50 | P a g e
51 | P a g e An organisation needs to create the case for change thereby instituting a tactical, economic, and emotional source for change. This may raise the question as to what are the reasons for change. Additionally, change has been viewed as ‘‘situational’’ and transpires devoid of individuals’ transitioning (Bridges, 2010). Next, leadership, the organisation, and stakeholders must be aligned, collaborating, and encouraged. Stakeholder associations need to be managed using effective communication. Therefore, management should consider whether or not their leadership is entirely dedicated to change, and the nature and degree of resistance needed to be overcome or required for success (Robertson, 2008). Subsequently, a new organisational management system must be instituted. So, how exactly do they know that they are measuring the correct factors in order to achieve organisational objectives and goals? This aspect requires the integration of performance management and appraisals with specific strategies.
The subsequent step requires re-engineering process facilities and technology, thereby launching business processes and technology enablers. Here, the question to be asked is: ‘‘to what extent do our current processes and technologies inhibit or enable the achievement of our objectives?’’ (Robertson, 2008, p. 14). The organisation then must manage strategic features of change, through the integrated programme. The last element of change management is the establishment of a competent and skilled organisation. According to The University of Adelaide (n.d.): ‘‘Management plays an essential part in making the changes happen; it empowers the ‘doing’. Leadership inspires the transition, it is what energises people and sustains a change in behaviour and approach. Leadership engages the hearts and minds of staff’’ (p. 5-6). Moreover, specific policies, roles, duties and capabilities must be developed to determine the manner in which the firm’s human resources should be structured to facilitate and maintain superior outcomes. Major change may then be generated through the below five elements:
52 | P a g e Source: Kotter, 1996, cited in Robertson, 2008, p. 17.
Moreover, if managers institute organisational changes with the intent of achieving positive reactions to the change, they must be aware of the factors leading to the propensity for change within the following regions listed in Figure 2.9 below:
Source: Cameron and Green, 2015, p. 54.
1. Establish sense of urgency 2. Create the guiding coalition 3. Develop a vision and strategy 4. Communicate the change vision 5. Empower broad-based action 6. Generate short term wins
7. Consolidate gains and produce more change 8. Anchor new approaches in culture
Figure 9: Focus areas in relation to organisational change outcomes
53 | P a g e With consideration to the organisation under study within this research, and their accompanying procedures, strategies and culture- Unilever South Africa promotes an organisational culture based on tenacity and drive within a fast-paced and constantly changing market. All employees are encouraged to participate within company procedures and are kept engaged. Processes within each department are integrated to afford ease of transition and employees kept informed and updated in order to provide them with adequate skills to influence positive change. A “performance culture” is then engendered so as to invite and retain suitable talent and cultivate future leaders which compliments organisational values and diversity (Unilever South Africa, 2016).
A suggested change management model has not been explicitly suggested, thus subsequent to literature review, the following change management models of Lewin, Kotter and Carnall may be inferred as most suitable change models to be employed within a company of this nature (Appelbaum, Habashy, Malo, and Shafiq, 2012). The below table depicts the advantages and disadvantages of all three models so that each benefit and limitation is clearly understood. The execution of an appropriate change management model is essential, especially within a multinational organisation, since employees may be resistant to change.
Thus, leaders are required to apply and adapt best change management processes in order to diminish employee resistance in order for change to be executed effectively. Hence, it is important to understand the existing change management models available and its subsequent pros and cons in an attempt to evaluate which may be best suited to be implemented within Unilever. Subsequent to the analysis of Unilever SA’s organisational culture, it may be deemed that Kotter’s eight step model and Carnall’s change model are most appropriate for effecting and influencing positive change within Unilever.
54 | P a g e Table 4: Advantages and disadvantages of change management models
Model Lewin’s 3 step model Kotter’s eight- step model Carnall: Managing transitions
Advantage
Uses information gathered on probable judgements joined onto a graph and affords a graphical outline of the numerous aspects that assist and dispute a specific idea.
The transition is easier with this model. Focus on buy-in of employees as focus for success and fits well into the culture of classical hierarchies
This model focuses on managers and the skills they use to manage change. The model emphasises three skills in
particular which must be existent at all levels of management: (1) managing transitions effectively; (2) dealing with organisational cultures; and (3) managing
organisational politics.
Advantage
The “force field analysis” further develops the assessment ahead of the actual data so as to investigate the qualitative elements which may possibly influence the success or failure of the result under study
Process is simplified and step- by-step which offers guidance.
Focus leans towards preparing for and accepting change and not on the actual change.
This assists in tending to change within all levels of the employee structure, ensuring that change is efficiently accepted.
Disadvantage
Lewin’s model depicts a very coherent representation, however, its actual
implementation may omit the consideration of individual emotions and know-hows which could prompt adverse results which may lead to change resistance.
Steps within the process cannot be skipped and entire process is time consuming.
Encourages risk-taking (not necessarily a negative aspect, dependant on organisation type/
culture)
Disadvantage
Force field analysis necessitates the complete involvement of all individuals in order to afford correct data needed for an operative examination. If full involvement by all employees is not possible, this may cause undesirable results as it is unable to depict an accurate representation of the supporting and contesting forces.
Model is top-down, hampering room for co-creation or other forms of true participation. This may lead to frustrations among employees if the stages of grief and individual needs are not taken into consideration.
Effective execution of change greatly dependent on management skills.
Source: Vuodatus.Net, 2014.
55 | P a g e The below figures display graphical representations of the three change management models discussed:
Figure 11: Kotter’s eight-step model KOTTER’S EIGHT-STEP MODEL
1. Establish a sense of urgency. Discussing today’s competitive realities, looking at potential future scenarios. Increasing the ‘felt-need’ for change.
2. Form a powerful guiding coalition. Assembling a powerful group of people who can work well together.
3. Create a vision. Building a vision to guide the change effort together with strategies for achieving this.
4. Communicate the vision. Kotter emphasises the need to communicate at least 10 times the amount you expect to have to communicate. The vision and accompanying strategies and new behaviours needs to be communicated in a variety of different ways. The guiding coalition should be the first to role model new behaviours.
5. Empower others to act on the vision. This step includes getting rid of obstacles to change such as unhelpful structures or systems. Allow people to experiment.
6. Plan for and create short-term wins. Look for and advertise short-term visible improvements. Plan these in and reward people publicly for improvements.
7. Consolidate improvements and produce still more change. Promote and reward those able to promote and work towards the vision. Energise the process of change with new projects, resources, and change agents.
8. Institutionalise new approaches. Ensure that everyone understands that the new behaviours lead to corporate success.
Source: Kotter, 1995; cited in: Cameron and Green, 2015, p. 115.
Figure 10: Lewin's three-step model
56 | P a g e Figure 12: Carnall: Managing transitions
Source: Cameron and Green, 2015, p.127.
SYNTHESIS:
In recent years, we have witnessed a shift from managing change towards leading change.
Numerous individuals still view management and leadership as one in the same, however, there exists a major difference. Success is determined by how well a “leader” can influence behaviour in a positive manner in order to yield progressive results.
Change management involves a well-adjusted change culture of acknowledgement, preparation and assessment of organisational tasks to successfully manage change (Robertson, 2008).
Tactical, economic, and emotional sources for change need to be instituted in order to generate a case for change (Cameron and Green, 2015).
Change needs to be perceived as situational and may occur without employee transitioning (Cameron and Green, 2015).
It is essential that alignment exists amongst the organisation, stakeholders and the underlying leadership style which will allow for successful activation of the leadership process (Robertson, 2008).
Effective communication within the organisation must take place which will assist in predicting and effectively managing resistance (Cameron and Green, 2015).
57 | P a g e
Major change may be engendered via (a) establishing sense of urgency, (b) creating the guiding coalition, (c) cultivating a vision and strategy, (d) communicating the change vision, (e) empowering broad-based action, and (f) generating short term wins (Robertson, 2008, p. 17). Of the three models proposed above of Lewin, Kotter and Carnall, Kotter and Carnall can be viewed as the most applicable to rendering positive change within Unilever specifically.