CHAPTER 9: DISCUSSION
9.3 Re-examining the underpinning literature
assist organisations deal with the many issues that beset them. There is also a tendency for the field to periodically undergo a ‘re-generation’ and come up with the latest and most relevant about change management. Organisations will tend to latch onto such discoveries, but will most often end up disappointed.
Much change literature is thus guilty of promoting a straight-forward outlook into change processes. Organisations will frequently end up completely flabbergasted when things go wrong. What is also most astounding is when it is discovered that the changes had negative effects in some areas and that people were not prepared or lacked the necessary skills. It also comes as a surprise when decisions which may have appeared light-weight, result in significant outcomes, which managers often cannot control. Then there is also a realisation that the same issues keep on re-appearing. Organisations thus sometimes only see short-lived results, or experience a situation where they resort to looking at employing processes that worked in the past, or there is simply lost investment.
There exists literature on change which has undoubtedly advanced the field significantly (Kanter 1983; Kanter et al. 1992; Kotter 2002; Senge et al. 1999). What is needed now though is more emphasis on the realities of organisational life, but with the inclusion of systems thinking and complexity theory. Studies cannot ignore the inherent turbulence that characterises organisations, and organisations must learn how to utilise such complexity to gain an advantage.
It must be illustrated that any attempts at imposing order and control will most surely have negative consequences in some areas. Studies should also have less focus on breaking up organisational parts and then studying those in isolation, as this will not present an accurate picture. Aspects around communication, participation, leadership, and organisational culture are critical, but must be studied in a realistic manner that portrays true organisational life.
Change literature, and management studies in general, must attempt to start looking at solutions to issues, and researchers should take more responsibility. It must be highlighted that change is not an event that has a starting and ending date; it is continuous and it occurs in all aspects of the organisation, through the interactions of people.
Traditional change management may make a difference to processes on face-value but it is the people behind the processes that are of concern. The people in an organisation do not leave their emotions at home when they arrive at work; the reality is that they have their views and perceptions of the world. Change literature must illustrate how critical learning processes are but more specifically the deeper, more meaningful learning where there is a change in thought processes. More literature must focus on illustrating the benefits that can be attained when
enhancing the skills and capabilities of all in the organisation. Finally, studies are needed into processes regarding multiple-stakeholder scenarios.
9.3.2 Simulation literature
The use of simulations for various disciplines, specifically in management, is highlighted in many studies, and is a useful way for conducting research. It can be beneficial for students, academics, and organisations. It is a tool that is capable of bringing various people with unique backgrounds together. More academics and researchers can thus do research using simulations to not only teach students critical concepts, but it can also involve people from actual organisational settings, who may in turn benefit. Simulation literature often does not highlight the difficulties of attracting people to a simulation. Research must be done into looking at how to facilitate this, and studies can also compare how people felt before and after the simulations.
In a similar vein, the long-term effects of a simulation need to be assessed. There is no doubt that simulations are powerful learning tools, but they may be more effective in the beginning as a way to unleash learning opportunities.
Employing a simulation for use in a complex, organisational setting has far-reaching benefits, as highlighted by the literature. Designing a simulation for a specific setting is however more challenging and current research does not adequately highlight this. Furthermore, designing a tailor-made simulation for a multiple stakeholder setting is a demanding task. Multiple considerations include being fair and ensuring that the simulation does not favour or negatively portray any stakeholder group, and finding activities to hold the interests of all. The researcher or designer decides on which critical issues to include, and this is based on what was considered important. This could involve researcher bias. This same could apply to the formation of the roles. These areas around simulation design need more exploration. Despite the knowledge that the simulation must have adequate goals and challenge level, more work needs to be done around incorporating activities applicable to all.
The use of interactive simulations also holds much promise. This is an approach that works with people who are on different levels, some of whom may be technology-averse, which is often the case in a developing country. It is most useful though for bringing together people in a way in which they jointly communicate and interact with others. The assertions that simulations do assist with communication and participation do hold true.
Practical areas of running simulations deserve more attention in the literature. These include highlighting the journey from stress to enlightenment, which the facilitator and participants
experience. The influence of factors such as low numbers, late starts, disruptions, language, and group dynamics must be further investigated as to how they impact on the flow of the simulation. More studies must highlight the multiple abilities required from facilitators. The literature must also highlight that simulations take on a life of their own, and that the best preparation is for the facilitator to be prepared.
The case of learning through simulations deserves more attention in the literature. Experiential learning in a simulation may vary significantly depending on the participants in the simulation.
It could be the case that all simulations do allow people to have concrete experiences, resulting in observation and reflection, and the formation of abstract concepts. These three stages are powerful in triggering learning processes, and challenging mental models.
Some simulations may however not allow for the testing of implications, especially where there is an absence of senior staff or critical decision-makers in the simulation. The limitations of pre- testing in a simulation also need to be measured. Everyone in the simulation therefore may not have the ability to be able to test implications. This also relates to the idea that simulations may not fully allow people to be proactive. Organisational learning and more specifically continuous learning and adaptability, thus may not be fully achieved through participation in a simulation.
All the relevant stakeholders would have to participate to see the importance thereof, and would need more than a simulation to facilitate such learning. Other learning mechanisms may need to be used in conjunction with a simulation.
The issue of verisimilitude also requires clarification, as to whether or not having participants see connections to the real world, does indeed facilitate learning. The debriefing phase, which is considered critical, has to take into account the difference between participants, as well as the differences in their experiences in the simulation. Some participants could thus take away more learning from a simulation than others. The skills development of participants could also therefore vary depending on the roles that they had. Participants may furthermore have an opportunity to practice skills in the safety of the simulation, but whether they will have a chance in the real world to utilise such learning, may not be something that is in their control. There are thus some areas around learning that deserve attention.