Managing Opposition to Change

business_boxer_400_clr_9457We all know what it feels like to have a great idea that we know will absolutely make the organization better; and then comes the opposition.  When opposition shows up, we brace ourselves for the battle that we knew would come. There is a different perspective and approach to opposition that can make you a more effective leader, in addition to helping you accomplish your goals.  As Daft and Marcic (2011) explain, this approach begins by understanding the four major reasons that people resist change in the first place (Daft, Marcic, 2011):

  • They believe the change is a threat to their own self-interest;
  • A lack of understanding and/or trust;
  • Fear created by uncertainty; and
  • Different goals.

When we understand why people are resisting, we know how to meet that resistance. If the people believe the change will cause them a loss of power, authority, money, or whatever, they will resist.  You must then show them how the change will benefit them.  If they must give up something, show them what they will get in exchange.

When there is a lack of understanding or trust, fill in the blanks for them.  Understanding their resistance from their perspective, allows you to do that.  That means you have to actively listen to them.  If it is a lack of genuine trust, you may have to back up, slow down, and build a level of trust before you attempt to successfully change their world.

Uncertainty refers to fear caused by a lack of information.  When we don’t know how something will affect us, it causes anxiety, especially when it involves things like income and promotion.  When we attempt to initiate change, it is important to thoroughly consider and provide information that will lessen the initial level of anxiety.  Plan your change before you try to work your change by anticipating and answering questions first. Lastly, sometimes people simply have different goals.

View this as a great opportunity to build relationship through open dialogue.  Negotiate, and make it a win-win for everyone.  People are usually willing to give up something if they know they will get something else in return. When we approach opposition as an opportunity for dialogue, it sharpens our skills, which makes us a better leader and allows everyone to win.

Daft, R.L., Marcic, D.  (2011).  Understanding management 7e.  South-Western Cengage Learning.  Mason, OH

Send me your email, dianaforhim@gmail.com, and I will personally add you to our list.  Or, you can visit our website to join, Diana For Him.  I promise you, we will not send you tons of emails.

Please follow and like us:

Characteristics of Future Leaders of 21st Century Learning Organizations

Organization Synergist (OS)

Organization Synergist (OS)

Theorists agree that having a strong stable culture is a component to organizational effectiveness and lasting performance.  It stabilizes the organization by providing a sense of purpose and predictability for those who participate in the organization.  Stabilization can, however, become a liability in a world of constant and rapid change, such as in this 21st Century information Age.  The solution to this contradictory relationship lies in the creation of a stable learning-oriented culture, that is both adaptive and flexible, and where leaders themselves are perpetual learners, who learn themselves and train others to respond to their rapidly changing environments on a situational basis (Schein, 2010).

Characteristics of the learning culture

This learning culture would adopt the assumption of proactive problem solving and learners.  Everyone in the organization would be a problem solver and learner that the leader could call upon.  And because of the rapidity and complexity of environmental changes needing to be addressed in a face-paced environment, such as new regulations or technologies, the focus of organizational commitment would be on learning and individualized problem solving (Schein, 2010).

The underlying cultural assumption for the learning culture would be that learning, and mastering the learning process are skills worthy of pursuit.  Three focal points of learning would be:  learning about changes in the external environment, learning about successfully managing internal relationships, and learning how well the organization has adapted to changes in the external environment.  The master key to learning, however, would be requested feedback, and seeking and asking for help.  Another key to the learning culture is innovation, finding new ways of doing things, with a high value placed on reflection and experimentation.  Even failure would be seen as an opportunity to learn (Schein, 2010).

Assumptions about human nature would align with McGregor’s Theory Y, which believes that employees are imaginative, intelligent, willing to exercise self-control, and contributing to organizational goals when the opportunity is given to them (Daft, Marcic, 2011).  Theory Y employees embrace the assumption that the environment, although changing, is manageable.  They believe that change is manageable, so they do not fear change.  This becomes even more acceptable in light of the fact that everyone is a problem solver, and that adaptation is itself seen as a learning process (Schein, 2010).

The learning culture will share the assumption that truth is found as a result of commitment, inquiry, and search, and not to be found in any one source.  Truth can be found in science, experience, experimentation, and other cultures.  In the learning culture, leaders will no longer be expected to have all the answers.  Learning will be a shared responsibility by everyone in the organization (Schein, 2010).

Because of the speed of environmental change, assumptions relating to time orientation in the learning culture will necessitate analyzing the near and farther future.   Communication and information sharing must be such that everyone has access to the people and information they need in order to successfully solve their problems.  Information flow will be task-relevant, and based upon trust between the parties.  There will be a solid commitment to effective diversity throughout all organizational levels, where diversity will be optimized by purposeful coordination mechanisms and mutual cultural understanding (Schein, 2010).

It will be assumed that the world is becoming more complex, requiring a commitment to systemic thinking, forsaking the simple linear causal logic.  Cultural analysis will be deemed an important mechanism to understand the nature of various groups and organizations, and how they accomplish what they do (Schein, 2010).

Characteristics of learning leaders

There are five characteristics learning leaders must possess:  perception and insight, motivation, emotional strength, cultural innovation, and participatory influence.

Perception and insight

            Cultural assumptions are unconscious beliefs and values that are shared by the members of an organization that determine behavior, perception, thought, and feelings of the members of that organization.  Because they are unconscious, the learning leader must learn to be perceptive in understanding the concept of cultural issues.  This includes how to analyze, impact, and/or change the dysfunctional elements of a culture.  Driskill and Brenton (2011) explain that cultural elements are not the culture itself; they only create the culture and reveal it.  This means that the leader must possess the skills to observe cultural elements, which could be symbols, stories, values, artifacts, rituals, or rules, and discern insightful meanings as to what those elements say about the underlying assumptions of its members, how those assumptions are manifested in the attitudes of its members, and the impact of those assumptions on the success or failure of the organization.  Driskill and Brenton call these elements, “surface manifestations of culture that offer insights into deeper layers of assumptions and values” (Driskill, Brenton, 2011, p.41).

Motivation

             Learning leaders must be self-motivated purpose-driven people, motivated by their commitment to the well-being and success of the organization and its members. This commitment to the organization becomes the impetus for initiating the painful process of confronting cultural issues associated with one’s own organization, and beginning the arduous task of cultural and human behavioral changes that are accomplished through unfreezing, intervention, refreezing, and implementation (Daft, Marcic, 2011).  Schein states that these leaders must learn to skillfully communicate their dedication and commitment to the organization and to others, above and beyond their own personal success (Schein, 2010).

Emotional strength

            People resist change for a variety of  reasons.  They may believe the change will conflict with their own self-interests in some way.  They may lack an understanding about the change and trust.  There may be levels of uncertainty regarding the change.  Some may worry that the change may differ from their own goals and plans (Daft, Marcic, 2011).  Attempts to change organizational culture will produce anxiety as predictability is removed, and subject the leader to be a target of member anger, discontentment, and criticism.  The leader must learn to be thick-skinned, capable of bearing the targeted abuse, and always ready to re-communicate the well-being of the organization as the primary reason for the proposed change (Schein, 2010).

Ability to change the cultural assumptions

            Any cultural assumption that is being targeted for replacement, must be replaced or redefined by the learning leader, with a new innovative value or concept, which must be skillfully reiterated to its members.  The leader must therefore not only possess the ability to know what is culturally inadequate, but he or she must also have the ability of deciding what the proper assumption should be, and successfully ensuring that the new assumption is properly embedded into the organizational culture (Schein, 2010).

Ability to create involvement and participation

             The learning leader must be fully engaged in the process with others in the organizational community, by learning to genuinely listen to their concerns and solicit their insights, ensuring them that their concerns are important to him.  Schein states that the end result of cultural change is that the assumption is redefined in the minds of its members, which will require full and active participation on their part.  This will require skillful relationship management on the part of the learning leader, and humility in recognizing that he or she does not possess all the answers (Schein, 2010).


 

References

Daft, R.L., Marcic, D.  (2011).  Understanding management 7th edition.  South-Western Cengage

     Learning.  Mason, OH 45040.

Driskill, G.W., Brenton, A.L.  (2011).  Organizational culture in action a cultural analysis

      workbook 2nd edition.   Sage Publications, Inc.  Thousand Oaks, CA 91320.

Schein, E.H.  (2010).  Organizational culture and leadership fourth edition.  John Wiley & Sons,

     Inc.  San Francisco, CA  94103-1741.

Please follow and like us:

5 Strategies for Resolving Conflict

Quick Tips for Managing Everyday Conflict

fighting_over_helm_400_clr_6419 

Conflict can be manageable, when you understanding the cause, and know definite strategies to resolve it.    

        

Decide on your ultimate goal by isolating side issues  

            What do you really want to do?  Isolate the conflict from side issues like what others want or think.  Example.  If  you were a human resource manager seeking to fill a position, your primary goal would be to select the best candidate for the open position in the department.  That means you may have to overlook who expects to get the position, or what others want.

Ascertain the Real Source of the conflict

            There are three main causes for most conflicts:  personality differences, communication differences, and structural differences.   To resolve a conflict, you have to clearly understand the real cause of the conflict.  Personality differences involve personal idiosyncrasies, value and education differences, or individual chemistry that just doesn’t mix.  Conflicts arising from personality differences are typically handled through education and tolerance training.  Conflicts caused by communication differences are misunderstandings due to some type of cultural or age differences, or where people speak different languages.  This requires training in effective communication.  Conflicts caused by structural differences are the result of interactions between employees in different departments with different goals.  Negotiation is key.  If possible, make it a win-win for everybody.

Choose the Best Conflict-Handling Style

            There are five primary strategies for handling conflicts.   Neither of the five always works best in every situation.

·         Collaboration

·         Compromise

·         Avoidance

·         Accommodation        

·         Forcing

Collaborating is a win-win style that looks for solutions where everyone wins.  Everyone’s interests are addressed. It works best when time is not an issue and when the conflict is too important to be compromised.

Compromise is a style where everyone wins some and everyone loses some.  It works best when both sides of the conflict are equal in power, or you need a quick fix to a complex problem.

Avoidance should be used for trivial conflicts.  It often means taking the high road.  It’s an ideal style when emotions are high and the potential for disruption is more costly than an immediate resolution.

Accommodation is a good choice when its important to maintain harmony in relationship.  It means putting the other person’s needs and desires above your own, and it works well when the dispute is not that important to you.  It also allows you to build points for the next dispute, which might be more important to you.

Forcing is a style used by people with formal authority to resolve a dispute.  It works well when there is a shortage of time, or when unpopular actions need to be taken.

 

Oliver, J.M. et al.  (2009).  Interperson professional communication:  National American University.  Pearson Custom Publishing.  United States of America.

Please follow and like us:

How to Develop Ethical Standards for Your Organization

Organizational leaders can no longer choose whether or not to have an ethical culture, with measurable and enforceable standards.  The Sarbanes Oxley Act (SOX) and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations (FSGO) both dictate that leaders of organizations will be held liable for the oversight of their organization.  New federal regulations remove the defense of ignorance, holding board of directors, CEOs, CFOs, and other leaders accountable for what employees do.  This article looks at the process of developing ethical standards with regard to content, training and communication, and enforcement.

Organization Synergist (OS)

Organization Synergist (OS)

Developing Ethical Standards

            The standards themselves are the nuts and bolts of the ethical culture being created and established. They come in the form of a code of conduct, a code of ethics, or a statement of values.  The code of ethics is typically the most comprehensive, although all three forms are interchangeable.  Participants in composing standards should be the president, board of directors, and the CEO (Ferrell et al., 2013).  Two critical components most important when developing ethical standards are what Kranacher (2006) calls the tone at the top.  Kranacher (2006) describes the tone at the top concept as, “a comprehensive program that goes beyond ‘setting a good example’ and ‘doing the right thing’; it requires an organization’s management to act on the principles embodied in its formal ethics policy” (Kranacher, 2006, p.80).   No matter how well written the standards are or what format they take, they must be visibly supported and upheld by the actions of those at the top.

The second critical component of the standards is the content.  They must reflect the desires of top management for compliance to the organization’s cultural values, rules, and policies.  They should also address what Ferrell et al. describes as “high-risk activities that fall within the scope of daily operations” (Ferrell et al., 2013, p.223).  Other considerations for inclusion are:

1).     Stating risk areas complemented with the values and the explicit conduct that is necessary for compliance with laws and regulations.  In other words, do not assume that readers are capable of connecting the values and knowing the right conduct.  When you spell out the values and conduct, it makes it easier for them to obey (Ferrell et al., 2013).

2)     Identifying and addressing the specific ethical issues that are relevant to the organization.  This, of course, is indicative of the fact that an analysis must precede the construction of the ethics program (Ferrell et al., 2013).

3)     Consider values from the stakeholders’ perspective, and look for areas of overlap, where stakeholders and organization values are the same.  Including stakeholder values creates inclusiveness and unity among the organization and its stakeholders (Ferrell et al., 2013).

4)     Use examples to reflect values.  Draw pictures for people to help them understand the value behind the rule or procedure.  When people understand why they are being asked to do something, they become more agreeable (Ferrell et al., 2013).

5)     The code must be communicated frequently and in a way that people can thoroughly understand (Ferrell et al., 2013).

6)     The code should be revised each year, allowing input from all stakeholders.  As the organization grows, new issues will arise and need to be included.  This is a continuing project (Ferrell et al., 2013).

Training and Communicating the Ethics Program

            A major component to establishing an ethical culture is ethics training.  According to Ferrell et al., three factors influence ethical decision-making of employees:  the corporate culture, co-workers and supervisors, and opportunities to engage in unethical behaviors.  Ethics training can impact all three areas of influence.  Employees who understand their company’s philosophical position on ethical behavior are less likely to engage in unethical behaviors.  Every department manager must be involved in the development of ethics training, which should be individualized for the unique features of the organization.  Components of an effective training program should include:  a theoretical foundation, a code of ethics, procedural guidelines for airing ethical issues, involvement from both line and staff, and explicit executive priorities regarding ethics (Ferrell et al., 2013).

                When creating and establishing a new ethical culture in an organization, training can be used as a strategy for building shared vision.  It is through genuinely shared vision that leaders are able to obtain commitment and focus from their members.  Peter Senge (1994) in his book, “The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook,” shares the story of Vaclav Havel, who was elected president of Czechoslovakia in 1989, when it first became a democracy.  Although Havel had plenty of ideas about what this new country should be like, understanding the dangers of imposing vision, he wisely restrained himself and developed strategic mechanisms that involved the entire country in the process of rebuilding.  While he admits that sharing vision did not solve all of the country’s problems, it did create an environment where, “ . . . people believed they were part of a common entity – community” (Senge, 1994, p.298).  In this same way, training can be strategically used to create community through the sharing of vision.

Monitoring and Enforcing Ethical Standards

            When codes of ethics are aggressively enforced and become an integral part of the company’s culture, ethical behavior in the organization will improve.  Enforcement and employee conduct must, however, be measured and evaluated for effectiveness, and altered when necessary.  Among the variety of methods that can be used are internal audits, observing employees, surveys, questionnaires, and hotlines.  One of the keys to measuring effectiveness is input and feedback from employees (Ferrell et al., 2013).

            Another major tool for determining the effectiveness of an ethics program is the ethics audit which identifies and measures an organization’s commitment to its ethical procedures and policies.  It uses objective systematic evaluation to determine whether its program and policies are effective.   It is not required, but when used demonstrates to stakeholders that the company is committed to improving its strategic planning, and serious about its responsibility to comply with legal and ethical standards (Ferrell et al., 2013).

            Organizations of all types play a major role in all of society.   As a result of increased competition, advanced technologies, and public scandals, companies are being forced to operate and function at a higher level of ethical standards.   Many organizations in their efforts to meet these new requirements will have to re-create and establish a new ethical culture.  This major initiative begins with an understanding about the role that organizational culture plays in the decision-making process.  Leaders must then be acquainted with new responsibilities connected to new roles as ethical leaders in a new culture.  A new ethics programs will have to be developed and implemented with the involvement of employees at every level of the organization.  Once implemented, the new ethics program should be monitored and systematically evaluated for effectiveness.   


References

Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, J., Ferrell, L. (2013). Business ethics ethical decision making and cases (9th edition).     

     South-Western Cengage Learning.  Mason, OH  45040.

Kranacher, M. (2006, October). Creating an Ethical Culture. CPA Journal. p. 80.

Senge, P. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook: strategies and tools for building a learning organization. 

     Doubleday.  www.currencybooks.com.

Please follow and like us:

The Role of Leaders in Creating & Establishing an Ethical Culture

Why have an ethical culture?  Because experts agree that the degree of ethics in the culture of an organization has a direct impact on the financial success of the organization.  This makes having an ethical culture an important issue.  This articles explains the roles of various leaders in the ethical culture creation process.

The Role of Leaders in the Creation of an Ethical Culture

It is the leadership of an organization, comprised of founders, managers, and boards of directors that are the main contributors to the culture of an organization.  Meyers describes this process as, “those in positions of authority use their power to create the de facto rules and values and to motivate behavior consistent with them” (Meyers, 2004, p.273).  These leaders themselves are products of other macrocultures and organizations to which they have previously belonged, as are other employees who also play a part in the culture setting process so that the end product is what Schein (2010) calls a blend (Schein, 2010).  Whether re-creating culture through planned or managed change, or establishing an original culture, leaders set forth their values explicitly by way of written rules and procedures.  They reinforce their true values implicitly by their actions.  Without implicit actions, statements and policies have little effect (Meyers, 2004).

Rose Evans, the vice president of a successful property management company and member of IREM Ethics Appeal Board illustrates the type of implicit reinforcement leaders must exhibit.  During her own interview for a position at a firm that manages one of the largest  portfolios in the Northeast, she asked pointed questions about the integrity of the bidding process.  She describes procedures in place to protect their clients’ monies by requiring two signatures to move even small amounts of monies.  When hiring she asks prospective applicants ethical questions about what they believe to be acceptable behavior.  Background checks are not only done on all applicants, but carefully reviewed.  Suppliers are required to submit references, which are checked (Evans, 2009).

Leaders must possess virtues of moral character, of which three are most important.  First, they must have practical wisdom in order to analyze problems, distinguishing between relevant facts and non-relevant facts to determine the best means for achieving the desired outcome.  Second, they must be honest with themselves and with others.  Third, they must have the courage to do what is right even in the face of peer or managerial pressures (Meyers, 2004).

The Role of Boards of Directors

            Prior to passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) and SEC regulations that emphasize accountability for top managers, including boards of directors, governance experts agree that directors and trustees have always been responsible for organizational culture, albeit  with little guidance for how to assume those responsibilities.  Their ineffectiveness has been linked to scandals involving major organizations such as Enron, Washington Mutual (WaMu), and WorldCom.  Lightle (2009) rebuts the tradition of board activity being limited to matters directly related to wealth creation, and insists that boards have “The same level of responsibility for providing direction and oversight should be extended to the objective of creating and maintaining the kind of organizational culture and tone at the top so crucial to achieving long-term objectives” (Lightle, Baker, Castellano, 2009, p.69).  Lightle et al. goes on to indicate that it is the board’s responsibility to be proactive in defining the desired organizational culture and approving strategies to achieve that culture.  It then becomes management’s responsibility to develop and implement specific policies and procedures that will adequately support those strategies.  The final responsibility rests with the board to monitor the effectiveness of the policies and procedures (Lightle et al., 2009).

Lightle et al., suggest five guidelines to assist boards in meeting their fiduciary responsibilities regarding company culture:  1)  assessing the existing organizational culture; 2) defining the desired culture; 3) performing a GAP analysis; 4) developing a strategy for achieving the desired culture; and 5) monitoring management’s performance in carrying out the strategy.

            Assessing the existing culture.  In this first step, the objective is to identify behavioral norms and expectations that are currently in place.  In other words, how do people actually behave as opposed to how they are supposed to behave.  Lightle et al. suggests the retention of an outside consultant, and emphasizes the importance of obtaining input from as many stakeholders as possible.  Boards are to be proactive in the process (Lightle et al., 2009).

            Defining the desired culture.  Here, the board determines where they want the organization to be.  What exactly is the desired culture?  What is right for the organization?  What constitutes the right choice; is it that which benefits the stakeholders, the customers, or society?  What are the best practices we as an organization will follow to do our job?  What will we not do?   Lightle et al. indicates that the starting point for the desired state is to do that which is legally required by SOX and other regulatory agencies.  From there, they must choose the higher ethical principles that will govern the company, and the type of culture that will enable the organization to maintain a healthy position in its environment (Lightle et al., 2009).

            Perform a GAP analysis.  Finding the gaps is locating precisely where the organization is falling short between where the culture is and where it is desired to be.  These could be specific behaviors from either management or employees.  It could be policies that are obstacles to where the culture is desired to be.  It can be explicit or implicit behaviors that are hindering the organization from moving forward.  In this step, the board is seeking to, “ . . . determine the root causes of any ethical lapses or issues that may arise from the cultural audit” (Lightle et al., 2009, p.71).  Lightle et al. goes on to emphasize that because these are strategic as opposed to operational functions, they are very appropriate for boards (Lightle et al., 2009).

            Develop a strategy for achieving the desired culture.  At this stage management develops a strategy, with input and direction from the board, to create the desired organizational culture.  This strategy should include processes and procedures, rewards and incentives; metrics, targets, and timetables.  These strategic plans should be approved by the board (Lightle et al., 2009).

            Monitor management’s performance.  It is the board’s role to evaluate management’s performance not only in operational functions, but also with regard to cultural strategies using the approved metrics and timetables (Lightle et al., 2009).

The Role of the Ethicist

            The ethicist assumes the role of critic, one that employees and others who are an integral part of the organization cannot assume because the culture itself is a part of their identity.   Since they define themselves via that culture, it is unlikely they will be able to see alternative ways of doing things, and less likely they will be able to act accordingly.   The ethicist as an outsider helps employees to break free from old cultural paradigms, and consider new alternatives with new values.  Before the ethicist can function effectively in the role of ethicist, he must first have what Meyers (2004) calls a rich understanding of the culture within which he is working.  He must understand how it operates and reinforces behaviors.  He must be able to talk their language while retaining enough separatism to remain objective.  Meyers (2004) states that he must strive “. . . to acquire an insider’s perspective, one that sufficiently grasps the normative forces present in an organization’s culture” (Meyers, 2004, p.274).  Though he may be conversant in the culture, he does not allow himself to become immersed in it (Meyers, 2004).

References

Evans, R. (2009). Ethical cultures: establishing and developing standards within your firm.

     Journal Of Property Management, 74(5), 10.

Lightle, S. S., Baker, B., & Castellano, J. F. (2009). The role of boards of directors in shaping

     organizational culture. CPA Journal, 79(11), 68-72.

Meyers, C. (2004). Institutional Culture and Individual Behavior: Creating an Ethical

     Environment. Science & Engineering Ethics, 10(2), 269-276.

Schein, E.H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership 4th edition.  Jossey-Bass. 

     San Francisco, CA  94103-1741

Please follow and like us:

Organizational Culture: The Hidden Key to Success

Organization Synergist (OS)

Organization Synergist (OS)

Organizations are a pervasive part of the every-day lives of most people.  We enter the world through an organization called a hospital.  We live in virtual organizations called communities that have laws and rules that we generally obey without question.  Our social worlds are filled with various types of organizations such as schools, churches, and grocery stores.  Many of us voluntarily join organizations whose objectives align with our own heartfelt passions.   We spend a significant amount of time as employees in organizations.  We even trust organizations with our most valuable resources when we enroll our children in schools and deposit our money in banks.   Driskill and Brenton say it like this, “Organizations are places that carry us from cradle to grave by shaping our sense of identity, role, and meaning in life” (Driskill, Brenton, 2011, p.4).

The bottom line:  organizations play a major role in our lives.  Over the past two decades, scandals have destroyed the trust and confidence of many consumers as major organizations like Enron, AIG, Fannie Mae, and Countrywide Financial and more, have been reprimanded for engaging in deceptive, illegal, and unethical practices that have cost society losses in the billions of dollars.   In response, two major initiatives have resulted.   First, new federal regulations like the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations (FSGO)  have been passed to establish new ethical guidelines that will help to protect consumers from unethical practices and restore public confidence.  The second result is increased public awareness and sensitivity to unethical behaviors in organizations.

What these two responses have effectively done, in conjunction with pressures from increased competition, is to force organizations to operate and function with new and higher standards of ethics.  In order, however, for them to change how they function and operate, they must examine cultural aspects of their organization that cause them to do what they do the way they do it.   In order for them to achieve substantive changes through the creation of new cultural values, they will have to recreate and change aspects of their organizational culture.  Schein (2010) explains how the culture of an organization has within itself powerful unseen forces that dictate how members of that organization operate and function.   Those unseen forces must be identified before they can be changed (Schein, 2010).   Whatever the cultural values are, they play a significant role in the behavior of its stakeholders.  As such, organizational culture plays a significant role in the performance of members, and therefore, the overall success of the organization.

A team of managers who desire to improve operations, would have to first look at the cultural values accepted and shared by its employees.   For instance, to transition from an unethical to an ethical culture, would involve as Meyers (2004) explains, an understanding of ethical behavior.  One would have to understand why ethical problems exist in the first place.  With respect to organizational culture, Meyers (2004) states that one must go beyond identification to an understanding of the role that culture plays in the ethical decision-making process.  Beginning with the former, Meyers (2004) states there are three possible explanations for unethical decisions that are made in organizations (Meyers, 2004).  The first explanation is that good people sometimes make unethical decisions because of ignorance or simply not knowing what the right thing to do is.  Ferrell, Fraedrich and Ferrell (2013) point out the complexities involved, in that businesses have a duplicative responsibility to not only be ethical, but to also make a profit.   For this reason, the approach to the ethical dilemma cannot be limited to the philosophical dimension (Ferrell et al., 2013).   The second explanation given by Meyers (2004) for unethical decisions is that sometimes good people make unethical decisions by reason of being overcome by some personal weakness (Meyers, 2004).   This can be limited by increasing accountability.   Meyers’ (2004) third explanation is that some people are bad, and bad people simply do bad things (Meyers, 2004).   These are bad apples that must be terminated (Ferrell et al.. 2013).

The point is, while all three causes are valid, Meyers correctly insists that the three causes present an incomplete picture of the ethical decision-making process in that they do not take into consideration the organizational culture within which the unethical decisions are made (Meyers, 2004).  Schein (2010) reinforces Meyers’ position when he alludes to the powerful forces that are inherent within the culture of an organization.  Schein (2010) attributes the strength of those inherent forces to the fact that they operate outside of one’s awareness, in the subconscious realm, meaning that one may not even be aware of their existence (Schein, 2010).

The indication is that in order to successfully implement substantive change that will impact the successful achievement of organizational goals, will require some degree of cultural analysis.  Without incorporating this necessary step, it is unlikely that change will be significant or long-term.

References

Driskill, G.W., Brenton, A.L. (2011). Organizational culture in action a cultural analysis

     workbook 2nd edition.  SAGE Publications, Inc.  Thousand Oaks, CA  91320.

Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, J., Ferrell, L. (2013). Business ethics ethical decision making and cases (9th edition).  South- 

     Western Cengage Learning.  Mason, OH  45040.

Meyers, C. (2004). Institutional Culture and Individual Behavior: Creating an Ethical

     Environment. Science & Engineering Ethics, 10(2), 269-276.

Schein, E.H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership 4th edition.  Jossey-Bass. 

     San Francisco, CA  94103-1741.

 

Please follow and like us:

Group Development Interventions

Intergroup development interventions

Organization Synergist (OS)

 OD change is not only about altering what organizations are culturally, but it specifically focuses on how organizations do whatever  it is  they do.  The focus that in times past was on the skills of the individual leader or employee, has now shifted to group functionality.  The diversity of different perspectives of group members, makes groups an ideal tool for accomplishing goals in a consistently changing environment.  Instead of depending on one person for a particular solution, a group offers many solutions for the same problem, from which the best can be selected.  Unfortunately, groups also create a perfect scenario for conflict among its members because of different perspectives, experiences, and backgrounds joining together.  Conflict within organizational divisions and departments not only impedes how the group functions among itself, but it also causes dysfunction among the groups they must coordinate with in order to accomplish the goals of their organizations.  Intergroup development is a confrontational OD intervention technique that reduces misunderstandings, open communications, and develops mechanisms for greater collaboration between organizational groups.  Techniques used in intergroup development are role play, opening communications, balancing power, and shifting unhealthy hostility to problem-solving confrontation (Brown, 2011).

Intergroup development begins with a six-step meeting where each group prepares three lists explaining three things:  their perceptions of their own group; how they believe the other group perceives them; and their perception of the other group.  In step two, each group is allowed to ask clarifying questions regarding the prepared lists.  In step three, the groups meet separately to discuss the feedback received in step two.  Groups divide into smaller mixed groups in step four, to diagnose the interface problems and to develop problem-solving alternatives with action plans and follow-up activities.  Step five is a follow-up meeting to evaluate progress (Brown, 2011).

Goal Setting

  Regardless of the type of OD intervention, goal setting will be a part of the process.  Goal setting increases efficiency and effectiveness by providing direction and purpose to individuals in work groups, or the interfaces of work groups, by specifying the desired outcomes of work.  Setting goals has the potential of improving employee performance by amplifying the intensity and persistence of effort, coupled with giving employees clearer role perceptions so that their work effort is focused towards specific behaviors that are likely to improve performance.  Goals should be specific, and capable of being measured for progress.  They should be challenging, but realistic.  Channels should be created through which employees can receive regular feedback regarding their individual progress (McShane, Von Glinow, 2012).

Management by objectives

One very popular goal-setting technique is management by objectives (MBO).  MBO benefits employees by integrating their personal career goals with the goals of the organization.  This allows employees the opportunity to participate in setting the goals they he will be expected to accomplish, which increases their motivation.  MBO also benefits the organization in two ways.  First, it clarifies the goals of the organization at all levels; and second, the organization benefits by having employees that are more motivated as a result of their participation (Brown, 2011).

Specifically, MBO is a four-step process that begins with mutual agreement between manager and employee – or group — of specific goals for a specific period of time.  Action plans are created for both employees and department.   Periodic progress reviews are scheduled to ensure that action plans are working.   Lastly, there is an annual evaluation as to whether or not goals have been achieved.  This evaluation is used for salary increases and other rewards (McShane, Von Glinow, 2012).

References

Brown, D.R.  (2011).  An experiential approach to organization development eighth

     edition.  Prentice Hall.  Upper Saddle River, New Jersey  07458.

McShane, S.L., Von Glinow, M.A.  (2012).  Organizational behavior.  McGraw-Hill

     Irwin.  New York, NY  10020.

Please follow and like us:

Changing Organizational Culture to Improve Performance

Corporate Culture and organizational performance

A second key component to the OD process is changing some aspect of the corporate culture of the target organization.  Shared beliefs, values, assumptions, and norms all play a major role in what organizational stakeholders do and how they do it.  Brown states, “Management style and corporate culture are central factors in the success of a company” (Brown, 2011, p.64).  Schein explains why we must understand cultural forces.  He says, “We need to understand them not only because of their power, but also because they help to explain many of our puzzling and frustrating experiences in social and organizational life” (Schein, 2010, p.7).  The perception of an organization by its external environment is central to its ability to engage with that environment.  Ferrell, Fraedrich, and Ferrell state, “Some cultures are so strong that to outsiders they come to represent the character of the entire organization” (Ferrell, et al., 2013).  Corporate culture influences how managers and employees alike, problem-solve, respond to customers and react to competitors, and how they do what they do (Brown, 2011).

All OD change will not necessarily include a cultural change; although many will.  Cultural change differs from other OD change in that it affects the basic values of the organization, changing the hearts and minds of its employees.  Brown calls culture the very essence of organizations (Brown, 2011).  It begins with a thorough assessment of why it’s being done, what problem is attempting to be solved, and what one means by culture.  Schein explains the key assumptions this type of assessment is based upon (Schein, 2010):

o   Initial data should be obtained in a group setting because culture involves shared;

o   Assumptions;

o   It’s more important for the members of the group to understand the meaning of their assumptions, than it is for the agent to understand them.

o   Not all cultural aspects are pertinent to every problem;

o   The agent should assist as a process-consultant, helping the group members decipher the meanings of their shared assumptions;

o   Some assumptions will be helpful in assisting the organization with its goals, while others will be detrimental.  The groups must categorize their assumptions;

o   The culture-deciphering process often reveals that new practices can and should be derived from the existing culture;

o   If the basic paradigm of the organization has to change, it will be a multiyear change process.

Cultural assessment is a major objective that should only be attempted with the full commitment and consent of the organization’s leaders.  Using the problem to be solved as criteria, a group should be selected to participate in the assessment.  The group can be as small as three and as large as 30.  The room should be comfortable, with seating arranged in a circular fashion.  Breakout rooms may also be necessary, especially with larger groups (Schein, 2010).

The meeting begins with statement of purpose by someone with major authority in the organization, to bring clarity to the meeting, and inclusion.  The consultant presents a 15-minute lecture on culture, what it is and what it means.  The group should then describe artifacts, which are written down.  The question regarding artifacts is:  What’s going on here.  It helps to have new people in the organization, describe what they felt and saw upon entering the organization.  Next is identifying espoused values.  The question is:  Why are you doing what you are doing?  To get underlying assumptions, you check to see if espoused values that have been identified explain all the artifacts.  Or, are things happening that are clearly not explained or in direct opposition with the values.  Now they must categorize the assumptions as to whether they will aid or hinder the change process.  Lastly, they reach a consensus on what they believe are the relevant shared assumptions, and how they affect the organizational goals (Schein, 2010).

Brown provides three initiatives to follow after the assessment.  A leader needs to cast a vision for the future that employees can share with one another, focus on, and commit to.  Develop a model group to lead the change.  Ensure that the old culture is no longer rewarded.  Use pay, promotion, and other incentives to reward the new behavior (Brown, 2011).

References

Brown, D.R.  (2011).  An experiential approach to organization development eighth

     edition.  Prentice Hall.  Upper Saddle River, New Jersey  07458.

Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, J., Ferrell, L.  (2013).  Business ethics ethical decision making and

     cases.  South-Western, Cengage Learning.  Mason, OH  45040.

Schein, E.H.  (2010).  Organization culture and leadership 4th edition.  Jossey-Bass.  San      Francisco, CA  94103-1741.

Please follow and like us:

Managing Change In Your Organization

Change – the ultimate OD objective

Change is the primary method by which the OD process achieves the ultimate goal, the transformation of an organization from a static hierarchical ineffective structure, to a flexible, viable, and adaptable organization that is capable of flowing in sync with its external components (McShane, Von Glinow, 2012).  Because those external components are rapidly and constantly changing, for any organization to remain in sync necessitates that they too must be rapidly and constantly changing.  OD change is more clearly portrayed by Baulcomb who states, “Managing change is seen as being skilled at creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge to reflect new knowledge and insights” (Baulcomb, 2003, p.275).

The difficulty in managing change, whether it is planned or unplanned, lies in the competition between what Lewin called driving and restraining forces.  Lewin describes the driving forces as the problems and opportunities that create the need for change; such as a downturn in the economy, new government regulations, increased competition.  He identifies restraining forces as the barriers that prevent the desired change from occurring.  These barriers could be a lack of financial resources, scarcity of skilled labor, or even a lack of motivation on the part of staff and/or employees for change.   Lewin’s theory of force-field analysis advocates identifying the respective forces, and then removing as many restraining forces as necessary, thereby strengthening the driving forces, enabling the implementation of the desired change to occur (Daft, Marcic, 2011).

Christian Leadership Coach

Christian Leadership Coach

Once restraining forces have been minimized, the change agent can begin the implementation process of change.  Implementation involves three stages of planned change, also identified by Lewin as:  unfreezing, movement, and refreezing.  Lewin refers to unfreezing as the creation of motivation for change by creating serious disequilibrium through the use of disconfirming data that threatens the accomplishment of organizational goals, and creates anxiety which becomes the motivation for change.  Psychological safety is created to decrease learning anxiety connected to learning new desired skills through the use of a compelling vision, formal and informal training that is also autonomous; practice fields, coaching and feedback;  role models, support groups, and systems and structures to support the new concepts or skills (Schein, 2010).

Once psychological safety has been established, learning anxiety is under control, and the organization or group has been unfrozen, movement can then occur where new learning is reflected by one of two ways:  scanning (trial and error), or by role modeling.   When there are clear ways for things to be done, role modeling works best.  When mastery of new skills involves personality and options, scanning is the most appropriate method.  During this stage, cognitive redefinition occurs, or restructuring the new learning to give it acceptable meaning throughout the organization.  This important step undergirds and aids the actual behavioral changes by creating new and palatable organizational paradigms (Schein, 2010).

In the third and final stage of learning change called refreezing, new concepts/learning has been internalized by the employees and stabilized.  Stabilization of new behavior only occurs when new behavior has been confirmed by better results (Schein, 2010).  Mitchell adds that strategies must be incorporated to prevent a return to the replaced behaviors (Mitchell, 2013).

References

Baulcomb, J.  (2003).  Management of change through force field analysis.  Journal Of Nursing

     Management, 11(4), 275-280. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2834.2003.00401.x

Daft, R.L.. Marcic, D.  (2011).   Understanding management 7th edition.  South-Western

     Cengage Learning.  Mason, OH  45040.

McShane, S.L., Von Glinow, M.A.  (2012).  Organizational behavior.  McGraw-Hill

     Irwin.  New York, NY  10020.

Mitchell, G. (2013).  Selecting the best theory to implement planned change.  Nursing

     Management – UK, 20(1), 32-37.

Schein, E.H.  (2010).  Organization culture and leadership 4th edition.  Jossey-Bass.  San

     Francisco, CA  94103-1741.

Please follow and like us:

What is Organization Development (OD)?

Organization Synergist (OS)

Previously, the primary focus of organization development (OD) was defined differently, depending upon what professional was being asked.  W. Warner Burke, a professor of psychology and education at Columbia University viewed OD as planned change in the culture of an organization using principles of behavioral science facilitated by a consultant.  Present that same question to Lynda McDermott, a director of human resources, and she viewed OD in a much broader sense, one that focused on both culture and management systems.  Jan Margolis, a corporate director had yet another perspective.   She sees the OD process as strictly a senior management function (Hurley, 1983).

Regardless of which perspective seems most appropriate, each perspective correctly alludes to at least one salient aspect of OD.   Changing the corporate culture is commonly a major component in the OD process.  Brown (2011) suggests that culture is a key factor to outstanding financial performance, which is certainly at least one of the underlying goals of OD initiatives (Brown, 2011).  Change, of course, is not restricted to culture alone, but inclusive are management systems such as organizational structures, policies, and processes.  The idea that OD is solely a senior management function seemingly highlights the prominent role that leaders play in establishing cultural values, which again, play a key role in the behaviors of its citizenry (McShane, Von Glinow, 2012).

Brown defines organization development as, “an emerging discipline aimed at improving the effectiveness of the organization and its members by means of a systematic change program” (Brown, 2011, p.5).  Delving slightly beneath the surface of the composite descriptions of OD, one could identify three key components in the OD process:  the role of corporate culture, OD managed and planned change, performance orientation, and change itself (Brown, 2011).

References

Brown, D.R.  (2011).  An experiential approach to organization development eighth

     edition.  Prentice Hall.  Upper Saddle River, New Jersey  07458.

Hurley, P.G.  (1983).  Q.  What in the name of OD do we do?  A.  change.  Training &

     Development Journal, 37(4), 42.

McShane, S.L., Von Glinow, M.A.  (2012).  Organizational behavior.  McGraw-Hill

     Irwin.  New York, NY  10020.

Please follow and like us:
1 2