Process for change - CM 5
Download as DOCX, PDF1 like329 views
The consultant is working with a market research company to restructure their operations. They encountered issues defining the context and content of the changes initially. Upon further review of Van de Ven and Poole (1995), the consultant determined that using a life cycle approach would allow for multiple change plans to address different workload scenarios. The consultant views their role as a complex adaptive system influencer per Dooley (1997), helping the organization adapt to environmental changes like fluctuating client workloads. They will take a project manager approach as an outside consultant change agent per Caldwell (2003) and Weick and Quinn (1999).
Process for change - CM 5
- 1. © SMART Leadership Consulting a SMART way of doing business May 28, 2014 Daryl Horney SMART Leadership Consulting Use Van de Van and Poole (1995) to separate the content, context, and process of your change. What problems did you encounter when attempting to do this? Creating my process for change was the simplest of matters. However, I did have issues formalizing the context. I presumed the context describes the setting or environment in which the changes will be made and I presumed the content is the change itself. Upon further reading of Van de Van and Poole (1995), I have rethought my approach to the process I will undertake. At first, I felt that I had to choose one of the four basic theories. I was leaning towards the teleological theory as it best represented my actions of strategic planning and vision, but the fact that as the motor of change I am limited and bound by environmental constraints. The constraints in the environment are the issues of insecurity in the amount of work available. If the workload drops, then I will have to return and make additional changes. However, if I follow the life-cycle theory it can offer a more secure process by assuming the change I implement will come to an end therefore multiple plans will have to be developed to deal with this issue. I can make 3 or 4 variations of changes that could be implemented to the, what if scenario’s. For example, what if incoming work availability drops below the 80% threshold? Then, implement plan A. What if incoming work availability drops below the 60% threshold? Then, implement plan B and so forth. Dooley (1995) pointedly admits, “the selection process in the evolutionary model can be used to account for termination in the life cycle; the
- 2. implementation step in the teleological cycle can trigger the start-up event in the life cycle and the antithesis in the dialectic.” With this in mind, I can be the motor in the life cycle design of the change. Which conceptualization of change is most relevant to your situation (Van de Ven and Poole (1995), Weick and Quinn (1999), or Gioia and Chittipeddi (1991) )? Why is this conceptualization ideal? The conceptualization of change from Weick and Quinn (1999) best suits my situation. I have been asked as a consultant to reshape, redefine, and restructure a market research company’s marketplaces in order to get maximum output with lower costs and the better quality. The consultancy model best represents episodic change. As Weick and Quinn, state episodic change is “relevant when it is necessary to create change.” One of the five assumptions (Marchak, 1993 cited in Weick and Quinn 1999) is the separateness assumption. The separateness assumption is understood by providing an outside influence. Consultant change agents accomplish this outside influence in organizations. Revisit the rich picture of your organization that you created in module 1 and use the information provided to select a model of change from the above articles that you can use as a baseline to create a tentative diagram/map of your planned change process. As I mentioned above I will use the life cycle and the teleological process to represent my planned changes. Below is a diagram I am using to map my process of change. I am at the center directing the changes. Project Manager (Me) Implement Observe Configure and Adjust Record Outcome and Sustain
- 3. Use Caldwell (2003) to figure out which form of agency you have in this change. How does this impact the approach that you will take towards the change? The form of agency that I have chosen is the consultant model. As Caldwell (2003) mentions the job of the consultant as a change agent is to provide expertise and solutions. By providing these tools, the consultant takes on the role of project manager. My role is to not only offer my expertise and provide solutions, but to make sure that my recommendations are implemented and carried out to the decree in which they were created. I have to make sure managers are receiving their training, change is enacted simultaneously in 22 markets and I have to be there in case of any fallout. My role is very laborious and complex. I have to be fully dedicated to my role and responsibilities and ready to make changes in the road map. As I was the former director of the company and I began my career there as a manger I would often put myself in a managers shoes, so to speak while making decisions that would impact an employees career. However, I will not use the same approach. I have decided to remain unbiased in my recommendations and only provide what has been requested. I chose to do this, as I believe the outcome of my recommendations would favor the supervisors and managers and not the company as a whole. Use Dooley (1997) to relate the organizational change to complex adaptive systems. As a complex adaptive system, how can you influence the organizational outcome of the change? Dooley (1997) describes system theory as a mechanism that can help an organization attain its goals. He further illustrates that an outside force is able to impact an organization. In my view, as a consultant I am the outside influencer that will have an impact on the organization through my planned changes. Dooley also recognizes that contingency theory an organization is shaped from its surrounding environment. The market research company that I am representing is also influenced and shaped by it surrounding environment. The primary reason I am involved is because of the fluctuation of incoming work. The company is reliant on their clients and if their clients do not have enough work for the company then the company has to change its structure in order to adapt.
- 4. Reference Caldwell, R. (2003) ‘Models of change agency: A fourfold classification’, British Journal of Management, 14 (2), pp.131–142. Available from: http://sfxhosted.exlibrisgroup.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/lpu?title=British+Journal+of+M anagement&volume=14&issue=2&spage=131&date=2003 Dooley K.J. (1997) ‘A complex adaptive systems model of organizational change’, Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Science, 1 (1), pp.69–97. Available from:http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ecn&AN=0 582857&site=eds-live Van de Ven, A.H. & M.S. Poole (1995) ‘Explaining development and change in organizations’, Academy of Management Review, 20 (3), pp.510–540. Available from: http://sfxhosted.exlibrisgroup.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/lpu?title=Academy+of+Management+ Review&volume=20&issue=3&spage=510&date=1995 Weick, K.E., & Quinn, R.E. (1999) ‘Organizational change and development’, Annual Review of Psychology, 50, pp.361–386. Available from: http://sfxhosted.exlibrisgroup.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/lpu?title=Annual+Review+of+P sychology&volume=50&issue=&spage=361&date=1999