Comparative Analysis of Different Models of Organizational Change

Abstract

Changes have always been a characteristic of the economic life and, implicitly, of organizations, but their impact is presently greater than ever. The number of changes in the organization has been and is still growing and the role of change management has become increasingly important. Together with the complexity and dynamism of organizational changes appeared the need for new models to achieve them. Change management models synthesize research and practice in this area and represent the starting point in understanding the processes and mechanisms of organizational change. The purpose of this article is the comparative analysis of different change management models and identifies the advantages of their application. To reach the established objectives we have used as research method the content analysis of various Romanian and foreign authors' works. We have chosen six models, four of which are considered classics (the Kurt Lewin model, the model of research action, the model of adaptation to the research action, the model of systemic approach) and two models are inspired from the IT area (Hard System Change Model and Soft System Change Model).

Headnote

Abstract

Changes have always been a characteristic of the economic life and, implicitly, of organizations, but their impact is presently greater than ever. The number of changes in the organization has been and is still growing and the role of change management has become increasingly important. Together with the complexity and dynamism of organizational changes appeared the need for new models to achieve them. Change management models synthesize research and practice in this area and represent the starting point in understanding the processes and mechanisms of organizational change.

The purpose of this article is the comparative analysis of different change management models and identifies the advantages of their application.

To reach the established objectives we have used as research method the content analysis of various Romanian and foreign authors' works. We have chosen six models, four of which are considered classics (the Kurt Lewin model, the model of research action, the model of adaptation to the research action, the model of systemic approach) and two models are inspired from the IT area (Hard System Change Model and Soft System Change Model).

Keywords: organizational change, change models, lewin model, hard system change model, soft system change model

JEL Classification: M10

Introduction

Change is natural, the weather and the times also change, our (economic, social, political) environment changes, attitudes and mentalities change. The last decades have been characterized by periods of unprecedented transformations in all areas of activity and no one is immune to the revolutions. The world is changing and change will happen with or without our will. (Ridderstrale, J.; Wilcox, M., 2010)

The pace of change has increased under the pressures of the external environment that produce rapid changes and their effects are felt in all aspects of political, social and economic life.

Clarke, L., (2002) believes that "change is the very essence of business development: it is inevitable. It is strange to act stubbornly according to the misleading assumption that things will remain unchanged. Unfortunately, what was appropriate in the past will no longer bring results in the future - a very hard lesson to assimilate by successful companies who believe in their own mythology."

Change management models synthesize the research and the practice in the field as a basis to understand the processes and mechanisms of change at both organizational and individual levels. The literature is full of models meant to achieve organizational change and we believe that their analysis and their adaptation to the existing situations in the life of an organization can provide viable solutions to streamline and improve change management.

Organizational change models generally pursue three objectives:

* defining change, respectively exploration, analysis and understanding a situation of change in the context of an organization, identification and evaluation of possible solutions;

* the implementation of change which consists in applying a change in the organization, according to the chosen strategy;

* the consolidation which guarantees the assimilation of change by the organization.

"Known as change theories or models of change, the conceptions of planning and implementing changes in the organization describe specific activities required for the initiation and conduct of change in an organization. In the literature the following theories or models of change are known to be important: the Kurt Lewin model, the research action model, the model of contemporary adaptations to the research action, the model of systemic approach, the general model of change planning." (Burdus E. et all, 2003)

To achieve the above mentioned goal, the paper includes an introduction, a section in which we present some models of change that are considered "classical", a section dedicated to the presentation of hard system change model and soft system change model, conclusions and bibliography.

1. "Classic" models of change

1.1. The Kurt Lewin model

Kurt Lewin and E.H. Schein, considered precursors of change management models, believe that the process of change involves three basic stages: the behavioural thaw, the change and the recrystallization of behaviours. (Chisu, V. A., 2011)

In Kurt Lewin's conception, change is a modification of the forces that ensure the stability of the behavior system. The forces involved in this process are divided into two categories, the first category of forces that favor or require change and the second category of forces that resist change. At organizational level, this model reflects a state of balance required by the equality between the actions of the two types of forces. The intensification of the action of one force can accelerate the process of change, or, on the contrary, it can register stagnation.

The model proposed by Lewin for change splits the development of this process in three stages / phases namely: unfreeze, change and refreeze.

In the initial phase we observe the existing state as unsatisfactory and it creates motivation to approach the change process. The unfreeze stage highlights the differences between the real behavior of the organization and the desirable behaviors. In this way, the members of the organization are motivated to change.

The second step involves changing the shape of new answers, implementing a system of behavior change and moving towards a state of equilibrium. After motivation, there is a switch to another behavioral level centered on specific new values and attitudes.

The last phase involves the recrystallization of behaviors, their stabilization and integration into the permanent elements of the organization. The stabilization of the organization in the change process constitutes the freezing phase that maintains the new system of rules, norms, structures and policies.

1.2. The model of the research action

Through this model, planning of change is a cyclical process due to the close collaboration between members of the organization who are the initiators of the research process, a process which in turn involves a chain of activities. The diagnosis itself is the core of this model. Implicitly, the present diagnostic stages are presented as stages of the model.

In general, the manager has the task to identify the problem facing the organization. The analysis of the organization is achieved by consulting a specialist in the field who will then work with the members of the organization to gather data and draw up a preliminary diagnosis. These findings are communicated to all those involved in the analysis.

The next stage involves planning actions and the necessary steps to achieve a new balance and implement change effectively. After the establishment of the plan of action, the next is its implementation through specific activities, implementing new strategies, reorganizing, redesigning jobs etc.

At the end of the implementation of actions an analysis is performed to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the measures. If new problems are identified, the cycle will resume till the respective moment in order to solve them.

1.3. The model of adaptation to the research action

The applicability of this model can be found in various fields, which implies a significant increase in the number of participants to change due to the research activities. Similarly, the structure of this model of change involves taking several steps, but please note that there is a difference compared to the previous model, that is the lack of cyclical process.

The model provides a number of six stages. The process begins with the identification of the organization's strengths, which are represented mainly by competitive products, recognized brand, team work performance and subsequent data recording related to the favorable happenings at the organizational level. Based on this information, the image of the desired future state is outlined. This approach allows focusing attention on how to be or derive business. The transition to the new state will be based on an action plan which should be developed for this purpose. Finally the purpose of the process involves evaluating the obtained results.

Furthermore, we present comparatively the three stages of change management models discussed above (Figure 1).

1.4. The model of systemic approach

From the perspective of the systemic approach, there are five variables that exert influence on the organization and possible changes can be identified by the manager in the interrelation between them. The organization (seen as a whole) changes when one of its components is subject to change.

The five variables shown in model of systematic approach are:

* the staff which includes individuals working in the organization, along with individual characteristics: personality, attitudes, perceptions, skills, needs, tasks, motivation etc;

* work tasks of a person who is required to achieve them permanently or for a specified period of time;

* the technology, that is the methods and techniques that allow solving problems and applying knowledge in various organizational processes (using computers, special programs, robots, machinery in manufacturing, etc.)

* the structure involving organizational hierarchy, organizational communication systems, allocation of responsibilities and authority;

* strategy to the organization's objectives, deadlines to achieve them, resources and options of action.

The variables of the systemic approach are interrelated. Any change made on a variable involves changes in one or all the other variables.

2. Hard System Change Model vs. Soft System Change Model

Starting from the idea of the organization as a whole system, Joakim Tell presents two different approaches to managing organizational change, each based on different philosophies and comprising different methods. The first approach (hard) is based on rational and logical models, more suitable in situations of high complexity, in which human related aspects are considered minor.

The second approach (soft) keeps in mind that most of the changes involve people (leadership, organizational culture, motivation, etc.)

2.1. Methodology of the hard systems of change management

Hard System Change Model is a method to achieve organizational change configuration and its management which has been created and developed based on the methods of analysis and change associated with the engineering of the systems and project management. This model provides a rigorous and systematic determination of objectives for change and is used especially in situations where quantitative criteria can be used to test the options for change, but it is still possible to use qualitative criteria. This model was developed by Open Systems Group from the previous work by Neufville and Stafford (1974). The authors differentiated the stages of hard approach to organizational change, presenting a continuous line on the borders of "problem / opportunity" and "implementation", that occur in the real world, while the remaining steps are dashed frames to indicate that they are thinking processes.

We believe it is important that each step is covered with the consent of those involved as well as, after the implementation of a stage, there must be an agreement of the interested parties that the activities were carried out correctly.

Stage 1: Identification of the problem (What is the problem?)

The aim of the first stage is to identify and describe the problem and the result of this step is to determine the direction of the course of work. We believe that the need for a change may result from identifying opportunities, not only unfavorable situations (problems). The best way to distinguish between them is to think about:

* a problem as an unwanted deviation from a standard state or a state of affairs - the solution requires restoration, satisfactory existing state of affairs;

* an opportunity as a chance to improve the existing state of affairs.

At this stage, we consider appropriate carrying out the following activities: recognizing the need for change to solve a problem or exploit an opportunity, testing other people's vision on the need for change.

Stage 2: Analysis of the existing situation (Where are we now?)

Identifying and defining the problem, and the covered system or systems are essential to the success of subsequent analyses, therefore, appropriate diagnostic techniques must be used.

Stage 3: Identification of objectives/constraints (Where would you like to be?)

In this stage the identified objectives and constraints associated with the problem or opportunity are explicitly identified. This is important for several reasons:

* it obliges all people concerned to clarify what they hope to achieve;

* the need to agree that objectives and constraints may bring to the fore the open disagreements that could arise only in a later stage of the approach;

* the process of defining, developing and adopting objectives and constraints that can help maintain commitment to the project;

* lay the foundation for further work, because, once the objectives and constraints have been defined, it is possible to decide what is necessary to do in order to achieve or avoid them.

Stage 4: Generation of routes to objectives (How could we get there?)

This stage explores different ways of achieving the established objectives. It is the most imaginative step and it is based on the idea to generate as many ideas as possible, and to reduce the list up to two to three "clear opportunities", which can continue to be used in the development stage.

Stage 5: Formulating measures of performance (How will we know when we reached?)

Hard systems approach emphasizes the need for measurable means of evaluating the effectiveness of any potential solution, but recognizes that this may not be possible all the time.

Stage 6: Option development (How would the options look like?)

The objective is to develop routes to the objectives generated in Stage 4 in the position where they could be implemented if the decision to go ahead was taken. This requires sufficient work for each option, and the technical or other details to be defined, the costs and benefits to be assessed and the correct decision to be taken, and simultaneously reduce the time and resources needed for that task.

Stage 7: Testing the option (How would each work?)

While the objectives and constraints identified were constantly mentioned during the development stage, the testing stage is a more formal approach to each option. Its objective is to determine whether the option will meet operational objectives, if it is technically and organizationally possible and if they achieve the financial goals.

Stage 8: Choice (decision making)

We might believe that after all that took place before, the decision about whether to go ahead or not would be automatic, but it is rarely the case. There are still many discussions and "fine tuning" necessary to ensure that the proposal is acceptable.

Stage 9: Implementation

The implementation of all tasks involves all detailed tasks of design, development and installation necessary to achieve the proposed operation.

Successful completion of a project will give rise to other opportunities or to a different set of problems to be addressed.

According to Senior B. & J. Fleming (2006), the hard systems model provides a practical approach to change that has been designed to apply to situations of low-medium complexity. The HSMC can also be effective to begin to diagnose a change situation before categorizing it into more simple or complex change.

This model of organizational change is less good at identifying the political and moral issues surrounding types of change.

2.2. Methodology of the soft systems of change management

Another change approach, which takes into consideration that many change situations involve "people issues" (leadership, culture and politics) is Soft System Change Model.

Different "softer" approaches to solve problems have been proposed by several specialists and have been developed later, starting with the 60s in response to the problems that had emerged in applying the Hard System Change Model.

The one we describe is based on the methodology developed by Peter Checkland and his collaborators at the University of Lancaster. (Stan Lester, April 2008) This was applied to the problems of the systems in a number of projects.

The stages of the soft approach are presented in Figure 3.

Stage 1: The situation of the unstructured problem

The approach begins with a situation where one or more people discover that there is a problem. It will not be possible to define the problem and establish its precision and, in any case, the various people involved will have different ideas.

Stage 2: The analyzed situation

The first step is to develop an image (named a rich image in the terminology of software systems) that encapsulates all the elements that people involved in this matter are thinking. Once the rich image has been developed, the analyst will attempt to extract "problems" and key tasks.

The problems are areas of dispute in the problem situation. The key tasks are essential jobs that need to be considered in case of problem.

Stage 3: Relevant systems basic definitions

The extracted key issues and tasks are based on the definition of what it is called "relevant systems". A further analysis of a relevant system could provide valuable insights to different perspectives of the situation.

The original idea of the concerned relevant system is then extended to a basic definition.

Stage 4: The conceptual model

The conceptual model (or activity) includes all activities to be performed by the relevant system. The pattern is typically designed as a block diagram.

Stage 5: Comparison of the stages 2 to 4

The objective of the comparison stage is to link the conceptual model and the case problem as described in the rich image. The idea is to highlight the differences between the two so that the possible improvements in the problem situation can be identified.

Stage 6: Debate on possible and desirable changes

The comparison made in the previous stage may have two results: it may cause opinions to change the problem situation and the problems arising from it, and provide an agenda for change. In both cases, the objective of this stage is to discuss, with all parties involved, the proposed changes to ensure that it is both desirable and possible. The goal is to reach a consensus on the proposed changes. However, since the soft systems approach especially seek to explore and reconcile different views and perceptions of the problem situation, this may not be fully achievable. Thus, the soft systems try to be established between these different views and allow action to be taken.

Stage 7: Implementation of changes

Eventually, the established changes are applied.

Both the hard systems approach and that of the software ones are considered a learning process. Repetition is a feature of the application of the methodology. Learning takes place in both approaches by using models, although the software systems have been further improved to include an analysis specific to the culture and politics of the problem situation.

Conclusion

Change is a continuous process and many changes occur without the organizations to interfere. Changes can generate sometimes just a slight adjustment functionally and structurally or, oppositely, they can lead to a major redesign of the organization. Considering that changes refer to threat and opportunity, it is important how organizational members perceive them and this is where the talent of managers interferes to use an appropriate change model adequate for the organization.

Change can bring both improvement and deterioration in performance of the organization, a reason for which the determination of the adequate time to initiate change is one of the most important stages of any model of change and one of the biggest responsibilities of managers. The organization which does not accept change as an effective and necessary process will not be competitive; it will not be able to meet the new demands of the market and will gradually lose its customers.

What we consider to be important in the change process is to review strategies, training and motivation of human resources in order to accept and promote change, communication and expertise in the design, development and evaluation of changes.

In our opinion, there is a direct and strong correlation between the models of change management effectiveness and organizational vision. People accept and support the change if they are offered a destination, they are presented a picture of what awaits them there and feel that they are partners on the way to that destination. Both managers and employees should be drawn to change not only rationally but also emotionally, that is to join a new vision and accept its costs of transformation into reality and permanently be aware that this will not be the last.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the project " Excellence academic routes in the doctoral and postdoctoral research -READ" co-funded from the European Social Fund through the Development of Human Resources Operational Programme 2007-2013, contract no. POSDRU/159/1.5/S/137926.

References

References

Bold, O., (2011) A Perspective on Organizational Change Issue - Case Study on the Application of Two Change Models, Review of International Comparative Management, Volume 12, Issue 5, p. 871

Burdus, E.; Caprarescu, G.; Androniceanu, A.; Miles, M., (2003) Managementul schimbarii organizationale, 3rd Edition, Bucharest: Economica

Chisu, V. A., (2011) Manualul specialistului în resurse umane, Bucharest: IRECSON

Clarke, L., (2002) Managementul schimbarii - Ghid practic privind producerea, mentinerea si controlul schimbarii într-o firma sau organizatie, Bucharest: Teora,

Lester, S. (2008), Soft System Methodology, available on-line at http://www.sld. demon.co.uk /ssm.pdf

Popescu, C, (2008) Modele si metode ale schimbarii, Revista Business&Leadership, no. 2, p. 78

Ridderstrale, J.; Wilcox, M., (2010) Revitalizarea corporatiei. Cum reusesc liderii sa produca schimbarea, Bucharest: Publica

Senior, B., (2002) "Organizational Change Lecturer's Guide", available on-line at www.ln.edu.hk/mgt/staff/robin/Change/EMBA%25208%2520redone.ppt+&cd=2& hl=ro&ct=clnk&gl=ro

Senior, B.; Fleming, J., (2006) Organizational Change, Pearson Education Limited

Tell, J., Strategies for managing change, Chapter 8-The practicalities of managing change, available on-line at ww.hh.se