qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer A study of organizational change tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas InfoTech Pakistan dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrty uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
5/7/2011 Zarmina Siraj
Contents:
Organizational Change An overview Organizational change in InfoTech Pakistan Company background Business work Organizational change 2003 The major decisions The levels of organizational change adopted by InfoTech Pakistan Learning outcomes recommendations
Organizational Change:
2|P ag e
An overview:
Perhaps the most asked but least answered question in business today is ³What can we do to make our business survive and grow?´ The world is rapidly changing into something too hard to easily predict, with a hundred opportunities and pitfalls passing by every moment. To add to this confusion, there are hundreds, if not thousands of techniques, solutions and methods that claim to help business improve productivity, quality and customer satisfaction. A company President, CEO or business owner has so many choices in these buzzwords, whether they are called Total Quality Management, Customer Satisfaction, Re-engineering or Teambuilding. They are like new shoppers in a giant grocery store: They are hungry, but there are so many brands, sizes and varieties you don¶t know what to buy. In response to this confusion, many do nothing, often afraid of making the wrong choices. Others change the techniques they use every few months, using the ³program du¶jeur´ method of organizational change, otherwise known as MBS (Management by Best Seller). Neither of these responses helps the organization in the long run. Changing nothing will produce nothing. Implementing a different buzzword (Total Quality, Just in Time, Re-engineering, etc.) every few months often creates a ³whipsaw´ effect that causes mass confusion among your employees. These buzzwords are often a hammer in search of a nail, techniques applied with no clear focus as to the why, expected results or return on investment. y One of the organizations we consulted with started on this path. Senior management proclaimed in a memo that Total Quality should be a way of life. One senior vice president declared that he wanted 25% of his organization using Total Quality tools within a year. This caused tremendous excitement in the organization, However, the follow-through was delayed, occasionally inappropriate and sometimes not there. Many employees became discouraged with the process and considered it just another management fad. With the next business downturn, virtually all training had stopped and little enthusiasm was left. Other organizations clearly focus on technical problems and on improving what they had. They are initially successful, but become victims of their own success. I call this an improved, planned incremental approach. Their initial quality improvement teams may be so successful they rapidly create more teams, without the qualitative organization-wide changes (reengineering) necessary to sustain a permanent effort. One organization we worked with had over 70 quality improvement teams in a plan with only 300 employees. They had shown little results after their first successes, and asked us what their next steps should be. We suggested the union¶s leadership in their efforts, look at restructuring their organization along more product-focused lines, and possibly start profit sharing. They were not interested in taking any of these actions. A few months later, its parent company shut down the site, partly because of its poor productivity. y Organizations need to move beyond the buzzwords into deciding what actions they need to perform that will help them grow and develop. In response to this problem, this article will provide you a framework for coping with organizational change independent of buzzwords or the latest management fad. Organizations must first decide on the framework their organizational change long before they choose a buzzword to implement.
3|P ag e
Organizational change in InfoTech Pakistan
1.1 COMPANY PROFILE:
y ABOUT INFO TECH PKISTAN:
Established in 1995, InfoTech now stands as a recognized market leader in Business & Information Management Consulting, Technology Solutions Provisioning, Systems Integration and Outsourcing Services. With deep business process knowledge, highly skilled resources and collaborative working culture they are committed to delivering Performance-centric Technology Solutions for our customer to help them become high-performance businesses and governments. A decade of their alliance partnership with industry leaders like IBM, Oracle/Siebel, Microsoft, Cisco, Computer Associates, and others, provide us distinct advantages to remain as a Dependable & Trusted technology partner to our customers. y EXECUTIVE TEAM:
Naseer A. Akhtar President & CEO Nadeem A. Malik VP Strategy & Corporate Development
4|P ag e
Suresh Agarwal MD InfoTech Global Amer Khan VP Middle East & Africa Amin Shakir VP Finance & Operations M. Usman Farooq System Integration Team Lead Muhammad Akram Territory Manager, North
y
VISION OF COMPANY:
To remain a Trusted Technology Partner for their customers. They need to grow with their customers, locally as well as internationally. To enable their customers to sustain, grow and become high-performance businesses using their knowledge, skills & experiences. To help achieve their business goals by leveraging best-in-class ³need driven´ industry practices. The AIM is to implement ³Performance-Centric´ technology solutions using Collaborative Methodologies. Their code of business ethics is built around Corporate Governance by ³people & principles´ through well defined roles, and empowering people to perform as Responsible Corporate Citizens.
Business work:
Info tech Pakistan is involved in providing services in following ways; y y y y y y y y y y Technology Consulting Technology Infrastructure. Industry Focus Banking & Financial Sector End-2-End Infrastructure Solutions Messaging, Work-flow and Back-office Help Desk & Branch Operations Support CRM Strategy, Implementation & Integration Security Solutions Outsourcing Solutions
5|P ag e
y
Capital Market Solutions Achieving high performance in the capital markets industry has never been more challenging. Rapid, cost effective innovation in capital markets requires highly skilled technologists with deep industry knowledge. InfoTech has a vast experience in the development of capital market solutions and products. InfoTech's capital market solutions provide a unique blend of technology, industry and methodology expertise to deliver cutting edge results at rapid speed and low delivery risk. InfoTech leverages its expertise in the capital and securities market to deliver value through continuous innovation and improved efficiency of financial markets. We use our financial understanding to create tangible value for customers in terms of strategy as well as implementation. InfoTech collaborates with its clients to help them become high-performance businesses. InfoTech continues to invest in new technologies, processes, and people which can help its customers succeed.
Organizational change 2003:
In October 2003 InfoTech Pakistan went through an organizational change to enhance its business in accordance to the changing needs of e-commerce and marketing.
The major decisions
Instead of grasping for the latest technique, InfoTech Pakistan went through a formal decisionmaking process in 2003 that had four major components: y Levels, goals and strategies y Measurement system y Sequence of steps y Implementation and organizational change
The levels of organizational change adopted by InfoTech Pakistan:
Perhaps that was most difficult decision to make at what "level" to start. There were four levels of organizational change: y shaping and anticipating the future (level 1) y defining what business to be in and their "core competencies´ (level 2) y reengineering processes (level 3) y incrementally improving processes (level 4) First let's describe these levels, and then under what circumstances InfoTech Pakistan used them. Level 1- shaping and anticipating the future
6|P ag e
At this level, InfoTech the organization started out with few assumptions about the business itself, what it is "good" at, and what the future will be like. Management generated alternate "scenarios" of the future, define opportunities based on these possible futures, assessed its strengths and weaknesses in those scenarios changed its mission, measurement system etc Level 2 - defining what business to be in and their "Core Competencies Many attempts at strategic planning started at this level, by assuming that 1) the future will be like the past or at least predictable; 2) the future was embodied in the CEO's "vision for the future"; or 3) management didn¶t know where else to start; 4) management was too afraid to start at level 1 because of the changes needed to really meet future requirements; or 5) the only mandate they have was to refine what mission already exists. After a mission had been defined and a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis was completed, InfoTech Pakistan then defined its measures, goals, strategies, etc. Level 3 - Reengineering (Structurally Changing) Your Processes Either as an aftermath or consequence of level one or two work or as an independent action, level three work was made focused on fundamentally changing how work should accomplished. Rather than focus on modest improvements, info tech made reengineering focused on making major structural changes to everyday with the goal of substantially improving productivity, efficiency, and quality or customer satisfaction. Level 4 - Incrementally Changing your Processes Level 4 InfoTech Pakistan were focusing in making many small changes to existing work processes. Often time¶s InfoTech Pakistan put in considerable effort into getting every employee focused on making these small changes, often with considerable effect. as, making improvements on how a buggy whip for horse-drawn carriages is made will rarely come up with the idea that buggy whips were no longer necessary because cars have been invented.. But InfoTech Pakistan the organization I consulted with has had a more positive experience with the incremental approach. They trained an internal facilitator, helped them deliver training in a just-in-time fashion, and had them focus on specific technical problems. The teams¶ management formed reduced initial quality defects by 48%.The disadvantages of such an incremental approach include avoiding structural, system-wide problems, and assumes existing processes need modest improvement. In addition, using incremental approaches can be frustrating to employees and management if (pick a buzzword) does not catch on in the organization. As a result of these disadvantages, many organizations experience a high risk of failure in the long run. But InfoTech during this period of organizational change successfully implement this strategy and found fruitful results
7|P ag e
level-1
shaping and anticipating the future defining what business to be in and their "Core Competencies - Reengineering (Structurally Changing) Your Processes Incrementally Changing your Processes
level-2
level-3
level-4
Learning outcomes
These levels adopted by InfoTech Pakistan have much of the same goals: increasing customer satisfaction, doing things rights the first time, greater employee productivity, etc.Despite these similarities; they differ substantially in the methods they use to achieve these goals. Levels one through three, on one hand, focuses on "big picture" elements such as analysis of the marketplace, out-sourcing, purchase/sale of subsidiaries, truly out-of-the box" thinking and substantial change in the management and support systems of the company . In my experience, companies that use these methods tend to have a high need for change, risktolerant management, relatively few constraints and have substantial consensus among its management on what to do. Types of industries include those whose environment requires rapid adaptation to fast-moving events: electronics, information systems and telecommunication industries, for example. Companies using mostly incremental tools (level 4) have management that perceives only a modest need for change, is relatively risk-avoidant, has many constraints on its actions and only has a modest consensus among them on what to do. Instead of focusing on new opportunities, they wish to hone and clarify what they already do. Types of industries that often use these methods include the military, aerospace, and until recently, health care organizations. Those organizations whose strategic planning solely focuses on refining an existing mission statement and communicating the paragraph also fall into using incremental (level 4) methods. When discussing the continuum of structural vs. incremental change, it¶s important to realize that what labels companies use is not important here. One must carefully observe their
8|P ag e
actions. Many companies have slogans, "glitter" recognition programs and large budgets to provide "awareness" training in the buzzword they are attempting to implement. The key, however, is to note what changes they are really making. If management is mostly filling training slots with disinterested workers and forming a few process improvement teams, they are using level three methods. If they are considering changes in business lines, re-organizing by customer instead of by function, or making major changes in how the everyday employee is being paid, they are using level 3 methods. Unfortunately, all of this discussion hinges in management's belief about how much change is necessary. This belief often hinges on their often unassessed beliefs of 1) how well the organization performs compared to other organizations (a lack of benchmarking); and 2) what the future will be. As a result, my recommendation is that organizations conduct scenario/strategic planning exercises (level 1) anyway, even if they have already decided that level 4 (incremental) methods will suffice to solve their problems. This way management can be aware of the limitations of the lower-level methods they are using and realize when it is best to abandon these lower-level methods for something more substantive. Based on this exercise, comparison of existing internal processes with world-class examples (benchmarking) and market analysis, management may come to realize how much change is necessary. The greater the gap between what the organization needs to be and how it currently operations and what businesses it is in, the more it suggests that greater change is necessary, and greater restructuring is necessary. This decision is very important. IBM in the mid 1980¶s felt that the future would be much like the past and a result didn't have to change much. They did not realize how much microcomputers would replace the functions of their bread-and-butter business, the mainframe. The net result was tens of thousands of people were laid off, with the company suffering the first losses in its history.
Goals:
Based on whatever level work InfoTech Pakistan had done, the opportunities that are found need to be evaluated to determine which of them best suit the existing and future capabilities of the organization and provide the most "bang for the buck" in terms of improvement in your measures of success. In addition, goals need to have the resources and management determination to see to their success. Goals also need to be SMART, that is: Specific - concrete action, step-by-step actions needed to make the goal succeed Measurable - observable results from the goal's accomplishment Attainable - The goal is both possible and is done at the right time with sufficient attention and resources Realistic- The probability of success is good, given the resources and attention given it. Time-bound- The goal is achieved within a specified period of time in a way that takes advantage of the opportunity before it passes you by. Some examples include: y ³We will expand into the polystyrene market within the next five years and achieve 20% market share´
9|P ag e
y y
We will decrease the time from research to customer delivery by 50% within two years We will increase the quality of our largest product by 20% in three years.
Recommendations:
Strategies
Where goals focus on what, strategies focus on how. Some examples include: y ³We will re-engineer our research and development process´ y ³We will evaluate and improve our sales and marketing department´ y We will conduct a SWOT analysis and then define our core competencies Additional examples of strategies are included in the "Moving from the Future to your Strategy" chapter. Wait a second. Aren't goals and strategies really the same? They are in one sense as they both need to be SMART. As what you might guess, the goals of a level are achieved by creating strategies at the lower levels.
y The Measurement System
Without measures of success, the organization does not know if it has succeeded in its efforts. Someone once said, ³What gets measured gets improved.´ Someone else said, ³If you don¶t know where you are going, any road will get you there.´ For more information on measurement systems and their place in organizational change, please see the "Balanced Scorecard" article, along with a number of articles where employee surveys are used.
y Implementation and Organizational Change
The success of any organizational change effort can be summed into an equation: Success = Measurement X Method X Control X Focused Persistence X Consensus Like any equation with multiplication, a high value of one variable can compensate for lower levels on other variables. Also like any equation with multiplication, if one variable equals 0, the result is zero.
y On employee involvement
Some organizations involve employees¶ right from the start, where they have significant influence in the strategic plan of the organization. This kind of involvement tends to reduce employees¶ resistance, which is always a very important factor in the success of any organizational change. Such organizations as Eaton, Eastman Chemical and Rohm and Haas have used such an approach. Such employee involvement, however, might also be threatening to management¶s traditional power. Some organizations decide employee involvement will be limited to implementing the strategic decisions management makes, or further limit involvement to purely task-focused
10 | P a g e
teams working on technical problems. Many aerospace organizations have used this approach. y Focused persistence, implementation good project management and the sequence of
The sequence of implementation is also an important factor. There are four basic options, with many variations of them. 1. The first involves the entire organization from the start, with the whole organization intensively working at once on making the change. Ford Motor Company is currently restructuring its entire organization, moving from planning to implementation in nine months. 2. Another option is a more relaxed approach, in which divisions or business units of the organization go at their own pace. This option can often become an incremental approach like the first or second village. Many conglomerates or other companies with diverse operations try this approach. 3. A third option is similar to the previous one, with the focus being on individual business units doing the implementation. In this case, however, business units implement roughly the same things in roughly the same time schedule. Unisys, the computer company, is using this method on some of its organizational change efforts. 4. A fourth option is to create a pilot project in one division or business unit, learn from its mistakes, and then apply those lessons to the rest of the organization. Examples of this option include the Saturn car facility at General Motors and the Enfield plant of Digital Equipment Corporation. It¶s important to note here that creating pilot projects is a highrisk business. In both cases, the lessons learned from these pilot projects have not gained widespread acceptance in their parent companies due to their heavily ingrained cultures.
References: y How to manage organizational change By David E. Hussey-page 120 y Organizational change By Barbara Senior page 56 to onwards y Managing change: a strategic approach to organizational dynamics Bernard Burns y Organizational change: theory and practice by Christian Louis Van Tender y WH Bovey - Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2001 - emeraldinsight.com Observes that the published literature on resistance to organizational change has focused more on organizational issues rather than individual psychological factors. The present study investigated the role of both adaptive and maladaptive defense mechanisms in individual resistance
11 | P a g e
y Specter, B, Beer, M (1994), "Beyond TQM programmes", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 7 No.2, pp.63-70. ... y RT By - Journal of Change Management, 2005 - informaworld.com ABSTRACT It can be argued that the successful management of change is crucial to any organization in order to survive and succeed in the present highly competitive and continuously evolving business environment. However, theories and approaches to change management currently y H Bennett - Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2000 - emeraldinsight.com Employee commitment is a concept which has attracted much attention in recent years. Research has focused on relationships between commitment and various facets of individual performance and on the psychological basis of the commitment itself. Profiles the pattern of employee
12 | P a g e
doc_999480560.docx
5/7/2011 Zarmina Siraj
Contents:
Organizational Change An overview Organizational change in InfoTech Pakistan Company background Business work Organizational change 2003 The major decisions The levels of organizational change adopted by InfoTech Pakistan Learning outcomes recommendations
Organizational Change:
2|P ag e
An overview:
Perhaps the most asked but least answered question in business today is ³What can we do to make our business survive and grow?´ The world is rapidly changing into something too hard to easily predict, with a hundred opportunities and pitfalls passing by every moment. To add to this confusion, there are hundreds, if not thousands of techniques, solutions and methods that claim to help business improve productivity, quality and customer satisfaction. A company President, CEO or business owner has so many choices in these buzzwords, whether they are called Total Quality Management, Customer Satisfaction, Re-engineering or Teambuilding. They are like new shoppers in a giant grocery store: They are hungry, but there are so many brands, sizes and varieties you don¶t know what to buy. In response to this confusion, many do nothing, often afraid of making the wrong choices. Others change the techniques they use every few months, using the ³program du¶jeur´ method of organizational change, otherwise known as MBS (Management by Best Seller). Neither of these responses helps the organization in the long run. Changing nothing will produce nothing. Implementing a different buzzword (Total Quality, Just in Time, Re-engineering, etc.) every few months often creates a ³whipsaw´ effect that causes mass confusion among your employees. These buzzwords are often a hammer in search of a nail, techniques applied with no clear focus as to the why, expected results or return on investment. y One of the organizations we consulted with started on this path. Senior management proclaimed in a memo that Total Quality should be a way of life. One senior vice president declared that he wanted 25% of his organization using Total Quality tools within a year. This caused tremendous excitement in the organization, However, the follow-through was delayed, occasionally inappropriate and sometimes not there. Many employees became discouraged with the process and considered it just another management fad. With the next business downturn, virtually all training had stopped and little enthusiasm was left. Other organizations clearly focus on technical problems and on improving what they had. They are initially successful, but become victims of their own success. I call this an improved, planned incremental approach. Their initial quality improvement teams may be so successful they rapidly create more teams, without the qualitative organization-wide changes (reengineering) necessary to sustain a permanent effort. One organization we worked with had over 70 quality improvement teams in a plan with only 300 employees. They had shown little results after their first successes, and asked us what their next steps should be. We suggested the union¶s leadership in their efforts, look at restructuring their organization along more product-focused lines, and possibly start profit sharing. They were not interested in taking any of these actions. A few months later, its parent company shut down the site, partly because of its poor productivity. y Organizations need to move beyond the buzzwords into deciding what actions they need to perform that will help them grow and develop. In response to this problem, this article will provide you a framework for coping with organizational change independent of buzzwords or the latest management fad. Organizations must first decide on the framework their organizational change long before they choose a buzzword to implement.
3|P ag e
Organizational change in InfoTech Pakistan
1.1 COMPANY PROFILE:
y ABOUT INFO TECH PKISTAN:
Established in 1995, InfoTech now stands as a recognized market leader in Business & Information Management Consulting, Technology Solutions Provisioning, Systems Integration and Outsourcing Services. With deep business process knowledge, highly skilled resources and collaborative working culture they are committed to delivering Performance-centric Technology Solutions for our customer to help them become high-performance businesses and governments. A decade of their alliance partnership with industry leaders like IBM, Oracle/Siebel, Microsoft, Cisco, Computer Associates, and others, provide us distinct advantages to remain as a Dependable & Trusted technology partner to our customers. y EXECUTIVE TEAM:
Naseer A. Akhtar President & CEO Nadeem A. Malik VP Strategy & Corporate Development
4|P ag e
Suresh Agarwal MD InfoTech Global Amer Khan VP Middle East & Africa Amin Shakir VP Finance & Operations M. Usman Farooq System Integration Team Lead Muhammad Akram Territory Manager, North
y
VISION OF COMPANY:
To remain a Trusted Technology Partner for their customers. They need to grow with their customers, locally as well as internationally. To enable their customers to sustain, grow and become high-performance businesses using their knowledge, skills & experiences. To help achieve their business goals by leveraging best-in-class ³need driven´ industry practices. The AIM is to implement ³Performance-Centric´ technology solutions using Collaborative Methodologies. Their code of business ethics is built around Corporate Governance by ³people & principles´ through well defined roles, and empowering people to perform as Responsible Corporate Citizens.
Business work:
Info tech Pakistan is involved in providing services in following ways; y y y y y y y y y y Technology Consulting Technology Infrastructure. Industry Focus Banking & Financial Sector End-2-End Infrastructure Solutions Messaging, Work-flow and Back-office Help Desk & Branch Operations Support CRM Strategy, Implementation & Integration Security Solutions Outsourcing Solutions
5|P ag e
y
Capital Market Solutions Achieving high performance in the capital markets industry has never been more challenging. Rapid, cost effective innovation in capital markets requires highly skilled technologists with deep industry knowledge. InfoTech has a vast experience in the development of capital market solutions and products. InfoTech's capital market solutions provide a unique blend of technology, industry and methodology expertise to deliver cutting edge results at rapid speed and low delivery risk. InfoTech leverages its expertise in the capital and securities market to deliver value through continuous innovation and improved efficiency of financial markets. We use our financial understanding to create tangible value for customers in terms of strategy as well as implementation. InfoTech collaborates with its clients to help them become high-performance businesses. InfoTech continues to invest in new technologies, processes, and people which can help its customers succeed.
Organizational change 2003:
In October 2003 InfoTech Pakistan went through an organizational change to enhance its business in accordance to the changing needs of e-commerce and marketing.
The major decisions
Instead of grasping for the latest technique, InfoTech Pakistan went through a formal decisionmaking process in 2003 that had four major components: y Levels, goals and strategies y Measurement system y Sequence of steps y Implementation and organizational change
The levels of organizational change adopted by InfoTech Pakistan:
Perhaps that was most difficult decision to make at what "level" to start. There were four levels of organizational change: y shaping and anticipating the future (level 1) y defining what business to be in and their "core competencies´ (level 2) y reengineering processes (level 3) y incrementally improving processes (level 4) First let's describe these levels, and then under what circumstances InfoTech Pakistan used them. Level 1- shaping and anticipating the future
6|P ag e
At this level, InfoTech the organization started out with few assumptions about the business itself, what it is "good" at, and what the future will be like. Management generated alternate "scenarios" of the future, define opportunities based on these possible futures, assessed its strengths and weaknesses in those scenarios changed its mission, measurement system etc Level 2 - defining what business to be in and their "Core Competencies Many attempts at strategic planning started at this level, by assuming that 1) the future will be like the past or at least predictable; 2) the future was embodied in the CEO's "vision for the future"; or 3) management didn¶t know where else to start; 4) management was too afraid to start at level 1 because of the changes needed to really meet future requirements; or 5) the only mandate they have was to refine what mission already exists. After a mission had been defined and a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis was completed, InfoTech Pakistan then defined its measures, goals, strategies, etc. Level 3 - Reengineering (Structurally Changing) Your Processes Either as an aftermath or consequence of level one or two work or as an independent action, level three work was made focused on fundamentally changing how work should accomplished. Rather than focus on modest improvements, info tech made reengineering focused on making major structural changes to everyday with the goal of substantially improving productivity, efficiency, and quality or customer satisfaction. Level 4 - Incrementally Changing your Processes Level 4 InfoTech Pakistan were focusing in making many small changes to existing work processes. Often time¶s InfoTech Pakistan put in considerable effort into getting every employee focused on making these small changes, often with considerable effect. as, making improvements on how a buggy whip for horse-drawn carriages is made will rarely come up with the idea that buggy whips were no longer necessary because cars have been invented.. But InfoTech Pakistan the organization I consulted with has had a more positive experience with the incremental approach. They trained an internal facilitator, helped them deliver training in a just-in-time fashion, and had them focus on specific technical problems. The teams¶ management formed reduced initial quality defects by 48%.The disadvantages of such an incremental approach include avoiding structural, system-wide problems, and assumes existing processes need modest improvement. In addition, using incremental approaches can be frustrating to employees and management if (pick a buzzword) does not catch on in the organization. As a result of these disadvantages, many organizations experience a high risk of failure in the long run. But InfoTech during this period of organizational change successfully implement this strategy and found fruitful results
7|P ag e
level-1
shaping and anticipating the future defining what business to be in and their "Core Competencies - Reengineering (Structurally Changing) Your Processes Incrementally Changing your Processes
level-2
level-3
level-4
Learning outcomes
These levels adopted by InfoTech Pakistan have much of the same goals: increasing customer satisfaction, doing things rights the first time, greater employee productivity, etc.Despite these similarities; they differ substantially in the methods they use to achieve these goals. Levels one through three, on one hand, focuses on "big picture" elements such as analysis of the marketplace, out-sourcing, purchase/sale of subsidiaries, truly out-of-the box" thinking and substantial change in the management and support systems of the company . In my experience, companies that use these methods tend to have a high need for change, risktolerant management, relatively few constraints and have substantial consensus among its management on what to do. Types of industries include those whose environment requires rapid adaptation to fast-moving events: electronics, information systems and telecommunication industries, for example. Companies using mostly incremental tools (level 4) have management that perceives only a modest need for change, is relatively risk-avoidant, has many constraints on its actions and only has a modest consensus among them on what to do. Instead of focusing on new opportunities, they wish to hone and clarify what they already do. Types of industries that often use these methods include the military, aerospace, and until recently, health care organizations. Those organizations whose strategic planning solely focuses on refining an existing mission statement and communicating the paragraph also fall into using incremental (level 4) methods. When discussing the continuum of structural vs. incremental change, it¶s important to realize that what labels companies use is not important here. One must carefully observe their
8|P ag e
actions. Many companies have slogans, "glitter" recognition programs and large budgets to provide "awareness" training in the buzzword they are attempting to implement. The key, however, is to note what changes they are really making. If management is mostly filling training slots with disinterested workers and forming a few process improvement teams, they are using level three methods. If they are considering changes in business lines, re-organizing by customer instead of by function, or making major changes in how the everyday employee is being paid, they are using level 3 methods. Unfortunately, all of this discussion hinges in management's belief about how much change is necessary. This belief often hinges on their often unassessed beliefs of 1) how well the organization performs compared to other organizations (a lack of benchmarking); and 2) what the future will be. As a result, my recommendation is that organizations conduct scenario/strategic planning exercises (level 1) anyway, even if they have already decided that level 4 (incremental) methods will suffice to solve their problems. This way management can be aware of the limitations of the lower-level methods they are using and realize when it is best to abandon these lower-level methods for something more substantive. Based on this exercise, comparison of existing internal processes with world-class examples (benchmarking) and market analysis, management may come to realize how much change is necessary. The greater the gap between what the organization needs to be and how it currently operations and what businesses it is in, the more it suggests that greater change is necessary, and greater restructuring is necessary. This decision is very important. IBM in the mid 1980¶s felt that the future would be much like the past and a result didn't have to change much. They did not realize how much microcomputers would replace the functions of their bread-and-butter business, the mainframe. The net result was tens of thousands of people were laid off, with the company suffering the first losses in its history.
Goals:
Based on whatever level work InfoTech Pakistan had done, the opportunities that are found need to be evaluated to determine which of them best suit the existing and future capabilities of the organization and provide the most "bang for the buck" in terms of improvement in your measures of success. In addition, goals need to have the resources and management determination to see to their success. Goals also need to be SMART, that is: Specific - concrete action, step-by-step actions needed to make the goal succeed Measurable - observable results from the goal's accomplishment Attainable - The goal is both possible and is done at the right time with sufficient attention and resources Realistic- The probability of success is good, given the resources and attention given it. Time-bound- The goal is achieved within a specified period of time in a way that takes advantage of the opportunity before it passes you by. Some examples include: y ³We will expand into the polystyrene market within the next five years and achieve 20% market share´
9|P ag e
y y
We will decrease the time from research to customer delivery by 50% within two years We will increase the quality of our largest product by 20% in three years.
Recommendations:
Strategies
Where goals focus on what, strategies focus on how. Some examples include: y ³We will re-engineer our research and development process´ y ³We will evaluate and improve our sales and marketing department´ y We will conduct a SWOT analysis and then define our core competencies Additional examples of strategies are included in the "Moving from the Future to your Strategy" chapter. Wait a second. Aren't goals and strategies really the same? They are in one sense as they both need to be SMART. As what you might guess, the goals of a level are achieved by creating strategies at the lower levels.
y The Measurement System
Without measures of success, the organization does not know if it has succeeded in its efforts. Someone once said, ³What gets measured gets improved.´ Someone else said, ³If you don¶t know where you are going, any road will get you there.´ For more information on measurement systems and their place in organizational change, please see the "Balanced Scorecard" article, along with a number of articles where employee surveys are used.
y Implementation and Organizational Change
The success of any organizational change effort can be summed into an equation: Success = Measurement X Method X Control X Focused Persistence X Consensus Like any equation with multiplication, a high value of one variable can compensate for lower levels on other variables. Also like any equation with multiplication, if one variable equals 0, the result is zero.
y On employee involvement
Some organizations involve employees¶ right from the start, where they have significant influence in the strategic plan of the organization. This kind of involvement tends to reduce employees¶ resistance, which is always a very important factor in the success of any organizational change. Such organizations as Eaton, Eastman Chemical and Rohm and Haas have used such an approach. Such employee involvement, however, might also be threatening to management¶s traditional power. Some organizations decide employee involvement will be limited to implementing the strategic decisions management makes, or further limit involvement to purely task-focused
10 | P a g e
teams working on technical problems. Many aerospace organizations have used this approach. y Focused persistence, implementation good project management and the sequence of
The sequence of implementation is also an important factor. There are four basic options, with many variations of them. 1. The first involves the entire organization from the start, with the whole organization intensively working at once on making the change. Ford Motor Company is currently restructuring its entire organization, moving from planning to implementation in nine months. 2. Another option is a more relaxed approach, in which divisions or business units of the organization go at their own pace. This option can often become an incremental approach like the first or second village. Many conglomerates or other companies with diverse operations try this approach. 3. A third option is similar to the previous one, with the focus being on individual business units doing the implementation. In this case, however, business units implement roughly the same things in roughly the same time schedule. Unisys, the computer company, is using this method on some of its organizational change efforts. 4. A fourth option is to create a pilot project in one division or business unit, learn from its mistakes, and then apply those lessons to the rest of the organization. Examples of this option include the Saturn car facility at General Motors and the Enfield plant of Digital Equipment Corporation. It¶s important to note here that creating pilot projects is a highrisk business. In both cases, the lessons learned from these pilot projects have not gained widespread acceptance in their parent companies due to their heavily ingrained cultures.
References: y How to manage organizational change By David E. Hussey-page 120 y Organizational change By Barbara Senior page 56 to onwards y Managing change: a strategic approach to organizational dynamics Bernard Burns y Organizational change: theory and practice by Christian Louis Van Tender y WH Bovey - Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2001 - emeraldinsight.com Observes that the published literature on resistance to organizational change has focused more on organizational issues rather than individual psychological factors. The present study investigated the role of both adaptive and maladaptive defense mechanisms in individual resistance
11 | P a g e
y Specter, B, Beer, M (1994), "Beyond TQM programmes", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 7 No.2, pp.63-70. ... y RT By - Journal of Change Management, 2005 - informaworld.com ABSTRACT It can be argued that the successful management of change is crucial to any organization in order to survive and succeed in the present highly competitive and continuously evolving business environment. However, theories and approaches to change management currently y H Bennett - Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2000 - emeraldinsight.com Employee commitment is a concept which has attracted much attention in recent years. Research has focused on relationships between commitment and various facets of individual performance and on the psychological basis of the commitment itself. Profiles the pattern of employee
12 | P a g e
doc_999480560.docx