Opposition to Addict’s Model
Lepsinger (2010) says persons with addictive behavior can teach us about change.
There are three main ideas from the research of Prochaska, DiClemente, and Norcross. We agree with the ideas of five levels of change readiness and a set of specific strategies to facilitate changing levels. We disagree with “change is not a linear process and most people do not maintain the change in behavior on their first attempt. People will recycle through the stages several times before the new behavior is a habit” (Lepsinger, 2010, p. 138).
As a united team, we oppose the “what we can learn from addicts’ model” because we believe organizational change is linear. We know, from experience, organizational policies and procedures have tested and verified algorithms. Organizational change built on linear models. We will describe our definitions of change and the factors required to successfully implement change in organizations.
Sobriety is not linear because there are too many variables that are dependant on the individual. If an addict decides to relapse and goes back to old patterns, the addict cannot linearly progress towards sobriety.
On average, an addict will attempt sobriety seven times before they are successful (Cummings, 2018). An addict change process can also be considered linear in that it usually takes a regimented step by step program. Once the addict is successful in one step of the program, they progress to the next. Just like in an organization once certain metrics are met, they move on to the next phase of change. So, there is a parallel in the fact that organizational change plans and sobriety plans both follow a sequential order.
Defining “change”
Change is constant. Hughes, Beatty, and Dinwoodie (2014) describe the world as volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA), and say the change in this world is fast and pervasive. Leaders must find a way to implement strategic change to counteract the chaotic change in a VUCA environment. “External and internal factors are constantly forcing organizations to change; in order for organizations to survive and change successfully, it is crucial to respond quickly.” (Riddell, Roisland, & Tofte, 2017).
When a person decides to change it is an ongoing process. Every day that person makes small decisions to affect long-term change, and they have their own timeline. Organizational change is similar but with added constraints such as unionized staff, financial, technological advances, and access to resources to better facilitate change. Most organizations set targets, short- and long-term goals in their change plan. Change is regimented in the organizational world.
The fact is that organizations don’t just change because of new systems, processes or structures; they change because the people within the organization adapt and change too. Every company needs an organization that changes as quickly as its business does (Galbraith, 2014, p.131).
We define change as a linear process which is better and necessary for development on adoption over non-linear change. For a change to happen, it is necessary to have a smooth straight graph of progression with respect to time. It shows a stepwise progression of the individual over time.
Figure 1. A graphical representation of organizational change.
Dawson & Sykes (2016) concur, saying “the definition of linear change states any change to an independent variable will cause a direct change in the dependent variable” (p. 81).
Once a change is made in a particular time, it cannot be reversed. An example of linear change is in health behavior. As stated by Schwarzer (2008), “Most social‐cognitive theories assume that an individual’s intention to change is the best direct predictor of actual change.” An individual prepared with strong intentions and a linear progression pathway is well focused and determined to meet deadlines, leading to achieving change more rapidly.
This example of health behavior shows how linear change is superior to non-linear change. Also, it shows better positive outcomes without any fallback which is important for the development of the organization. Also stated by Ingersoll, Kirsch, Merk, and Lightfoot (2000) “When change is a positive characteristic of the environment, employees are more likely to commit to the work of the institution.”
Change readiness
For change to be successful, organizations and their leaders must be ready for change. Change readiness “is the ability to continuously initiate and respond to change in ways that create advantages, minimize risk, and sustain performance” (Musselwhite & Plouffe, 2010). For an organization, “readiness refers to organizational members’ change commitment and change efficacy to implement organizational change” (Weiner, 2009).
“Readiness for change and actions undertaken in the implementation of change serve as key constructs for the success of a change effort” (Riddell et al., 2017). The term readiness evokes “a state of being both psychologically and behaviorally prepared to take action (i.e., willing and able).” (Weiner, 2009). “Implementation entails collective (or conjoint) action among interdependent individuals and work units. Coordinating action across many individuals and groups and promoting organizational learning are good examples of collective (or conjoint) capabilities” (Weiner, 2009).
As Bandura and others note, “efficacy judgments refer to action capabilities; efficacy judgments are neither outcome expectancies nor assessments of knowledge, skills, or resources. Change efficacy is higher when people share a sense of confidence that collectively they can implement a complex organizational change” (as cited in Weiner, 2009).
Diverse teams can challenge assumptions and mental models more efficiently and develop solutions that are acceptable and will make sense to a wide variety of stakeholder grouping(Ungerer, Ungerer, Herholdt, 2016, p.252).
According to Weiner (2009):
Change experts assert that greater readiness leads to more successful change implementation. But how, or why, is this so? Social cognitive theory suggests that when organizational readiness for change is high, organizational members are more likely to initiate change (e.g., institute new policies, procedures, or practices), exert greater effort in support of the change, and exhibit greater persistence in the face of obstacles or setbacks during implementation.
Detriments to Change
Defining change requires us to describe what is change not. The following items may present as barriers to change as organizations may find these elements present during their change process.
Ungerer, Ungerer & Herholdt (2016, p.244) talk about a thinking trap of using old paradigms to drive change. Change requires a new way of thinking; if one falls back into old ways, they are still using old thinking and therefore have not changed.
Further, Ungerer et al. (2016, pp. 255-256) say leaders tend to confuse a political reshuffling or an arbitrary consumer demand for meaningful change. These busybody activities mean nothing if employees are not inspired or empowered to make long-lasting strategic decisions.
Finally, Ungerer et al. (2016, p. 262) note the immense power of culture when compared to change plans – invariably culture wins out. If leadership succeeds in creating a culture of openness and shared leadership and makes an effort to contextualize plans that speak to employees, then leadership has solved the puzzle of implementing change (Ungerer et al., 2016, p. 266)
Change is a linear process
For reconfigurable organizations, a fondness for working in teams, the ability to solve problems and handle conflicts, and the desire and potential to learn new skills are some of the sought-after personality attributes (Galbraith, 2014, p.145). Therefore, the ability to appropriately analyze the problem, assess risks and manage the reaction of the employees is part of the change management process. “The people tend to participate in cross-functional teams” (Galbraith, 2014, p.140), where everyone interacts on the execution of common goals; thus, they can connect to everyone else frequently.
Hughes et al., (2014) provide many ways of implementing successful company change which further proves the point that change is a linear process.
When making a change in a company you usually go through the following steps (Hughes et al., 2014, p.55).
- Clarify the change that is necessary
- Collect the data
- Predict possible outcomes
- Predict hurdles and obstacles
- Weigh Pros and cons
- Collaborate with different departments
- Formulate action plan with attainable actionable
- Follow action plan
“The functional structure is also the host to managers who move across functions on rotational assignments” (Galbraith, 2014, p.142). The participants need to be cross-functionally skilled, have a cross-unit interpersonal network, identify with the company as a whole, and part of a reconfigurable culture. The various human resources policies are central to creating these skills and systems and the overall culture. These HR policies start with hiring practices that recruit and attract people who fit the organization and the job. Training is continuously targeted at cross-unit participants. Assignment and careers are also cross-functional for many managers. They learn a new functional-skills, and those assignment process develops individuals and simultaneously develops the organization’s network. The process builds the social capital on which reconfigurability based change (Galbraith, 2014, p.142-145).
Musselwhite & Plouffe (2010) note sustained success depends on an organization’s ability to adapt to an environment changed by either external or internal factors. Change mechanisms should encourage clear goal alignment across functions, the ability to integrate a change into existing systems, accountability for results, and reward systems that reinforce desired change behaviors. Change awareness is the company’s ability to redefine itself as necessary, to scan the environment for opportunities, to focus on emerging trends and to plan for the future. It’s the flexibility of the structure and system to take in all changes, adapt and support the implementation of the change. Therefore, the internal focus of the company to make good change agility requires the capacity to stretch when necessary and quickly shift the resource to the right place to make the difference (Musselwhite & Plouffe, 2010).
Conclusion
We have discussed our definition of change and the factors required to successfully accomplish lasting change within organizations. Effective change requires a progressive, linear process with a prescribed set of steps. Organizations must be ready and well-equipped to implement these change plans; otherwise, their efforts will ultimately be wasted.
References
Cummings, C. (2018) . Article Addictions Statistics. Retrieved from : http://www.camh.ca
Dawson, P., & Sykes, C. (2016). Organizational change and temporality: Bending the arrow of time. New York: Routledge.
Galbraith, J. R. (2014). Designing Organization: strategy, structure, and process at the business unit and enterprise level. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN:978-1-118-40995-4
Musselwhite, C., & Plouffe, T. (2010, June 02). Four ways to know whether you are ready for change. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2010/06/four-ways-to-know-whether-you
Hughes, R. L., Beatty, Collarelli-Beatty, K., & Dinwoodie, D. L. (2014). Becoming a strategic leader: Your role in your organization’s enduring success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ingersoll, G. L., Kirsch, J. C., Merk, S. E., & Lightfoot, J. (2000). Relationship of organizational culture and readiness for change to employee commitment to the organization. Journal of Nursing Administration, 30(1), 11-20.
Lepsinger, R. (2010). Closing the execution gap: How great leaders and their companies get results. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Riddell, Roisland, V., R., Tofte, M. (2017). Change Readiness Factors influencing employees’ readiness for change within an organisation: A systematic review. Ubiversitetet I Agedr / Aura. Retrieved from: https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/handle/11250/2452955
Schwarzer, R. (2008). Modeling Health Behavior Change: How to Predict and Modify the Adoption and Maintenance of Health Behaviors, The International Association of applied psychology, 57(1), 1-29. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00325.x
Ungerer, M., Ungerer, G., & Herholdt, J. (2016). Navigate strategic possibilities: strategy formulation and execution practices to flourish. Randburg: KR Publishing. ISBN 978-1-869-22623-7. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.student.twu.ca:2956/eds/ebookviewer/ebook/ZTAwMHhuYV9fMTQyNzAyOF9fQU41?sid=978ecd5d-68db-489c-9ecb-1f013269a988@sessionmgr4010&vid=2&hid=/&format=EB
Weiner, J., B. (2009). A Theory of Organizational Readiness for Change. Implementation Sciences, 4,67. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67