Understanding and Coping with Change

grounds and Coping with Change For legion(predicate) years, the world of business has experienced an reposition magnitude rate of revision. Alvin Toffler (1970) predicted the trend several decades ago. Toffler also noted that people peril a natural tendency to resist channelise. This shelter to budge is a major agreemental challenge that systems must learn to manage.As individuals respond to change in different ways, and as variations in responses produce different outcomes the credit of this resistance to change is an essential step in the development and death penalty of effective change management strategies. Change, positive or negative, is unsettling beca implement people try stability. Certain individuals ar more resistant to change than other(a)s, at propagation there freighter be situational characteristics such as a omit of rely in management contributing to this resistance to change.Often this resistance to change is out of self interest, at stake potent iometer be federal agents such as income, job security, prestige, power, and personal convenience. Low tolerance for change, lack of invest in management, and self interest are all grammatical constituents which burden in resistance to change. However my experience suggests that lack of understanding of the need for change can be the single expectantest contributing factor and is the factor which the organization has the greatest control over.My current employer is in the offshoot of implementing a major change in the organizational structure. Without going into overly some(prenominal) detail the restructure involves changes to the grant structure and changes in organizational insurance coverage . As is the deterrent example with most organizational changes there has been a great deal of resistance involved. Previously I had suggested that lack of understanding of the need for change can be the single greatest contributing factor and the factor which the organization has the greatest control over.I believe that to be the case here, the organization has done an absolutely abysmal job in communication what the changes get out entail and why the changes are needed. As a result of this poor communication there is a great deal of discernment and resistance to these changes. This poor communication has resulted in a lack of trust in senior management and an ever increasing sentiment that the changes are going to result in a reduction in pay and benefits. This protection of self interest is a natural eaction being that many of the individuals affected have been with the organization for several years. Over time a persons investment in a company escalates as pension currency accumulate and the allowed vacation time rises, along with their chances of being promoted or enjoying the benefits of seniority, this is know as the sunk cost doctrine. This investment in the organization can in turn lead to greater resistance to change as the employee seeks to mai ntain the status quo (Patti, 1974).Again it is imperative that the organization manage change with with(predicate) proper communications, detailing the nature of the pending changes and the need for and expectations of these changes. While this depart not always ensure that all members of the organization agree with the changes or the need for them it will eliminated the apprehension that comes with the unknown. John Kotter of the Harvard Business School has make on existing models of change to create a more exact approach for implementing change. Kotter began by listing common mistakes that organizations make when trying to bug out changes.These mistakes include the inability of the organization to create a sense of essential about the need for change, failure to create a coalition for managing the change process, the absence of a vision for change and the ability to effectively channel that vision, not removing obstacles that could impede the achievement of the vision, fai lure to provide short terminus and achievable goals, the tendency to declare victory too soon, and not anchoring the changes into the organizations culture (Kotter, 1996).Kotter established eight sequential steps for organizations to use in overcoming and managing these problems. They are as follows 1. Establish a sense of indispensability by creating a compelling reason of why change is needed. 2. progress to a coalition with complete power to lead the change. 3. Create a sore vision to like a shot the change and strategies for achieving the vision. 4. Communicate the vision end-to-end the organization. 5. Empower others to act on the vision by removing barriers to change and load-bearing(a) risk taking and creative problem solving 6.Plan for and create settle with short term wins that move the organization toward the new vision. 7. Consolidate improvements, reassess changes, and make necessary adjustments in the new program. 8. Reinforce the changes by demonstrating the race between new behaviors and organizational success. The first four steps basically extrapolate on the unfreezing stage. Steps 5 through 7 support movement. And the terminal step works on refreezing. When I present at the organizational structure change my current employer is going through it is clear that they have made many of the mistakes Kotter discussed.When reviewing the unfreezing stage the organization has not created any sense of want or new vision to direct change. As I have discussed previously the entire communication process related to these changes has been vague at best. The restructuring project is being lead by well respected senior management within the organization, however without the other components discussed respected senior management leadership of project is not enough to ensure its success. We are currently in the movement cast of the project, this phase has been filled with a great deal of uncertainty and apprehension.Individuals within the organiz ation are concerned as to what the end result is going to smell like and ultimately how their self interests are going to be affected. The final step of refreezing has not yet occurred, so it is unclear if this project will ever achieve acceptance among the member of the organization. I believe that age the organization has made many mistakes in implementing this change it is not too late for this project to be successful. While to project is currently underway, or in the movement phase, I believe the senior management can take a step back, recognize mistakes made, and implement an expedited unfreezing stage.A component of this expedited unfreezing stage needs to be recognition of initial failures followed by creating the sense of urgency and the creation of new vision that Kotter outlined. Without that I do not prevent the organization being successful in demonstrating the relationship between new behaviors and organizational success. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston Harvard Business School Press. Patti, R. J. (1974). Organizational resistance and change The view from below. Social Service Review, 48, 371372. Toffler, A. (1970). Future shock. New York random House.