INTRODUCTION

Strategic change can simply be described as the successful allocation of resources to strategic initiatives (Buchel, 2013). But what actually is the cause of this re-innovation and re-definition of change? The business world is an ever changing environment new products, new marketing techniques and new challenges thus forcing the managers to invent new ways of dealing with the emerging issues. Therefore strategic change is a more complex change in the organization and seeks to improve the alignment among the organizations’ environment, strategy and organizations design. Strategic change in organizations can be compared to the security department of a country. It seeks to stimulate new threats to the country either through new advancement in the existing threats or new threats and comes up with a formula or strategy for keeping the country safe. The same case applies to strategic change which targets to counter the new challenges and threats to the business.

Task 1.1 Models of Strategic Change

Machiavelli, one the most controversial political and economic philosophers in one of his works wrote that “It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out nor more doubtful of success nor more dangerous to handle than to initiate a new order of things” (Moore, 2011). This is the humongous task that strategic change attempts to tackle following a relatively similar approach in all institutions. This has led to development of various change models with the most effective and practical being the Lewin’s change management model, McKinsey 7-S model and Kotter’s 8 step model.

Lewin’s change model seeks to approach the change process by first recognizing the tendency of people preference of operating within safety zones. The model uses three changes to implement change and produces an incremental type of change (Balogun, 2001). The first stage is unfreezing which involves a period of thawing through motivation to overcome people’s active effort to resist change. The second process is transition which is the actual implementation of the strategic change while the final process is refreezing which restores the individual’s safety zones but under new guidelines (Normadin, 2012).

The McKinsey 7-S model and Kotter’s 8 step change model have a holistic approach to the process of change. The McKinsey 7-S model uses 7 factors that act as collective agents of change (Normadin, 2012). The agents include; shared values, strategy, structure, style, staff, systems and skills. The agents do not only help implement change but also help in understanding the organization and is most effective for realignment type of change (Balogun, 2001). The Kotter’s model on the other hand is a handy tool in the actual implementation of change as it makes change a campaign (Normadin, 2012). The 8 steps included in this model are; increasing the urgency for change, building a team dedicated to change, creating the vision for change, communicating the need for change, empowering staff with the ability to change, creating short term goals, staying persistent and making the change permanent. This approach can be used to produce either a revolutionary or evolutionary type of change (Balogun, 2001).

 

Task 1.2 Relevance of Models

The models may have been created a long time ago when technology was not moving fast as it is today but their impact is still as it was during their creation. The fast moving technology has made big bang changes to be less common. This is because technology changes are a continuous process and not a one in a lifetime occurrence. The fast movement of information has helped most organization to be up to date with new trends in management, packaging, marketing among others thus big bang changes being less often.

The most effective type of strategic change has been transformational change. This is because it involves more than just than organizational change. This type of change which applies  Lewin’s three process of change which are, unfreezing, transition and refreezing has had a fair share of success (Normamdin, 2012). This is because the model is able to overcome the challenges of founding conditions which are a major hindrance to strategic change (Boeker, 1989). This model involves the changing of an organization’s culture which usually a hard task. This is because it involves the changing of individual’s culture and it takes time ((Balogun, 2001).

 

Task 1:3 Value of Using Strategic Interventions

Strategic changes involve thorough analysis of a company’s profile, size and economic and financial conditions so as to ensure an effective change process. The understanding of these details enables the implementers of the change to conduct a smooth transition. This is the indicator of success and is not a common phenomenon especially for companies that are undertaking a total overhaul. Change which may involve the change of culture requires precise decisions and steps for the process to be a success, a factor that is guaranteed by strategic change.

The structuring of the strategic change process ensures the need for an objective assessment (Robinson, 2005). The approach enables the board especially in transitional changes to take a deeper analysis of the organizations future. This enables the organization to stay in line with its long term goals and objectives. Strategic change also supports understanding and buy-in (2005). The staff is involved in planning of strategic change which enables them to have a better understanding of the direction of the change and the organization in general and the benefits associated with the change.

The strategic approach is best adapted form of change for anticipating future problems that the anticipated change may have or that it might bring to the organization (Pearce & Robinson, 2003). This enables an organization to make the right decisions prior to the implementation of the change. Use of strategic change gives the change an organizational perspective. The implementation process does not only focus on the departments that will be affected by the change, the process analyzes the impact of the changes effected on the whole organization.

 

Task 2.1: The Need for Strategic Change

If changes are occurring in the industry in which an organization is in, those changes will finally catch up with the organization affecting the people and the processes. To help in minimizing and rechanneling the impact of the changes and avoid unintended negative outcomes, strategic change is important. This will help in minimizing the negative effects from the industry as a whole as well as take advantage of the changes. It is also important to note that change itself is a process, leading it, managing it and achieving it is also a process. Therefore in strategic management, it should not be approached using one common approach.

 

The business world is quite competitive and organizations which have been in the business for quite a long time may need to reinvent themselves. The process of deciding how to change and what to change can be quite a challenge. This is where strategic change comes in, it helps in coming up with answers to all those questions. It involves developing an innovative vision for the organization which indicates where the organization wants to be. The process also helps in developing an equally innovative path that will be the guide to achieving the vision (Douglas, 2013). Strategic change takes into account all the stakeholders who will be affected by the change and develops a change that will have minimum negative impacts but with positive benefits in the long run.

Change is the most important factor to the future of any organization. The changing technologies, management models, workers’ unions have made change a necessity hence leading to increased demand for change. This has made the single most important factor in business hence the demand for strategic change. The organizations do not only need change, but they need change which involves all the parties and considers the current and future trends in the business world.

Task 2:2 Driving Forces for Strategic Change

The main driving forces for the adoption strategic change are dramatic changes in the business environment or declining organizational performance (Roberts, 2008). These two factors indicate one internal factor and an external factor indicating that the driving forces are not different from the factors affecting the organization (internal & external factors). However the variation is in the magnitude of the factors and the impact they do have on the organization. Decline of an organization’s returns for one to two years maybe not an issue however decline for a consecutive third year raise a lot of questions and hence need for a strategic change. A good example is Blackberry, the company failed to re-strategize since being ousted from the top by apple in 2007. The continuous decline has however happened despite several strategic changes to revamp its lost glory. This indicates that not all strategic changes produce the desired results especially when the implementation is late.

Other than the two main causes, the stakeholders may also be a cause of strategic change. A dramatic change in consumer preferences, a sudden change of competitor’s products among other factors that affect the suppliers and products may be of influence to strategic plans. The strategic plans aim at restoring an organization to a previous profitable position or having the organization among the competitive list. The customers’ needs are not always the same, they tend to change over time and in some cases out of the organization’s current plans thus necessitating a review of the plans. Moreover crisis in the suppliers company may also be a cause for a change. A good example is Nokia which has seen a lot of competition hit the phone market with android powered gadgets being the most popular. Pressure has been on the company to ditch its symbian operating system for android but Nokia had a better idea. The company introduced Lumia, a new line of windows phones which really helped the company turn around its fortunes though more is still expected of it.

Task 2.3: Resource Implications

Resources analysis provides a very interesting twist to the analysis of the need for strategic change. Levitt and March (1988) noted that resources created competency traps due the tendency of firms to engage in exploitation (use and development of things already known) at the expense of exploration (pursuit of new knowledge) (Kraatz & Zajac, 2010). The organizations prefer exploitation because the returns are generally certain and in the long run exploitation drives out exploration (Levinthal & March, 1993). This in effect creates learning barriers. The resources may also create environmental buffers, which enable organizations to wade through environmental changes without having to implement a strategic change. This is because the organization’s accumulated stocks buffers it from the impact of the organizational changes (Kraatz & Zajac, 2010). This leads to organizations being more passive as a result of the loosening of the coupling between the organization and its environment.

Resources can also be seen as commitments whereby distinctive resources often represent commitments that own them (Kraatz & Zajac, 2010). The organizations acquire the distinctive resources by making binding commitments to specific practices, structures, standards and goals. These resources bind the organizations and the resources tend to become valued as ends and of themselves which greatly curtails the organization’s decisions as well as its strategic changes plans (2010). Resources of an organization can make strategic change which is a benefit for resource rich organizations. Therefore historically valuable resource like marketing expertise, research & development capability, production capacity and financial reserves have the capability to be used as facilitators of strategic change. These resources will enable their owners to be in a position of better response to environmental changes as well as adopt technological or organizational innovations that may threaten their survival (Kraatz & Zajac, 2010).

Task 3.1: Develop Systems to Involve Stakeholders in Planning of Change

Strategic change on an organization affects each member of the organization and therefore there is need to inform each member. The organizational stakeholders on the other hand need to be involved in planning strategic changes (Dudovskly, 2012). The level of involvement however is determined by several factors such as degree of active involvement, required capacity for direction setting and learning or by the level of influence.

The method of using degree of active involvement and required capacity for direction setting for the organization to include stakeholders in planning the strategic change symbolizes an effective method for creating an effective change plan and plays a role in its effective execution. The program suggests the participation of workers and supervisors in change preparing process to the level of ‘co-creating’ that includes interesting in-depth conversation and creating combined situation research. The reasoning behind such a great attention to worker opinions pertains to close understanding of this specific type of stakeholders with organizational issues (Dudovisky, 2012).

The level of participation of Company’s main exterior stakeholders –who are the customers on the other hand, is made the decision to be restricted to ‘testing’ that includes ,simulation, lead treatments, and examining, because clients approach the issue from a filter perspective i.e. they anticipate greater value with no concerns to sources required. Another method that can be applied is the application of the level of influence in the organization as well as the level of interest on the change proposal. This is indicated in the figure below.

 

Task 3.2 : Management Strategy With Stakeholders

This process will involve the identification and management of the goals and objective of each of the stakeholders. This is a key component for a successful project management and should not be taken lightly. It will help the change managers to gain support for the project and anticipate resistance, conflict and also the competing objectives among the project’s stakeholders. Early identification and communication with the stakeholders will be a catalyst to success as the managers will have ample time of planning the approach they will use to communicate the change.

This process will also involve the identification of stakeholders which is a crucial part of the entire process. This ensures that no stakeholders are omitted which a factor that may lead to delays in the implementation of the change. Once identified, the stakeholders are classified as major or minor depending on their role in the implementation of the change or the involvement in the change process. The identification and classification process will use brainstorming, semi-structured interviews, digging up of existing data and time lines to come up with the information needed for classification.

The final process will be the identification of key stakeholders. These are stakeholders who the success of the project is dependent on and they need to be informed in detail of all that the change process involves. They constitute of members who have most influence on the project, those that are adversely affected by the project or those that are resistant to the change project. They require more communication and management throughout the change process lifecycle.

Task 3.3: Systems Used to Involve Stakeholders in the Planning of Change

This process is aimed at identifying the effectiveness of the systems used to involve the stakeholders in the change process. It identifies how well each member of the organization is involved in the change process and the benefits of their involvement. The involvement of each member is quite a tedious and long process and may take time for large organization. This is because of the pockets of resistance within the organization that need to be convinced on the need of change. However this challenge can be solved by the use of a departmental approach as management of each department is not as complex. The level of influence approach on the other hand is a delicate strategy to apply especially for young institutions. It is more vulnerable to resistance especially if it involves a holistic overhaul of the organization. However for organizations which indicate their ambitions from the recruitment process, this is the best approach as it’s less expensive and involving.

The strategic change manager should however note that a good stakeholder engagement program is characterized by timely and comprehensive information disclosure and early and ongoing stakeholder consolations. The success of the latter is founded on a well developed and communicated plan, well defined consultations, prioritized issues, carefully selected engagement methodologies and a well documented consultation and action oriented feedback management. Information disclosure on the other hand is characterized by earliest possible disclosure, factual information, respect for sensitive information and a process that is structured to facilitate engagement.

Task 3.4 Strategy for Resistance Management

It is a very rare occurrence for a strategic change to face no resistance, an occurrence that should prompt the change manager to re evaluate the change process. Its effects can be both positive and negative to the organization. Two of the change models theorists, Kotter & Schlesinger (1979) emphasized on the importance of strategy to manage resistance in the organization. The theory solves the issue with the use of principles.

The first principle that Kotter and Schlesinger identified was education and communication. Through proper education and communication with the stakeholders regarding the change, the misconceptions and confusions which are the cause of resistance are cleared and hence the change is understood. The principle notes that people tend to accept a change once they are aware of the change. Negotiation and agreement which is the second principle identifies the fact that lots of things are at stake when an organizations undergoes strategic change. Therefore the best way of navigating through the change is by forming agreements between members and the organization.

The other principle is participation and involvement, a principle that involves the development of a strategy to facilitate the participation and involvement of stakeholders in the change process. This acts as a source of motivation as it makes the stakeholders feel part of the change which often result to minimal resistance. The fourth and final principle is the facilitation and support principle which entails facilitating and supporting the change proponents and initiators which motivates them and as a result becomes an example to others thus having a positive attitude to the change process in the entire organization.

Task 4.1 Develop Appropriate Models for Change

The change process involves three sets of parties; the individual, the team and the entire organization. The three parties have a relatively different reaction to change and hence the need to use different models to implement the strategic change. Kolb’s change model is the most effective individual change model and involves four different styles of learning. The first style involves diverging which involves individuals who are a very sensitive and therefore prefer to sit and watch rather than doing. The second style is the assimilation which involves individuals who have a logical and concise approach and tend to attach more importance to ideas and concepts rather than people. The convergence style which involves doing and thinking is the other style. It involves individuals who take more interest in technical tasks than people and interpersonal aspects. The final style is the accommodation style which entails doing and feeling. This is a more complex style as it involves individuals who believe in their own institutions.

Tuckman’s model on the other hand is the most effective model for managing team change. It involves forming, storming, norming and performing as its four main stages. The first stage which is forming involves a situation where the leader is responsible for all the change, the second process (storming) involves the team members as they discuss how the change needs to be done, the norming process further increases the powers of team members as all the members have to be in agreement for the decision to be implemented. The final stage involves the functioning of the team as it implements the decisions made. Kotter’s 8 step change model as indicated earlier in task 1 involves changes in the whole institution.

Task 4.2: Plan to implement a model for Change

This usually a make or break moment for any strategic change model. However good the plans and ideas maybe, the implementation of the model has to be ‘on point.’ The best approach to this process is creating an enabling environment for the implementation of the change. This may be through creation of urgency among the stakeholders which helps spark the initial motivation and believe in the organization that gets things moving. The formation of a powerful coalition is also another useful approach and involves convincing people that the need is necessary and being not just an implementer but also a leader of the change.

The implementation phase will also include environmental assessment of both internal and external factors so as to determine the most appropriate time to roll out the change. There will also be need to link strategic and organizational change, overall coherence and vesting of more trust and addition of value to the staff for effective implementation. These factors will promote unity in the organization which a crucial part of a successful implementation of strategic change in any institution.

 

 

Task 4.3: Develop Appropriate Measures to Monitor the Progress

The sole goal of strategic change is to make a difference in the organization. Monitoring the progress is of great importance as it determines whether the process is a failure or a success. One of the monitoring approaches that can be used is the guidance system approach. This approach uses systematic data to guide the overall change strategy (Tichy, 1983). This approach will use the data that is collected as the change takes place to make adjustments of the process in its later stages. This approach may involve acknowledgement of errors in the strategic change which the change managers collect in the next implementation phase.

The audit approach which is commonly used to assess all activities in organizations can also be used monitor the change process. This involves a situation where the change managers will stand back and assess the impact of the strategic change on the organization. The informal anecdotal approach may also be a useful monitoring tool as it is less technical and sophisticated. This involves collection of information from informal sources such as people’s observation, very informal meetings among other sources which helps to monitor the progress of the strategic change (Tichy,1983).

           

 

 

 

 

 

                        CONCLUSION

As change is inevitable so is the strategic change process. Long gone are the days that Machiavelli described, change is no longer one of the hardest thing to do but may be classified as one of the most complex activities of management. Success of strategic change is not only measured by the implementation of the policies but also by the satisfaction of the stakeholders. Change is a holistic process and so should be the approach. As Heraclitus observed, “No man ever steps in the same river twice , for its not the same river and he is not the same man.” This is the aim of strategic change that neither the stakeholders nor the institution is the same after a strategic change.

 

 REFERENCES

1. Boeker, W. (1989). Strategic Change: The Effects Of Founding And History..Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 489-515
2. Balogun, J. (2001).Exploring strategic change. Harlow: Prentice Hall/Financial Times.
3. Buchel, B. (2013). Exploring Strategic Change. Retrieved 8 May 2014 from http://www.imd.org/news/Exploring-Strategic-Change.cfm
4. Cummings, T. G. (2008). Handbook of organization development. Los Angeles: SAGE Publication.
5. Douglas, E. (2012). Why Strategic Change Management is important. Retrieved 8 May 2014 from http://ezinearticles.com/?Why-Strategic-Change-Management-is-Important&id=4892760
6. Dudovskiy, J. (2012). Systems to Involve Stakeholders in the planning of Change. Research Methodology. Retrieved 8 May 2014 from http://research-methodology.net/systems-to-involve-stakeholders-in-the-planning-of-change/
7. Kraatz, M. S., & Zajac, E. J. (2001). How Organizational Resources Affect Strategic Change and Performance in Turbulent Environments. Organization Science,12(5), 632-657.
8. Roberts, C. (2008). Implementing Educational Technology in Higher Education: A Strategic Approach . The Journal of Educators , 5(1), 6.
9. Robinson, R. (2005). The advantages and Disadvantages of Strategic Management. Charity Village. Retrieved 8 May 2014 from https://charityvillage.com/Content.aspx?topic=the_advantages_and_disadvantages_of_strategic_management
10. Tichy, N. M. (1983). Managing strategic change: technical, political, and cultural dynamics. New York: Wiley.
11. Normandin, B. (2012). Three Types of Change Management Models. The Fast Track. Retrieved 8 May 2014 from http://quickbase.intuit.com/blog/2012/08/28/three-types-of-change-management-models/

&nbsp
Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?