I appreciated the Stakeholder identification and Salience Theory article most of all. Too often our definition of stakeholder is either too broad or narrow to fit in our analysis for change. The broad definition of stake or stakeholders limits an analysts scope to the individual or group who can and are affected by the achievement of an organization (Mitchell, Agle, Wood, 1997). However, on the narrow side of the definition, a stakeholder analyst can “pigeon hole” their scope to those who are voluntary, those who have invested some form of capital, or involuntary, those who are placed at risk by the organizations activities (Mitchell, Agel, Wood, 1997). Yet, this analysis only scratches the surface of stakeholder identification. This information is enlightening to me as this aids in identifying change agents, champions, and those who would on the guiding coalition or core change team, depending on which change model one uses. Kotter (2007) states that 15 to 50 individual are needed in to for successful transformation to see fruition. This could be a daunting number and without some form of analysis, the selected individuals may not provide a strength enough team for successful transformation. Through the application of Stakeholder Salience Theory, that 15 to 50 individuals across the organization becomes a lot easily to identify in terms of their stake to change. In addition, if Stakeholder Salience Theory were coupled with Kotter’s Eight Step Model, establishing a sense of urgency those who are definitive, dependent, dominate, or dangerous stakeholders will be self-identified in the process (Mitchell, Agel, Wood, 1997).
I reviewed the “Transformation Efforts Fail” article from Kotter when I initially posted about his Eight Ste...
... middle of paper ...
...lp but think about Tony Stewart and his encounters with David Duke, specially how Tony used the walk to raise money against Duke’s movement. Thought verbal jujitsu and disruptive self-expression are easy concepts to read, the application is much harder to practice.
These are just three of the articles that resonated me with. Overall, all eight articles provided me with different levels of insight into the beginning stage of change or why there is a need for change when things are good. I remember Michael states that one of his organizations values is Urgency. Urgency not in terms of getting products or people moving fast, but being able to identify the need for change and doing so quickly. “If we need to make a change, let’s do it now rather than later”, is what I believe Michael said at one point. Hemp and Stewart (2004) would strongly agree with that view point.
Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. A. (2008). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review, 86(7/8), 130-139.
A stakeholder is anyone whether involved or not involved that is interested in an outcome to a situation (Editorial Board, 2015).
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.
Within my organization there are many different stakeholders. It is crucial to first understand what a stakeholder means. A stakeholder is a person who has something to gain or lose through the outcome of planning process. Within healthcare there are three types of stakeholders, those who receive health care, those who give health care, and those who manage the financial aspects of health care. Health care organizations do not face just one or a few stakeholders they hold many. Healthcare executives must learn to manage a portfolio of stakeholder relationships.
Bundy, J., Shropshire, C., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2013). Strategic Cognition and Issue Salience: Toward an Explanation of Firm Responsiveness to Stakeholder Concerns. Academy Of Management Review, 38(3), 352-376. doi:10.5465/amr.2011.0179
An official approach for managing change that starts with the leadership team and then engages key stakeholders and leaders should be developed near the beginning, and modified frequently as change moves through the organization. Since change is intrinsically unsettling for people at all levels, when it is on the horizon, all eyes will turn to the CEO and the leadership team for strength, support, and direction. The leaders themselves must accept the new approach...
Conceptually, the three theories Stakeholders Theory, System Theories and Functionalist Theory of Attitudes, have a significant function that is directly relating to this study. Stakeholders Theory emphasized the need for the effort to identify the public and consider those publics need. Similarly, Systems theory also relates to the study in a sense that the theory emphasizes on the relationship and the structure of the organizations.
Hence, the stakeholders which are described as those who are affected by the organisation performance ,actions and duties and those actions includes employees, clients, local community and investors as well. The theory of stakeholders also suggests that it is the responsibility of firm to make sure no rights of stakeholders are dishonoured and make decisions in the interest of stakeholders which is also the purpose of stakeholder theory to make more profit and balancing it while considering its stakeholders (Freeman 2008 pp. 162-165). In the other words organisation must also operates in a more socially accountable approach by carrying out corporate social responsibility as (CSR) activities.
The concept of stakeholder capitalism has been misconstrued over the years because of misunderstandings about the “moral foundations” and fundamentals of stakeholder capitalism. The common ideal of capitalism is that business is an essential part of society rather than a separate entity. The primal question is if the responsibility of the business is to that to the stakeholders or shareholders. However, the goal of the company is actually to be profitable while maintaining a balance between shareholders and stockholders. The reading further goes on to illustrate the four principles of stakeholder capitalism: stakeholder co-operation, complexity, continuous creation, and emergent competition. The model behind stakeholder capitalism is that it aids the business in becoming an institution with morals and values; it goes beyond just earning profit. The central argument is that business and ethics must coincide with each other for a business to fully progress.
Evan, W. M., & Freeman, R. E. (1988). A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian
Graetz, F., & Smith, A. C. T. (June 2010). Managing organizational change: A philosophies of change approach. Journal of Change Management 10(2), 135–154.
Stakeholders’ analysis is the analysis which tells that how the company is dealing with the people which are directly or indirectly related with the company’s operations. These are called stakeholder and they include the employee, society, suppliers, buyers, shareholders, got and other tax related companies.
Middlebrook, B., Caruth, D., & Frank, R. (1984, Summer 85). Overcoming Resistance to Change. Management Journal, 50(3), pp. 23.
The above model helps to analyze whether or not Attero Recycling Private Limited should move forward with entering into a city to which the concept of e-waste management is completely new. Having a vast experience in the other cities of the country, this change certainly aids as a prospect for them.
Stakeholders are those groups or individual in society that have a direct interest in the performance and activities of business. The main stakeholders are employees, shareholders, customers, suppliers, financiers and the local community. Stakeholders may not hold any formal authority over the organization, but theorists such as Professor Charles Handy believe that a firm’s best long-term interests are served by paying close attention to the needs of each of these stakeholders. The modern view is that a firm has responsibilities to all its stakeholders i.e. everyone with a legitimate interest in the company. These include shareholders, competitors, government, employees, directors, distributors, customers, sub-contractors, pressure groups and local community. Although a company’s directors owes a legal duty to the shareholders, they also have moral responsibilities to other stakeholder group’s objectives in their entirely. As a firm can’t meet all stakeholders’ objectives in their entirety, they have to compromise. A company should try to serve the needs of these groups or individuals, but whilst some needs are common, other needs conflict. By the development of this second runway, the public and stakeholders are affected in one or other way and it can be positive and negative.