Organizational Change: Factors & Approaches

P R E S E N T E D B Y: HEENA MIRCHANDANI HIMANSHU GARG J Y O T I S AT S A N G I VINEET HARIT

Meaning of organizational Change

The term organizational change implies the creation

of imbalances in the existing pattern of situation. Change is a continuous phenomenon of organizational life. The survival and growth of an organization depends to a great extent on its ability to cope with change required by forces operating within its boundaries and in its external environment

Nature of Change
Organizational change denotes any alteration which occurs in the overall work environment of an organization. Characteristics are:
Change results from the pressure of forces both

outside and inside the organization. The whole organization tends to be affected by change in any part of it. Change takes place in all parts of the organization, but at varying rates of speed and degrees of significance.

Forces For Change

Technology

Marketing conditions

External Forces
Social changes Political and legal forces

Change in operative personnel Change in managerial personnel Deficiencies in existing structure

Chain effect of change Fear of inflexibility

Levels of Organizational Change

Individual Level Change

Group Level Change

Organizational Level Change Strategic change

Structural change
Process oriented change People oriented change

Types of organizational changes

Anticipatory or proactive change Reactive change Incremental change Strategic change

Causes of human resistance to change

Economic factors
Workers apprehend technological unemployment

Workers fear that they will be idle for a major portion of

their time due to higher efficiency of new technology Workers are afraid of demotion as they do not have the new skills required for the performance of new jobs.

Psychological factors
It is human psychology to maintain status quo.

Human beings resist change by nature Workers may apprehend boredom in new jobs because of increased automation. Workers may be lazy and reluctant to learn new things Workers do not have complete knowledge about the change. They may make their own assumptions about change. The assumptions may be totally illogical

Social reasons

It may be felt by workers that their status may go

down as a result of introduction of new technology Changes may require new social adjustments which are not liked by the workers. Workers as a group oppose change as they are unfamiliar with the change Workers resist changes which are brought about without consulting them.

Strategies to overcome resistance to change

Education and communication Participation and involvement Education and training

Facilitation and support

Negotiation and agreement Manipulation and co-optation Explicit and implicit coercion

Management of change
Identifying the need for change Developing the objective for change

Determining the type of change

Planning the change

Implementation of change
Follow-up and feedback

Approaches to Change Management

ADKAR Model Lewins change management model Kotters 8 step change model Bridges transition model

ADKAR Model
(Simple, powerful and action oriented model for change)
Developed by Jeff Hiatt, CEO of Prosci Change

Management, and first published in 2003, focuses on 5 actions and outcomes necessary for successful individual change, and therefore successful organisational change.

Lewins change management model

One of the cornerstone models for understanding

organizational change was developed by Kurt Lewin back in the 1940s, and still holds true today. His model is known as Unfreeze Change Refreeze, refers to the three-stage process of change Lewin, a physicist as well as social scientist, explained organizational change using the analogy of changing the shape of a block of ice.

Kotter's 8-Step Change Model

(Implementing change powerfully and successfully)
Change management guru, John Kotter introduced his

eight-step change process in his 1995 book, "Leading Change."

Bridges' Transition Model

The Transition Model was created by change consultant,

William Bridges, and was published in his 1991 book "Managing Transitions."

CASE STUDY
How Cisco IT Implemented Organizational Change and Advanced Services for Operational Success

Problem
NDCS (Network and Data Centre Services)

Pre-existing Traditional Model: With two separate service organizations, there was much duplication and lack of focus.

 NDCS engaged Cisco Advanced Services Network

Availability Improvement Services organization (NAIS) to identify the areas that needed to be changed and recommend how to proceed. The ORMA (Operational Risk Management Analysis )is a Cisco support deliverable that outlines a roadmap for operational excellence and availability via a best-practice approach to network design, tools, process, and expertise.

SOLUTION
An organizational restructure to Ciscos IT NDCS group

solved the business problem. Cisco Lifecycle Methodology: Cisco IT NDCS now uses this framework for its organizational structure.

NDCS New Lifecycle Model

Ciscos new NDCS organization includes administration on

both the front end (via the Program Office) and the back end (via the Business Office), and incorporates Ciscos Lifecycle Model

RESULTS
The restructuring, together with the NAIS ORMA

report affected change in NDCS The operational maturity comparison of 2006 to 2008 shows dramatic improvement in each of the five areas.

 Cisco NDCS has achieved customer satisfaction

scores of 4.856, with 5 being the best possible score Service Level Agreement timeframe has risen from 60 percent to 90 percent since the NDCS restructuring

 Before using the lifecycle methodology, NDCS had:

An average of approximately 150 client-impacting incidents per quarter Total impacting outage duration of 1000-plus hours per quarter. A defective root cause percentage consistently above 40 percent .

The Cisco lifecycle methodology now provides a

focus on operational excellence with these results:

Incidents have decreased to approximately 70 per quarter The total impacting outage duration has been reduced to 300 impact

hours per quarter The defective root cause percentage is now consistently below 10 percent.