Organizational change is difficult and challenging. However, once the change has been made and it is successful, there is one last step that is needed, which is institutionalizing the change. According to Fernandez and Rainey (2006), this is where employees learn and establish new behaviors and leaders institutionalize them so that new patterns of behavior become the norm. This has also been referred to by Cummings and Worley (2009) as refreezing from Lewin’s three stage change model where refreezing is to make the new practice routine. Therefore, institutionalization is an important part of any change program to maintain longer term success. An example of an organization that has institutionalized structural change within their organization is Hewlett-Packard. Institutionalization Framework According to Cummings and Worley (2009) there is an institutionalization framework that will affect an organization success in change programs. First there are the organizations characteristics and the intervention characteristics. These two factors then influence the institutionalization process which can be measured by the indicators of institutionalization (Cummings & Worley, 2009). Organizational Characteristics There are three main characteristics that include congruence, stability of environment and technology and unionization (Cummings & Worley, 2009). Unionization was not an issue for Hewlett-Packard, but congruence and stability were. Congruence is how well the intervention is believed to be aligned with the organization’s managerial structure and culture (Cummings &Worley, 2009). This was an issue for Hewlett-Packard when they changed from 50 autonomous product divisions that were decentralized to a centralized com... ... middle of paper ... ...argest IT company in the world with a revenue totaling $126 billion for fiscal 2010 and was ranked number eleven in the fortune 500 in 2010 (Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.). IN addition, Hewlett-Packard is one of the few organizations that have successfully initiated a dozen change programs since they were founded in 1939. Therefore, they are a great example of how culture and reward systems fit into the institutionalization frame work and success of intervention (Cummings & Worely, 2009). Accordingly, it is important to not only understand the institutionalization framework, but also the organization’s culture and how it will affect an intervention. In Hewlett-Packard’s case, they have a very strong culture of individualism and teamwork that had to be considered when initiating new interventions so that they would be accepted and institutionalized.
Leading Change was named the top management book of the year by Management General. There are three major sections in this book. The first section is ¡§the change of problem and its solution¡¨ ; which discusses why firms fail. The second one is ¡§the eight-stage process¡¨ that deals with methods of performing changes. Lastly, ¡§implications for the twenty-first century¡¨ is discussed as the conclusion. The eight stages of process are as followed: (1) Establishing a sense of urgency. (2) Creating the guiding coalition. (3) Developing a vision and a strategy. (4) Communicating the change of vision. (5) Empowering employees for broad-based action. (6) Generating short-term wins. (7) Consolidating gains and producing more changes. (8) Anchoring new approaches in the culture.
Institutionalize Change in Organisational Culture – One important question is when does the process end. The successful culmination of change process is when the objectives of that process become a part of the daily organisational culture. When the next generation of management takes over, the objectives should be a part of the whole organisation and not just a single process or department.
Sanders, E. J., & Cooke, R. A. (2005). Financial Returns from Organizational Culture Improvement: Translating Soft Changes into Hard Dollars. Human Synergistics/Center for Applied Research, Inc. Arlington Heights IL USA
Change is the only constant in life. And therefore it should be understood as part of a continuing work in progress that calls for a much broader canvas that seeks out competing voices, and works with the resulting ambiguities, contradictions and tensions of messy reality (Graetz, F. & Smith, A., 2010). In this submission I try to show that organizational change is majorly based on the environment surrounding it much more than the desire of the members or change agents working in that organization. This view diverts from that of Lippitt, (1958) who suggests that implementing planned organizational changes successfully depends on premeditated interventions intended to modify the functioning of an organization. It also diverts from the traditional approaches to organizational change that generally follow a linear, rational model in which the focus is on controllability under the stewardship of a strong leader or ‘guiding coalition (Collis, 1998). In this discussion therefore, comparison made between the different philosophies of change and I try to show that successful change implantation largely depends on an organizations appreciation of what goes on around it rather than what they have planned as a strategic direction.
Organizational changes are constant in both the public and private sector. Some changes are small and easily managed and others are large scale vision changes. With organization-wide changes, such as a redirection in the organizations vision, strong creative leaders are needed to ensure the vision is sold to the employees and that the change is implemented smoothly. The Virginia Department of Corrections (VADOC) has recently changed visions to strengthen the way we create long term public safety. This change in mission and vision statements was a smooth process but has not been implemented without its share of issues.
In today’s ever changing world people must adapt to change. If an organization wants to be successful or remain successful they must embrace change. This book helps us identify why people succeed and or fail at large scale change. A lot of companies have a problem with integrating change, The Heart of Change, outlines ways a company can integrate change. The text book Ivanceich’s Organizational Behavior and Kotter and Cohen’s The Heart of Change outlines how change can be a good thing within an organization. The Heart of Change introduces its readers to eight steps the authors feel are important in introducing a large scale organizational change. Today’s organizations have to deal with leadership change, change in the economy,
Kotter, JP 1995, Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. In Harvard Business Review on Change, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
One of the change models of Organizational Development was created by Kurt Lewin. It includes three phases: unfreeze, move or change, and refreeze (Lewin, 1951, 1958). Lewin’s model recognizes the impormance of changing the people in organization and the role of top management involvement to overcome the resistance of change.
Chapter sixteen in our textbook highlights the benefits of organizational culture and what it can do for any company with a strong culture perspective. In fact chapter sixteen-three(a) speaks widely on how a strong culture perspective shapes any organization up well enough to perform better than any of its competitors who do not balance any organizational culture. If not mistaken after viewing SAS institute case they are well on track with facilitating a high performance organization culture. First, SAS institute motivate all employees to become goal alignment in their field of work. This is where they all share the common goal to get their work done. In one of the excerpts taken away from this case, an employee- friendly benefits summary expresses the statement “If you treat employees as if they make a difference to the company, they will make a difference to the company.” “SAS Institute’s founders set out to create the kind of workplace where employees would enjoy spending time. And even though the workforce continues to grow year after year, it’s still the kind of place where people enjoy working.” Clearly highlighted from this statement that SAS Institute is mainly ran off of a fit perspective. Which argues that a culture is only as good as it fits the industry. Allowing a good blueprint or set up will
The organizational culture of the automotive industry is one that underwent a drastic decline between 2008 and 2009 (Goolsbee & Krueger 2015). However, within a few years the Chrysler organization made enhancing adjustments for the better. The catalyst for the transformation from negative to positive within Chrysler organization was Sergio Marchionne, who took radical measures to realign the organizational culture (Kreitner & Kinicki 2013). Through carefully adjusting the espoused value of the company and guaranteeing that they matched the enacted values he was able to generate a high Person-environment fit (PE fit) that guided the company out of bankruptcy. By using attentive deliberation of the Chrysler culture we can learn about the
Pascale, Richard and Linda Gioja. “Changing the Way we Change.'; Harvard Business Review, Vol. 75, No. 6, Nov-Dec 1997, p. 126.
In my discussion, the main types of organizational strategies and structures will be listed and how they have impacted on Unilever’s improved performance and growth in recent years.
The change process within any organization can prove to be difficult and very stressful, not only for the employees but also for the management team. Hayes (2014), highlights seven core activities that must take place in order for change to be effective: recognizing the need for change, diagnosing the change and formulating a future state, planning the desired change, implementing the strategies, sustaining the implemented change, managing all those involved and learning from the change. Individually, these steps are comprised of key actions and decisions that must be properly addressed in order to move on to the next step. This paper is going to examine how change managers manage the implementation of change and strategies used
One of the first scholars to describe the process of organizational change was Lewin (1974). He described change as a three-stage process that consists of unfreezing, moving and freezing stage. During the unfreezing stage the organizations become motivated to change by some event or objective. The moving stage is like implementation when the organization actually makes the necessary change. Furthermore the freezing stage is reached when the change becomes permanent. Organizational change has also...
The world is constantly changing in many different ways. Whether it is technological or cultural change is present and inevitable. Organizations are not exempt from change. As a matter of fact, organizations have to change with the world and society in order to be successful. Organizations have to constantly incorporate change in order to have a competitive advantage and satisfy their customers. Organizations use change in order to learn and grow. However, change is not something that can happen in an organization overnight. It has to be thought through and planned. The General Model of Planned Change focuses on what processes are used by the organization to implement change. In the General Model of Planned Change, four steps are used in order to complete the process of change. Entering and Contracting, Diagnosing, Planning and Implementing, and Evaluating and Institutionalizing are the four steps used in order to complete the process of change in an organization. The diagnostic process is one of the most important activities in OD(Cummings, 2009, p. 30).