sppn.info Fitness The Theory And Practice Of Change Management Pdf


Saturday, March 23, 2019

John Hayes is Emeritus Professor of Change Management at Leeds University. Business School and contributes to programmes on change. The Theory and Practice of Change Management - Download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online. management. from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data. Hayes, John, –. The theory and practice of change management / John Hayes.

The Theory And Practice Of Change Management Pdf

Language:English, Spanish, Indonesian
Genre:Business & Career
Published (Last):
ePub File Size: MB
PDF File Size: MB
Distribution:Free* [*Regsitration Required]
Uploaded by: VINITA

Synopsis: A core textbook for all modules in Change Management, John Hayes examines and applies all of the key theories on change to organisational. The Theory and Practice of Change Management (5th ed.) by John Hayes. Read online, or download in secure PDF format. John Hayes' bestselling textbook combines a scholarly discussion of change management with a host of practical tools and techniques. It provides future.

It provides future managers with all the skills they need to diagnose the need for change and to ensure its successful implementation. The book will be essential reading for final-year business undergraduates, as well as MBA and postgraduate students who are taking modules in change management or organisational change.

It is also ideal for change practitioners and consultants. Video interviews with experienced change practitioners from a range of organisations Change Tools: PART I: Process Models of Change 2. Leading Change: Patterns of Change. Recognising the Need or Opportunity for Change 5.

The Theory and Practice of Change Management (5th ed.)

Starting the Change 6. Diagnosis 8. The Role of Leadership in Change Management Power, Politics and Stakeholder Management Responsible Change Management: An Ethical Approach Managing Context to promote ethical practice This will breed resentment to both the change and you, since no-one else had a say in the matter.

Instead, the change should be presented in a way that the team will understand and respond well to, with evidence to back it up, and above all else as a choice.

If not, make the most of the rejection, and either way… Listen to feedback Whether your changes were rejected or not, you need to be open to whatever feedback your team may have. This, in turn, will make them more willing to give your changes a shot. If your team uses your new process and immediately hits a roadblock, their enthusiasm for the whole thing is going to plummet.

Instead, make the transition to the new way of doing things as easy as possible by assessing what might get in the way of the change and tackling that issue as soon as possible. Again, talking to your team to help identify these obstacles is a great way to identify ones you would have otherwise missed. Keep momentum up with short-term wins Once some progress has been made on deploying your change you need to make sure that it is maintained.

The good Helping the employee realize the importance of the issue and letting them choose the solution makes them more motivated to see it through. Giving them that choice also promotes a stronger bond with yourself and your business, which can extend into greater loyalty and a lower employee turnover rate.

This makes nudge at least a great supplement to more formal approaches. Also, because of having to be used alongside another method, the extra time and effort involved in providing attractive choices for your employees can be staggering and impractical for larger companies.

Nudge also suffers a little in terms of its predictability. While you can improve the landscape for your changes all you want, the choice or a variation thereof ultimately has to lie with your employees, which can make the outcome uncertain. The verdict Nudge theory is an odd concept, but with careful planning you can turn the people] your changes most depend on your employees into its biggest champions.

That way you can have a specific action plan while getting a large amount of support from your team. By focusing on achieving the following five goals, the ADKAR model can be used to effectively plan out change on both an individual and organizational level: Awareness of the need to change Desire to participate and support the change Knowledge on how to change Ability to implement required skills and behaviors Reinforcement to sustain the change The method Awareness The awareness stage is all about making sure that your employees understand the need for change.

Instead, you need to justify those changes by using hard evidence to really drive the point home. Give real-world examples of what will happen after the change and compare it to their current position.

The McKinsey 7-S model

Listen to their feedback and implement any useful advice to share the responsibility if creating the change. Knowledge The knowledge goal in ADKAR is to make sure that everyone knows how the change will be carried out and how to fulfill their specific part in that process. So, here you need to break down the change into steps and analyze what various employees will need to know in order to complete them all. Once you know this, the team s need to be taught how the change will be completed and what their part in the process is.

Ability While it might seem like knowledge and ability are the same thing, the time it takes to go from knowing how to complete a task to being able to actually carry it out can be immense. As such, you need to check the ability of each employee and assess whether they need extra experience or knowledge in order to reliably complete their tasks.

The required knowledge and ability to achieve your change can also be limited by creating a documented process which anyone can follow, no matter their skill set or experience. However, in loosely coupled fields, radical change will be more common and will tend to be evolutionary and could unfold over a relatively long period of time. How a game of football is played may change over the course of a match, but there is a consistency that is determined by the nature of the playing field and the rules of the game.

The coach and the players can intervene and make changes that will affect team performance, but they cannot intervene to change the nature of the playing field or the rules of the game the deep structure. Gersick argues that so long as the deep structure is intact, it generates a strong inertia to prevent the system from generating alternatives outside its own boundaries.

Furthermore, these forces for inertia can pull any deviations that do occur back into line. Gersick identifies three sources of inertia: cognitive frameworks, motiva- tion and obligations. Organizational members often develop shared cognitive frame- works and mental models that influence the way they interpret reality and learn.

With regard to change, attention may be restricted to searching for ways of doing things better. See Hodgkinson and Healey, , for details of studies that have considered the role of mental representations in both organizational inertia and strategic adaptation. Thaler and Sunstein draw on the work of Samu- elson and Zeckhauser to argue that for lots of reasons people prefer to stick with their current situation.

Obligations can also limit change. Tushman and Romanelli note that even if a system can overcome its own cognitive and motivational barriers against realizing a need for change, the networks of interdependent resource relationships and value commitments generated by its structure will often prevent it being able to achieve the required change. Episodes of discontinuous change occur when inertia, that is, the inability of organizations to change as rapidly as their environment, triggers some form of revo- lutionary transformation.

This, according to Romanelli and Tushman , is because resistance to change prevents small changes in organizational units from taking hold and substantially influencing activities in related subunits. Consequently, small changes do not accumulate incrementally to transform the organization. They report that the metaphor of the firm implied by concep- tions of episodic change is an organization that comprises a set of interdependencies that converge and tighten become more closely aligned as short run adaptations are pursued in order to achieve higher levels of efficiency.

This focus on internal alignment deflects attention away from the need to maintain external alignment and, consequently, the organization is slow to adapt to environmental change. Inertia maintains the state that Lewin described as stable, quasi-stationary equilib- rium until misalignment reaches the point where major changes are precipitated. The only way forward is for the organization to transform itself. Gersick 19 argues that the transformation of deep structures can only occur through a process of wholesale upheaval: According to this logic, the deep structures must first be dismantled, leaving the system temporarily disorganized, in order for any fundamental change to be accomplished.

This process of revolutionary change and organizational transformation provides the basis for a new state of equilibrium. However, because of forces of resistance that inhibit continuous adaptation, this new equilibrium gives rise to another period of relative stability that is followed by a further period of revolutionary change.

The Theory and Practice of Change Management (5th ed.)

This process continues to unfold as a process of punctuated equilibrium. Pat t e r n s o f c h a n g e 21 Those who subscribe to the punctuated equilibrium paradigm argue that revolu- tionary episodes may affect a single organization or a whole sector. An example of a whole sector that was faced with the need to change its deep structure is the electricity supply sector in the UK.

When the Conservative government decided to privatize the industry, this created a new playing field and a new set of rules for all the utility companies in the sector. Support for the punctuated equilibrium paradigm Numerous case histories offer support for the punctuated equilibrium paradigm.

Pettigrew reports a study of change in ICI over the period — He found that radical periods of change were interspersed with periods of incremental adjustment and that change in core beliefs preceded changes in structure and business strategy. Tushman et al. They also observed that these equilibrium periods were punctuated by brief periods of intense and pervasive change that led to the formulation of new missions and then the initiation of new equilibrium periods.

Research report 1. Resistance to change is critical to punctuated equilibrium theory in that it establishes the key condition that supports revolutionary transformation. Resistance prevents small changes in organizational subunits from taking hold or substantially influencing activities in related subunits. This gives rise to their second hypothesis: Small changes in individual domains of organizational activity will not accumulate incrementally to yield a fundamental transformation.

Their final set of three hypotheses addressed how organizational transformation is stimulated. Method Romanelli and Tushman studied the life histories of 25 minicomputer producers founded in the USA between and The firms were selected to maximize organizational similarities on dimensions of organizational age and the environmental characteristics that the organizations faced during founding and later in their lives.

They found that detailed information about strategies, structures and power distributions was available for all organizations throughout their lives. However, they also found that organizations reported information about cultures and control systems infrequently and inconsistently.

Consequently, Romanelli and Tushman dropped the culture and control system domains of activity from further analysis and focused their attention on structure, strategy and power distributions.

Fundamental organizational transformations, which could be either revolutionary or non-revolutionary, were identified as occurring whenever substantial changes were observed in the strategy, structure and power distribution domains of organizational activity.

Revolutionary transformations were defined as occurring whenever changes in all three strategy, structure, and power distributions occurred within any two-year time period. NB: Two years was selected because some of the data were presented for corporate fiscal years and some for calendar years; however, they found that the majority of the revolutionary transformations actually occurred within a single year.

Non-revolutionary transformations were identified in two ways. The key findings of the study were that: 1 A large majority of organizational transformations were accomplished via rapid and discontinuous change.An adaptation 15 Mildred Golden Pryor, Sonia Taneja, John Humphreys, Donna Anderson, and Lisa Singleton Conclusion and Recommendations The change management models that have been discussed in this article are still relevant and can be used as they have been in the past, with one exception — the speed at which the steps, stages, or phases of the models occur.

Quinn, J. In his autobiography.

The gradualist paradigm The gradualist paradigm posits that fundamental change organizational transforma- tion can occur through a process of continuous adjustment, and does not require some major discontinuous jolt to the system in order to trigger a short episode of revolutionary change.

Some commentators have suggested that because of its track record of sustained success.