IMPLEMENTATION AND STRATEGIC CHANGE: CONSTRAINING FORCES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIC CHANGE (CASE STUDY OF XYZ COMPANY)

<< IMPLEMENTATION AND STRATEGIC CHANGE: CONSTRAINING FORCES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIC CHANGE (CASE STUDY OF XYZ COMPANY)

WHY IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIC CHANGE IS SO DIFFICULT?:Change Typology, Technical Change >>

Change Management MGMT625

Lesson # 35

IMPLEMENTATION AND STRATEGIC CHANGE: CONSTRAINING FORCES IN

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIC CHANGE (CASE STUDY OF XYZ

COMPANY)

In our previous lecture we have discussed some major constraints that can occurs during the

implementation phase of a changed strategy. Previously, we have discussed the following factors which

are tangible in nature:

Systems and subsystems

Structural

Strategic direction

Policies, plans and procedural alignment

Now the remaining two variables intangible in nature are followings:

People

Culture

People

The matter under discussion is how to manage people? It is the people who at the action level can make

change implementation either a successful or failure. So, people's traits, psyches, attitudes, behaviours

and their orientation is required to be analyzed particularly at lower levels where masses of people

directly involved in change orientation and execution.

(a) Fear of failure non performance and humiliation

It is a general tendency that whenever a change program, or a plan introduced in an organization and is

perceived negative by greater majority of managers in the organization as against the established

patterns, norms, and conventions then the resistance level will quite high. One such reason for higher

resistance towards change plan has been the perceived threat of non-performance which acts as a source

of failure associated with humiliation. Here, innovative organizational structure provides some

remedies. For instance, it allows failure to occur. This also means that organization culture is not geared

towards learning.

(b) Resistance to change non comfort zone

Again, the fear of change lead the individuals or groups from a comfort zone to a non comfort zone

where learning about new values, new technologies, new patterns or fears about unknowns produce

resistance. This resistance to change can cause considerable loss of efficiency in organizations. In fact,

if organization goes for successful execution of strategic change then strategists should go for removing

this phenomenon. Therefore, there must be the introduction of learning oriented culture or

entrepreneurship like attributes in organizational environment.

Parochialism, provincialism or ethnocentrisms means to interpret the things or developments on self

reference basis. Again, there is tendency among individuals or among groups that they percept changes

narrowly and un-sophisticatedly. At organizational level where we have different hierarchies, groups,

departments, and divisions, the parochialism is dangerous for the health of the organization. Under such

situation management consultant and strategists must workout for exploring the dominant interpretation

of the change acceptability and ensure that the benefits of that change should be for large masses with

minimized costs.

Change Management MGMT625

(d) Turf protection hiding behaviour

Turf protection means favouritism or protection of individuals or a group or groups who have some

vested interest with change process. For instance, the protection for those ones: (1) who are non-

performers or (2) may be for those who are loyalist toward change initiators. The turf protection,

therefore, leads an organization towards failure in change implementation. In the context of developing

countries, for instance, where we have seen a more personalized style of management, the turf

protection culture is more prominent and highly lucrative.

(e) Short-term orientation

Short term orientation means short sightedness. Earlier in strategic direction variable we have discussed

that, the leaders who have short term view in respect of time often go for immediate calculations

instead long term of deferred gratifications. This is a myopic view of organizing and such behaviour is

actually associated with individual psyche. The same behaviour also matter for organizational

perspective. The organizations who go for immediate calculations suffer losses in the long run.

Contrarily, the organizations who go for deferred attitude may be at deficit in short term but in the long

run they are more lucrative.

In cross cultural terms, for instance, traditional Asiatic peoples such as Japanese, Chinese or Malays

have had long term behaviour then other Asiatic ones. In reality, we have also seen them more

developed and rich.

(f) Complacency satisficing behaviour

It is generally observed that the people who involved in change process are more satisficing and

complacent than from those who actually are not involved. Therefore, complacent people are those who

retained their energies at certain level which may be appropriately below from maximizing level.

In general, the behaviour of employees are satisficing rather than toward maximizing. One thing that

produces such scenario is organization structure and design. If an organization structure is decentralized

and behaviour of employees is complacence towards objective setting and achieving than it goes for

maximizing behaviour. On the other hand, organizations that are based on centralized structure then

normal behaviour of employees are not complacent and based on `wait-and-see' strategy. Therefore,

this is satisficing behaviour instead of maximizing because of the least involvement of employees.

Complacency concept actually studied under the domain of Management by Objective (MBO) in both

Management and Change Management disciplines. It is normally used as a tool for avoiding resistance

and conflicts.

(g) Inappropriate talent/ skills

If an organization wants to avoid resistance then they should be appropriately equipped with the

requisite level of skills, knowledge and aptitude. It is based on learning behaviour or on learning culture

in an organization. Here organization strategists can play an important role in change implementation

process by determining the required skills and aptitudes and how can these be acquired. Because it is

crucial for change implementation and for achieving the desired level of productivity.

Culture

(a) Ill-defined values or preferences and priorities

Managers, often top mangers, sometimes cannot create the climate for the enterprise. Sometimes, this is

because they have unable to define and prioritise the values and preferences in organization. The values

and preferences of the organization are depending on the values and preferences of the top management

Change Management MGMT625

because their values influence the direction of the firm. Also some times, top management has

conceived the values and preferences but unable to share them with the bottom of the organization. That

makes implementation difficult and can create conflict in organizations. So, why values preferences and

priorities are important? Because:

Values can be thought of as forming an ideology that permeates every day decisions.

In successful organizations, value-driven corporate leaders serve as role model, and are a symbol to the

external environment.

The organization culture created by corporate leaders can result in managerial functions being carried

out in quite different ways.

(b) Lack of consensus over priorities

This concept has already been discussed in our previous sessions that there must be consensus over

priorities, goals and objectives formulation. Because people interpret and differ on organization goals

and objectives both in qualitative or quantitative terms, and also give meanings to events at self

reference basis. If consensus lacks then naturally conflict is bound to occur.

The point here is that there must be a fit or balance between organizational culture and newly

formulated strategy. For instance in Higgins 8-S model, the first 7-Ss: Strategy, Structure, Systems and

Processes, Style (leadership/management style), Staff, ReSources, Shared Values (organizational

culture) are derived form waterman's model and 8th S derived by Higgins that is Strategic

Performance. So what actually Strategic Performance means? The complimentarily or alignment of all

seven variables is given in the connotation of strategic performance variable. If there is some misfit

between any of theses variables then there could be the resistance in organization against desired

change.

(d) Values that conflict with entrepreneurial requirement

Sometimes an organization based itself on such values which may contrary to the values of an

entrepreneurial or progressive organization. Such kind of organizations normally has the following

attributes:

· risk averting rather than risk taking attitude

· fearful about failure

· non innovative

· introvert personality

· least progressive thinking

For coping with such problems, the organization should move for transforming the attitudes and

behaviours of his people that it is in the best interest of our organization to have entrepreneurial like

values or behaviour. So values and strategies should be compatible to each other.

(e) Non-egalitarian values (elitist-orientation)

Egalitarianism means believing in equality or maintaining, relating to, or based on a belief that all

people are, in principle, equal and should enjoy equal social, political, and economic rights and

opportunities. In organizations context, there should be very little gap between leader and follower, or

between bosses and subordinates. Therefore, such kind of organizations is considered very progressive

and long lasting.

We can also found similar attribute in context of economies. For instance, the economies where gap

between rich and poor is wider, therefore, such economies are very less progressive, least growth

Change Management MGMT625

oriented, and have high degree of power distance . We can see such characterization especially in

agrarian societies.

Similarly, the non-egalitarianism, or in other words hierarchy and power differentiation in organizations

also affects the change implementation process. If an organization is based on non-egalitarian kind of

behaviour then it creates a moral deficit in actions which are vital for successful change

implementation. In these organizations, the element of resistance is rather high as against those

organizations which are egalitarian.

Why implementing strategic change is so difficult?

The author Alex Miller has cited some further variables which can cause constraints in implementation

of a revised change strategy.

Organization Immune system

It is the tendency of the human system that human system seeks homeostasis and equilibrium. In every

organization, there is an immune system which is working for the achievement of a comfort zone. In

other words human system desired a world which could be more stable, more predictable, and more

controllable. The same spirit is also working behind the base of scientific knowledge that it is struggling

for achieving certainty, reliability, and predictability. And same spirit is working behind the social

sciences that it is also struggling for predicting the various kind of human behavior. So that appropriate

controllability could be achieved. Therefore, on the basis of this knowledge, which a management

paradigm manifests, desired level of policies, actions, and processes has been designed.

But when a change occurs, firstly it creates a kind of disequilibrium and unstable environment. At

second place, a resistance against this is emerged which is again a human system or immune system

phenomena that makes the implementation process so difficult. So to overcome such resistance, one

should associate different kind of incentives or packages that could lead the people to change their

existing perceptual patterns and toward next level of equilibrium.

Numerous complex variables are at work

It means in organizations where simultaneously numerous complex variables are working

interactively any intervention in one field or domain do not yield results. Why Miller has said this?

Because commonly, number of strategists or even scholars associate a whole change process with

one or two apparent variables that, according to them, brings a successful change in organizations.

For instance, you have often heard a common sentence from number of intellectuals on television

that if education could improve then all problems related to development could be solved. Another

one says that if political structure could effectively be solved then all problems will be

automatically solved. And so on and so forth. But in real life many variables are interconnected

with each other and form a complex system. Similarly in organizational perspectives, management

consultants often suggest that training is the most important component for dealing approximately

all sorts of managerial problems. This training paradigm is more popular during 60s, 70s, and even

in 80s. And in 90s, technology paradigm is considered vital for all sorts of managerial hindrances

and can go for efficiency and competitive advantages.

Interconnectedness of various element

As Alex Miller said metaphorically:

"Organization is like a woven fabric or sweater if you pull one string or single thread, you

run the danger of unraveling the whole."

100

Change Management MGMT625

The change management in organization is a difficult process. It is because strategists normally

consider a single variable instead of the holistic view of the organization. For instance, what should

be the ramifications for other departments or for the culture of the organization when an organization

goes for introducing the new technology? So, these kind of issues or linkages must properly be

addressed or analyzed when an organization go for a change because Organization is just like a

woven fabric.

The Need to change every thing at once

The phenomenon that `change should be happened overnight' is the most basic reason behind many

change programs failures. There are two schools of thought about change implementation patterns. One

is the incremental or gradual school of thought and the other is radical school of thought.

The first school of thought believes that if change pattern should be incremental of gradual then it is

more effective, efficient and long lasting. As Mintzberg (1987) argued that many strategic changes are

actually emergent strategies, or those that evolve incrementally over long period of time. The second

school of thought believe that people already conceive gradual changes into their day-to-day businesses

which is a continuous learning phenomena in organizations. So, any gradual changes have very little

impact on the overall results of the organizations. The real change could only be achieved through large

scale transformational or radical pattern which is based on shock-therapy or to compel people's

mobility from comfort zone to non comfort zone. The Japanese, for instance, normally believe on

incrementalism while the Russian believe on radicalism in context of change management patterns.

101

Table of Contents: