Leading Change in Organization

IMPLEMENTING CHANGE

Group members

• LAI WING VIAN B11HA0009• JANATUL ADNI HISHAMUDDIN AH100166• TEH CHIN GUAN B11HA0046• MOHD HASNOL ADLI BIN HARUN B11HA0014• MOHD HANIF

The success of efforts to transform an organization depend in part on when, where, and how various aspects of the change are implemented, and who participates in the process in what ways.

Responsibility for implementing Major Change.

-Top management in an organization need to support the large-scale change. (however, contrary to common assumptions, major changes are not always initiated by top management and they may not become involved until the process is well under way.)

-In traditional approach, major changes suggested by lower levels may be resisted by top managers.

-As noted in Chapter 12 ( Strategic Leadership by Executive)The major change/transformation of an organization often requires the replacement of top management by new leaders with a mandate for radical change.

The essential role of top management :

1) Formulate an integrating vision and general strategy.

2) Build a coalition of supporters who endorse the strategy.

3) Guide and coordinate the process by which the strategy will be implemented.

4) Provide encouragement, support, and necessary resources to facilitate

change, but should not try to dictate the details of how to do it.

- Complex changes usually involve a process of experimentation and learning.

- Specifying detailed guidelines for change all levels of the organization.

- Encourage middle and lower-level managers to transform their own units in a

way that is consistent with the vision and strategy.

The Pace and Sequencing of Changes.

-A debate continues among change scholars about the optimal pace and

sequencing of desired changes.

- Some scholars have advocated rapid introduction of changes throughout

the organization to prevent the buildup of resistance whereas other

scholars favor a more gradual introduction of change to different parts of

the organization at different times.

-The limited amount of longitudinal research does not yet provide clear

answer to these questions, but some evidence favors the latter approach.

- Major change was more successful when it was implemented slowly,

beginning in highly visible, important ways that convey the message that

the change is serious, long-lasting effort.

- Controversial changes occurred in a nonlinear way,

- with delays and reversals as aspects of the change were modified to deal

with opponent concerns

- or postponed until a time when opponents would be more receptive to

them.

- this process provided opportunities for the change agents to establish trust

and use a process of collaborative problem solving for contentious issues.

- Whenever feasible it seems beneficial to change interdependent subunits of

the organization simultaneously.

-The effects will be mutually supporting.

-However, in a large organization with semi-autonomous subunits,

simultaneous change is not essential, and it may not be feasible to implement

change in all subunits at the same time.

- One way to demonstrate the success of a new strategy is to implement it on a

small scale in one subunit or facility on an experimental basis.

- A successful change that is carried out in one part of an organization can help

to stimulate similar changes throughout the organization.

- However, it is unwise to implement it in all subunits, especially when they are

very diverse.

- This type of mistake is more likely to be avoided when middle managers are

allowed to have a major voice in determining how to implement a strategy in

their own organizational subunits.

Successful implementation of a major new strategy usually

requires changes in the organization structure to make it

consistent with the strategy.