1. How
can using the Change Kaleidoscope and Force-field analysis help an organisation
to deliver its intended strategy?
Change
Kaleidoscope is a model which analyses whether the organization requires any
change or not. The kaleidoscope contains an outer ring which shows the features
which supports limits or remains neutral during change and inner ring which has
implementation options to change agents. there are eight contextual features of change kaleidoscope, which are: (proworkproject.com,2013).
| Time: | How quickly is change needed? Is the organisation in crisis or is it concerned with longer-term strategic development? |
|---|---|
| Scope: | What degree of change is needed? Does the change affect the whole organisation or only part of it? |
| Preservation: | What organisational assets, characteristics and practices need to be maintained and protected during change? |
| Diversity: | Are the different staff / professional groups and divisions within the organisation relatively homogeneous or more diverse in terms of values, norms and attitudes? |
| Capability: | What is the level of organisational, managerial and personal capability to implement change? Is there a need to improve this capability before the change process can be started? |
| Capacity: | How much resource can organisation invest in the proposed change in terms of cash, people and time? |
| Readiness for change: | How ready for change are the employees within the organisation? Are they both aware of the need for change and motivated to deliver changes? |
| Power: | Where is the power vested within the organisation? How much latitude of discretion does the unit needing to change and the change leader possess? |
Force Field
Analysis is used to evaluate various forces which are for and against a projected
change. After evaluating the pros and cons of projected change, we can make
strategies to eradicate forces which are against and strengthen the supporting
forces. This model can be used to identify important stakeholders of
organization or identifying competitors and partners.
2. Use
the Change Kaleidoscope to describe and analyse the change context at
Hewlett-Packard at the time of Meg Whitman’s arrival in September 2011.
HP was in desperate
need of change, although 3 CEO's were changed within two and half years there
was no sign of change or let's say company was struggling for right direction.
Time:
Although Meg
Whitman says it will take five years to change things in HP, I think some
immediate changes are required. As profit of the company is lowering every year
we can say that company is in crisis. Likewise, some directors and employees
are used to traditional organizational culture which needs to be changed
immediately.
Scope:
Some extent of
change is required for current situation. Poor management team, leadership
style, and employee autonomy has seized creativity and barely innovated anything.
Previous CEO Hurd says, "HP has been operated with an eye toward the short
term", which shows company needs to strategize for long term and start
working on employee motivation, work environment and ethics of employees.
Preservation:
After when
Whitman came she changed the parking system of organization, likewise when HP
opened customer meeting center it looked modern and impressed many people, but
the oak tree which William Hewlett and David Packard planted in 1960s was still
there which shows new CEO's philosophy making today's HP like what it was back
then. But Whitman must surely work on employee's characteristics and be strict
towards directors or managers who are leaking vital information of the company.
Diversity:
In my opinion,
staffs and professional groups of the company are diversified. Some of the
employees are not willing to make their company better. As there is a dispute
among directors so it is obvious employees motivation and attitude towards
company will be negative which needs to be changed.
Capability:
HP surely has
capability to change; it was no.10 on the fortune 500 and has sales of $127billion
in 2011. Employees of the company are highly qualified but due to poor
management system they are not able to give their best. Managerial capability
must be changed to stop down fall of the company
Capacity:
If company can
use their people's capability to full extent they don't have to exploit other
resources. As the profit of the company is falling every year they must work on
a very short to regain its earlier position.
Readiness:
At first
employees were not happy with the new CEO but they were surely aware of need of
change for the betterment of the company. If the new CEO help these employees
to be motivated and create good impression by changing some negative forces of
company, employees can commit to implement changes.
Power:
Company has always
emphasized on employee autonomy, but due to poor management team employees
cannot work well. Although company must start working for long term some
immediate changes on management team and leadership style must be changed.
References:
Johnson, Whittington and Scholes (2011)
Exploring Strategy, 9th Edition, Pearson Education, Chapter 14
No comments:
Post a Comment