Organizational Behavior managing change Tomáš Ondráček ondracek.t@mail.muni.cz Faculty of Economics and Administration, Masaryk University 2023 Introduction Introduction ·ORBE ·2023 2 / 84 Introduction questions How changes occur? How to analyze change? a process perspective ·ORBE ·2023 3 / 84 Process models Process models ·ORBE ·2023 4 / 84 Process models Sources open system theories thinking about organizations (and parts of organizations) as a system of interrelated components that are embedded in, and strongly influenced by, a larger system ·ORBE ·2023 5 / 84 Types of Process Theories Types of Process Theories ·ORBE ·2023 6 / 84 Types of Process Theories Sources Life cycle theories Teleological theories Dialectical theories Evolutionary theories Van de Ven and Poole (1995) ·ORBE ·2023 7 / 84 Types of Process Theories Process Theories of Organizational Development and Change (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995: 520) ·ORBE ·2023 8 / 84 Types of Process Theories A life-cycle model A life-cycle model depicts the process of change in an entity as progressing through a necessary sequence of stages. An institutional, natural, or logical program prescribes the specific contents of these stages. motor: A singular, discrete entity exists that undergoes change, yet maintains its identity throughout the process. The entity passes through stages distinguishable in form or function. A program, routine, rule, or code exists in nature, social institutions, or logic that determines the stages of development and governs progression through the stages. (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995: 520–521, 525) ·ORBE ·2023 9 / 84 Types of Process Theories A teleological model A teleological model views development as a cycle of goal formulation, implementation, evaluation, and modification of goals based on what was learned by the entity. This sequence emerges through the purposeful social construction among individuals within the entity. motor: An individual or group exists that acts as a singular, discrete entity, which engages in reflexively monitored action to socially construct and cognitively share a common end state or goal. The entity may envision its end state of development before or after actions it may take, and the goal may be set explicitly or implicitly. However, the process of social construction or sense making, decision making, and goal setting must be identifiable. A set of requirements and constraints exists to attain the goal, and the activities and developmental transitions undertaken by the entity contribute to meeting these requirements and constraints. (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995: 520–521, 525) ·ORBE ·2023 10 / 84 Types of Process Theories A dialectical model In dialectical models of development, conflicts emerge between entities espousing opposing thesis and antithesis that collide to produce a synthesis, which in time becomes the thesis for the next cycle of a dialectical progression. Confrontation and conflict between opposing entities generate this dialectical cycle. motor: At least two entities exist (each with its own discrete identity) that oppose or contradict one another. The opposing entities must confront each other and engage in a conflict or struggle through some physical or social venue, in which the opposition plays itself out. The outcome of the conflict must consist either of a new entity that is different from the previous two, or (in degenerate cases) the defeat of one entity by the other, or a stalemate among the entities. (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995: 520–521, 525) ·ORBE ·2023 11 / 84 Types of Process Theories An evolutionary model An evolutionary model of development consists of a repetitive sequence of variation, selection, and retention events among entities in a designated population. Competition for scarce environmental resources between entities inhabiting a population generates this evolutionary cycle. motor: A population of entities exists in a commensalistic relationship (i.e., in a physical or social venue with limited resources each entity needs for its survival). Identifiable mechanisms exist for variation, selection, and retention of entities in the population. Macropopulation characteristics set the parameters for microlevel variation, selection, and retention mechanisms. (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995: 520–521, 525) ·ORBE ·2023 12 / 84 Types of Process Theories Reactive sequences subsequent events challenge rather than reinforce earlier events the importance of working on support (Hayes, 2014: 8–9) ·ORBE ·2023 13 / 84 Self-reinforcing sequences Self-reinforcing sequences ·ORBE ·2023 14 / 84 Self-reinforcing sequences Self-reinforcing sequences Increasing returns Psychological commitment to past decisions Cognitive biases and interpretive frames (Hayes, 2014: 8–9) ·ORBE ·2023 15 / 84 Self-reinforcing sequences Increasing returns Set-up costs Learning Coordination Betting on the right horse (Arthur et al., 1994) ·ORBE ·2023 16 / 84 Self-reinforcing sequences Psychological commitment to past decisions escalation of commitment Gambler’s Fallacy protection of self conistency naïve theory of chance ·ORBE ·2023 17 / 84 Self-reinforcing sequences Cognitive biases and interpretive frames Confirmation bias Framing effect Default effect ... ·ORBE ·2023 18 / 84 Path Dependence Path Dependence ·ORBE ·2023 19 / 84 Path Dependence Path dependence preformation phase path formation phase lock-in phase (Sydow, Schreyögg, & Koch, 2009) ·ORBE ·2023 20 / 84 Models Models ·ORBE ·2023 21 / 84 Models characterization (key) elements (causal) relationships outputs (Hayes, 2014: 124–125) ·ORBE ·2023 22 / 84 Models use description interpretation guidence decision making (Hayes, 2014: 125) ·ORBE ·2023 23 / 84 Models component and holistic models part, element, person the whole, complex (Hayes, 2014: 125) ·ORBE ·2023 24 / 84 Models good models relevance recognition usefulness (Hayes, 2014: 142) ·ORBE ·2023 25 / 84 Open Systems Theories Open Systems Theories ·ORBE ·2023 26 / 84 Open Systems Theories characterization embedded within a larger system able to avoid entropy regulated by feedback subject to equifinality cyclical in their mode of functioning equilibrium seeking bounded (Hayes, 2014: 132) ·ORBE ·2023 27 / 84 Kotter’s Integrative Model of Organizational Dynamics Kotter’s Integrative Model of Organizational Dynamics ·ORBE ·2023 28 / 84 Kotter’s Integrative Model of Organizational Dynamics Kotter’s integrative model of organizational dynamics ((Hayes, 2014: 133) adapted from (Kotter, 1980: 282)) ·ORBE ·2023 29 / 84 Kotter’s Integrative Model of Organizational Dynamics Kotter’s integrative model of organizational dynamics short term imediate medium term months long term years ((Hayes, 2014: 133) adapted from (Kotter, 1980: 282)) ·ORBE ·2023 30 / 84 The McKinsey 7S Model The McKinsey 7S Model ·ORBE ·2023 31 / 84 The McKinsey 7S Model The McKinsey 7S model (Waterman Jr, Peters, & Phillips, 1980: 18) ·ORBE ·2023 32 / 84 Weisbord’s Six-Box Model Weisbord’s Six-Box Model ·ORBE ·2023 33 / 84 Weisbord’s Six-Box Model Weisbord’s six-box model (Weisbord, 1976: 432) ·ORBE ·2023 34 / 84 The Burke-Litwin causal model The Burke-Litwin causal model ·ORBE ·2023 35 / 84 The Burke-Litwin causal model The Burke-Litwin causal model of organizational performance and change (Burke & Litwin, 1992: 528) ·ORBE ·2023 36 / 84 Selecting a diagnostic model Selecting a diagnostic model ·ORBE ·2023 37 / 84 Selecting a diagnostic model component and holistic models ??? (Hayes, 2014: 133) ·ORBE ·2023 38 / 84 Patching Patching ·ORBE ·2023 39 / 84 Patching patching patching Patching is the strategic process by which corporate executives routinely remap businesses to changing market opportunities. It can take the form of adding, splitting, transferring, exiting, or combining chunks of businesses. (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999) ·ORBE ·2023 40 / 84 Patching patching and reorganizing structure stable vs. temporary strategy first vs. emerging (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999) ·ORBE ·2023 41 / 84 Patching patching: further characteristics changes small frequent size agil efficient infrastructure modular fine grained metrics and complete consistent compensation quick (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999) ·ORBE ·2023 42 / 84 Patching patching: further characteristics reorganization and patching reorganization patching role of change defensive reaction proactive weapon scale of change sweeping small, some moderate, a few large frequency rare ongoing formalization every change is unique change process is routine and follows standards patching moves driver of change get business focus right get business focus and size right precision optimal restructuring at specific point in time roughly right realingments over time metrics collect fine-grained metrics only for infrequent reorganizations reguĺarly trasck extensive, fine-grained metrics on modular business compensation not relevant companywide parity (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999) ·ORBE ·2023 43 / 84 Patching patching: examples Hewlett-Packard small frequent 3M agil efficient Johnson & Johnson modular fine grained metrics and complete consistent compensation quick (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999) ·ORBE ·2023 44 / 84 Patching patching: principles Do it fast. Develop multiple options, then make a roughly right choice. Take an organizational test-drive. Get the general manager right. Script the details. (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999) ·ORBE ·2023 45 / 84 Patching patching: blocks "missing the hill" "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" (Eisenhardt & Brown, 1999) ·ORBE ·2023 46 / 84 Gartner Hype Cycle Gartner Hype Cycle ·ORBE ·2023 47 / 84 Gartner Hype Cycle Gartner Hype Cycle (Gartner, 2020) ·ORBE ·2023 48 / 84 Gartner Hype Cycle core activities recognizing and starting diagnosing and formulating planning implementing and reviewing sustaining leading and managing learning (Hayes, 2014: 436) ·ORBE ·2023 49 / 84 Due Diligence Due Diligence ·ORBE ·2023 50 / 84 Due Diligence range and complexity of issues an industry and competitor analysis a product and market analysis an assessment of the target’s management talent an analysis of management fit an assessment of potential synergies and technical issues a review of the terms and conditions of employment an assessment of the compatibility of pension funds and so on (Hayes, 2014: 438) ·ORBE ·2023 51 / 84 Due Diligence fragmentation of the data collection external help strategic fit practical implementation (Hayes, 2014: 438) ·ORBE ·2023 52 / 84 Due Diligence access to information and resources obstacles insufficiency ignorance time (Hayes, 2014: 438) ·ORBE ·2023 53 / 84 Psychological Issues Psychological Issues ·ORBE ·2023 54 / 84 Psychological Issues mindset leader team shareholders stakeholders ·ORBE ·2023 55 / 84 Psychological Issues communication planning to maximize the likelihood of successful communication to coordinate the communication of ‘secrets’ to coordinate internal and external messages to provide a contingency plan (Hayes, 2014: 443) ·ORBE ·2023 56 / 84 Psychological Issues managing stakeholders Aligning and coordinating Promoting trust and procedural justice Responding to pressure to deliver quick wins socioemotional support (Hayes, 2014: 446–448) ·ORBE ·2023 57 / 84 Problems and Obstacles Problems and Obstacles ·ORBE ·2023 58 / 84 Problems and Obstacles types of problems I/II practical theoretical procedural evaluation moral personal non-personal ... ·ORBE ·2023 59 / 84 Problems and Obstacles types of problems II/II well-defined vs. unknown or insufficiently defined routine vs. unexpected real generic generic for an institution real unique first of many konvergent divergent ... ·ORBE ·2023 60 / 84 Change Management Indicator Model Change Management Indicator Model ·ORBE ·2023 61 / 84 Change Management Indicator Model Change Management Indicator Model (SARA32, 2020) ·ORBE ·2023 62 / 84 Change Management Indicator Model COVID What about routines? ·ORBE ·2023 63 / 84 Change Management Indicator Model COVID: Routines (Young, 2020) ·ORBE ·2023 64 / 84 Change Management Indicator Model questions How to implement change? How to review change? How to make change stick? ·ORBE ·2023 65 / 84 Two Main Approaches Two Main Approaches ·ORBE ·2023 66 / 84 Two Main Approaches blueprint changes blueprint changes ·ORBE ·2023 67 / 84 Two Main Approaches blueprint changes blueprint changes a clear action plan ↓ a vision implementation rolling plan monitoring the effect of interventions taking corrective action (learning) the validity: a matter of course ·ORBE ·2023 68 / 84 Two Main Approaches emergent changes emergent changes ·ORBE ·2023 69 / 84 Two Main Approaches emergent changes emergent changes generally defined goals a general direction of change ↓ a vision implementation an open approach adaptations and revisions double-loop learning challenging assumptions to support the change plan ·ORBE ·2023 70 / 84 Monitoring Monitoring ·ORBE ·2023 71 / 84 Monitoring Hypotheses cause and effect (Kaplan, Kaplan, Norton, Norton, & Davenport, 2004) ·ORBE ·2023 72 / 84 Monitoring Hypotheses undestandable clear measurable (Kaplan et al., 2004) ·ORBE ·2023 73 / 84 Monitoring Monitoring: Questions Are interventions being implemented as intended? Are interventions producing the desired effect? Is the change plan still valid? (Hayes, 2014: 452–453) ·ORBE ·2023 74 / 84 Monitoring Problems the braking factors founding deviations and deflections external factors (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995: 520) ·ORBE ·2023 75 / 84 Measuring Measuring ·ORBE ·2023 76 / 84 Measuring performance balance scorecards Financial measures Customer-related measures Internal business process measures: Innovation and learning (Kaplan, Kaplan, Norton, & Norton, 1996) ·ORBE ·2023 77 / 84 Responses Responses ·ORBE ·2023 78 / 84 Responses Change Management Indicator Model (Hayes & Hyde, 2016: 2) ·ORBE ·2023 79 / 84 Sustainability Sustainability ·ORBE ·2023 80 / 84 Sustainability Definitions static dynamic (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995: 520–521, 525) ·ORBE ·2023 81 / 84 Sustainability Issues perception implementation timing, sequencing, and pacing ·ORBE ·2023 82 / 84 Sustainability Problems Those who initiated the change move on Accountability for development becomes diffused Knowledge and experience of new practices is lost through turnover Old habits are imported with recruits from less dynamic organizations The issues and pressures that triggered the change initiative are no longer visible New managers want to drive their own agenda Powerful stakeholders are using counter-implementation tactics to block progress Pump-priming funds run out Other priorities come on stream, diverting attention and resources Staff at all levels suffer initiative fatigue and enthusiasm for change falters. ((Buchanan, Fitzgerald, & Ketley, 2007) via (Hayes, 2014: 474)) ·ORBE ·2023 83 / 84 Sources Arthur, W. B., et al. (1994). Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. University of michigan Press. Buchanan, D. A., Fitzgerald, L., & Ketley, D. (2007). Sustaining change and avoiding containment: practice and policy. The Sustainability and Spread of Organizational Change, 249–271. Burke, W. W., & Litwin, G. H. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and change. Journal of management, 18(3). doi: 10.1177/014920639201800306 Eisenhardt, K. M., & Brown, S. L. (1999). Patching. Restitching business portfolios in dynamic markets. Harvard business review, 77(3). Gartner. (2020). Hype cycle research methodology. Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/en/research/methodologies/gartner-hype-cycle Hayes, J. (2014). The theory and practice of change management. Palgrave. Hayes, J., & Hyde, P. (2016). The Change Management Indicator. Retrieved from http://peterhyde.co.uk/ wp-content/uploads/2013/09/The-Change-Management-Indicator.pdf Kaplan, R. S., Kaplan, R. E., Norton, D. P., Norton, D. P., & Davenport, T. H. (2004). Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Harvard Business Press. Kaplan, R. S., Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action. Harvard Business Press. Kotter, J. P. (1980). An integrative model of organizational dynamics. In E. e. Lawler, D. A Nadler and C. Cammann (eds) Organizational Assessment. New York: Wiley. SARA32. (2020). Animals funny - stick with me... change is happen... Retrieved from https://memegenerator.net/instance/82038386/ animals-funny-stick-with-me-change-is-happening Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G., & Koch, J. (2009). Organizational path dependence: Opening the black box. Academy of management review, 34(4). doi: 10.5465/amr.34.4.zok689 Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of management review, 20(3). doi: 10.5465/amr.1995.9508080329 Waterman Jr, R. H., Peters, T. J., & Phillips, J. R. (1980). Structure is not organization. Business horizons, 23(3). doi: 10.1016/b978-0-12-054752-4.50024-5 Weisbord, M. R. (1976). Organizational diagnosis: Six places to look for trouble with or without a theory. Group & Organization Studies, 1(4). doi: 10.1177/105960117600100405 Young, A. (2020, March). People are sharing their ’quarantine routines’ i’ve gotta ask, is everyone doing okay? Retrieved from https://awol.junkee.com/quarantine-routine-memes/83539