![\"\"](\"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/48\/2018\/02\/LRNT525-Assignment-2.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Figure 1.<\/em> Two Perspectives of Leading Change in a Digital Environment. This figure illustrates a comparison of two different change events within different organizations.<\/p>\n First Example<\/strong><\/p>\n In the chart above I have outlined two perspectives of change within different organizations. Each organization underwent a large-scale change which impacted processes internally but also had a large impact on the processes and procedures affecting end users. In the first example, the organization was ready for change. Strategies for organizational readiness \u201cinclude highlighting the discrepancy between current and desired performance levels, fomenting dissatisfaction with the status quo, creating an appealing vision of a future state of affairs, and fostering confidence that this future state can be achieved\u201d (Weiner, 2009, p.2). In terms of this particular project, support for the new Learning Management System (LMS) was provided at all levels. Top-level department heads, the leadership team and champions for the project were determined across teams and within them. Confidence in the ability to successfully implement the new LMS was a department wide effort. In any project there are challenges that arise which may hinder the ability to successfully implement any new change. However, how these challenges are managed makes a difference in the continued motivation of employees and end-users. The active involvement of all stakeholders was a key to the success of this project.<\/p>\n [E]nd-user involvement in change design and implementation planning can be a powerful way for not only increasing change valence (e.g., helping people to see why this change is needed, important, and worthwhile), but also for helping organizational members realistically appraise the match of task demands, available resources, and situational factors (Weiner, 2009, p. 7).<\/p>\n Lean Thinking and Six Sigma were used as a method for implementing the change. These two processes together enabled the internal teams to document the current processes, identify what would be required with the new system, and find ways to produce \u201cwhat [was] needed, when it [was] needed, with the minimum amount of materials, equipment, labor and space\u201d (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 247). By outlining specific tasks required to complete the overall project, employees could see the benefits of the new system as well as understand what the tasks were in order to complete the implementation. All these things considered it is easy to see why this project was successful.<\/p>\n With the methods of change that were used and the Shared\/Situational Leadership style (O\u2019Toole, 2008, p.4); this enabled all stakeholders to participate as well as provide feedback from previous experience. This lead to an engagement of employees and end-users to do what was necessary for the successful implementation of the new LMS. We can identify in this example that motivation of all levels was at an all-time high.<\/p>\n Second Example<\/strong><\/p>\n In the second example that I provided we can see the different approach to the implementation of new software which was rolled out to the franchisees across the network. \u00a0This new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system was sourced to change their old system to a new third party cloud system which would effectively manage their businesses from sales orders, inventory management, purchasing and accounting. This change came from the top-level executives but clear messaging was not provided to employees or to end-users. It was clear to all stakeholders that the organization was not quite ready for this change.<\/p>\n organizational members are unlikely to hold common perceptions of readiness when leaders communicate inconsistent messages or act in inconsistent ways, when intra-organizational groups or units have limited opportunity to interact and share information, or when organizational members do not have a common basis of experience (Weiner, 2009, p. 3).<\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The leadership style was more of a transactional\/authoritarian model (O\u2019Toole, 2008, p. 4). Internal resources were just completing tasks that were required as they were told. Change was perceived to be required only to enable better business which came from the top level and no major consultation with end users or those who would be responsible for the change occurred. Unlike the first example, a clear vision from the leadership team was not provided. One of the major pitfalls that I can see in this example is that no change management method was put in place to tackle appropriate planning and resources for the change. Some project management techniques were used, but this was not conducted by implementation consultants or proper project managers. Many challenges arose because of this lack of resource planning and task management. The project took much longer than anticipated, extreme resistance to the change from franchisees made supporting them very difficult.<\/p>\n Training tools were not ready and sometimes incorrect as changes happened rapidly and internal resources could not keep up with the ever growing need to support the new users. \u201cIntra-organizational variability in readiness perceptions indicates lower organizational readiness for change and could signal problems in implementation efforts that demand coordinated action among interdependent actors\u201d (Weiner, 2009, p. 3). The lack of appropriate resources, task specification, and a coordinated effort made the project go over budget and it was not delivered on-time. In fact, it took more than three years to implement the change since it was put on hold a few times to continue to develop the software as end-users complained daily. Enhancements were made to the system as it was being implemented since users did not believe the system was ready for the type of business that they were in. This example shows how the lack of leadership and change management methods can have a negative effect on digital learning environments.<\/p>\n Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>In terms of these two examples, it is easy to see how important the organization\u2019s leaders are to successfully implement a large-scale change. Roles and responsibilities need to be defined with internal and external parties. Clear and consistent messaging from the leadership team is critical in order to motivate employees so that they can clearly identify why the change is important and the benefits that it will have for the organization and themselves. Appropriate support also needs to be considered for training employees, and the end-users who are affected by the change. Involving all stakeholders will also make implementation more successful since previous experiences and lessons learned from past projects can be discussed so that challenges are overcome each step of the way.<\/p>\n References<\/p>\n Al-Haddad, S., & Kotnour, T. (2015).\u00a0Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change.\u00a0Journal of Organizational Change Management<\/em>,\u00a028<\/em>(2), 234-262.<\/p>\n O’Toole, James (2008).\u00a0Notes Toward a Definition of Values-Based Leadership.\u00a0The Journal of Values-Based Leadership<\/em>,\u00a01<\/em>(1).<\/p>\n Weiner, B. J. (2009).\u00a0A theory of organizational readiness for change.\u00a0Implementation Science<\/em>,\u00a04(67)<\/em>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Figure 1. Two Perspectives of Leading Change in a Digital Environment. This figure illustrates a comparison of two different change events within different organizations. First Example In the chart above I have outlined two perspectives of change within different organizations…. Continue Reading →<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":43,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[45,44],"class_list":["post-257","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-lrnt525","tag-digital-environments","tag-leading-change"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/43"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=257"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":261,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257\/revisions\/261"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/malat-webspace.royalroads.ca\/rru0002\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}