Student

number 610033217

The concept of change is one that has been around for many centuries. It was introduced
around 500 BCE by Greek philosopher Heraclitus, who famously declared that the only thing
constant is change. Due to its complex nature, change has ever since been a main interest of
experts in management studies. This essay will begin by exploring the concept of
organisational change management (OCM). It will then look into the planned approach of
change management, its unintended consequences, and finally, consider alternatives to
effectively manage change within a corporate environment.

Change, as defined by Van de Van and Poole (1995), is an empirical observation of difference
in form, quality or state over time in an organisational entity. The current society is
dominated by rapid high technological advancements, significant changes in legislation,
unpredictable economic conditions, and rampant social developments. It may be observed
that these external influences share one theme, wherein they can occur at any point in time
and at variable degrees. This means that these factors affect the market and economy as a
whole. This then increases competition between organisations where business entities feel
more susceptible and vulnerable. In order to prevent these events from negatively
disrupting operational activities, managers of organisations devise changes in structure,
processes and culture to make themselves more adaptable (Hayes, 2002). As Marsteller
(1992) observes, uncertainty is what led to long-term future planning.

Aside from unforeseen cicumstances, managers may also make decisions which becomes the
internal triggers of change. This comprises but is not limited to redesigning of jobs, change
of location, installation of new systems, and merging with other organisations. Despite the
source of change, the underlying force for an organisations desire to manage change is to
move from its present state to its desired future state effectively, efficiently, and sustainably.
An organisation that practices a certain degree of control may enable it to predict trends of
changes more accurately, which in turn puts managers in a stronger position to make
informed decisions to mould their future direction and performance (Rees and French,
2013). Adjusting to change however is complicated, where according to a McKinsey &
Company survey in 2008 only 30% of change programmes were successful (Keller and
Aiken, 2010).

One concept that has been the centre of research is the planned approach to change
management, which was pioneered by Kurt Lewin and has been prevalent within the
corporate environment for 50 years (Burnes, 2004). One may support the good intentions of

Student number 610033217

the planned approach, where it aims to safeguard an organisation from unanticipated
circumstances. Specifically, this includes looking at past experiences and breaking these into
reducible action plans, for organisations to be ready to respond to signs of potential change.
According to Sturdy and Grey (2003), it is this assumption of controllability which
emphasises the belief that change can and should be managed. However upon putting this
into practice, many experts have claimed that this intentional approach leads to detrimental,
unintended consequences due to its linear and rational characteristics. This will be further
explored using Lewins 3-Step Model, a systematic model showing interrelated processes for
change.

This model follows the course of unfreezing, moving, refreezing (Robbins, 2013).
Specifically, managers identify the need for change, and then employees form the will to
abandon old habits in order to adopt the new behaviour required of them. This newfound
state is then maintained by positive reinforcements of organisational policies and practices
(Burnes, 1996). Based on this model, one may already note the mechanistic view this poses
on organisations. It assumes that employees are able to simply adopt new routines without
considering associated elements, such as their opinions and well-being. It also shows a more
management directive approach to change, and less employee developmental or proactive
role. In addition, the main problem with this traditional view of change is that it over-
simplifies a complex process by listing logical steps on how to manage subjective and
intangible features. This step-by-step characteristic of planned change management leads to
a misconception that makes change seem more feasible to tackle. This notion of thinking has
however constituted the dominant view of OCM, which presides that there is one best
practice to managing change. It immediately assumes that it is applicable to every business
unit and employee in the organisation. In practice, this may not be the case as individuals
have their own sets of beliefs, values and practices. This unitarism view on organisations has
become one of the problematic features of OCM (Sturdy and Grey, 2003). From a personal
standpoint, one may argue that the increasing negative reputation of change is not due to the
concept itself. The need to adapt and manage change may be done with positive intentions,
however it is the process of implementing change which makes it a sensitive topic.

The planned approach to change management suggests a top-down method, where
managers seem to be pressured to constantly review the organisations work practices. In
order for managers to successfully convince employees to share and work towards the
common goal, a manager needs to establish credibility. A lack of credibility occurs when
employees view management as lacking trustworthiness and competence (Kim et al, 2009).

Student number 610033217

As a result, employees develop an attitude of cynicism wherein they are pessimistic about
the success of change efforts. As previously observed by Dawson (2003), employee cynicism
increases as workers feel that management looks at three-letter acronyms such as JIT, BPR
or TQM as the ultimate solution for all corporate ills. In addition, there are those who
question the use and practicality of change programmes. This is because in the first place,
cynical employees will be less emotionally attached to their organisations, as their
discontent leads them to believe that they will not be around for the long haul (Kim et al,
2009).

Another critical repercussion of planned change is employee resistance. Resistance against
change programmes spring from reasons such as the fear of taking risks, wherein employees
feel that there is information asymmetry between them and senior managers. Carnall (1999)
categorises this incapacity to tolerate ambiguity as an emotional block to change. On a
similar note, due to humanistic instincts of self-preservation, employees may act on self-
interest. As Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) explain, even changes that appear to be positive
and rational, employees may perceive this to cost them more losses than garner them
substantial gains. Other resistance to change includes reluctance to lose control, and
hesitation to give up old habits (Oreg, 2003).

Most managers try to reach out to employees through lengthy motivational speeches to
avoid resistance, as employee demonstration of resistance can greatly affect job
performance, the working environment, and perhaps threaten the authority of senior
management. However, it may be argued that resistance is not necessarily a protest or
negative reaction towards change programmes. When employees voice their concerns
regarding certain aspects of the change initiatives, it could be viewed as them getting
involved and participating in enacting change. Managers should therefore devise certain
communication aids that will promote employee participation.

Resistance may be viewed as a superficial reaction to change management, as experts
identify that it involves a much deeper issue, the culture of an organisation. As Weick and
Sutcliffe (2011) argue, researchers still differ on whether culture should be seen as
something an organisation is such as its beliefs, attitudes and values, or as something an
organisation has, referring to its practices and controls. One may pinpoint how this
definition of culture has a positive relation with the traditional view of OCM, where culture
becomes something that can be managed or controlled. However the former definition gives

Student number 610033217

culture a root metaphor, which sees organisations as manifestations of human
consciousness (Smircich, 1983). Until today, there are innumerable conflicting definitions of
change. Nevertheless, the main discussion regarding organisational culture is the issue that
managers seem to utilise this concept to implement change, which according to Harris and
Ogbonna (2002), may lead to unintended ramifications. One of these is the ritualisation of
culture change. Since change is a long process, some managers choose to implement this
piecemeal so as not to add more pressure to employees. This may however result to
employees developing change fatigue where their perceived significance towards the
change programme slowly diminishes. A more damaging one identified is known as the
hijacked process where change initiatives might open the opportunity for others to satisfy
their own purposes. This means that non-specialist change agents may veer away from the
original plan and create an easier path for themselves, or even open the programme up for
sabotage from employees who may feel that they have been done injustice to.

Finally, after the enactment of change initiatives, one needs to evaluate its results because
despite it seeming successful, the intended long-term goal may not have been realised. For
instance, Harris and Ogbonna (2002) found that most change initiators aim to influence
employees values and beliefs, but an in-depth look shows that employees merely practice
behavioural compliance. This may pose as a future threat, since superficial conformity is
short-term thus there will be a tendency for employees to revert back to familiar habits. This
usually happens when the change adopter becomes a passive recipient of corrective
solutions.

Drawing out from a collective reading and personal analysis of culture, one may argue and
define the parameters between organisational culture, organisational environment, and
social culture. For instance, an employee who leaves the work premises will use an
ingrained social culture to interact with others or to go about doing their non-work related
activities. To a certain extent, it may be argued that organisational culture based on this
reasoning is therefore dependent on the atmosphere that an organisation creates. This
viewpoint is backed by Ogbonnas (2007) claim that minor adjustments can be made by
altering the climate of the organisation, while retaining the deep fabric of culture to be
without apparent change. One of the benefits of distinguishing organisational culture in this
manner is that it avoids the positivist notion that culture is directly linked to financial
performance. This allows managers to therefore direct their attention on the symbolisms of
culture evident within the workplace, instead of trying to manage different individuals to
adopt a common culture as a single entity.

Student number 610033217

Due to the aforementioned consequences of change, various alternatives have been explored
by experts in order to achieve an effective and sustainable management of change. Change
may come in varying magnitudes either significantly or discreetly. It may also be
anticipatory or reactive to external events. However, as Sturdy and Grey (2003) argues, no
one seems to consider that stability or continuity is possible, or perhaps even desirable. This
therefore leads to our first alternative to the planned approach of change management.

Continuity, as adopted by Kolb (2003), is defined as the connectedness over time among
organisational efforts and a sense of ongoingness that links the past to the present, and the
present to future hopes and ideals. One may argue that to a certain extent, the structure of
an organisation is a significant factor in reinforcing continuity. For instance, a large public
organisation will be at a disadvantage as they constantly go through new leadership which
usually comes with different managing styles. On the other hand, a family-owned
organisation will be able to pass down its practices. For instance, Ferrero once said that
behind its trademark and turnover, is a story of a brilliant Piedmontese family that ensures
the companys structure is founded on solid family values (Ferrero, 2009).

One may argue that Ferrero is an exceptional example of a family-owned company that
broke through business conventions of international success. Ferrero did not respond to
societys rapidly changing external events by competing for the highly qualified produce of
the labour market, or adopting the trending strategic model. Instead, it develops its core
assets in-house (Ferrero, 2009). One advantage of this approach to change is that it shows
how an organisation realises the value of its people, who served as the backbone in shaping
Ferreros current standing. As Kolb (2003) confirms, continuity is not possible without
appreciation of the past, as neglecting this may cost a company the established goodwill,
wisdom and support of long serving employees. This is because employees work on the
ground and have first-hand experience, therefore they may be able to give an insightful
perspective on how certain changes can be tackled. For instance, they can aid in
distinguishing between a radical change or something that a company has gone through in
the past. Allowing employees to be involved, counters the problem of change fatigue with
the planned approach, wherein managers are now viewed as colleagues instead of change
masters.

One unintended by-product of continuity however is the view that the organisation has sunk
into a state of stagnation. Taylor (2011) argues that this should not be the case, as stability

Student number 610033217

enables progress through its search for new meanings and understandings. Continuity
therefore is about realising forces that bring stability in a changing environment, which
allows an organisation to propel ahead effectively and efficiently. That being the case,
change initiators need to understand that although change and continuity represent
competing principles, they also complement each other in the sense that one begets the
other and vice-versa (Graetz and Smith, 2010). One may note that there is still much to be
learned about continuity, as there is not enough information regarding its application and
success results to conclude this as a recommended replacement to the planned approach to
change.

Another alternative to planned change that is currently gaining popularity among managers
is the concept of creativity. Creativity, as defined by Zhou and Shalley (2009) is both an
outcome and a process, wherein the conceptualisation and development of novel ideas or
procedures occur. Sharing similar principles with continuity, creativity also allows for the
involvement and participation of employees in implementing change initiatives. According
to Elsbach and Hargadon (2006), one way of improving employees output is to use work
design to make tasks more interesting, challenging and motivating. One organisation that
has understood and applied this concept successfully is Google. Google is known to have a
fun and innovative work environment in order to bring out the most creative ideas from
employees. As Amabile et al (1996) notes, research shows that employees produce quality
work when they perceive themselves to have the freedom to choose the method in
accomplishing the tasks that they are given.

One may agree with Starko (2013) that creativity in the workplace results to a number of
benefits. Creativity enables employees to look at situations from different perspectives,
either through brainstorming with colleagues or simply by using creative thinking
techniques. This results to flexibility in decision-making and independence in judgment.
When employees are able to hone their skills, cynicism will eventually subside as they feel
valued by the management. In turn, these employees will become a long-term asset for the
company. Most importantly, Starko (2013) highlights that creativity aids in coping well with
novelty. This means that employees will be able to visualise different scenarios and consider
the more suitable approach in escaping entrenchment. Similarly in the long run, when
presented with new reasons for change, highly creative employees will then be able to sort
through and find order in chaos. This also means that instead of showing signs of
demotivation and change fatigue, employees may instead take the initiative to use creative
thinking techniques in tackling the situation at hand. As a result, managers will be impressed

Student number 610033217

by the perseverance, drive and commitment from employees. Despite the attractive
advantages of using the creative approach, there may be dangers of employees abusing this
opportunity. For instance, Elsback and Hargadon (2006) discuss the folly of free time,
wherein this may inadvertently cause employees to use work time for personal purposes.
This may therefore deter the employee from focusing on the change programme goal.
Another inadvertency of creativity is the erosion of traditional, established values and
practices. This may occur due to the limitless and endless possible ideas that creative
thinking techniques may generate, which may lead to over-reliance of such models.

As this essay has thoroughly considered, organisations may still benefit from the good
intentions of a planned approach. Unfortunately, despite the numerous studies that have
been conducted, there still seems to be difficulties in implementing certain change
initiatives. To a certain extent, managers can only predict and prepare for the future to
lessen the impact of the unforeseeable circumstances. Therefore, in order to attack the
dynamism of change, organisations need to react accordingly. This means that instead of
using the traditional stagnant approach as the first choice to tackling change, managers may
consider the notion that not everything new is always good; and old, bad. The 21st century is
dominated by increasing concerns on good working conditions, ethical practices and the
like. Managers may therefore counter the unintended repercussions by using alternatives
such as continuity and creativity techniques. One may argue that there is however a
literature gap regarding the effectiveness of these concepts, as they are still trying to prove
useful for application in the corporate environment. Regardless of the approach used, it is
important to keep in mind the main goal of OCM, which is to allow an organisation to
manage its core assets, employees and resources, effectively and efficiently to reach its
future goal sustainably.