LEADERSHIP AND CHANGE MANAGEMENT

LEADERSHIP AND CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Introduction

Change management is an essential element of leadership that needs to be backed up with a confirmed strong leadership strategic approach. In order to choose the appropriate change model, it is essential to have enough knowledge of the organization in terms of the specific areas that need change (Abbasi, 2017). This paper aims to evaluate models that can be used to facilitate change at Pemancar, interventions to be implemented, and anticipated resistance for change as well as the recommendations of reducing resistance. The two models that can be used in this case include Lewin’s theory of change and the Burke and Litwin change theory. The two primary interventions to be implemented are leadership and corporate culture. Additionally, the paper focuses on the possible resistance to change and recommendations to counter the resistance.

Pemancar Case Study Analysis

Organizational management entails a critical analysis of the organizational approaches of carrying out activities and formulating the right strategic strategies to solve the challenges (Will and Wetzel, 2017). Lack of motivation among the employees, lack of well-developed strategic management, lack of proper communication between the management is among the significant challenges affecting Pemancar. The deterioration of production in the firm under the supervision of Nova was inevitable because the firm introduced drastic changes in the organization without giving the workers enough time to adjust to the changes. Nova launched way too high standards for Pemancar, a company that was doing well in the region without sufficiently explaining to the workers why the desired change was needed. An organizational analysis is a critical stage towards developing a long-lasting competitive advantage of an organization (Gelaidan, Al-Swidi and Mabkhot, 2018).

Some of the drastic changes introduced by Nova include production new product recipes as a diversification approach and the use of new machines and technologies across all departments. The situation was worsened by the fact that Nova expected the production to remain high at a lower cost and with fewer employees without compromising the quality. Strategic management entails critical analysis and formulation of the most appropriate approaches towards the long-lasting competitive advantage of an industry (Schell, 2019). Interventions by Nova led to the management piling up pressure on the workers to perform to meet the expected production output, which put so much stress on the workers.

Extensive interventions by Nova significantly contributed to the worsening of the Pemancar. For instance, the introduction of the Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS) in 2004/2005 saw the retrenchment of many skilled workers. Lack of strategic analysis in developing organizational strategies significantly affects the productivity of an organization (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018). The sacking of some of the workers has also instilled stress and fear among workers who fear that if the company does not meet Nova’s requirements, the company is going to be closed down. While making rounds in the company, Danial was able to realize that employee motivation levels were low. The workers were spending so much time doing unproductive work. For instance, Danial was able to note that some of the workers were filling out application forms for other companies.

Various change models can be used in the analysis and evaluation of organizational change and management (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018). Change models include Lewin’s theory of evolution, Kotter’s integrative model of organizational dynamics, McKinsey’s 7s model, Weisbord’s six box model, and Burke Litwin change model. In order to examine the change at Pemancar, the most applicable change models include the Lewin’s change model and Burke Litwin change model (Narayanan and Adams, 2017).

Lewin’s Change Model

Lewin’s model refers to a three stages change theory, namely; unfreeze, change, and refreeze. The approach is based on the analogy of changing a block of ice where one needs to unfreeze the ice to a liquid, put the liquid in a container of the desired shape and then refreeze the ice to form the desired shape (Gelaidan, Al-Swidi, and Mabkhot, 2018).

In an organization, the first stage is a sensitization stage. The stage is used to prepare the workers for change and to help them highlight areas where change is required. Preparation for the move is done by breaking down the aspect of the organization that needs changing, such as culture, leadership, or structure. In this stage, it is also necessary to convince the workers why the change is necessary, and critical areas may include a decline in sales or poor work climate (Abd Kadir and Taha, 2019). Challenging some of the negative beliefs can also be done at this stage in order to create room for change. The process of unfreezing is necessary to reduce resistance to change by individuals who may tend to remain conservative (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018).

The second stage is the stage where actual change happens. At this stage, the workers are able to realign their focus and shift their attention towards the induced changes. The beliefs and cultures are slowly changed and directed towards the new changes (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018). However, due to the fact that the change has not been fully reinforced, it is essential to continually remind people why the change is necessary by highlighting the benefits of the desired change (Schell, 2019).

The final stage is a readjustment phase, where workers are expected to accommodate the changes into the organization’s culture. The refreezing step is a stage that is marked with stabilization and consistency to help reinforce the implemented changes and to ensure that the changes work as expected to benefit the organization Hussain et al. 2018). The refreezing stage is also meant to help employees to be comfortable with the changes. In order to achieve this, an organization needs to support, mobilize, and allocate resources to take full advantage of the change and to ensure the difference is not short-lived (Kasemsap, 2017).

The advantages of the model are that it is able to achieve desired change in a short time, and it is possible to control the change process through force field analysis (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018). This process involves the identification of the supportive forces of change and the opposing forces of change. In order to implement the desired change, the leader works on reducing the opposing forces and increasing the supporting effects (Hussain et al., 2018). A combination of the two activities helps to shift the equilibrium towards the necessary change. In addition, it gives space and time for the change to take place; hence it has a smooth transition process. Lastly, all workers are able to participate fully in the process, which makes the employees own up the process, which helps to yield better results (Hassan, 2018).

According to Janićijević (2017), one of the significant disadvantages of the organizational change is that it creates anxiety in preparation for change, which lowers the performance of workers. In addition, it depends on so much cooperation from workers, whereas the desire for change is not even for all workers. Many workers are afraid of new roles, new technology, and some benefit from the status quo.

Application of Lewin’s Change Model

For the sake of Pemancar, the Lewin Model is more suitable as compared to the Burke and Litwin model. The model is more effective due to its direct implication and ability to evaluate the results of the approach suggested in the long run (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018). Pemancar has various challenges, and the Lewin’s model cannot solve all of them at ago because the manager does not have the time and resources to fully utilize the model to effect the desired change (Bakari, Hunjra and Niazi, 2017). The primary goal of change that is desired at Pemancar includes improving the relationship between the workers and the management to ease the tension and stress among workers and, much more important, to meet the required production targets. The anxiety and stress among workers have developed workers have out of fear of being retrenched, not meeting the set targets, and the strict conditions under which they are expected to operate (Yoon, 2017).

Unfreezing Stage                                                                                                  

In this stage, it is essential to break down the organizational culture that creates fear and tension among workers. This can be done by motivating the workers to realize that it is possible to meet the target if everyone does what they are supposed to do (Hussain et al., 2018). Employees play a critical role in the development and implementation of organization policies. The freezing stage ensures the inclusivity of all stakeholders in the formulation of the most effective approach (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018).

Based on the Pemancar case study analysis, the process entails involving employees in activities that need to be done include sensitizing the senior, middle, and junior management to lead by example. Management and department heads are supposed to visit the working sites more frequently and work alongside the lower-level employees to boost their motivation and team spirit (Amjad and Rehman, 2018). The supervisors, for instance, should lead the workers in doing the work. The manager should also start a decentralization campaign that sees everyone becoming accountable for their actions and checking on the effects of the other. Additionally, workers should be allowed to work in the department where they are more competent and where they have the most skills to improve performance (Bakari, Hunjra and Niazi, 2017).

Change stage

At this stage, the company is supposed to start adjusting to the new roles, culture, and way of doing things. The manager is supposed to focus on the restraining forces as well as supporting troops (Nash, Manning, and Heiser 2019). Pemancar key objective at this stage was to orient all the stakeholders and provide a critical framework that will ensure focus and productivity in the long run.

Refreezing

The third stage of the model entails cementing the changes and strengthening the foundation. Performance is expected to increase at this stage as the workers get accustomed to their work, which will help them to work at ease. The manager should continue setting attainable goals for the company and also allow departments and workers to set their targets to improve performance management and to ensure that the motivation is sustained (Bakari, Hunjra and Niazi, 2017).

Burke and Litwin Causal Model of Organisation Performance and Change

The Burke and Litwin model is a theory of change developed in 1922 by Burke and Litwin. According to Tang (2019), the model can be used to effect the desired change in an organization as well as modify and influence the behavior of workers. According to the model, there are 12 interconnected elements of organizational change that influence each other. The theory accommodates both internal and external influences that cause and effect change in an organization. The features include; corporate culture, mission, and strategy, external environment, systems (Amjad and Rehman, 2018). Structure, management practices, tasks and skills, working climate, individual and general performance, motivational level, and personal values and needs. The first four elements represent the organizational structure, and they are collectively known as transactional factors. These factors usually involve the day to day running of the organization (Church and Burke, 2017).

According to Olivier (2018), the model stresses that the external pressures influence change within the organization to a greater extent than the internal forces. The external environment includes customer relations, political pressures, laws, policies, and competition from other firms. The mission and strategy are the internal forces and motivational agents that influence the employees towards the company goals and objectives. According to Hayes (2018), a company should always ensure that the vision and mission suit the employees. Leadership in the organization represents the critical agents of change as they guide and direct operations in the company. The organizational culture refers to the values and traditions of the organization. The culture entails both implicit and explicit rules which set the standards of work among employees. The structure refers to the hierarchical outline of offices and the line of command. The arrangement outlines responsibilities and roles at each level (Dumas, and Beinecke, 2018).

Management systems provide support to employees and their work. Management practice refers to the activities carried out by management, such as budgeting, resource allocation, planning, and staffing, as well as the management relationship with employees (Amjad and Rehman, 2018). Working climate refers to the encounters and experiences that employees have regarding their work and relationships with fellow employees. The working environment influences the amount of effort that workers exert towards the achievement of company goals and objectives. Tasks and skills refer to individual competency concerning their job function. The level of competency is essential in the performance of company goals and objectives as it facilitates specialization, which increases efficiency (Coleman 2018).

Individual values and needs refer to the feelings of the employees, their needs, and expectations for the job. It also involves the way they perceive work and their attitude towards working in the firm ((Choromides 2018). The approach contributes significantly to the performance of the firm. Motivational level refers to the resilience that workers have towards meeting organizational goals. Additionally, the individual and general performance refer to the relationship of individual performance to that of the department and that of the whole firm (Feng, Huang and Zhang, 2016).

According to Freeburg (2020), the most dominant factor is the external environment. The organization has minimal control over its external environment. Therefore, to bring change, the organization changes its internal factors to accommodate pressures and changes from its external environment. Application of the Burke Litwin model to change management in organizations requires an initial diagnosis of the challenges in the organization as well as the forces that hinder change. After the diagnosis, it is then essential to create an action plan that helps to outline the process and goals of reform. The effectiveness of the model, however, depends on the proper identification of all the 12 elements (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018).

According to Tang (2019), the Burke and Litwin model helps to improve performance, and it also facilitates change. Besides, the model can be used to bring about both transformational and transactional change. Transformational change is geared towards changing the nature of the company, which is perceived to be more radical. Transformational change is achieved through realigning objectives, strategy, mission, goals, and leadership. Transformational change induces changes in the organizational culture that reflect in the organizational performance (Hechanova, Caringal-Go, and Magsaysay, 2018).

Interventions

Transformational Leadership

This entails analysis and development of organizational goals through the utilization of a collective approach by management to guide the change. The company requires a change in its corporate culture as well as leadership. Based on the case, it is quite clear that the system of administration in place is not humanistic enough to get to individual needs hence raising morale at a different level. A solution to the leadership gap would be to adopt the transformational leadership style (Halkias, Santora, Harkiolakis, and Thurman, 2017). In addition, the lead manager also needed to make a few efforts to centralize power without changing the organizational structure so as to have a level of control in the firm (Rosenbaum, More a

nd Steane, 2018).

According to Halkias, Santora, Harkiolakis, and Thurman (2017), transformational leadership is a theory of leadership where leaders work with the teams to identify areas that require a change in the organization. The leaders then use inspiration and motivation to direct employees to achieve the organization’s goals and objectives. The leaders can influence workers to work beyond their identified purposes. The style has four main pillars, which include individualized consideration, inspirational motivation, idealized influence, and intellectual stimulation.

Inspirational motivation requires leaders to remain optimistic that their workers will be able to work in good faith by understanding the importance of their work (Cameron and Green, 2019). The leaders, therefore, praise the abilities of their workers. Lastly, individualized consideration refers to the use of mentors and coaches. The leader identifies mentors and coaches to help each worker to improve their performance levels (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018). The leaders remain empathetic of every worker’s situation, which makes workers feel valued, and they become indebted to the organization, which makes them work hard to achieving the best results for the organization (Van Looy 2019).

According to Will and Wetzel (2017), transformational leadership has several advantages over other forms of leadership. Some of the benefits of transformational leadership include lowering turnover costs. It engages workers fully, it is easy to create and manage change, and the style encourages continuous learning and development of skill. It facilitates efficient communication, and it helps to fight low morale. One of the greatest achievements over other techniques is the fact the style is able to obtain exceptional results without coercion. This saves a great deal of time and resources, as there is reduced supervision. Besides, workers are able to improve the quality of work as they feel obliged by the strong work ethics reinforced by the style (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018).

Improving Corporate Culture

Corporate culture refers to a collective term that describes the shared values and practices of an organization’s workers (Abbasi, 2017). It is the corporate culture that controls the feelings, beliefs, and actions of the workers. In other words, the corporate culture constitutes the psychological environment of the organization highlighting the uniqueness of the company’s values and beliefs (Flemming, 2017). The corporate culture is essential because it influences how workers react and interact with the external environment, which may affect the quality of services being delivered to customers. The other importance of corporate culture is that it increases job satisfaction among workers, which boosts their confidence and morale, and they perform better (Rosenbaum, More, and Steane, 2018).

According to Thomson III, Rawson, Slade, and Bledsoe (2016), there are various indicators of a healthy corporate culture. These include; having a long line of future workers, low turnover rates, good relationships among workers, high job security, ability to accommodate changes, efficient communication, and openness to ideas, and high employee motivation. Pemancar Company had inefficient communication among the departments, which made the flow of information hard for Adam as it is indicated that at times he had to talk to workers individually. Poor communication led to the worsening relations between workers and management as the workers did not understand why the company made drastic changes. Open communication in an organization is critical (Flemming, 2017). The communication approach could have helped to improve the corporate culture by ensuring that workers were able to remain aware of the changes in management.

Anticipated Resistance and Recommendations

During the application of the change model, resistance to change is likely to come from the high-level management staff who may feel bad while working along with the junior workers. The management may also resist decentralization as it exposes them to harder roles than the managerial work. On the other hand, the majority of the workers are also resigned to the idea that they are supposed to produce more to meet targets due to the fact that the company is among the best in the region (Rafferty and Jimmieson, 2017).

In order to make the workers feel comfortable. Danial is expected to allow workers to choose the departments they are more competent. One of the challenges that may arise is that workers may deliberately choose individual departments over other others due to the workload or other related problems. Similarly, some departments may also stagger with many employees who feel more competent in certain departments. In such a situation, it is required of Danial to judiciously decide on how to balance the employee in the departments that need more workers or where there are shortages. He is likely to encounter resistance from workers who may feel unfairly treated as they may still end up in departments where they do not have enough skills and competence.

According to Hussain, Lei, Akram, Haider, Hussain, and Ali (2018), it is difficult to convince people to set individual targets when they do not feel oriented to the work. Some workers may differ from the management in terms of the change model because they think that Lewin’s model is a fast model that demands effects drastic changes. According to Amjad and Rehman (2018), there are various ways on how the management can handle resistance form workers. For instance, the manager needs to remain committed to explaining to workers why the work needs to be done that way. This would require the manager to explain the transition process of the company from KLCorp to Nova and the numerous challenges that have led to the current situation. The leaders should then explain to the workers why and how the models are expected to offer the best solution (Rafferty and Jimmieson, 2017).

Consequently, the leader can also quell rebellion from workers by allowing them to air opinions and views on how to improve the situation (Galli 2018). When employees are allowed to contribute, they accept the changes more positively. Based on the fact that culture presents a big difference, the management should also set aside some training sessions to teach the Pemancar conservatives on how to adapt to the Nova-instigated European culture. It is also essential to highlight and appreciate minor achievements as well as breaking up the company goals to form individual goals for each person who will also increase their motivation and accountability. It is also necessary for the manager to introduce rewards for the high performing workers in order for the team to remain motivated (Neves, and Schyns, 2018).

Conclusion

Organizational Leadership style influences the success of the organization in various ways. Intellectual stimulation refers to the quality of leaders to come up with creative solutions to real organizational challenges and the ability to corporate culture. It stimulates workers to think creatively and use their talents at the workplace to meet organizational goals. Idealized influence is achieved through setting high standards of moral and ethical behavior.

Through a critical analysis of the Pemancar case study, several indicators of a poor corporate culture can be identified. The indicators are evident from the case due to the persistent management challenges that Adam, the former manager, faces. The corporate culture worsened due to the pressure that was exerted by Nova to meet production demands that seemed unrealistic to the workers. Transformational leadership models are critical in the development of an organization. They offer a well thought strategic approach towards solving organizational challenges and develop competitive advantages.

Embracing new ideas is also an indicator of a healthy corporate culture. Having a strong belief in the leadership and management of a company allows the workers to comply with new directives. Consequently, the employees are also able to give in their thoughts and ideas on new issues providing thoughtful solutions and ideas. Motivational incentives are critical in enhancing productivity among employees and also facilitate competitiveness within an industry. This study explores proper leadership and management approaches and models effective towards developing a competitive company through the exploration of the Pemancar case study.

References

Abbasi, B., 2017. Transformational leadership and change readiness and a moderating role of perceived bureaucratic structure: an empirical investigation. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15(1), pp.35-44.

Abd Kadir, M.F. and Taha, A.Z., 2019. Task Performance and Adaptive Performance Among Logistician: A Conceptual Perspective on the Individual Factors and the Situational Factors. International Journal of Business and Management, 3(3), pp.16-25.

Amjad, A. and Rehman, M., 2018. Resistance to Change in Public Organization: Reasons and How to Overcome It. European Journal of Business Science and Technology, 4(1), pp.56-68.

Bakari, H., Hunjra, A.I. and Niazi, G.S.K., 2017. How does authentic leadership influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions: Integration of theory of planned behavior and Lewin’s three step model. Journal of Change Management, 17(2), pp.155-187.

Cameron, E. and Green, M., 2019. Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. Kogan Page Publishers.

Choromides, C., 2018. Leadership and change management: A cross-cultural perspective. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.

Church, A.H. and Burke, W.W., 2017. Four trends shaping the future of organizations and organization development. OD Practitioner, 49(3), pp.14-22.

Coleman, C.A., 2018. Organizational Diagnosis in the Logistics Sector in Ghana: An Application of the Burke-Litwin Model. J Entrepren Organiz Manag, 7(245), p.2.

Dumas, C. and Beinecke, R.H., 2018. Change leadership in the 21st century. Journal of Organizational Change Management.

Feng, C., Huang, X. and Zhang, L., 2016. A multilevel study of transformational leadership, dual organizational change and innovative behavior in groups. Journal of Organizational Change Management.

Flemming, P.L., 2017. Building a Climate of Change with a link through Transformational Leadership and Corporate Culture: A Management key to a Global Environment. International Journal of Business and Social Research, 7(1), pp.44-55.

Freeburg, D., 2020. An information-based approach to organizational change management. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems.

Galli, B.J., 2018. Change management models: A comparative analysis and concerns. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 46(3), pp.124-132.

Gelaidan, H.M., Al-Swidi, A. and Mabkhot, H.A., 2018. Employee readiness for change in public higher education institutions: examining the joint effect of leadership behavior and emotional intelligence. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(2), pp.150-158.

Halkias, D., Santora, J.C., Harkiolakis, N. and Thurman, P.W. eds., 2017. Leadership and change management: A cross-cultural perspective. Taylor & Francis.

Hassan, A.T., 2018. Organizational change management: A literature review. Available at SSRN 3135770.

Hayes, J., 2018. The theory and practice of change management. Palgrave.

Hechanova, M.R.M., Caringal-Go, J.F. and Magsaysay, J.F., 2018. Implicit change leadership, change management, and affective commitment to change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

Hussain, S.T., Lei, S., Akram, T., Haider, M.J., Hussain, S.H. and Ali, M., 2018. Kurt Lewin’s change model: A critical review of the role of leadership and employee involvement in organizational change. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 3(3), pp.123-127.

Hussain, S.T., Lei, S., Akram, T., Haider, M.J., Hussain, S.H. and Ali, M., 2018. Kurt Lewin’s change model: A critical review of the role of leadership and employee involvement in organizational change. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 3(3), pp.123-127.

Janićijević, N., 2017. Organizational models as configurations of structure, culture, leadership, control, and change strategy. Economic Annals, 62(213), pp.67-91.

Kasemsap, K., 2017. The roles of organizational change management and resistance to change in the modern business world. In Organizational Culture and Behavior: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 1034-1062). IGI Global.

Narayanan, V. and Adams, C.A., 2017. Transformative change towards sustainability: the interaction between organisational discourses and organisational practices. Accounting and Business Research, 47(3), pp.344-368.

Nash, M.M., Manning, M.R. and Heiser, E.J., 2019. Applying Lewin’s Force Field Theory to facilitate SWOT analysis: an effective and efficient approach. In Preparing for High Impact Organizational Change. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Neves, P. and Schyns, B., 2018. With the bad comes what change? The interplay between destructive leadership and organizational change. Journal of Change Management, 18(2), pp.91-95.

Olivier, B., 2018. Psychometric validation of an Organisational Performance Questionnaire (OPQ) based on the Burke-Litwin model. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 28(1), pp.46-51.

Rafferty, A.E. and Jimmieson, N.L., 2017. Subjective perceptions of organizational change and employee resistance to change: Direct and mediated relationships with employee well‐being. British Journal of Management, 28(2), pp.248-264.

Rosenbaum, D., More, E. and Steane, P., 2018. Planned organisational change management. Journal of Organizational Change Management.

Schell, W.J., 2019. Leadership and change management. In Traffic Safety Culture: Definition, Foundation, and application (pp. 191-218). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Sinaga, H.G., Asmawi, M., Madhakomala, R. and Suratman, A., 2018. Effect of Change in Management, Organizational Culture and Transformational Leadership on Employee Performance PT. AdhyaTirta Batam (PT. ATB). International Review of Management and Marketing, 8(6), p.15.

Tang, K.N., 2019. Leadership Styles and Organizational Effectiveness. In Leadership and Change Management (pp. 11-25). Springer, Singapore.

Thomson III, N.B., Rawson, J.V., Slade, C.P. and Bledsoe, M., 2016. Transformation and Transformational Leadership:: A Review of the Current and Relevant Literature for Academic Radiologists. Academic radiology, 23(5), pp.592-599.

Van Looy, A., 2019. Capabilities for managing business processes: a measurement instrument. Business Process Management Journal.

Will, M.G. and Wetzel, R., 2017. Next concepts for successful organizational change. Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change, Guest Editorial (Forthcoming).

Yoon, H.J., 2017. Diagnostic models following open systems. In Assessment and Diagnosis for Organization Development (pp. 53-78). Productivity Press.