Performance Management

Overview

This is an example of what a Learning Guide might look like.  The content is merely here to fill the space and is not indicative of what would be in place for the real learning guide.

Introduction
The nature of change
Changing organisations
Forces for change
Perspectives on change management
Focused, programmed changed
Disadvantages of programmed change management
Emergent change model - a new approach?
Enabling successful change
Implementation issues
Summary
References

Introduction

Browsing the business management texts in any bookstore will reveal an astonishing array of books on and around the theme of change management. Books whose titles include chaos, transformation, revolution, paradigm, and learning organisation all urge our attention, promising the ultimate panacea for the challenges of the future. We are urged to 'forget old ways of doing things', and 'revolution not evolution' is the order of the day. We are told by respected commentators that to compete and survive in this new age, we must disregard the traditional management structures and mind-sets which will not provide us with the answers to the questions of today, let alone those of tomorrow.

To succeed, organisations must change, but to say that change is necessary appears somewhat superfluous and somehow misses the essential question. Change is implicit. It is core and central to every strategy, business plan and business re-organisation. The challenge is the very nature of change itself. Where should efforts be focused to make change succeed in this new environment? In today's business environment, prescribing a universal model of change management we are told will not work. The one-off phased programme of organisational change, the quick fix answer to organisational problems can no longer be relied upon to deliver the results. A new approach to managing changing within organisations is called for.

An approach that aligns change strategies, which have been by informed by environmental imperatives, to the strategic aims of the business. There is no one proven accepted method of change management, rather a portfolio of key principles and approaches which when placed in the context of the organisation have been shown to be successful.

This learning guide will consider the various approaches to change management and explore their practical applicability. The aim is not to present the ultimate change management programme, as current thinking suggests that this is inappropriate for today's organisations, rather the aim is to raise awareness of new insights about change and present some key principles which will hopefully find resonance with, and applicability to your own environment.

Back to the top

The nature of change

Whatever your organisation, whatever your industry, at whatever level, you will have realised by now that change is a fact of life. Change is the nature of modern business, but as we know change is not new. Over time inevitably people change, organisations change. As humans our ability to change and adapt to new circumstances and environments is crucial to our survival. The same is true for organisations. Sometimes changes can be predicted, managed and manipulated, but often organisations are forced into change.

Although change is not new, the nature and pace of change is nowadays faster and more furious than at any other time, altering not only how we live but the ways in which we work. For organisations, environmental forces are changing organisational landscapes and boundaries. New technologies, and political and social trends are raising new possibilities and opportunities which must be recognised early and exploited fast. The rewards are there for those organisations who take risks, think the unthinkable and have the ability to respond, adapt and change. What does not change, it seems, is individual responses to change, which remain predictable, characterised by a need to maintain the status quo and a resistance to the new. This response to change is mirrored in cultures the world over, time and time again throughout history. This presents challenges to those responsible for moving organisations forward, for enabling change to happen.

Back to the top

Changing organisations

The notion that change is confined to organisations who are struggling in the market place or have been forced to change because they have become 'fat' and complacent is a misnomer. All organisations must constantly adapt and innovate not only in products and services but in management structures and working practices. Organisations are told that they must reinvent themselves. Traditional functional hierarchies are being replaced by matrix organisations, relying on teamwork, collaboration and personal responsibility, providing for a new empowered workforce. How the work gets done is changing. Processes are being redesigned or eliminated. They are becoming more responsive and more customer focused. The magnitude and the extent of the changes to be made are important and can generally be classified as follows:

• Radical or macro level change. This type of change is transformational, comprehensive, revolutionary and discontinuous, ie it represents a break with the past. It generally results in a complete overturning of previous organisational structures and processes. Examples might include fundamental changes to operations such as business process re-engineering; a public company entering a market driven environment; entering new markets; mergers or take-overs which fundamentally change the organisation.
• Incremental or micro level change which occurs daily at the operational level. This type of change is localised and evolutionary in nature, building on past performance over time or 'tweaking' the system, leading to improvements such as better team work and improved communications. The changes by themselves do not represent a break in tradition but over time the combined affects can result in major change, though never of the revolutionary kind.

Marshak (1) adds a further dimension:

• Transitional change: moving from one state to another, eg introduction of automated processes changing or replacing manual processes

Leavitt (2) suggests organisations can create change by intervening in 4 areas:

• tasks; goals and strategies on one level to individual jobs
• organisation; structures, systems and procedures
• technology; new equipment, work methods, information systems
• people; replacing, reducing, expanding, re-training

Back to the top

Forces for change

Change is usually associated with progress. History is testament to the problems of not recognising and adapting to change. The Aztecs of Mexico, a highly advanced race, were aware of the existence of worked metal but continued to fight successfully against their neighbours with wooden arrows. However, what had worked in the past had little effect against the steel weapons of the Conquistadors. History is littered with similar examples of organisations who fail to recognise the forces for change, symbolised in recent times by western failure to appreciate the growing dominance of Japan in post war markets. Looking back, it is easy to suggest what should have been done in such circumstances.

Today, organisations have to predict and create their own change. Organisations who seek stability, we are told, are living in the past and will ultimately pay the price. Change is being driven by the need to develop the ability to compete, grow and survive in an increasingly competitive environment that is re-shaping the very nature of business. Forces in the external environment are compelling change in organisations at a rate not seen since the industrial revolution. External forces such as the changing nature of competition, new technologies and economic cycles all have effects on the way organisations do business. The key pressures for change can be attributed to the following environmental forces:

• Market forces: erratic markets, increased competition, the changing role of the customer, market opportunities, changing aspirations.
• Technological advances: heralding new ways of doing business. The opportunities presented by technology to make the organisation more efficient and customer responsive are just being realised and understood. Technology is transforming organisational structures and processes which are being re-designed and streamlined. Advances in telecommunications have altered the speed of communications affecting the speed of decision making and redefining relationships between customers and suppliers. Technology is allowing organisations to harness the power of information. Greater information access is empowering staff and shifting the focus of control from the manager to the employee.
• Political, economic: organisations are having to manage and adapt to political, economic and social trends resulting from government legislation, regulatory bodies, effects of trade tariffs and increased globalisation. For example who could have foreseen the collapse of the Asian tiger economies in the 1990's and the effects it would have on the global economy.
• Internally: as a result, organisations are focusing on becoming leaner, removing unnecessary processes, delayering and changing reward and benefits systems. Human resource policies are changing and adapting in response, emphasising empowerment, teamwork, responsibility, continuous development and the concept of the learning organisation is becoming ever dominant.

Back to the top

Perspectives on change management

So given that such forces for change exist and are increasing in importance and intensity, what are the essentials of change management for organisations in such an environment? What will enable better prediction, management and implementation of change? There has been much published on change management and the key perspectives are of interest as they form the basis of accepted change management approaches. Three perspectives on change management prevail in common change management models:

1. The individual perspective
2. The group dynamics perspective
3. The open perspective

The individual perspective

This view is characterised by 2 beliefs:

1. Behaviour is the result of an individual's reaction with their environment (3)
2. Behaviour is the result of environment, but it is also influenced by the individual's attempts to reason and interpret the environment (4)

Essentially, change management approaches focus on behaviour which is learned. Behaviour that is rewarded is repeated and to change an individual's behaviour, the conditions which support the behaviour must change. The individual is seen as passive during the process.

The group perspective

This perspective on change management emphasises the importance of group norms and pressures. To bring about change, efforts must focus on the group rather than the individual (5). As people do not work in isolation but in groups, behaviours have to be modified in the context of the group. To bring about change, efforts must focus on challenging and influencing the group's norms and values.

The open perspective

Here the organisation is the focus of any change effort. The organisation is seen as being comprised of a number of sub systems. Change in one sub system will effect changes in other sub systems. Approaches to change focus on assessing the functioning of the subsystems in order to identify how they need to change in order to benefit the functioning of the total organisation.

Although each approach is different, they are not mutually exclusive. The challenge is to identify when each approach is appropriate, but realistically can any one approach be used in isolation to affect change? Surely effective organisation-wide change is based on changing the behaviours of individuals and groups?

Back to the top

Focused, programmed change

All models are wrong, some models are useful (6)

There is no definitive model of change management that if adhered to, will produce perfect change in every organisation. If only life were that simple! We can look at organisations who have successfully implemented change, and some success criteria may emerge, but as every organisation is different, each must identify those approaches that best suit the organisational task, culture and climate.

The planned approach to change, ie the concept of a premeditated programme of change, was based on the work of Kurt Lewin (7). This approach promotes changes through a series of sequential, linear, predictable stages, involving a number of sequential tasks or interventions to be completed within a specific timescale, following which there endures a period of 'settling down'. It is a structured process. Most models of change tend to focus on this staged approach, implementing the phases of change over a period of time. A number of commentators have promoted this approach with varying degrees of success.

The three step model

This model, attributed to Lewin, observed that changes and consequent improvement in group performance is short lived. After a period of time, behaviours revert back to previous. In order for change to succeed, old patterns of behaviour must be discarded before new behaviours are adopted. For this to occur there must be recognition for the need for change to occur. Therefore if change is to be successful the new behaviours must be embedded in and secured for the future. To do this he suggest 3 steps (table 1).

Table 1. Lewin's 3 step model

The 3 step model is somewhat general and broad and over the years has been developed and expanded by other commentators (8, 9,). Phillips (10) suggests a similar model focusing on:

• Creating a sense of concern throughout the organisation
• Developing a commitment to change
• Pushing for change on a number of fronts using change levers.

Such models represent a top down approach to change management. There have been critics of the 'top down' approach to managing change. Beer et al (11) suggest that the various change management models do not work because the process focus is on changing individual's attitudes and knowledge. They suggest that in fact, people are shaped by the organisation, not the other way round. Change should start with reorganising employee roles and responsibilities to effectively manage the organisational task, ie provide a new organisational context. They propose 'task alignment' as an alternative to programmatic change.

Programmatic change focuses on the individual, while task alignment believes that changing organisational structure and processes will ultimately affect change in behaviours. Change is seen in six key stages (figure 1).

Fig. 1.

The contingency theory of leadership and change offers some help to manage change effectively. Leaders must do whatever the circumstances necessitate. In other words 'it all depends'. This is an attractive concept to some. It avoids prescriptive suggestions and is non-judgemental, but such an approach could be seen as inconsistent. The approach suggests that the best approach to use 'depends on the circumstances'. The aim is to distil useful generalisations about various change management strategies and apply them to given certain conditions.

Bullock and Batten (12) analysed over 30 models of change management and arrived at their own 4 phase model of programmed change management which can be applied to almost any circumstances. The model is useful in that it distinguishes between the 'phases' of change which the organisation passes through as it implements change, and the 'processes' of change, ie the methods applied to get the organisation to the desired state. The model progresses as follows:

Exploration phase

The organisation has to make decision on the need for change:

• Explore and decide on the need for change
• Identify what changes are required
• Identify resources required

Planning phase

Understanding the problem:

• Diagnosis of the problem
• Clarify goals and objectives
• Identify specific activities required to undertake change
• Agree changes with stakeholders
• Identify supports required to enable change to occur

Action phase

Changes identified are agreed and implemented:

• Support for change is explicit
• Changes are monitored and evaluated
• Results are communicated and acted upon
• Adjustments and refinements are made where necessary

Integration phase

Stabilising and embedding change:

• Changes supported and reinforced
• Results and outcomes from change communicated throughout the organisation
• Continuous development of employees through training, education
• Ongoing monitoring and evaluation

We can see certain similarities in the models. Key elements include preparing the organisation for change, analysing and exploring key issues with those involved, designing and implementing for change and embedding changes in the organisational culture.

Back to the top

Disadvantages of programmed change management

Implicit in many models of programmed change is the support of an outside consultant or 'change agent'. Much emphasis is placed on a facilitator/consultant who acts as the 'change agent'. This, critics say, results in those involved becoming dependent on the change agent to implement the change rather than being responsible themselves for the change. Individuals are passive in the process and this allows little opportunity for learning, whereas an action research model which encompasses personal reflection and emphasises personal learning has greater value for both the individual and organisation.

In today's turbulent times, change is continuous and open ended, at times requiring transformational change. As such, programmed models of change are unable to integrate transformational change (13). They do not acknowledge organisational conflicts or assume they can be easily resolved. They are not suitable for crisis situations or for events which demand quick action and swift change. Although there are shortcomings in the programme approach, it does have an important place in the implementation of organisational change. Dunphy and Stace (13) suggest:

'Turbulent times demand different responses in varied circumstances. So managers and consultants need a model of change that is essentially a 'situational' or 'contingency model', one that indicates how to vary change strategies to achieve 'optimum fit' with the changing environment'

So what alternatives are there to programmed phased change and are they relevant to change management in today's turbulent environment?

Back to the top

Emergent change model - A new approach?

Complexity and uncertainty in the environment make programmed change inappropriate. In the field of change management, emphasis is shifting from focused programmes of change to how to create continuously adaptive or 'learning' organisations. As the need for a more relevant approach to change management for today's organisation is recognised, a new approach has been attracting attention.

Sometimes called continuous improvement or the learning approach, it is more frequently called the emergent approach. In this approach learning is central to change. Individual and group learning is continuous and adaptive, directed by the circumstances and situation of the organisation and those involved in the change. Whereas the programmed approach to organisational change is backed up by years of research and debate, the emergent approach is still relatively new. It emphasises the unregulated, unpredictable nature of change.

Change is seen as complex and having too many variables and too many different contexts to be neatly packaged as a planned model. Dawson (14) promotes a 'processual' approach to change which is less directional, more analytical and has the ability to provide of better organisational 'fit'. The approach stresses the need to have an appreciation for the complexities and issues involved in change as opposed to relying on a series of linear steps following prescriptive action plans. Times of change are seen as periods of transition. The ultimate destination may not be known, as changes are refined and re-evaluated possibly altering in focus and direction.

In the emergent approach change becomes the responsibility of all managers, employees and stakeholders. They are the change agents. Change becomes inherent and implicit to everyone's role in the organisation. If managers are to create a culture of sustained continuous adaptive change, they will require a keen sense of understanding and knowledge about the environment in which the organisation must operate to enable swift and proactive responses to the forces for change (15). Those who endorse the emergent view of change consider that it offers the only useful approach to organisations who must operate in an environment which is complex and uncertain. There is also the view that both approaches are relevant.

This emergent approach to change is not as haphazard and undefined as it may appear. Changes must acknowledge and be aligned to changing competitive markets and organisational strategies, changing technologies and economic and social trends. Managers need to constantly scan the environment for those pressures for change and trends relevant to their organisation, change and adapt appropriately with the ultimate objective of improved performance.

So which change approach is appropriate and when? Consider, are changes transformational, transitional or incremental? This will influence your strategy for change. It may at times be appropriate to use a programmed phased model of change, particularly for large scale initiatives and where there is the time for planning and implementation. Kotter (16) provides a model of change management appropriate for major transformational change. Some authors argue for revolutionary change as opposed to incremental change. Change may need to move in a direction rather than towards a specific end point. Commentators suggest a more 'open' view of change needs to be considered wherever the precise change may not be known, but the general direction is. Do not assume an 'end point' to change, it may only be possible to know the general direction of change.

'All we can really do now is go with the flow, and try to steer things a little'
Charles Handy (17)

The general view now about managing change is that change cannot be treated as a set of sequential linear events: organisations are in a state of perpetual transition. As ongoing change is now a fact of life, it can be difficult to differentiate between the start and finish of a change programme; however 3 general timeframes of the change process may be relevant and can be applied to suit the context and culture of the organisation:

• The perception of a need to change
• The process of organisational transition
• The operation of new work practices or procedures

Back to the top

Enabling successful change

Carr et al. (18) suggest that whatever model or approach is used, change efforts must arise from the organisation's natural and established capabilities, that is, be a good 'fit'. Successful change models appear to have certain characteristics:

• Change is managed at all levels of the organisation. Consideration is given to how the change will affect structures, working practices, behaviour
• They have strategies for preparing for change, implementing and monitoring the change process
• They have identified critical success factors, ie those aspects of change management which must be addressed if change is to be successful. These are the aspects of the programme which must succeed as success is dependent on them.

In a recent overview of current initiatives looking at 166 US and European organisations (18), only about one third reported success in most types of changes. 32% were successful in changing vision/values/culture; 27% were successful in changing business systems/processes and only 20% successfully changed IT. Organisations reported that the most successful methods of implementing change were maintaining focus on change, a heightened awareness of communication needs, encouraging process ownership and limiting change management to outcomes.

Organisations who were not so successful, commented on the need for leadership training; erratic implementation of changes; inability to devolve initiatives from senior management level to junior staff; competition; and internal politics. In terms of the challenges presented by the changes, 43% of organisations commented that changing vision/culture/values was the most difficult.

Back to the top

Implementation issues

The need for change

It is an accepted maxim that successful change will only succeed where there is an overwhelming need for change. If there is insufficient pressure to change, then change is just a theoretical exercise. Whatever the size and nature of the change, there is first a general awareness of the need to change followed by a range of discussions and activities. Levers for change can be identified and may include changing markets; customers; HR strategies; processes; technology. Effective leadership and communication of the vision will be essential.

Visioning the change

It is important to know what it is you are trying to do. What will be the outcomes of the change? How will the organisation or department be structured following the change? What will it look like? How will it function? What are the improvements for customers, efficiency, teamworking, communications? Basically what are the benefits?

Focus change efforts

Change efforts should be directed to areas of the business with the potential for the greatest improvements to performance. Changes should be considered in terms of their alignment with organisation strategy. The advent of new technologies and a changing competitive environment have provided numerous options, possibilities and imperatives for change.

Articulate the need for change

Plan ahead. Be brief, logical, compelling. Anticipate resistance to change. Communicate the benefits of change and the imperatives for change. Illustrate the consequences of not changing.

Communicating with those involved

Managing change in this new age is less about directing employees, telling them what to do, and more about providing the opportunities and conditions for employees and those most affected by the change, to contribute to, and be included in the change. Change management is now an implicit part of every manager's job. Today managers must consider themselves as leaders of change. The rationale behind this it seems is that organisations who cannot manage, change or empower individuals within the organisation, will no longer exist in the future that belongs to those who are able to adapt and innovate (19). Part of the change management process may include a survey of attitudes through a climate survey or through focus groups, where the real issues, fears and concerns of those involved can be articulated. It also provides an opportunity to communicate the benefits of change and positive outcomes anticipated for working practices and reward systems. Change of course is not always positive, and where there are real issues regarding job structures or job losses, they will equally need to be addressed, although a focus group is unlikely to be the preferred choice of communication.

Resistance to change

Organisations have undergone turbulent times in the past. We might perceive change to be something new, but often change is much like changes that have gone before. Often our responses to change are predictable. This can help us structure and plan to adapt. Although it is commonly thought that it is non-management or junior management staff that form the main body or resistance to change, Greiner (20) suggests that the greatest resistance to change occurs at the very top of the organisational structure, for it is here that individuals build power bases or have vested interests in maintaining the status quo. This frequently accounts for the reasons why, when major transformation change takes place, it is the CEO and senior management who are replaced not those who form the major part of the workforce. Nonetheless, when individuals have not been prepared for or involved in the change to take place, rumour can abound resulting in concern and resistance. This can be due to:

• fear of losing job, loss of status
• inability to see the need for change
• unfavourable view of the person leading the change
• not consulted
• perception that change will create more work
• the negative influence from others, colleagues and peers.

Change can be particularly threatening for individuals during times of economic uncertainty. However getting people on board is crucial to any change effort. The CEO of Xerox commented, (21)

'The hardest stuff is the soft stuff ... values, personal style, ways of interacting. We are trying to change the total culture of the company. When you talk about it in general terms, everybody is all for it, but then you talk about it in terms of individuals, it's much tougher, and yet if individuals don't change, nothing changes'

Acceptance of change

Acceptance of change can be influenced by perceptions of:

• improved working conditions, increase in pay, benefits
• opportunities for growth, development, recognition, promotion
• potential for new challenges
• a feeling that change is required
• respect for the person or department introducing the change
• being able to contribute to the change.

Managing stakeholders

Crucial to any change initiative is winning the support of key stakeholders. Stakeholders are all those individuals affected by the change and will include individuals, groups, customers, suppliers. Map the stakeholders to identify who has potential wrecking power and who are likely to be potential champions of change (figure 2). Segment and analyse the stakeholders.

Fig. 2

Back to the top

Summary

The challenge facing today's organisations is how to implement change that will drastically effect the organisation's ability to improve performance. Change management skills will be vital for organisations to succeed in the next century, to become learning organisations. Managing change is now a core competence for all organisations, not just for those with structural or financial problems. There is no level playing field and organisations will have to be proficient at playing on many different levels: They will have to create new rules and identify the team players that will help them take it forward.

How to transform your organisation or manage change cannot be prescribed by any one model of change management. Extract the key principles of change that seem to 'fit' with your organisation, its strategies and culture. Develop resilience in employees to adapt and manage change for themselves so that they may learn. Whatever change management approach is employed, change management can become a core competence by developing a resilient team, encouraging creativity and innovation, empowering employees and communicating at all levels. It is also a core competence for managers who must develop an array of skills including the ability to handle complexity, ambiguity and uncertainty.

Back to the top

References

Back to the top

2 of 3