2003) also endorse this view. Change will not suggest that there is inevitably rise to resistance in an organization, or even that resistance is necessarily
counterproductive. In some cases of change, members of an organization use resistance to get senior management attention for issues that employees believe they must be addressed in order for the organization to maintain high performance. However, managers never should
underestimate the level of resistance in their organization during change (Jones, 2007). This because resistance can be a significant restriction to effective organizational transformation (Cummings and Worley, 2005).
For managing a change process, it is important to understand the potential for, and nature of resistance (Burns, Ezzamel, and Scapens, 2003). According to Jones (2007) are organizations working because they reduce members uncertainty. Organizations have predictable rules and routines that people will help to complete the tasks in their function. When managers change their organization the predictability of the routines and rules disappears. There is even the possibility that the status and prestige that go with some positions will end. Therefore Jones (2007) concludes that it is not surprising that members of an organization resist change, and that organizations, which are a collection of people, are so difficult to change.
There are different causes of resistance, some of them are seen as a psychological concept and other definitions are seen as a systems perspective (Dent and Goldberg, 1999). Psychological causes of resistance to change, which are seen as within the individual, can be uncertainty, threatened self-interests, perceptions which differ from employers’ about necessity for and consequence of change, feelings of loss, and a lack of tolerance. According to Kotter and
Schlesinger (2008) to predict what form of resistance will appear a manager must be aware of the four most common reasons why people resist. These reasons are: (1) a desire not to lose
belief that the change initiative is senseless, and (4) the low tolerance for the change initiative. However, resistance can be perceived as employees’ behavior that managers do not like, from an innocent question to a roll of the eyes, or even sabotage. But, human resistance to change is not only motivated by egoism, resistance might be motivated by individuals’ desires to act in accordance with their ethical principles (Piderit, 2000). To overcome resistance to change it is more effective to weaken the barriers than to strengthen the drivers (Lewin, 1951).
In the articles of Dent and Goldberg (1999), and Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) and in the book of Cummings and Worley (2005) are different strategies for overcoming resistance mentioned which are used in the management literature. The authors all mentioned the same three major methods to deal with resistance; communication and/or education, participation and involvement, and
empathy and support (Cummings and Worley, 2005) or facilitation and support (Dent and Goldberg, 1999; Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) and Dent and Goldberg (1999) added three other, less important, methods to deal with resistance, which are negotiation and agreement, manipulation and co-optation, and explicit and implicit coercion. This chapter will discuss the in the articles used methods to positively influence members and groups of an organization during transformation. The first three sections will discuss the most important methods which are mentioned by all three authors. The fourth section will shortly describe the other three methods to overcome resistance. The last section of this chapter will give an answer to the third sub question of this research: ‘How to overcome resistance’.
5.1. Education and Communication
Therefore, according to Elving (2005) organizational communication within the organization has got two important goals before, during and after the change. These goals are: (1) To inform employees about their tasks and about the policy and other issues of the organization, and (2) communication with a mean to create a community within the organization. The information about change should address reasons to change, and the worries or uncertainties employees initially will have.
5.1.1. Communication
During the change process it is important that change management listen to the critics of employees if there is resistance. During the whole transformation process managers should communicate to the members of the organizations if there is progress in the situation (Burns, 2004). This message should contain information about short-term gains to motivate the
employees (Kotter, 1995). Important is that these messages are send during the whole process, to keep motivated people in the whole process. Else there is the possibility that almost at the end of the transformation, the process still will fail because of unmotivated people. This does not mean that poor outcomes, or things that went wrong should be ignored.
See section 4.2 , page 18, last paragraph for forms of communication.
5.1.2. Education
During the change implication, or in the new situation after change, management of the organization can face different management control problems. In the new situation employees may not understand what is expected, employees may not be motivated, or are not capable of performing well even if they both understands the direction of the job and are highly motivated (Merchant and Van der Stede, 2007). Employees of an organization needs new skills and attitudes because a change initiative can have changed roles, responsibilities, and relationships in an organization (Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990). Therefore, specific training programs are necessarily during and after the change initiatives.
way (Merchant and Van der Stede, 2007). According to Hirschhorn (Beer and Nohria, 2000) are training programs not simply to make employees more productive. With a training, organizations tries to find a way of expressing and discharging obligations to their employees. Management of organizations think that without these obligations employees are not loyal to the firm. Also a training can motivate employees for the change initiative because employees can be given a greater sense of professionalism, and they are often more interested in performing well in jobs they understand better.
When an organization wants to make its change initiative a success a specific training program for their employees is of vital importance. A general, one-size-fits-all program does not work because it takes energy away from the effort to solve the key business problem (Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990). It is important to have a very-well specified program that fits the needs of the organizations’ employees. Also it is important that the program starts during the change initiative and not too late after the implementation of the change effort. To many and inappropriate training programs undermine the credibility of the change effort.
5.2. Participation and Involvement
In some cases if a change manager involve the potential ‘resisters’ in some aspects of the design and implementation of the change, he/she can often prevent resistance (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). Especially in situations that requires attitudinal and cultural change of the organization and its members participation is necessarily (Burns, 2004). These changes are a slow and long-term learning process. But, when employees and other stakeholders becomes committed to a (new) vision, they are willing to accept and embrace a new management method that demands changes in their behavior (Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990). However according to Beer, Eisenstat and Spector (1990) cannot help everyone in the design of a change transformation. At this point in the process is strong leadership from the change manager and its team necessarily.
5.3. Facilitation and Support
See section 4.3, page 19 what facilitation and support is.
5.4. Other methods
This section will discuss shortly the three other methods mentioned by Dent and Goldberg (1999), and Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) to deal with resistance. These methods a change manager can use to overcome resistance are: negotiation and agreement, manipulation and co-optation, and explicit and implicit coercion.
When there is a conflict in an organization during change, negotiation and agreement is an important tool to manage this conflict (Jones, 2007). Also according Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) change management is able to offer incentives to active or potential resisters, or when an individual or a group will clearly lose out in a transformation process. Besides bargaining employees with incentives negotiation will help to understand employees and groups how the transformation will affect others. This makes it possible for the entire organization to develop a common understanding on why change is important and taking place (Jones, 2007). Negotiation and agreement is relatively simple method to avoid major resistance, but it can be very expensive and can draw attention to others of the personal advantages of bargaining (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008).
The method manipulation and co-optation can be used when other methods does not work or are too expensive, and if the situation demands quick actions to be taken (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). An important disadvantage of manipulation and co-optation is that it can lead to problems in the future if members of the organization feel manipulated.
The last method to overcome resistance change management can use is the explicit and implicit coercion. Especially in situations when speed in the change process is essential, and/or change management has considerable influence this method is very useful (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). By coercing the key players, which are the source of resistance in the organization, into accepting change and threaten these people with deterrent consequences if they choose to resist (Jones, 2007). These consequences can be reassignment, demotion, or even firing employees. The advantage of this method is its speed and the fact it is able to overcome any kind of resistance. But, this method is also the most risky method, especially when individuals or groups in an organization stays mad at the change managers (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008).
5.5. Overcome resistance
This section will divide an answer to the third sub question of this literature study. This sub question was formulated as stated below:
‘How to overcome resistance?’
Resistance in a transformation process, is a negative attitude towards that transformation. Change managers therefore should never underestimate the level of resistance, because resistance in an organization has got a negative influence on the implementing of change in an effective way. To deal with resistance managers should understand the potential for, and nature of resistance, before they can take action. There are multiple methods for dealing with resistance. The most important three are communication and education, participation and involvement, and facilitation and support. The other three methods are negotiation, manipulation, and coercion.
there is resistance under members of the organization. Also must management communicate to the whole organization premature results and developments. Also if there are rumors,
management should counter these rumors by providing clear and appropriate information.
Also during the change process management must make use of participation and facilitation. Besides the process of creating readiness, during the whole change or transformation process to deal with resistance are these methods important. Employees and groups in the organization must have the feeling that it is theirs change. This can be created to involve people in every aspect of the change process if it is possible. This will have a motivating power, but change managers must keep in mind that there is still a need for support. Every change process will create uncertainty and demands new skills of the organizational members. Therefore change management must provide emotional support or training.
6. Successful / Unsuccessful transformation
For any organization to survive and succeed in the present highly competitive and continuously evolving business environment, successful change management is of crucial interest (By, 2005). However, the implementation of change or transformation in an organization can be successful or unsuccessful. According to Cowan-Sahadath (2009) is implementation of change the movement forward with the strategy and a plan with a strong focus on measurement of both the processes and results. Also a willingness to consider revisions to the plan in the face of unforeseen events is important.
The purpose of change is to create an asset that did not exist before – a learning organization capable of adapting to a changing competitive environment (Burns, Ezzamel and Scapens, 2003). To achieve this purpose it is important that members of an organization are able to change there behaviors and to accept there new function. The organization, and its business units has to continually monitor its behavior – in effect, to learn how to learn. Therefore a successful change project must involve three steps (Lewin, 1951): unfreeze old patterns, implement new changes, and refreeze the new patterns to embed and reinforce them. In this process there are three factors essential to become a successful change program: (1) coordination, (2) commitment and (3) new competencies (Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990). These factors are important to create internal customer satisfaction.
Change is successful if the business problem which was the occasion for change is resolved. In the article of Burns, Ezzamel and Scapens (2003) their view of ‘success’ is one in which the intentions of the change program are mostly accomplished and the change process involves minimal resistance or conflict. However, successful change efforts depends also upon the ability of all levels in an organization to implement the change (Conger, in Beer and Nohria, 2000). To guide employees of different business units in an organization through change, managers needs a relatively simple vision (Kotter, 1995). This vision of change can reduce the error rate and make changes successful.
factors to institutionalize the transformation in the organizations culture: (1) show members of your organization how the change have improved the organizations performance, and (2) make sure that the new generation of senior management embrace and personify the new approach. Especially the last factor takes a lot of time. Also it is important that senior management applies to them selves what they have been encouraging their general managers and workers (Beer, Eisenstat, and Spector, 1990). If this is not the fact, the whole transformation process can break down.
Change can also become unsuccessful. If change is incompatible with the existing ways of thinking in an organization it will not succeed (Burns, Ezzamel, and Scapens, 2003). The new rules and routines are incompatible with the underlying taken for granted assumptions of the organization. Probably there is not enough powerful support for the actual change. Also the communication between and the involvement of all business levels is not sufficient enough.
6.1. Successful change
This section will give the answer to the last sub question which is formulated in this research. The sub question is formulated as stated below:
‘When is change successful or unsuccessful?’
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
This last chapter of this report will first give a conclusion by providing an answer to the main research question which was formulated in chapter two. The second and third section of this chapter will evaluate the quality of this research by determining the limitations of this research, and providing recommendations for further research.
7.1. Conclusions
To give a conclusion in this research we need to answer the main research question. The main research question, stated in section 2.1.2. was:
- ‘Making change successful: Which actions are needed?’ -
The research question was divided in four sub questions. Every sub question has been answered in the last section of the chapters three, four, five, and six. The results of these chapters are a part of a model with actions which needs to be taken by change management and/or senior
1. Structural / Cultural change Readiness Successful change Institutionalization Adaptation 3. Overcome Resistance 2. Creating Readiness Un-successful change 4.
A. Define business problem
B. Forming a change management team
C. Redefining business problem
D. Start brainstorm solutions for business problem
E. Compare organizations’ long term vision with change solution
F. Start actual transformation
A. Compare new situation with the
starting point of change
B. Interview members of the organization C. Institutionalize change in the
organizations culture
D. Is change successful
A. Communicate to the organization
B. Involve people in the change initiative C. Facilitate people in the change initiative
A. Communicate to the organization B. Involve people in the change process C. Facilitate people in the change process D. Other (Force people to overcome resistance)
7.2. Limitations
Every research has got its defaults and never can be complete. This section will present the main limitations of this research. With these limitations or shortcomings people can learn from it in conducting further research on this topic of change management.
The first limitation is the research method. This research was a literature research, so there is not any empirical research which can underpin the results of this research.
The second and last limitation is the validity of the new developed ‘change model’. This model is created on the base of existing change management literature. There was not any ‘practical’ input from the field of change management. Besides, this new model is not tested in the change
management practice.
7.3. Recommendation for further research
The limitations which are formulated in the previous section of this chapter are the base for recommendations for further research. With these recommendations people can deepen the findings of this thesis, the developed ‘change’ model, and explore the field of change management a more comprehensive way.
The first limitation was the research method which has been used in this research. To test the findings and conclusions, which were the base for the new developed ‘change model’, empirical research is needed. But, before a empirical research can take part, a more in depth research is needed in how to change the structure and/or culture of an organization, and how readiness and resistance are correlated to each other.
Bibliography
Armenakis, A.A., S.G. Harris, and K.W. Mossholder. (1993). Creating readiness for
organizational change. Human Relations, 46(681), 681 – 703.
Armenakis, A.A., and A.G. Bedeian. (1999). Organizational change: A review of theory and
research in the 1990. Journal of Management, 25(3), 293 – 315.
Armenakis, A.A., S.G. Harris, and H.S. Field. (1999). Making change permanent: a model for
institutionalizing change. In: Pasmore, W. and Woodman, R. (Eds). Research in Organizational Change and Development. JAI Press, (7), 97 – 128.
Baarda D.B. and M.P.M. de Goede. (2001). Basisboek methoden en technieken. (3rd ed.). Houten: Stenfert Kroese.
Balogun J. and V.H. Hailey. (2008). Exploring strategic change. (3rd ed.). Pearson Education Limited.
Beer, M., R. A. Eisenstat, and B. Spector. (1990). Why change programs don’t produce change. Harvard Business Review, Nov/Dec, 158 – 166.
Beer M. and N. Nohria. (2000). Breaking the code of change. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
Burke W.W. and G.H. Litwin. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and change. Journal of Management, 18(3), 523 – 545.
Burnes, B. (2004). Managing Change: A strategic approach to organisational dynamics. (4th ed.).Harlow, Prentice Hall.
Burns, J., M. Ezzamel, and R.W. Scapens. (2003). The challenge of management accounting
change: Behavioural and cultural aspects of change management. Elsevier. By, R.T. (2005). Organisational change management: A critical review. Journal of change
management, 5(4), 369 – 380.
Cohen, A.R. (2000). Initiating change – The anatomy of structure as a starting point. In: Beer, M. and N. Nohria (Eds). Breaking the code of change. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Conger, J.A. (2000). Effective change begins at the top. In: Beer, M. and N.Nohria (Eds). Breaking the code of change. Harvard Business School, Press, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Cowan-Sahadath, K. (2010). Business transformation: Leadership, integration and innovation –
A case study. International Journal of Project Management, (28), 395 – 404.
Dent, E.B. and S.G. Goldberg. (1999). Challenging resistance to change. Journal of Applied Behavioural Research, 35(1), 24 – 41.
Duck, D. (2000). ‘Managing change: The art of balancing’ Harvard Business Review, Oct. Elving, W.J.L. (2005). The role of communication in organizational change. Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, 10(2), 129 – 138.
Ford, M.W. and B.M. Greer. (2005). The relationship between management control system usage
and planned change achievement: an exploratory study. Journal of Change Management, 5(1), 29 – 46.
Galbraith, J.R. (2000). The role of formal structures and processes. In: Beer, M. and N. Nohria. (Eds). Breaking the code of change. Harvard Business School Press, Boston,
Massachusetts, USA.
Hirschhorn, L. (2000). Changing structure is not enough: The moral meaning of organizational
design. In: Beer, M. and N. Nohria. (Eds). Breaking the code of change. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Hofstede, G. (1994). The business of international business is culture. International Business Review, 3(1), 1 – 14.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw Hill. Holt, D.T., A.A. Armenakis, H.S. Feild, and S.G. Harris. (2007). Readiness for organizational
change: The systematic development of a scale. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, (43), 232 – 255.
Jones, G.R. (2007). Organizational theory, design & change. (5th ed.). Pearson Hall.
Klein, S.M. (1996). A management communication strategy for change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(2), 32 – 46.
Kotter, J.P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, March /April.
Kotter, J.P. (1996). Leiderschap bij verandering. (1st ed.). Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard business School Press.
Kotter, J.P. and L.A. Schlesinger. (2008). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review, July/August.
Leavitt, H. (1965). The handbook of organizations: Applied organizational change in industry. New York: Rand-McNally.
Luecke, R. (2003). Managing change and transition. Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard Business School Press.
Mabey, C. and B. Mayon-White. Managing Change. (2nd ed.). London: The Open University. Mento, A.J., R.M. Jones, and W. Dirndorfer. (2002). A change management process: Grounded
in both theory and practice. Journal of Change Management, 3(1), 45 – 59.
Merchant K.A. and W.A. van der Stede. (2007). Management Control Systems: Performance
Measurement, Evaluation and Incentives. (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.
Metselaar, E.E. and A.J. Cozijnsen. (2002). Van weerstand naar veranderingsbereidheid: over
willen, moeten en kunnen veranderen. (3rd ed.). Heemstede: Holland Business Publications.
Nutt, P.C. (1986). Tactics of Implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 29(2), 230-261. Piderit, S.K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimensional
view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 783 – 794.
Porter, M.E. (1985). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: The Free Press.
Sandbrook, M. (2001). Using the EFQM Excellence Model as a framework for improvement and
change. Journal of Change Management, 2(1), 83 – 90.
Appendix 1: Eight Steps to Transform Your Organization4
Appendix 2: Lewins Planned Change Model5
5
Appendix 3: Structure-Culture Continuum6
