Introduction
A strategic change of the organization is a necessary part of developing and improving overall efficiency. It is the role of the leader or the manager to envisage and understand when and how to start implementing new methods. A strategic change in a health care institution is a real challenge as far as there are a number of internal and external forces (technological progress, financial potential, cultural, and personal resistance) that can both facilitate and hinder an overall implementation.
Main body
Strategic change deals with the improving and altering of all segments of the organization. The investigation of the nature of the institution is of great importance. A hospital is an organization with many departments and employees. It is a primary task of a good leader to be able to unify all these constituents. A good leader is someone who can set exact goals, motivate, manage difficulties, and explain everything in order to achieve unity and active espousal (Grossman & Valiga 2012).
Taking into account a variety of the constituents of the United States Hospital, one may come to the conclusion that the best approach is the so-called “continuous change”. It presupposes a modification that will be enduring, cumulative, and developing. The essential scheme of continuous change is that it depends on several smaller adjustments (Weick & Quinn 1999).
The next step of the strategic change implementation is a choice of the type of leadership. Four major styles of leading change are as follows: persuasion, collaboration, participation, and direction. Collaboration is the paramount approach for a planned transformation in a hospital. According to this approach, employees take an active part in the decision-making process (Johnson et al. 2014). The collaborating method is an internal force that facilitates strategic change.
However, there are several internal consequences that can become obstacles. The first one concerns the possible mistakes of the leader. According to Kotter (1995, p. 60), the primary aim of the leader is to establish a sense of urgency otherwise the whole plan may fail. A cultural perspective of the personnel may become one more barrier. The culture within a particular group influences the organizational environment, the execution, and the achievement of goals (Johnson 1992).
There are external forces that can become both hindrances and facilitators in a health care environment. Technological change and financial potential are conditions that vary from time to time. Technologies are constantly changing. Most of them have already altered the current form of organizations. Technological progress may improve strategic change and, at the same time, delay the flourishing accomplishment of set goals. The situation with financial potential is the same (Mar 2013).
Conclusion
A successful strategic change is an integral part of the progress and incessant enhancement. The primary aim of the United States Hospital is to guarantee the most efficient health care for the patients. This should be a starting point of any change. Leadership is essential for the realizing of plans. A good leader has to be able to predict and prevent all possible difficulties, amalgamate the employees and departments of the hospital, and personally participate in processes. Various external and eternal forces may become negative or positive catalysts of the organization’s transformation. It is up to the leader to find the most effective approaches and methods for successful strategic change.
Reference
Grossman, S & Valiga, T 2012, The New Leadership Challenge: Creating the Future of Nursing, PA: F. A. Davis, Philadelphia.
Johnson, G 1992, ‘Managing Strategic Change — Strategy, Culture, and Action’, Long Range Planning, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 28-36.
Johnson, G, Whittington, R, Scholes, K, Angwin, D & Regnér, P 2014, Exploring Strategy Text & Cases, Pearson, Harlow.
Kotter, P 1995, ‘Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 59-67. Web.
Weick, K & Quinn, R 1999, ‘Organizational Change and Development’, The Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 50, pp. 361-386.