ASSIGNMENT FOR ORGANIZATION
Students are required to submit their work through MORE Portal to ensure the originality of their work. 3. All references must be fully cited in Harvard/ PAP notation. 4. Plagiarism in any form will result in severe penalties. 5. Work submitted within up to 7 calendar days late = 10 marks subtracted. 6. Work submitted up to 10 calendar days late = 20 marks subtracted. 7. Work submitted more than 10 calendar days late = 1 marks awarded. Declaration: I declare that a) No part of this assignment has been copied from any other person’s work except where due acknowledgment is made in the text. ) No part of this assignment had been written for me by any other person except where such elaboration has been authorized by lecturer concerned. C) All grades obtained by students are final. Appeal can only be made (on FAIL case only) to the Academic Broad along with a payment of ARM 100. 00 to formalize the Process. D) the University/ College uses plagiarism detection software. Student Signature Signature: Date 13th January 2015 Date: Declaration: I declare that d) No part of this assignment has been copied from any other person’s work except where due acknowledgement is made in the text. ) No part of this assignment had been written for me by any other person except where such collaboration has been authorized by lecturer concerned. F) All grades obtained by students are final. Appeal can only be made (on FAIL case only) to the Academic Board along with a payment of ARM 100. 00 to formalism the Process. Signature: The Examiner’s Remark: Date Received: Marks &/or Grade: Received By: Lecturer: Exam Coordinator Use Only Subject Title: N. B: A tutor has, and may exercise a right not to mark this assignment if the above declaration has not been signed.
If the above declaration is found to be false, no mark will be awarded for this assignment. If this assignment was vomited late and the application for extension has been rejected, it shall be marked as zero. Student’s Copy / Registry Student’s Name: Last updated by Department of Registry: Table Of Content Globalization Growth Government regulation Market demand Business sustainability Number 2 Practical Applications of Change Management Overview about resistance and Challenges 1. 2. Environment analysis 1. 3.
Problem identification 1. 4. Responding to Solutions Action plan Porter five forces analysis 6 4 7 Bargaining power of suppliers Diagram 1 Kurt Lenin Change Model 8 Kurt Lenin 3 Phases Change Management Model Diagram 2 9 Linen’s Three Step Change Model Phases are: 3 Shari Window Diagram 3 References A) 10 11 12 Organizational change is the process of planning and implementing change in organization in such a way as to minimize employee resistance and cost to organization while also maximizing the effectiveness of change effort.
Below are the some of the significant factors which triggers for change which is exit today. Today’s business environment requires company to undergo changes almost constantly if they are to remain competitive. Factors such as globalization of markets are rapidly evolving technology force businesses to respond in order o survive. Such changes maybe relatively minor as in the case of installing new software program or quite major as in the case of refocusing an overall marketing strategy. This will cost inside pressures come from top managers and lower level employees who push for change.
Growth Factor that growth in technology change are often introduce as components of larger strategic changes and important aspect of changing technology is determining who in the organization will be threatened by the change, to be a successful, a technology change must be incorporated into the company overall yester and a management structure must be created to support it. Attempting strategic change, introducing a new technology in the working environment may affect people’s attitudes some time in negative way.
Government Regulation Changes in government regulations can have an impact on how an organization does business. Newly mandated safety procedures can force an organizational to change its production process to create a safer work environment. Businesses that make or distribute consumer goods such as food products might have to add more quality control measures to ensure consumer safety. Market Demand Organizational markets processes certain market demand characteristic. The organizational demand for products or services maybe inelastic, the derive, joint or fluctuating in nature.
The buying decision of the organizations are influenced by environmental factors, organizational factors, social factors and personal factors. So marketers need relevant information about the characteristic of the industries for marketing their goods and services effectively. Business Sustainability Today in change management, business enterprises in developed countries operate in a more complicated, and more regulated, environment. Numerous laws and regulations govern their activities, and make their directors accountable to a broader range of stakeholders.
Sustainable development according to extends the stakeholder group even further, by including future generations and natural resources. One of the most difficult problems organizations face is dealing with change. In today’s rapidly changing, highly competitive environment, the ability to change rapidly, efficiently, and almost continually will distinguish the winners from the losers. Many organizations will disappear because they find themselves unable to adapt. Furthermore, many of the pressures for change in the organizations are independent of technological change.
This means that informatics working for change are doing so in organizations that are already highly stressed by other pressures. Major organizational changes typically involve many different types and levels of personal loss for the people in the organization. For example, change always requires the effort to learn the new, which is a loss in terms of time and energy that could have been used elsewhere. Upgrading to new software is a common example, in which the future benefits may not be seen s sufficient to outweigh the short term investment required to learn the new programs.
Second, people want to feel good about themselves. Ideally, people are able to take pride in their work, feel responsible for a job well done, feel they are part of a high quality enterprise, and feel that their time has some significance. In many work situations, the work itself and the organizational culture make it difficult for people to feel good about themselves. In these poorer situations, people usually invent strategies to help them feel better about themselves, and these strategies involve getting some sense of control, loneliness, and significance out of their work.
Sometimes this involves opposition to management, on the assumption that management is always up to no good. More commonly, the worker management relationships are not completely alienated. Still, the workers’ strategies for achieving “good” feelings are unknown to or quite misunderstood by management. Therefore, change initiatives, unknowingly and unintentionally, threaten to cause the workers serious personal loss. Not surprisingly, the workers resist and do all they can to sabotage such change initiatives. Third, change initiatives often require rage losses for middle managers.
Generally, people perceive that information systems increase the ability of top executives to know more about what is going on and to exert more direct control. This means a serious loss of personal and organizational significance for the middle manager. Sometimes middle managers fight this loss. Any significant organizational change involves changing habits, that is, changing the way actually do work. This usually involves changes in the way of interaction, both with people and our tools. New systems require us to learn a new set of behaviors. Overview about resistance and Challenges
The core feature of the case study is a transformational change during a consolidation of two hospitals. Both hospitals face challenges stemming from the complexity of the merge that involves different leadership styles, systems, policies, ingrained cultures and employees’ beliefs, and it bears financial constraints. Diversity and complexity impact upon two main dimensions: (a) behavioral (motivation, retention, employee relations, cultural integration) (b) organizational (design of new systems, management practices, processes and in general O.
D. Issues). Both dimensions ultimately influence the organization’s efficiency and in turn a reflections delivery of health services to the community. The two hospitals face external pressures from: (a) the shareholders to reduce costs (b) the community to deliver high quality health services (c) the labor market with shortage of qualified staff (d) political pressures demanding a restructuring (e) From citywide union agreements that can influence HRS decisions.
These external factors must be duly accounted as they impact upon behavioral and organizational dimensions and by reflection can affect the success of the consolidation. Leadership in handling the change, Internal and external complexities and halogens suggest that effective leadership, especially handling human aspects of the change, would be key for a successful consolidation process. In both hospitals employees face low motivation, uncertainty on the future, differences in leadership styles, ethical approaches, and in working cultures that add complexity to the process. A. Responding to Solutions Firstly, an HARD multilevel analysis looking at structures, strategies, cultures, with HRS working with the change agents, and the leaders to align the two organizational architectures (hard structure). Importantly, many mergers have ailed at the integrations stage for lack of cultural integration (Unguent, & Klein, 2003) and culture has a profound effect on leadership styles in a merge process (Keel, & Carrot, 2005), consequently leading the human aspects (soft structure) would be essential, having in mind that leadership can be developed.
The styles are task oriented for LASH and relationship oriented at SUCH. Cross trainings where leaders would learn the others’ style thus combining both task and relationship might be a remedy. Also, given the many differences cultures, the complexity of the context and external factors, a situational approach adapting the style to a specific situation would be ideal, and it is considered effective in a hospital context.
Further, path guide leadership that provides support to subordinates will be beneficial in the first stage to clarify procedures, and motivate staff. Path guide increases retentions (Dixon & Hart, 2010), thus it may help respond to potential turnover challenges. ELM style, which achieves strong relationship and interactions with subordinates, would be beneficial in handling sensitivities in regard to different religious beliefs.
Further, employees need to be motivated and inspired to become leaders through a ramifications style that is effective during change (Harold, Fedora, Caldwell, & Hi, 2008) and enhance both individual and organizational performances in the public sector (Parameter & Leaving, 2010). Thus, it fits comfortably with the scenarios analyzed. Group dynamics for the leaders are proposed to obviate the weaknesses of situational, path goal and transformational theories in that they are meant to bee too dyadic and lack efficacy on group satisfaction (Morehouse, 2010).
In sum, leaders will have to learn how to lead and how to manage groups as well. In addition to styles, development should focus on behaviors to address team inflicts and employee relations. Behavioral trainings will include leading change skills, managing difficult employee and diplomatic conflict resolutions. Importantly development emotional intelligence that is fundamental in leadership efficacy especially to enhance the transformational style (Fitzgerald & Schuster, 201 0), which is proposed as efficient approach given the specificities of this consolidation.
The following are the proposed steps: (a) consolidation should be led jointly by the HRS unit, and citywide consultants involving leaders and line managers in all stages (b) An all staff climate survey old provide feedback, staff concerns and ensure ownership at lower level (c) An analysis of the leadership profiles and the organizations’ tolerance for different styles, the latter is effective during mergers (Keel, & Carrot, 2005). After this diagnostic, participative phase, the change agents would design targeted development trainings on leading change and leadership style and behaviors proposed above.
A leadership development process will unleash an environment of continuous learning, allowing organizations to transform through an effective integration of people, cultures, systems, and policies. The cross cutting theme in the development framework is to enhance leaders’ human skills by: (a) programs geared to manage resistances; (b) stimulating emotional intelligence: empathy, self-awareness, social skills, integrity, hence developing leaders’ personalities and indirectly subordinates. E. I. An be improved through feedback and self-observation, stimulating partnerships, controlling emotional reactions, and being aware of strengths and limitations (Coleman, 2004). At lower levels (medics, nurses, support staff) problem solving forums would ensure bottom up feedback and ownership of he transformation. Failure to develop subordinates, to enhance interpersonal skills leads to leadership failure (Zinger, & Folkway, 2009). Leaders should receive constant feedback on their styles and behaviors, as little feedback stifles leadership development (Camp, 2005).
The other cross cutting area to be addressed in the development framework would be the cultural aspect, which is imperative in effective leadership (Elves, et al. , 2009) and that will integrate behavioral and organizational differences. Developing leaders and subordinates will have a cascading positive effect on there challenges such as employee relations, smooth integration of policies and systems, and employee motivation. The challenges would be that people development and the merge are long and complex undertaking requiring strong organizational commitment and a professional HRS unit that has to play a strategic and proactive role.
And above all before relying on any specific leadership styles or superior behavior as the catch-all solutions, leaders involved in the consolidation have to understand that people are complex and people are difficult and are driven by many more social and human stimuli (Prentice, 2004). Hence understanding this human part of the leaderships would be the heart of the consolidation process. Additionally there are few theory which can apply and implement to organization change which can identify, monitor and research towards the company goals.
It is a framework to analyze level of competition within an industry and business strategy development. It draws upon industrial organization (10) economics to derive five forces that determine the competitive intensity and therefore attractiveness of an Industry. This analysis is associated with its principal innovator Michael E. Porter of Harvard University. Porter referred to these forces as the micro environment, to contrast it with the more general term macro environment. They consist of those forces close to a company that affect its ability to serve its customers and make a profit.
A firm that competes in a single industry should develop, at a minimum, one five forces analysis for its industry. Porter makes clear that for diversified companies, the first fundamental issue in corporate strategy is the selection of industries in which the company should compete; and each line of business should develop its own, industry specific, five forces analysis. Diagram 1 Kurt Lenin change theory and Linen’s three step model is very much a significant part of change management strategies for managing change in the workplace in the 21st century.
This change management model was developed during the sass’s and the concept of ‘Unfreezing-Transition-Freezing’ still remains very relevant today. Below, from the perspective of a change management consultant explain this change management model, ‘the 3 phases model’, and how it works today as a key part of business improvement and successful organizational change initiatives. Kurt Lenin 3 Phases Change Management Model Kurt Linen’s change management model is a fantastic change model for understanding the basic concepts of a straight forward change management process which is attached in diagram below.
Unfreeze: Reducing the forces that are striving to maintain the status quo, and dismantling the current mind set. Usually by presenting a provocative problem or event to get people to recognize the need for change and to search for new solutions. Transition: Developing new behaviors, values, and attitudes, sometimes through organizational structure and process changes and development techniques. There may be a period of some confusion as we move from the old ways of doing things to the new. Freeze: The final stage of crystallizing and the adaptation of ownership of the new ‘as is’.
The organization may revert to former ways of doing things at this point unless the changes are reinforced through freezing. The Kurt Lenin model demonstrates that to move an organization from point A to point B first should create compelling and motivating reasons to change (unfreeze). Then implement and install the necessary changes (transition) to the way wish for things to be. Then aim to stabilize the operation (freeze) at a better ND or higher level of performance. This model works whether the changes are strategic and incremental or reactive or anticipatory change.
There is a very broad selection of strategies for managing change in the workplace that management can select from to achieve successful organizational change. The Kurt Lenin three step model provides an outline that assists to visualize, plan and manage each of the stages of change. In each stage of the Kurt Lenin change theory as being able to be planned, as implantable, and as dubitable for achieving successful change management program implementation and business improvement results.
Shari Window The Shari window is a psychological assessment tool designed to be used in a group setting for the purpose of identifying how individuals in a group perceive one another. The Shari window is a stepping stone for developing leadership communications and improving the emotional intelligence within an organization. Using the Shari window is simple. Individuals describe themselves from a list of adjectives and are in turn described by others. The presence of common adjectives and character traits, and the absence of others, creates opportunities for dialogue and change.
Results are grouped into four different exes: Open: Adjectives that both participants have selected are placed into this box. For example, if the subject describes themselves as trustworthy and the group members also describe the subject as trustworthy, that is an openly held belief about an individual’s personality. He or she need not have to work terribly hard to convince others about their being trustworthy. Hidden: Adjectives which are selected by the individual but not by any of his or her peers are placed into this category, aptly named because the traits which are known to the individual are seemingly hidden from the group.