IMPROVISING CHANGE MANAGEMENT

 

Introduction

Organizational change management happens not only in business organizations but increasingly so in public sector.  There is not only a “classical” resistance to technological innovation, but also a more contemporary resistance to organizational innovation, and more widely cultural resistance to changes in social norms.

Employees do in fact always resist.  People may not want to change.  They may not believe in the change.  They may feel demoralized by change initiatives.  John Kotter said that the most general lesson to be learned from the more successful cases is that the change process goes through a series of phases that, in total, usually require a considerable length of time.

It is now common for an organization to undergo change due to internal or external factor that requires an organizational adaptation.  Significant change involves uncertainty the lack of clarity of the unknown will raise the anxiety levels of staff which can be overcome with knowledge.

 

Emotional intelligence (EI)

Emotional intelligence (EI) is “the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and actions.”  EI can have predictive capabilities for success and can be influenced through appropriate training and development.  Research has identified EI as a powerful predictor of success when dealing with people, and especially as one climbs the ladder of success.

Organizations look to leadership (management) for ways to deal with the demands and new challenges of a changing environment.  One of the key benefits to be gained by an organization using EI is having staffs that are able to regulate their own emotions when dealing with others

 

Resistance to change

One thing people resist could be the idea of change itself. People may indeed do not like change, any change.  Human beings do not change easily. People only want to change when both the pull-and push-forces are strong that people themselves see no other solution anymore than to change.

People are quite sensitive about the “technical” aspects of change initiatives, i.e. how change is introduced, communicated and discussed.  The very idea of new public management and managerialism, of accountability and performance measurement – and the intended and unintended consequences which come with these new systems and methods is also an issue.

People are not against change per se, but they are against managerialistic change management initiatives and paternalistic ideology of leadership which primarily serve the personal and group interests of a few. Changing mindsets, attitudes and culture in an organization typically requires different techniques, applied consistently and over time.  Change masters have realized that behavioral and cultural change are crucial to project success and are considerably tougher to address than the so-called ‘‘hard’’ factors, such as structure, performance measures and incentives.

 

Failure of change initiatives

Management fails to recognize that adjustment to change takes time.  They very quickly expect employees to move from the denial phase to the commitment phase and fail to recognize that each individual will go through all of the phases at different paces.  It is never uniform.

No two change processes look the same.  Each change is different, each organization is different and each department is different.  We are not the same today as we were even five years ago because the circumstances right now are different.  The customers are different.  The structures are different.  The drivers of change are different.  If change were easy, we would not be struggling with the issue of strategic change management.

 

Conclusion

There are several layers of change, and what appears as confusion of the ante narratives hides inconsistencies among the layers of change.  The appearance of a change success can cover up the contrary and discreet resistance to change which may not be dysfunctional.

Change management often considers individuals as agents or actors, and not as subjects.  Successful projects require a full, realistic understanding of the upcoming challenges and complexities, followed by specific actions to address them. Lack of early insight leads to a high risk and complexity will be underestimated or even overlooked.  In particular, the complexity of managing behavioral and cultural changes is often underestimated in the early project planning and scoping stages.

 

References:

Don Chrusciel, (2006),"Considerations Of Emotional Intelligence (EI) In Dealing With Change Decision Management", Management Decision, Vol. 44 Iss: 5 pp. 644 – 657

Hans Henrik Jørgensen, Lawrence Owen, Andreas Neus, (2009),"Stop Improvising Change Management!", Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 37 Iss: 2 pp. 38 - 44

Michael Stanleigh, (2008),"Effecting Successful Change Management Initiatives", Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 40 Iss: 1 pp. 34 – 37

Thomas Diefenbach, (2007),"The Managerialistic Ideology Of Organisational Change Management", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 20 Iss: 1 pp. 126 - 144

Yannick Fronda, Jean-Luc Moriceau, (2008),"I Am Not Your Hero: Change Management And Culture Shocks In A Public Sector Corporation", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 21 Iss: 5 pp. 589 - 609