ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE

  • Uncategorized

ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE 3

ORGANISATIONALCHANGE

Nameof School

Papersubmitted for…

To

Lecturer’sName

Department

School

Overviewof the Models

Pettigrew’sProcess/Content/Context Model

Thismodel is developed to direct the focus away from the textbook modelswhich have been used by scholars to explain changes in theorganisational setup. This model was started in Britain to be analternative to theoretical approach put forward by textbook modelssuch as the Lewin’s three-phase model. The organisational changesare characterized by three factors which are continuouslyinterconnected the factors include context, content, and process.

AppreciativeEnquiry (AE)

DavidCooperrider developed this model of organisation in the 1980s. Appreciation is majorly concerned with enhancing values andrecognition. The enquiry is related to both discovery and explorationand involves learning, studying and asking questions[CITATION The14 p 42 l 1033 ].On the other hand, appreciation is defined as evaluating potentials,asset, and strengths for boththe past and the present. Appreciative Enquiry takes a positiveapproach where it starts to look at what is working in theorganisation rather than what is not working[CITATION Gia14 p 204 l 1033 ].It is a tool that offerspositive energy to the organisations, people, and the surroundingenvironment. It encourages the people so that they can give theirvery best. The aim of this model is to discover, understand andsupport ideas that result from effective social, organisationalarrangements and processes (Bushe, 2012, p. 73).

CaseStudy: Healthcare

Appreciatiativeenquiry is the best approach which can be used to effect change in ahealth institution.The kind of activity conducted in a hospital ispersonalised and therefore, the change is mostly directed to thepersonnel.The strengths and weaknesses of each employee can beanalyzed separately[CITATION Kin131 p 52 l 1033 ].

Similarities

Bothof this models have a structural framework that can be followed.Appreciative Enquiry has four stages called the 4D cycle, which askthe question that are to be answered to as to apply the model. Thesteps: Discovery – this is a search done diligently and extensivelyto understand the question “what has been.” Dream- this one asksthe question “what might be.”Design – it revolves around thequestion “what should be.” Destiny – this is a series ofinspired action

Thismodel operates on the assumption that human systems such asorganisations are made up of groups of people and cannot be treatedlike machines where various parts make up the device and enable it tofunction as one unit. Human groups are comprised of living andbreathing organisms[CITATION Sen16 p 96 l 1033 ].Therefore, we cannot remove incompetent people and replace them withactive ones.Context model also is composed of three factors which includecontext, content, and process. These factors are the backbone of themodel. And after establishing and identifying all these aspects, thenthe model can be applied[CITATION Ked12 p 54 l 1033 ].The change will involve the three factors which are in continuousinterplay with each other. This model emphasizes some factors whichinclude: appreciating levels of analysis that are interdependent, therelationship that exists with the changes that occur over time, howthe concept of change is modeled by action, the multi- causation andnon-uniform characteristic ofchange experienced in organisations over several years (Johnson,2012, p. 47). Therefore, both of this models are composed ofdifferent parts which, when joined, they make one unit. Each of themhas a set of steps and procedure in implementing them to anorganisation.

Differences

Appreciativeenquiry identifies the strengths of an organisation and enhancesthem. This model starts from the positive side of an organisation.The already established and working change methods are improved whilethe methods that do not work are overlooked[CITATION Gia14 p 204 l 1033 ].

Onthe other hand, context model relies on the history of change in theorganisation. It analyzes the positive and negative methods that areapplied and came up with a series of procedures.AE does not considerthe subject of change, which is important to the leaders of theorganisation while context model considers the issue (Bushe, 2012, p.76). Pettigrew emphasizes on three factors which are related in sucha way that without one of the factors then the model breaks down.These factors are content, process, and context. While AE has a 4Dcycle composed of steps that form a closed loop. These measuresinclude discovery, dream, design and destiny.

Strengths

ContextModel

Thismodel is particularly useful when applied to the higher educationsector. It is selected in this case because it brings new knowledgein organisationalchange management and organisational development and characterizesorganisational change as historical, contextual and procedural innature. It was developed so as to shift from the textbook basedmodels which were flawed. With the increasing size of businessenterprises, it became apparent that the older models such as Lewin’sthree-phase model were not capable of handling the changingenvironment of companies[CITATION Max15 p 42 l 1033 ].

PositiveModel

Thereare many strengths of this model, but the key strength is the focusput on appreciating the already existing organisational situations tocome up with new and positive ideas. The generated ideas have beenthe industry trendsetters because of being a crucial factor forchange in organisations[CITATION joh12 p 42 l 1033 ].Thismodel has broughtgreat success to organisations which have applied it. Theappreciative enquiry has been instrumental to both small andlarge-scale companies and organisations. It has resulted intofostering positive change and growth in different types of companiesincluding military, educational, medical, religious and academicorganisations (Maxwell, 2015, p. 36).

Weakness

ContextModel

Thismodel is only appropriate for institutions that are large and have adefined structure in place. Therefore, it cannot be applied toorganisations that are emerging and do not have a well-definedstructure. It relies on the historical data of the organisationalchanges that have occurred over the years. This becomes a challengewhen hat information is not available[CITATION Haw12 p 20 l 1033 ].

PositiveModel

Irrespectiveof the great success this model has brought to organisations, it hasbeen criticized for not factoring in the focus of the enquiry. Thesubject matter should be the first cause of action before attemptingto change an organisation[CITATION Sen16 p 82 l 1033 ].Thetopic of change should be well identified and defined so as to givethe leaders and the relevant stakeholders an overview of what issupposed to be done. Consultation with the interested parties isnecessary because they are the recipients of the successes of themodel application in their company (Maxwell, 2015, p. 32).

Thismodel is faulted for only focusing on the strengths of theorganisation. Therefore, change brought to the groups is biased andincomplete. To effectively manage successful changes, both thechallenges and strengths existing in the organisation should beanalyzed and be factored in when constituting changes to a company [CITATION Sen16 p 80 l 1033 ].

Conclusion

Withthe growing global business environment, organisations and theirmanagers keep changing. Which, in turn, creates a situation wherethe organisational structure is evolved over time. Sometimes thechanges brought to organisations are ineffective, and others areeffective. Because of the varying sizes, structure, systems and theworkforce of organisations, the degree of success experienced in anychanges applied also varies widely.

Increasingthe chances of a successful organisational change to a company thereshould be adequate planning for the critical factors which determinethe overall success rate of the changes. Changes do not come to anorganisation overnight it takes time and money. The models discussedin this document, have been applied by many organisations becausethey have proven to be useful over the years. Regardless of themodels chosen, the method should coincide with the organisationalgoals and objectives.

References

Bennet, J. &amp Bush, M., 2014. Coaching for Change. New York: Routledge.

Bushe, G., 2012. Generativity and the transformational potential of appreciative inquiry. In Zandee,. Bingley: Emerald PUblishing.

Cameron , E. &amp Green, M., 2014. Making sense of. London: Kogan Page Publishers.

Giannarou, L. &amp Zervas, E., 2014. Using Delphi. ournal of Business Science and, 9(2), p. 204.

Johnson, p., 2012. Transcending the polarity of light and shadow in appreciative inquiry: Bingley: Emerald PUblishers.

Keddy, j. &amp Johnson, c., 2012. Managing Coaching at Work: Developing, Evaluating and. London: Kogan Page.

King, A., 2013. Make no litttle plans Ontario`s public health secor strategic plan. s.l.:Queen`s printer.

Maxwell, A. A. &amp. J., 2015. A critical review and uimplications for creating learning organizatiosn. European journal of training and develoment stidies, pp. 29- 43.

Oreg, S., 2014. The psychology of organisational change. New York: Cambridge University Press.

P, H., 2012. Creating a Coaching Culture. London: Open University Press.

Senior, B. &amp Swailes, S., 2016. Organisatiinal change. 5 ed. New York: Pearson.