Change management plays an important role in the modern business environment. Its importance is increasing simultaneously with the technology, science and business processes development. Every organization that has been operating for many years experiences changes. Change management is a transitioning of teams, individuals and organizations to a preferred future state. The organizations that are willing to implement changes may prefer to use one of the change models suggested by the scientists. For example, they may choose Lewin’s change model or Hammer’s business process reengineering model.
The researcher Lewin suggests the model that includes three phases of organizations’ transformation. The first one is unfreezing. This phase relates to winning of readiness to change within the organization. The term “change readiness” means people who are ready for the next step. Some people require less time to become ready for changes while others need more time for it. To “melt” people in the organization (change readiness) means to create buy-in by means of addressing the individuals’ concerns regarding the change. The concerns are rather predictable and provide the leader with the possibility to lessen the change resistance early in the process. Addressing concerns helps with changing thinking regarding the change.
According to both researchers, most colleagues do not resist change itself. They may resist reduce of pay, loss of status or comfort, but it is not the same as change resisting. The solution to limiting resistance is to involve colleagues in change planning. If leaders can determine the concern stages, they can communicate the appropriate information at the right time and this will reduce resistance. Unless change leaders take time to determine and resolve colleagues’ concerns, they will not be able to reach the momentum that is necessary for the successful change. One of the main reasons why a lot of change attempts fail is because leaders do not look at the process of change and the required transitions from the point of view of the involved individuals.
The second phase of Lewin’s model is called transition. This phase relates to the process of change. Once the company is prepared to change after employing unfreezing techniques, managers can then move to transition. Lewin admits that when changing from the status quo to a new level, it should be considered to be a process rather than just a step. Leaders often underestimate this process. A significant trap that tempts change leaders is to spend several months in their own process of change understanding and then expecting their colleagues to accept the change in one simple step. Changes always take time and leaders should consider this in their planning. At this moment starts the hardest change part. People see the change and transition as a huge, big, monstrous event. It can cause paralysis and stagnation because of overwhelm and over-analysis the colleagues before they get going. Effective leaders should use the reverse approach. They should make each step so easy and small to neutralize all possible objections.
The third phase is called refreeze. This phase relates to the fixing of achieved changes in the organization. After completing the change and unfreeze phases, many organizations declare victory. Then in six months or a year they return to where they started as if they did not incorporate any changes. It is because they did not complete the third phase of Lewin’s model that is called refreeze. The goal in this phase is to create the new behavior and new stability for the company. Without this phase, the implementation of change is ineffective and incomplete. In order to make the permanent change, leaders should integrate it in the company’s culture. Until newly established behaviors are rooted in shared values and social norms, they may be degraded as soon as the pressure is removed.
The goal of Lewin’s change model’s implementation is “to assist in expanding of a leader’s awareness regarding the dynamics involved in creation of the effective change in the organization. If implemented correctly, change is a chance for development and growth” (Manduca, 2012).
Business process reengineering model of Hammer is a strategy of business management, originally started in the 1990s, focusing on the design and analysis of workflows and business processes in a company. Business process reengineering aimed to help companies fundamentally rethink how they work in order to improve customer service, become world-class competitors and reduce operational costs. In the 1990s, 60% of the Fortune 500 companies informed that they either have initiated the process of reengineering, or plan to do it.
Lewin’s and Hammer’s models are different, but at the same time they have very much in common, as the main goal is almost the same. The processes according to these models are different; however, they also have many similarities, especially regarding the employees’ relations aspects.
In the Hammer’s model, as well as in the Lewin’s model, one of the most serious barriers is employee’s resistance to change. According to Hammer’s model, “mostly people are afraid to lose their jobs, not to get promotion, etc. People often ask the question “why should it be changed if it is working?” According to this model, the company should create an appropriate leadership in order to eliminate the resistance and involve people into the process” (Chen, 2001).
Business process reengineering is closely connected with the improvement of IT technologies within the company. Thus, IT systems should help to automate many processes and make the company’s work more effective.
Business strategy is the main driver of business process reengineering initiatives and the other dimensions are ruled by strategy's encompassing role. The company dimension reflects the elements of the company’s structure, such as the composition of units, hierarchical levels, and work distribution between them. Technology is focused on the computer systems and other kinds of communication technology in the business. In business process reengineering, information technology is an enabler of new forms of collaborating and organizing, rather than existing business functions supporting. The human resources dimension is connected with aspects such as training, education, reward systems and motivation. The business processes concept, interrelated actions aiming at creating an added value to a customer, is the main idea of business process reengineering. These processes possess many attributes, such as customer focus, process ownership, cross-functionality, and value adding.
Reengineering efforts cannot be exercised without an organization-wide commitment to its goals. However, the commitment of top management is the most important for success. Top management should understand the need for change, develop a full awareness of what reengineering is, and plan how to realize it.
Leadership in both models has to be strong, effective, visible, and creative in understanding and thinking in order to ensure a clear vision. Convincing every group within the company of the necessity for business process reengineering is a main step in successful process implementation. It is possible to eliminate resistance to change and improve the odds for success by means of informing all groups at every stage, and making accent on the positive results of the process of reengineering. The success of business process reengineering depends on the consistent, strong, and continuous involvement of all divisional levels within the company. It also depends on the colleagues who do it and how good they can be motivated to apply their detailed knowledge and to be creative.
As it is obvious from the above models’ description, the organizational change is not possible without people’s commitment and involvement into the process. Both models require from leaders to be competent and efficient in order to create effective change. The Hammer’s model is focused on the IT technology improvement within the company, whereas the Lewin’s model is more about the change in company’s culture. Both theories require from leaders to continue working after successful change project’s implementation, otherwise everything can get back to the condition, as it was before the change.
References
Chen, Y. (2001). Business Process Reengineering: Introduction. The University Of Warwick, 68-96. Retrieved from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/dcs/research/em/publications/phd/ychen/files/chap-3.pdf
Manduca, B. (2012). Strategic Leadership Review, Volume 2, Issue 2, June 2012 ISSN: 2164-5108 Leading Effective Change: Three Keys for Transforming Your Organization. Strategic Leadership Review, 2(2), 28-33. Retrieved from https://submissions.scholasticahq.com/supporting_files/405/attachment_versions/402
