In modern organizational settings, the significance of effective management of change cannot be underestimated. Organization X, which is based in the United States, is regarded as one of the largest conglomerate corporations in the world. This company operates through various subsidiaries in the energy, technology infrastructure, and capital finance sectors. Since the inception of Organization X in 1892, it has efficiently managed change processes that have seen it become one of the highly profitable companies in the U.S.
However, in the wake of the increased competitiveness in industries in which it operates, its management team has realized the need for integrating secure and resourceful automation systems. A successful change process needs to incorporate various components of the change toolkit that constitutes a set of ideas, tips, tools, techniques, and inspirations, which foster the management of change in an organization. As this paper reveals, Organization X has benefited hugely from change management theories, including Kurt Lewin’s model, the transformational framework by John P. Kotter, and Kubler-Ross’ change curve. The mentioned change management concepts provide the guidance for successfully managing reforms in various organizational contexts. However, this paper discusses the extent to which Organization X has adopted the above change management theories in its operations.
The Change Toolkit
The change toolkit incorporates an array of concepts that facilitate the effective management of change. According to Brown (2009), the change toolkit contains tools that focus on change preparedness, the identification and assessment of stakeholders, managing communications, sustaining and managing technological change, and the opposition that is linked to organizational reforms. These elements influence an organization to choose a strategy that is expected to yield optimal results regarding performance and profitability. Although the directive strategy of change is considerably fast, it ignores views raised by people who are affected by the change, hence subjecting them to resistance that is captured in the change toolkit (Laposi, Dan, & Oţel, 2016). On the other hand, the participative approach to change management underlines the need for ensuring the commitment of individuals who are expected to experience the change directly. This strategy boosts workers’ acceptance of change.
As Kirkpatrick (2001) asserts, the change toolkit also addresses the issue of developing a feasible change strategy. In the context of Organization X, the initial step in the implementation of reforms involved embracing a strategic perspective regarding the reason for the change and the process to be deployed to execute it successfully. Additionally, the creation of the change strategy required this company to develop an operational perspective that influenced the way it applied the required transformations. Moreover, the change toolkit acknowledges the need for seeking feedback from key stakeholders. Organization X involved all stakeholders in the change management process to ensure minimal resistance and, consequently, its successful execution.
As Brown (2009) reveals, the change toolkit also provides ideas, techniques, and tools for managing communication as an important aspect of the change management process. The change process needs to embrace a communication plan that effectively guides all involved individuals to abide by the specified courses of action. An organization needs to adopt an appropriate and timely communication channel to enhance the attainment of a shared meaning of messages delivered to stakeholders. In line with concepts presented in the change toolkit, effective reforms call for the execution of a communication audit at the end of each stage of the change process.
According to Kirkpatrick (2001), the change toolkit contains instruments that focus on enhancing the sustainability of the transformational management initiative. The need for enhancing the sustainability of change activities necessitates the change team to measure the impact of new processes. As such, gauging the sustainability of the proposed transformation reveals the extent to which an organization is bound to adopt the change, including its stability and influence on the prevailing institutional culture. In addition, the deployment of monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, as emphasized in the change toolkit, plays a crucial part in streamlining the execution of change management processes. Moreover, the change management guide provides strategies for effectively managing technological changes in an organization. As Cummings and Worley (2014) reveal, many reforms in contemporary businesses involve the use of technologies that seek to enhance operations efficiency. In the organizational environment, users need to adopt hi-tech reforms seamlessly by acquiring the necessary skills required to reap the most from present-day technological applications.
Organization X’s Application of Concepts Presented in the Change Toolkit
Organization X applies technological changes continuously to foster its competitiveness in the energy, hi-tech infrastructure, and capital finance industries. Drucker (2017) identifies Jack Welch, a former CEO of Organization X, as the individual responsible for introducing revolutionary changes at the organization during his tenure between 1981 and 1998. After Welch took over the leadership of Organization X, he applied tools required for preparing a company for transformations. In particular, the former CEO of Organization X ensured that this company was ready for an overhaul by adopting a participative change strategy (Drucker, 2017). The creation of the change strategy initiated by Welch enhanced stakeholders’ collaboration. Before the proposal for change, local managers of Organization X operated in a setting that hindered their vertical and horizontal interaction with other departments as well as employees. In this respect, this ex-CEO initiated the change process by identifying the need for creating a workplace environment that could support group efforts.
Organization X also incorporated communication channels that guaranteed effective change processes. The absence of collaboration among managers and employees called for the creation of a change strategy to could bolster positive change. Specifically, there was a need for dialogue between the workforce and management teams to seek their feedback, explain the reason for reforms, and respond to employees’ questions. According to Coe (2010), Welch strategized on enhancing the communication aspect of change in the organization by underlining the need for the management team to welcome the opinion of everyone in Organization X. As a result, the former CEO introduced the workout program, which sought to encourage the consideration of employees’ feedback and the sharing of ideas. Therefore, in addition to using the change toolkit to enhance communication, Organization X promoted the empowerment of employees in a way that fostered its execution of the change process.
Organization X also applied the concept of sustaining change as provided by the change toolkit. Welch initiated a change management approach that has been proven sustainable over the years. As Drucker (2017) reveals, the ex-CEO focused on improving teamwork while at the same time continually reassessing performance and regularly benchmarking employees (Coe, 2010). This approach has been instrumental since it has allowed Organization X to assess the extent to which the change has been adopted, including its permanence and impact on the company’s culture. Organization X applied the concept of sustainable change by continuously monitoring and evaluating the impact of the initiated reforms. This approach has seen Organization X integrate the automation of processes to enhance collaboration and the quality of products provided by various subsidiaries of this multinational corporation. The computerization of systems is a major change process that has taken place at Organization X over the years. This reform also denotes the application of concepts required to manage transformations successfully, as presented in the change toolkit.
Theories and Models Applied in Organization X
The change process that has taken place at Organization X incorporates various theoretical frameworks and models. Some notable theories that have been deployed at Organization X include change frameworks developed by Kurt Lewin, John Kotter, and Kubler-Ross.
The Change Model by Kurt Lewin
As Anderson (2014), reveals the change model established by Kurt Lewin incorporates three phases, which include unfreezing, changing, and refreezing. The unfreezing aspect of Lewin’s change process involves the creation of a perception that change is necessary. According to Brown (2009), the unfreezing phase facilitates the preparation of an organization for change by challenging the existing status quo before establishing a new way of conducting business. Organization X applied the unfreezing phase of Lewin’s change model by challenging the existing counterproductive environment, which discouraged the horizontal and vertical interaction of managers with other departments, including employees. Therefore, Welch saw the need for challenging the status quo by initiating a change process that would create a workplace environment that valued teamwork. There was the need for managers at Organization X to acknowledge the significance of employees as well as other stakeholders’ opinions. Consequently, Organization X applied the first step of Lewin’s change model.
The changing phase of Lewin’s model entails the execution of the proposed transformation. According to Kirkpatrick (2001), the change phase is a transition period, which takes some time before its positive outcomes are realized. Organization X applied the step of the change model after introducing the Change Acceleration Program (CAP) that seeks to drive reforms throughout the company. Organization X implemented the CAP by restructuring the organization in a way that eliminated barriers to collaboration (Drucker, 2017). In particular, Welch facilitated the establishment of an organizational structure that supported interdisciplinary as well as interdepartmental cooperation. The new configuration saw Organization X create room for more leaders, as opposed to managers, to enhance employees’ productivity. The changing process for Organization X took at least two decades of transition before the company could realize its current business success.
According to Anderson (2014), the refreezing step of the change model developed by Lewin focuses on reinforcement, stabilization, and solidification of the new environment after the transformation has taken place. Organization X carries out the refreezing aspect by continuously enhancing connectivity among its various units. Furthermore, Organization X solidifies collaboration within the workplace environment by constantly reassessing employees’ performance. This re-evaluation facilitates the acquisition of feedback from workers and other stakeholders to identify new ways of fostering productivity. The criticism gained from employees has helped Organization X to consider adopting automated processes to realize a positive change.
The Change Framework by John P. Kotter
John Kotter is well known for his change framework that incorporates eight steps for leading change in an organization. As Kotter and Cohen (2012) reveal, the first step of the change framework involves the establishment of a sense of urgency that prompts immediate action. Welch led the change at Organization X immediately after becoming the CEO by calling for the adjustment of the prevailing structure and culture. As Busco, Frigo, Leone, and Riccaboni (2010) reveal, Organization X’s leader proposed the need for embracing a collaborative approach in this company to foster the profitability of its operations.
The second phase of the change framework requires the formation of a powerful coalition to steer and implement the intended reform (Kotter & Cohen, 2012). Specifically, as Drucker (2017) asserts, Welch formed an elite club consisting of the “upper 500” executives whose responsibility involved facilitating change across the organization. As such, this CEO established a coalition with top leaders within the company to boost buy-in while at the same time overseeing the implementation aspect of change. The third step of Kotter’s change framework focuses on creating a strategic vision that gives the change process a sense of direction. In particular, the former of CEO of Organization X came up with a vision that acknowledged the need for increased interdisciplinary and interdepartmental cooperation to enhance the company’s prosperity. In addition, Organization X created values, which were instilled among employees to facilitate a culture change that was in line with its vision.
The communication of the vision is the fourth phase of the change framework created by Kotter. Brown (2009) argues that the frequent and powerful announcement of a company’s vision increases the chances of implementing successful transformational initiatives. Organization X created an 80-page document titled Integrity: The Spirit and the Letter of Our Commitment to underline the need for observing values that supported the change process initiated at the organization (Coe, 2010). This company further communicated its vision by continually reminding employees of the need for showing their commitment to the realization of positive change.
According to Kotter and Cohen (2012), another step in Kotter’s change framework involves the removal of obstacles. Welch introduced the watch-out program at Organization X to facilitate the identification of challenges that undermined the change process. This approach mitigates the issue of resistance to change by enhancing its ownership by all stakeholders. As Coe (2010) reveals, short-term targets of Organization X included the establishment of a highly profitable entrepreneurial enterprise, a diversified corporation, and high-quality leadership. This company had realized the above short-term targets by the onset of the 21st century.
The Change Curve by Kubler-Ross
The change curve developed by Kubler and Ross incorporates five stages of grief as an organization approaches imminent death. As Lawrence, Ruppel, and Tworoger (2014) disclose, stages of this change curve include rejection, annoyance, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Organization X experienced the denial stage of the change curve when it could not easily accept the need for restructuring its counterproductive systems. This company’s CEO was angered by the lack of cooperation among departments and business units. As such, bargaining emerged as the chief executive established a team of administrators to discuss the need for change. The development of depression also characterized the change process at Organization X due to cases of resistance from employees who thought they would be laid off. Finally, managers and workers accepted the proposed change, thereby creating a sense of ownership. Their reception of reforms has seen Organization X become one of the most profitable companies in the U.S.
The Recommended Change Model
Organization X should also consider applying the ADKAR change model, which is a goal-oriented approach to its restructuring process. According to Hornstein (2015), the ADKAR change framework consists of actions that include responsiveness, aspiration, knowledge, capability, and reinforcement. The awareness aspect recognizes the necessity for change in an organization. A company also needs to show the desire for change by encouraging the participation of all stakeholders. The change team is required to acquire requisite skills and behaviors to implement the change process successfully. An organization should also implement the change on a daily basis. Moreover, managing reforms calls for the inclusion of reinforcements that foster the sustainability of the change initiative.
The ADKAR transformational model paved the way for Organization X to realize a sequential change management process that fostered the attainment of cumulative goals that added up to its overall goal. Organization X seeks to promote the cooperation of its business units to make it the most profitable in the world. Therefore, adopting the ADKAR change model would be instrumental in enhancing sustainable teamwork and, consequently, profitability.
Conclusion
Organization X has conducted a series of change management processes over the years. As revealed in this paper, such transformations have made it one of the most competitive multinational companies in the world. Organization X applies concepts presented in the change toolkit to foster the efficiency of its change management processes such as strategy development, communication, and ensuring sustainable reforms. In addition, Organization X has considerably deployed change management theories, including Lewin, Kotter, and Kubler-Ross’ transformational frameworks. Organization X has applied these theories to foster cooperation, leadership development, entrepreneurship, and profitability. However, the ADKAR change model has been recommended because it allows Organization X to realize greater sustainability and profitability levels since it focuses on a sequential and goal-oriented approach to change management.
References
Anderson, D. (2014). Organization development: The process of leading organizational change (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. New York, NY: Harper Business.
Busco, C., Frigo, M. L., Leone, E. L., & Riccaboni, A. (2010). Cleaning up. Strategic Finance, 92(1), 29-38.
Coe, J. T. (2010). Unlikely victory: How General Electric succeeded in the chemical industry. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2014). Organization development and change (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Drucker, P. F. (2017). What makes an effective executive (Harvard business review classics). Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Hornstein, H. A. (2015). The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 291-298.
Kirkpatrick, D. (2001) Managing change effectively: Approaches, methods and case examples. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Kotter, J., & Cohen, D. (2012). The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change their organizations. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Laposi, E. O., Dan, S. I., & OĹŁel, C. C. (2016). Change management – A dominant of the management of organizations. Review of Management & Economic Engineering, 15(2), 306-313.
Lawrence, E., Ruppel, C. P., & Tworoger, L. C. (2014). The emotions and cognitions during organizational change: The importance of the emotional work for leaders. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 18(1), 257-273.