Discuss about the Organizational change environmentally sustainable.
In order to realize how and why the wicked problems occur during the implementation of structural change, a clear definition of the wicked problem should be mentioned and the causes of occurrence of the wicked problems have to be addressed. Also, it is important to discuss the reasons and benefits of structural changes. Then the tools to be used to resolve the wicked problems are to be discussed.
The original idea of the wicked problem stems from urban planning rather than public policy. This term was created to provide a particular definition of the difficult to deal with. The term does not mean ‘evilness’, but it addresses a problem with a solution that is not readily available. It includes problematic elements, uncertainty and complexity (Janeczko, 2011).
The wicked problems at workplace reflect peoples’ resistance to resolution. This kind of problems cannot be treated successfully with the traditional analytical approaches. The literature concerned with wicked problems focuses on systems design at the micro level, but the concept has been applied to macro social and economic policy conflicts. There is a difficulty in defining the nature of the wicked problems, as its nature is a function of different aspects. They are multi-causal and have many interdependencies. For example, dealing with illicit drugs reveals the tension between the aim of minimizing the harm to the drug user and the drug use as an illegal activity.
Organizational structure is the official system of authority relations and duty that takes place in an organization. Structural change is the transformation in the organization’s vertical or horizontal structures and power relocation at the formalization level. Wicked problems have many examples as, the climate change, cybercrime, hidden and the real cost of waste management , moral hazards and the organizational ecosystems (McMillan & Overall, 2016). Change is likely to affect the employees’ daily routine and results in resistance to change (Chen, et al., 2011).
Kotter (1996) as cited in Appelbaum et al., (2012), defines the eight steps for organizational transformation, they are described as follows:
Dealing with obstacles that occur during the change process is essential to overcome resistance to change. The conflict situations created due to change are likely to result in covert and calculations of forms of engagement in order to delay change and gain time to resolve problems, challenge pressures and understand the new situations. It takes time to develop a constructive dialogue with local stakeholders to understand the change required to overcome a wicked problem (McGivern, et al., 2017).
In order to resolve complex wicked problems, the organization of some working groups as a management committee is considered as the initial step to address organizational problems. The board of directors and executives may be confused about what should be done in cases of social messes and uncertainty. The Endstate systems are considered as useful tools for the recognition of how a given wicked problem can be resolved.
These tools do not provide a forecast of the best desirable outcomes. Decision makers usually say that the combination of two or more elements of Endstates is most desirable. It is important to know how Endstates are linked to each other in order to create an Endstate system. It is also important to consider that the relationships that exist among Endstates could change over time, some of them may change in the short term, while others may change in the long term.
The Endstate systems are usually created in a workshop, where the participants are allowed to map the alternative resolutions in a holistic way to consider their beliefs, information and the shared analyses during the workshop. The analysis of one workshop could be used as an input in other workshops (Horn & Weber, 2007).
Change is an ongoing process, organizational change is implemented in three stages, individual, group and organization. Leadership plays different roles at every level of the change process. The survival of the organization requires change management. Change management mainly focuses on people and the pattern of human interaction and it requires managerial effort to succeed. Although, people’s attitude towards the change efforts may result in its failure (Ajmal, et al., 2012).
Organisational change has many types, including minor, major, and transformative change processes. The minor change is about changing people’s attitudes and behaviors. This category of change addresses surface-level issues and do not represent any threat to deep beliefs. Major change involves changes in the individual’s perspective, which involves ambiguity and chaos. Newly developed systems start to take place and the old ways are discarded. The reorganization of the new systems requires the knowledge of the causes of change. Transformative change involves fundamental variations in consciousness, perceptions and values. It takes place when new meanings are established in relation to the environment. Resistance to change may occur due to mistrust in the change managers, which could be resolved by open communication. According to Visagie (2010), there are five dimensions that should be considered during the communication process, as follows:
Employees react in different ways to change, as some of them might resist change for months and even years after implementing the organizational change. Three stages of change could be addressed according to Lewin’s change management model (Mourfield, 2014), as follows:
The front stage employees act according to the change management requirements. It is not a risk-free stage, as employees act according to the workload, but their resistant voice keeps silent which signals unrest and discontent to change agents. That is why it is considered a risky behavior. The backstage represents the change opponents and tends to criticize the situation. They criticize the print principles, make excuses for their absenteeism and do not deliver work according to the promises they make (Ybema, 2017).
It is important to notice that the organizational resistance to change may happen due to the poorly planned implementation of the organizational change initiatives, lack of corporate culture, time and technology and funding barriers (Durmaz, 2011).
Change leadership is this style of leadership that concerns the driving forces, processes and vision that leads to a large-scale transformation, Accordingly, Transformational leadership theory assumes that leadership behavior is meant with communication of goals that exceeds the employees’ perception and stimulates them to perform beyond their interests. The transformational leaders are able to motivate the employees through communication, exploration and experimentation, they are able to build teams, support and provide energy for change, knowledge sharing and organizational learning as they can act as change agents. Effective transformational leadership integrates both of the individual-level and organizational level processes (Feng et al., 2016). The complexity of situations due to ambiguity is sometimes welcomed to learn from it instead of controlling it (Fraher & Grint, 2016).
There are four principles according to Obolensky (2010), as cited in Yergler (2011) that can be used to guide leaders in the cases of organizational complexity. These principles represent a new way towards adaptive leadership that concerns with learning, observation and less action. They are represented in military technology, communication technology, transportation technology, and human awareness. These principles are directed towards the increasing complexity of leadership practice. They provide the leaders with collaborative and enhanced decision-making practices to be able to manage the complexity of the organizational change process. The chaos theory and complexity science reveal the dynamic nature of situations faced by leaders. The chaos theory has been developed through various scientific and mathematical disciplines. Edward Lorenz has discovered that the change in complex situation can lead to further huge change, it is known as the butterfly effect. Accordingly, the smallest effort can lead to big results. This situation also happens with leadership, as hard work leads to great results and big achievements. When the leader faces an organizational radical change within the complex environment, they should consider that these changes are likely to have a major effect on the employees. The attractor theory finds out the dynamic behavior by following and plotting the behavior movement.
According to Obolensky (2007), the idea of the attractor theory depends on pointing the attractor of leadership that requires the leader to delegate more to help the employees to overcome their fears and feel respected. Good leadership motivates employees and delegates them when they are capable of this, it is called the point attractor. In addition to the importance of using the catalytic mechanisms to help employees to overcome working too hard, this is called the strange attractor. Finally, to conduct a dynamic question and answer session on a periodical basis, this is called the periodic attractor. Leaders should realize the fact that the world is becoming more complex than before, as peoples’ expectations are increasing, the followers have more professional knowledge than their supervisors and the organizational structure is becoming more dynamic. The implications of these changes are challenging and should be carefully and effectively managed (Obolensky 2007).
Transformational change may take the form of mergers, acquisition, downsizing and restructuring. It causes uncertainty, as the employees find difficulties in determining the real reaction of management in the light of the change that created a new situation. Management reaction may reveal the integrity and competence that create trust in their relationship with the employees. Although, the trust may be undermined by managers and causes employees fear of change as the new situation threaten their jobs and eliminate the existing benefits. The group norms are likely to influence the employees’ attitude to the distrust of their managers and causes behaviors such as opportunistic, or malevolent behavior. In order to solve the problem of distrust, managers can break down the problem to know exactly the reason that caused the employees to lack trust in him. They can also interpret the distrust attitude as resistance to change from the side of the employees. In this case, the trusted repair should take place if it has weakened during the change management process. Change should not be considered as an organizational failure due to problems related to uncertainty. The problems that take place at the organizational level affects the organization at large. As this change is made by management, employees relate the consequences of the change to the managers (Sorensen et al., 2011).
Paradox used to take place in organizations, evidence reveals that complex, uncertain, volatile and ambiguous environment is a main characteristic of the public sector organization. It is essential for leaders in the public sector to face the complex, paradoxical and wicked challenges. Their outcomes vary according to their response to such situations. The paradox is continuous contradictions between elements that act interdependently, these elements seem logical when they act in isolation. Despite the paradox, the leaders do much effort to influence the organizational outcomes (Soon et al., 2016). The examination of leadership in different conditions reveals its paradoxical nature in the modern organizations (Bligh, 2016).
Change is considered as a common thread that affects all types of organizations regardless of their size, age or industry.
References
Ajmal, S., Farooq, M., Sajid, N. & Awan, S., 2012. Role of leadership in change management process. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2), pp. 111-124.
Ajmal, S., Farooq, Z., Sajid, N. & Awan, S., 2012. Role of leadership in change management process. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2), pp. 111-124.
Appelbaum, S., Habashy, S., Malo, J. & Shafiq, H., 2012. Back to the future: revisiting Kotter’s 1996 change model. Journal of Management Development, 31(8), pp. 764-782.
Australian Public Service Commission, 2007. Tackeling wicked problems, s.l.: Australian Government.
Bligh, M., 2016. Introduction: Exploring compelling contexts through paradox, tension, and new approaches to leadership. In: Leadership Lessons from Compelling Contexts. s.l.:Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Buk?aha, E., 2012. Change management in organization based on APMG change management methodology, Poland: Warsaw School of Economics.
Chen, J., Suen, M., Lin, M. & Shieh, F., 2011. Organizational change and development. T&D, Volume 113, pp. 1-13.
Durmaz, V., 2011. Organizational change for The environmentally sustainable airport management. Emerging Markets Journal, Volume 1.
Feng, C., Huang, X. & Zhang, L., 2016. A multilevel study of transformational leadership, dual organizational change and innovative behavior in groups. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(6), pp. 855-877.
Fraher, A. & Grint, K., 2016. Agonistic Governance: The antinomies of decision-making in U.S. Navy SEALs. Leadership, 0(0), pp. 1-20.
Grint, K., 2005. Problems, problems, problems:The social construction of ‘leadership’. Human Relations, 58(11), p. 1467–1494.
Horn, R. & Weber, R., 2007. New Tools For resolving wicked problems, San Francisco: Inc. and Strategy Kinetics, LLC.
Janeczko, L., 2011. Managing wicked policy problems: A case for deliberative practices, Australia: Murdoch University.
Malmstrom, M., 2016. Cognitive micro-foundations at work: how organizations resist change in work practice. Baltic Journal of Management, 11(4), pp. 473-492.
Markos, S., 2010. Employee engagement: The key to improving performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(12), pp. 89-96.
McGivern, G. et al., 2017. The silent politics of temporal work: a case study of a management consultancy project to redesign public health care, s.l.: Organization Studies.
McMillan, C. & Overall, J., 2016. Wicked problems: turning strategic management upside down. Journal of Business Strategy, 37(1), pp. 34-43.
Mourfield, R., 2014. Organizational change: A guide to bringing everyone on board, USA: Indiana University.
Obolensky, N., 2007. Chaos Leadership and Polyarchy – countering leadership stress?, UK: University of Exeter.
Schwalbe, M., McTague, T. & Parrotta, K., 2016. Identity contests and the negotiation of organizational change. In: Advances in Group Processes. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 57-92.
Senior, B. & Swailes, S., 2007. Inside management teams: developing a teamwork survey instrument. British Journal of Management, Volume 18, p. 138–153.
Soon, S., Yan, W. & Bolden, R., 2016. Paradoxes of leadership: An exploratory study of public sector leadership in contexts of complexity, ambiguity and uncertainty, Singapore: Civil Service College.
Sorensen, O., Hasle, P. & Pejtersen, J., 2011. Trust relations in management of change. Scandinavian Journal of Management, Volume 27, p. 405—417.
Thomas, R., Sargent, L. & Hardy, C., 2011. Managing organizational change: Negotiating meaning and power-resistance relations. Organization Science, 22(1), pp. 22-41.
Visagie, C., 2010. The relationship between employee attitudes towards planned organizational change and organizational committment: An investigation of a selected case within the South Africaan telecommunications industry, South Africa: Cape Peninsula University.
Welch, M., 2011. The evolution of the employee engagement concept: communication implications. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 16(4), pp. 328-346.
Ybema, S., 2017. Resistance through compliance: The strategic and subversive potential of frontstage and backstage resistance. Organization Studies, 38(9), p. 1233–1251.
Yergler, J., 2011. Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(3), pp. 316-318.
Zin, R. & Vrontis, D., 2010. The reactions of employees toward the implementation of human resources information systems (HRIS) as a planned change program: A case study in Malaysia. Journal of Transnational Management, Volume 15, p. 229–245.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order formOnce we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignmentAs soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download