Changing it Up: Comparing Continuous and Discontinuous Change in US Business

Continuous and discontinuous change are two different approaches to managing organizational change. Continuous change is a gradual, incremental process that focuses on making small, ongoing improvements to existing systems and processes. Discontinuous change, on the other hand, is a more radical approach that involves making significant and sometimes disruptive changes to the organization’s structure, systems, and processes.

In this blog post, we will take a look at two US-based organizations that have followed continuous and discontinuous change methodologies and examine which one has remained successful and why.

The first organization we will examine is General Electric (GE), a multinational conglomerate that operates in a wide range of industries, including aviation, energy, healthcare, and finance. For decades, GE was known for its continuous improvement approach to change, with a focus on driving efficiencies and reducing costs across its operations. This approach helped GE to maintain its position as a leading player in the global market for many years.

However, in recent years, GE has undergone a significant transformation, shifting its focus towards more discontinuous change. In 2018, the company announced a major restructuring plan, which involved selling off many of its core businesses, including its healthcare and energy divisions. The goal of this transformation was to streamline the company’s operations and focus on its core strengths in aviation and renewable energy.

While it is still too early to say whether this transformation will be successful in the long term, early indicators suggest that it has been a challenging process for GE. The company has faced significant financial losses, and its stock price has been in decline in recent years. However, some experts argue that this transformation is necessary for the company to remain competitive in the long term and that the company’s focus on disruptive change may ultimately pay off.

The second organization we will examine is Amazon, a multinational technology company that is known for its innovative and disruptive approach to business. Amazon has followed a continuous change methodology from the beginning, constantly seeking to improve its operations and processes to better serve its customers.

One of the ways that Amazon has achieved continuous improvement is through its culture of experimentation and innovation. The company encourages its employees to come up with new ideas and try out new approaches, and it is not afraid to experiment with new technologies and business models. This approach has allowed Amazon to stay ahead of the curve in a rapidly changing industry and has helped the company to remain successful over the long term.

In conclusion, both continuous and discontinuous change methodologies can be effective for managing organizational change, depending on the specific circumstances and goals of the organization. However, in the case of Amazon and GE, it is clear that a culture of continuous improvement and innovation has been key to their success. While GE’s shift towards more disruptive change may ultimately pay off, it remains to be seen whether the company can navigate this transformation successfully in the long term.

Action Research Method: A Dynamic Approach to Organizational Change

Organizations are dynamic systems that constantly change to adapt to new environments, technologies, and competitors. Change management is a critical function in ensuring that these changes are effective and sustainable. One of the most powerful tools in change management is the Action Research Method (ARM), which is an iterative process of problem-solving that involves collaboration between researchers and practitioners. This blog post will explore the origin and contributions of ARM in change management, its utility in modern-day organizations, how US organizations have taken advantage of this method, and the future of ARM in organizational development.

Origin and Contribution of Action Research Method

The ARM was first introduced in the 1940s by Kurt Lewin, a psychologist, and social scientist. Lewin used the ARM to study group dynamics and social change. ARM is a cyclical process that involves four stages: planning, action, observation, and reflection. In the planning stage, the problem is identified, and the research question is formulated. In the action stage, the intervention is designed and implemented. In the observation stage, the effects of the intervention are observed and measured. In the reflection stage, the results are analyzed, and adjustments are made to improve the intervention.

ARM is an effective tool in change management because it involves collaboration between researchers and practitioners. It enables practitioners to participate actively in the research process and to take ownership of the results. This ownership increases the likelihood of successful implementation and sustainability of the change. ARM is also beneficial because it is a flexible and adaptable process that can be customized to fit the unique needs of each organization.

Utility of Action Research Method in Modern-day Organizations

ARM is especially relevant in modern-day organizations that operate in complex and rapidly changing environments. The ARM enables organizations to address specific problems and challenges in a targeted and efficient manner. The ARM is also beneficial because it involves stakeholders at every stage of the process, which increases their engagement and commitment to the change.

US Organizations that Utilized Action Research Method

Several US organizations have used the ARM to address organizational challenges. For example, General Electric used the ARM to develop a new leadership development program that was tailored to the needs of the organization. The program was successful in developing a new generation of leaders who were able to drive change and innovation. Another example is the National Institute of Health (NIH), which used the ARM to improve the effectiveness of its research programs. The ARM enabled NIH to identify and address specific areas of weakness and to develop new strategies for improving research outcomes.

Steps Organizations Take to Implement Action Research

Organizations that undertake action research typically follow a series of steps to ensure the process is effective and produces the desired outcomes. The following are the steps that organizations commonly take to carry out action research:

1. Identify the problem: The first step is to identify the problem that the organization wants to address. This could be a specific issue, such as low employee engagement or a broader concern, such as declining market share.
2. Formulate research questions: Once the problem has been identified, the organization needs to formulate research questions that will guide the action research process. These questions should be focused and specific and should relate directly to the problem identified.
3. Develop a research plan: The organization then needs to develop a research plan that outlines how the action research will be carried out. This plan should include details on the research methods, data collection tools, and analysis techniques that will be used.
4. Implement the research plan: The next step is to implement the research plan. This involves collecting data through various methods, such as surveys, interviews, and focus groups.
5. Analyze the data: Once the data has been collected, it needs to be analyzed to identify trends, patterns, and insights. This analysis will inform the development of interventions or solutions to address the problem.
6. Develop interventions: Based on the data analysis, the organization needs to develop interventions or solutions to address the problem identified. These interventions should be targeted and specific and should be developed in collaboration with key stakeholders.
7. Implement interventions: The interventions developed need to be implemented in the organization. This may involve training programs, changes to policies and procedures, or other interventions that address the root cause of the problem.
8. Monitor and evaluate progress: The final step is to monitor and evaluate the progress of the interventions implemented. This will help the organization determine if the interventions were effective in addressing the problem and if any further action is needed.

The key to success in action research is to involve key stakeholders throughout the process and to ensure that the interventions developed are specific, targeted, and sustainable over the long term.

Employees’ Role During Action Research Intervention

Employees play a critical role in carrying out action research activities during organization development programs. They are often the ones who provide the data and insights needed to identify the problem and develop interventions to address it. Additionally, employees are typically the ones who will be most impacted by the interventions developed and implemented, so their active participation is essential to ensure the success of the program.

There are many examples of organizations that have successfully used action research to improve their operations and achieve their goals. For instance, one well-known example is the case of Ford Motor Company. In the 1980s, Ford was facing a significant challenge in terms of quality control. In response, the company launched an action research program that involved employees at all levels of the organization. Through this program, employees were encouraged to identify and address quality issues in real time, rather than waiting for problems to escalate. The program was led by a team of internal consultants who worked closely with employees at all levels of the organization, from front-line workers to senior executives.

Employee participation in action research activities can occur at all levels of the organization. Ideally, all employees should be encouraged to participate, as they all have valuable insights and perspectives to contribute. However, in practice, employee participation may be more focused at certain levels of the organization, depending on the nature of the problem being addressed and the interventions being developed. For example, front-line employees may be more heavily involved in identifying and addressing quality issues, while senior executives may be more focused on developing and implementing strategic interventions.

The success of an action research program depends on the active participation of employees at all levels of the organization. By involving employees in the process, organizations can tap into the collective intelligence of their workforce and develop interventions that are more effective, sustainable, and aligned with the needs of the organization.

Future Utility of Action Research Method

The ARM is likely to remain a relevant and effective tool in organizational development in the future. As organizations continue to operate in complex and rapidly changing environments, the ARM will enable them to address specific problems and challenges in a targeted and efficient manner. The ARM is also likely to become more integrated with emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, which will enable organizations to analyze and interpret data more effectively.

References:

• Bradbury, H., & Reason, P. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. Sage Publications.
• Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2015). Organization Development and Change. Cengage Learning.
• Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34-46.
• Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
• Van de Ven, A. H., & Johnson, P. E. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 802-821.

Navigating Resistance to Change: Strategies for Engaging Employees in Organizational Transformation

Change is an inevitable part of organizational life. In today’s fast-paced business environment, organizations must adapt quickly to stay competitive and respond to new technologies, changing customer demands, and economic conditions. However, change can also be disruptive, unsettling, and often met with resistance from employees. In this blog post, we’ll explore the concept of resistance to change, the reasons behind it, and strategies for engaging employees in organizational transformation.

Change refers to any alteration in an organization’s processes, strategies, tactics, or structures. It can be triggered by internal or external factors, such as shifts in market conditions, new technologies, mergers, acquisitions, or changes in leadership.

Organizational change can take many forms, including structural, strategic, process, and cultural changes. Structural changes involve alterations to the organization’s physical or hierarchical structure, while strategic changes involve shifts in the company’s goals and objectives. Process changes involve modifications to the way work is done, and cultural changes involve changes to the values, norms, and behaviors of the organization. Organizations sense the gravity of the situation when they start to experience the negative consequences of not changing. This could be a decline in sales, loss of market share, decreased productivity, or increased turnover. Organizations realize that responding to change is inevitable when they recognize that the status quo is no longer sustainable, and change is necessary to remain competitive.

Employees resist change for a variety of reasons, including fear of the unknown, fear of job loss, lack of trust in leadership, and a feeling of not being consulted or involved in the change process. When employees resist change, it can lead to decreased productivity, increased absenteeism, decreased morale, and increased turnover. It can also delay the implementation of the change, leading to further negative consequences.

To reduce resistance to change, organizations must engage employees in the change process, address their concerns, and provide support and training to help them adjust to the new reality. Here are some strategies for reducing resistance to change:

1. Communicate early and often: Communicate the reasons for the change, the benefits, and how it will impact employees’ jobs.
2. Involve employees: Involve employees in the planning and implementation of the change. Solicit their feedback, ideas, and suggestions.
3. Provide training: Provide training and support to help employees adjust to the new reality.
4. Address concerns: Address employee concerns and fears, and provide reassurance where possible.
5. Celebrate successes: Celebrate small wins along the way to help build momentum and maintain motivation.

Change is never easy, but with the right strategies and interventions, organizations can reduce resistance and engage employees in the transformation process. By communicating early and often, involving employees, providing training and support, and addressing concerns, organizations can win the confidence of employees and make them part of the solution instead of turning them into a part of the problem. In the end, a successful organizational transformation requires a shared commitment from all stakeholders, including employees, leaders, and stakeholders.

References:

1. Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2015). Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools, and techniques of organizational change. Kogan Page Publishers.
2. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business Press.
3. Oreg, S., & Berson, Y. (2019). Leadership and employees’ reactions to organizational change: The role of leaders’ personal attributes and transformational leadership style. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(3), 277-287.
4. Ford, J. D., Ford, L. W., & D’Amelio, A. (2008). Resistance to change: The rest of the story. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 362-377.
5. Huy, Q. N. (2002). Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and radical change: The contribution of middle managers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1), 31-69.
6. Beer, M., & Nohria, N. (2000). Cracking the code of change. Harvard Business Review, 78(3), 133-141.
7. Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. (2007). Winning through innovation: A practical guide to leading organizational change and renewal. Harvard Business Press.

Radical Change: How Organizations Can Succeed or Fail

Radical change refers to significant and fundamental shifts in an organization’s structure, culture, or strategy. These changes are often necessary to adapt to new markets, technology, or customer demands. In the business world, radical change can bring huge success or disastrous consequences for an organization. In this blog post, we will explore examples of both and discuss the indicators that can alert corporate leaders about the impending change.

Example of Radical Change Leading to Success: Netflix

Netflix started as a DVD-by-mail rental service, but in 2007, the company made a radical change by launching its streaming service. This move disrupted the traditional cable TV industry and transformed the way people consume media. Netflix’s radical change allowed the company to stay ahead of its competitors and expand its market reach. Today, Netflix has over 200 million subscribers worldwide and is worth over $200 billion.

Example of Failure to Manage Radical Change: Kodak

Kodak was once a leading company in the photography industry, but the company failed to manage the radical change brought on by the digital age. Kodak invented the first digital camera in 1975 but failed to capitalize on the technology due to concerns about cannibalizing its lucrative film business. Kodak’s failure to embrace digital photography and adapt to the new market ultimately led to its bankruptcy in 2012.

Indicators of Impending Radical Change

Corporate leaders need to be aware of the signs that can indicate an impending radical change. Some of the indicators include:

1. Market Trends: Changes in customer behavior or market demands can signal the need for radical change. For example, the rise of e-commerce and mobile technology has radically changed the retail industry.
2. Technology Advancements: Technological innovations can bring radical change to an industry. Companies that fail to keep up with technology risk being left behind. For example, Blockbuster Video failed to adapt to the digital age and lost out to Netflix.
3. Competitor Actions: Competitors that are making radical changes should be monitored closely. Companies that fail to respond to competitors’ radical changes risk being left behind. For example, Uber disrupted the taxi industry by offering a more convenient and affordable alternative.
4. Regulatory Changes: Changes in regulations can require companies to make radical changes to comply. Failure to comply with regulations can result in fines or even the closure of the company. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) required companies to make radical changes to their data privacy policies.

Radical change can bring either success or failure to an organization. Corporate leaders must be aware of the signs that can indicate an impending radical change and be prepared to adapt. Companies that successfully manage radical change can stay ahead of their competitors and thrive in the long term.

Organizational Renewal: Adapting to Change

Managing effectively is a major challenge facing organizations today. When organization fails to change, the cost of failure may means its survival. Because the environment is composed of system outside the immediate influence of the organization, it must adapt itself to those forces  by introducing internal changes that will allow it to be more effective.

To be successful, organization must develop a managerial style and culture that can adequately handle the challenges and opportunities they face. A management style that was adequate under one set of conditions may become progressively less effective under changing circumstances.

What is a Corporate Culture?

The most important step to introduce successful planned change management programs is to understand the corporate culture of an organization.

We all know that companies with outstanding financial performance often have powerful corporate cultures, suggesting that “culture” is the key to an organization’s success.

Cultural change does not happen in an organization; it is usually result of a complex change strategy implemented by company’s management.

Let’s examine what is corporate culture all about:

A corporate culture is a system of shared values and beliefs that interact with an organization’s people, structure, and system to produce behavioral norms (“the way things are done around here”)

How to Select an OD Practitioner?

Any organization that would embark upon OD programs, will face the most important question: Who should we hire as OD practitioner to manage and coordinate OD program?

Unfortunately little systematic advice is available on how to choose a competent OD practitioner, whether from inside or outside of the organization.

Gordon Lippit, a well-known OD practitioner of his time, provided some guidelines for the organizations to answer this question. He listed areas  that managers should consider before selecting a practitioner, including the ability of consultant to:

Understanding the Concept of Change in an Organizational Context

The famous American Quality Guru J.Edward Deming once stated, “No one has to change, survival is optional.”

This statement and many other quotations by famous management gurus and thinkers provide us food for thought to discuss and understand the fundamental concept of change; for it lays the very foundation of the discipline of Organization Development.

In the following paragraphs, I would attempt to explain the philosophy of change and its underlying mechanics  in an organizational context.

The increasing pace of global, economic, social and technological development makes change an inevitable feature of organizational life. Keeping a pace with them in a fast changing environment is a daunting task for most of the organizations. Many firms are finding it difficult to adapt to these changes.

The Characteristics of Organization Development

Here are some basic characteristics of an OD program:

Change: OD is a planned strategy to bring about organizational change. The change effort aims at specific objectives and is based on a diagnosis of problem areas.

Collaborative: OD is typically involves a collaborative approach to change that includes involvement and participation of the organization members most affected by the changes.

Performance: OD programs include an emphasis on ways to improve and enhance performance and quality.

Systems: OD represents a system approach concerned with the interrelationship of divisions, departments, groups, and individuals as interdependent subsystems of the total organization.

Scientific: OD is based upon scientific approaches to increase organization effectiveness.

What is the role of change leader in organization development?

A change leader is a person in an organization responsible for organization’s renewal or changing existing pattern to obtain more effective organizational performance. Typically, it is the CEO of an organization that acts as change leader, sometimes, also known as change manager of his/her organization.  He/She  is the advocate of change in his/her organization and introduces companywide change programs.