Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Die SlideShare-Präsentation wird heruntergeladen. ×

Organizational_Change_Atina Ndindeng.doc

Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Wird geladen in …3
×

Hier ansehen

1 von 12 Anzeige

Weitere Verwandte Inhalte

Aktuellste (20)

Anzeige

Organizational_Change_Atina Ndindeng.doc

  1. 1. Organizational Change, Toyota Motor Corporation (TMC)- Knotters 8 Stage model. Organizational change remains one of the inevitable elements of business growth and sustainability (Biedenbacha and Soumlderholma,2008). Rapid technological development and global competition (Armenakis and Harris,2009) make a need for change in the future even more urgent. This paper discusses three change drivers TMC has undergone and three desired outcomes. This document uses Kotter's 8 stages model to discuss how the desired outcomes of these changes can be implemented from an HRM perspective. However, this model does not apply to all types of changes (Burnes,1996) because of its 'rigid approach' and some steps are not relevant in some contexts (Steven et al., 2012). One of the change drivers TMC thrives on is technological knowledge and aptitude (Toyota,2020). TMC has applied an acceleration suppression function system (Toyota,2020) that uses big data collected from connected cars to help identify the abnormal operation of the accelerator. Also, an advanced automatic collision notification system and a new retrofit accelerator control system will be installed in all new cars by June 2020. However, technological changes reflect strongly on the objectives and expectations of management and weakly on the characteristics of technology (Preece and Harrison,1988) which implies that not every customer can adapt to these changes due to income inequality and strategic choices (Mudambi,1994). So, for TMC to remain innovative, sustain its competitive advantage, and ensure the health and safety of its car users it must make these changes.
  2. 2. Another change driver has been an overhaul of the corporate structure aimed at taking a lead in COVID -19 recovery(Toyota,2020).TMC support measures have been put in place to help frontline and medical workers.TMC will use the Teiho Plant in Japan to produce about 600 injection mold and 3D printed face shields a week (Toyota,2020) using its Toyota production systems to fight the global pandemic. Also, changes have been made in working hours from home and how to improve productivity, and to reduce the cost further, they train workers with extra time gained from suspended production due to decreased demand to improve its corporate structure and competitiveness (Toyota,2020). These changes are in line with the UN sustainability goals which stem from poverty reduction and safety and health well- being. Changes in customer demands have been another driver for change. The global financial crisis and globalization (Mehri,2012) have affected customer buying behaviors. So, TMC is working closely with its suppliers to maintain its supply chain by making alternative production arrangements and carrying out cost differentiation strategies to keep all customers satisfied. Therefore, TMC promotes human resource development by supporting its suppliers and to remain competitive and build more integration through business and communication. The above notwithstanding, this article uses the knotters 8 stages model to analyze 3 desired outcomes at TMC. The first outcome of TMC's technological change hinges on customer safety and economic growth. Knotter (1996) in his model posits that the urgency for change when it is needed, creating a guiding coalition, developing a vision and strategy, and communicating it effectively (Knotter,1996) are important.
  3. 3. In TMC, the new acceleration suppression function and the retrofit accelerator control system are triggered by customer safety. This is very urgent and developing a clear strategy and vision using clear communication strategies to reduce uncertainty and ambiguity (Bordia et al.,2004) are crucial elements of the organizational change process. The guiding coalition is not a single-handed matter and needs people in power who are credible and good leaders (Lines,2007). TMC demonstrates this with its high revenue turnover of $10 billion in the last two years (Forbes,2020) due to good leadership management. However, knotter's claim of urgency in organizational change is counteracted by the fact that when change is delayed the benefits are slim and when it is rushed there is not enough time for adaptation causing it to fail (Buchanan et al., 2005). Therefore, the desired outcomes of customer safety and well-being and the need for economic growth can be linked to the knotters model. Another desired outcome is innovation due to changing customer behaviors. The urgency of this thrives on customer satisfaction and the need to remain competitive. TMC uses a unique approach in its Toyota production systems which is inimitable and clearly understood by managers who think less of failure (Washington and Hacker,2005). For this thrive, employees have to be empowered and participate in the change outcomes through training and shadowing (Klidas et al., 2007). However, not all employees can be receptive to change visions (Frahm and Brown,2007). So, for TMC to remain innovative it must use a support structure with change agents to sustain its competitive advantage (Massey and Williams,2006), develop and communicate a clear vision and strategy and involve its employees in the decision-making process.
  4. 4. To summarize, the knotter model does not apply to all types of changes (Steven et al., 2012) and the overlapping steps may compromise success. An application of the knotters model in TMC will largely succeed due to TMC's clarity of strategic vision, globalization, and its prompt responses to the changing market environment. However, commitment to change can make change succeed (Steven et al., 2017) and resistance to change (Jaros,2010) is an obstacle any organization will face. So, further research is need on this outside knotter's model.
  5. 5. Appendix 1 Appendix 2 – Review of Change framework Fig 1. Knotters 8 stages model
  6. 6. As seen in Fig .1, Knotters model has eight steps of change. In step 1, the change will not occur if there is no need for it to be done (Smith,2005) and the urgency of the change must be attractive to employees showing that it can be done and creating a positive mindset (Kobi,1996) In step 2 it is argued that one person cannot carry out change in an organization so, putting the right group of people is important for success (Kobi,1996). Knotter (1996) argues that this guiding coalition needs enough key players on board with expertise, who are credible and have good leadership skills. But, a coalition made up of bad leaders and good managers will not succeed. Self et al. (2007) intimates that change guided by a leader is more likely to be accepted by workgroup members and implementation is easier.
  7. 7. In step 3, Knotter (1996) argues after a guiding coalition we must formulate a 'clear and sensible vision' for the transformation effort. An effective vision changes the dynamics and looks beyond the immediate goals of the firm (Knotter,1996). Therefore, teamwork and coaching are needed to carry out change at this level. In Step 4, no change can occur effectively without good communication. High quality of management communication has a positive impact on organizational change (Nelissen and van Selm,2008). Knotter (1996) argues that two-way communication is always better than one-way communication and face to face communication has the greatest impact (D'Aprix,1982). A study by Frahm and Brown (2007) examines the link between communication and employees' receptivity to change. They found that weekly team meetings made employees more trusting and open to change. In step 5, the employees must be empowered to try new approaches to change by communicating the vision of the organization. Knotter (1996) intimates empowering employees means addressing obstacles in structure, skills, systems, and supervisors. The role of training is vital to employee empowerment. Critics have argued firmly that communication, training, and coaching are mediums through which companies develop empowered employees (Ellinger et al.,2010). So, employee empowerment and a shift in the paradigm of the organizational culture (Pinheiro,2010) are valuable ingredients for organizational change. In step 6, celebrating short- term wins boosts self -confidence and belief that bigger gains are possible, and this helps to build momentum for long term goals (Pieterson,2002). It also reassures employees and management that their efforts are on the right track (Marks,2007). However, striking a balance between short term
  8. 8. gains and long-term effects of change on employee perception can be complicated for organizational leadership (Boga and Ensari,2009). In step 7 and 8 consolidates gains and produce more change using new approaches in the corporate future (Steven et al., 2012). However, Knotters 8 step model has the following limitations: The approach is rigid because knotter (1996) argues that the 8 steps should be followed in a sequence and extended overlapping of the steps will compromise success. So, failure to implement the first step invalidates the subsequent steps (Burnes,1996). As mentioned before, some steps are not relevant in some context, and dealing with difficulties during change management (Steven et al., 2012) are some of the limitations of Knotter's model.
  9. 9. References Armenakis, A.A. and Harris, S.G. (2009), "Reflections: our journey in organizational change research and practice", Journal of Change Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 127‐42. Burnes, B. (1996), "No such thing as … a 'one best way' to manage organizational change", Management Decision, Vol. 34 No. 10, pp. 11‐18. Boga, I. and Ensari, N. (2009), “The role of transformational leadership and organizational change on perceived organizational success”, The Psychologist‐Manager Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 235‐51. Bordia, P., Hunt, E., Paulsen, N., Tourish, D. and DiFonzo, N. (2004), "Uncertainty during organizational change: is it all about control?", European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 345‐65. Biedenbacha, T. and Soumlderholma, A. (2008), "The challenge of organizing change in hypercompetitive industries: a literature review", Journal of Change Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 123‐45. Buchanan et al., (2005), "No going back: a review of the literature on sustaining organizational change", International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 189‐205. D'Aprix, R. (1982), “The oldest (and best) way to communicate with employees”, Harvard Business Review, September‐October, pp. 30‐2.
  10. 10. Ellinger, A.E., Keller, S.B. and Bas, A.B.E. (2010), “The empowerment of frontline service staff in 3PL Companies”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 79‐100. Forbes (2020), 'Can Toyota Grow Its Top Line In 2020 Despite the Global Auto Slowdown'?, Markets Forbes.com. Frahm, J. and Brown, K. (2007), "First steps: linking change communication to change receptivity", Journal of Organizational Change, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 370‐87. Jaros, S. (2010), "Commitment to organizational change: a critical review", Journal of Change Management, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 79‐108. Kotter, J.P. (1996), Leading Change, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Klidas, A., van den Berg, P.T. and Wilderom, C.P.M. (2007), "Managing employee empowerment in luxury hotels in Europe", International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 70‐88. Lines, R. (2007), "Using power to install strategy: the relationships between expert power, position power, influence tactics, and implementation success", Journal of Change Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 143‐70. Massey, L. and Williams, S. (2006), "Implementing change: the perspective of NHS change agents", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 667‐81. Marks, M.L. (2007), “A framework for facilitating adaptation to organizational transition”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 721‐39.
  11. 11. Mehri, D. (2012), "Restructuring in the Toyota keiretsu during the Asian financial crash: A case study of liberal market reforms and Japanese welfare corporatism", Journal of Organizational Ethnography, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 138-157 McDowell Mudambi, S. (1994), "A Topology of Strategic Choice in Retailing", International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 32-40. Nelissen, P. and van Selm, M. (2008), “Surviving organizational change: how management communication helps balance mixed feelings”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 306‐18. Pietersen, W. (2002), “The Mark Twain dilemma: the theory and practice of change leadership”, The Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 32‐7. Pinheiro, R. (2010), “Organizational change and employee empowerment – a grounded theory study in lean manufacturing integration into a traditional factory environment”, PhD dissertation, Capella University, Minneapolis, MN. Self, D.R., Armenakis, A.A. and Schraeder, M. (2007), “Organizational change content, process, and context: a simultaneous analysis of employee reactions”, Journal of Change Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 211‐29. Smith, I. (2005), “Continuing professional development and workplace learning 11: managing the ‘people’ side of organizational change”, Library Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 152‐5. Steven et al., (2017), ' Factors that impact the success of an organizational change: a case study analysis', Industrial and Commercial Training, vol. 49 no. 5.
  12. 12. Steven et al., (2012), 'Back to the future: revisiting Kotter's 1996 change model', Journal of Management Development. Toyota-global .com, (2020) https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/ Washington, M. and Hacker, M. (2005), "Why change fails: knowledge counts", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 26 No

×