“The race for survival in this world is not to the strongest, but to the most

adaptive”
Jong-Yong Yun
CEO of Samsung

Introduction

The author aims to discuss about the management of change in an

organization that leaders and employees experiences paradoxical tension in this
paper. Human being (employees) react towards any change that take place whether
it is positive or negative in nature. Often at the beginning employees desires the
change that the organization is pursuing but at the same time they will opt to resist
the process of change in many form and ways. This natural reaction will put the
change agent in a delicate situation whether to follow through the planned changes
or abandoned it by succumbing to the internal pressure. Nevertheless, change is
requisite if the organization wants to stay relevant and competitive, leaving limited
choice for the change agent rather to steamroll his implementation plan. Therefore,
by identifying and strategically tackling each factor that promote resistance, a
change agent can be successful in achieving organizations policy.

What is organizational change?

Organizations have a tendency to change predominantly because of external

pressure rather than an internal desire or need to change. This external factor can
be from emergent of new competitor that seizing the substantial allotment of the
market, acquisition of the organization by bigger industry forcing change in company
direction, new invention and innovation that requires the organization to change
their business model, introduction of new legislation by the authority and any
uncertainty in economy and social condition locally or globally.
Any experienced organization will tend to be observing any sign of
forewarning externally or internally and swiftly make necessary adaptation in order
to survive in ever-changing external world and this trend is becoming a norm among
the industry players. In other words, competent organization is the one that
continuously makes change and be up-to-date with the external or internal
environment. As it is well defined that external forces for change derived from
outside of organization whereas internal forces come from inside the organization.
Predominantly external forces either present new opportunities for the organization
to seize and expand or otherwise lose out and collapse. The internal forces can be
in subtle or alarming sign that centralized with human resource problems and
managerial behaviour and decisions. More example (refer figure ) on external and
internal forces refer summary as follow (Kinicki & Fugate, 2018): -

Figure: External and Internal Forces for change

Therefore, organization change can broadly define as “the movement of an

organization away from its present state and toward some desired future state to
increase its efficiency and effectiveness." Its further requires the leaders and
managers to have balance act while improve existing processes but also respond to
new and volatile events (George, 2015). This shift from present state to desired
state will cause structural changes that challenges organizational goals and desired
outcomes, eventually affecting quality of work life as employees struggle to align
business changes with their own interests (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001).
Organizational change approaches can be viewed as transitional(adaptive)
change, transformational (radically innovative) change, or developmental
(innovative) change based on the degree of complexity, cost and uncertainty each
approaches causes (see figure ) (Kinicki & Fugate, 2018).

Transitional change reintroduces a familiar practice as small, gradual, even

incremental changes in people, policies, procedures, technology, culture, or
structures that is performed by management starting with a unit to entire
organizations. The downside of this approach is inability to achieve large scale
changes in organization but instead small scale improvement successfully
implemented focusing to their processes and procedures.
Transformational change introduces a practice new to the industry and
focuses towards radical shifts in underlying assumptions, deep seated mind-sets,
culture, strategy, or other significant organizational paradigms which is regarded as
extreme and revolutionary in nature. It leads to a new identity of the considered
organization causing deep structural i.e. mergers, acquisitions, consolidations, and
divestiture of operating units and cultural change which is regarded as less tangible
and the hardest most to change.
Developmental change introduces a practice that is new to the organization
and focuses to organization philosophy of continuous growth and development that
leads to increasing competitive advantage through dynamic stability (Wrzesniewski
& Dutton, 2001).

Figure : Generic typology of organizational change

Hence the organization will constantly scan their internal and external
environments to establish work settings that encourage and reward individual
innovation, growth, and development, while avoiding radical, infrequent yet
disruptive large-scale change.

Who is Change Agent?

‘Change Agent’ a term that is widely used to describe a person or group that
facilitates change through interventions in group and organizations which has its
roots in the field of organizational development. At an earlier time, change agent
was considered as a person who facilitate positive learning, change, and
development (Sullivan, 2005).

Later Cumming and Worley (2005) elaborated that a change agent “as a
person who make an effort to change some aspect of an organization or an
environment. Change agents can be someone from inside an organization and
identified as an internal consultant, or they may come from outside an organization,
in which they are referred as an external consultant.” This identified person or group
will be trained to acquire needed skill to handle change in the organization.

Sullivan, (2012) further add that a change agent is an individual who has
formal or informal legitimate power and whose purpose is to direct and guide change
promoting a vision and rationale for the change. Often time an individual that play
the role of leader will take the charge or responsibility. Researcher have realized
that often the behaviour of the leaders can successfully influence staff action.
Hence as change agent i.e. leaders and managers are responsible for change
strategy, implementation, and monitoring (Kanter, Stein, & Jick, 1992).

Recently, Peter Drucker a has put forward a new approach in defining the
change agent and brought the term to a new level. He said that we can already
foresee the future is taking shape in unpredicted way. Hence to survive and succeed,
organizations will have to become the change agents (Sullivan W. J., 2005). For
example, Nokia was the leading cell phone maker but the lost it leads to Apple,
Motorola and Samsung when it resisted change in producing more competitive cell
phone model which the other players did. Therefore, failure to change swiftly and
adaptive towards changing environment is catastrophic. (Daft, 2010)
 In the end, leaders in the organization need to play central and persistence
role in facing the challenge of managing changes, and acquiring effective leadership
skill become vital and the organization need to constantly backing the changes in
order to remain competitive (Gilley, McMillan, & Gilley, 2009). For a large
organization engaging with external change agent such as private consultant is
preferred because of the fact this group or individual are not bounded by
organization culture, politics, or traditions. These allows them to bring a new
perspective to the situation and challenge the status quo. However, this may not be
the case since this external change agent lacks in grasping organizations history,
core business and their personnel’s (Lunenburg, 2010).

Thus, to pacify the internal and external resistance, author as change agent
will be team up with internal coordinator that is know well the organization related
information thoroughly and make the change possible.

What is type and role of Change Agent?

Recent few studies have explored and identified different type of change
agent based on their attribute and approaches in implementing the change. There
are four different type of change agents (table 1) i.e. Outside Pressure type,
People Change Technology type, Analysis for the Top, and Organization
Development.

No Type of Change Agent Description

1. Outside Pressure Type  work to change systems from outside the
organization
 not members of the company
 use various pressure tactics to achieve their
objective - mass demonstrations, civil
disobedience, and violence
 offer options that are more radical
2. People Change Technology  focuses more towards individual
Type  concerned with employee morale and
motivation, including absenteeism,
turnover, and the quality of work
performed
 methods used include job enrichment, goal
setting, and behaviour modification
  based on notions that individuals change
their behaviour, the organization will also
change
3. Analysis for the Top Type  focuses on changing the organizational
structure to improve output and efficiency
 uses operations research, systems analysis,
policy studies, and other forms of analytical
approaches
 focuses on organization's structure or
technology (introducing computerized
information-processing systems)
4. Organization Development  focuses towards internal processes such as
Type intergroup relations, communication, and
decision making
 intervention strategy is "cultural change
approach,"
 grew out from such areas as sensitivity
training, team building, and survey
feedback
(Lunenburg, 2010)
Table 1: Type of Change Agent

Based on several previous research many change agents adopt the role of
analysis for the top and organization development type when implementing changes
in organization. Nonetheless the author will adopt people change technology type it
is preferred by employees with less resistances.
 Author also understand that change agent regardless whether internal or
external agent plays three distinctive roles i.e. consultant, trainer and researcher
(diagram 1).

Consultant
connects employees with data
from outside the organization
or generate data from within
the organization and analyse
it to find solutions for
problems

Trainer
facilitates organization
members derive
implications for action
from the present data
and provide organization
members with a new set
of skills—the ability to
retrieve, translate, and
use new data to solve
future problems
Researcher
trains organization
members in the skills
needed for valid
evaluation of the
effectiveness of action
plans that have been
implemented will design
an evaluation
component that can be
used in solving not only
the current problem but
also future problems

Diagram 1: Role of Change Agent

Author anticipate that victory of any change effort depends heavily on the
quality and workability of the relationship between the change agent and the key
decision makers within the organization (Lunenburg, 2010). By applying the above
mentioned role and type, author as a change agent will be able to produce balancing
act and excite the whole organization towards new desired direction change.

Resistance to change, employee’s reasoning?

Identifying the reasons for the resistance is complicated since it can take
many shapes and looks. In spite of the fact that change is executed for positive
reasons such as adjusting to volatile environment conditions and enduring
competitive, employees repeatedly react to change efforts negatively and resist
change. Leaders and manager have the tendency to imply narrow view that
resistance is a way employee pursuing their own agenda without taking in
consideration about the future of the organizations. Therefore, solely putting the
blame on the individual employee perspective. But based recent development,
change experts have put forward a more complex, dynamic and system approach to
ascertain resistance. This in other hand emphasizes resistance is triggered by an
interaction between change recipients, change agents, and the relationships
between the two (Kinicki & Fugate, 2018).
The following are the common reasons for resistance to change within
organizations among others are (Zafar & Naveed, 2014): -
1. Lack of Communication
employees are not communicated properly why change is implement
in organization, how it will work, what approaches will use, therefore
the employee will think that their status quo will also be changed

2. Unaware of change objectives

employees are unaware about the change objectives or management
fails to define the objectives of change

3. Knowledge and skill obsolescence

employees are lacking of knowledge or skill for the change
implementation and unfamiliar about the technical issue of the
change or have no experience about the scope of change and
complexity

4. Organizational structure
unsupportive organizational structure, poor management problems
and fails to define the hierarchy level in organization for change
implementation

5. Limited resources
Inadequate resources may lead to abandon the desired changes

One of the common organizational change approach are scaling down the
organizational structure and reducing the number of employee. This approach will
not favour the employee, because some of them will be laid off and the retained
one will be required to absorb the current workload including any new additional
task. Furthermore, there will be less promotional opportunity made available which
will not be taken lightly by the employees. Under such situation their performance
will be affected and sense of revolt will be manifest throughout the organization if
not cleverly tackle by the leaders and managers.
In some organization resistance can be translated as declining in level of
creativity, commitment, performance and job satisfaction. In long run if this issue
allowed to persist then organization will suffer badly. All this factor very much
related to how good the leaders (change agent) able to maintain and provide the
environment which is conducive for the employees (Chen, Hou, & Fan, 2009). If the
employees sensed the workplace atmosphere is high degree of challenge,
involvement and trust, they feel motivated and committed to making contributions.
However, if employees feel the environment is vague, low tolerance of uncertainty,
less freedom and idea time for work, they become hesitate to take risk, and thus
less motivated and committed to making contributions (Isken et al. 2001).
Therefore, we can arrive to a conclusion that organizational change can
affect practically all aspect of the organizational operations i.e.: - organizational
structure, culture, strategies, control systems, groups and teams, and human
resource management system. This also include critical organizational processes
such as communication, motivation, and leadership (George, 2015).

As the author understand the factors that constitute resistance, a action

plane for change in organization will include strategies to facilitate and minimise
the resistance by adopting techniques and suggestion that is put forward by the
researchers.

How author as change agent can execute organizational change?

Change agent can utilise several approaches to manage change while able to
minimizes resistance in the organization. Many change experts have developed
models that can be used to better understand the change and its relation to
organizations. In generality most change experts agreed upon that awareness on
need for change is a most fundamental and to certain extend crucial step in ensuring
change kick-start in desired manner and achieve intended future for the
organization. Then a thorough analysis of current situation need to done before start
implementing the planned changed.
The success in implementing the change is depending on individual
involvement in working together in realising the change. For example, involvement
of HR professional, who is familiar with the organizational culture and employee’s
behaviour can contribute to the success of the planned change. Therefore, three
commonly used change model will be further discussed as author chooses this model
to implement the change instead many other models. The reason being this models
have shown evident successfully applied in organizational change because of its
simplicity, that’s make easy to understand and implement.

Lewin’s 3 Step Model

Lewin’s 3 step model for change is one of the most important theories in
understanding the organizational change. It was developed by Kurt Lewis a German-
American psychologist in 1947. Lewin suggested that change take place only because
of two different forces, the internal force (individual personal needs) and external
force induced or imposed by the environment. His ideology was to find a way to
make change permanent and at the same time prevent individual employees revert
back to their old habit but sticking to new habits (Mills, Dye, & Mills, 2009). There
3-step model – unfreeze, change, re-freeze is show as framework below:
Figure: Lewin’s framework for change

Referring to figure above unfreeze is the stage whereby the organization

realizes the change is imperative therefore status quo need to be dismantled and
new way of doing business installed. At this stage resistance need to be managed by
applying solution swiftly to reduce the force, change the attitude and make people
understand on the change and obtain their supports. (Mills, Dye, & Mills, 2009)
Successfully adopting unfreeze stage, then the organization can start to move
forward to desired and agreed upon state. All individual employees within the
organization start to act according they given trust towards desired goal. They will
start executing change initiative and understand the benefit of change. The
organization need to ensure that during this stage to promote effecting
communication within all level of people. Organization also need to support
facilitate the employees to embrace new way of working and learn new values,
attitudes and behaviours. All problem that may arise during this stage shall be
identified and develop action plan to manage it effectively. (Mills, Dye, & Mills,
2009)
The final stage proposed by Lewis is re-freeze is very crucial whereby people
that made the change in their working and culture shall not be allowed to revert
back to old habits. Instead rewards and acknowledgement shall be used to encourage
and reinforce the changes. Organizations all shall keep monitoring the sign of
problem arising and tackle it as soon as possible if arises. (Mills, Dye, & Mills, 2009)
But the author does aware that this model also comes its weaknesses. One of the
setback back for this Lewis 3 – step module is it does not discuss ways that leaders
can deal with people who are resistant to changes and are reluctant to change their
positioning. It presumes that via an adequate amount of motivation and
encouragement people tend to toe the line, and this is not always the case. This
model is logical and promising, but carrying out it may result the way it intended,
and list of ways to overcome that was not given.

Kotter’s Eight-step plan

Using Lewis 3-step model, John Kotter developed a comprehensive model for
implementing change in organizations. He firstly analyses all the mistake and wrong
approaches that leaders and managers commit while implementing change in
organization. Based on the Kotter created eight sequential steps to overcome these
problems as shown in the list below: (Robbins & Judge, 2018)
1. Creating a Sense of Urgency
Establish a sense of urgency by creating a compelling reason for why
change is needed.
2. Building a Core Coalition
Form a coalition with enough power to lead the change.
3. Developing a Strategic Vision
Create a new vision to direct the change and strategies for achieving
the vision.
4. Involving Everyone in the plan
Communicate the vision throughout the organization.
5. Reducing Obstacles
Empower others to act on the vision by removing barriers to change
and encouraging risk taking and creative problem solving.
6. Focusing on Short-term Wins
 Plan for, create, and reward short-term “wins” that move the
organization toward the new vision.
7. Keeping the Momentum Going
Consolidate improvements, reassess changes, and make necessary
adjustments in the new programs.
8. Add some Stability
Reinforce the changes by demonstrating the relationship between new
behaviours and organizational success.

If the both Lewis and Kotter model analysed closely, a conclusion can be made
that Kotter’s first four steps more or less resembles Lewin’s “unfreezing” stage.
Steps 5 to 7 represent “change,” and the step 8 works on “refreezing.” In conclusion
author believes that Kotter’s 8 step has given better understanding on what and how
the leaders and managers can tackle issue while implementing change while it was
lacking in Lewis 3-step approaches. This model is formulated for leading change, not
managing it thus it’s the organisation top management obligation to provide the
required support for change to succeed. Therefore, author agrees that this model
serves as good reference guide and steer the organization in finding their own steps
on their change initiatives, making it more appropriate for their desires. (Blomqvist,
2017)

ADKAR Model

This model is developed by Jeff Hiatt (founder of Prosci). ADKAR is an

acronym that is based on five building blocks that bring about successful change that
an individual in an organisation must achieve for change to be successful: Awareness,
Desire, Knowledge, Ability and Reinforcement. Author accept the fact once ADKAR
employed to organizational change, this model permits leaders and change
management teams to focus their activities on what will coerce individual change
and produce organizational results collectively. (www.prosci.com, 2019)
 The ADKAR Model outlines an individual’s successful journey through change.
Each step of the model naturally aligns to typical activities associated with change
management and articulates clear goals for these activities

Awareness
As a first step, it focuses on individual to see the problems in the old ways of
doing things and understands what can be the consequence if the change does not
happen. This is because most of resistance to change arises due to the fact lack of
awareness among the people why is being made and needed. If all this information
is made available and communicated, resistance can be managed.

Desire
Once the individual has awareness on the needed change, nevertheless the
obstacle will be to make them have desire towards the changes planned. A person
who don’t have may have the knowledge why the change is needed but may not
support the change initiatives. This is due to the fact the organization doesn’t have
or have narrow grip on individual’s choice. Therefore, by paying more attention to
the factor’s that would result in intended desire to change is crucial and important
for the organization to make ADKAR model a successful venture.

Knowledge
The individual needs to understand and knows how to execute the change,
Therefore, providing them with training, education on the needed new skills,
information on the new processes, systems and tools and information on the new
roles and responsibilities that the change will bring, the individual then can engage
in transformation process.

Ability
Ability offers the individuals how to execute the change and reach the desired
outcome. Once an individual has the knowledge and aware and desires to make the
change, they need to have the ability to make the changes. To achieve success in
this step organisations, need to give time to the employees by providing with
sufficient coaching and training and allows constant feedback both ways.
Reinforcement
Final and crucial step is to maintaining the change that have taken place. To
make change stay and preventing the individuals revert to their old habits needs
time. Therefore, strong reinforcement efforts needed in order to make individuals
stick to the change initiatives until its sustained and become part of organisational
culture.

Author realizes that this model is straightforward to implement in any change

initiative and easily analysed with regards to what and where constitute to failing in
a change process. The ADKAR model establishes a new way of thinking of change and
it focuses on the individual, that is the key of any change initiative. If leader’s choses
a macro-level change or were not exactly sure of how deep they needed to go with
transitions, this method would probably not get the job done because it is built for
incremental change and has a narrow focus.

The Conclusion: Managing the paradox in change management

Organization and change must be approached as having implicit opposite

tendencies in nature. With this view organizational change or transformation can be
regards as a natural that will occur on their own volition. Therefore, its
acknowledges the presence of paradoxical and dualities in organizational change
approaches. Then only the tension or resistance caused by the contradictions
paradox can be addressed by the change agent successfully. Many change
management experts have proposed couple of step or approaches that can be
implemented in handle situations of paradox or duality by embracing, resolving,
patching and balancing. Among this four approaches balancing is seen as appropriate
in most situation because its required action to manage both sides of the opposing
force or resistance at the same time. So here the change agent and organization
need to devise an action plan that integrate for both paradoxical situations instead
choosing side or focus on one plan that is though is right thing to do to achieved
desired outcomes for the organization. Therefore, there will be constant process
engaging in finding balance point (a dynamic equilibrium) along with shifting
priorities over time. Leaders and managers holistically acknowledges the
significance of balancing paradoxical factors are more effective, especially in
generating adaptive and creative behaviours in those they are managing.