1) Identify the two, different, theoretical perspectives (ontologies or world-views) used in this subject, which underpin how we understand organisational change, and explain. Write two different definitions of organisational change, one based upon the first theoretical perspective, and the second based on the other theoretical perspective. explain the link between each definition and its underlying theoretical perspective.
2) Using an organisation that you are familiar with (you may use information in the public domain, i.e. from organisational websites and other forms of media to assist you):
a) Briefly introduce the organisation
b) Identify and describe a change that is happening, or has previously happened, within it (including what the change is, how it is implemented, who the change agent'/s are, who is involved and how, and how employees are engaged and affected).
c) Go on to explain how your definitions (from Question 1 above) related to the change occurring in this organisation.
3) a) Draw up a SWOT analysis, as a table, to assess what has caused the need for the organisational change which you identified in question 2 above, then explain, discuss and integrate your analysis, including a conclusion that summarise the current state of the business and connects this to why the change was (or is being) implemented.
b) Then, in your own words, identify and critically evaluate the benefits and drawbacks (from both the objectivist and social constructionist perspectives) of using business SWOT analyses in general to determine the need for organisations to change.
4) identify, explain and critically assess the key conceptualisations of role of the change agent, and then apply this analysis to the change in organisation described above.
5) Briefly identify which theoretical ontology of organisational change (which you discussed in question 1) underpins each. Critically assess the benefits and drawbacks of each of these approaches to change management. Go on to identify which of these approaches you would prefer to use to manage the change you identified in 2a and explain why.
Identifying the two different theoretical perspective used in the organizational change, Explaining and critically discussing their key ideas and features
Recent economic situation has demanded the changes of the structure of the organization as the objectives of the organizations have changed. All the organizations have the objectives to achieve a rapid growth and development within a short period of time. In order to achieve the aims and objectives a rapid change in structure of organization is needed without this organizational change rapid development is not possible. Therefore, it is clear from the discussion that the organizational change and growth of the organization is the synonyms for now a day. The organizational change includes all kind of change of the organization. In this case, change of management, working style, working atmosphere and so on are included, that helps a firm to achieve the rapid development. By changing the structure and management, an organization will be able to remove the issues within the organization, which restricts the growth of the company. On the basis of this discussion it can be said that, in recent economic situation the organizational changes is the driver force of the company and based on this the company will be able to achieve their potential growth (Sofat, Kiran & Kaushik, 2015).
In this case, organizations have followed the different theories of organizational change as there are different types of organizational changes are there. On the basis of the requirement the organizations have choose their theories and based on this theories the company brings the changes within their organizations. In this case, the two distinct theories of organizational changes are: Lewin’s change management model and Kotter’s 8 step change model. By applying both theories, an organization can be able to bring the changes within the company but the basic difference between these two theories that the way they are bringing the changes is totally different. In this case, if the organizations adopt the theories of Lewin’s change model then they have to adopt the three steps. On the very first step, the organization will unfreeze those employees who are not interested about the change and they will restrict the changes within the organization. Therefore by applying this steps the authority of the organization will be able to overcome the tendency that resist the changes. The second step is transition and through this step they will be able to make the transition from one period to another and last of all the organization will refreeze the employees after the changes within the organization (Musty et al. 2015).
Another theory of organizational changes is the Kotter’s 8step change model. In this case, the organization first increase the urgency of the change, they develop a team for the change. They will build the vision for change, proper communication strategy have to be adopted for the change. In addition to that, the organization has to empower the employees to accept the changes. The organization will build the short-term goal, consistency must be achieved and they will try to make the change permanent. Both the theories are same as they are bringing the organizational changes within the organization (Stevenson et al. 2014).
a)Brief introduction of the organization
Wesfarmers is one of the renowned organizations in Australia and they are producing the industrial goods and competing with the other multinational companies as they have experienced the organizational change because they are producing different kind of goods and they have diversified their business by applying the technological changes within the organization. At first the organization was cooperative company but now the company become a multinational company and they have different branches in New Zealand, Perth and so on. Without the help of the organizational change it is not possible for the organization. With the help of the organizational change they were able to bring the changes within the organization (Murray, 2015).
In thgis regard, it can be said that, not only the technological changes but also the management structure, by changing the business strategies, by changing the organizational power and by changing the other sectors of organization the authority is able to bring the changes within the organization. Among all the changes, the technological changes and the changes in the business strategies are the main for the Wesfarmers because the organization has achieved a rapid change within a stipulated time period and able to wider their growth path which is not possible without the rapid changes.
b) Identifying and describing a change that happens to the organizational change
From the cooperative company the organization become the multinational company by adopting the organizational change in this case, the authority first adopts the changes in the business strategy and they have tried to start the production of industrial goods and they have supplied the fertilizers, chemicals and so on. Apart from this, they have started the coal mining and started to produce industrial safety products. All these type of business reduce the risk of the organization and they freely can move towards the expansion of the business. If they were not able to change their business strategy then it was not possible for them to achieve this rapid expansion (GITUMA, 2016).
Not only they have applied the organizational change in their business strategy they have also changed their technology which is also a part of the organizational change. In this case, by applying the modern technology the organization now able to produce huge scale of products that helps them to achieve the 1st position in Australia and they are able to compete with other multinational companies quite easily. In this case, the organization has adopted the capital-intensive technology rather than the labor-intensive technology because of this the organization is able to produce this huge scale of production. Therefore, from the discussion it is clear that, by applying the technological changes and the strategically change they are able to bring this rapid change within the organization.
c) Explaining how the definitions are related with the organization
In this case, Kotter’s 8 step model is very much related with the Wesfarmers’s organizational changes because they have first increase the need of the change of the organization. In this case, the organization has the objectives to achieve the rapid growth. In order to achieve these objectives the organization has developed a team who has the potential to bring the changes within the organization. Not only by setting the objectives, the organization has also built the vision for the organization that helps the Wesfarmers to achieve the objectives quite easily. A proper communication strategy has been developed by the organization in order to achieve the objectives and the authority has trained the employees in order to create the ability within the employees to bring the organizational changes within Wesfarmers. In this case, the organization has developed a short term goals that helps them to achieve the objectives of the organization. In addition to that, the goals and objectives of Wesfarmers was consistent and as re4sult of this they have made t6he changes permanent (Ginsberg, 2015).
a) Developing the SWOT analysis as a table
|Strength||The organizational change make the organization more powerful and with the help of this organizational change the company will be able to achieve the rapid growth within a short period of time. Technological changes, organizational structure can be changed with the help of this organizational change. With the help of this changes the organization will be able to produce huge amount of production that reduce the cost of production (Townsend, 2016). Therefore, it is clear that the organizational change has the potentiality to bring the rapid growth within the company, which is the basic strength of organizational change. |
|Weakness||If the proper theories and steps have to observed then the organization will not be able to achieve the organizational change properly.Frequent change will not help the growth process of the organization. The changes should be proper otherwise; the fruitful result will not be achieved. The organization will adopt a proper theories of the organizational change otherwise, the changes will not bring the growth to the company. If the organization is not able to develop the proper team then they will not be able to bring the changes within the organization|
Therefore, from the above discussion it is clear that the organizational change has many opportunities for which the organization will be able to compete in competitive market.
Table 1: SWOT table
(Source: self developed)
b) Analyzing the benefits and drawbacks of the business SWOT
Benefits of the SWOT analysis
1. With the help of the SWOT analysis, the organization will be able to know more about the strength, opportunities and threats. On the basis of that the organization will be able to adopt the policies.
2.I n this case, with the help of the SWOT analysis the organization will be able to know more about the threats and the authority will be able to aware about the threats. On the basis of it they will adopt the policies and technologies to remove the threats from the business.
3. With the help of the SWOT analysis, the organization will be able to increase opportunities by applying the policies and monitoring. In addition to that, an organization will be able to take the advantages of the strength for which the organization will be able to achieve the growth.
4. On the basis of the SWOT analysis the organization will be able to set their aims and objectives and they also change their vision towards the objectives if there is any problem in the SWOT analysis of the organization.
Therefore, it is clear that, the SWOT analysis has the huge advantages and with the help of this the organization can wider the growth path (Chevers & Chevers, 2014).
Drawbacks of the SWOT analysis
1. With the help of the SWOT analysis, the organization will not be able to priorities the issues and they will not be able to get the help from the SWOT analysis.
2. The SWOT analysis only discuss the strength, weakness, opportunities and threats but it does not discuss the remedy or the process how to remove the threats from the organization. In addition to that, it also does not discuss the process how to increase the opportunities.
3. The SWOT analysis of the organization is able to produce lots of information but all of that information has no effectiveness within the organization. In addition to that, the authority of the organization will not be able bring the fruitful result of the information of the SWOT analysis.
Therefore, from the above discussion it is clear that not only advantages but also the SWOT analysis has the drawbacks for which the organization not believes fully on SWOT analysis.
Critically explaining the role of change agent
With the help of the organizational change, a firm can be able to change their growth process by changing the internal and external structure of the organization. In this case, it can be said that the organizational change is the driver force of the objected growth process of the organization. Without the help of the organizational change, they cannot be able to achieve the growth quite easily.
By understanding the current state of the organization, the authority will try to bring the changes within the organization. If the changes will not proper then it will be difficult for the authority to bring the growth and development within the company. In addition to that, the future of the organization is also based on this organizational change. If the changes of the organization are not based on the objectives of the company then only the changes will take place within the company. Ultimately, no fruitful result will be achieved with the help of this change. The changes should be implemented step by step otherwise the organizational change will lose the effectiveness. The authority of the organization must handle the transition period quite safely otherwise, the problem may arise. In this case, the organizational authority should develop a team who has the potentiality to bring the changes within the organization and who has the ability to achieve the objectives of the organization. If the authority of the organization will not be able to develop the efficient team within the firm then the organization will not be able to achieve the growth with the help of the organizational changes (Yenidogan & Sencan, 2017).
Late monetary circumstance has requested the progressions of the structure of the association as the destinations of the associations have changed. Every one of the associations have the destinations to accomplish a quick development and advancement inside a brief timeframe. Keeping in mind the end goal to accomplish the points and destinations a quick change in structure of association is required without this hierarchical change fast advancement is unrealistic. Hence, it is clear from the talk that the hierarchical change and development of the association is the equivalent words until further notice a day. The hierarchical change incorporates all sort of progress of the association. For this situation, change of administration, working style, working climate et cetera are incorporated, that encourages a firm to accomplish the quick advancement. By changing the structure and administration, an association will have the capacity to evacuate the issues inside the association, which confines the development of the organization. On the premise of this exchange one might say that, in late financial circumstance the hierarchical changes is the driver power of the organization and in light of this the organization will have the capacity to accomplish their potential development.
In this case, the organization must identify the areas where the change is necessary if the areas will not be identified properly then it will be impossible for the authority of the organization to achieve the growth with the help of the organizational change. Proper area should be identified in order to get the fruitful result of the organizational change. In this case, if the technological changes is required then the authority should adopt the appropriate technologies then only the growth can be achieved with the help of the technological change. In addition to that, the strategic changes can be achieved in order to achieve the objectives of the organization properly.
Definition and Critical Discussion of the approaches to change
In order to monitor any change within the infrastructure of an organization, Lewin’s Change Management model have always appeared indispensible to the prominent business executives. It is an imperative obligation of any enterprise to detect changes since it is well established that those imparts considerable influence in the strategic faculty. On that context, the model provided by Lewin earns its reputation since it deals with the changes in a very ordered and structured fashion. The interpretation of organizational change in terms of an analogues regular phenomena is one of the unique propositions of the prescribed model (Rosemann & vom Brocke, 2015).. It vehemently addressed to the fact that the respective enterprise is required to accept the fact that change is an indispensable yet cardinal phenomena along with the encouragement to attain the acquaintance with the prevalent culture in organizational premises. The previous discussion leads to the basic essence of the first phase of the prescribed model where he expects the organization to gain the ability to adapt to change. In the context of Wesfarmers, the foundational preparation to be established as a prominent conglomerate coupled with the ambition to grow as an co-operative has been embedded within the initial objective. This phase is extensively considered as paramount since it contradicts the universal attempt to resist change, instead of being able to mitigate it.
This phase further urges for an insightful introspection regarding the foundational axioms of the business unit. It also transmits the moral urge to provide a lucid interpretation of the objectives and outcomes of the changes. In accordance with the diversity of comprehension, the next phases decide its duration and typically characterized as the execution of the nascent change. The paramount requirement of this phase is to exhibit command and explicit resilience in order to assure the underlying subordinates. The leaders and acting players is usually endowed with the governing liability to ensure the involvement of the subordinates seamlessly. Insightful communication is the governing tool here. Furthermore, as Lewin suggests, the enterprise needs to acquire stability after the implementation and execution of the nascent change. The stability of this phase cannot be characterized by the stagnant hostile behavior that is mainly generated to prevent change. This stability can only be characterized in terms of complacence since the atmosphere around became as it was before the implementation of the change.
On the other hand, as it was loosely discussed here, Kotter have systematically classified the empirical phases of an effective change management model. In order to inspire the sunordinates within the organization to cope with change, an ambience of urgency (may be superficial) needs to be developed (Kuipers et al. 2014). In the successive phase, a team of change agents has been designed in order to administrate the change delicately within the premises of efficient and suitable subordinates. This can be accomplished by a homogeneous blend of knowledge, skill and dedication. In order to facilitate the discerned change a prudent and introspective vision needs to be established in order to direct the enquiry and activity in a proper manner. Kotter also emphasizes on the aptitude of communication and further designates it as the key element of this phase of change management. In the next phase, Kotter appear a little bit cynic and inhibitive since he vehemently expects the Subordinates to design themselves in accordance with the short-term goals (Luyssaert et al. 2014). The leading conglomerates like Wesfarmers used to employ this model since it is systematic and can be executed easily. Kotter made one thing very clear during the discourse that the dedications that the subordinates are functioning with needs to persistent and rigorous. An ambience of collaborative capability needs to be maintained while incorporating the prescribed change.
Identifying the Ontological support of the organizational Change
Both of the theories that have been discussed within the attached report impart an intent to nudge the potential subordinates in terms of motivation or encouragement. Moreover, it encourages exploring the prevalent influences that is imperative to take into consideration (Prochaska, 2013).. The potential subordinate needs to accept the fact that there exists a substantial possibility for hazardous nudges to exist. The prevailing theories desire to put the chief emphasis on the aspect and importance of understanding human behavior as a potential requisite of embracing change.
Benefits and Drawbacks of the Proposed Theories
Benefits of the Kotter’s Model
Drawbacks of the Kotter’s Model
Benefits of the Lewin’s Model
Disadvantages of this Model
As per my apprehension regarding the change models and corresponding comparative analysis, I wish to employ the Kotter’s model in my respective business unit since it is very systematic and easy to employ. Moreover, as it is flexible enough to exercise properly and the robust nature of the respective model is commendable. Since it requires a disciplined allocation to all the aspects and the resources that is imperative to employ in order to attend the change, most of the industrial players take this fact as a disadvantage. To me, it is an opportunity for me to allocate the requisite expertise in a sequential manner.