Business Finance
Impetus for Change, management homework help

Question Description

Purpose of Assignment

Students start to think about how change may impact an organization, how leadership is effective or ineffective in communicating, and to hear from other students about types of changes experienced or researched. Organizations are impacted by change both internally and externally.

Assignment Steps

Choose an organization at which you have worked or with which you are familiar.

Examine the type of change experienced (current or past employer or a company that your facilitator approves). This is an organization you will be using throughout the entire class.

Reflect on how the leadership introduced/announced the change and the reason for the change.

Prepare a graphic that illustrates your analysis of the change and in 1,050 words, cover the following:

  • Identify the type of change
  • Explain how the change was communicated
  • Identify which leaders were involved in the communication
  • Identify the change model (if possible)

Format your assignment consistent with APA guidelines.

Click the Assignment Files tab to submit your assignment.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Impetus for Change Grading Guide MGT/426 Version 8 Managing Change in the Workplace Copyright Copyright © 2016, 2015, 2014, 2011 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved. University of Phoenix® is a registered trademark of Apollo Group, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries. Microsoft®, Windows®, and Windows NT® are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. All other company and product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies. Use of these marks is not intended to imply endorsement, sponsorship, or affiliation. Impetus for Change Grading Guide MGT/426 Version 8 Edited in accordance with University of Phoenix® editorial standards and practices. 2 Impetus for Change Grading Guide MGT/426 Version 8 Individual Assignment: Impetus for Change Purpose of Assignment In Week 1, students start to think about how change may impact an organization, how leadership is effective or ineffective in communicating, and to hear from other students about types of changes experienced or researched. Resources Required Chapters 2, 3, and 18 Grading Guide Content Met Partially Met Not Met Total Available Total Earned 7 #/7 Partially Met Not Met Comments: Prepare an infographic (Microsoft® PowerPoint®, Publisher®, Word, or sites such as Glogster® or PiktoChart® ) Identify the type of change. Explain how the change was communicated. Identify which leaders were involved in the communication. Identify the change model (if possible). Analysis is 1050 words Writing Guidelines The paper—including tables and graphs, headings, title page, and reference page—is consistent with APA formatting guidelines and meets course-level requirements. Intellectual property is recognized with in-text citations and a reference page. Met Comments: 3 Impetus for Change Grading Guide MGT/426 Version 8 Writing Guidelines Met Partially Met Not Met Total Available Total Earned 3 #/3 10 #/10 Paragraph and sentence transitions are present, logical, and maintain the flow throughout the paper. Sentences are complete, clear, and concise. Rules of grammar and usage are followed including spelling and punctuation. Assignment Total Additional comments: # Comments: 4 3 The Organization Development Practitioner learning objectives • • • • Discuss the roles and characteristics of OD practitioners. Describe the competencies required of effective OD practitioners. Compare the internal versus external OD practitioner. Understand the values and ethics guiding the practice of OD. Chapters 1 and 2 provided an overview of the field of organization development and a description of the nature of planned change. This chapter extends that introduction by examining the people who perform organization development (OD). A closer look at OD practitioners can provide a more personal perspective on the field and can help us understand how and why OD relies so heavily on personal relationships between practitioners and organization members. Much of the literature about OD practitioners views them as internal or external consultants providing professional services—diagnosing systems, developing interventions, and helping to implement them. Perspectives that are more recent expand the practice scope to include professionals in related disciplines, such as industrial psychology, human resource management, and strategic management, as well as line managers who have learned how to carry out OD to change and develop their organizations. A great deal of opinion and some research studies have focused on the necessary skills and knowledge of an effective OD practitioner. Studies of the profession provide a comprehensive list of basic skills and knowledge that all effective OD practitioners must possess. Most of the relevant literature focuses on people specializing in OD as a profession and addresses their roles and careers. The OD practitioner's role can be described in relation to its position: internal to the organization, external to it, or in a team comprising both internal and external consultants. The OD practitioner's role can also be examined in terms of its marginality in organizations, of the emotional demands made on the practitioner, and of where it fits along a continuum from client-centered to consultantcentered functioning. Finally, organization development is an emerging profession providing alternative opportunities for gaining competence and developing a career. The stressful nature of helping professions, however, suggests that OD practitioners must cope with the possibility of professional burnout. As in other helping professions, such as medicine and law, values and ethics play an important role in guiding OD practice and in minimizing the chances that clients will be neglected or abused. 3-1 Who Is the Organization Development Practitioner? Throughout this text, the term organization development practitioner refers to at least three sets of people. The most obvious group of OD practitioners are those people specializing in OD as a profession. They may be internal or external consultants who offer professional services to organizations, including their top managers, functional department heads, and staff groups. OD professionals traditionally have shared a common set of humanistic values promoting open communications, employee involvement, and personal growth and development. They tend to have common training, skills, and experience in the social processes of organizations (for example, group dynamics, decision making, and communications). In recent years, OD professionals have expanded those traditional values and skill sets to include more concern for organizational effectiveness, competitiveness, and bottom-line results, and greater attention to the technical, structural, and strategic parts of organizations. That expansion, mainly in response to the highly competitive demands facing modern organizations, has resulted in a more diverse set of OD professionals geared to helping organizations cope with those pressures.1 The second set of people to whom the term OD practitioner applies are those specializing in fields related to OD, such as human resource management, organization design, quality control, information technology, and business strategy. These contentoriented fields increasingly are becoming integrated with OD's process orientation, particularly as OD projects have become more comprehensive, involving multiple features and varying parts of organizations. For example, the integrated strategic change intervention described in Chapter 18 and the dynamic strategy-making intervention presented in Chapter 21 are the result of marrying OD with business strategy.2 A growing number of professionals in these related fields are gaining experience and competence in OD, mainly through working with OD professionals on large-scale projects and through attending OD training sessions. Most of the large accounting firms, for example, diversified into management consulting and change management.3 In most cases, professionals in these related fields do not subscribe fully to traditional OD values, nor do they have extensive OD training and experience. Rather, they have formal training and experience in their respective specialties, such as industrial engineering, information systems, or corporate strategy. They are OD practitioners in the sense that they apply their special competence within an OD-like process, typically by engaging OD professionals and managers to design and implement change programs. They also practice OD when they apply their OD competence to their own specialties, thus spreading an OD perspective into such areas as compensation practices, work design, labor relations, and strategic planning. The third set of people to whom the term OD practitioner applies are the increasing number of managers and administrators who have gained competence in OD and who apply it to their own work areas. Studies and recent articles argue that OD increasingly is applied by managers rather than by OD professionals.4 Such studies suggest that the faster pace of change affecting organizations today is highlighting the centrality of the manager in managing change. Consequently, OD must become a general management skill. Along those lines, Kanter studied a growing number of firms, such as General Electric, Hewlett-Packard, and 3M, where managers and employees have become “change masters.”5 They have gained the expertise to introduce change and innovation into the organization. Managers tend to gain competence in OD through interacting with OD professionals in actual change programs. This on-the-job training frequently is supplemented with more formal OD training, such as the various workshops offered by the National Training Laboratories (NTL), USC's Center for Effective Organizations, the Center for Creative Leadership, the Gestalt Institute, UCLA's Extension Service, the Tavistock Institute, the Institute for Socio-Economic Enterprises (ISEOR), and others. Line managers increasingly are attending such external programs. Moreover, a growing number of organizations, including Capital One, Disney, and General Electric, have instituted inhouse training programs for managers to learn how to develop and change their work units. As managers gain OD competence, they become its most basic practitioners. In practice, the distinctions among the three sets of OD practitioners are blurring. A growing number of managers have transferred, either temporarily or permanently, into the OD profession. For example, companies such as Procter & Gamble have trained and rotated managers into full-time OD roles so that they can gain skills and experience needed for higher-level management positions. Also, it is increasingly common to find managers and staff specialists using their experience in OD to become external consultants. More OD practitioners are gaining professional competence in related specialties, such as business process reengineering, reward systems, and strategic planning. Conversely, many specialists in those related areas are achieving professional competence in OD. Cross-training and integration are producing a more comprehensive and complex kind of OD practitioner—one with a greater diversity of values, skills, and experience than a traditional practitioner. 3-2 Competencies of an Effective Organization Development Practitioner The literature about OD competencies reveals a mixture of personality traits, experiences, knowledge, and skills presumed to lead to effective practice. For example, research on the characteristics of successful change practitioners yields the following list of attributes and abilities: diagnostic ability, basic knowledge of behavioral science techniques, empathy, knowledge of the theories and methods within the consultant's own discipline, goal-setting ability, problem-solving ability, ability to perform selfassessment, ability to see things objectively, imagination, flexibility, honesty, consistency, and trust.6 Although these qualities and skills are laudable, there has been relatively little consensus or research about their importance to effective OD practice. Two projects have sought to define, categorize, and prioritize the skills and knowledge required of OD practitioners. In the first effort, a broad group of well-known practitioners and researchers were asked to review and update a list of professional competencies. This survey resulted in a list of 187 statements in nine areas of OD practice, including entry, start-up, assessment and feedback, action planning, intervention, evaluation, adoption, separation, and general competencies.7 The statements ranged from “staying centered in the present, focusing on the ongoing process” and “understanding and explaining how diversity will affect the diagnosis of the culture” to “basing change on business strategy and business needs” and “being comfortable with quantum leaps, radical shifts, and paradigm changes.” Other items added to the list relate to international OD, large group interventions, and transorganization skills. To understand the relative importance of this long list, Worley and his colleagues collected data from 364 OD practitioners.8 The average respondent had about eight years of OD experience, a master's degree, and came from the United States. The results suggested an underlying structure to the list. Twenty-three competencies were generated that reflected both the skills and knowledge necessary to conduct planned change processes and the individual characteristics necessary to be an effective OD practitioner. Similar to other lists, the competencies included the ability to evaluate change, work with large-scale change efforts, create implementation plans, and manage diversity. One of the more surprising results, however, was the emergence of “self mastery” as the most important competence. The results supported the long-held belief that good OD practitioners know themselves and that such knowledge forms the basis of effective practice. The second project, sponsored by the Organization Development and Change Division of the Academy of Management,9 sought to develop a list of competencies to guide curriculum development in graduate OD programs. More than 40 OD practitioners and researchers worked to develop the two competency lists shown in Table 3.1. First, foundation competencies are oriented toward descriptions of an existing system. They include knowledge from organization behavior, psychology, group dynamics, management and organization theory, research methods, and business practices. Second, core competencies are aimed at how systems change over time. They include knowledge of organization design, organization research, system dynamics, OD history, and theories and models for change; they also involve the skills needed to manage the consulting process, to analyze and diagnose systems, to design and choose interventions, to facilitate processes, to develop clients' capability to manage their own change, and to evaluate organization change. The information in Table 3.1 applies primarily to people specializing in OD as a profession. For them, possessing the listed knowledge and skills seems reasonable, especially in light of the growing diversity and complexity of interventions in OD. Gaining competence in those areas may take considerable time and effort, and it is questionable whether the other two types of OD practitioners—managers and specialists in related fields—also need that full range of skills and knowledge. It seems more reasonable to suggest that some subset of the items listed in Table 3.1should apply to all OD practitioners, whether they are OD professionals, managers, or related specialists. Those items would constitute the practitioner's basic skills and knowledge. Beyond that background, the three types of OD practitioners likely would differ in areas of concentration. OD professionals would extend their breadth of skills across the remaining categories in Table 3.1; managers would focus on the functional knowledge of business areas; and related specialists would concentrate on skills in their respective areas. Based on the data in Table 3.1 and the other studies available, all OD practitioners should have the following basic skills and knowledge to be effective. 3-2a Intrapersonal Skills or “Self-Management” Competence Despite the growing knowledge base and sophistication of the field, organization development is still a human craft. As the primary instrument of diagnosis and change, practitioners often must process complex, ambiguous information and make informed judgments about its relevance to organizational issues. The core competency of analysis and diagnosis listed in Table 3.1 includes the ability to inquire into one's self, and as noted above, it remains one of the cornerstone skills in OD.10 Practitioners must have the personal centering to know their own values, feelings, and purposes as well as the integrity to behave responsibly in a helping relationship with others. Bob Tannenbaum, one of the founders of OD, argued that self-knowledge is the most central ingredient in OD practice and suggested that practitioners are becoming too enamored with skills and techniques.11 There are data to support his view. A study of 416 OD practitioners found that 47% agreed with the statement, “Many of the new entrants into the field have little understanding of or appreciation for the history or values underlying the field.”12 Because OD is a highly uncertain process requiring constant adjustment and innovation, practitioners must have active learning skills and a reasonable balance between their rational and emotional sides. Finally, OD practice can be highly stressful and can lead to early burnout, so practitioners need to know how to manage their own stress. TABLE 3.1 Knowledge and Skill Requirements of OD Practitioners 3-2b Interpersonal Skills Practitioners must create and maintain effective relationships with individuals and groups within the organization and help them gain the competence necessary to solve their own problems. Table 3.1 identifies group dynamics, comparative cultural perspectives, and business functions as foundation knowledge, and managing the consulting process and facilitation as core skills. All of these interpersonal competencies promote effective helping relationships. Such relationships start with a grasp of the organization's perspective and require listening to members' perceptions and feelings to understand how they see themselves and the organization—a process called “active listening.” This understanding provides a starting point for joint diagnosis and problem solving. Practitioners must establish trust and rapport with organization members so that they can share pertinent information and work effectively together. This requires being able to converse in members' own language and to give and receive feedback about how the relationship is progressing. To help members learn new skills and behaviors, practitioners must serve as role models of what is expected. They must act in ways that are credible to organization members and provide them with the counseling and coaching necessary to develop and change. Because the helping relationship is jointly determined, practitioners need to be able to negotiate an acceptable role and to manage changing expectations and demands. 3-2c General Consultation Skills Table 3.1 identifies the ability to manage the consulting process and the ability to design interventions as core competencies that all OD practitioners should possess. OD starts with diagnosing an organization or department to understand its current functioning and to discover areas for further development. OD practitioners need to know how to carry out an effective diagnosis, at least at a rudimentary level. They should know how to engage organization members in diagnosis, how to help them ask the right questions, and how to collect and analyze information. A manager, for example, should be able to work with subordinates to determine jointly the organization's or department's strengths or problems. The manager should know basic diagnostic questions (see Chapter 5), some methods for gathering information, such as interviews or surveys, and some techniques for analyzing it, such as force-field analysis or statistical means and distributions (see Chapter 6). In addition to diagnosis, OD practitioners should know how to design and execute an intervention. They need to be able to define an action plan and to gain commitment to the program. They also need to know how to tailor the intervention to the situation, using information about how the change is progressing to guide implementation (see Chapter 9). For example, managers should be ab ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Final Answer

Attached.

Running Head: CREATING CHANGE IN AN ORGANIZATION

Creating Change in an Organization
Case Study on General Motors
Name
Instructor
Institutional Affiliation
Date

1

CREATING CHANGE IN AN ORGANIZATION

2

Company Introduction
General Motors commonly known as GM is an American multinational corporation that
designs and manufactures automotive and car engines. The company also distributes and sells
motor vehicle and motor vehicle accessories throughout the world. GM was founded 1908 by
William C. Durant and Charles Stewart, and it is headquartered in Detroit, Michigan (GM.com,
2017). Currently, the company designs and manufactures ten different motor vehicle brands
under the GM corporate umbrella. Some of the common car brands developed and manufactured
by GM includes Cadillac, Chevrolet, Holden, Wuling, Jiefang among other luxurious car brands
in the market. General Motors is listed under the fortune 500 companies and operates in the
security market under the corporate trade symbol of GM (GM.com, 2017). Currently; GM
employs over 25,000 employees from six different continents. The company operates in 23
different countries across the world, and it is committed to ensuring diversity within its
workforce. For this reason, GM is considered one of the most diverse companies that are focused
on treating it employees and customers with respect, appreciating their customers by ensuring
that they design and manufacture brands that meet the emerging needs and demands of their
clients (GM.com, 2017).
Type of change experienced
Organizational change can sometimes become very cumbersome to the company since it
demands acceptance from every stakeholder within the organization. Corporate leaders have the
responsibility of convincing employees and other important stakeholders of the company on the
need for change. At General, Motors change was inevitable after the economic crisis of 20082009 (Cummings & Worley, 2014). The company suffered a great deal during the financial

CREATING CHANGE IN AN ORGANIZATION

3

crisis, and this prompted the company to change its operational procedures. To gain strong
momentum in the industry, GM has undergone several structural shifts in the industry. It is
imperative to note that change can take many forms within the company and depend on the
company, change can be predetermined, or it may come automatically. The type of change that
any manufacturing company can undergo includes shifts in the business management style,
operational procedures, branding, employee relationship and community interaction. In this case,
GM focused on changes in its management style and branding as a way of gaining economic
momentum and competitive advantage within the market (Cummings & Worley, 2014). GM
needed to refurbish and rebrand to become more competitive within the industry.
General Motors also needed to change its management style to move away from the
traditional management style that the company has always been applying. To ensure effective
implementation of these two changes, the entire workforce had to recognize the need for the
company to rebrand and change its management style. It is important to understand that
acknowledging the need for change is the first step to implementing change. The entire
workforce at GM recognized and accepted the need to modify the company brands and
management style to match the market standards. The industry had started becoming very
competitive and this r...

RyanTopTutor (21528)
New York University

Anonymous
The tutor was pretty knowledgeable, efficient and polite. Great service!

Anonymous
Heard about Studypool for a while and finally tried it. Glad I did caus this was really helpful.

Anonymous
Just what I needed… fantastic!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4
Similar Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors