Implementing Change Management

(1)

Chapter 8

Implementing Change:

(2)

Change Management Approach



Focuses on strategic, intentional

and usually large-scale change



Entails following a variety of

steps; the exact steps vary

depending upon the model used



Belief that achieving

organizational change is possible

through a coordinated and

planned approach



Claims to be appropriate for all

types of change

Change

Management Approach

-Kotter’s Eight-Step Model -Other n-step models

-N-step model issues

Change

(3)

Kotter’s Eight-Step Model



Kotter’s eight-step model is one of

the best known:

1. Establish the need for urgency

2. Ensure there is a powerful change

group to guide the change

3. Develop a vision

4. Communicate the vision

5. Empower the staf

6. Ensure there are short-term wins

7. Consolidate gains

8. Embed the change in the culture

Change

-Kotter’s Eight-Step Model

-Other n-step models

Change

(4)

Other N-Step Models



Ten commandements (Kanter, Stein and Jick

1992)



Ten Keys (Pendlebury, Grouard, and Meston

1998)



12 Action Steps (Nadler 1998)



Transformation Trajectory (Taffinfer 1998)



Nine-Phase Change Process Model (Anderson &

Anderson 2001)



Step-by-Step Change Model (Kirkpatrick 2001)



12 Step Framework (Mento, Jones and

Dirndorfer 2002)



RAND’s Six Steps (Light 2005)



Integrated Model (Leppitt 2006)

Change

(5)

N-Step Model Issues



The sequences of steps



The number of steps



The timing of steps



The resourcing of steps



The involvement in each step



Managing multiple steps



Revisiting diferent steps



“Are all steps needed for

particular changes?”



Cyclical or linear

Change

-N-step model issues

Change

(6)

Change Management vs. OD

There is a debate between

proponents of OD and proponents

of change management:

◦

OD is criticized for giving attention

only to human development, and not

to technology, operations, and

strategy

◦

Change management is criticized for



_{having a focus on the concerns of}

management rather than on those

of the organization as a whole



_{being the product of management}

consultancy firms

-Other n-step models

Change

(7)

Contingency Approaches



Contingency approaches challenge the

view that there is “one best way”



The style of change or the path of

change will vary, depending upon the

circumstances, including:



_{the scale of the change}



_{the receptivity to change of organizational}

members



_{the style of change management}



_{the time period}



_{the performance of the organization}

Change

Management vs Organization Development

Contingency Approaches

(8)

Contingency Approaches



Huy’s Contingency Approach categorizes

change into 4 ideal types:

1. The commanding intervention

• Short-term and rapid • senior executives

• Downsizing, outsourcing, divesting

2. The engineering intervention

• Medium-term and relatively fast • Analysts

• Changing work design and operational systems

3. The teaching intervention  _{Long-term and gradual}  _Consultants

 _{Work practices and behaviours}

4. The socializing intervention  _{Long-term and gradual}

 _{Participative experiential learning, self-monitoring}  _{Democratic organizational practices}

Change

(9)

Contingency Approaches

Contingency approaches remain less common

than change management approaches.

Suggested reasons include:

•

Achieving “fit” may be difficult due to difering perceptions of the conditions in which the fit is sought

•

Contingency approaches require greater analysis and decisions by managers; the prescriptiveness of change management models may be attractive to managers

•

Contingency approaches focus on leadership style rather than a specific set of actions

•

The use of diferent change styles at diferent times may raises questions in the minds of staf as to the credibility of senior management.

•

There is a question about “what” is contingent to managing change -Other n-step models

Change

Management vs Organization Development

Contingency Approaches

(10)

Processual Approach



It sees change as a continuous process

rather than a series of linear events

within a given period of time



It sees the outcome of change as

occurring through a complex interplay

of diferent interest groups, goals, and

politics.



This approach alerts the change

manager to the range of influences

which they will confront and the way in

which these will lead to only certain

change outcomes being achieved



This approach is often used to provide

a detailed analysis and understanding

of change retrospectively.

Change

(11)

Kotter has worked more any other theorist on the definition of leadership and how it actually differs from management.

(12)

John Kotter on Leadership & Management

(13)

(14)

When Katie Frazier first joined Norfolk Southern’s Atlanta terminal, she felt it was running well but still felt more could be done to improve operations. She was also concerned about safety issues. As she got comfortable in her new job, she was wracking her brain, struggling with how to help the company take its safety and operations standards from just “good enough” to a higher level. One day, while in a local bookstore’s business section, she noticed a book with penguins on the cover. Penguins had always been her favorite animal, but she wondered what such a book was doing surrounded by books on management! The book, needless to say, was “Our Iceberg Is Melting.” Once she started reading it, she thought to herself, “wow, this is really helpful.” She noticed that behaviors in her company sometimes

mirrored the penguins’ behaviors, for example, people would see a complex

problem, and then either ignore it or wait for someone else to fix it. Katie thought that if she could get other people in the company to read the book, it might be a big help in giving people perspective on the bigger picture.Katie, being one of the few

relatively young workers around, faced an enormous challenge in getting her older co-workers to buy in to the notion that penguins could help the organization. There were many skeptics. She showed the book to her manager, a former Marine. He told her that the book was something his granddaughter might read, not something he would value as a business leader. Katie persevered and insisted that he read it. After

Norfolk Southern: Case Study

(15)

Step 1) Katie started by trying to create a sense of urgency

around a willingness to raise safety and operational

standards. Through evaluation of these problems, not only by Katie but also by the broader leadership team, people

began to feel that urgency was more than just the latest fad. That process of raising the urgency level inside the Atlanta

terminal of Norfolk Southern took about 2 months from start

(16)

Step 2) After sufficient urgency was raised, a guiding coalition formed made up of a few conductors, engineers & supervisors.

Katie’s fear was that the group was too homogenous – she actually wanted to include a few of the company’s more

skeptical employees to get their feedback and help strengthen

the group’s decision making. The Guiding Coalition began

meeting regularly and called themselves “The Iceberg Group.”

This group started out small, but eventually grew to have about 9 people, changing over time, from different parts of the

organization, meeting regularly to see how to implement the rest

(17)

Step 3) The vision that the group created was designed to change

everyone’s mentality and attitude about safety. Injuries could not be treated as an acceptable risk at a railroad – they had to be reduced

(18)

Step 4) Communicating this vision was a constant battle, since most of a

railroad’s employees are on the move at any given time. Furthermore, most

of the crew members did not have access to modern communications like e-mail.

As a result, the vision was communicated through a vehicle called “job

briefings,” where the days weather & track conditions were discussed for crews about to go out on to the tracks. These briefings happen 3 times a

day, at the beginning of every shift. The Iceberg Group started

communicating the change vision at job briefings, around the clock, for two

weeks straight. Over time, every crew member was touched by the vision

(19)

Step 5)The largest barrier Katie felt she needed to overcome were related

to the concept of raising the bar on safety standards – how can you make people really care about the highest possible safety standards, when

current standards are already high? The way to do it, she said, was to make it personal – get to the heart and not just the mind. They forced

people to think about their families and how they would feel about an

injury to their loved ones. Over time, the message began to sink in and people started to change their behavior. This created a high level of

(20)

Step 6) The Iceberg Group set a goal for a short term win – six months injury free and communicated it broadly. Since the inception of the Iceberg

Group’s work, with the exception of a small muscle pull, the Atlanta terminal has gone almost 9 months injury free.

Other outcomes resulted as well, for example, because the terminal became so proficient, they’ve never had to reduce the number of shifts

running, even as other companies have cut back. With injuries down about 97% over last year, the Atlanta terminal has had fewer missed days of work,

fewer injury-related costs and more productive workers, enabling it to gain a

(21)

Step 7&8) Even with this success, the Atlanta terminal isn’t content to let up. As they continue to move through the 8 Step process, they

hope to make the change permanent by anchoring these new

changes into the culture. The Iceberg Group continues to meet, looking for other ways in which they can help the company improve