Organizational Change - Chapter 8.pdf

Chapter 8: Soft systems models for change Managing change in situations of soft complexity Acko: (1993) iden$=es three di:erent ‘kinds of things’ that can be done about problems. He says: ‘They can be resolved, solved or dissolved’. To resolve a problem is to select a course of ac$on that yields an...

Chapter 8: Soft systems models for change Managing change in situations of soft complexity Acko: (1993) iden$=es three di:erent ‘kinds of things’ that can be done about problems. He says: ‘They can be resolved, solved or dissolved’. To resolve a problem is to select a course of ac$on that yields an outcome that is good enough, that sa$s=ces and suJces. People who use this approach do not pretend to be objec$ve in their decision making and use liCle especially collected data, jus$fying their conclusions by saying ‘lack of $me’ or ‘lack of informa$on’ or ‘it’s too complex a situa$on’. Solvers of problems use approaches to problems that are much more heavily reliant on researchbased scien$=c methods, techniques and tools. Acko: calls this the ‘research’ approach to mess management. The third approach is dissolving. To dissolve a problem is to change the nature, and/or the environment, of the en$ty in which it is embedded so as to remove the problem. He calls this approach the ‘design’ approach in that problem dissolvers, in addi$on to using the methods and techniques of problem resolvers and problem solvers, seek to redesign the characteris$cs of the larger system containing the problem. Organizational development – philosophy and underlying assumptions According to French and Bell organizaon development is: a long-term e:ort, led and supported by top management, to improve an organiza$on’s visioning, empowerment, learning and problemsolving processes, through an ongoing, collabora$ve management of organiza$on culture – with special emphasis on the culture of intact work teams and other team con=gura$ons – using the consultant-facilitator role and the theory and technology of applied behavioural science, including ac$on research. Characteris$cs of the OD approach to change: - It emphasizes goals and processes but with a par$cular emphasis on processes – the no$on of organiza$onal learning as a means of improving an organiza$on’s capacity to change. It deals with change over the medium to long term, that is, change that needs to be sustained over a signi=cant period of $me. It involves the organiza$on as a whole as well as its parts. It is par$cipa$ve, drawing on the theory and prac$ces of the behavioural science. - It has top management support and involvement. It involves a facilitator who takes on the role of a change agent. It concentrates on planned change but as a process that can adapt to a changing situa$on rather than as a rigid blueprint of how change should be done. 10 OD principles: 1. OD focuses on culture and processes. 2. OD encourages collabora$on between organiza$on leaders and members in managing culture and processes. 3. Teams of all kinds are par$cularly important for accomplishing tasks and are targets for OD ac$vi$es. 4. OD focuses on the human and social side of the organiza$on and in so doing also intervenes in the technological and structural sides. 5. Par$cipa$on and involvement in problem solving and decision making by all levels of the organiza$on are hallmarks of OD. 6. OD focuses on total system change and views organiza$ons as complex social systems. 7. OD prac$$oners are facilitators, collaborators and co-learners with the client system. 8. An overarching goal is to make the client system able to solve its problems on its own by teaching the skills and knowledge of con$nuous learning through self-analy$cal methods. OD views organiza$on improvement as an ongoing process in the context of a constantly changing environment. 9. OD relies on an ac$on research model with extensive par$cipa$on by client system members. 10. OD takes a developmental view that seeks the beCerment of both individuals and the organiza$on. ACemp$ng to create ‘win/win’ solu$ons is standard prac$ce in OD programmes. The signi'cance of people in organizaons The OD approach to change is, above all, an approach that cares about people and which believes that people at all levels throughout an organiza$on are, individually and collec$vely, the drivers and engines of change. Paton and McCalman (2008) o:er three ‘fundamental’ concepts with respect to the management of people and gaining their commitment to their work and organiza$on: 1. Organiza$ons are about people. 2. Management assump$ons about people o>en lead to ine:ec$ve design of organiza$ons and this hinders performance. 3. People are the most important asset and their commitment goes a long way in determining e:ec$ve organiza$on design and development. The signi'cance of organizaons as systems Organiza$ons are systems of interconnected and interrelated subsystems and components that include more formal organiza$onal structures and processes as well as culture, poli$cs, styles of leadership which are closely bound up with the values and aLtudes people bring to their workplaces. This idea is one of the most important assump$ons of OD as a process of facilita$ng change. This because: 1. It reinforces the systema$c nature of organiza$onal life and the fact that changes in one part of the organiza$on will inevitably impact on opera$ons in another part. 59 2. OD challenges the assump$on that a single important cause of change with clear e:ects can be found, as well as the assump$on that any cause and its e:ects and necessarily closely related in space and $me. 3. Any organiza$on is a balance of forces built up and re=ned over a period of $me. Consequently, proposed change of any signi=cance will inevitably change this balance and will, therefore, almost certainly encounter resistance. 4. Because organiza$on development as a concept is assumed to operate throughout an organiza$on, the OD process is most de=nitely not a ‘quick =x’ to the latest management problem. 5. OD approaches to change are essen$ally processes of facilita$ng planned change. The signi'cance of organizaons as learning organizaons The only way to survive and prosper for organiza$ons opera$ng in an increasingly complex and turbulent environment is to be a learning organiza$on. For instance, most employees, if given the opportunity, have a large interest in learning within the organiza$on. This way, the organiza$on can become a learning organiza$on. The concept of a learning organiza$on is built upon the proposi$on that there is more than one type of learning (single-loop/double-loop). The concepts of single- and double-loop learning can be explained in terms of systems for change that are either goal oriented or process oriented. A goal-oriented approach to change is directed towards changing the means by which goals are achieved. By contrast, those who subscribe to a process-oriented approach to change, while s$ll concerned with goals, focus more on fostering a change process that enables the goals to be challenged. Goal-oriented approaches are concerned with doing things beCer, while processoriented approaches are concerned with doing the right things. Goal-oriented approaches to problems, issues and change are basically congruent with the hard systems model of change. Once the objec$ve is iden$=ed, then the issue that remains is to establish the most eJcient means of achieving it – hence the func$on of objec$ves trees. Within a process-oriented approach, the problem is much more concerned with changing the behaviour of people and the structures and cultures within which they work. The process-oriented approach starts by iden$fying who must be involved in the process, what sort of issues should be addressed and how all this can be facilitated. The phases of the project are by no means as clearly de=ned as in a goal-oriented approach. The OD process OD is a process of facilita$on of organiza$onal change and renewal. It operates at all levels of the organiza$on. It is a rela$vely long-term process for ini$a$ng and implemen$ng planned change. It takes into account the messy nature of many organiza$onal problems, which involve unclear goals and di:ering perspec$ves on what cons$tutes the problems, let alone how to solve them. Organiza$on development as a process for ins$ga$ng and implemen$ng, change has two important characteris$cs: 1. It is a process of change which has a framework of recognizable phases that take the organiza$on form its current state to a new, desired future state. 2. Within and across these steps, the OD process can be perceived to be a collec$on of ac$vi$es and techniques that help the organiza$on and/or its parts to move through a considera$on of Lewin’s three phase model of change. Lewin’s three-phase model of change 60 - - - Unfreezing: Concerns the shaking up of people’s habitual modes of thinking and behaviour to heighten their awareness of the need for change. This implies disturbing the status quo by either strengthening the forces that could push for change and/or weakening the forces which are maintaining the situa$on. Moving: The process of making actual changes that will move the organiza$on to the new state. As well as involving new types of behaviour by individuals, this includes the establishment of new strategies and structures, with associated systems to help secure the new ways of doing things. Refreezing: Involves stabilizing or ins$tu$onalizing the changes. This requires securing the changes against ‘backsliding’ and may include recruitment of new sta: who are ‘untainted’ by the old habits. The con$nuing involvement and support of top management is crucial to this step. Once strategy, structure and systems have been changed it is important to reinforce the changes through symbolic ac$ons and signs such as a change of logo, forms of dress, buildings design and ways of grouping people to get work done. OD – an action research based model of change According to Paton and McCalman (2008) ‘change is a con$nuous process of confronta$on, iden$=ca$on, evalua$on and ac$on’. They go on to say that the key to this is what OD proponents refer to as an ac$on research model. Ac$on research (=gure, 8.2, see under) involves the following steps: Stages 1a and 1b: the present and the future Stage 1a: Diagnose current situaon Within this stage, an environmental analysis is carried out. In addi$on, the temporal and internal environments must be assessed. And, there is also a need for an examina$on of one or more things such as: - Organiza$onal purposes and goals Organiza$onal structure and culture Prevailing leadership approaches and styles Recruitment prac$ces, career paths and opportuni$es Reward structures and prac$ces 61 - Individual’s mo$va$on and commitment to their work and organiza$on Intra- and inter-group rela$ons The diagnos$c stage should provide informa$on about the ‘total system’. Table 8.1 (see right) shows di:erent data collec$on methods. It is necessary to give feedback on the =ndings to those from whom the data came, for further discussion and veri=ca$on – a process par$cularly important in the case of data gained from the administra$on of ques$onnaires and through observa$on, where there is liCle interac$on between ques$oner and ques$oned. Stage 1b: Develop a vision for change As the diagnosis proceeds and problem and success areas emerge, theories of what should be changed begin to form. In turn, some de=ni$ons of what the future should look like will arise. One way of looking at this stage of ac$vity is to perceive it as a crea$ve phase, in the sense that ‘something or some process that is new’ is being looked for. Stage 2: Gain commitment to the vision and the need for change Feedback form the results of stages 1a and 1b is most important. Unless those concerned and involved with the change have been consulted and have par$cipated in the process to this point, there will be liCle incen$ve for them to ‘buy into’ the new vision and the change process. Managers need to use many di:erent interac$ng ways to gain the commitment and involvement of all concerned in the change program. Pugh’s four principles draw aCen$on to the need for not just twoway but many-way communica$on as part of the process of gaining commitment to the vision and the need for change. Pugh’s principles and rules for understanding and managing organizaonal change - - - - Principle 1: organiza$ons are organisms – this means the organiza$on is not a machine and change must be approached carefully, with the implica$ons for various groupings thought out. Par$cipants need to be persuaded of the need for change and be given $me to ‘digest’ the changes a>er implementa$on. Principle 2: organiza$ons are occupa$onal and poli$cal systems as well as ra$onal resourcealloca$on ones – this means that thought must be given to how changes a:ect people’s jobs, career prospects, mo$va$on, etc. It also means paying aCen$on to how change will a:ect people’s status, power and the pres$ge of di:erent groups. Principle 3: all members of an organiza$on operate simultaneously in the ra$onal, occupa$onal and poli$cal systems – this means that all types of arguments for change must be taken seriously. It is not suJcient merely to explain di:erent points of view. Principle 4: change is most likely to be acceptable with people who are successful and have con=dence in their ability and the mo$va$on to change – this means ensuring an appropriate 62 place (or set of people) from which to start the change and to ensure the methods used are relevant to those who are ‘=rst in line’ in accep$ng the change. Stage 3: Develop an acon plan The development of an ac$on plan can be thought of as beginning the phase of managing the transi$on from an organiza$on’s current state to its desired future state. It also con$nues the process of gaining commitment to the vision but with a somewhat changed emphasis on how that vision can come about. A number of issues are important in this stage of the OD process: 1. The issue of who is to guide the planning and, later, the implementa$on of the change. 2. The issue of precisely what needs to change to achieve the vision, while 3. Where any interven$on should take place. The role of a change agent The success of using an OD approach to facilitate change rests on the quali$es and capabili$es of those who act as the facilitators of change. In addi$on, many managers are o>en busy with the dayto-day issues and problems of managing that they =nd it diJcult take on the role of change agent as well. Buchanan and Boddy (1992) give a helpful list of the competencies of e:ec$ve change agents (see below): 1. To help the organiza$on de=ne the problem by asking for a de=ni$on of what it is. 2. To help the organiza$on examine what causes the problem and diagnose how this can be overcome. 3. To assist in geLng the organiza$on to o:er alterna$ve solu$ons. 4. To provide direc$on in the implementa$on of alterna$ve solu$ons. 5. To transmit the learning process that allows the client to deal with change on an ongoing basis by itself in the future. Competencies of an e+ecve change agent Responsibility charng 63 Beckhard and Harris (1987) developed a technique called ‘responsibility char$ng’ that assesses the alterna$ve behaviours for each person or persons involved in a series of ac$ons designed to bring about change. Responsibility char$ng clari=es behaviour that is required to implement important change tasks, ac$ons, or decisions. It helps reduce ambiguity, wasted energy, and adverse emo$onal reac$ons between individuals or groups whose interrela$onship is a:ected by change. The basic process is as follows: Two or more people whose roles interrelate or who manage interdependent groups formulate a list of ac$ons, decisions, or ac$vi$es that a:ect their rela$onship and record the list on the ver$cal axis of a responsibility chart (=gure 8.4, see right). They then iden$fy the people involved in each ac$on or decision and list these ‘actors’ on the horizontal axis of the form. Certain ground rules are set out when making a responsibility chart: 1. Assign responsibility to only one person. That person ini$ates and then is responsible and accountable for the ac$on. 2. Avoid having too many people with an approval-veto func$on on an item. 3. If one person has approval-veto involvement on most decisions, that person could become a boCleneck for geLng things done. 4. The support func$on is cri$cal. A person with a support role has to expand resources or produce something. This support role and its speci=c demands must be clari=ed and clearly assigned. 5. Finally, the assignment of func$ons (leCers) to persons at $mes becomes diJcult. The what and where of change Pugh has devised a matrix of possible change ini$a$ves based on the di:erent issues that can hamper change and the level at which they occur (=gure 8.7, p. 324). The matrix can be used to help with ac$on planning about: - The type of interven$on required to facilitate change in line with the organiza$on’s vision 64 - The level at which it should take place. Beckhard and Harris suggest the following organiza$onal subsystems – any of which can be considered as a star$ng point for change: - Top management – the top of the system Management-ready systems – those groups or organiza$ons known to be ready for change Hurng systems – a special class of ready systems in which current condi$on have created acute discomfort. New teams or systems – units without a history and whose tasks require a departure from old ways of opera$ng. 65 - Sta2 – subsystems that will be required to assist in the implementa$on of later interven$ons. Temporary project systems – ad hoc systems whose existence and tenure are specially de=ned by the change plan. In addi$on to the issue of where change interven$ons might take place, the planning of OD interven$ons must also take account of the degree of change needed that is the scope of the change ac$vi$es. In terms of Pugh’s OD matrix, this means considering whether: - People’s behaviour needs to change and/or The organiza$on’s structure and systems need to change and/or The context or the seLng needs to change Beckhard and Harris say that an e:ec$ve ac$on plan should have the following characteris$cs: - Relevance – ac$vi$es are clearly linked to the change goals and priori$es. Speci$city – ac$vi$es are clearly iden$=ed rather than broadly generalized. Integraon – the parts are closely connected. Chronology – there is a logical sequence of events. Adaptability – there are con$ngency plans for adjus$ng to unexpected forces. Stage 4: Implement the change Survey’s feedback Surveys can be used to assess the aLtudes and moral of people across the organiza$on and are used at di:erent stages in the OD process. Feedback from surveys of those involved in the change ac$vi$es should result in modi=ca$ons to the ac$on plan or the way it is being implemented. Organizaonal mirroring The organiza$on is a set of ac$vi$es in which a par$cular organiza$onal group, the host group, gets feedback from representa$ves from several other organiza$onal groups about how it is perceived and regarded. Inter-group confrontaon This technique enables two groups, which have their unique special$es, to confront organiza$onal issues that go beyond their par$cular exper$se. The objec$ve is to help the members of the two groups increase their awareness of the importance of each other’s ac$vi$es. Role negoaon It involves individuals or groups nego$a$ng to ‘contract’ to change their behaviour on a quid pro quo basis. In general, it requires the help of a facilitator. Each set of par$cipants is asked to say what they want the others to do more of, do less of or maintain unchanged. Process consultaon According to French and Bell: ‘the crux of this approach is that a skilled third-party consultant works with individuals and groups to help them learn about human and social processes and learn to solve problems that stem from process events’. Process consulta$on (PC) includes: agenda-seLng, coaching and counselling, communica$on and interac$on paCerns, work alloca$on, etc. Team building 66 Team-building techniques can be used for established long-term groups as well as for shorter-term project groups. The role of short-term wins Six ways in which short-term wins can help organiza$onal transforma$ons: - Provide evidence that sacri$ces are worth it – wins greatly help jus$fy the short-term costs involved. Reward change agents with a pat on the back – a>er a lot of hard work, posi$ve feedback builds moral and mo$va$on. Help $ne-tune vision and strategies – short-term wins give the guiding coali$on concrete data on the viability of their ideas. Undermine cynics and self-serving resistors. Keep bosses on board – provides those higher in the hierarchy with evidence that the transforma$on is on track. Build momentum – turns neutrals into supporters, reluctant supporters into ac$ve helpers. A short-term win has three characteris$cs: 1. It is visible – large numbers of people can see whether the result is real or just hype. 2. It is unambiguous – there can be liCle argument over the call. 3. It is clearly related to the change e:ort. Stage 5: Assess and reinforce the change Assessing change In so>, ‘messy’ situa$ons where change methodologies of the OD type tend to be used, change is an evolving process concerned not only with changes in quan$=able performance objec$ves, but more frequently with changes in aLtudes, behaviours and cultural norms where measurement is bound to be less precise. Even so, measurement of these things is possible. A number of ways are available for measuring the so>er issues associated with change: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. A survey or cultural audit Interviews with individuals or focus groups An examina$on of turnover and absenteeism rates An analysis of group performance ‘Re-picturing the organiza$on’ Reinforcing and consolidang change The new order resul$ng from any change needs to be ins$tu$onalized. It is pointless expec$ng people’s behaviour to change if this is not reinforced. An assessment of the OD model for change Organiza$onal development as a philosophy and a process can be cri$qued according to a number of cri$cisms: - OD does not always face up to harsh reali$es of change; OD is limited when change situa$ons are ‘constrained’; OD requires ‘out of the ordinary’ leadership; OD =ts uneasily with the structures and culture in the public sector; OD does not ‘work’ in all cultures. 67