Of Change Management

Dr B K Mukhopadhyay

(The author is a Professor of
Management and Economics, formerly at IIBM (RBI) Guwahati. He can be contacted at m.bibhas@gmail.com)

Globally, merger, acquisition, or divestiture; the launch of a new product
or service; a new leadership coming up; or a new technology going to replace the static practices of the past decades—these are happening. There are questions galore, from Mali to Singapore or from Boston to Colombo, as to the need to adapt to changes.

As the situation demands

We are now living in an age of rapid change where even technology is being replaced by a newer one almost on a regular basis. Let us accept and describe this as an age of “Innovention”—innovation plus invention. Whether change will happen is a matter of speed and adaptability. The more quickly a nation adapts to the change, the greater its rate of economic growth. Those who do not accept change are bound to stagnate or fail, be it in the sectors of civil aviation, banking, agribusiness, telecom, or biotechnology. And that is why the management of change has emerged as the toughest challenge for contemporary business managers—big, medium, or small.

At the same time, the fact that organizations must undergo continual change does not necessarily mean that people “enjoy the process or that the change-related experience is a pleasant one. The reality is that change is often disheartening as well as frustrating, while at the same time it generally leaves a number of casualties in its wake. Some are of the view that the process is lengthy and costly, while others think it will not last long enough or cost enough to get the job done. A balanced view is the prime need in such a precarious context, since time, money, and energy are involved in the process of change. Change is for becoming better off, not otherwise. It is to be ensured, therefore, whether the company is in a state of change readiness—effective leaders as well as a non-hierarchical culture being the front runners.

Dealing with change and crisis is undoubtedly one of the most difficult arenas in any business environment. In such a context, the most essential elements are recognizing the very need for organizational change, executing the different approaches to change, preparing structural shifts such as merger, amalgamation, and new leadership, addressing the emotional responses to downsizing and helping people adapt, and being competitive through the turbulent period of change.      

Is anyone planning for a major change in one’s  organization? Then please check up on the communication issues as well. If the leader wants people to change the way they do their jobs, there is a need to change the way you communicate with them. The suggestion is that when an institution needs to communicate a major change, it is better to spend most of the time, money, and effort on frontline supervisors. Most corporate improvement efforts have negligible results because they focus on activities, not results, and there is no explicit connection between action and outcome. It has been rightly observed that results-driven approaches offer greater potential for improvement because they focus on achieving specific and measurable goals, and by committing to incremental change, managers can not only see results faster but also determine more quickly what is working and what is not.

Change is certain to come

The process is never easy, especially keeping in view the actions of blockers. A section of people always tries to derail the process. Tackling such a negative attitude calls for resorting to patterns and principles that could be successfully used by those responsible for change in their organizations—the nature of change, the process of change, the roles played during change, resistance to change, commitment to change, and how change affects culture, synergy, and resilience. Dary 1R Cornner rightly states that the degree to which people demonstrate resilience is the key factor in managing change successfully.

In many cases, a simple strategy, executed fast, right away, and all at once, can pull the organization out of the woods, focusing on key factors like a proper understanding of market musings, increasing revenue inflow, improving product range and quality, as well as transforming the corporate culture.

Change in an organization is nothing but a response to change in the business environment. It may be discontinuous in nature—a single, abrupt shift from the past followed by a long period of stability, at which point another major change often needs to be made. It may also take the shape of a “continuous incremental change” implemented through a series of small, discrete changes over a fairly long period of time. In the latter way too, an organization may be made change-ready, providing people with meaningful anchors while paying adequate and undivided attention to continuous internal and external monitoring.

Change is where the business is

Change is often disruptive and, in several instances, traumatic as well. People faced with dramatic changes often respond through shock, defensive retreat, acknowledgement, acceptance, and adaptation. But what to do? Should we avoid change or go for it? The answer is always in the positive, because refusing to accept change amounts to being sidelined. Then why not keep people as connected as possible to their work groups and eventually move them from a focus on personal emotions to a focus on productive activities, as rightly pointed out by management expert Richard Lueckc.

No doubt, many people avoid change if they can. But for how long? It is better to accept that change is a part of organizational life and essential to progress. So you should know how to anticipate change and manage it, which in turn could contribute to the careers of individuals and companies that take timely, strategic decisions. Yes, successful change programmes necessarily begin with results. And the world wants to see the results.’

Time stays, we go out!!