The Pace and Scope of Change PDF

The pace and scope of change Balogun and Hope Hailey iden$=ed change ‘paths, they go further by sugges$ng four types of change mapped on two dimensions: scope (incremental or big-bang), and scale (realignment or transforma$on). Organiza$onal change can also be mapped in terms of its pace (con$nuous...

The pace and scope of change Balogun and Hope Hailey iden$=ed change ‘paths, they go further by sugges$ng four types of change mapped on two dimensions: scope (incremental or big-bang), and scale (realignment or transforma$on). Organiza$onal change can also be mapped in terms of its pace (con$nuous or episodic) and its scope (convergent or radical) (Plowman) Each of the four categories of change di:ers on the following dimensions: - The driver of change, namely instability or iner$a; The form of the change, namely adapta$on or replacement; The nature of the change, namely emergent or intended; Types of feedback: nega$ve feedback discourages devia$ons from the organiza$on’s current; posi$on whereas posi$ve feedback encourages devia$on; 8 - Types of connec$ons in the system which are loose or $ght. The four quadrants portray four types of change (Plowman): 1. Connuous and convergent change -> happens slowly and which is channelled into improving systems and prac$ces. Change happens within an organiza$ons template; the template itself is not altered. 2. Episodic and convergent change -> occurs more quickly and perhaps as a result of a speci=c shock or crisis. Nega$ve feedback pushes minor changes and keeps the template in shape. 3. Episodic and radical change -> happens quickly in response to a major shock or crisis. The template is altered through, for instance, a new top management team or new strategy. 4. Connuous and radical change -> arises out of an accumula$on of small changes that gather momentum and lead to a new template being formed. If successful the new template becomes established and is reinforced by new rules, values, and norms. Fine-tuning to corporate transformaon Dunphy and Stace’s scale types 1 and 2 (illustra$on 2.2, p. 36) are typical of Grundy’s concept of smooth incremental change, while their scale types 3 and 4 are reminiscent of Grundy’s bumpy incremental and discon$nuous types of change respec$vely. De'ning the scale of change Scale type 1: =ne-tuning Organiza$onal change is an ongoing process characterized by =ne-tuning of the ‘=t’ or match between the organiza$on’s strategy, structure, people and processes. Scale type 2: incremental adjustment Organiza$onal change is characterized by incremental adjustments to a changing environment. Such change involves dis$nct modi=ca$ons to corporate business strategies, structures and management processes. 9 Scale type 3: modular transforma$on Organiza$onal change is characterized by major realignment of one or more departments/divisions where radical change is focused rather than on the organiza$on as a whole. Scale type 4: corporate transforma$on Organiza$onal change is corpora$onwide, characterized by radical shi>s in business strategy and revolu$onary changes throughout the whole organiza$on. Explaining types of change - - - - - Convergent -> this =ne-tuning of an exis$ng con=gura$on. The organiza$onal con=gura$on or template is not changed. Planned -> deliberate ac$ons designed to move an organiza$on or part of one from one state to another and having discrete beginning and end points. Change is seen as something that managers can control. Evolu$onary -> slow adapta$on of exis$ng systems or structures. Also termed con$nuous change. Although small in nature, changes are not trivial and are cumula$ve. They can trigger radical change. Revolu$onary -> fast-paced and a:ec$ng all or most of an organiza$on at the same $me. A planned move from one strategy and/or structure to another. It incorporates the idea of episodic change which is inten$onal but is infrequent, not con$nuous. Radical -> breaking away from a posi$on such that a very di:erent posi$on is reached. Organiza$ons or parts of them can be seen as being transformed from one template or blueprint to another. Also known as frame-bending or frame-breaking. Emergent -> if the organiza$on is seen as an evolving system then change arises out of experimenta$on and adapta$on. Change is seen as something that managers create the right climate for. Planned and emergent change Wilson (1992) cri$cises the idea that change can be planned logically and systema$cally. He argues that planned change is a management concept which relies heavily on a single view of the way change ought to be done. This view assumes that the environment is known and, therefore, that a logical process of environmental analysis can be harnesses in the service of planning any change. Quinn (1980) has also cri$cized the idea of planned change as something that is deliberately and carefully thought through and then implemented. His research into the decision-making processes of a number of organiza$ons demonstrated that most strategic decisions are made in spite of formal planning systems rather than because of them. Stacey (2011) summarizes the key points made by Quinn as follows: 1. E:ec$ve managers do not manage strategically in a piecemeal manner. They have a clear view of what they want to achieve and where they are trying to take the business. The des$na$on is thus intended. 2. But the route to that des$na$on, it strategy itself, is not intended from the start in any comprehensive way. E:ec$ve managers know that the environment they have to operate in is uncertain and ambiguous. They therefore sustain 8exibility by holding open the method of reaching the goal. 3. The strategy itself emerges from the interac$on between di:erent groupings of people in the organiza$on, di:erent groupings with di:erent amounts of power, di:erent requirements for and access to informa$on, di:erent $me spans and parochial interests. These di:erent 10 pressures are orchestrated by senior managers. The top is always reassessing, integra$ng and organizing. 4. The strategy emerges or evolves in small incremental, opportunis$c steps. But such evolu$on is not piecemeal or haphazard because of the agreed purpose and the role of top management in reassessing what is happening. It is this that provides the logic in the incremental ac$on. 5. The result is an organiza$on that is feeling its way towards a known goal, opportunis$cally learning as it goes. Quinn terms this process ‘logical incrementalism’ in that is based in a certain logic of thinking but is incremental in its ability in the light of new informa$on and the results of ongoing ac$on. Does change lead to more change? Beck and colleagues (2008) conceptualize change as ‘discrete modi=ca$on of structural organiza$onal elements’. A core assump$on is that experience of change leads to increased chances of further change; change today is more likely to lead to change tomorrow. Beck and colleagues iden$fy three common analysed change events: - Change of markets, e.g. =nding new groups of customers and/or new products/services Change of organiza$onal leadership Changes to rules and rou$nes that comprise the basic structure of organiza$ons The theory behind the ‘change leads to more change’ assump$on is that the more an organiza$on changes things the more it learns about how to do it successfully. People increase their competencies at making changes of par$cular type and raise their con=dence as well. 11