Managing Change

'Managing Change' is a popular theme for managers.   Organisations have been struck externally by waves of turbulence - rapid competitive change, by deregulation and re-regulation, by economic boom and recession, and through international turbulence.  

Turbulence is the apparently random and unpredictable way in which change occurs both externally and internally. (This apparent or real chaos is due to the often perverse interaction of internal and external change systems of the business and its environment.)

It is evident that managers now face a qualitatively different challenge to that faced in the 1990s and early 00s. This is because the changes being managed now are not only more awe-inspiring and widespread, but also because managers are becoming more receptive to recognising change as a strategic process.  Indeed, if we are concerned about managing strategic change in management, this would appear to require a strategic rather than a primarily tactical approach.

Despite the considerable amount of thinking which has gone on in strategic planning and in strategic management generally, few writers have sought to apply strategic thinking to practical issues in the management of change.  Indeed, it has been said that 'Implementing Strategic Change' is regarded in many  circles of strategic management as a 'mucky and murky area'.  Yet, it is so often in the implementation of change that strategic planning traditionally runs to ground.

Strategic planning can be defined as the creation of a sense of long-term direction in order to anticipate and shape the future environment, to allocate resources for competitive advantage and to steer change.

Where strategic thinkers have entered this territory, they appear to be frightened of prescribing management approaches.  This may be because one-time excellent companies are now sinking into competitive distress and oblivion.  It may also be because of a negative reaction to the plethora of 'how to' management books that clutter bookshops.

Strategic thinking is surely an essential tool in helping implement strategic change.  

Many managers perceive 'change' as a homogeneous body and a journey  largely in an un-mapped or partly  mapped state.  'Other managers describe change as being primarily the enemy of stability.  It is possible, however, to separate out a number of characteristic types of change.  These varieties of change' are broad generalisations which can be used to help managers reflect on the relative severity of change which they face, rather than being empirically tested models.

First, managers may experience smooth incremental change.  This is a characteristic of business environments which have been evolving slowly and in a systematic and predictable way.  Although few managers would characterise their change environment as having a smooth incremental' profile nowadays.  Not all change contexts are turbulent or chaotic by any means.

Second, we may have a situation of  bumpy incremental change. This characterised by periods of relative tranquillity punctuated by acceleration in the pace of change, which is then frequently perceived as 'overload.  These periods of overload are often associated with periodic reorganisation.  Bumpy incremental change is, thus, akin to movement of continental land masses where the 'fault' enables periodic readjustment to occur without cataclysmic effect (although sometimes there might be an earthquake).These triggers of change can be defined as follows:

Triggers of change are the factors which may conspire to initiate change both internally and externally regardless of whether these are seen as needs, opportunities or threats.

The third variety of change is one of discontinuous change.  Although sometimes associated with 'bumpy incremental change' - where an extremal shock generates major change - it is more typically associated with a break in the patten of 'smooth incremental change'.

Discontinuous change can be defined as change which is marked by rapid shifts in either strategy, structure or culture, or in all three.

This discontinuity can occur either because internal change has not kept up with external change, or where change in markets or regulation has propelled an organisation into a radically new way of operating.  

Strategy is the deliberate or emergent pattern of decisions which shape an organisation's future and its fit within its environment.  These 'decisions' may involve changing the future scope and shape of activities or major areas of internal change aimed at protecting or enhancing capability.

Structure is the formal reporting relationships, roles and clusters of activity within an organisation.

Culture is the set of values, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours which are the unique hallmark of an Organisation.

The three key elements of managing strategic change - strategy, structure and culture - need to be skilfully and consciously coordinated. 

The idea that leadership is a key link between strategy and structure comes from the observation that - because of a lack of appropriate leadership - having a clear 'strategy' may not necessarily produce effective implementation.  Leadership plays a pivotal role in managing strategic change because without it 'the strategy' will not galvanise staff into appropriate action.  However appropriate 'organisational structure' (or culture) is in fitting the strategy, it will not, of itself, prevent drift. 

Leadership is vitally important therefore, not merely as a part of the change management process  but also because of its symbolic role in reinforcing strategy and structure.  It also plays an indirect but important role in shaping the 'paradigm' or guidance system of an organisation.