Different aspects have led to many changes in the contemporary society. Todnem (2005) asserts that many people around the globe have failed to handle change despite being the ever-present aspect in life. He examines the various aspects that have caused the disparity when handling change. His statistical evidence shows that nearly 70% of all change programmes that were initiated during the last decade of the twentieth century failed thus calling for the development as well as acquisition of change development skill. This paper gives an overview of literature concerning the approaches that can be employed by not only leaders but also member of any given society to enhance sustainable development.
Waddel, Cummings and Worley (2011) postulate that it is important for leaders to be knowledgeable about change. They argue that it is the only way for organizations to be able to thrive in the dynamic nature of the contemporary society e.g. in terms of technological advancement. They feature the organizational change theory by Kimberly as one of the theories that could help leaders understand the dynamism of the world. The main feature of the theory that they believe are crucial in enhancing sustainability is the implementation of the both incremental and transformational change. Additionally, they add that the organizations need to invest heavily on the acquisition individuals with excellent organizational and management skills. At the individual level, they belief that the personal theory of change should propel leaders to embrace change an aspect that enhances sustainability.
About organizational development, all factors that are brought about by change should be considered when planning the organizational development plan of an organization (Waddel et al., 2011; Aras and Growther, 2008) . The unit approaches that enable an organization to achieve its goals such as technological innovation and training and development should be carried out in a manner that embraces change. The other aspects, according to Waddell et al. (2011) which should be put into consideration in ensuring organizational development is achieved are behavioral science and knowledge and practice; organizational evolution; creation and subsequent involvement of change; the strategy, structure and process changes; and the zeal to improve organizational effectiveness. They suggest that these factors should also be considered in tackling the changes that an organization might have especially those caused by external forces.
Smith and Rayment (2010) offer a four-steps solution that leaders in business organizations should embrace in the initial stages of dealing the urgent global issues i.e. the aspects that have brought change in the society. He believes that there it is important to offer guidance to the various key players in the corporate world due to the complexity of the matter. The four steps include the adoption of a new business paradigm, development of a contemporary mission, embracing a global approach and them solving the problem effectively. They note that the key stakeholders in this aspect are leaders and decision makers, organizations and nations and societies. Unlike Waddell et al. (2011), Smith and Rayment suggest that systematic model of problem-solving as the best tool in solving the problem that change brings to any organization.
The recent technological advancements have brought about many changes in the way business is conducted as well as the general social aspects. The poor approach that people have towards the technological changes has been the cause of the failure to embrace change well says Read (2006). He points out the elements that should be considered when dealing with issues of sustainability at all levels-individual, societal and organizational. Individual emotional health and wellness should be addressed. Additionally, organizations and the society should seek to understand the various aspects that seek to enhance sustainable development without causing harm not only to individuals but also to the environment. On the contrary, Aras and Growther (2008) believe that the leaders in the corporate are solely responsible for most of the failures for most programmes that promote change. Consequently, they should be the only party which should take full responsibility for the failure.
Unlike most of the researchers, Peschl and Fundneider (2008) believe that they are not a problem (since they cause changes) but are an advantage to the sustainable development. They enhance the development as well as the acquisition of new knowledge and leaders should incorporate such knowledge in their organizations. They believe that the leaders, as well as all individuals in any given society should welcome new knowledge i.e. ‘download’ it. This should be followed by a modification of the already existing patterns to create space for the new technologies in the society/organization. They suggest that every individual will have to examine themselves, a step that will help in positioning the new knowledge in their everyday life. Next, one should ‘reframe’ everything possible to create an environment that would boost the development as well as the optimization of the acquired knowledge. This are the steps toward emergent innovation which refers to the psychological and physical preparedness to embrace change. Harris and Crane (2001) as well as Dunphy et al. hold the same opinion in that all the stakeholders should be able to accept and position the changes within their operations to enhance sustainable development.
There are certain traits that people should understand when dealing with any system in order to enhance sustainable development. Doppelt (2010)explores the elements and they include the specific purpose of the system in question, the specific parts that make the system functional, the core elements of the system which are dependent on each other, and the feedback approach used for the system e.g. in monitoring and evaluation. Foxon (2003) also believes that understanding the key elements of the system in question is vital in not only embracing but also implementing sustainable development strategies in the society. If leaders fully understand these key aspects about their organizations/systems, sustainable development would be easy to achieve.
Governments need to be at the forefront in creating a conducive environment for sustainable development in all sectors of the economy by providing policies that encourage the society to embrace change. Foxon (2003) highlights the three basic types of instruments which the policies should support namely support for basic research and development, market development and financial incentives to the organizations who embrace change especially in the fight against global warming.
Everyone in the society has a role in enhancing sustainable development. This is because the technological advancements in the contemporary society affect every one either directly or indirectly. The support of the government is crucial especially in coming up with policies that enable the society to embrace change. Additionally, all the leaders should seek to acquire change management skills since they are of great influence to many people in their areas of work. They should do so with the help of the theories suggested by the researchers mentioned in this paper. One of such theories is the personal development theory. Additionally, leaders should take time to learn all the elements involved in the running of any system. This is crucial since it would guide them on the areas that need to be altered or reframed to accommodate change. Moreover, I would encourage everyone to develop a positive attitude towards change. Change especially technology-based changes present new and easy methods of tackling our problems but can only be effected when we accept them.
Reference List
Aras, G., and Growther, D., 2008. Governance and Sustainability: An Investigation into the
Relationship between Corporate Governance and Corporate Sustainability. Management Decision, 46 (3), pp. 433-448.
Doppelt , B., 2010. Leading Change toward Sustainability: A Change-management Guide for
Business, Government and Civil Society. 2nd Ed. Oregon: Greenleaf Publishing.
Dunphy, D., Griffiths, A., and Benn, S. ,Organizational Change for Corporate Sustainability: A
guide for leaders and change agents of the future. 2nd Ed. London and New York: Routledge.
Foxon, T. J., 2003. Inducing Innovation for a Low-carbon Future: Drivers, Barriers and Policies:
A Report for the Carbon Trust.
Harris, L. C., and Crane, A., 2001. The Greening of Organizational Culture Management on the
Depth, Degree and Diffusion of Change. JOCM, 15 (3), pp. 214-235.
Peschl, M. F., and Fundneider, T., 2008. Knowledge Co-creation. A Socio-Epistemological
Approach to “Innovation from Within”. In M.D. Lytras, J. M. Caroll, E. Damiani et al. (Eds.), The Open Knowledge Society: A Computer Science and Information Systems Manifesto, pp. 101-108. New York, Heidelberg: Springer.
Read, V. Technologies and Processes for Human Sustainability.
Smith, J., and Rayment, J., 2010. Globally Fit Leadership: Four Steps Forward. Journal of
Global Responsibility, 1(1), pp. 55-65.
Todnem, R., 2005. Organizational Change Management: A Critical Review. Journal of Change
Management, 5(4), 369-380.
Waddell, D., Cummings, T., Worley, C., 2011. Organizational Change and Development and
Transformation. 4th ed. South Melbourne: Cengage Learning.
