Choosing a path of change: Envisioning a strategy for successful organizational change MPA 8002 The Structure and Theory of Human Organization Richard M. Jacobs, OSA, Ph.D.

As most managers/leaders know from first-hand experience...



The primary maladaptation involves people...

…who enact differing views of reality into what they define as the organizational reality (Weick,1979, 1995) …and, thus, maladaptive behavior manifests itself in organizational dysfunction

Creating Paths of Change

(McWhinney, Webber, Smith, & Novokowsky, 1997) 

Asserts that organization change begins first with self-change...

…that is, if manager/leaders are to initiate organizational change, they first must understand how they view the world …because how individuals view reality is a critical element in how they formulate a decision (p. 3)

Organizational change involves a five-step process...

1 to identify and understand one’s view of reality and attitudes toward change …requires managers/leaders to grapple with all that is “antecedent” to a practice episode (Sergiovanni, 1986)

2 - to search for resources, people, money, and situations that match one’s image of what it will take to “work the larger issue” …necessitates differentiating between organizational “problems” and the “issue” implicit in the problems

3 - to engage team members in examining one another’s views of reality as well as each member’s assets and deficits …provides the experiential base of self-reflection and understanding of alternative views that enables team members to assess the current organizational situation (“reality”)

4 - to identify the organizational problem(s) and to organize resources into a coherent force …engages team members to identify the maladaptation between people, process, and technology …as these are attributed not to people but to the strengths and limitations of their differing views of reality

5 - to formulate a path of change …a path that allows managers/leaders to solve the organizational issue by inculturating shared values (Schein, 1990, 1992) …as followers solve problems as they emerge because the changing patterns of the followers’ interactions require new solutions

Creating Paths of Change

(McWhinney, Webber, Smith, & Novokowsky, 1997) 

Organizational change can consist of one of two grand paths of change...

…the grand path of renaissance …or the grand path of revitalization.

Each of these two grand paths utilize multiple modes of change.



Organizational change can also consist of a single, minor path...

…socio-technical systems design …business process re-engineering …interactive planning …mediation …organizational design

These minor paths utilize one mode of change.

Initiating either of the two grand paths of change...



begins in the sensory reality …where there is evidence of a need for organizational change …and managers/leaders start “working an issue” …by choosing a direction to resolve the conflicts between competing values



the goal of each grand path of organizational change...

…is for the followers to begin “working the problems” to successful solution

Initiating the minor paths of change...



begins in the sensory reality …where there is evidence of a need for organizational change …and managers/leaders believe that making a simple and well-identified intervention



the goal of the minor path of organizational change...

…to deal effectively with immediate problems that do not necessitate an “issue defined” change effort

The sensory view of reality in action...

Formulating policies along a revitalizing pathway Generating new ideas through a co-creative pathway

test induce value

Inquiring into values along a pathway of renaissance

The origin and direction of the two grand paths of organizational change...

The grand path of revitalization begins in the analytic mode and uses the tool of testing to define the direction of the path of change

test value

The grand path of renaissance begins in the evaluative mode, using the tool of valuing to define the direction of the path of change

Grand Path #1: Organizational renaissance...

Grand Path #2: Organizational revitalization...

Initiating the grand path of organizational renaissance...



The grand path of organizational renaissance can begin with a desperate situation...

…where organizational action and outcomes are obsolete (e.g., “teddy bears” per Winnicott, 1958).



Or, organizational renaissance can begin in an entrepreneurial situation where an opportunity presents itself...

…and organizational action can pave the way for new possibilities...



with the outcome...

…of a dramatic organizational turnaround …or of an organizational rebirth in a new form.

The grand path of organizational renaissance begins with action...

Step 1: A measured loss of meaning...

Data indicate some form of organizational failure



“game playing” on the first board...

action

 where problems arise  structural problems  human resources problems  political problems  cultural/symbolic problems

(Bolman & Deal, 1997) …to identify what isn’t working and won’t work any longer

Step 2: Evaluative mode...

To elicit what matters: why do we do what we do?



“game playing” on the third board...

values 1

 how problems are defined  antecedents  theories of practice  organizational culture  organizational environment

…to elicit what really matters



with the outcomes...

…communicating …bargaining …allocating

Step 3: Emergent mode...

To co-create images that reflect shared values



“game playing” on the sixth board...

truth

 a substantive vision  provides meaning and purpose  rooted in culture and perdures  beyond individuals abstract, needs to be made concrete in human experience

…to co-create a new truth based upon shared values

Step 4: Assertive mode...

To formulate policies that express the vision



“game playing” on the second board...

power 1

 how problems are dealt with  coercive  remunerative  normative (Simon, 1947)

…to formulate new policies reflecting new truth

Step 5: Analytic mode...

To put new policies into action



“game playing” on the second board...

power 2

 how problems are dealt with  coercive  remunerative  normative (Simon, 1947)

…to put new policies into practice



The desired managerial/leadership outcome being that...

…while followers “work the problems” toward solutions …the manager/leader “works the issue” toward resolution truth values power action

Initiating the grand path of organizational revitalization...



The grand path of organizational revitalization is used most frequently by managers/leaders in response to moderate organizational crises...

…features organizational adaptation (e.g., contingency theory per Lawrence & Lorsch, 1967).



The purpose of organizational revitalization is to strengthen the extant organization...

…though various technical processes (e.g., Total Quality Management [TQM], Continuous Quality Improvement [CQI]), Organizational Development [OD], Organizational Re-engineering).

The grand path of organizational revitalization begins with action...

Step 1: Awareness of a problem...

Data indicate some form of organizational failure



“game playing” on the first board...

action

 where problems arise  structural problems  human resources problems  political problems  cultural/symbolic problems

…to test the “one best way” (Taylor, 1911)

Step 2: Analytic mode...

To renew organizational purpose, policies, and goals



“game playing” on the second board...

power

 how problems are dealt with  coercive  remunerative  normative (Simon, 1947)

…to make the organization responsive to its reality

Step 3: Assertive mode...

To mobilize people around the renewed organizational purpose, policies, and goals



“game playing” on the sixth board...

truth

 a substantive vision  provides meaning and purpose  rooted in culture that perdures beyond individuals  abstract, needing to be made concrete in human experience

…to facilitate the adoption of shared values among all stakeholders

Step 4: Emergent mode...

To motivate workers to value the renewed organizational purpose, policies, and goals



“game playing” on the third board...

values

 how problems are defined  antecedents  theories of practice  organizational culture  organizational environment

…to identify and divide up job roles and responsibilities

Step 5: Evaluative mode...

To allocate responsibilities and engage in action



“game playing” on the first board...

action

 where problems arise  structural problems  human resources problems  political problems  cultural/symbolic problems

…to develop “team” accountability for renewed purpose, policies, and goals



The desired managerial/leadership outcome being that...

…while followers “work the problems” toward solutions …the manager/leader “works the issue” toward resolution truth values power action

Either of the two grand pathways of organizational change...



ultimately leads back to the sensory reality...

…which is the logical end point of action intended to solve problems.

Initiating the minor paths of organizational change...

Minor Path #1: Socio-technical systems design (STS)...



a minor path where resolutions to organizational problems...

…can emerge from the natural adaptive behaviors of those who do the work (e.g., “holographic organization” [Nonaka & Takenchi, 1995]; “organizational learning” [Argyris & Schön, 1978]).

STS...



begins as managers/leaders recognize the need to change policies to reflect the workers’ values...

STS...

STS...

mode: tool:

evaluative value

To change policies to reflect the workers’ values

STS...

mode: tool:

influential persuade

To build a value consensus among involved managers and workers

STS...

mode: tool:

influential convert

A contract (“charter”) sets the limits for work design

STS...

mode: tool:

analytic design

Cross-functional work teams design more efficient operations

Minor Path #2: Organizational process re-engineering (OR)...



a minor path where resolutions to organizational problems...

…can emerge by integrating the internal operations with the forces present in the environment (e.g., “autopoeisis” [Maturana & Varela, 1980]; “contingency theory” [Burns & Stalker, 1961]; “population ecology” [Aldrich, 1979]).

OR...



begins as managers/leaders recognize dissatisfaction expressed by external stakeholders...

OR...

OR...

mode: tool:

analytic test

Managers/leaders recognize the organization’s failure in dealing with environmental turbulence

OR...

mode: tool:

assertive inspire

A management team organizes findings and identifies a new design

OR...

mode: tool:

assertive establish

Managers/leaders codify policy changes

OR...

mode: tool:

analytic design

Managers/leaders implement new policies

Minor Path #3: Interactive planning (IP)...



a minor path where resolutions to organizational problems...

…can emerge as intra-organizational experts are combined to discover the most rational plan for more effective operations (e.g., “adhocracy” [Bennis, 1966]; “matrix organization” [Mintzberg, 1979]).

IP...



begins as managers/leaders recognize that the organization’s internal operations are ineffective...

IP...

IP...

mode: tool:

inventive induce

Teams produce designs to eliminate the messes identified in analytic studies

IP...

mode: tool:

assertive establish

Leaders/managers select the most promising scenario

IP...

mode: tool:

analytic design

Leaders/managers codify new policies

Minor Path #4: Mediation and Arbitration (MA)...



a minor path where resolutions to organizational problems...

…can emerge as contracted disputants establish new rules governing a more “level playing field” (e.g., “labor management teams” [Wainwright & Elliott, 1982]; “radicalized organization” [Burrell & Morgan, 1979]).

MA...



begins as managers/leaders recognize management-labor conflict...

MA...

mode: tool:

influential convert

Management identifies conflict and disputants

MA...

mode: tool:

influential persuade

Management-labor team engages in fact finding

MA...

mode: tool:

influential convert

Management-labor team identifies procedure for resolution

MA...

mode: tool:

influential persuade

Labor accepts procedure for solution

Minor Path #5: Organizational Development (OD)...



a minor path where resolutions to organizational problems...

…can emerge by utilizing a value base to formulate a shared set of paths (Bennis, 1966; Levinson, 1972)

OD...



begins as managers/leaders establish lists for an acceptable change effort...

OD...

OD...

mode: tool:

evaluative value

The need to enhance the meaning and quality of work and efficiency

OD...

mode: tool:

emergent evoke

Building a value consensus

OD...

mode: tool:

emergent facilitate

Sharing values

OD...

mode: tool:

evaluative allocate

Shared values used to assess performance

This module has focused on...

Choosing a pathway of change

. It has featured the primary choices confronting organizational managers/leaders as problems emerge. The choice of pathway requires courage, which enables managers/leaders to “work the organizational issue” by enabling followers to “work the organizational

problems.

”

References      Aldrich, H. (1979).

Organizations and environments

. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978).

Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective

. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Bennis, W. G. (1966). Changing organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1997).

Reframing organizations

(2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Burns, T., & Stalker, G. (1961).

The management of innovation

. London, UK: Tavistock.

    Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979).

Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis

. London, UK: Heinemann Educational Books.

Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967).

Organization and environment

. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration.

Levinson, H. (1972).

Organizational diagnosis

. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1980).

Autopoeisis and cognition: The realization of the living

. London, UK: Reidel.

    McWhinney, W., Webber, J. B., Smith, D. M. , & Novokowsky, B. J. (1997).

Creating paths of change: Managing issues and resolving problems in organizations

. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Mintzberg, H. (1979).

The structuring of organizations

. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Nonaka, I., & Takuchi, H. (1995).

The knowledge creating company

. New York: Oxford University Press.

Simon, H. A. (1945/1997).

Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations

. New York: The Free Press.

   Taylor, F. W. (1911).

The principles of scientific management

. New York: Harper & Row.

Wainwright, H, & Elliott, D. (1982).

The Lucas plan: A new trade-unionism in the making

. London, UK: Allison & Busby.

Winnicott, D. W. (1958). Transitional objects and transitional phenomena. In D. W. Winnicott,

Collected papers

. London: UK: Tavistock.