Implementing Change, Essay Example

Introduction

A department that is unable to successfully achieve its goals and objectives in the current dynamic and competitive environment which is characterized by a comprehensive economy globalization, explosion of technological information, system restructuring, new departmental employee-employer relationship and downsizing, must be ready to adopt momentous changes in the manner they operate, this changes can be realized in so many ways and areas, for example, it can be seen in the workers attitude and behavior. In most cases changes at the departmental level are intend to bring changes in performance, behavior, attitude among other key elements at the work place (Richard, 1997). The manager is always the key figure in bringing changes in the working environment, most of the changes brought about by managers occur in the organizational structure of which involves replacement of personnel, it as well be a change in formal roles and jobs, in the system control, work process system structure or the change might occur in other aspects of departmental internal environment.

Managers ought to have an extensive know how on how the department operates, what is involved and those involved in carrying out what the department is entitled to do, the change to be put in place should be initiated and implement by the manager or his or her authority. The problem within the department is clarified and mitigations agreed upon by managers after a vigorous analysis and evaluation of information that has been researched by others within the department (Bruce, 1998). Once the manager has made the decision on the kind of change to be effected, the changes are usually communicated to workers in the department by use of form of communications i.e. memos, speech, letters, policy statements and verbal commands depending on the type of staff within the department. Since in most cases only the top officials or managers are involved in coming up with policies that form the changes, the changes in most cases are rapidly introduced within the department, this has proven to result in frictions between the staff and the managers.      A common fallacy on change is that it has to come from the top management, the underpinning fact on success of a change within a department lies in involving individuals who will be affected by it in coming up with the change, it is the only sure way of which managers can handle staff resistance to change within a department. It is natural for human being beings to resist change, According to Harvard Business Review article on Change (1998), people have a preference for a familiar environment, and habitually react negatively to changes in their work and social environments; the resistance takes different forms which may be a denial or passive form depending on the type of change. Most managers are mislead by the fact that when people think the change to be positive, they won’t resist it, it is true the staff might need change but not that developed during change assessment, the staff usually need change which will ‘‘fix’’ there problems, it advisable to involve the staff in change development. (Bruce, 1998) Sharing of responsibilities at departmental level in line with change involves a complete interconnection and relation between the managers and those at low level at the department; this should work in such a way that those at lower level are actively involved in identifying challenges facing the department and coming up with solution to the related problems, this encourages a continual interaction between the managers and the low level workers that eliminates staff resistance to change.

Also in order to for a manager successfully implement a change within the department, employees need to know how the change will benefit them even if they are not involved in decision making. The manager ought to bring the “change’’ to the staff before implementation, this will have a positive impact as you are able to initiate a change that works for the people (Bruce, 1998). The manager should develop the change within the department, a change does not occur in a minute, it’s a gradual process of which the management should monitor it closely so as its objective is achieved in the long run.

In deed change is a process; it involves gradual steps of assessment, planning, implementation and evaluation.

Change assessment involves putting in consideration if really there is need of change in the department; it also put in consideration when this change is to be effected if there is need of, during change assessment ranging from mistakes that have corrupted performance within the department to intricate probability model and models with dependability beyond existing limits of performance within the department. Once change assessment is over, the change to be effected is then planned, planning of change within a department is a vital shared responsibility process, and the managers come up with a problem within the department while the staff gathers data which is later used in planning on how to tackle the defined problem (Blache, 988). Planning process is complex in nature, in the management relies on the feedback from other involved parties to make decisions otherwise the whole change planning process would be a waste of time, the feedback from other parties in the ‘change’’ is used by the managers to make modification on the solution already put in place by the manager, the underlying assumption is that only those being who are experiencing the problem are in a position to come up with an expertise solution or change. Change planning also includes coming up with a programme on how the change is to be effected and in the manner it will be done, it involves stating system models, the technology or the elemental aspects to be changed within the department. During the planning phase, the manager should inform the staff the reason for the changes, what they anticipate to happen and how much will be used in coming up with the change, the manager ought to enlist support from other departments as this will influence the quality of the plan.

Change implementation is another important process within the change process, the ability for the people to acknowledge what is driving change and their feedback, is vital in success implementation of change, it normal for mankind to resist change when it is implemented. Implementation refers to putting the intended change in action by the management, during implementation, managers ought to keep on listening to resistance from the staff and respond to their feedback accordingly, the manager should keep involved in the change process even after implementation, the manager should ensure that sufficient resources, effective methods of communication and training is made as this will impact on the performance directly (Richard et al, 1997). The implemented change within a department undergoes evaluation to engage its performance, has the ‘‘change’’ really resulted in any change?  Has it improved or worsened the situation within the department? Is there any resistance and how is it going to be dealt with? These are some of the question evaluated after implementation of change with a department of an organization by the manager

Referance:

Brill, Peter L., and Worth, Richard (1997). The Four Levels of Corporate Change. New York: AMACOM, American Management Association.

Harvard Business Review on Change. (1998). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Hesselbein, Frances, Goldsmith, Marshall, and Beckhard, Richard, eds. (1997). The Organization of the Future. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Nixon, Bruce. (1998). Making a Difference: Strategies and Tools for Transforming Your Organization. New York: AMACOM, American Management Association.

Klaus M. Blache (1988): Success factors for implementing change: a manufacturing viewpoint, publisher SME