Change management:

Change management is an approach to shifting/transitioning individuals, teams, and organizations from a current state to a desired future state. It is an organizational process aimed at helping change stakeholders to accept and embrace changes in their business environment or [citation needed] individuals in their personal lives. In some project management contexts, change management refers to a project management process wherein changes to a project are formally introduced and approved.

Change management is a systematic approach to dealing with change, both from the perspective of an organization and on the individual level. A somewhat ambiguous term, change management has at least three different aspects, including: adapting to change, controlling change, and effecting change. A proactive approach to dealing with change is at the core of all three aspects. For an organization, change management means defining and implementing procedures and/or technologies to deal with changes in the business environment and to profit from changing opportunities. Successful adaptation to change is as crucial within an organization as it is in the natural world. Just like plants and animals, organizations and the individuals in them inevitably encounter changing conditions that they are powerless to control. The more effectively you deal with change, the more likely you are to thrive. Adaptation might involve establishing a structured methodology for responding to changes in the business environment (such as a fluctuation in the economy, or a threat from a competitor) or establishing coping mechanisms for responding to changes in the workplace (such as new policies, or technologies).

History of change management:

Linda Ackerman Anderson, co-author of Beyond Change Management, described how in the late 1980s and early 1990s top leaders were growing dissatisfied with the failures of creating and implementing changes in a top-down fashion. They created the role of the change leader to take responsibility for the people side of the change. The first "State of the Change Management Industry" [4] report in the Consultants News was published in February 1994. McKinsey consultant Julien Phillips first published a change management model in 1982 in the journal Human Resource Management, though it took a decade for his change management peers to [5] catch up with him. Marshak credits the big 6 accounting firms and management consulting firms with creating the change management industry when they branded their reengineering services groups as change management services in the late 1980s
[6] [3]

Organizational change:
Managing organizational change will be more successful if you apply these simple principles. Achieving personal change will be more successful too if you use the same approach where relevant. Change management entails thoughtful planning and sensitive implementation, and above all, consultation with, and involvement of, the people affected by the changes. If you force change on people normally problems arise. Change must be realistic, achievable and measurable. These

aspects are especially relevant to managing personal change. Before starting organizational change, ask yourself: What do we want to achieve with this change, why, and how will we know that the change has been achieved? Who is affected by this change, and how will they react to it? How much of this change can we achieve ourselves, and what parts of the change do we need help with? These aspects also relate strongly to the management of personal as well as organizational change. Organizational change is a structured approach in an organization for ensuring that changes are smoothly and successfully implemented, and that the lasting benefits of change are achieved. In the modern business environment, organizations face rapid change like never before. Globalization and the constant innovation of technology result in a constantly evolving business environment. Recent phenomena such as social media and mobile adaptability have revolutionized business and the effect of this is an ever increasing need for change, and therefore change management. The growth in technology also has a secondary effect of increasing the availability and therefore accountability of knowledge. Easily accessible information has resulted in unprecedented scrutiny from stockholders and the media. Prying eyes and listening ears raise the stakes for failed business endeavors and increase the pressure on struggling executives. With the business environment experiencing so much change, organizations must then learn to become comfortable with change as well. Therefore, the ability to manage and adapt to organizational change is an essential ability required in the workplace today. Organizational change directly affects all departments from the entry level employee to senior management. With recent developments, such as social media marketing and smart phone applications, the entire company must learn how to handle these new changes to the organization. Whether it is the CMO determining how to incorporate social media, or the executive assistants representing themselves and their company responsibly online, change is occuring at an increasingly rapid pace. When determining which of the latest techniques or innovations to adopt, there are four major factors to be considered. 1. Levels, goals, and strategies, 2. Measurement system, 3. Sequence of steps, 4. Implementation and organizational change, Organizational change can have many faces. But regardless of the type, the critical aspect is a companys ability to win the buy-in of their organizations employees on the change. To effectively implement organizational change consists of a four-step process. First, recognizing the changes in the broader business environment. Second, developing the necessary adjustments for their companys needs. Third, training their employees on the appropriate changes. And fourth, winning the support of the employees with the persuasiveness of the appropriate adjustments. This four-step process is change management in its essence, and organizational change in practice.

Scope of change management:

The purpose of defining these change management areas is to ensure that there is a common understanding among readers. Tools or components of change management include:

Change management process

Readiness assessments Communication and communication planning Coaching and manager training for change management Training and employee training development Sponsor activities and sponsor roadmaps Resistance management Data collection, feedback analysis and corrective action Celebrating and recognizing success

Change management process:

Change management process The change management process is the sequence of steps or activities that a change management team or project leader would follow to apply change management to a project or change. Based on Prosci's research of the most effective and commonly applied change, most change management processes contain the following three phases: Phase 1 - Preparing for change (Preparation, assessment and strategy development) Phase 2 - Managing change (Detailed planning and change management implementation) Phase 3 - Reinforcing change (Data gathering, corrective action and recognition) These phases result in the following approach as shown below in Figure 1.

Examples of organizational change:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Mission changes Strategic changes Operational changes (including structural changes) Technological changes Changing the attitudes and behaviour of personnel.

As a multidisciplinary practice that has evolved as a result of scholarly research, Organizational Change Management should begin with a systematic diagnosis of the current situation in order to determine both the need for change and the capability to change. The objectives, content, and process of change should all be specified as part of a Change Management plan. Change Management processes may include creative marketing to enable communication between changing audiences, as well as deep social understanding about leaderships styles and group dynamics. As a visible track on transformation projects, Organizational Change Management aligns groups expectations, communicates, integrates teams and manages people training. It makes use of performance metrics, such as financial results, operational efficiency, leadership commitment, communication effectiveness, and the perceived need for change to design appropriate strategies, in order to avoid change failures or resolve troubled change projects. Successful change management is more likely to occur if the following are included:
[citation needed]

1 .Benefits management and realization to define measurable stakeholder aims, create a business case for their achievement (which should be continuously updated), and monitor assumptions, risks, dependencies, costs, return on investment, dis-benefits and cultural issues affecting the progress of the associated work. 2 .Effective Communications that informs various stakeholders of the reasons for the change (why?), the benefits of successful implementation (what is in it for us, and you) as well as the details of the change (when? where? who is involved? how much will it cost? etc.). 3 .Devise an effective education, training and/or skills upgrading scheme for the organization. 4 .Counter resistance from the employees of companies and align them to overall strategic direction of the organization. 5 .Provide personal counseling (if required) to alleviate any change-related fears. 6 .Monitoring of the implementation and fine-tuning as required.

Change Management Models: A Look at McKinsey's 7-S Model, Lewin's Change Management Model and Kotter's Eight Step Change Model:
The McKinsey 7-S Model was created by Tom Peters and Robert Waterman while they were working for McKinsey & Company, and by Richard Pascale and Anthony Athos at a meeting in 1978 (12Manage, 2007). The McKinsey 7-S model is a holistic approach to company organization, which collectively determines how the company will operate (12Manage, 2007). There are seven different factors that are a part of the model: shared values, strategy,

structure, systems, style, staff, and skills, which all work collectively to form the model (12Manage, 2007). Shared values are the center of the model because it is what the organization believes in and stands for, such as the mission of the company (12Manage, 2007). Strategy represents what the company plans to do react to any changes of its external surroundings (Recklies, 2007). The structure refers to the organizational structure of the company (12Manage, 2007). Systems are the portion of the model that represents "the procedures, processes and routines that characterize how the work should be done" (12Manage, 2007). Staff is quite obvious in the fact that it is a proper representation of who is employed by the organization and what they do within the organization (12Manage, 2007). Style signifies the organizational culture and management styles that are utilized within the organization (12Manage, 2007). Skills indicate the abilities and competencies of either the employees or the organization holistically (12Manage, 2007). There are many benefits and disadvantages of the McKinsey Model. There are four main benefits of the McKinsey 7-S Model: It is an effective way to diagnose and understand the organization; it is a guide for organizational change; it is a combination of both rational and emotional constituents; and all parts are interrelated, so all portions must be addressed and focused on (12Manage, 2007). One major disadvantage is that when one of the parts is changed, all parts change because they are all interrelated (12Manage, 2007). Another major disadvantage is that this model ignores differences (Morgan, n.d.). After five years many of the companies that used this model fell from the top (Morgan, n.d.). WHAT IS CHANGE MANAGEMENT? WHY IS IT IMPORTANT: Change is inevitable for individuals, organizations, and society, such as technology changes, values and attitudes change, goals and needs change, resource availability changes, laws change, political control of government changes (Heffron, 1968:152). Change management is a systematic approach to dealing with change, both from the perspective of an organization and on the individual level. For organization changes, we can define that change management as activities involved in (1) defining and instilling new values, attitudes, norms, and behaviours within an organization that support new ways of doing work and overcome resistance to change; (2) building consensus among customers and stakeholders on specific changes designed to better meet their needs; and (3) planning, testing, and implementing all aspects of the transition from one organizational structure or business process to another (GAO, 1998) For organizations, Demands for change are now constant impending.According to Champy and Nohria, there are three major drivers stirring organizational change faster than ever before are as follows: technology, government and Globalisation (Champy and Nohria, 1996). In the first place, technology affects organization structure, determines the nature of individual jobs, affects employee attitudes and behaviour, and controls the informal social structure within the organization and ultimately determines the organizations ability to accomplish its goals (Arthur,

1980: 212-214). Richard argued that technology is the knowledge, tools, techniques and action used to transform inputs into outputs (1983:159). The emergence of new technology can speed up or change the process of the transformation from inputs to outputs. For example in business new technology could greatly reduce the cost of production and enhance the profits; in public sector, according to the theory of Perrow that each of his four basic types of technology (Craft, Nonroutine, Routine and Engineering) was associated with a characteristic organizational structure, for instance, Routine technologies would lead to a machine bureaucratic structure (cited from Herron, 1968: 128). Therefore the appearance of new technology would result in the structure change in public organizations. Secondly, with the influence of good governance in public sector, the government on a worldwide basis began to rethink its role and position in the market, initiating deregulation, privatisation and devolution (Hamlin et al, 2001:14). Government itself has been changing for a long time. Take British Government for example from 1979-1995, because The Conservative Party believes in the pursuit of individualism and the freedom of choice rather than state provision or collectivism, and the culture of the private sector would lead to a more efficient and effective public sector, the British Government was committed to rolling back the frontiers of the state. Rhodes stated from 1979-1994 that the British governments programme can be broken down into six broad parts: introducing the minimalist state, reasserting political authority, extending regulation, audit and evaluation, reforming public sector management and structure democratising the public sector, and transforming the culture (1997:88). Finally, globalisation is widely recognized as a fundamental feature of our time. It has a far-reaching implication towards every aspect in our society. Globalisation has forced many national companies restructure their operations to reposition themselves in a broader and more open market place (Dawson, 2003:114). They have to base their strategies on complex and multi-faceted focuses instead of a single focus. In terms of public sector, globalisation has facilitated connection and coordination among governments and nongovernmental organizations and also caused major changes in the character of the modern state, such as the reinforcement of supraterritorial governance organizations, the increasing degree of interdependence among modern states, gaining the information-age advantages to process information, the growing role of governments as partners with the private sectors and the shift of the administrative state from a welfare state to a corporate state (Farazmand, 1999: 514515). From the above, it is apparent that there is an unavoidable trend that many organizations whether in public or private sectors are changing and becoming slimmer and flatter. Therefore change management is considerably important as a sort of systematic approach to deal with changes

Different drives of change management:

Change is a constant driving force in any organization, requiring the need to meet the unique needs of both the external and internal environment of the organization that the management needs to address. Thus, change management is an empirical approach to constant transitions involving the individuals who are part of the organization, the composition of teams, the organization structures, and the organizational culture in order to maintain its survival. Rothwell and Sullivan (2005) define change management as the continuous process of aligning organization in its market place and being able to do it in a more competitive manner and better than its competitors. There are many published literatures that deal with change management that are written by scholars, philosophers and writers as course books about change management in the attempt to identify specific processes that will help the management bring about change in an organization with better competence. This paper will present three case studies involving change in the management within particular companies or corporations as well to associate the common processes involved by which the management is able to handle the issues pertaining to different market conditions to different literatures available in change management. This paper should be able to identify the principal determinants of change in the organization and to identify the roles that leaders should assume in solving complex problems affecting their organization and how to bring about change more effectively.
Cummings and Worley (2009) emphasize that for change management to be effective, the management should be committed to organizational planning. This pertains to establishing direction by which the management is able to take the organization. If the organization wants to maintain its survival, they need to learn how to establish innovative ideas and learn to adapt to the constant changes affecting their existence in terms of profitability, market demands, and technology changes in order to be adept in keeping their competence against other competitors. Dubrin (2008) identifies the role of leaders or managers that in order to reach their objectives, they should be able to manage change almost daily as change has an impact to various aspect of the organization operation such as technology, organization structure, competition, human resource, and budgeting. Managers should hurdle the challenge of constant change demands almost everyday and must have a contingency plan in case anything goes wrong on the implementation of the change in the organization. Lastly, Kendrick (2009) provides his insight that in order to manage change better, it is vital to understand why the need for change while assessing the benefits for bringing change into the organization. Moreover, it is also as important to identify the impact of such change to the organization physical and human resources and prompt identification of the resources that could help assist in the implementation of change.

Based on various literatures, the effectiveness of bringing change in the management relies on the conscientious judgment of a leader, the ability to maximize all physical and human resources, recognizing the strengths and weakness in the areas of management, and to reinforce the employee skills and ability for better competency in their areas of expertise. Anderson & Anderson (2001) describe change as one requirement for continuous success, with competent leadership change being the most coveted executive skills. Among the main points in these author's insights regarding change management is the identification of driver's of change. They identify the various shifts in the external environment such as in the marketplace that require for more specific changes in the business market strategy, organizational designs, and the human aspect of domains involved in the organization involving cultures, behavior, and ways of thinking of members of the organization. The authors also explain about the need for leadership approaches to transformation in order to provide efficient change in management with a kind of leader who reacts to change more consciously than reactively. In support to these authors' point of view, Cook, Macaulay, and Coldicott (2004) also recognize the need to identify the driving forces and the restraining forces within the organization in order to address each one to be able to manage change in the organization more effectively. Most organizations struggle to implement change due to the inability or failure of the leaders to identify and attend to the cultural, mindset and behavioral factors that may result to resistance to change. In the case study involving the MCKINSEY, the change in leadership and abrupt changes in the company's services and policies caused tension among the employees. Campbell (2009) emphasizes the need for managers to develop their ability to communicate to their subordinates. In this manner does the manager is able to understand the predicaments of his support groups and to be able to act upon it. If the employees lack skills on a particular area, they can initiate to undergo training and seminars to upgrade their competency. With effective communication, the manager is able to explain better among the employees the need for change and its importance to the success of their organization. Being able to communicate the needs of the organization can help promote better understanding and can recruit the cooperation among the employees. Additionally, Kofman (2008) also advocates the need for the top management to shift from unconscious to conscious leadership that enables leaders to appreciate and understand better the cultural values, behaviors and beliefs of the individuals forming the organization. This is an integral area of management leadership that influences the members take the responsibility of being a part of the organization to adapt to change with the least resistance. Similarly, Kotter (1996) also identifies the major driving forces to change involving the more large-scale change in organization, the social and economic factors affecting change, and the globalization of market and competition. Moreover, he further presents the 8-stage process of creating change. These are the variable steps that will help management deal with the driving forces of change, how to assert the need for transformation despite the hardened status quo of its implementation. Among these valuable steps include the establishment of sense of urgency; creation of guiding coalition of groups to lead the change; developing a vision and strategy, communicate such vision; empower broad-based action; generate short-term wins; consolidate gains and produce more change; and anchor new approach to in the culture. (Kotter, 1996, pp. 22) In the case study involving the UPS, the management is able to

recognize the need to re-upgrade its technology in order to offer better and more competent services to their customers. Holland (2000) discusses that engineering change is one among the important areas of management consisting of assessing the physical needs of the organization. The management should find the need to re-organize and adopt improvement on their technology resource when such a need will help them position their market better for global competitiveness. Along with the introduction of technology change is the process of upgrading the skills of the employees in order to maximize the benefits of the newly adopted technology upgrade within their organization. Gustin (2008) supports the recognition of Kotter to communicate the change within the organization and implies communication as the core of the change management program. The changes itself must be communicated among the organization members in order to engage them to participate in the needed change through the process of definition, explanation, and progression. It is indeed a matter of communicating well to the people involved in the organization the need for change in order to win their commitment and cooperation as primary key players in organization to help in the attainment of the organization's success and progress. As in the case study involving the need for disseminating the new work process to at least 13 government departments from various regions, the activity of presenting the new changes in the regional department went smoothly because of the efforts given by the government to educate their employees in order to prepare them to future changes. Through the various workshops given to the member of the organization, each employee is able to understand their role in making the changes effective to the benefits of their institution. Change is endemic to all organizations operating in business markets. Although all organisations are in the process of changing the nature of these changes can vary enormously and so, we need a way to differentiate between the scale and scope of change experienced across different organizations, and within the same organization, over time. Evaluating the extent and depth of company change allows us to classify change from small developmental activities and routine modifications through to large-scale transformational initiatives. The former can involve improvements on current ways of doing things, of finetuning operations and implementing incremental changes on standard operating procedures. These changes typically work within the domain of the known, and often form an integral part of in-house monitoring and evaluation activities. Within Universities, course and programme evaluations may be used to further refine and develop curriculum design and teaching delivery methods as part of ongoing and regular operating procedures. At the other end of the spectrum lie the more radical transformational change initiatives that are generally large-scale and strategic in nature. A company may radically rethink their core activities, markets and purpose. The change may be proactive and involve considerable planning and adjustment over a number of years or it may be in response to a sudden shift in world economies and business market activities. The growth, development and change in the telecommunications and computer industries over the last two decades provide a number of examples of radical change (and the concomitant rise and fall of associated companies). Within the oil and gas sector, major multi-national companies like Shell and BP, are repositioning themselves as energy companies in a long-term strategy for corporate renewal.

Between large-scale transformational and small-scale developmental change programmes lie a raft of other change initiatives including branch and divisional restructuring, the reconfiguration of operations in the production of a given good or service, and the transition from some current state to a well-defined new state over a planned timeframe. Within these distinctions, the notion of the known and unknowable arises, especially with respect to the vulnerability and scope of the change in question. Much of the change management literature has focussed on large-scale transitions and transformational change initiatives that are referred to as first-order change. The velocity and vulnerability of such change initiatives draw them to the attention of academic researchers, the media and the business community; and yet, many of these change initiatives do not succeed in practice.Whether change is reactive, in response to certain unforeseen events or a proactive decision, can all influence the nature, direction and shape of change. In combining these two continua of small-scale to large-scale change, and reactive to proactive initiatives, we can categorise four different types of change. First, reactive change initiatives that seek to accommodate and adapt to unforeseen changes in, for example, local business market conditions. Second, developmental proactive change programmes that seek to improve on current ways of doing things over a planned period of time. Third, a radical response to an unexpected world event that necessitates a major repositioning of a company. Fourth, transformational proactive change in the radical reinvention of company strategy and business operations.