Leadership in UK Hospitality Change

Part A

Due to the varying macro and micro environmental facets in United Kingdom hospitality industry to adapt or renew the fundamental structures, organisational culture, systems and management actions. The emergence of international competition, development of information technology and social dynamics can be perceived to be essential factors to be considered when trying to implement change or organisational transformation. The process of implementing organisational change is among the leadership challenges experienced in any company or industry. The success of transformation majorly relies on the leadership of an entity. It is possible to bring about meaningful change if an organisation has credible and qualified leaders to take charge of this process. Strategic leadership is useful for systematic premeditated and controlled transition. Burns, Diamond-Vaught, and Bauman (2015) argued that when dealing with organisational change in direction, the most important value to consider is ethical values that are majorly influenced by both the actions of the leader and final results of the change initiative. The authors continue by arguing that we are in a time where leaders have been given space to put their egos and self-interest ahead of the interests of other individuals, which is always considered to have adverse consequences on the organisations. To prevent such situations, leaders should embrace the essence of ethical dimensions to ensure that both managers and staffs work in the interest of the majority rather than the interest of a few people. Whitworth and Chiu (2015, p. 134) contended that for a leader to navigate through organisational changes and challenges thereof the difference in a productive transformation begins with moving away from looking at how changes and the subsequent process affects the daily running of the organisation. An informative way of analysing the possible effects of change and change management affects what people do, is by looking at people’s routine, how people perceive each other and the entity as whole. This article will look at processes re-designing as a change leadership problem in the UK hospitality industry. Process re-designing aims at improving productivity and efficacy in a company. Working in a restaurant I was able to experience the leadership challenges associated with process re-designing

Neves and Schyns (2018, p. 139) recommended that leaders should understand some fundamental elements in the change process, majorly, that organizational transformations cannot be treated as independent and isolated occurrences, and that all changes cannot be perceived as top priority, there must be a list of activities to be undertaken starting from the most important one to least important one. Secondly, leaders should learn to adopt a more strategic view of the progressions of changes. Lastly, no matter how strategic and calculated leaders are, organisational change is likely to affect or benefit the external and the internal environment of a business. The main challenges challenge of process re-designing is expected to be the increase exponentially as the organisational context becomes more turbulent. In the internal environment not, everyone will react the same to change (some will embrace, while some will resist the changes. In the external environment, organisational change is likely to spur mixed reactions among stakeholders such as customers, suppliers and shareholders with an organisation. Therefore, leaders should carefully measure their role in conducting various change initiatives.

Part B

How the organisation Approached Process Redesign

From experience, various strategies were used by the food chain management to initiate the process redesign. These strategies include;

Organizational Survey

Marshall, Coleman, and Reason (2017) contended that in most cases, managers would assume that the existing state of affair is clear and that they have an idea of how the staff fit into the organisational culture and programs. In most cases, such assumptions usually are not right. Therefore, if company decides to work on-premises, it might find itself in a dilemma. Consequently, an organization must survey to identify the interests of its staffs, the cultural diversification index in the organisation, and how such elements can be harmonised to achieve a successful transition. When implementing process re-design, the company took time to understand their staffs, their limits and their capabilities, as well as the exact nature of their talents and other processes. The information helped in unveiling the leading cause of the current inadequacies, which helped in resolving the risk of repeating the same mistakes in the previous system after the implementation process. By conducting a comparison between the baseline and the starting point with the strategic goals of the company, leaders were able to have a comprehensive understanding of the organisation’s current weakness, and what they should add to fill the existing gaps

Use of Influential leaders

The most fundamental role that was taken by leaders was to act as sponsors or rather the champion of the whole process. The organisational leaders helped to keep the ambition alive and would not let the drive to achieve the needed change die due to lack of attention or delayed schedules. They made sure that all activities were at par with the plan and all departments were also in tandem with each other. Besides, being champions these leaders were also role models to the company. Naturally, employees would watch leaders for consistency, and their subsequent actions to assess whether they believed in the change propagated or not (Komives 2016). In cases, where leaders are adamant about adopting the change, employees are also likely not to embrace it, but the fact that influential leaders were able to push for this drive, other employees also bandwagon with the trend. Leaders also made determining decisions when it came crucial verdicts such as allocating duties to people, the needed budgets, and the necessary tools to assemble. Conger (2015, p. 2) stated that leaders have to approve or disapprove a project. When advocating for such changes, leaders ought to leverage their decision-making authority and decide on the options that will be best for the initiative. Leaders also helped in setting priorities that supported changes. Generally, the use of influential leaders to drive process redesign proved to be beneficial to the whole process especially in terms of mobilising people and resources.

Inclusion

In any process employees need to be included, and most importantly, their values ought to be understood, recognised and respected. Employees need to feel that their ideas are heard. Such conditions create a strong motivation and momentum for employees to adhere to any organisational processes and can also derive satisfaction from the whole process. It is a significant challenge working with people of different cultures, and it is even more challenging to make them conform to systematic changes, especially when others have specific value and systems that are different from the dominant culture. Such differences can lead to more resistance to organisational changes because other people might not understand what the change is all about. For instance, western values are more rational and value elements that would lead to attaining specific benefits. The culture values individualism and competition, while contrary to other cultures that value a sense of community, common sharing and patience. Due to the complexities in learning the cultures of an organisation, it is essential for one to continuously be open on differences and consult with employees in the process transforming the organisation. Such strategies proved to be useful for the organisation, primarily because some of the organisation’s employees are from different cultures, that subscribe to different ideologies. A lesson that was learnt from this strategy, that any change processes that are not endorsed by the employees might not be successful, bearing in mind that employees are essential drivers in the process

A value system that is focused on customer and stakeholder (external environment) satisfaction

Any organisational change aims at improving the outcomes within the organisation, therefore, the process re-designing process also aimed at improving the results in various sectors, including customer service. Therefore, to succeed in the transitional process, the organisation established a value system that majorly focused on external factors such as customers and other stakeholders. The value system helped in mobilising external partners to support the program. Leopold and Kaltenecker (2015) advised leaders always to involve external partners in such a process, since the organisation exists because of them. For instance, a change that is not embraced by clients is likely to lead loss of customers, which ultimately leads to the company losing its revenue base, while in case they lose their shareholders, then it means that they have lost their funding base. Therefore, to avoid such losses in the dynamics of process changes, it necessary to create a value system that is focused on satisfying the needs of clients and shareholders. Kerber and Buono (2018, p.55) stated that support from the external environment is an indicator that the desired organisational change will be successful. Hence, it can be concluded that the organisation’s decision to create a value system that is focused on customer and stakeholder satisfaction was effectively in delivering a new organisational process.

Formulation of the right metrics to measure short- and long-term success

Essentially no leader can claim to manage an organisation without the right metrics of measuring organisational success. To evaluate the short- and long-term success, managers established new parameters that focused on how the changes that are being pursued are changing the organisation both in the short and long term. Straightforward key performance indicators (KPIs) are fundamental in this process; such an approach helps the company asses the impact of the process re-designing and stop in case they notice early signs of disruption. Therefore, the company established a well-stipulated metrics that were used to asses the impact of the transition after every four months (quarterly).

Measures to manage transition risks

A plan to manage the unforeseen risks might prevent an organisation from falling into trap. Usually, every organisational redesign contains certain risks like business interruptions, employee defection, lack of personal engagement, and poor implementation. The company mitigated the looming risk by identifying essential risks early on and monitored them well after the redesign went live. Keep track of financial, operational and commercial metrics during a design transition helped to check on the reactions of staffs and the external partners during the process. A clear and straight forward accountability for the development and execution of risk management strategies were also vital for the success of the whole project. Conclusively, it can be said that the organisation took the right processes and procedures in ensuring the change process was attained. The organisation was not perfect in its execution plan, but the implemented strategies were effective in relations to desired objectives.

Part C

From a personal perspective, if presented with similar challenges as a leader, I will adhere to the following strategies;

The balance between people-oriented leadership and task focus

A study conducted by Grint, Jones, Holt, and Storey (2016, p. 3) revealed that successful leaders deploy management styles that fit the critical the crucial situational factors and partake leadership tasks in a balanced and rational way. Therefore, when trying to realise change, such strategies are necessary especially when trying to avoid conflicts. Most leaders have a prevalent misconception that if they apply people-oriented management, they will not be able to deliver the required output since it is somehow inefficient to focus on individuals if something needs to be delivered. Kelan and Wratil (2018, p. 9) stated that task-oriented managers are more focused on the objectives of the organisation and the performance of employees in attaining their set goals, with an inclination towards a management style which is objective but delivers productivity and efficacy. The only problem with adopting a task-oriented leadership methodology is that it ignores the human component in the change progression which can lead to high turnover and diminished staff morale. Contrary people-oriented managers are perceived to be considerate and thoughtful towards their staffs, pays attention to the need of employees, build their capacity and focus on their needs. People-focused leadership leads to higher employee fulfilment, but there are several inquiries over its efficacy. Therefore, a balance between these two methodologies would be useful in leading the organisation towards the desired change. With such considerations, most people will advocate for a people-oriented approach. However, the truth is that building relationships for the sake of connecting with people will not help the organisation to achieve its objectives. Having a conducive environment where everyone is happy, but the organisation is not attaining its goals will not deliver shareholder value, and might prove to be disastrous in the long run. However, finding an approach that balances between task-oriented and people-oriented management values necessitates that a leader should develop the consciousness of their emotions and social intellect along with the capability to set objectives and oversee performance. Open and honest communication of what needs to be completed, while at the same time building trust and developing people to help them align their individual needs with the organisational objectives.

Leadership Dilemma and solutions

A leader will likely face particular dilemmas when trying to introduce change in an organisation, especially in a case where the organisation was used to a specific culture or practice. This section will, therefore, discuss some of the leadership dilemmas expected in the company.

The misalignment between the board’s readiness and system transformation.

In most cases a long-tenure organisational culture leads to atrophy of the board’s vitality and improves their dependency, especially when they perceived that the system was effective and helped in the successful management of the organisation. Practically, the organisation ins question has aligned itself to a specific process for close to two decades, and from the financial perspective, then system was somehow profitable (Van der Voet, Kuipers, and Groeneveld 2016, p.842). However, with the introduction of technology, the organisation could continue using the same process in the face inventible change. Therefore, when changing the organisational means to accommodate technological revolutions, pivotal support to support to the board will be missing as they think about the transformations and the implications of the whole project. In most cases, leaders are always in denial on when their efficacy is losing its edge, and the best time to implement the necessary change, and the board members are likely to grow dependent on the long-standing process.

A mismatch between the strategy and succession

When deploying system succession tasks, a good strategy is vital for the board to outline the scope of change, and to ensure high-quality selection of the best strategy for the company. In facing organisational change, the best policy for the board members is to define the scope of leadership and establish the best corporate plan that sets the range of leadership and ensures a smooth transition (Betancourt, Tan-McGrory, Kenst, Phan, and Lopez 2017, p.1097). In cases where there are enormous challenges with the existing plan, then this plan should not be used by any means to inform the next strategy because it will not support the strategic vision of the future vision. The dilemma is exaggerated because if significant differences drive the need for a new plan on strategic direction, the company’s management could be reluctant to apply it and in turn, the board could face various challenges in reaching a choice and supporting the plan. If the organisation goes ahead and implements such a project, it is likely that it will struggle within the first years of its implementation, especially in regard to the splits in the board, until a contingent plan is chosen that would help in aligning the difference of the board and the objectives of the new project.

A mismatch between the Managerial capability and the Plan

The managerial tenure is usually a valuable foundation of institutional memory. When driving change other managers may not embrace their new roles, and therefore fail to oversee the whole process which the organisation is driving. When faced with significant changes in the environment, new technologies, new systems and different viewpoints, the management might lack members who have sufficient experience with such new occurrences (van der Voet 2016, p. 660). Strategic planning comprises of brainstorming on future threats, opportunities and the required proficiencies for a group to succeed. In case, the change is only driven by the leader alone, the organisation might experience splits in the board, which will hurt the working alliance with the leader. In some instances, the implementation processes are always taken up by consultant to avoid organisational splits. The problem is that consultant do not have in-depth knowledge and experience about the corporate culture and conflict management systems, especially when working with different managerial sections/departments within an organisation.

Generic Factors to Consider

Employee Involvement

Employees interact and influence each other, and are always accountable for attaining common objectives and always see themselves as essential entities in an organisation. Bodies around the world are continually discovering that employees have the potential of making creative and informed decisions and coordinate various works without much supervision. Besides, researchers have acknowledged the role of employees, especially in regard to teamwork. These teams have proved to be efficient in the implementation process of managers’ knowledge. Employees help in carrying out many knowledge-intensive activities within the organisation. Betancourt, Tan-McGrory, Kenst, Phan, and Lopez (2017, p.1010) states that employees are the ones who must apply the distributed knowledge successfully. Teamwork is a vital source of generating knowledge in various processes. A group of knowledgeable employees are essential for the success of a program, especially in the implementation process. This is because the knowledge that people have could be challenging to articulate as they are deeply embedded in various routines and some practices that are taken for granted. By creating such teams, a leader can apply different skills and experiences towards solving some problems that might arise during the implementation process. After all, the emphasises of the business is provide an environment where employees of different knowledge and backgrounds can come together to create new experience. Hornstein (2015, p. 294) stated that employees could work together as members of an organisation and build each other in terms of their weaknesses and strengths. Such development creates a mutual relationship within a team. This is due to the fact that organisations with team-oriented employees that trust each other are more successful at sharing different information and knowledge. Ultimately such an environment will foster trust, and inform the organisation on various dynamics of change, leading to a successful implementation of knowledge.

Information systems infrastructure

Kalmanovich-Cohen, Pearsall, and Christian (2018, p. 601) argued that in the current business environment, no change could successfully take place without the influence of information systems and its subsequent infrastructures. One factor that should be considered is the right system of measurement that could be used to deliver the correct information to people. Since that process change also includes implementation of information system. Aarons, Ehrhart, Farahnak, and Hurlburt (2015) insisted that an effective technology system is key to implementing sustainable changes in organization, especially when thinking about the future and the competitiveness of the organisation.

Outcome Evaluation

Outcome evaluation tends to gauge changes from the beginning of an intervention, which includes the amount of energy, resources, and the money used. The whole process seeks to identify various ways in which the implementation process can be made more effective and efficient. It generally facilitates the process of learning and the establishment of the best organisational practice that various companies can use. Typically, the process of outcome evaluation leads to modification of goals, implementation efforts, and the redefinition of new objectives (Burnes, Hughes, and By 2018, p. 147). Hence, measurement and evaluation are essential to a cycle of continuous improvement. The first category of evaluating the project will be to assess the organisational performance. Such measures are linked with the project attaining its desired outcomes for the company. The organisational metric should aim at answering whether the initiative delivered the expected results. The corporate performance metrics ought to involve the following features; performance improvement trends, the adherence to the initial plan, the KPI of the project, and the speed of execution. The next aspect of measurement is individual performance. These measures reveal whether the people who have been impacted by change are adapting to the new framework. An individual is always assumed to be the unit of change; measuring this progress can be a leading indicator of the project’s success. The individual metrics to be used include; adoption metrics, compliance and adherence, assessment of proficiency, employee feedback, compliance rate and utilisation reports (Aarons et al. 2015). Most of these measures depict the current position of employees in the process of change and their progression. These measures can be obtained using surveys, performance evaluators, observations and assessments.

The last assessment tool will involve the performance of change management. The metrics of this area are linked to the actual activities that are conducted the team in a change of change management. The change management performance measures to be used include; communication deliveries, keeping track of change management activities, communication deliverables, project KPI measurements, and performance improvement.

Part D

The experience from this module has positively impacted my practice as a change leader. First, I have learnt that during the process of change, communication is an essential tool. The surest way to fail as a change leader is to focus on the drivers of change rather than the move itself. While succeeding in the process of change required clear and straightforward communication on what needs to be done, by who and when. Leaders that communicate to their followers the objective and mission of a change process and relate it to the values of an organisation create a stronger urgency for change and motivate their employees to adhere to this process until the end. Besides communication, partnerships help to bring people together to implement change. The fact that a leader can partner with various people and manage them encourages employees to break out their silos and take an active role in the implementation process. The partnership also forges a lasting relationship with employees when making decisions and strengthening their commitment to change. Failing to partner with other stakeholders is likely to lead to failure in the change process. Commitment is another fundamental aspect of a successful change process. For a leader to be successful, they must make sure that their own beliefs and behaviours support the needed change. Change is a complicated process, but leaders who can negotiate through it successfully ought to be resilient and persistent, and are always willing to go an extra mile to achieve the organisational objectives. Leaders should also devote most of their time the change process and focus on the big picture. A leader who devotes less time or no time at all to the operation of change is likely to record negative results. The process of leading the process of change does not take place on its own. Instead, leaders drive them. Effective leadership calls for leaders to take the initiative by making a case for the needed changes. Initiative measures include evaluating the case for the change they seek. It can involve assessing the business context and understanding the necessary evolution. It consists of determining the business context, comprehending the objectives of change and establishing a clear mission and desired goals. If a leader fails to focus on the tasks mentioned they might fail to attain the desired goals. Another useful element is strategy. A successful leader must establish a lasting policy and a clear vision plan, which comprises of the resources needed, the project timelines, task management and the relevant resources. Through the right approach, leaders can be able to identify what should change and the factors to be maintained. Failing to strategies will lead a waste of time and resources. Lastly, execution is another important facet; the art of performance is as important as the planning process. Implementation involves getting critical people into positions for improving them. Execution is a step by step process that includes both long term and short-term goals, and each stage should have a metric of measurement and monitoring system to ensure that the project progress is still in line with the schedule.

References

Aarons, G.A., Ehrhart, M.G., Farahnak, L.R. and Hurlburt, M.S., 2015. Leadership and organisational change for implementation (LOCI): a randomised mixed method pilot study of a leadership and organisation development intervention for evidence-based practise implementation. Implementation Science, 10(1), p.11.

Betancourt, J.R., Tan-McGrory, A., Kenst, K.S., Phan, T.H. and Lopez, L., 2017. Organisational change management for health equity: perspectives from the Disparities Leadership Program. Health Affairs, 36(6), pp.1095-1101.

Betancourt, J.R., Tan-McGrory, A., Kenst, K.S., Phan, T.H. and Lopez, L., 2017. Organisational change management for health equity: perspectives from the Disparities Leadership Program. Health Affairs, 36(6), pp.1095-1101.

Burns, H., Diamond-Vaught, H. and Bauman, C., 2015. Leadership for sustainability: Theoretical foundations and pedagogical practices that foster change. International Journal of Leadership Studies.

Grint, K., Jones, O.S., Holt, C. and Storey, J., 2016. What is leadership? The Routledge companion to leadership, p.3.

Hornstein, H.A., 2015. The integration of project management and organisational change management is now a necessity — International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), pp.291-298.

Kalmanovich-Cohen, H., Pearsall, M.J. and Christian, J.S., 2018. The effects of leadership change on team escalation of commitment: the Leadership Quarterly, 29(5), pp.597-608.

Kelan, E.K. and Wratil, P., 2018. Post‐heroic leadership, tempered radicalism and senior leaders as change agents for gender equality. European Management Review, 15(1), pp.5-18.

Kerber, K.W. and Buono, A.F., 2018. The rhythm of change leadership. Organization Development Journal, 36(3), p.55.

Komives, S.R., 2016. Leadership for a better world: Understanding the social change model of leadership development. John Wiley & Sons.

Leopold, K. and Kaltenecker, S., 2015. Kanban change leadership: Creating a culture of continuous improvement. John Wiley & Sons.

Marshall, J., Coleman, G. and Reason, P., 2017. Leadership for sustainability: An action research approach. Routledge.

Neves, P. and Schyns, B., 2018. Destructive uncertainty: The toxic triangle, implicit theories and leadership identity during organisational change. In Organizational Change (pp. 131-141). Routledge.

Van der Voet, J., 2016. Change leadership and public sector organisational change: Examining the interactions of transformational leadership style and red tape — the American Review of Public Administration, 46(6), pp.660-682.

Van der Voet, J., Kuipers, B.S. and Groeneveld, S., 2016. Implementing change in public organisations: The relationship between leadership and affective commitment to change in a public sector context. Public Management Review, 18(6), pp.842-865.

Whitworth, B.A. and Chiu, J.L., 2015. Professional development and teacher change: The missing leadership link. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(2), pp.121-137.