Interim Assessment Planning Guide

Introduction

Change has ceased to be an exception and become a condition that firms must always meet in order to remain successful. Despite this shift, implementation of planned organisational change remains the most challenging task for leaders (Hermann 2015). Handling change requires a leader to consider different interacting factors during the decision making process failure to which the change is not successfully implemented. Research shows that about two-thirds of proposed change fail either due to lack of integrity and efficiency from leaders or due to leaders’ failure to involve employee in the organisational change (Rosenbaum et al. 2018). This report is divided into two parts: part I critically assesses the applicability of Lewin’s change theories in formulation of change management strategies for implementation while part II uses Kotter’s change model to evaluate and identify appropriate practical steps that the organisation might use to effectively manage the implementation of the new IT system.

A Critical Analysis of Lewin’s Change Theories

Literature on change management identifies Kurt Lewin as the father of change theories. Lewin was a social scientist who focussed on resolving social conflicts through change in behaviour (Endrejat et al. 2017). Lewin developed four theories that could be used to resolve social conflicts resulting in effective change. These theories include field theory, group dynamics, action research, and three-step model for change. The first two theories are concerned with formation of groups, interdependence of groups, group relationships, and motivation while the last two focus on changing behaviours in order to suit the new requirements of an organisation (Lehmann 2017). This task considers how Lewin’s theories can be applied in the formulation of a change management strategy.

The field theory was influenced by the Gestalt approach and opposes the associative approach of behaviourists. Lewin believed that any change is influenced by multitude of factors thus change processes are not predictable or rational (Lewin 1939). Lewin emphasises that the relationship between the implementation of a change and its results cause not cause failure. He holds that the result depends on two factors; the degree to which the change alters the perceptions and values of the organisation, and the extent to which management strategies succeed in moving the staff within an organisation. According to Lewin, implementation of change can only succeed if all the parts of the organisations mutually work towards the change (Lewin 1939). This implies that employees must perceive the changes as acceptable and meaningful for them to carry out the assigned responsibilities.

Among Lewin’s insights is that the current needs of an individual are influenced by how he/she perceives the environment (Bakari 2017). In this case, employees perception of the new IT system will differ based on their needs. If employees are in need of a system to make their work easier or to help them manage voluminous data then they system might be perceived to meet their needs. Making a change seem acceptable and meaningful to employees does not guarantee employees’ support on its implementation. According to Lewin (1943a), employees must be motivated to support the implementation of a change. Initially, there will be tension among the employees, which presents an opportunity for the organisation to motivate the employees. Therefore, the organisation should first seek to establish the physical, social, or psychological conditions in the intermediate environment for every employee, how these conditions are represented in the psychology of individual employees, and the valence it could influence on employees. If the organisation intends to create groups in the implementation of the change, it is necessary to note that at the group level, the structure of the group is not to a greater extent characterised by individual team members but by the relationships between the team members (Shirey 2013).

The group dynamics theory emphasise the importance of group behaviour rather than individual behaviour in change management. According to Lewin (1943a), it is ineffective to focus on changing the behaviour of individual employees as they are a part of the entire workforce, which has some social norms (Hermann 2015). Therefore, concentrating on the behaviour of individual employees is counterproductive given that group behaviour will pressure the individual to conform. This implies that implementing the new IT system, the organisation focus of change must be at the group level concentrating on factors as group norms, interactions, roles, and the socialization process, which will effectively create disequilibrium and change. Additionally, the organisation should understand that resistance is a group habit, which can be overcome by involving employees in decision making so they gain personal and group motivations towards the change.

Lewin in the three-stage model defines the change process as a process of three steps namely unfreezing, moving, and freezing (Cummings et al. 2016). Unfreezing serves to alter the existing norms and habits in the organisation in order to create readiness for change. To achieve this, it is important that the organisation challenges trains of self-righteousness and complacency among the employees. In this case, in pursuit of changing employees’ behaviours and attitudes towards the new IT systems, the organisations should emotionally stir up individual needs so they can experience a change process right from the mind. In practice, the organisation can organise a training session that focuses on the importance of the IT system so that employees can psychologically see the need for change. The training should also equip the employees with the skills they require to operate the new IT system so they can feel that the change offers a direction. The organisation should choose a leader who has the capacity to change the current mindset of employees and motivate them towards the new IT system. In essence, the leader should be able to disintegrate how employees contemplate the existing situation, create dissatisfaction with the current situation, show in does not conform to the status quo, and thus present the new IT system as the appealing future vision that effectively solves with the current problems.

The second stage, moving, serves to bind employees to a course of action (Cummings et al. 2016). For the organisation to succeed in moving employees to a new point of equilibrium (the new IT system), it is mandatory that it ensures employees are committed to change. This implies that the organisation should develop a way to measure the commitment of employees towards the change. In essence, the organisation should establish the extent to which employees support the new IT system based on the belief that the new IT system is beneficial, the extent to which employees understand that failure to support the change will result in unaffordable costs, and the extent to which employees feel that supporting the change is an obligation and duty (Hossan 2015).

In the freezing stage, which is commonly known as refreezing, serves to normalise the new habit (Burnes and Bargal 2017). In this case, the refreezing stage will seek to ensure that employees are confident in the new IT systems and prefers it to the old one such that they do not turn back. The organisation will have to review performance and provide the required level of support so that employees continue valuing the new IT system. Additionally, the organisation might consider motivating employees extrinsically through rewards and benefits. Throughout the change management process, the organisation should ensure the employees have the ability, in terms of capacity, to handle the change and that there are values guiding the process (Burnes 2017). Finally, the leader should avoid lecturing employees on how to behave but instead elaborate the reasons for a behaviour change (Hunjra et al. 2017).

Literature presents more theories of change management among them being Prosci Adkar and Kotters change management theory. ADKAR model of change was developed by Prosci in 1998 who holds that successful management of change undergoes five stages (Goyal and Patwardhan 2018). Initially, ADKAR model was used to determine if activities for change management were yielding the desired goals during the organisational change. ADKAR model of change management has been praised for effectiveness in managing organisational change in that it recognises that individual employees respond differently to change. However, the model has been criticised for failure to distinguish incremental change from step change as well as the functions and roles of leadership in management (Goyal and Patwardhan 2018). On the other hand, Kotter’s eight-stage process of creating major change was developed by Kotter in 1996 describing a series of steps that should be taken to achieve the required organisational change. The model is among the most well-known approaches to organisational change but despite its popularity, the model is criticised for describing what should be done rather than providing details about how it should be achieved (Pollack and Pollack 2015). The table below compares the stages of change management as purported by Prosci and Kotter.

Just as Lewin’s unfreeze-move-refreeze model, the two models first seek to prepare employees for the change by making sure they understand what the change is and why it is important. After this is attained, the model posit that moving should start which includes training employees to ensure they have ability to handle the change. Once this has been attained, refreezing should be sought which seeks to ensure employees are comfortable with the change and they do not get back to the old norms. However, Kotter’s model is more profound and offers more guidance of how to help employees embrace the change. For this reason, the next session details the process of change management using Kotter’s model.

Application of Kotter’s Model in Implementation of the New IT System

People are inherently resistant to change (Wentworth et al. 2018), which reflects that the most difficult issue in an organisation is implementing and adapting to change. From Kotter’s perspective, resistance to change stems from a desire not to lose something valuable, failure to understand the change and its implications, a belief that the change is not beneficial to the organisation, and low tolerance to change (Kotter and Schlesinger 2008). Over the years, organisations have relied on Kotter’s model in change management given its simplicity and clarity (Appelbaum et al. 2012). This task uses Kotter’s model to identify and evaluate appropriate practical steps that the organisation should use to effectively implement the new IT system.

Kotter’s model of change identifies eight steps that should be followed in implementation of change. These are (1) establishing a sense of urgency, (2) forming a powerful guiding coalition, (3) creating a vision, (4) communicating the vision, (5) empowering employees to act on the vision, (6) planning and creating short-term wins, (7) consolidating improvements and produce more change, and (8) institutionalising new approaches (Kotter 1996).

This step should aim to ensure that the employees are aware of and understand the pressing need for the new IT system (Baloh et al. 2018). In some cases, a sense of urgency will occur naturally for failures in the old systems but in other cases, the organisation will have to identify factors that will make employees perceive the system as needed urgently. To create a sense of urgency for the new IT system, the organisation should establish the time period the old system (if any) has not been updated and use it to show its time the organisation forsook old ways as we are living in a modern era where technology is influencing everyday activities. The organisation should also analyse the ability of the old system to perform the required activities in the current era and use this as a shortcoming of the old system. The organisation should also prove that the old system is outdated, invalid, and has no developmental aspects thus time to shift to a valid, updated, and a system with developmental aspects. Further, the organisation should identify the losses (financial, time, and energy) incurred as a result of using an invalid and outdated system. Moreover, the organisation should communicate the situation of the old system (slow and experiencing frequent breakdowns) which increases the length of time taken to evaluate employees. To prove this, the organisation should use complaints from employees that the human resource department is slow in responding to the concerns of employees, which should be attributed to the faulty old system. Finally, the organisation should show that it is impossible to track employee and organisational performance using the old system given the old system has limited storage capacity and limited features that hinder this function. By focussing on the weaknesses and disadvantages of the old system, the organisation will be able to show its employees that it is impossible to attain its mission with the old system thus time to get a new system.

This step involves forming a team of employees that will represent the organisation in influencing the rest of the employees during the change process (Teixeira et al. 2017). Members in this team should have enough credibility and stature to be respect by all the other employees (Pollack and Pollack 2015). To attain this, the organisation should have employees in senior management and consider other influential subordinates. In addition, the organisation should consider some well-known external persons; for example, the chairman of a successful company in the same industry who will associate their performance to the new IT system. People in the research and development office and those in assessment office are essentially important in this coalition as they are deemed credible thus can be trusted with the success of the new IT system. In involving subordinate employees, the organisation should consider an employee that has continually complained of the old system and has an idea of what should be improved. This employee should then be made a member of the coalition team responsible for researching, selecting, and implementing the new IT system. It will be necessary that the organisation involves people from all departments so that every department feel represented in the development of the new IT system. If possible, the coalition should be co-chaired by people from different departments to ensure that departmental needs and interests are fully represented in the development and implementation of the new IT system. If this is attained, each department will feel their needs will be met by the new IT system, which will lower the chances of resistance.

Creating a vision helps plan for the change. A vision explains the direction and shape of the change effort and why it is important (Kotter 1998). To attain this, the organisation should allow the coalition team ample time (not less than three months) to determine which new IT system to purchase and implement. In this process, the coalition team should survey the needs of individual employees in the organisation to ensure that the end result is beneficial to all in the organisation. For every potential system, the coalition should take time to consider its features and function and how they solve the needs of the entire workforce. The most effective system should have strong psychometric properties including high validity and reliability and relevant norms, should be user-friendly, should have the ability for tasks to be completed online, and should offer the organisation developmental suggestions and actions to help improve employee and organisational performance. Once the coalition team has settled for a single system, three members of the team should attend a trainer workshop on the instrument to gain in-depth knowledge of the system, how it is developed and its recommended administration procedures to further ascertain their decision.

In communicating the vision, the organisation should ensure all employees learn the change fast way possible and in much details as possible (Hackman 2017). Communicating the change should be done by the coalition team so it can help the entire staff understand the vision and question or seek clarification where unclear. Each of the coalition team member should be assigned a group of employees to inform and train on the new system. The organisation should ensure different methods such as classroom training sessions, development and dissemination of materials, online training sessions, whole organisation training session provided by a webinar, and one-on-one interactions among others to ensure the staff has as much details as possible.

This stage should seek to extend the coalition team by making it open to others in the organisation (Mishra 2013). In this step, the organisation should make the coalition team member key contact points and communicators of the vision. The coalition team should inform the entire staff of the new system, explain the new system, explain its importance over the old system, and address concerns raised by the employees. The coalition team should work closely with persons involved in the old system, understand their experience with the old system and communicate how the new system will operate in their favour. This will ensure the staff involved in the old system are educated and empowered about the proposed new system ensuring these persons are not an obstacle to change.

Short-term wins help people commit to the change by showing early success to the organisation (Calegari et al. 2015). To promote acceptance of the new IT system, the organisation should organise for pilot tests over the first two quarters of the financial year. The pilot tests should involve the coalition team members, employees involved in the old system and any other volunteers so that as many employees as possible can understand the new system and get used to it increasing the probability of the new system being eventually implemented. Prior to piloting, resources and training should be provided to ensure the workforce understands the new system and can explain it to colleagues.

This step increases the probability of widespread acceptance and implementation of change (Chappell et al. 2016). It is necessary that results of the pilot tests are released at the end of every quarter of the financial year highlighting the successes. Such reports should help the organisation see the system in operation and learn more about it thus prepare for the coming change. At the end of the second pilot test, the coalition team should solicit for a formal buy-in of the new IT system. The key stakeholder should be identified and the coalition team should spend extra time with each making sure they understand the new system and approve the buy-in petition.

This is the last stage and it seeks to ensure the change becomes part of the ongoing system (Teixeira et al. 2017). After the six months pilot testing period, the organisation should implement the new IT system in all the departments making it the standard system. Nonetheless, it would be necessary to ensure that some functions of the old system are transferred to the new system in order to ensure consistency in the organisation.

Conclusion

Undoubtedly, strategic change management is an organised process which seeks to ensure that an organisation leverage every opportunity of maximise its performance. The report reveals there are different models of change management but each has its strengths and limitations which underscores the need for critically analysis each model and applying the most appropriate in a given situation. Between Lewin’s change models, Adkar and Kotter’s model, the report finds Kotter’s model more elaborate and practical thus considers it for the implementation of the new IT system. Through the application part, the report reveals that change management process is rigorous and lengthy thus organisations should dedicate ample time to change implementation.

Recommendations

The report makes the following recommendations to the organisation in the implementation of the new IT system:

Dedicate enough time to the pre-planning stage so that the most appropriate persons are selected in the coalition team

Value the input of every employee so that employees can own up the change

Foster open upward communication so that employees are free to make enquiries about the new IT system

Ensure support materials in form of instructions and training are readily available to employees during the transition period

References

Alfes, K., Shantz, A.D., Truss, C. and Soane, E.C., 2013. The link between perceived human resource management practices, engagement and employee behaviour: a moderated mediation model. The international journal of human resource management, 24(2), pp.330-351.

Appelbaum, S.H., Habashy, S., Malo, J.L. and Shafiq, H., 2012. Back to the future: revisiting Kotter's 1996 change model. Journal of Management Development, 31(8), pp.764-782.

Bakari, H., Hunjra, A.I. and Niazi, G.S.K., 2017. How does authentic leadership influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions: Integration of theory of planned behavior and Lewin's three step model. Journal of Change Management, 17(2), pp.155-187.

Baloh, J., Zhu, X. and Ward, M.M., 2018. Implementing team huddles in small rural hospitals: How does the Kotter model of change apply?. Journal of nursing management, 26(5), pp.571-578.

Burnes, B. and Bargal, D., 2017. Kurt Lewin: 70 years on. Journal of Change Management, 17(2), pp.91-100.

Burnes, B., 2017. Kurt Lewin (1890–1947): The Practical Theorist. The Palgrave handbook of organizational change thinkers, pp.749-763.

Calegari, M.F., Sibley, R.E. and Turner, M.E., 2015. A roadmap for using Kotter's organizational change model to build faculty engagement in accreditation. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 19(3), p.31.

Chappell, S., Pescud, M., Waterworth, P., Shilton, T., Roche, D., Ledger, M., Slevin, T. and Rosenberg, M., 2016. Exploring the process of implementing healthy workplace initiatives: mapping to Kotter's leading change model. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 58(10), pp.e341-e348.

Cummings, S., Bridgman, T. and Brown, K.G., 2016. Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management. Human relations, 69(1), pp.33-60.

Endrejat, P.C., Baumgarten, F. and Kauffeld, S., 2017. When theory meets practice: Combining Lewin’s ideas about change with motivational interviewing to increase energy-saving behaviours within organizations. Journal of Change Management, 17(2), pp.101-120.

Goyal, C. and Patwardhan, M., 2018. Role of change management using ADKAR model: a study of the gender perspective in a leading bank organisation of India. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 18(3-4), pp.297-316.

Hackman, T., 2017. Leading change in action: Reorganizing an academic library department using Kotter’s eight stage change model.

Hermann, K., 2015. Field theory and working with group dynamics in debriefing. Simulation & Gaming, 46(2), pp.209-220.

Hossan, C., 2015. Applicability of Lewin's change management theory in Australian local government. International Journal of business and Management, 10(6), p.53.

Hunjra, A.I., Bakari, H. and Masood, M.T., 2017. Managing Organizational Change in Pakistan: Insights from the Work of Kurt Lewin.

Kotter, J.P. and Schlesinger, L.A., 2008. Choosing strategies for change. Harvard business review.

Kotter, J.P., 1996. Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Kouzes, JM, & Posner, BZ (2002). The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA.

Kotter, J.P., 1998. Winning at change. Leader to leader, 10(Fall), pp.27-33.

Lehmann, S., 2017. Bridging strategies and action: Towards a method for change management in Danish emergency management organizations. Journal of Change Management, 17(2), pp.138-154.

Lewin, K. 1939. Field theory and experiment in social psychology: Concepts and methods. American Journal of Sociology, 44(6), 868.

Lewin, K. 1943a. Defining the 'field at a given time'. Psychological Review, 50(3), 292–310.

Mishra, S., 2013, September. Relevance of Kotter’s Model for Change in Successfully Implementing Lean. In IFIP International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems (pp. 540-547). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Pollack, J. and Pollack, R., 2015. Using Kotter’s eight stage process to manage an organisational change program: Presentation and practice. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 28(1), pp.51-66.

Pollack, J. and Pollack, R., 2015. Using Kotter’s eight stage process to manage an organisational change program: Presentation and practice. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 28(1), pp.51-66.

Rosenbaum, D., More, E. and Steane, P., 2018. Planned organisational change management: Forward to the past? An exploratory literature review. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(2), pp.286-303.

Shirey, M.R., 2013. Lewin’s theory of planned change as a strategic resource. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 43(2), pp.69-72.

Teixeira, B., Gregory, P.A. and Austin, Z., 2017. How are pharmacists in Ontario adapting to practice change? Results of a qualitative analysis using Kotter’s change management model. Canadian Pharmacists Journal/Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada, 150(3),pp.198-205.

Wentworth, D.K., Behson, S.J. and Kelley, C.L., 2018. Implementing a new student evaluation of teaching system using the Kotter change model. Studies in Higher Education, pp.1-13.

Continue your journey with our comprehensive guide to Integrated Digital Marketing Strategies.