The success puzzle for organizational change implementation management strategy delivery operates on the periphery of the soft skills involving the timeless vision of organizational principles. Besides, defining value of the business, determining requirements, clarifying the vision, building teams, mitigating task, resolving issues, and providing direction complete the response projections which shall be addressed in the proposed change involving reduction of the Zetech’s work week and employee pay by one full work day.
Change planning is an important policy that aims to promote long term success in change objectives. Change is intertwined into professional and personal components of lives. It has the ability to steadily occur within the environment mankind dwells in and even beyond. This reflective treatise attempts to explicitly review the successful implementation of the proposed change involving reduction of the Zetech’s work week and employee pay by one full work day.
Organization change environment needs
Zetech organization deals with automobile windscreen manufacturing. Currently, the company’s wage bill is more than its profits since competition, the global financial crisis and market dynamics have negatively affected the returns of the organization. At present, the organization is not in a position to sustain the salaries paid to its employees without having to forgo profit making and business sustainability. Thus, there is an urgent need for change involving reduction of the Zetech’s work week and employee pay by one full work day in order to ensure business sustenance. The above dilemma presents an ideal environment for implementing the proposed change. The Naval Joint Taskforce Development Office will design a strategic change plan, implementation model and success tracking score card for the proposed change involving reduction of the Zetech’s organization work week by a day.
Planning of the proposed change
|Level 1 |
Reaction to the change
| || |
|Level 2 |
Effectiveness of the change implementation process
| || |
|Level 2 |
Application of the change
| || |
|Level 3 |
On-the-job & environment
| || |
|Level 4 |
| || |
Strengths and weaknesses of the proposed plan
Sustainability of the proposed change guarantees better performance of the Zetech Company. Its benefits are tangible and non tangible in the running the organization (Kotter 1995). Therefore, managers should include these practices in the strategic plan in the change involving reduction of the Zetech’s work week and employee pay by one full work day. However, this may prove challenging due to a number of reasons. Implementing sustainability may require an overhaul of the usual way of carrying out business for the Zetech Company. However, managers can change some internal business processes upon receiving approvals from stakeholders. These changes may not be approved hence hindering implementation.
The management may lack experienced expertise required to fast tract implementation of sustainability. This hinders implementation. Also, the legislative processes in the home country of Zetech Company may stop management from implementing sustainability of the proposed change. Finally, management needs to strike a balance between reputation and business and implementing sustainability (Bustin 2004). This occurs when the sustainability project affects a group people as is the case in Zetech. Thus, the management may choose not to implement the sustainability project so as to protect the reputation of the business (Prosci 2007).
Solutions to the challenges in the proposed plan
Communication to employees should be done early in the decisions making process. The message should be meaningful and accessible. This should be done throughout the entire three months of the change implementation. The consultation need to be inclusive, well documented, communicated and balanced within a suitable follow up process. The negotiations and partnerships in the change process should be in the best interest of the stakeholders (Pritchard and Ashwood 2008).
There is a need to establish reachable and reactive ways for the employees to raise distresses and complaints about the proposed change throughout the three months of implementation. Lastly, there is a need to report frequently to the stakeholders on the general performance of the proposed change. The dynamic essence of change proponent should not facilitate any state of quagmire or conflict as the unnecessary pressure associated with change should be integrated in a more consultative, proactive, and structure system for managing the proposed change of the Zetech Company (Weick and Quinn 1999).
Results measuring process
In order to present an alternative but flexible change plan, the process should be able to allow the Zetech Company to plan for future desirability and be able to achieve them while responding to the rising circumstances. Being cyclic in nature, it operates on the perception that management of change in an organization is an interactive process. Direct as the first dimension, deals with making an alignment. It ensures that all the objectives are thought in a right way and then articulated appropriately to create a platform on which the other four dimensions will rely and operate.
In the case of the proposed change at the Zetech Company, the task of the implementation committee should be in a way that it is evidenced both to the internal and external stakeholders. As an exemplary behavior, it needs to be incorporated into the management system in order to be in a continuous evaluation. Achievement of these factors will only occur if behaviors of the employees are clearly defined and described appropriately (Pritchard and Ashwood 2008).
Translation of both direction and vision strategies towards operations that require description is the second dimension. Operational strategies are plans that ensure functions are well articulated as required by every section of business. Thus, the implementation committee of the Zetech Company should embrace the four key enabling strategies which include strategy towards resourcing, strategy for managing performance, rewarding strategy and final strategy to ensure proper communication in the organization within the three month period (Pritchard and Ashwood 2008).
Define forms the third model the management has to adopt to ensure organizational change. This approach, though mostly ignored by most of the organization managers, is crucial in the ongoing processes within the organization. Thus, the Zetech Company should ensure that the change encompasses various aspects such as procedures, policies, and processes that ensure implementations in the businesses are fulfilled. Delivery of the strategies is the fourth strategy that the management should strive to embrace.
It ensures that consistency in implementing overall values and visions of the organization is quantifiable and within reach. Reflectively, depending on organization management decision making process may not guarantee commitments to their implementation (Pritchard and Ashwood 2008). This strategy calls for communications to appropriate models demonstrated through behaviors as displayed by the employees and the change implementation committee of the Zetech Company.
In the fifth position is the dimension that ensures development and is placed above all requirements to ensure that there is appropriate monitoring of the processes. The above elements will be applied to the Zetech Company’s proposed change involving reduction of the Zetech’s work week and employee pay by one full work day. The feedback tracking success measurement is summarised in the table below.
|Topic||Frequency or timeline||Purpose||Rationale||Message|
|The decision to adopt the consultation approach in addressing the concerns of the employees in the process of change||This event should be carried out prior to informing the employees of the same and the decision recorded in a poster that can be found in the company website||To bring to attention the intended modifications in the salaries to the employees in order to find the most appropriate approach for carrying out the intended modification.||The rationale of this aspect is to ensure participatory implementation and make the change process smooth||The intentions of the company will be adopting a new communication approach, organizational benefits of the new changes, room for discussion and weighting diverse opinion, adopting a common stand and the plotting the way forward|
|Discussion of how to implement the change process||The event should embrace the company’s technocrats to decide on how to utilize the 3 month period required to make the proposal viable||To expound to the implementation committee the approaches that should be adopted in implementing the change||To authenticate the cost elements of the change and ensure proactive decision making||The most appropriate approach for the change introduction to ensure that all the stakeholders are aware of the actual change process|
|Publication of the intended change||The event should be carried out upon stakeholders’ acceptance of the new change in the company||To communicate the changes to the employees||To ensure that accurate report and plan is presented to represent the company’s official information on the change||The reasons why the company has opted for the change and underlying rationale that informed this decision|
In conclusion, from the whole aspect of organizational management change, the five outlined dimensions are normally cyclical in nature. They create a link to all factors that contribute to change in an organization. Additionally strategies and related activities should be coordinated in a consistent and constant manner if the Zetech organization is to successfully implement the proposed change.
Bustin, G. (2004). Take Charge: How Leaders Profit From Change. Irving, Texas: Tapestry Press.
Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Boston: Harvard Business School Publication.
Pritchard, R.D., & Ashwood, E.L. (2008). Managing motivation: A manager’s guide in diagnosing and improving motivation. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group.
Prosci, M. (2007). Change Management Best Practices Benchmarking. New York, NY: McGraw Hills.
Weick, K. & Quinn, R. (1999). Organizational Change and Development. Annual Review Psychology, 50(2), 361-386.