This report considers a case study which introduces and provides examples of faux change and superfluous change. Within this discussion, these areas of change context are considered and evaluated with regard to how they may be identified and resisted. The report also defines and evaluates organisational change and the frameworks within which it may be undertaken. The impact of change is discussed and is followed by an analysis of resistance to change and the factors that may enhance or weaken it. The report then focuses on force field analysis before concluding with the point that although change may be seen as being inevitable, it must be carefully considered and ...view middle of the document...
In a market economy, organisation exist and thrive on competition and if they are not constantly working towards innovation and innovation-based changes, they are likely to fall behind in the competitive race that effectively ensures the ongoing growth of living standards and of overall wealth (McConnell and Brue 2008). However, while there may be a constant need for change, this is different to change for the sake of change or to fulfill the personal ambitions of a manager or even executive who perceives career opportunities in constantly instigating change. There are also many different levels of change, ranging from those that are minor to those that have the potential to fundamentally alter the nature of the culture of a company (Cameron 2004).
Therefore, the extent of the damage or positive outcomes that may come from change will be contingent upon a number of factors. In order to better understand these, the report, following this introductory section, first considers definitions and models for organisational change. It then attempts to develop a better understanding of faux and superfluous change, using the case study (Karn and Highfill 2004) and the examples within it to highlight points made. This is followed by a discussion of the impact of change, both ‘good’ and ‘bad,’ before coming to a final section that concludes the report.
2.0 What is Organisational Change?
2.1 Definitions of organisational change
As stated above, organisational change can be in many forms and at many different degrees of importance and intensity. It can also be undertaken for many and different reasons and with different motivational factors. Therefore it can only be defined in general terms. One such general definition is provided by Chen, Suen, Lin and Shieh (2013, p. 1), who propose that it is a “process in which an organisation optimises performance as it works towards its ideal state,” that it occurs as a “reaction to an ever-changing environment.” It can be a response to a crisis or can be “triggered by a leader.”
A further definition, which includes a greater depth with regard to the implications of organisational change, is provided by Ramanathan (2008, p. 20), who (citing Cohen et al 1995) notes that it is a situation that involves “moving from the known to the unknown, from relative certainty to relative uncertainty, from the familiar to the unfamiliar.” A further definition, provided by Ramanathan (2008, p. 20, citing Ferdig and Ludema 2003) is that organisational change is “characterised as a process that unfolds over time, revealing periods of greater or lesser stability, in which the restlessness of a system is an instinctive response toward survival in a constantly changing environment.”
2.2 Frameworks in which organisational change can be undertaken
One early framework in which change takes place was proposed by Lewin in 1947. This suggests that the stability and routines associated with normal working life had to be undone...