Outside Article 3

Maurice Knight

Outside article 3

McAllaster, C. (2004). The 5 P’s of change: Leading change by effectively utilizing leverage points within an organization. Organizational Dynamics, 33(3), 318-328. doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2004.06.008

Link to article:

http://www.sciencedirect.com.www.lib.ncsu.edu:2048/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W6S-4D4CYKB-2&_user=290868&_coverDate=08%2F01%2F2004&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=290868&md5=952da0746cd0eac53f469fbe4a3434c9

               

This article examines five components of organizational change and suggests that these components be used in concert in order to provide the organization leverage for successful change.  According the author the fundamental driver of change is pain.  This pain serves as the impetus that organizations need to draw attention to the change.  The second component is process which outlines the steps leaders must take to facilitate change.  The third component is politics which involves a understanding of potential change foes or allies.  The author argues that a change leader must know how to use power to get people to accept change.  The fourth component is payoff.  He asserts that a leader must understand what reward structure would work best at sustaining change.  The fifth component is persistence or overcoming resistance.  The author points out that the change message must be repeated by top management and the change must be monitored by people at the top.

                This article was of interest because it added salience to the Burke’s work.  In the final chapter of his book, he synthesizes the considerations for organizational change, which this article does as well.  This article also attempts to highlight important considerations for change, both being remarkably similar in ideas presented.  In particular there were several themes that can be found in both literatures. First, both authors highlight the fact that organizations operate in dynamic environments in which technology, economic conditions, and legal environments change often. Therefore, organizational members must see a need for change; otherwise change efforts will be viewed as temporary or just a fad.  Another similarity is the fact that both highlight the need for involvement by organizational members to reduce resistance and suspicion.     Next, both authors emphasized the need for a reward structure that reinforces the change the organization is trying to make.  People often respond to incentives, therefore a change leader must know which incentives to utilize. 

McAllaster argues that the five P’s mentioned in his article can be used independently to facilitate change but they are more effective if used in concert.  One of the primary differences between the works of these two authors is that McAllaster does not focus on the interpersonal traits needed by a change leader while Burke does.   Burke and other scholars would argue that interpersonal traits such as charisma and tolerance for ambiguity are vital to any change effort.  Burke asserts that radical changes to an organization’s structure can rip at the cultural fabric of any organization, especially radical changes such as mergers and acquisitions.  A change leader must be viewed as trustworthy, credible, and inspirational in order to facilitate deep structure change as radical changes require.

In summary, this article added salience to Burke’s work on organizational change and presents similar but somewhat incomplete ideas about organizational change.

Outside Article 2

10/19/2008

Henderson,Gregory. (2002). Transformative learning as a condition for transformational change in organizations. Human Resource Development Review, 1(2), 186.

Link to article:

http://hrd.sagepub.com.www.lib.ncsu.edu:2048/cgi/reprint/1/2/186

 

 

In this article, Henderson proposes that two categories of organizational change, transformative learning and transformational change, should be considered in concert in order to provide a holistic understanding of organizational change. The author states that organizations operate in unstable environments in which radical organizational changes, such as the merger highlighted in the Dime Bancorp, Inc example in this week’s readings, can rip the cultural fabric of the organizations producing a disorienting dilemma for organizational members.

This article highlights change theories prominently used in organizational change literature and argues that they are complementary and provide holistic insights for effective transformational change in organizations.  Henderson groups the Burke-Litwn model as a transformational change model which delineates the modification and redesign of the systems and processes in which individuals interact.  Transformational change is characterized by changes in culture, mission, strategy, leadership, and individual and organizational performance. It is also refers to changing the way people in organizations perceive their roles, responsibilities, and relationships.  Henderson argues that transformational change requires altering the basic elements of organizational culture. 

 Inherent in this article is the idea that change or transformation at the individual level is an essential outcome of the change process.  Henderson argues that this can be accomplished through a second category of change, transformative leaning. Transformative learning is rooted in constructivist learning theory and explains how people see change.  Transformative learning theories have three common factors: (1) individual level of focus, (2) the notion of critical reflection, which allows a person to alter their perspectives to be open to change, (3) and detailed descriptions of the characteristics of the transformed individual. 

This article was interesting because the applications highlighted in this week’s readings added salience and validity to Henderson’s claim that transformative learning should be a condition of transformational change.    As the BBC example in this week’s readings highlight, change in organizational culture is needed in order for transformational changes to be successful.  Henderson would argue that transformative learning could be seen in this application because changes in how individuals see change and how people make sense of their experiences is needed to facilitate change.  In the BBC example, surveys were issued that enabled the organization to ascertain how staff perceived the relative impact and importance of strategy, structure, and systems, for BBC’s overall performance.  This information was then used to guide organizational strategy.

Henderson argues that transformative learning efforts foster greater commitment to organizational change which in turn has four implications for human resource development within organizations. The first implication is that mangers should define change in their organizations as transformative or transactional.  Second, mangers should encourage critical reflection and thinking skills in the organization that will facilitate introduction of new group processes.  Third, HRD must asses the culture of the organization to determine what elements must change in order to align with the new strategic direction of the organization.  Fourth, Henderson argues that HRD should enable the organization to reflect on what it means to value differences and integrate respect for diversity into the organizational culture.