Organizational Change Model and Theory †Free Samples to Students

Question: Discuss about the Organizational Change Model and Theory. Answer: Introduction Change management is a process fashioned from the late 20th century in business and corporate sectors (Hayes 2014). In a business environment a number of risk factors are responsible for altering the output for the organisation. Change in terms of process, role of employees or organisational structures and use of technology are played a pivotal role in companys success (Burke 2017). In other words change management is a systematic approach which is primarily dealt with the organisational objectives (Hornstein 2015). It can be argued that the purpose of implementing a change management is not only to figure out any loopholes and drawbacks that can obstruct the growth of the organisation in future but also change management is helping to take the necessary steps in order to resolve the emerging issues (Lozano, Nummert and Ceulemans 2016). From this point of view it can never be denied the significance of change management in present case scenario. In response to that the purpose of thi s report is to highlight the different theories and models of change management and also put emphasis on the application of different models. In order to do that the report is also going to conduct a comparative discussion about different types of change management models. Therefore, the report will start its discussion with the different kinds of change management models and gradually make a comparative analysis. Change management has gone through various kinds of models and theories which are strongly dedicated to the development and sustainable growth of the organisation. In this regards, there are three popular theories that are going to be addressed, namely, Lewins model, Kotters model and the nudge theory. In 1947, Kurt Lewin had developed a sequential change model which is popularly known as the Lewins model. The model is primary based on a structure Unfreeze-Change-Refreeze (Bartunek and Woodman 2015). However, the model kept focus on the group performance and not solely dealt with the organisational performances. To establish his model with a solid base Lewin derived the role of emotional experience as a tool to change organisational development. According to this theory, unfreezing emerges as a result of dissatisfaction and frustration to meet the organisational goals (Hossan 2015). In that scenario the management of the organisation must opt for a strategy to dismantling the status quo. As a result of that the problem will be exposed and it can able to help the organisation to figure out the root cause of the issue (Mahmood et al. 2017). Subsequently, the role of change has come into place. The mode of change is comprised mainly with semantic redefinition, widening the perception and a set of new judgement and analytical process (Lines et al. 2015). In order to increase the analytical power and behaviour through organisational structure it is imperative for the management to introduce some development technique. However, there may be some possibilities of facing uncertainty during the transformation from old to new. Moreover, the process of transformation is lengthy. Therefore, it can take some time to adapt the new environment. In order to manage this kind of mayhem continuous communication should be taken. It is the responsibility of the management to communicate with every people associated with the new environment and acknowledging them with the reason and effectiveness of this change (Kuipers et al. 2014). The next stage is related to refreezing. It is more convenient for the management to understand the perception of the employees and change related workforce. In response to this, the management will take proper attitude and set values in accordance with the change environment. The refreezing technique will be taken into action when the structure, people and strategy elements are seemed fine. In this manner, the Lewin model of Change Management will be completed (Bartunek and Woodman 2015). Despite of a well narrated scientific way of changing method the Lewins theory is not free from limitations. Some scholar often argued that the Lewins model is advocated against the continuous change in organisational structure (Worley and Mohrman 2014). It can also be argued that the Lewins model is not well enough to judge the root cause of the problem. The model is more depend on assumptions rather investigating the real reason of the issue. In fact, during the process of transformation there are always possibilities for new issues to be erupted which can obstruct the course of change (Hossan 2015). Kotters Model Kotters change management model is referred as very helpful and systematic approach to initiate a transformation in organisation. The model encompasses an eight stages structure which was professed by John Kotter in his book Leading Change in the year 1996 (Pollack and Pollack 2015). The eight steps are: Sense of urgency- It is imperative for the company or organisation to recognize the urge for change in the structure. In response to this, the management will take necessary steps to identify the threats and anticipate the opportunities to resolve the issue. After that, the company can take necessary steps. Set a powerful coalition- To convince the people with the importance of change the management should unify the key actors of the project. It can ease the process of transformation and able to build an emotional commitment which will facilitate the process of change (Hansen and Clausen 2017). Develop change strategy- There are ample of strategies and plan for combating a specific organisational issue. It is the efficiency of the company to find out the perfect solution strategy which can ensure organisational development. Communicating the change vision- Discussing the change strategy in a close meeting cannot be beneficial for the company. Instead daily communication and open conversation will result an advantage for the organisation. Remove obstacles- It is important for the management to eradicate all the obstacles related to the change process. By removing the obstacles it can also be beneficial for the management to execute their mission and vision (Lozano 2015). Generate short-term achievements- It is better to achieve short-term targets rather than fixing long-term goals. Besides this, achieving short-term goals will help to motivate the company and generate a moral boost up to set foot towards the long-term achievements. Producing more change through gains- According to Kotter, gaining successively leads towards producing more change in building new targets on a long term basis. Nevertheless, it has to be kept in mind that successive gains are not a sign of satisfaction. Actually, it pushes the person or organisation further to go for more (Pollack 2015). Anchoring new changes in culture- Change or transformation should be a primary strategy of any organisation. In fact, change in every aspect of the working environment should be maintained. It can provide a change in practice that the employees are getting used to with. Despite resembling enormous popularity the Kotters model also faces some challenges. It can be alleged that Kotters model does not follow the fundamental concept of change management. The primary concern of change management is to provide information about the transformation not describing the way to achieve it. It is also true that no single theory will be effective in all situations and therefore Kotters model is not the only model o solve solutions (Chappell et al. 2016). Nudge Theory The addition of nudging in change management plan is a recent phenomenon on the backdrop of the 2008 economic crisis (Grne-Yanoff and Hertwig 2016). The nudge theory is principally referred to the behavioural insights if human mind which influences people to choose their need keeping pace with the change in environment. It is predominantly based on the rational and pragmatic choices with the help of intuition and impulse (McClelland 2016). In response to this, nudging in corporate organisation is essentially perceived the decision taking abilities of the management in order to deal with new issues. The best thing in nudge theory is that spontaneous participation of the members in voluntary and non-coercive manner (Brooks 2013). However, in the context of organisational implementation the voluntary elements are referred to the decision making body only. The employees are compelled to follow the management decisions (Burns, T.R. and Roszkowska 2016). Nevertheless, the decision making ability of the management body becomes increase due to the use nudge theory (Cornelissen and Cornelissen 2017). As the nudge theory puts emphasis on the behaviour and cognate topics therefore by utilising nudge it can generate the clear depiction of the psychology behind the decision (Kosters and Van der Heijden 2015). In addition to this, the nudge theory can also be implemented in both short term and long term goals. Hence, the theory is q uite relevant in present day change management. Nonetheless, there is always a possible threat while using nudge theory. It can manipulate the decision making power of human beings and exploit the rationality in a given environment (Neal et al. 2016). It is true that nudging creates fewer alternatives in order to make a good decision but no all the time little number of alternative will be beneficial for the company. The distinctive nature of the different theories of change management reflects unique characteristics of each model. For an example, the Lewins model shapes the fundamental structures of the change management strategy. It is evident that no theory can be defined as the only solution for every problem but still the Lewins model is relevant even in present strategy of change management. The three fold model provides a basic understanding of the organisational issues. In compare to the Lewins model, the Kotters theory was more structured and helped to figure out the in depth problem associated with the organisation. The eight stages of change model encompass both the capability of choosing problems and also identify the success rate of the taken change decision. However, the change management is not entitled to evaluate the success rate. It also works as a problem tracking tool. Adding the evaluator mechanism can perturb the basic purpose of Kotters model. In compare to this, the Nudge Theory is considered to be the recent inclusion in change management. The primary task of nudging is related to the individual behaviour. In this context, Nudge theory performs as a device to understand the necessity to change the company structure. Lewins theory can be maintained in a small sport brand industry like Kukri. The company is well known for their sportswear in Australian rugby, hockey and cricket. Recently the company is suffering with their market capitalisation. Actually, Australia is very popular for sports brand industry and giant companies are always wanted to maximize their market holding. As a result of that, the small and medium enterprises are facing strong competition in Australian market. In order to change their market capitalisation policy, the Kukri Sports limited is now searching for possible threats for changing marketing policy. In order to do that using Lewins theory will be the best option as the process is less complex. For introducing the Kotters model in telecom industry like Blackberry will be very beneficial. In recent times Blackberry has faced a severe threat from mobile companies like Apple or Samsung. The volatile global market with high competition set the Blackberry Company back in market capitalisation. Therefore, using the change management tools like Kotters model can help the company to get back its lost glory. The reason behind choosing Kotters model is that the model is detailed and critically identified the success rate of using new strategies. The nudge theory will be widely fitted in the health service industry. For an instance, obesity becomes a grave problem in Australian health care facilities. In combating this growing tendency the Allamanda Private Hospital of Southport, Australia is going to take a new initiative. The hospital cafeteria provides fewer amounts of fatty products and as a result the hospital staffs are also decreased their habit of taking high fat products. This kind of initiative is a reflection of nudge theory where the behaviour of the people can be exploited by nudging. Conclusion It can be concluded that in theory these models are seemed to be different but in application they perform in the same way and oblige to effect similarly. There is a little difference in their act of targeting the organisational issue. Despite having similarities these models can prove to be effective in different business organisation and will be beneficial if they are being used altogether. Reference Bartunek, J.M. and Woodman, R.W., 2015. Beyond Lewin: Toward a temporal approximation of organization development and change. Brooks, T., 2013. Should we nudge informed consent?.The American Journal of Bioethics,13(6), pp.22-23. Burke, W.W., 2017.Organization change: Theory and practice. Sage Publications. Burns, T.R. and Roszkowska, E., 2016. Rational choice theory: Toward a psychological, social, and material contextualization of human choice behavior.Theoretical Economics Letters,6(2), pp.195-207. Chappell, S., Pescud, M., Waterworth, P., Shilton, T., Roche, D., Ledger, M., Slevin, T. and Rosenberg, M., 2016. Exploring the process of implementing healthy workplace initiatives: mapping to Kotter's leading change model.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine,58(10), pp.e341-e348. Cornelissen, J. and Cornelissen, J.P., 2017.Corporate communication: A guide to theory and practice. Sage. Grne-Yanoff, T. and Hertwig, R., 2016. Nudge versus boost: How coherent are policy and theory?.Minds and Machines,26(1-2), pp.149-183. Hansen, P.R. and Clausen, C., 2017. Management Concepts and the Navigation of Interessement Devices: The Key Role of Interessement Devices in the Creation of Agency and the Enablement of Organizational Change.Journal of Change Management,17(4), pp.344-366. Hayes, J., 2014.The theory and practice of change management. Palgrave Macmillan. Hornstein, H.A., 2015. The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity.International Journal of Project Management,33(2), pp.291-298. Hossan, C., 2015. Applicability of Lewins change management theory in Australian local government.International Journal of business and Management,10(6), p.53. Kosters, M. and Van der Heijden, J., 2015. From mechanism to virtue: Evaluating Nudge theory.Evaluation,21(3), pp.276-291. Kuipers, B.S., Higgs, M., Kickert, W., Tummers, L., Grandia, J. and Van der Voet, J., 2014. The management of change in public organizations: A literature review.Public administration,92(1), pp.1-20. Lines, B.C., Sullivan, K.T., Smithwick, J.B. and Mischung, J., 2015. Overcoming resistance to change in engineering and construction: Change management factors for owner organizations.International Journal of Project Management,33(5), pp.1170-1179. Lozano, R., 2015. A holistic perspective on corporate sustainability drivers.Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management,22(1), pp.32-44. Lozano, R., Nummert, B. and Ceulemans, K., 2016. Elucidating the relationship between sustainability reporting and organisational change management for sustainability.Journal of cleaner production,125, pp.168-188. Mahmood, W.B.W., Idris, K., Samah, B.A. and Omar, Z., 2017. Behavioral Support for Change: Integration of Planned Organizational Change Model and Theory of Planned Behaviour.Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH),2(3), pp.1-8. McClelland, A., 2016. Nudge Theory.Institute for Historic Building Conservation Yearbook 2016, pp.31-32. Neal, D., Vujcic, J., Burns, R., Wood, W. and Devine, J., 2016. Nudging and Habit Change for Open Defecation: New Tactics From Behavioral Science.Water and Sanitation Program, World Bank, Washington, DC. Pollack, J. and Pollack, R., 2015. Using Kotters eight stage process to manage an organisational change program: Presentation and practice.Systemic Practice and Action Research,28(1), pp.51-66. Pollack, J., 2015. Is there a divide between change management theory and practice?.The Business Management Review,6(2), p.64. Worley, C.G. and Mohrman, S.A., 2014. Is change management obsolete?.Organizational Dynamics,43(3), pp.214-224.