This document discusses principles and practices of organizational change and management. It covers topics such as triggers of change, making change happen, dealing with resistance to change, and the relationship between change and innovation. The key learning outcomes are explained including understanding human responses to change, overcoming resistance, and distinguishing between types of innovations. Change management approaches like organization development are also summarized.

1. Principles and Practices of
Management
Change
Dr. Eng. Adel Alsaqri

2. Learning Outcomes
• Explain why effective change management is important, to organizations and to
individuals.
• Identify the main external and internal triggers of organizational change.
• Explain the issues that management must take into account to ensure that change is
successful.
• Understand the typical characteristics of human responses to change.
• Understand the nature of resistance to change and approaches to overcoming it.
• Explain the advantages and limitations of participative methods of change management.
• Understand the significance of innovation, and the distinction between sustaining,
disruptive and operational innovations.
• Explain the organizational properties that stimulate and stifle innovation respectively.
• Recognize the challenges facing innovative change leaders.

3. Why do we need change
• Organizations must change, to keep up with economic and
geopolitical developments, competitor behavior, changing customer
demands and expectations, new legislation and regulations, new
materials, new technologies – and many other surprises.
• Failure to change, and to change rapidly, can threaten an organization’s
survival.
• You as an individual must also be able and willing to change.
• new knowledge and skills every few years must be acquired every year
• Failure to change as an individual will put your employability, and your career, at risk.
• Change is a constant, and it is a constant challenge, for organizations,
and for us as individuals

4. Triggers of change
• External triggers for organizational change include:
• economic and trading conditions, domestic and global;
• new technology and materials;
• demographic trends, silver tsunami;
• changes in consumers’ demands and expectations;
• activities and innovations of competitors, mergers and acquisitions;
• legislation, regulation, government policies, corporate social responsibility
demands
• shifts in local, national and international politics;
• changes in social and cultural values.

5. Triggers of change
• Internal triggers for organizational change can include:
• design of new products and services;
• low performance and morale, high stress and staff turnover;
• appointment of a new senior manager or top team;
• inadequate skills and knowledge base, triggering training programes;
• office and factory relocation, closer to suppliers and markets;
• recognition of problems triggering redistribution of responsibilities;
• innovations in the manufacturing process;
• new ideas about how to deliver services to customers.

6. Making change happen
• Change is not simply a matter of reacting to triggers.
• Organizations and individuals can anticipate trends and opportunities, and
be proactive as well
• we need to focus on ‘next practice’ as well as ‘best practice’
• The major challenge for organizations today is navigating high levels of
turbulence
• Organizations operate in dynamic environments, in societies where the
aspirations and purposes of various stakeholders change over time.
• A key organizational capability is the ability to adapt as context,
opportunities, and challenges change

7. Making change happen
• One of the best-known metaphors for change was developed by Kurt
Lewin (1951), who argued for the need to unfreeze the current state
of affairs, to move to a desired new state then to refreeze and
stabilize those changes
• However, as Mohrman and
Lawler suggest, refreezing is no
longer an option.
• ‘Repeat change’ is the norm,
and ‘permanent thaw’ is a better
metaphor

8. Making change happen
• Organizational change takes many different forms:
• affecting structures,
• culture,
• working practices,
• information systems
• Changes also vary in ‘depth’, from shallow to deep
• most organizations today appear to need deep transformational change. This
is more difficult to implement than shallow change,
• it is more costly and time-consuming, requires greater management expertise, and
affects larger numbers of people in more significant ways
• deep change is appropriate when dealing with ‘deep problems’, while fine-tuning is an
appropriate response to minor concerns

9. Depth of organizational change

10. How to change
• The advice for managers on implementing change – on how to make it
happen – is straightforward
• usually in the form of a checklist.
• One of the best-known sets of guidelines comes from John Kotter “Leading Change” (2007).
• He suggested eight steps to successful transformational change:
1. Establish a sense of urgency for the proposed changes.
2. Create a powerful team to guide and drive the implementation.
3. Develop a vision to direct the change efforts, and a strategy to achieve the vision.
4. Communicate the new vision and strategy.
5. Empower others to help achieve the vision, removing obstacles, encouraging risk taking.
6. Plan for and create short-term wins, and recognize and reward those involved.
7. Consolidate improvements and develop new ideas and projects to support the vision.
8. Ensure that new approaches are embedded in the organization culture.

11. Minimizing failure of change
• Boris Ewenstein et al. (2015) suggest that the failure rate of planned
change efforts could be reduced by innovative applications of social
media, which can be used to:
• give employees immediate feedback on progress;
• tailor information to individual roles and needs;
• sidestep the hierarchy and establish direct contacts;
• build community and shared purpose among people who are physically
distant from each other;
• demonstrate achievements in real time.

12. Be carful of Rapid change
• constant change can be damaging; that we need to slow things down,
and perhaps keep some things the same
• Rapid pace creates the problem of initiative decay (or ‘improvement
evaporation’), where the benefits of one change are lost because the
organization moves on to deal with new priorities!
• therefore, it is advisable to learn how to sustain changes that are already in place
• A further problem is initiative fatigue, as people become tired of constant
demands to do things differently, work better, smarter, faster, harder.
• affecting all levels of an organization, and reducing enthusiasm for more change.

13. The acceleration trap
• some organizations (‘hares’) respond rapidly and aggressively to changing
conditions hiring or laying off parts of the workforce
• Others (‘tortoises’) try to maintain consistency, and make smaller
adjustments
• studies showed that employment instability lowered organizational
performance
• Although, very high instability was damaging, so was very low instability.
• Highly stable organizations may be too rigid and inflexible.
• therefore, a ‘slow and steady’ approach, changing in response to external conditions, but
retaining talented employees
• Change too slowly, and the organization’s survival may be at risk. Change
too quickly, and staff may be overloaded and demotivated, which could
also threaten performance and survival

14. The acceleration trap
• three typical patterns (Bruch and Menges, 2010):
• Overloading: staff have too many activities, but not enough time or resources.
• Multi-loading: focus is reduced by asking employees to take on too many
different activities.
• Perpetual loading: the organization operates close to capacity all the time,
giving employees no chance to rest or retreat, but only to ask, ‘When is the
economizing going to come to an end?’

15. Change and the Individual
• David Schneider and Charles Goldwasser (1998) introduced ‘the
classic change curve’
• In the middle of the curve sits a ‘valley of despair’, suggesting that that
change can mean loss and pain for those who are affected by it.
• A leader of change must anticipate employees’ reactions, another key
factor in the process.
• Blue line: unrealistic high expectations
• Deep valley desire

16. Coping with change
• Kübler-Ross coping change’s cycle are defined as following:

17. How much can we take?
• Robert M. Yerkes and John D. Dodson (1908) introduced what is
called “Yerkes–Dodson law”:

18. Readiness and resistance
• Readiness depends on:
• understanding the need for change,
• knowing the direction and the goal,
• Having a clear plan,
• enough resources,
• capable people to implement it.
• If readiness is low, implementation will be more difficult,
• some ‘groundwork’ may be required in order to increase levels of readiness
among those who are going to be affected

19. Readiness and resistance
• change readiness is an individual attitude which has both cognitive and
emotional dimensions.
• Collective readiness is based on the shared beliefs which develop through
social interaction and shared experiences.
• individual’s change readiness five beliefs are:
• 1. Discrepancy: the belief that change is needed.
• 2. Appropriate: the belief that the proposed change is an appropriate response.
• 3. Efficacy: the individual’s perceived capability to implement the change.
• 4. Principal support: the belief that the organization will provide resources and
information.
• 5. Valence: the individual’s evaluation of the personal costs and benefits; no benefits,
no overall positive evaluation of readiness.

20. Readiness and resistance
• Individual change readiness is demonstrated through support for,
openness towards, and commitment to change.
• These attitudes and behaviours can be influenced by three sets of
factors:
1. external pressures, including industry and technology changes, new
regulations, and professional group memberships.
2. Internal context enablers’, including change participation and
communication processes, and leadership.
3. personal characteristics and include needs, values and traits such as self-
confidence, risk tolerance, dispositional resistance to change and self-
efficacy.

21. Readiness and resistance
• Those who are responsible for change may therefore have to address
resistance to change
• Change has positive and negative aspects.
• On the one hand, change implies experiment and the creation of something
new.
• On the other hand, it means discontinuity and the dismantling of traditional
arrangements and relationships
• change can be resisted because it involves confrontation with the unknown, and loss of
the familiar.

22. Readiness and resistance
• There are many sources of resistance to change, but the main ones seem to
be:
• Self-interest: Change may threaten to push us out of our ‘comfort zone’,
and away from what we enjoy.
• Misunderstanding: We are more likely to resist change if we do not
understand the reasons behind it, or its nature and consequences
• Different assessments: We each differ in how we see and evaluate the costs
and benefits of change
• Low tolerance for change: We differ in our abilities to cope with change
and uncertainty. Change that requires us to think and behave in different
ways can challenge our self concept.

23. Managing Resistance
• understand each stakeholder or stakeholder group affected by a
particular change.
• Stakeholder analysis is useful in planning change, and involves the
following steps:
• 1. Draw up a list of stakeholders affected by the proposed changes.
• 2. Establish what each will gain or lose if the change goes ahead.
• 3. Use the potential benefits to strengthen support.
• 4. Find ways to address the concerns of those who feel they will lose out, by
altering the nature of the changes, or reducing their losses in other ways

24. Dealing with resistance

25. Dealing with difficult resistance
• Jeffrey and Laurie Ford (2009, p.100) argue that ‘Even difficult people can
provide valuable input when you treat their communication with respect and
are willing to reconsider the change you’re initiating’.
• They identify five ways in which resistance can be used productively:
• 1. Encourage dialogue: keep the conversation alive, increase awareness of the change
ideas, and allow those affected to think through the implications.
• 2. Clarify the purpose: help those affected to understand why their roles have to
change.
• 3. Consider new possibilities: accept if useful the ideas of those resisting; the most
outspoken are often closest to the operations affected, and care about getting it right.
• 4. Listen to the voices: encourage participation and engagement; people want to be
heard, and noting concerns can generate novel and valuable options.
• 5. Deal with the past: current responses to change can be based on previous failures,
in which current managers were not involved;
• it may be necessary to resolve any ‘leftover’ issues before going ahead with new plans.

26. Readiness and resistance
• Todd Jick and Maury Peiperl (2010) suggest that change leaders
should ‘rethink’ the concept of resistance,
• see this as a natural part of the change process, and as a potential source of
energy and feedback.
• The power of resistance can be used to build support for change.
• Treating resisters with respect strengthens relationships and improves
the chances of success.
• Accept that there are situations where focusing on dissent can be
counterproductive.
• This can occur, for example, where challenges to change proposals are not
well-informed, or where change is necessary for organizational survival.

27. Participation and dictatorship
• Doug Stace and Dexter Dunphy (2001) identified four styles of
change:
• Collaborative: widespread employee participation in key decisions.
• Consultative: limited involvement in setting goals relevant to areas of
responsibility.
• Directive: the use of authority in reaching decisions about change and the
future.
• Coercive: senior management impose change on the organization.

28. Participation and dictatorship

29. Organization development (OD)
• Organization development (OD) approaches begin with the assumption
that organizational problems are due to conflict caused by poor
communication and lack of understanding.
• OD has a toolkit, based on a set of core values concerning how
organizations should treat their employees.
• OD aims to improve both organizational effectiveness and individual
capabilities, through the systematic application of social and behavioural
science knowledge and techniques.
• OD argues that ‘bureaucracy is bad’ and that the caring, sharing,
empowering organization is a better place to work, and is financially and
materially more effective

30. Organization development (OD)
• Stephen Robbins and Timothy Judge (2008) outline the OD values:
• Respect. Individuals should be treated with dignity and respect.
• Trust. The healthy organization is characterized by trust, authenticity and
openness.
• Power equalization. Effective organizations do not emphasize hierarchical
control.
• Confrontation. Problems shouldn’t be hidden; they should be openly
confronted.
• Participation. Those who are affected by change will be more committed to
its success when they are involved in the decisions.

31. OD solutions for bureaucracy

32. OD’s extensive toolkit of ‘interventions

33. OD’s extensive toolkit of ‘interventions

34. Benefits of OD
• improved productivity, morale, commitment to success;
• better understanding of organizational strengths and weaknesses;
• improved communications, problem solving and conflict resolution;
• creativity, openness, personal development;
• decrease in politicking;
• better management and teamwork, increased adaptability;
• ability to attract and retain quality people.

35. Criticisms of OD
1. It ignores organizational power inequalities, claiming that conflict is due
to poor communication, and not to a conflict of interests between
management and employees.
2. It focuses on ‘soft’ attitudes and values, rather than on ‘hard’ operational
and financial results.
3. OD interventions take time.
• Improved effectiveness, difficult to measure, based on intangible values, in the long
run, after an expensive programme this is not a compelling promise in a fast-moving
competitive world.

36. Change vs Innovation
• Is ‘change’ an appropriate response to a fast-paced unpredictable
world?
• To keep ahead of the competition, organizations must be creative and
innovative.
• In the public sector, innovation is necessary in order to meet rising public
expectations with regard to service cost and quality.
• Innovation is not limited to new products.
• Most organizations also want to create new ways to organize, to
develop new working practices, and to provide customers, with
innovative services

37. Innovation and creativity
• innovation is defined as the adoption of any device, system, process,
programme, product or service new to that organization.
• This means that an idea may have been developed and applied elsewhere, but if
it is ‘new in this setting’, then it can be regarded as an innovation here.
• Innovation and creativity are often seen as individual attributes
• Despite commercial pressures, some organizational norms, systems and
practices are receptive to innovation, while others encourage risk
avoidance.
• Creative people in the wrong organization are likely to be less creative.
• However, ordinary people in an organization that encourages innovation are
more likely to become more creative in that environment.

38. Innovation and creativity
• The innovation process also has a cultural dimension.
• Some countries are considered to be more innovative than others
• These differences are difficult to explain, and are influenced by social norms as well as
by low investment in new technology, and weak training practices.
• Clayton Christensen, Richard Bohmer and J. Kenagy (2000) distinguish
between sustaining innovations and disruptive innovations.
• Sustaining innovations improve existing products and processes: a more efficient
motor car, a mobile phone with video capability.
• Disruptive innovations introduce wholly new processes and services: electric cars,
social networking websites

39. Innovation and creativity
• Everett Rogers (1995) argues that the probability of an innovation being
adopted is
• increased when it is seen to have the following six properties:
• advantageous when compared with existing practice;
• compatible with existing practices;
• easy to understand;
• observable in demonstration sites;
• testable;
• adaptable to fit local needs.