Question 1: What constitutes the organization’s general environment? How would this impact on decisions made by a change agent?
Organization’s general environment is all the external forces that either affects a department or an organization as whole. It is made up of technology, legal and regulatory, economic, political, social and ecological elements. It affects decisions made by change agents indirectly or directly. For instance, economic meltdown directly affects demand for organization’s products by lowering products demand. It can as well indirectly influence decisions made by change agents’ because of its linkages with the external agents. When the elements are high, the organization is restricted and thus becomes responsive
Question 2: Through what strategies do organisations gain ‘control’ over their environments? What implications does this have for how change is managed?
It entails identification understanding of the relevant environmental features that affect organizations growth and survival. This gives insight into how the information gathered is translated into an opportunity thus response by developing special scanning units to craft strategies to solve the anomaly.
Proactive responses
This entails alteration of the environment through manipulating external forces to an organization’s advantage, e.g. participating in law formulation, but to its favor
Collective structures
Typically, it entails liaison of an organization with other organizations through bargaining, contracting, joint ventures, federations and alliances to fit positively in the environment.
Implication
These thus imply that a balance is created between the organizations and its environment and therefore limited external disruptions experienced. Besides, it implies broader linkage of organization to information and resources.
Question 3: What is associated with a transorganisational system? Describe its stages and compare and contrast this with the OD process
Transorganizational systems are groups of organizations joined together for a common goal. They can make decisions and perform tasks on behalf of other members. However, member’s identity and goals are maintained. This is similar to OD, as members can make change on behalf of the organization. It goes through four stages. The identification stage involves recognition of core member organizations of TS. Just like OD, it clarifies appropriate participants. Basically, one or more interested TS organizations participate in this stage. The convention stage involves pulling together potential members to validate the viability of the TS. It’s facilitated with change agents and develops motivation in members. Organization stage involves adoption of structures, mechanisms and communicational strategies among members to facilitate interaction geared towards task completion. Lastly, evaluation stage entails understanding of responses from members so that problems can be curtailed. Response may include performance outcome and contentment levels. The same may apply to OD, where evaluation is done with respect to performance level.
However, the major difference between OD and TS is that TS creates partnerships with other organizations to solve problems which are complex to a single organization. Besides, TS follows a planned change as opposed to OD.
Question 4: Describe both downsizing and re-engineering, then compare and contrast them
Downsizing
This is an intervention that involves reducing the organization’s work force through lay-offs, attrition, redeployment or early retirements. It as well involves reducing the number of organization’s units through outsourcing or reorganization. Generally, it results in cost reduction as it replaces permanent workers with contingent workforce. Its merits include; synergistic outcomes, leverage on distinctive competency, and adaptability to the changing environments.
Re-engineering
It is a radical rethinking and drastic redesign of fundamental business undertakings in order to achieve valuable performances. It typically changes production and delivery of goods and services. It aims at reorganizing work processes by making them more flexible and responsive to variations in competitive conditions and to a wider organization’s environment. Its center stage is in information technology. Also, it encompasses work re-design and downsizing. It relates with motivational and socio technical work design hence employee inspiration.
Re-engineering prepares the organization, rethinks how task should be done and re-structures an organization around a new designed process. On the contrary, downsizing focuses on organizations strategies and follows a growth plan to address needs of members towards achieving the strategy. They both however aim at restructuring an organization.
Question 5: What are the approaches to work design? Give an example of each.
Re-engineering approach
It involves scientific analysis of tasks performed by workers so as to establish desired procedures that result in maximum output but with minimum energy input and resources. It thus leads to higher work specification and specialization. An example is the use of traditional re-engineering design in automobiles.
The motivational approach
Here, organizations effectiveness directly correlates with members’ needs satisfaction. It improves worker performance through job enrichment hence autonomous and accountability development. It presents motivational factors that boost employee performance, for instance, the company policy, work conditions and promotion strategies. Satisfied workers perform better.
Question 6: Why are the work design approaches more effective when integrated?
This is because integration leads to incorporation of all the factors that operate in the work setting, e.g. technological factors for goods production and the personal needs of employee; thus high level of employee satisfaction and productivity. The factors that need incorporation include the technical and personal need factors.
Reference
Waddel, D.M., Cummings, T. G., and Worley, C. G. (2011). Organisational Change, Development & Transformation. 4th Edition. Cengage Learning, South Melbourne.
Chaminade, B. (2005). The workers divided. HR Monthly, October, p. 29.
