ZeePedia buy college essays online


Change Management

<<< Previous IMPLEMENTATION: RADICAL OR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE Next >>>
 
img
Change Management ­MGMT625
VU
Lesson # 41
IMPLEMENTATION: RADICAL OR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE
In this lesson we will continue to discuss the leftover of Francis & Bessant model of managing
radical change
Stage III: Competency required for extensive innovation
Most innovation takes place within an established envelope of possibilities, usually following some
kind of "technological trajectory". When this occurs change is possible in small or large increments but
the overall boundary conditions remain relatively stable. For example in their studies of bicycle, Roy
and colleagues showed how the dominant design emerged in the mid-nineteenth century and remained
the framework within which innovation took place for the next century. Countless innovations have
taken place in terms of product modifications and process developments so that today's bicycle is
smoother, safer, cheaper, available in different configurations to suit different users, etc. But all of this
innovation has essentially been "doing what we do better" ­ the fundamental framework remains
constant.
By contrast, the emergence of the float glass represented a radical shift to in the way in which flat glass
had been made. For centuries the basic envelope within which product and process innovation took
place was bounded by the principles of grinding and polishing to create the finished product.
Pilkington's breakthrough innovation transformed the industry ­ and the fortunes of the company with
them. This is an example of "do different" innovation that establishes a new dominant design ­ a new
trajectory for the development and a new envelope within which product and process innovations can
be explored.
The journey to become more successfully innovative is not easy to manage, especially in firms that are
facing major discontinuities. Among the case companies that we studied, difficulties faced included:
·
Failure of perception
Not recognizing the need to innovate. As mentioned above, this can arise through isolation from key
environmental signals (typically a small firm problem) or from insulation caused by a corporate
"mindset" associated with particular historical strengths ­ core competencies can become what Leonard
Barton (1995) "core rigidities".
·
Inappropriate innovation
Recognizing the need to change but responding in ways that have poor strategic fit with the business or
divert from more important ends. Here firms may take changes but they cannot support them ­ for
example the failure of EMI Body scanner is attributed at least in part to a lack of suitable experience or
competence in manufacturing and marketing of complex high tech products. Another common problem
is adoption of innovation as a result of following fashion rather than for clear strategic purposes.
·
Episodic innovation
Recognizing the need but on occasional basis so that intensive innovation effort is followed by a period
of inactivity. Here the problem is one of maintaining continuity and ensuring a steady stream of
innovation rather than pursuing a blockbuster approach
·
Emphasizing steady state innovation
Recognizing the need for and deploying innovation on a continuous basis but where product and
process innovations are essentially "doing what we do better" rather than transformational in intent.
126
img
Change Management ­MGMT625
VU
Discontinuous innovation is qualitatively different from the improvement-oriented approaches
illustrated earlier. These forms of innovation are likely to provide transformational change
opportunities. According to this author, the differences between incremental and discontinuous
innovations are in the following respects:
·
Both the positive and/or negative impact of discontinuous innovation is greater.
·
Generally, discontinuous innovation requires destruction of mind-sets and other assets.
·
Discontinuous innovation requires entering into a psychological space with unknowns
and uncertainties
·
The risk element is high
·
There are like to be many trials and tribulations
·
Distinctive skills are needed
Stage IV: Competency to manage systematic change
Firms can be proactive with regard to discontinuities ­ they can seek actively to create them and,
thereby, to "re-write the rules of the competitive game". Alternatively, they can be unresponsive, being
surprised by emerging developments and not maintaining their position within the new strategic
opportunity space. Our research indicates that, at a minimum, firms need to develop strategic
orientations and routines to help them cope not only with "steady state" innovation, but also with
discontinuity. Frequently, this requires change in multiple parts of organization ­ i.e. systematic
change.
One of the key requirements seems to be a massive upgrading of an organization's capacity to
be open to signals from the outside and be prepared to learn from "outside of the box".
Consequently there is often tension between groups tasked with radical change. The solution may
require the separation of the radical and steady state groups. New divisions and companies may need to
be established or frustrated staff with entrepreneurial skills may leave to set up their own organizations
to pursue their radical vision. Key routines are required for activities like scanning the environment for
signals to trigger innovation, managing the implementations of projects, coordinating different
knowledge sets, etc. The solution sought to this problem is either in the form of (Strategic Business
Unit) SBU or in the concepts like corporate entrepreneurship.
Stage V: Competency to install leadership process.
Our research suggests that a key to managing a successful transition is to have the capacity to manage
paradoxes. This requires a strength and subtlety of leadership that we consider to be comparatively rare.
This suggests that leadership processes need to be capable of contextual adaptability and handling
paradox.
Interestingly the ten paradoxes outlined below encapsulate "competing values" and can be
characterized into "hard" and "soft", re-awaking the debates into the merits of androgyny as a guiding
management philosophy. In brief, it seems that an organization's leaders need to be able to be both hard
and soft, most importantly, to know when each stance is best at a moment in time. In periods of
transformational change there is a need of attention, agility of mind and wise judgment.
As Slatter (1984) showed a common cause of corporate collapse is that the firm is led by a strong
personality who does not listen to others. Our research suggests that a major risk in managing
transitions is that "wrong people are chosen to lead.
The capacity to pursue apparently paradoxical principles, sometimes at the same time appears to
especially important when sea-change is contemplated. Managers need to develop themselves, their
processes and adopt values that promote prudent, radical change. Without the capacity to manage
paradoxes a company in transition is in peril
127
img
Change Management ­MGMT625
VU
Research questions for further
·
Are older organizations (type of Org) less likely to undergo radical change?
·
Do they respond less quickly?
·
Does the occurrence of fundamental change decrease the probability of organizational survival?
·
Do the slower responses to environmental shift increase the likelihood of survival?
·
I leave these questions with you to find their answers but answer these in critical tonality ­ in an
analytical style instead of mere descriptive. Also try to seek application in the context of Pakistani
organization, industry and or society.
128
Table of Contents:
  1. COURSE ORIENTATION:Course objectives, Reading material, Scope of the subject
  2. BENEFITS AND SIGNIFICANCE OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT:Traditional management domain
  3. KURT LEWIN MODEL: ASSUMPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:Change Movement, Refreeze
  4. IMPLICATIONS OF KURT LEWIN MODEL:Sequence of event also matters, A Critical Look
  5. SOME BASIC CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS:Strategic change, Logical incrementalism
  6. TRANSACTIONAL VS. TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP:Micro-changes, Organisation Development
  7. THEORIES OF CHANGE IN ORGANISATIONS
  8. LIFE CYCLE THEORY:Unit of Change, Mode of change, Organisation death
  9. TELEOLOGICAL THEORIES OF CHANGE:Unit of change, Mode of Change, Limitations
  10. DIALECTICAL THEORIES OF CHANGE:Unit of Change, Strategic planning
  11. A DIALECTICAL APPROACH TO ORGANISATIONAL STRATEGY AND PLANNING:
  12. LIMITATION OF DIALECTICS; DA AND DI:Overview of application of dialectics
  13. THEORIES OF CHANGE IN ORGANISATIONS
  14. APPLICATION OF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY:Managerial focus
  15. FURTHER APPLICATION OF EVOLUTIONARY THEORIES:Criticism
  16. GREINER’S MODEL OF ORGANISATIONAL– EVOLUTION AND REVOLUTION
  17. GROWTH RATE OF THE INDUSTRY:CREATIVITY, DIRECTION, DELEGATION
  18. COORDINATION:COLLABORATION, The Crisis
  19. ORGANISATION ECOLOGY:Structural Inertia, Internal Structural Arrangements, External Factors
  20. CLASSIFICATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL SPECIES:Extent of Environmental Selection, Determinants of Vital Rates,
  21. FOOTNOTES TO ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE:Stable Processes of Change, Rule Following, Conflict
  22. SOME COMPLEXITIES OF CHANGE:Superstitious Learning, Solution Driven Problems
  23. ORGANIZATIONAL ADAPTATION:The Entrepreneurial problem, The Administrative Problem
  24. PROSPECTORS:Analyzer, Reactors, Adaptation and Strategic Management
  25. SKELETAL MODEL OF ADAPTATION:Determinants of Adaptive ability, The Process of Adaptation
  26. STRATEGIC CHANGE:Nature of Change, The Importance of Context, Force field Analysis
  27. Management Styles and Roles:Change Agent Roles, Levers for managing strategic Change
  28. SYMBOLIC PROCESSES:Political Processes, COMMUNICATING CHANGE, Change Tactics
  29. STRATEGIC CHANGE:Pettigrew & Whipp’s Typology, Context on X-axis (Why of change)
  30. STRATEGIC CHANGE:Attributes of SOC Model, Implications for Management
  31. STRATEGIC CHANGE:Flow of Information, Recruitment, SOC Process
  32. Determinants of a Successful Change Management:Environmental, Management Orientation, Management Orientation
  33. Higgins 08 S Model – An Adaptation from Waterman’s Seven S model:Strategy, Systems and Processes, Resources
  34. IMPLEMENTATION AND STRATEGIC CHANGE: CONSTRAINING FORCES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIC CHANGE (CASE STUDY OF XYZ COMPANY)
  35. IMPLEMENTATION AND STRATEGIC CHANGE: CONSTRAINING FORCES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIC CHANGE (CASE STUDY OF XYZ COMPANY)
  36. WHY IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIC CHANGE IS SO DIFFICULT?:Change Typology, Technical Change
  37. IMPLEMENTATION APPROACHES:Attributes of incremental change,
  38. IMPLEMENTATION: RADICAL OR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE
  39. IMPLEMENTATION: RADICAL OR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE:Definition of Leadership, Follower Work Facilitation
  40. IMPLEMENTATION: RADICAL OR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE:Recognize the challenge
  41. IMPLEMENTATION: RADICAL OR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE
  42. IMPLEMENTATION: PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM MODEL:Features of Radical Change, Theory of P-E model
  43. CHANGE IMPLEMENTATION: OD MODELS:The Transactional Factors
  44. CULTURE, VALUES AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE:Significance and Role of Values, Values Compete
  45. ORGANIZATIONAL VALUES, CULTURE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE:Issues in Change Management