It is my opinion that the theories/models for change have not evolved too much over time. Theories such as Systems theory and Theory E are broad and overarching. In the Systems theory, an organization is a complex system where any type of change in one area will inadvertently cause a shift elsewhere. Theory E is a change management theory that describes the process of achieving the best economic results for an organization (Biech, 2007). Both these theories can be adopted into today’s contexts with minimal effort. For example, an adaptation would be depending on the environment, an implementation of technology may or may not cause a shift everywhere. Also, as a society it is hoped that the most important thing to an organization is not the bottom line and therefore Theory E should incorporate social license within the change management mandate.
In terms of an organizational change theory that aligns with my leadership approach, I believe that the Six step method most closely fits with my values. This method involves reassigning roles to accomplish a specific task with the six steps being: 1) jointly diagnosis change, 2) develop a shared vision, 3) foster consensus for change, 4) spread revitalization to all department, 5) institutionalize revitalization through policies, and 6) monitor & adjust strategies (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). I strongly believe in shared leadership and collaborative endeavours, which the Six step method espouses throughout. While this method is not ideal in a large organization such as my own, the shared leadership component is strongly encouraged by my executive through all departments.
Leadership itself has a very important role to play in managing change. Chiefly, this is because often change is dictated from the top. To manage change well though, there needs to be an assessment of organizational readiness for the change. Weiner (2009) notes the three factors that influence the ability to implement change as being task demands, resource availability, and situational factors. If leadership fails to take stock of these factors, the organizational change will not have buy-in from staff and the process will be far less smooth than it could be, and perhaps even fail.
Failure can be caused by resistance. The resilience theory captured my attention as I had always wondered why large organizations were resistant to change. Holling’s ecological system analogy on how systems can absorb and adapt to change is fascinating (as cited in Weller & Anderson, 2013). I can now see how bureaucracies in their entrenched ways refuse to change institutionally. While there may be individuals who want change, the established ways and infrastructure may not give way. Mindset can also play a part. I believe once an effective strategy is in place such as one that informs all staff of the benefits of change and/or dictates the shared responsibility (Biech, 2007), there can be a positive transition which while may be slow, moves the organization into the future.
References
Al-Haddad, S., & Kotnour, T. (2015). Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2), 234-262.
Biech, E. (2007). Models for Change. In Thriving Through Change: A Leader’s Practical Guide to Change Mastery. Alexandria, VA: ASTD [Books24x7 database]
Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4(67).
Weller, M., & Anderson, T. (2013). Digital Resilience in Higher Education. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning.