Strategic Change Approaches To Change Management Commerce Essay

St pointgic channel Approaches To Change Management Commerce EssayIt is imperative that shapings maintain a greater reach, are present in various distinct agencys and ceaselessly abreast of regional and cultural divagations and ensure to integrate these into their strategies for the different foodstuff and communities they occupy. Due to the ever growing importance of salmagundi at bottom organisations, it has constitute imperative that managerial staff posses the skill to success ampley manage these careens when they croak (Senior, 2002 By, 2005).Merrel (2012) set forth turn as a sustained reality for organisations that imply to survive and prosper in these volatile and unpredictable clock. He went pass on to define transfer as simply doing things in a authority different from what you are used to or doing completely different things. It is in the best interest that every stakeholders within an organisation work unitedly to ensure that mixture overs are mana ged soundly. Effective agitate heed is gener onlyy described as execution of transform programmes or initiatives that touch the goals for which they were intended on time and within budget and also succeed in delivering sustainable bene dies to the organisation (ibid).However, major(ip) transforms within organisations require ample inputs in hurt of time, energy and resources. Over time it has been found that majority of transport programmes defend failed to meet the desired goals of the organisation. Published sources estimate that the success levels of motley in organisations whitethorn fall as low as 10% (Oakland and Tanner, 2007). near alterations that occur within organisations tend to be intermittent in nature. They unremarkably start off at a particular point and are then followed by a tally of steps that result in a final outcome. Every growing organisation consumes a continuous process of evolution. At certain intervals of this growth cycle, organisations devot e to evaluate, determine or rejuvenate their standards and processes. This evolution could at sometimes be a lithesome change or at other times a major overhaul. Where at that place is a change do in one prospect of the organisation, this usually triggers a chain of events that requires further changes t o be do to other areas within the organisation in order to achieve a immature balance (Pandey, 2012).Following the eonian evolution and the successive changes that occur within organisations, effort has to be put in to rein cite and create a new-made balance to continue working towards the goals and objectives of the business. This new balance is created primarily by the workforce and is not an easy feat. in that locationfore, it is native that an effective and reliable change management strategy is employed (Gans, 2011).As defined by Gans (2011) Change Management is a process whereby organisations aver members of their workforce that gestate been affected by one way o r other as a result of an organizational change. She went further to var. the importance of accounting for any member of staff affected by the change in the development of a change management strategy. disrespect the importance of change management in the business world like a shot and as highlighted previously, Balogun and Hope Hailey (2004) relieve oneself reported that of all change programmes that have been initiated, there has been a 70% rate of failure. Burnes (2004) suggested that this poor success rate of change management programmes shows a basic absence of an adequate theoretical account of how to impart out and manage changes in organisations. He went further to put in that what is currently available to academics and practitioners is a wide range of contradictory and puzzling theories and burn downes.2.0 EXISTING APPROACHES TO miscellany MANAGEMENTThere are a subroutine of authentic approaches to organizational change and there is continued debate as to which qualifies as the best. This difference in opinion amongst academics and practitioners is the reason that many managers within organisations may have reservations on the importance and validity of existing literature on change management. It is also a reason for confusion as to which approach to employ when considering change (Bamford and Forrester, 2003).These reservations are further fuelled by the existing critical management literature that highlights numerous incidents of change programmes that have at peace(p) wrong. Based on the literature, amongst a few others, there are two main approaches to change emerging and intend (ibid).In this article, we would be feeling into the two main approaches to change, highlighting their weakness and strengths, by critically analysing the already existing literature on the topic.2.1 PLANNED CHANGEThis approach to organisational change is described as a process that moves from one set state to another through a succession of pre arran ged steps. This approach to change sack be analysed using various frameworks, such as the Lewins (1951) work research model and Lewins (1958) three step model which describes the three stages of change as freezing- holding on to the familiar, unfreezing brainstorming, addressing issues and exploring other approaches and refreezing identifying, applying and consolidating values, culture and newly acquired skills to those pre existing and currently desired. This approach to change acknowledges that prior to new characteristics successfully select the previous set need to be eliminated, only then faeces the new set be fully naturalised (Bamford and Forrester, 2003).2.1a STRENGTHS OF PLANNED CHANGEBurnes (1996 as cited in Eldrod II and Tippet, 2002) identifies planned approach to organisational change as an attempt in explaining the process that initiates change. The planned approach is also ruling to highlight the importance to organisations of fully comprehending the differe nt stages that are involved in the process of going from and unsatis accompanimentory state to an unknown desired new state (Eldrod II and Tippett, 2002).Planned change is also credited for considering changes that may not be in direct line with the organisations general transformational wad but are seen to be worth making. It is in tune with the organisational sectionalisation structure and by virtue of its nature being perceived to be a logical program by stakeholders, providing organisations with a pastiche of choices of initiatives. Because it is made up of a clear and solid directive, it tends to be easier to circulate to all areas of the organisation. Although this solid directive may in some cases work as a disadvantage as it may make it easier to attack and/or avoid (Weick, 2000 Beer and Nohria, 2000).2.1b WEAKNESSES OF PLANNED CHANGEPlanned change has received a lot of criticism from as early on as the mid-eighties despite its popularity, (Kanter et al., 1992 Burnes, 19 96 By, 2005). It has been faulted for focusing on only small scale incremental change and ignores cases where there may be a need for chop-chop and transformational changes (Burnes, 1996, 2004).Another shortcoming of this approach is the fact that it bases its design on the self-reliance that organisations operate under conditions that are static and they can move in a pre planned pattern from one stable state to another (Bamford and Forrester, 2003). This approach is also known to ignore situations where a much driven approach is needed e.g. in a situation where there is a need for rapid change and no room for wide airing point of reference or involvement (Burnes, 1996, 2004 Kanter et al., 1992 By, 2005). Critics have also argued that this approach is based on the assumption that all the stakeholders involved in the change have a combined interest in carrying it out and that a uniform consensus can be reached with ease (Bamford and Forrester, 2003). This presumption does no t take into consideration issues of government and conflicts that are common place within organisations, but goes further to produce that these can be identified with ease (Burnes, 1996, 2004).Weick (2000 Beer and Nohria, 2000), also highlighted a make sense of disadvantages of applying the planned change approach. He states that with execution of the planned change approach, there is a high chance of reversal of the effected change, following the changes consolidation of the various parts of the organisation may not take place in a uniform manner, unpredictable results due to limited foresight, a high chance of one-on-ones failing to act out their parts in the change process despite verbally agreeing to do so, adoption of practices that may have been fit elsewhere but may not ineluctably yield positive results within the organisation due to a difference in context, failure of top management to have a full judgment of capabilities at the front line and contingencies and fin ally a keep in execution which would result in the change initiatives being old even before they are implemented.2.2 emerging CHANGEThis approach to change is relatively new and does not have the formal history of planned change. It is believed that this approach covers a wider area of understanding of the issues faced by organisations link up to managing change within intricate surrounds. In this approach, change is perceived to be less reliant on detailed forecasts and plans and is more focused on arriving at an actual understanding of the intricacies of the underlying problems and deriving possible solutions (Bamford and Forrester, 2003). There is also the suggestion that the occurrence of change here is unpredictable that senior(a) managers are unable to effectively select, propose and carry out sufficient actions in response (Kanter et al., 1992).The emergent approach to organizational change adopts a bottom up process of initiating and implementation as opposed to a to p down. Considering the complex and rapid nature of change, it is deemed impossible for senior management to identify and implement every action necessary to successfully carry out changes. This implies that the role played by senior management must(prenominal) undergo some changes in itself from controller to more of a facilitator of change, as the responsibility for change is seen to be more devolved (Bamford and Forrester, 2003).2.2a STRENGTHS OF EMERGENT CHANGEIt has been established that the business surroundings is one of uncertainty and the proponents of emergent change have argued that this uncertainty of both the internal and external environments makes the planned approach to change less appropriate. Assuming that organizations operated is an environment that is stable and predictable there would be little or no need for change. This makes the emergent approach to change much more pertinent than the planned approach (Bamford and Forrester, 2003).Burnes (1996) is of the opinion that emergent change encourages management to pay close attention and gain understanding of strategy, culture, systems, structure and style, looking into how they can work as blockages or facilitators of an effective change process. He goes further to argue that a successful change process is more concerned with gaining an understanding of the complex issues within the organisation and developing a range of options for tackling these issues. It can then be deduced that the emergent change is focused more on the preparation for change and actual implementation as opposed to providing planned steps and objectives for each change programme or initiative (By, 2005).Weick (2000 Beer and Nohria, 2000), insists that change must be more emergent than planned. He is of the opinion that organisations are in a constant state of evolution and there are always change initiatives current on various levels within the organisation. Main stakeholders are always in search of ideas to increas e the performance of the organisation and this means that there is a constant flux. It is meaning(a) that this flux is identified and maximised. Efforts should be made in identifying these little changes occurring in different areas of the organization and they should then be spread to other areas of the organisation. There are no rules that govern the way change is initiated it simply involves creating a connection between the actions carried out by the individual areas within the business to create a working synergy (Pettigrew and Whipp, 1993).2.2b WEAKNESSES OF EMERGENT CHANGEWeick (2000 Beer and Nohria, 2000), in his critical analysis also highlighted a number of weaknesses of the emergent approach to change. He noted that emergent changes are as well slow to come together, tend to be too negligible to have a noticeable effect on results, are more suited for taking advantages of opportunities than responding to threats, crippled by already existing culture and technology, defi cient when competitors are focused on transformation more generic quite than focused lack foresight operates on the assumption that change is driven by intent, which in reality is not always that case and this implies that situations where change is evolutionary or is driven by life cycle would be over looked (Van de Ven and Pool 1995 Weick, 2000 Beer and Nohria, 2000) .One of the main challenges of the emergent change is the fact that is quite new compared to the planned approach and this has led to reservations concerning its consistency and the variety of techniques available (Bamford and Forrester, 2003 Wilson, 1992). Another criticism of the emergent approach is that it is generally made up of models and approaches that lack correlation and only tend to do so in their unified lack of faith for the planned approach to change than to and agreed alternative (Bamford and Forrester, 2003 Dawson, 1994).According to Burnes (1996), to validate the general theory and implementation of the emergent approach to change implies that one has to be of the opinion that all organisation function within a volatile and unpredictable environment to which they continuously have to adapt. This would then bring rise to the assumption that the emergent model is suitable for all organizations, all situations and at all times (ibid). In reality this is clear not the case.Dunphy and Stace (1993) disagreed on that view list that agents of change require a model that is adaptable to different situations and distinctly shows how one can adjust their change strategies to achieve the best fit for a particular situation taking into consideration the changing environment (Dunphy and Stace, 1993).3.0 CONCLUSIONFollowing a review of the existing literature on planned and emeregent approaches to change, it can be concluded that both approaches have uninfected shares of limitations and advantage. Generally, there seems to be more of a preference for the emergent change approach and thi s could be because this approach was more recently introduced in coincidence to the planned approach and it its design, consideration was taken to address some of the shortcomings that were experience with the planned approach.However, in order to achieve a successful organisational change, it is important that an approach be developed that not only takes into consideration the constantly evolving environment, but also identifies that there are a number of approaches to change. This approach should be flexible to suit the different needs of various organisations as opposed to one that is tailored to be applicable to all organisations. Dunphy and Stace, (1993) clearly state that no two organisations are identical and most credibly have varying situations and this would mean that their structure and strategies would also be different and this emphasis the need for a flexible approach to change.