Introduction
All organizations be it public or private strive to survive to progress and grow. To achieve this goal, organizations may need to change their physical infrastructure or incorporate some changes in their routine operations. These changes have always been viewed a top-down approach that is mostly induced by managers (Samuel, 2013). Due to this reason, organizational change theory has been a very useful tool for management practice. There are various and multiple information sources available today on change theories to help managers manage change in organizations. However, despite the vast amount of literature involving change management available today and the benefits that organizations may attain from change, managing change has always been a problem in most sectors.
Effects of Organizational Change Theory on Management Practice
Organizational change theory in most cases does not have the desired effect on management practice. The theory offers some help to managers but it appears not to have the optimal impact on management practice. Studies done on this matter have revealed three main facts that try to explain why this happens.
Characteristics of Managers and their Work Context
Linear change processes are no longer left in the hands of a single leader or the organizational development consultant. In reality, four change agents each with different experiences and perspectives have to be involved in any organizational change process. These agents are; senior leaders, middle managers, external consultants, and teams. Organizational change theory promotes the complex interaction between these four change agents that takes place within an organization. However, studies have identified the differing experiences and complexity of interactions between senior and middle managers inhibits the successful implementation of change theory.
Further research has shown that private sector managers have more satisfactory experiences in implementing change than their counterparts in the public sector. The main reason why the public sector has less satisfaction is because of the nature of public policies. The policies are mostly based upon ministerial command that is mostly coupled with threats, the substance of the policies is mostly highly controversial, the policies have tight and sometimes non-negotiable time frames leaving no planning window, and most of them do not consider the political and logistical implementation issues.
Teaching and Learning of Organizational Theory
Organizational theory is among the subjects taught to students in Masters in Business Administration (MBA). MBA is currently the most common qualification for managers and most students attempt to apply what they learned in business schools when they get employed in managerial positions. However, the MBA is not as useful as perceived to be because of the way organizational change theory is taught in the programs. The MBA focuses more on teaching techniques as opposed to useful concepts. As such, managers do not know how to approach a problem where techniques do not work (Andrews, Cameron, & Harris, 2008). This is because they lack the necessary concepts for adapting theories or thinking creatively suited for their particular work context. Managers facing multiple changes are mostly concerned with action and do not have time to reflect upon the importance of theory in solving problems. The fact that organizations rarely have systems that encourage employee learning for the benefit of the organization also does little to help this situation.
Nature of Organizational Theory
Different experts in organizational theory have come up with different arguments concerning the nature of organizational theory that limits its usefulness in practice. Some argue that organizational theory is based on how the world works as opposed to the knowledge of what works in practice. The experts believe that management should be concerned with what works in practice. The experts suggest the development of knowledge that is of practical use to managers, which requires collaboration efforts between managers and universities. The content taught in universities should be changed and managers should be more involved in the research process.
However, not everybody supports the above idea as some have argued that the approach sacrifices academic rigor and any hope of generalizing knowledge. They suggest what they refer to as bridging epistemology that involves the connection of rigor and relevance, particular and general, inductive and deductive knowledge. This will develop a theory that circles between the whole and the parts, interpreting each in terms of the other leading to the generation of new ideas that create new realities.
The current organizational change theory is also seen by some to reflect instrumental motivations and reasoning. The experts argue that current organizational theory promotes three different forms of organizational imperialism; cultural fragmentation, cultural imposition, and cultural domination. The proposed solution to this problem is developing an alternative approach to conceptualizing change management that incorporates shared meanings and cultural emancipation.
Another problem seen in the current management theory is that it claims to be general and predictive but assumes managerialism and ignores other power differentials that are part of society (Andrews, Cameron, & Harris, 2008). The main problem with this approach is that it relies on change being manageable and controllable, which is an illusion. To deal with this problem requires changing the under-socialized approach of organizational change theory and putting it in history’s context.
Issues in Managing Change
There are many issues that lead to the complexities of managing change in both public and private sectors. Key among these issues that are seen in both public and private sectors is the political and organizational environments in where the implementation and management of change take place. `Political pressure arises when people with formal or informal powers and vested interests in the organization determine how the members of the organization react to change (Samuel, 2013). The organizational environment triggers resistance to change because of the threats presented by changes within the organization. People mainly against change in organizations are subordinates who view changes induced by management as only interested in organizational profits or the managers’ careers.
Problems in implementing organizational change were also seen to arise from particular long-standing organizational cultures or distinct public sector issues involving the employment of professionals in government institutions. These issues are particularly common in organizational changes arising from mergers or collaboration between two or more public organizations. In such scenarios, issues of organizational control and governance are seen as the main factors that prevent successful change implementation.
Studies also show that many managers although managers understand the internal and external pressures to implement organizational change, most of the managers view the emphasis on speed as inappropriate. This was especially in situations where implementation of one change was soon followed by another. Most managers are also concerned about how little attention is paid to the monitoring and evaluation of resulting outcomes of implemented changes. Sometimes checks in line with performance management were made on whether the target of specific changes had been achieved but there was little interest on how the changes had affected the structures and values of the organization.
Some organizations also are risk or change-averse and others lack control over changes. This brings about negative experiences while trying to manage change implementation in the organizations (Andrews, Cameron, & Harris, 2008). Managers in such organizations are also wary about the resulting uncertainties of the final outcomes from change implementation.
The final issue seen in both private and public organizations is the threat that changes pose to their organizational values. The values of an organization such as equity and caring motivate people to work in the organization. However, the current manner in which organizational change is implemented does not consider these organizational values.
Responses to the Challenges of Managing Change
One of the ways of reducing the organizational turmoil due to organizational change in lower level employees is managers playing an advocacy or mentoring role. This involves ensuring that all those who the managers are managerially or professionally responsible for are aware of the reasons and benefits of organizational changes. This will help eliminate the labor versus management conflict and ensure that change is accepted by all employees in the organization.
Another way of dealing with the issues arising in change management is involvement of both internal and external stakeholders in organizational change. This will enable the managers to get the opinions of the change process and iron out any differences that exist. If done effectively, the implementation of organizational change will gain the support of all stakeholders thereby maintaining the integrity of both the internal and external environments of the organization.
Another solution to the issue is by encouraging the ownership of change strategies. This is done through promotion of multi-agency approach to the implementation of organizational changes. This will result in synergetic working among all entities involved in the change process leading to improved services. This strategy can be especially useful in solving the organizational control issue that is seen in collaboration and mergers of public organizations.
Recommendations
Research shows that the formal studies managers receive of organizational change theory are very valuable to the managers. This enabled the managers to understand the policy drivers and context of organizational change and the reasons for change resistance. This acted as a motivator for the managers enabling them to be consistent and persistent with change implementation despite the arising issues. Studies also show that the managers valued the opportunity to discuss the application of presented organizational change theories to real life practice. However, the educational content of organizational change lacked the techniques necessary to implement change. As such, the teaching of organizational change theory should be changed in universities to incorporate implementation techniques.
Two experts in organizational theory have proposed the use of four learning processes to ensure successful transmission of change theory into practice (Aram & Salipante, 2003). The processes include socialization, combination, externalization, and internalization. These processes allow managers to change implicit ideas, combine their explicit knowledge with new knowledge, make tacit knowledge, and incorporate take explicit knowledge and incorporate it into their implicit ways of thinking and practice.
Conclusion
Change is an inevitable part of today’s public and private organizations. To successfully manage change managers need to understand organizational change theory because they are the ones who induce the change process in an organization. However, there are various obstacles and issues that hinder the change in organizations. These obstacles are largely attributed to the characteristics of managers and their work context, the nature of organizational theory and how organizational theory is taught and learned by potential managers in MBA programs. Research has shown that these problems arise because managers lack the necessary techniques to implement changes in organizations. The recommended solution is to revise the current teaching of organizational change theory to incorporate learning processes necessary for effective transmission of change theory to practice.
References
Andrews, J., Cameron, H., & Harris, M. (2008). All change? Managers’ experience of organizational change in theory and practice. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 21(3), 300–314. doi:10.1108/09534810810874796
Aram, J. D., & Salipante, P. F. (2003). Bridging scholarship in management: Epistemological reflections. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 189–205. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.00374
Samuel, K. (2013). The Effects of Change Management in an Organization: A Case Study of National University of Rwanda (Nur). Wyno Journal of Management & Business Studies, 1(1), . Retrieved from http://www.wynoacademicjournals.org/THE%20EFFECTS%20OF%20CHANGE%20MANAGEMENT%20IN%20AN%20ORGANISATION.pdf
