include the change initiative, a concerted effort is consistent at various levels. Senior management and the board are important to the process as it is a change agent, and the shepherds, and the Steering Committee and the people as a whole
includein various key roles in the process of organizational change on the following:
the initiator of change : organizations often understand the need for change, but when I was bitten by some of the deep losses. Loss could be in terms of sales dipping size, and the departure of key people, a decline in market share or an important customer loss to rival other often, the change begins when someone within the organization interacts with such events and indicate the need to change the
factor change : change agent is the one who is responsible for driving and implementing change across the enterprise. The agent of change can be either an external consultant or internal consultant. In fact, at different stages of the process of change, individuals or different teams have come to fill this role. For example, if outsourcing the task of managing the sources of change to an external consultant, he served as the primary agent of change. However, when the project team begins the actual work on the recommendations of the consultant, and team leaders to become agents of change. Basically, the change agents in various stages pushing the change, which reinforces the need for change, and defend the cause of the change
sponsor of the official team : Usually, the organization will determine the team or department to coordinate officially the change process. In large organizations, sponsors may have the human resources department or IT department. In smaller organizations, it can be for a team of senior leaders play this role.
Finally, while making change efforts on the ground, they need to be guided by senior management. The role of senior management is critical to ensure that the initiative does not lose focus or get stranded due to operational or motivational issues.
TOP management role
Change either the "life or death" an organization. Change does not take care of herself. Change is difficult in the beginning but eventually deposited. These are the three basic facts of organizational change.
Although after the initial denial phase, people will eventually adapt to change, as the difficult transitional phase. This is where you can help the top management. As we have seen, the change starts from one side severely affected some of the crises in the organization and carried forward by the agents and sponsors. However, the success of change efforts is ultimately in the hands of senior management. This depends on the structure of the organization, delegating work to the different levels of employee engagement depending on the complexities involved. Thus, the Board of Directors has the supervision of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Executive Officer of the company oversees executive assistants, who in turn delegates work to middle management, even penetrates to the entry-level supervisors.
senior management are useful, vital to a certain extent in determining the mood for change. Not only does it play a key role in the delivery of the vision and objectives attendant, it also plays a key role in determining the goals and objectively determine the results to achieve change. Most people severely affected by the actions of their superiors. Thus, the leaders themselves need to drink the expected behavior is that change orders, so as to ensure that they induce such behavior in other countries.
senior management teams can enhance the agenda for change by using their power sites or external links, even push through the media, but in the end, the actual progress does not come only in cooperation with the workers. Again, it is important for senior management to generate a sense of collective responsibility. Key to instill this attitude lies in the evaluation of real workers and their role in the whole process. There can be nothing more motivating than to know that your labors and acknowledged and appreciated by the company. Foster a culture that runs through the hierarchy and treats all people equally, with priority given to organizational goals on personal goals etc. all seen as acts of symbolism to denote the need for change and the value assigned to it. Thus, the many lies in the capacity of senior management in terms of sending the right signals that will drive change
Off late, I noticed that a certain brand of shampoo, has its products (read: the bottle) bearing the signature of a small image expert hair they collaborated with to create the product. What are they doing? From my point of view, they are trying to increase the credibility of the product, so that more people come to trust in the brand. Similarly, change your people "sell" requires that the term "the credibility of the administration." This is the main responsibility of the top management team. Senior management needs not only to communicate and vision for change, but you also need to connect the vision to business needs and to show how the change affects the profits and productivity or quality of work life. Equally important is the administration's ability to realistically address the existing gap between the current situation and the situation is conceivable, and a gift to the people strong, reasonable and outline its strategy well - a plan for success. Next, driving fast implementation is extremely important. Once people are convinced of the strategy, senior management need to put it quickly to "do" it. And faster and develop your own strategies to work, earlier it is likely to succeed. It's like a "bell-round contest for the game", the faster you hit the buzzer, the more chances of winning. On the other hand, we may well know the ideal solution, but if you do not press the bell on time, and it really does not work! Even with a perfect strategy, to take immediate action becomes a buzzword. With all the success that get closer to your vision and increase your credibility, so people will eventually volunteer to follow you.
Important note other is that during organizational change, and the resistance of the people is directly proportional to the perceived threat of change. Change is challenging the status quo and calls for people to get out of their comfort zones. This means giving up "the way things are done" and the adoption of a new set of potential conditions better. But despite the potential benefits of the change, it is always obnoxious at first. It comes with fears of job loss, a change in the role, changing in the report, and so on and so forth until the people are so consumed with anxiety and doubt that it left no room to think about building it. Most of the change to take advantage, you should reduce the perceived top management of change threats. In many cases, a lot of fears may actually be unfounded, and thus be addressed at the highest level means putting the credibility of unnecessary concern to rest, thus avoiding the loss of precious because of the tension and anxiety.
So, we talked about the senior management responsibility in sharing the vision, and the development of collective responsibility, and management's credibility, and erase fears are meaningless, set goals, set goals and lead by example, but there is still something that we did not talk about it. Listen, because this is important ....
Now consider: How quickly do you dismiss the last four words in the previous paragraph, expecting to stumble great secret management in the next
[1945001؟] doused expectations apart, and the most basic fact that senior management understand the need to communicate about change is that it is important to hear. Just like most of us miss the message in these four words, in the hope of greater things to follow, often skips management attention to employee concerns, preferring to defend rather than listen. Often, employees can raise concerns related issues, which need be included in the change management plan. You need to take care of the senior management teams, that the communication between them and the organization, and is held on the interactive sessions, instead of imposing a one-way conversations. Do not rush to explain how great the change would be or provide examples of how people survived previous changes and how they were expected to do the same thing again. Instead, it recognizes that change is difficult and all the attention that deserves attention. Be firm on the agenda, but is sensitive to concerns. From there, the secret of effective communication lies in listening attentively, only when you listen you can respond appropriately. Only when you can respond appropriately address the concerns of your people effectively, and only does so you can reduce the perceived threats of change, and maximize the productive efforts toward change. So, take some time and listen and attend to individual employees, and the special needs or issues, while dealing with the change.Rather than call for a certain "the new system to work" state better than the "old order's work", can top management in an attempt to "thesis antithesis synthesis method" to communicate the change. "Thesis antithesis-synthesis" is the philosophy, usually associated with the German thinker of the 19th century, G.W.F. Hegel, who confirms that the historical development is the result of conflicting opposites. Simply put, it is the thesis statement. The statement is the antithesis of the counter. It is clear that the contradictory thesis and antithesis, or conflicting with each other. Synthesis means to resolve this conflict by providing solutions at the highest level, by combining the positive elements of both the thesis and antithesis. Synthesis and then form a new thesis, which, in time, faced the opposite, and is resolved at the next higher level through the synthesis else. Often used this philosophy to explain the dialectic of Hegel on the process of historical development.
how it can be applied to organizational change? In our context, let's take the current situation as a thesis. Therefore, the new system or the ideal situation is the opposite. Now, if you try to impose the new system better than the old because of that, the reasons b, c, d, e, which is a challenge that is likely to resist. No one wants to think that they are working in the sham system, which is no longer able to work. Instead, try "synthesis" hit the mainstream ideal situation. Communicate the positives in the current system and desirables of the ideal system. It indicates that the change will bring about a synthesis between the two countries, for better performance. In this way, you can promote change, without reducing the value of the current method of action. Psychologically, this has a positive effect on the way people react to the idea of change.
proceed, senior management also needs to ensure that business processes and performance systems, training programs, job descriptions and other forming or supporting frame that works, and is aligned staff to the goal of the change and complement each other.
while in calls, change to identify the various business units, delegating work to them, through a team capable leaders, you need senior management in order to draw the overall plan. After identifying the tasks involved in bringing about change and the time frame available to accomplish those tasks, you must be senior management set the critical path of all tasks, where they have a clear picture of the task that must be completed when the task of following that, and how are the different task areas associated with Each other. This helps to achieve synchronization of work efforts, without which the desired change can not be achieved. From there, the team leaders can take on the responsibility of guiding their teams to achieve specific objectives within a specified time frame to achieve change.
Various studies have shown that in the region is the best approach to higher management to work its way through the existing culture of trying to change it, suddenly. This can be done through a common vision in the purchase managers working to lower levels of the hierarchy. Generate interest among them, and the staff they supervise means pulling in precious energy for your project. For, the real work necessary to implement your plans happen here. Once they are committed to their role in bringing about change, and the project could pick up considerable speed. However, while such an approach based employee-oriented management, it must also make sure that those who do not adhere to their roles are mentored or door appears.
Research has shown that many companies, for example, Navistar International Corporation, which achieved miserably change, it did, and not through the appointment of external consultants, but by having the highest studying management in the regulatory context, the history The company standard operating procedures and then build to improve change leadership teams where necessary. Thus, these results witness enough the importance of the role of senior management teams "in dealing with organizational change
change management SUCCESSFULLY - how the CEO 'S achieve this
in? a survey of American conducted by productivity and center quality researchers that since the change is almost always achieved by the resistance, arises there is a need for a hero to lead change in the organization. Moreover, more powerful and visible champion, and more successful in the project of change it tends to be. in this trend, the research found that the leader of the organization, most often the CEO and is often the most effective vision of communication and the need for change in the organization. in fact, been found to change projects in most organizations best practices to be the spearhead, planning and management by the company's chief executive . often, it is not enough Executive Officer, Director of mere communication and vision of the labor force. in order to ensure that vision translates successfully into reality, the CEO must also play a key role in the planning and implementation process of change. active participation of the Chief Executive in the project confirms the importance of the same, thus ensuring the organizing broad support and commitment.
from the standpoint of CEO often seen as the product of the change to measure objectively. It could be an increase in the sales figures, and the new business unit or process re-engineering. However, what some and CEO of the company may miss is the transitional phase. Until it becomes visible output and employment, and can the impression that this effort will be the change or the worst did not happen did not succeed. The truth is that the transitional period leading up to the stage where the results become visible change is not only the most difficult stage, but is also a phase change that require maximum effort. This is the time, when people are coping with the new situation, and adjust themselves in the new responsibilities that were found, and sometimes operate both the old and new systems simultaneously. While this phase may not show any visible output, this is the stage where the maximum change is actually taking place. CEO needs to empathize with his staff during this phase instead of worrying about a clear result. The only obstacle we might face is the lack of limits on how long a transition period lasts before the change sets in the end and become visible.
another obstacle to the institution are effective to deal with pressure situations, as the board may want to see how the change might impact on the return on investment very soon. This ignores the fact that change is always gradual and could eventually lead to the decline.
The third challenge, which is not entirely clear, but the CEO often runs a cycle shift is shorter than middle management, and thus is actually not as "connected" to the middle management because it may feel. The reason is that, for him, the change is often demonstrated by the completion of a strategic goal, while the middle management and the impact of the actual change in groups after we check the target and a new set of circumstances create. So it is middle management that have to deal with this change on a daily basis, regularity slowly change to make them part of the system. Require time. Thus, a longer transition phase. This separation between the chief executive, middle management in a scenario change could pose a challenge to the CEO.
0 Komentar