MGT 521 Saudi Electronic University MOD7 Power Dynamics and Change Management Plans Essay

User Generated

Zbfuny92

Business Finance

MGT 521

Saudi electronic university

MGT

Description

Power Dynamics and Change Management Plans

Not all changes are positive nor well received. Change agents need to explore how various factors can impact the change initiative and must recognize the impact that certain changes have on individuals, teams, and organizations as a whole. Due to economic turbulence, and the impact of external factors, many organizations have needed to make tough decisions throughout the past two years. Globally, we have seen companies make changes that are positive, in order to remain afloat, and also changes that have resulted in scrutiny, loss of productivity, etc.

Consider the following scenario:

Throughout 2019, until the onset of the pandemic, a large national clothing brand was performing the best it had in 20 years. Unfortunately, when COVID-19 hit, many consumers were unwilling to visit local shopping malls, which resulted in massive profit losses. The large clothing brand was no exception to this phenomenon. The majority of individuals who shop at this retailer are 45 years of age and older and have no desire to frequent the mall anytime soon.

As an external change agent for this organization, you have been asked to sit with members of the C-suite (i.e., the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Human Resource Officer, the Chief Operating Officer, and the Chief Technological Officer) and discuss the proposed change initiative. Specifically, leadership is proposing that 25% of all retail locations are closed within the next six months and that the retail organization focuses on enhancing its ePlatform, thereby resulting in increased online sales.

After meeting with members of the C-suite, you were asked to meet with 10 senior-level employees. These employees expressed their concerns and frustration about the rumors that the company was shutting down select retail locations.

Using Table 6.3, explain the consequences that might occur if the decision to shut down 25% of stores occurs. Specifically, explain likely concerns that employees will express. Then, justify the impact associated with closing 25% of stores in terms of the organization’s reputation. Finally, given the fact that the organization may experience pushback from the workforce, when shutting down 25% of stores, is it possible to please C-Suite leaders and senior employees? If so, how? If not, why? Explain and justify your rationale.


Unformatted Attachment Preview

Chapter 6: Navigating Organizational Politics and Culture Chapter Overview • Change leaders need to understand the informal components of organizations—culture and power • Understanding the cultural and power dynamics in an organization is critical to a successful change • Force Field Analysis and Stakeholder Analysis are two key tools to analyze the informal organizational system and how to change it • Change leaders need to know themselves. They are both stakeholder and key actors in the process .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 2 The Change Path Model Awakening Chapter 4 Mobilization Chapters 5 through 8 Navigating Organizational Politics and Culture • Power Dynamics • Perception of change and the change equation • Force field analysis • Stakeholder analysis Acceleration Chapter 9 Institutionalization Chapter 10 .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 3 Power Dynamics: Sources of Individual Power • Position or authority power • Network power • Knowledge power • Expert power • Information power • Personality power .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 4 Power Dynamics: Other Sources of Power • Ability to cope with and absorb environmental uncertainty • Low Substitutability • What you have to offer is scarce and not easy substituted for • Centrality to decision making, resources critical to strategy or survival, or to work that others rely on .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 5 Resource, Process & Meaning Power • Resource Power • The access to valued resources in an organization • Process Power • The control over formal decision making arenas and agendas • Meaning Power • The ability to define the meaning of things. Thus, the meaning of symbols and rituals and the use of language provide meaning power .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 6 Usage Frequency of Different Power Tactics When Managers Influence Superiors Most Popular Tactic Least Popular Tactic When Managers Influence Subordinates Using & Giving Reasons Using & Giving Reasons Developing Coalitions Being Assertive Friendliness Friendliness Bargaining Developing Coalitions Being Assertive Bargaining Referring to Higher Authority Referring to Higher Authority Applying Sanctions .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 7 Toolkit Exercise 6.2 Assessing Your Power 1. What sources of power are you comfortable with and which do you have access to? 2. Consider a particular context that you regularly find yourself in. What could you do to increase the power you have available? What types of power are involved? 3. How do the key players, structures, and systems in the particular context influence the types and amount of power available to you? How could you change this? .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 8 Toolkit Exercise 6.2 Where Does Power Lie in Your Organization? Pick an organization you know well: 1. What factors lead to power? Which departments carry more weight? What behaviors are associated with having power? 2. Think of a change situation it faced. What types of power were at play? 3. In Hardy’s terms, who controlled resources? Who had process power? Meaning power? 4. Who had “yea-saying” and “nay-saying” power? On what issues? 5. If you examine Table 6.1 in the book, what types of power were used most often? What types are you most comfortable using when you are attempting to influence others? .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 9 When Does Change Occur? Change Occurs When: Perceived Benefits of Change Perceived Cost of Change .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 10 Modified Change Equation Change Occurs When: Perception of Dissatisfaction with the Status Quo Perception of the Benefits of Change Perceived Cost of Change Perception of the Probability of Success .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 11 Reactions to Change • People react to change for many reasons • Don’t equate support with friends and resistance with enemies • It may be ambivalence and not resistance you’re seeing • People experience ambivalence and/or resist for many reasons. Listen carefully so you can learn and refine initiatives • Don’t be blind to learning opportunities to refine analysis, avoid problems areas, and strengthen initiatives • The prospects of moving someone from resistance to support increase when they feel their concerns and insights have been understood and received .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 12 Resistance to Change • Resistance to change is normal and there are often good reasons for it • Don’t assume resistance is “bad” or “negative”. It might be helpful • Resistance usually contains information that is useful—people have reasons that they resist change .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 13 Reasons for Resistance • Self-interest • Misunderstanding and lack of trust • Different assessments of the consequences • Low tolerance for change .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 14 Organizational / Individual Consequences & Support for Change Perceived Impact of the Change on the Organization Perceived Impact of the Change on the Individual Direction of Support of the Change Positive Positive Strong support for change Positive Negative Indeterminate, with possible resistance Neutral Positive Support for change Neutral Negative Resistance to change Negative Positive Indeterminate support for change Negative Negative Strong resistance to change .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 15 Perceived Impact of Change 1. Consider the impact of a change on an organization you know and consider the impact on the individuals concerned. a) Were the impacts on the organization and affected individuals both positive? Were they perceived that way? 2. What were the perceived costs of change? Were the perceptions accurate? How could they be influenced? 3. What were the perceived benefits? What was the probability of achieving these benefits? Were people dissatisfied with the present state? What were the costs of not changing? 4. Were significant costs incurred prior to gaining benefits? Why did they take the risk (incurring definite costs but indefinite benefits)? .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 16 Force Field Analysis Desired State Restraining Forces Current State Driving Forces .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 17 Forces For and Against Change Strong R E S I S T A N C E No Change F O R C E S Discontinuous Change (Breakpoints) No change Weak Sporadic Change Weak Continuous Change CHANGE FORCE .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. Strong 18 Stakeholder Analysis A stakeholder is… Anyone who is influenced or could influence the change you wish to make happen. A stakeholder analysis is… The process of understanding of the motives, power base, alliances, goals, etc. of all crucial stakeholders. .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 19 Stakeholder Analysis (cont.) • Who are the stakeholders? • What do they want? • Do they support you? Why? Why not? • What prevents them from supporting you? • Who influences these stakeholders? Can you influence the influencers? • Can stakeholders be co-opted or involved in a positive way? .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 20 Stakeholder Management: Savage et al. Stakeholder Potential Threat Low High High Stakeholder Potential For Cooperation Mixed Blessing: Collaborate Supportive: Involved Non-Supportive: Defend Marginal: Monitor Low .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 21 Stakeholder Map Stakeholder # 1 (issues, needs, etc.) Stakeholder # 3 (issues, needs, etc.) Stakeholder # 5 (issues, needs, etc.) Stakeholder # 2 (issues, needs, etc.) Stakeholder # 4 (issues, needs, etc.) Change Agent Stakeholder # 6 (issues, needs, etc.) Stakeholder # 8 Stakeholder # 7 .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 22 Stakeholder Roles in Networks • Central Connectors • People who link most people in an informal network with each other • Boundary Spanners • Who connect an informal network with other parts of the organization or other organizations • Information Brokers • Who join the different sub-groups together (and prevent fragmentation) • Peripheral Specialists • Who have specialized expertise (and need freedom from connections to maintain that expertise) .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 23 Dimensions of Networks • Source of information • Inside or outside of the functional area • Social restrictions • Tenure, hierarchy, and location determining the network • Source of connections • Planned interactions or happenstance hallway encounters • Quality of the connections • Relationship quality (short vs. long term, level of trust and confidence in the information, etc.) .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 24 Stages in the Change Process Initial Awareness Interested in the Change Wanting the Change to Happen Ready to Take Action .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 25 General Orientation Towards Change • Innovators • Early Adopters • Early Majority • Late Majority • Late Adopters Similar to consumer adaptation profiles in marketing, except you are urging the adoption of a change, not a product or service • Non-adopters .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 26 Type of Commitment Exhibited • Opposed to the change • Let it happen • Help it happen • Make it happen .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 27 Managing the Strategic Consensus High Understanding Low Understanding of of the Change the Change High, Positive Commitment to the Change Strong Consensus Blind Devotion Low, Positive Commitment to the Change Informed Sceptics Weak Consensus Negative Commitment to the Change Informed Opponents Fanatical Opponents .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 28 Analysis of the Stakeholders’ Readiness to Take Action Predisposition to Change: innovator, early adopter, early Stakeholder’s Name majority, late majority, laggard Current Commitment Profile: resistant, ambivalent, neutral, supportive or committed Jones Smith Douglas Green Etc. .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 29 Toolkit Exercise 6.3 Force Field Analysis Consider an organization change situation you are familiar with: • What are the forces for change? Who is championing the change? How strong and committed are these forces (Who will let it happen; who will help it happen; who will make it happen)? • How could these forces be augmented or increased? What forces could be added to those that exist? • What are the forces that oppose change? • How could these forces be weakened or removed? What things might create major resentment in these forces? • Can you identify any points of leverage you could employ to advance the change? .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 30 Stakeholder Analysis Checklist 1. Who are the key stakeholders? 2. Is there a formal decision-maker with authority to authorize or deny the change project? What are his/her attitudes to the project? 3. What is the commitment profile of stakeholders? Do a commitment analysis for each stakeholder. 4. Are they typically initiators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, or laggards when it comes to change? 5. Why do stakeholders respond as they do? Does the reward system drive them to support or oppose your proposal? What consequences does your change have on each stakeholder? Do the stakeholders perceive these as positive, neutral or negative? .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 31 Stakeholder Analysis Checklist (cont.) 6. What would change the stakeholders’ views? Can the reward system be altered? Would information or education help? 7. Who influences the stakeholders? Can you influence the influencers? How might this help? 8. What coalitions might be formed amongst stakeholders? What alliances might you form? What ones might form to prevent the change you wish? 9. By altering your position, can you keep the essentials of your change and yet satisfy some of the needs of those opposing change? 10. Can you appeal to higher order values and/or goals which will make others view their opposition to the change as petty or selfish? .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 32 Summary • Change agents need to understand the power structures and people in their organization—much of which may be informal and emergent in nature • Ambivalence to change is a natural reaction. Resistance to change is likely (but not inevitable) and there is potential to use ambivalence and resistance in a positive way. People react to change for good reasons and change agents need to know those reasons. • Force field analysis helps plot the major structural, system and people forces at work in the situation and to anticipate ways to alter these forces. • Stakeholder analysis helps us understand the interactions between key individuals and the relationships and power dynamics that underpin the web of relationships .Deszca, Ingols & Cawsey, Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit, 4th ed.. © 2020 SAGE Pub. 33 Power Dynamics and Change Management Plans Not all changes are positive nor well received. Change agents need to explore how various factors can impact the change initiative and must recognize the impact that certain changes have on individuals, teams, and organizations as a whole. Due to economic turbulence, and the impact of external factors, many organizations have needed to make tough decisions throughout the past two years. Globally, we have seen companies make changes that are positive, in order to remain afloat, and also changes that have resulted in scrutiny, loss of productivity, etc. Consider the following scenario: Throughout 2019, until the onset of the pandemic, a large national clothing brand was performing the best it had in 20 years. Unfortunately, when COVID-19 hit, many consumers were unwilling to visit local shopping malls, which resulted in massive profit losses. The large clothing brand was no exception to this phenomenon. The majority of individuals who shop at this retailer are 45 years of age and older and have no desire to frequent the mall anytime soon. As an external change agent for this organization, you have been asked to sit with members of the C-suite (i.e., the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Human Resource Officer, the Chief Operating Officer, and the Chief Technological Officer) and discuss the proposed change initiative. Specifically, leadership is proposing that 25% of all retail locations are closed within the next six months and that the retail organization focuses on enhancing its ePlatform, thereby resulting in increased online sales. After meeting with members of the C-suite, you were asked to meet with 10 senior-level employees. These employees expressed their concerns and frustration about the rumors that the company was shutting down select retail locations. Using Table 6.3, explain the consequences that might occur if the decision to shut down 25% of stores occurs. Specifically, explain likely concerns that employees will express. Then, justify the impact associated with closing 25% of stores in terms of the organization’s reputation. Finally, given the fact that the organization may experience pushback from the workforce, when shutting down 25% of stores, is it possible to please C-Suite leaders and senior employees? If so, how? If not, why? Explain and justify your rationale. Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements: • Be 4-5 pages in length, which does not include the title and reference pages, which are never a part of the content minimum requirements. • Use writing standards and APA 7th style guidelines. • Support your submission with course material concepts, principles, and theories from the textbook and at least three scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles. • It is strongly encouraged that you submit all assignments into the Turnitin Originality Check prior to submitting it to your instructor for grading. If you are unsure how to submit an assignment into the Originality Check tool, review the Turnitin Originality Check – Student Guide for step-by-step instructions. Tools to Assess the Need for Change Individuals choose to consider and adopt a proposed organizational change—or choose not to. Sometimes they do this willingly and other times they choose reluctantly, either feeling forced or mixed about their decisions. This perspective is valuable when thinking about increasing the success of organizational change, for it is at the individual level that people decide to change. Their choices depend on their views of the situation and how it impacts their lives. In the recent past, many change programs have been focused on cost cutting, including the downsizing of the number of employees in an organization. People are bright. They understand what is happening. And if a program will cost them their jobs, why would you expect them to be enthusiastic and positive? Such resistance demonstrates the point that individuals will choose to cooperate or not depending on their personal circumstances and their assessment of how the change will impact them personally. Individuals will adopt or accept change only when they think that their perceived personal benefits are greater than the perceived costs of change. This can be summarized as follows: Change Occurs When Perceived Benefits of Change > Perceived Cost of Change This simple formula highlights several things. First, change agents have to deal with both the reality of change and its perceptions. Again, perception counts as much as reality. Second, in many situations, the costs of changing are more evident than the benefits of change. In most change situations, first the costs are incurred and then the benefits follow. The perceived benefits of change depend on whether people think the benefits are likely—that is, the probability of the change being successful in ways that count for them. As well, the benefits of change depend on the state of happiness or dissatisfaction with the status quo. Interestingly, people also tend to focus on the consequences of the change rather than the consequences of remaining the same. The more dissatisfied people are, the more they as individuals will be willing to change. The change equation can be modified to capture this as follows: 390 Change occurs when Dissatisfaction × Benefits × Success > Cost Where Dissatisfaction = Perception of dissatisfaction with the status quo Benefits = Perception of the benefits of change Success = Perception of the probability of success Cost = Perceived cost of change Thus, change agents need to build the case for change by increasing the dissatisfaction with the status quo by providing data that demonstrate that other options are better, demonstrating that the overall benefits are worth the effort of the change, and showing that the change effort is likely to succeed. When discussing these factors with others, it’s useful to extend the assessment beyond the rational, “headrelated” factors such as cost savings, market share, improved profitability, and competitive advantage. The assessment should extend to “heart-related” matters, such as the human impact of the change on employees, work teams, the department/division, customers and the community. Doing your homework, engaging others in conversations about the change, and early successes are important parts of the change agent’s toolkit in the early stages of a change initiative. It is important to differentiate between the costs and benefits to the organization and the costs and benefits to individuals. Too often, change leaders focus on the organizational benefits and miss the impact at the individual level. The earlier example highlighted this. If an individual sees that the change will increase profits and result in job loss, why would a manager expect support? It takes very secure people who feel they have alternatives and are being equitably treated to be positive under these circumstances even if they believe the change is needed for the organization. Table 6.3 captures this. It contrasts the impact on individuals with the impact on the organization to predict the resulting support for a change initiative. The purpose of Table 6.3 is to encourage change leaders to avoid the trap of assuming that positive organizational outcomes will automatically be supported by individuals. 391 In addition to considering the direct impact of a change on a person, individuals will also think about and be influenced by the effects of the change on their coworkers and teammates. The strength of interpersonal bonds, including the shared values, goals, and norms within an organization, can have a significant impact on attitudes and actions. The traditions of how work is divided, how people and departments interact or do not, and simply the way of doing business create a culture within an organization. The desire to maintain the organization’s traditions, even if there is a mutual understanding for a need to move on, can hinder the acceptance of changes. This challenge is greater if there are shifts in roles and responsibilities and therefore a shift in power. A change leader needs to understand and respect individuals’ and organizational history and the individual members’ perceptions of that history to effectively negotiate the change process and appropriately engage stakeholders. Table 6.3 Organizational and Individual Consequences and the Support for Change Table 6.3 Organizational and Individual Consequences and the Support for Change Perceived Impact Perceived Impact of of the Change on the Change on the the Organization Individual Direction of Support of the Change Positive consequences for the organization Positive outcome for the individual (e.g., less work, better work) Strong support for change Positive consequences for the organization Negative outcome for the individual (e.g., more work, worse work) Indeterminate support for change but very possibly resistance Neutral consequences for the organization Positive outcome for the individual (e.g., less work, better work) Positive support for change 392 Perceived Impact Perceived Impact of of the Change on the Change on the the Organization Individual Direction of Support of the Change Neutral consequences for the organization Negative outcome for the individual (e.g., more work, worse work) Resistance to change Negative consequences for the organization Positive outcome for the individual (e.g., less work, better work) Indeterminate support for change Negative consequences for the organization Negative outcome for the individual (e.g., more work, worse work) Resistance to change Change agents need to think of the impact on individuals—particularly people critical to the change. When doing so, consider also the people who will actually have to change and how they will view the change equation and assess the benefits, costs, and risks. A general manager may decide that new systems are needed, but it is the individual who will be operating the systems who will have to learn how to work with them and change his or her behavior. To consider the perceived impact of change see Toolkit Exercise 6.3. 393
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer:
4 pages
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

View attached explanation and answer. Let me know if you have any questions.

1

Power Dynamics and Change Management Plans

Student's Name
Institution Affiliation
Instructor's Name
Course
Date

2
Power Dynamics and Change Management Plans
Introduction
Businesses have been profoundly affected by the COVID-19 outbreak. Besides the
threat to public health, social and economic disruption threatens the well-being and long-term
livelihoods of millions of employees globally. The pandemic is affecting enterprises and
economies, the labor markets, and the global supply chains, resulting in increased business
disruptions (Donthu & Gustafsson, 2020). With the uncertainties surrounding the curbing of
the virus, businesses have been temporarily and permanently closed. This paper will analyze
the impacts surrounding the closure of business to the organization and the employees.
Consequences of shutting down 25% of stores
The most and obvious concern by the employees is the likelihood of losing jobs. The
closure of the 25% stores implies that the employees working in the stores will be laid off
with immediate effect. The issue has to bother the employees because business closure has
continued globally due to the pandemic (Donthu & Gustafsson, 2020). Thus, securing
another job after being laid off in the company will also be next to impossible. Loss of job
has the immediate consequence of loss of income which will be a source of stress to them on
how they will be able to take care of their families after the execution of the proposal.
Another concern by the employees is their physical and emotional well-being. In this
case, the idea to close the 25% of the stores was not ...


Anonymous
Great! 10/10 would recommend using Studypool to help you study.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags