Organizational Change and Development

Chapter 12

12. 1

O
RGANIZATIONAL

C
HANGE AND

D
EVELOPMENT
Introduction
Change is a constant, a thread woven into the fabric of our personal and professional lives. Change occurs within our world and beyond -- in national and international events, in the physical environment, in the way organizations are structured and conduct their business, in political and socioeconomic problems and solutions, and in societal norms and values. As the world becomes more complex and increasingly interrelated, changes seemingly far away affect us. Thus, change may sometimes appear to occur frequently and randomly. We are slowly becoming aware of how connected we are to one another and to our world. Organizations must also be cognizant of their holistic nature and of the ways their members affect one another. The incredible amount of change has forced individuals and organizations to see the big picture and to be aware of how events affect them and vice versa. Organizational development (OD) is a field of study that addresses change and how it affects organizations and the individuals within those organizations. Effective organizational development can

assist organizations and individuals to cope with change. Strategies can be developed to introduce planned change, such as team-building efforts, to improve organizational functioning. While change is a given, there are a number of ways to deal with change -- some useful, some not. Organizational development assists organizations in coping with the turbulent environment, both internally and externally, frequently doing so by introducing planned change efforts. Organizational development is a relatively new area of interest for business and the professions. While the professional development of individuals has been accepted and fostered by a number of organizations for some time, there is still ambiguity surrounding the term organizational development. The basic concept of both professional development and organizational development is the same, however, with an essential difference in focus. Professional development attempts to improve an individuals effectiveness in practice, while organizational development focuses on ways to improve an organizations overall productivity, human fulfillment, and responsiveness to the environment (Cummings & Huse, 1988). These goals are accomplished through a variety of interventions aimed at dealing with specific issues, as well as through ongoing processes. This chapter provides an overview of both change and organizational development. Educators, including those in the judiciary, must be familiar with the dynamics of organizational change, since all educational activities, both at the individual and organizational level, deal with effecting change. Organizational development and change efforts go hand-in-hand; judicial educators who are interested
Chapter 12

A
DULT

E
DUCATION

P
ERSPECTIVES FOR

J
UDICIAL

E
DUCATION

12. 2 in effecting change within their organizations must first thoroughly understand the dynamics of change. They must think in terms of the court system and the judicial education apparatus as organizations for which they may play a role as change agent. Within different parts of these systems, judicial educators may play different roles in the change process. Organizational development will also be discussed in this chapter. One specific OD strategy,

team-building, will be examined in some depth. This strategy, if institutionalized effectively, can reduce the need for outside consultants. It is important to include a chapter on organizational change and development in this manual to address issues within the larger frameworks that exist for most judicial educators. Change affects every individual and every organization. Moreover, all of the components of the program planning sequence discussed in this manual are administered within the setting of an organization, a committee or board, or some type of team. As more and more work gets accomplished through teams, it becomes increasingly important to learn how to translate organizational concepts to the small group environment. The team approach is often being used to accomplish short-term projects, such as planning programs, conducting a needs assessment, or developing a new curriculum. A teams capacity to create a shared vision for the task at hand and work together in the midst of a turbulent environment underlies its ability to be effective. Organizational change and development is a fitting summary chapter for this judicial educators manual since it deals with both effecting change (underlying much of education) and managing change.

Change in Organizations
Organizational development efforts, whether facilitated by an outside expert or institutionalized and conducted on an ongoing basis, bring about planned change within organizations and teams. However, they are but one type of change that occurs in organizations, for change can be both planned and unplanned and can occur in every dimension of the universe. A change in chief justice, appropriations, or staff support can dramatically alter the character of a judicial education organization. Institutional alignment of the state bar, local law schools, area colleges and universities, and judicial professional associations may yield similar impacts. Planned change takes conscious and diligent effort on the part of the educator or manager. Kanter (1983) originated the concept of the change master : a person or organization adept at the art of anticipating the need for and of leading productive change. As a way to reinforce the judicial educators role in the change process, this term will be used to refer to educators and managers who are interested in effecting change in their organizations or work teams. Organizational Change and Development
Chapter 12

12. 3 Change will not occur unless the need for change is critical. Because individuals and organizations usually resist change, they typically do not embrace change unless they must. One OD consultant describes how pain drives change (Conner, 1990). Pain occurs when people pay the price for being in a dangerous situation or for missing a key opportunity. As such, change is needed to relieve the pain. According to this perspective, change will not occur just because its a good idea. It will only occur when the pain of an individual or an organization is sufficiently high to justify the difficulties of assimilating change. Therefore, a change master must focus on the absolute need of the organization to change, rather than simply on the benefits of the anticipated change. Effective change masters understand this, and they then assist others in recognizing that the organization has no choice but to change. The organization cannot afford to maintain the status quo; change is simply that critical. The Ohio Judicial Colleges movement to full funding emerged from such a catharsis. In other states, mandatory training saved the office of justice of the peace. Court administration emerged as an independent vocation out of exigent circumstances. These examples of change in state judicial education provide evidence that effective change masters have perceived a critical need for change and then helped to make that change happen.

Planning for Change

Before embarking on an organizational change initiative, it is wise to carefully plan strategies and anticipate potential problems. One useful method of planning comes from an early researcher on change, Kurt Lewin (1947), who developed the concept of force-field analysis . The term describes analysis that is deceptively simple and can be used to help plan and manage organizational change. Lewin believed that behavior within an organization was a result of the dynamic balance of two opposing forces. Change would only occur when the balance shifted between these forces. Driving forces are those forces which positively affect and enhance the desired change. They may be persons, trends, resources, or information. Opposing them are the restraining forces , which represent the obstacles to the desired change. As these two sets of forces exist within an organization, they create a certain equilibrium. That is, if the weights of the driving and restraining forces are relatively equal, then

the organization will remain static. As changes occur and affect the weight of either one of the forces, a new balance will occur, and the organization will return to what Lewin called quasi-stationary equilibrium. Individuals practicing their vocation in the context of a political organization may intuitively employ these concepts in defining and redefining what change is possible. Judicial educators operate in such a context.
Chapter 12

A
DULT

E
DUCATION

P
ERSPECTIVES FOR

J
UDICIAL

E
DUCATION

12. 4 What is the usefulness of this perspective? Force-field analysis assists in planning in two major ways: (a) as a way for individuals to scan their organizational context, brainstorming and predicting potential changes in the environment; and (b) as a tool for implementing change. In the former, forcefield analysis becomes a method of environmental scanning (which is useful in strategic planning), whereby organizations keep abreast of impending and potential changes -- from societal trends and potential budget constraints to staff turnover and purchases of new office equipment. The more change can be anticipated, the better individuals and organizations are prepared to deal with the resulting effects. The second use of force-field analysis is similar, offering a way to systematically examine the potential resources that can be brought to bear on organizational change and the restraining forces that can be anticipated. This advance planning and analysis assists in developing strategies to implement the desired change. An example may help illustrate this point. A judicial educator wishes to introduce a computer class for a particular group of judges. In her role as a change master, she identifies the driving forces as follows: (a) most judges are presently obtaining the necessary equipment, (b) software and databases are available that are user-friendly and appropriate, (c) computers can help judges handle information quickly and efficiently, and (d) the use of computers as information sources allows court personnel to

perform other functions. On the other hand, restraining forces may include the following: (a) judges have limited time for attending additional courses; (b) they appear to be intimidated by computers, so they passively resist using them; and (c) they feel more comfortable utilizing human resources for their judicial research rather than a computer and databases. Force-field analysis provides the necessary information for the judicial educator to plan most effectively for change. If he or she is more aware of some of the potential pitfalls that can accompany the planned change, steps can be taken in advance to overcome them. One strategy for successfully implementing change is to confront the potential obstacles at the outset. In order for the educator to be proactive, however, the positive driving forces and the negative restraining forces must be listed, so that a strategy for change can include enhancing or adding to the positive forces, while decreasing or minimizing the negative forces. In this process, skills such as coalition building, networking, conflict resolution, and the appropriate utilization of power are necessary. Organizational Change and Development
Chapter 12

12. 5

The Process of Change

A method such as force-field analysis is the beginning step of any planned change. There are many different models for the change process in the literature; the following is a simple, straightforward one proposed by Egan (1988, p. 5). He delineates three steps:

The assessment of the current scenario.

The creation of a preferred scenario.

Designing a plan that moves the system from the current to the preferred scenario. It is evident Egan has been influenced by Lewin, in the emphasis on both planning and assessment. Additionally, Egan argues that planning must lead to an action that produces valued outcomes or results for the organization. Thus, both planning and change must be directed toward a specific goal. Once the need for change has been determined, one follows the steps of the model in sequence. While these steps could each be examined in detail, only step three will be discussed in an indepth manner here. The first step, assessing the current scenario, can be accomplished through a mechanism such as force-field analysis. It provides the necessary information on the forces that can facilitate the

desired change and the forces that will resist and deter the change. Step two, creating a preferred scenario, is often accomplished through team effort in brainstorming and developing alternative futures. While the need that precipitates the change is clearly compelling, there may be several ways in which the change could actually occur within the organization. It is important to examine the various alternatives thoroughly. The third step of the process, devising a plan for moving from the current to the preferred scenario, includes the strategies and plans that educators and managers must develop to overcome the restraining forces in an organization. This is a political process, requiring individuals to harness and utilize power. Power is necessary for change to occur. It is neither inherently good nor bad; it simply assists individuals in accomplishing their goals. In his recent book Mastering the Politics of Planning , Benveniste (1989) notes that even well-thought-out plans for change can be derailed when the politics of implementation are not considered. Change masters must gather support for the desired change throughout the organization, using both formal and informal networks. The multiplier or bandwagon effect, he notes, is often necessary to rally enough support for the change.
Chapter 12

A
DULT

E
DUCATION

P
ERSPECTIVES FOR

J
UDICIAL

E
DUCATION

12. 6

Key Roles in the Change Process

During this stage of planning, it is useful to distinguish the different roles associated with the change process. These roles must remain distinctive in order to implement planned change effectively. However, within different settings or systems, a judicial educator may play more than one role. The various roles that individuals can play, as described by Conner (1990), are: Change Sponsor: Individual or group who legitimizes the change. Change Advocate:

Individual or group who wants to achieve a change but does not possess legitimization power. Change Agent: Individual or group who is responsible for implementing the change. Change Target: Individual or group who must actually change. One of the most critical tasks for the educator in implementing change is to harness the support of an effective change sponsor . The sponsor is in a position to legitimize the change. Sponsorship is critical to implementing the desired change. Directly or indirectly, pain can motivate the sponsor to foster the planned change. Within the state judicial system, this sponsor may be the chief justice, the head of the education committee, or the state court administrator. Conner (1990) argues that weak sponsors should be educated or replaced, even by someone at a lower level in the organization, or, he emphasizes, failure will be inevitable. Educators and managers are often in the position of change advocates , who perceive the need for change and desire and advocate the change, but who do not have the necessary organizational power to implement the change. Alternatively, these individuals may function as the change agent , with the responsibility (but again, not the power) to implement change. And, of course, in an organizational change effort, educators and managers may be part of the group affected by the change, or the change target . It is useful to consider each of these roles in planning strategies not only for implementation, but for gathering support for the change effort.

Strategies for Implementing Change

In order to move an OD effort from the idea stage into implementation, educators and managers must also rally the resources and support of the organization. Kanter (1983) describes how the following three sets of basic commodities or power tools can be acquired by members of an organization to gain power: Organizational Change and Development
Chapter 12

12. 7

Information (data, technical knowledge, political intelligence, expertise).

Resources (funds, materials, staff, time).

Support (endorsement, backing, approval, legitimacy). The first strategy in implementing a change would be to collect as many of these power tools as possible. As this occurs, individuals can plant seeds of support for the planned change. This is particularly important in helping others see the critical need for the planned change. It may be possible to plant these seeds before sponsorship of the change is sought so that the sponsor feels he or she is proactively responding to a critical need. Another strategy is to package the change in a way that makes it less threatening and, therefore, easier to sell. For instance, it is easier to implement change of a product or a project when it is: (a) conducted on a trial basis; (b) reversible, if it doesnt succeed; (c) done in small steps; (d) familiar and consistent with past experience; (e) a fit with the organizations current direction; or (f) built on the prior commitments or projects of the organization (Kanter, 1983). This packaging should be completed prior to submitting the OD effort to the designated change sponsor, although that person needs to be involved in further assisting in the packaging and selling of the planned change. Building coalitions is a strategy that often occurs throughout the entire phase of implementing the change. Support must be gathered from all areas which will be affected by the desired change, across different levels of the organization. It is always advisable to get the support of an immediate supervisor early on, although this may not always be possible. In such instances, other support could be gathered across the organization to influence the supervisor to reconsider lending support to the change efforts. Effective change masters use their informal networks and deal with any concerns or questions of supporters individually rather than in formal meetings. Pre-meetings can provide a safer environment for airing concerns about implementing change. In such settings, an individual may have the opportunity to trade some of the power tools that he or she has acquired in order to generate support.

Additionally, some individuals will support a project or change effort for reasons that are fairly reactive: If so-and-so supports it, then I will, too," or If such-and-such state is moving in that direction, then we should, too. Obviously, the more change masters know about how particular individuals may react, the better able they are to plan for ways to garner support.

T&D 113
100 02 16

1 13
1

Organizational Change and Development

Jeaw-Mei Chen

Mein-Woei Suen

Mei- Jong Lin

Fu-An Shieh

Abstract Organizational change is an important i ssue in organizations. It is actually a process in which an organization optimi zes performance as it works toward its ideal state. Organizational change occu rs as a reaction to an ever-changing environment, a response to a current crisis situation, or is triggered by a leader. Successful organizational change is not me rely a process of adjustment, but also requires sufficient managing capabilities. Ho wever, there are many topics to be considered to achieve successful change. He nce, this paper discusses the causes of organizational change, its elements, appro aches, process, resistance, management, and finally the possible factors leading to its breakdown. Keywords: organizational change, orga nizational development, causes of organizational change, processes of organizational change, resistance & management of organizational change

Member of Examination Yuan, R.O.C

 Professor, Department of Psychology, National Chengchi University, R.O.C.

Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Chung Shan Medical University, R. O. C. & Research Consultant, Department of Medical Education, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, R. O. C.

Associate Professor, Department of Applied English, JinWen University of Science & Technology, R. O. C.

Graduate Student, University of La Verne, U.S.A.

T&D 113
100 02 16 2 13
2

Based on a five year survey conducte d by the world-renowned McKinsey consulting firm (Isern, & Pung, 2007), ou t of the 1536 companies that underwent organizational change, only 38% of the company managers claimed that the process succeeded in increasing work performance. Regarding long term health goals (such as increasing ability, better customer relations, supplier relations, positive work culture), only 30% of th e managers associated these with organization change. Hence, the goals of organizational change are rather multi-faceted. The most common goal stated

by over 50% of the interviewees is minimizing costs. Other goals include bettering the firm, mergence, crisis intervention, or overcomi ng competition. Seemingly, successful organizational change is not merely a process of ad justment, but also requires sufficient managing capabilities. The following discussion attempts to understand the causes of organizational change and its elements, approaches, pr ocess, resistance and management, and finally the possible factors leading to its breakdown. Why does an organization need organizational change? What is organizational change? It is a process in which an organization optimizes performance as it works toward becoming its ideal state. Why does an organization need organizational ch ange (Jones, 2004)? From a passive perspective, organizational change occu rs as a reaction to an ever-changing environment or as a response to a current crisis situation. On the other hand, a more proactive viewpoint is that it is triggered by a progr essive manager. Furthermore, organizational change is es pecially evident when the organization

T&D 113
100 02 16

 3 13
3

has just undergone a transfer of ex ecutive power (Haveman, Russo & Meyer, 2001). Van de Ven and Poole (1995) proposed th at the causes of organization change can be explained by one of the following theories: teleological theory, life-cycle theory, and dialectical theory. The te leological perspective believes that organizational change is an attempt to ach ieve an ideal state through a continuous process of goal-setting, execution, evaluation, and restructuring. Life-cycle theory claims that the organization is an entity that depending on the external environment, cycles through stages of bi rth, growth, maturati on, and declination. Dialectical theory hypothesizes that the organization is like a multi-cultural society with opposing values. When one particul ar force dominates over others, a new organizational value and goal is establishe d, resulting in organizational change. The targets of organizational change The influential factors of organiza tional effectiveness are widespread, including factors that are related to exte rnal environmental changes, and factors which will improve the internal managerial effectiveness. The organization must

consider the reasons for change, the ex ternal environment, and the internal situation to decide which factors to change. The most common known ta rgets of organizational change include vision, strategy, culture, structure, system, pr oduction technology, and leadership style (Yang, Zhuo, & Yu, 2009). Vision includes a firms organizational co re value but one that also adapts accordingly to the external environment. When an organizati on undergoes change,

T&D 113
100 02 16 4 13
4

its core value needs to be determined so that in the process of transformation, it can be preserved. Strategy refers to the organization s long term goals and the steps and resources needed to be considered in its decision-making. The strategy change can be divided into the enterprise strategy ch ange (Ex: low cost

strategy), the overall strategy change (Ex: multiple-angle ma nagement), and the global expansion strategy change. Culture is referring to its members collective value, norm, and basic assumptions. The change involved is alteri ng the content of this collective value and/or basic assumption. Typically, the exp licit culture is more easily manageable or changed than the implicit culture. Structure is an official sy stem of the duty and the authority relations of an organization. Structural change is tr ansforming the organizations vertical disintegration or horizontal differentia tion, power allocati on, and level of formalization. System is the formal regulations, polic ies and procedures such as reward system, performance evaluation methods, goa ls budget system, etc. that are used to operate the organization. Production science and technology is the technology, the knowledge, the ability, the material, the mach ine, the computer, the tool and other equipments which transforms inputs to outputs. Leadership is the influential force with in the organization. Leadership style impacts the group dynamic and also th e interaction of its members.

T&D 113

100 02 16 5 13
5

The above targets of organizational cha nge will influence each other. For example, the actualization of vision de pends on the incorporation of suitable strategy and the organizations culture. Ther efore, in the process of organization change, the systematic viewpoint has to be taken, so that different change targets can be considered as a whole to achieve the organizational change successfully. The different types of organizational change Managers continually face choices about how best to respond to the forces for change. There are several type s of change that managers can adopt to help their organizations achieve desired future status. In general, the types of change fall into two broad categories: evolutionary change and revolutionary change. Evolutionary change is gradual, inte rmittent, and narrowly-focused (George, & Jones, 2007; Miller, 1980/1982). Its main purpose is to make continuous improvement in order to adjust to the environment change s (Weick, & Quinn, 1999). Revolutionary change is rapid, dramatic, and broadly focused. It ofte n happens when the current

operation method can no longer fulfill the de mand of the external environment, and a significant change has to be made in a short period of time to keep the organization work. The most widely known types of evolu tionary change is socio-technical systems theory, total quality management, and management by objectives (George, & Jones, 2002; Yang, Zhou, & Yu, 2009). Socio-technical systems theory emphasizes the importance of the social and technological aspects within the organization during the process of cha nge. In other words, it emphasizes the development of the most optimal partne rship between members/workers of the

T&D 113
100 02 16 6 13
6

organization and the technology. Total quality management is an ongoing and constant effort by all of an organization s functions to find new ways to improve the quality of the organizations good and services (Deming, 1989). Management by objectives specifies the importance of

regular meetings between management and its subordinates. The objective is to assess future work goa ls, evaluate work performance, and discuss chal lenges and obstacles in an attempt to motivate work efficacy and coherence (Cummings, & Worley, 2001). There are also three important types of revolutionary change: reengineering, restructuring, and innovati on (George, & Jones, 2002). Reengineering involves the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvement in critical, contemporary measures of performance such as cost , quality, service, and speed (Hammer & Champy, 1993). When organization expe riences a rapid deterioration in performance, manager may try to turn things around by restructuring. For example, an organization tries to simplify its organizational structure by eliminating divisions, departments, or levels in th e hierarchy; and downsizing employees to lower operating costs. Innovation is the succe ssful use of skills and resources to create new technologies or new goods and service so that an organization can change and better response to the needs of customers (Jones, 1988). The processes of organizational change Regardless of what type of evolutio nary or revolutionary change an organization adopts, managers face the problem of getting the organization to change. Many scholars have devoted to the study of organizational change process,

T&D

 113
100 02 16 7 13
7

and most of them follow Lewins Force Theory of change. Based on the observation of real world organizational change, Lewin proposed a three-step process for succe ssful organizational change: unfreezing, moving, freezing (as cited in George & Jones, 2002). Unfreezing starts from the members understanding of the organizational crisis or vision that motivates th em to change, normally, unfreezing will go through three stages. First of all, there must be enough information indicating that the current organizational condition is not ideal. Secondly, this information has to be related to the important goal of the or ganization, thus elicits members anxious feeling. Finally, a solution has to be proposed that will reduce the members insecure feeling and resistance to change (Schein, 1992). Moving is taking certain actions to transform the organization to an expected condition. The moving process

is quite complicated; it involves goal setting, support seeking, resource finding, planning and execution. There are two forms of moving: problem-solving orie ntation, and vision orientation. The organization may adapt either one acco rding to their specific situation. Freezing is to stabilize the change achie ved in moving stage. The individual, the department, and the organization, all have an inertial wa y of thinking and doing, so that the change achieved in moving state will return to the status quo ante if freezing is not done. Form new ru les, regulate members new behavior directly, reinforce appropriate responses, are all possible ways to internalize the new value or behavior into the organizational culture.

T&D 113
100 02 16 8 13
8

Forces in organizational change According to Lewins force-field analysis

model, an organization is an open system. There are two forces in organi zation change (Lewin, 1951), one is the pushing of the organization to a new directi on; it is the driving force. The other is preventing organization from changing; it is the restraining force. When driving force is stronger than the restraining force, organizational change occurs, and the organization will move towards a new direction. When restraining is stronger than the driving fo rce, organization will stay where it was; and when these two forces ar e equally powerful, it will st ay stable temporally. When organization is about to change, there are different forces to prevent them from change, which is the above-m entioned restraining forces. Restraining forces can be divided into three levels: organization level, s econdary unit level, and individual level (Yang, Zhuo, & Yu, 2009). Factors in the organizational level include the organizational structure iner tia and system pressure, organizational culture, and the pressure from past success. Factors in secondary unit level include the standpoint difference and interest conflict between diffe rent departments. Factors in individual level include the mis understanding, lack of trust, own benefit threat feeling, uncertainty, custom, etc. How to manage these fact ors that may hinder the successful change of the organization. The active ways to gain organization members' support includes

education, communication, participation and involvement. The passive ways to eliminate members' resistan ce include assistance, negotiation control, and coercion (Kotter, & Schlesinger, 1979). These me thods are most effective in different situations therefore the superintendent must manage the organization change

T&D 113
100 02 16 9 13
9

according to the situation, and use th e combination of suitable methods to implement the change. Kotters 8 Step Change Model can be used as a good framework (Kotter, 1994): 1. Step One: Create Urgency 2. Step Two: Form a Powerful Coalition 3. Step Three: Create a Vision for Change 4. Step Four: Communicate the Vision 5.

Step Five: Remove Obstacles 6. Step Six: Create Short-term Wins 7. Step Seven: Build on the Change 8. Step Eight: Anchor the Changes in Corporate Culture Why does organizational change fail? According to Mckinsey investigation (Isern & Pung, 2007), only 38% interviewees think their companys organi zation change has successfully increased their work performance, and only 30% be lieve their organization change has achieved the organizations goal of long-ter m health. It is main ly because there are many factors that will affect the success or failure of organiza tional change. The 6 most important factors include the insuff icient readiness for change, lack of systematic plan for organization change, fast solution expectation, the focus of change activity instead of result, poor management in cha nge process, and mismatch between change plan and organization cont ext (Yang, Zhuo, & Yu, 2009). To achieve successful organizational change, all th ese factors have to be considered carefully. The following secti on will explain each of them briefly.

T&D 113

 100 02 16 10 13
10

Readiness for change refers to th e degree of positive acceptance of the necessity of change, and the positive attitude toward the effect of change on self and the organization (Armenakis, Harris, & Mossholder, 1993). The higher the preparation, the higher the acceptance and executive power of the member shall be. The lower the preparation, the higher the resistance to change, and the higher the probability of organization change to fail will be. Another common reason for organizati onal change to fail is that many organizations do not take the systematic viewpoint to make a holistic plan for organizational change. For example, th e attempt to make change through education only, and to overlook other fact ors that may affect employees behavior such as organizational system, structure, culture, etc. Moreover, some organization applies the identical changes plans to all departments and individuals without considering their differences. The fast solution expectation is anothe r error organization

makes. They often assume introducing a set of organizational changes can solve all the problems, and recruiting an outside consultant can assist on everything. With this expectation, the organization will depend on the consultant too much, and i nvest too little, and will end the change plan too early if the achi evement does not meet their expectation. In addition, when planning the organiza tional change, members often take the change activity too seriously, but neglect the change goal itself. Thus, members participate in the activity vigorously, but th e achievement is actually very limited. Poor management in change process is another commonly made mistake. Many factors have to be considered and attende d to in the unfreezing, moving or freezing stages. Overlook certain fact ors many lead to total failu re of the organizational change.

T&D 113
100 02 16 11

 13
11

Finally, the match between change plan and organiza tional context may also play a significant role in the success or failure of organizational change. Organizational change is to establish new pattern of thinking and behavior. When the new pattern conflicts with the old ones, the oversized resistance tends to cause the plan to fail. Therefore, in designing a change plan, the organizational context must be incorporated. References: Armenakis, A. A., Harris, S. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1993). Creating readiness for change. Human Relations, 46, 681-703. Cummings, T. G.., & Worley, C. G.. (2001). Organization Development and Change. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing. Deming, W. E. (1989). Out of the Crisis . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. George, J. M., & Jone s, G.. R. (2002). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior (3
rd

). New York: Pearson Education, Inc. George, J. M., & Jone s, G.. R. (2007). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior (5
rd

). New York: Pearson Education, Inc. Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation. New York: HarperCollins. Haveman, H. A., Russo, M. V., & Me yer, A. D. (2001). Organizational environments in Flux: the impact for regulatory punctuations on organizational domains, CEO succession, and performance. Organization Science, 12 , 253-273. Isern, J., & Pung, A. (2007). Harnessing en ergy to drive organizational change.

T&D 113
100 02 16 12 13
12

McKinsey Quarterly, 1, 16-19. Jones, G. R. (2004). Organization Theory, Design, and Change. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Jones. (1988). Organizational Theory . In Burgelman, R. A. , & Maidique, M. A. Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation . Homewood, IL: Irwin. Kotter, J. P. (1994). Leadership change: The eight steps to transformation . In J. A. Conger, G. M. Spreitzer an d E. E. Lawler (Eds.) The leaders change handbook: An essential guide to setting direction and taking action (pp. 87-89). San Francisco: Jossey-bass. Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1979). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review, 57 , 106-114. Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers. New York: Harper & Raw. Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership (2
nd

. ed.) . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995) . Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20 , 510-540. Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361-386.

Yang, R. S., Zhuo, X. Z., & Yu, H. Y. (2009). Organization theory and management: cases, measurements, and industrial applications . Taipei: Ye h - Ye h .

T&D 113
100 02 16 13 13
13

La Verne

Objective of OD

According to somil aseeja, the objective of od is: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. To increase the level of inter-personal trust among employees. To increase employee's level of satisfaction and commitment. To confront problems instead of neglecting them. To effectively manage conflict. To increase cooperation among the employees. To increase the organization problem solving. To put in place process that will help improve the ongoing operation of the organization on a continuous basis