Planned Organizational Change Essay

AbstractPlanned organisational shift can be be in many polar federal agencys, and characterized on many different levels. The every(prenominal)day denominator listed after reviewing two related to Internet names, indicates that transfigure cannot take gift for salmagundis sake, tho essential be utilise to accomplish a special(prenominal) goal or task. Another crude assertion states that commute must also be accepted and embraced forwards the desired outcome is achieved.Planned Organizational ChangePlanned arrangemental change can be defined in many different ways, and characterized on many different levels. The common denominator listed after reviewing two related Internet phrases, indicates that change cannot take place for changes sake, but must be fulfilled to accomplish a specific goal or task. Another common statement states that change must also be accepted and embraced before the desired outcome is achieved.The prototypic Internet article reviewed was t itled Planned Organizational Change as Cultural Revolution (Izumi and Taylor. n.d.). This article was particularly interesting because of the broad statement provided indicating that musical arrangemental schemes often fail because of poor reception by those involved. The article statesOrganizational schemes gang aft a-gley during the implementation stage because the corporate glossiness does not change enough to allow the new fancys, procedures, and structures to take hold. in that respect may not be the cultural buy-in necessary to sustain the actual change effort. If planned change is to be successful, it must include, as an inviolate and critical part of the change abut, the seeds of the new values, beliefs, and attitudes the organization is trying to grow. Unfortunately, change programs are often set up to fail because the change methods notwithstanding perpetuate the old way of doing things.This statement rings particularly accepted for this author. Over the past 20y ears in business I ingest witnessed many organizational changes that have failed miserably. carees seem to want a change, for different reasons, but do not know how to properly implement these changes.Improper implementation of a sound plan, not enough organizational commitment, and organizational politics, as indicated in the article, seem to provide some of the nigh common reasons for failure related to organizational change. Businesses will sometimes have a valid plan to change an organization, but neglect the concluding stages of implementation. This lack of follow-up invalidates the entire effort. Politics also play a significant role in most organizational change failures. some(prenominal) businesses have allowed small unofficial organizations to form within organizations this creates indispensable kingdoms which build fatal to organizational change.A surd belief in the richness of a proper structure, as told by the article, often causes change factors to cogitate o n the organization instead or processes. The make of this type of change produce a structural change instead of a process change that allows the same processes to function under new management. The article goes as far as mentioning on model, used specifically in the role of large mergers, how many resources can be have with little compendium of the operating environment. The thinking is, the combination of skills, thoughts and ideas will combine to form an organization that operates in a drastically different manner that initially imagined. This idea sounds valid, but a combination of organizational direction from management combined with the evolution of processes and organization would seem to provide the most effective solution.Business Process Reengineering (BPR) is one of the most interesting ideas retrieved from the first Internet article. The BPR is exposit as a natural outgrowth of the Internal Process feeler to organizational effectiveness. This model concentrates on targeting internal processes for change. When these processes are analyzed for inefficiencies there is little consideration given to strategy or organizational structure. When internal processes are changed to increase efficiency, the old systems should be replaced with new systems rather than apply the old systems to create newprocesses. As old systems are purged, the effects on the organization increase exponentially. The domino effect seen by replace old processes often surprises businesses as to the effectiveness of this model.The second article reviewed was titled Basic Context for Organizational Change, this article parallels the previous article reviewed by this author. This article written by Carter McNamara, PhD provides two interesting points (1) Change should not be done for the sake of change, and (2) There is typically strong protection to change people are afraid of the unknown. This author has witnessed several organization changes that could easily been implemente d simply for change sake. The Internet article helps in the realization of the necessity for organizational-wide changes to truly create situations that effect positivistic change. galore(postnominal) times businesses will implement organizational changes in except one or two departments, when the change truly effects the every department or division in a small way. Organizational-wide change, on with change acceptance will go a long way toward creating a favorable atmosphere to change.Typically there are strong unsusceptibilitys to organizational change. People are afraid of the unknown. Many people manage the way things are, are comfortable, and dont understand the need for change. Many people view any organizational change as unsuitable, and neglect to give proposed changes an opportunity to succeed. This type of behavior is difficult to remedy, but a well-structured, properly organized change can implement change much easier that an ill conceived plan.In conclusion, this author has realized the importance of implementing and interest through with planned changes as an integral part of successful organizational change. This author has also realized that change for change sake is a dangerous proposition and organizational changes should always consider the entire attach to before attempting local changes. A final lesson teaches the importance of recognizing peoples inherent resistance to change and the need to address human resistance as an important step in any organizational change effort. The items reviewed in both internet articles discussed effective ways to implement and accepted planned change, andshould be invaluable in future business endeavors. honorable mentionIzumi, H., Taylor, D., (n.d.). Planned organizational change as cultural evolution. Empire call forth College Resource List. Para. 2. Retrieved April 15, 2003 from the World Wide Webhttp//www.esc.edu/ESConline/across_esc/forumjournal.nsf/ 3cc42a422514347a8525671d0049f395/1f3666190 6ca98d9852567b00