Organizational Change 25

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, you will be able to:
1. Define the sequential process of organizational change
2. Identify the main roles in change management
3. Elaborate the dynamics of the implementation of change in organizations
4. Suggest ways of ensuring effective implementation
5. Explain the phenomenon of resistance to change and suggest ways of dealing with it
Organizational change is a complex phenomenon and has several dimensions. We shall
take up a few critical ones in this chapter, namely, the sequential process, the main roles in
change, the dynamics of implementation, and resistance to change.
There have been several models of the process of organizational change. All these models
envisage change as a continuous process involving several stages. Eight stages are
identified and detailed here:
1.
Initiation Initiation is the stage for the vocalization of the need to
change. Organizational change starts when someone at the level of the corporate
management, where the concern for a certain dimension of organizational functioning is
shared and discussed, takes the initiative of proposing that something has to be done. The
idea is mooted at the level of the corporate management, either being based on
observations or recommen dations from some other level of the organization or being a
result of discussion at the corporate management level. This usually leads to the hiring of a
consultant or discussion with the appropriate set of people within the organization.
2.
Motivation Motivation is the stage where people are involved in
detailed consideration of the proposed change. At this stage, both the corporate
management and the expert who helps with organizational change takes the necessary steps
to involve a large section of the organization in thinking about the various dimensions of
the change.

468 The Organization

3.
Diagnosis Diagnosis is the attempt to search for the main cause
underlying the symptoms encountered.
4.
Information collection
At this stage, detailed information is
collected about the dimension indicated by the diagnosis and alternative approaches are
developed in relation to the problems or issues.
5.
Deliberation
The deliberation stage is concerned with evaluating
various alternatives generated for dealing with the problem or the issues related to the
change.
6.
Action proposal This is the stage for framing a proposal in relation
to the problems or issues identified.
7.
Implementation Implementation is concerned with translating the
proposed ideas into action.
8.
Stabilization Stabilization is the stage of internalizing the change
and making it a part of the organization's normal life.
It may be useful to pay attention to the details of these processes as reflected in the various
stages of change in the beginning. This makes it possible to pay less attention to the
process as organizational change proceeds further and reserve more attention for the main
task of implementing change.
THE MAIN ROLES
Several roles are involved in organizational change and these can help ensure a smooth and
speedy transition. These include both internal and external roles. Organizational change is
a collaborative effort in which several roles and individuals are involved. Various roles
perform various functions. They make their specific contributions to the design and
implementation of organiz-ational change. The six main roles are discussed below in this
connection.
The Corporate Management
The corporate management includes the chief executive and several top executives who are
involved in making policy decisions. The following are the main functions of the corporate
management in relation to organizational change:
The legitimizing function The corporate management legitimizes the change being
planned, recommended, and implemented. The more actively the corporate management
promotes the change, the more legitimate it becomes and the quicker it is likely to be
accepted. If the corporate management does not clearly indicate its interest in and support
for the

Organizational Change 469

change, the implementation is likely to be slowed down. Concern on the part of the
corporate management and the visibility of such concern are very important for smooth
organizational change.
The energizing function Organizational change is a very difficult process. It may be
slowed down at several stages. Often, enthusiasm flags. Sometimes difficulties arising in
the natural course of the process may discourage members of the organization, who may
find it difficult to deal with problems and prefer to take the course of least resistance by
reverting to older methods or ways of management. The role of the corporate management
is crucial at such critical points. The management revives the slackening pace and interest
by taking up problems for discussion and by showing concern.
The gate-keeping function The corporate management helps in establishing a relationship
between the consultants and the various groups in the organization. This is usually done by
calling meetings in which the purpose of the change is explained and the consultants are
invited into the organization.
The Consultant(s)
A consultant or a team of consultants usually comes from outside to help with the change,
but they can also be insiders. The consultants' role is that of experts who have both
knowledge and experience in the field in which change is proposed. There are some
advantages in having outside consultants for some time. Internal members, even if they
have the necessary expertise, are likely to be biased by their own perceptions of the
problem. Also, they may be restrained by internal dynamics. This may make them less
effective. Therefore, even organizations with high-quality expertise in a particular field
initially invite outside consultants. The following functions are performed by the
consultant(s):
The implanting function The consultant does not supplant available internal expertise but
supplements and implants such expertise. It is necessary that the consultant carries the
various people along with him or her during the different stages of organizational change.
Then the consultant is able to make change a part of the organization.
The transcending function One great advantage of having an external consultant is that
he or she is not bound by the constraints governing members of the organization. He or she
takes an independent overall view. The consultant transcends both the ecology of the
organizationthat is, the various units and departmentsto be able to take this overall
view of the organization as well as transcending time and the people not yet attuned to the
future of the organization. This transcending function makes the role of the consultant
more creative. He or she thinks about the organization as a

470 The Organization

wholenot only as it is now but as it is likely to be in the future. This helps to give a wider
perspective to the organizational understanding of the change.
The function of generating alternatives The consultant is not there as much to work out a
specific solution as to help the organization develop the capability of evolving solutions.
The consultant does this by generating several alternatives, out of which the organization
can choose one or two. The more the consultant generates and helps to generate various
alternatives, the more creative and useful his or her role becomes and the more the
organization develops the ability to design interventions and ways of solving problems on
its own.
The process-facilitating function The consultant is primarily a process facilitator. He or
she has to be perceptive of the reality in the organization. There is no ideal or best solution.
Even if one solution is technically the best, a consultant may see the repercussions of the
solution and wish to make the necessary modifications to suit the situation. The consultant
also helps in developing various roles as the programme of change proceeds and change
begins to be implemented. The process-facilitating role helps the consultant to move
towards self-liquidation. He or she also helps the relevant people in the organization to take
over the role of consultant when the programme is being implemented.
The shock absorbing function During the planning of change and making of necessary
recommendations, much unpleasant feedback may have to be given to the organization. It
is sometimes difficult for internal people to do so. They cannot take the risk necessary to
make certain things explicit. An external consultant can take such a risk. He or she can
afford to absorb the shock created by the change and help the system to confront reality
and discuss certain processes, which may be quite unpleasant but without which it may not
be possible to move towards the solution.
The resource-sharing function The consultant brings with his or her background the
latest knowledge and a wide variety of experience, which he or she uses in making
organizational change effective. The consultant collects these resources and shares them
with internal members so that the knowledge can be utilized for making the change
effective.
The resource-building function The consultant helps in generating resources within the
organization by building the necessary expertise as he or she works with the organization.
This does not mean that the consultant makes people dependent on him or her. By sharing
his or her knowledge and experience and by continuously discussing issues with the
concerned people, he or she helps in building internal resources.

Organizational Change 471

The self-liquidating function By building internal expertise and resources, the consultant
is working towards withdrawal from the organization and liquidating his or her role and
indispensability. In many cases, the consultant enjoys the influencing function so much that
he or she may continue to play this role in the organization. This is bad both for the
organization and the consultant. The consultant must hence deliberately refrain from using
undue influence on internal executive decisions.
As the work of the organizational change draws to a close, he or she takes definite and
deliberate steps to withdraw and wean the organization off depending on him or her. The
self-liquidating function is very difficult to carry out. Once a consultant is successful and
effective, he or she faces the temptation to continue to influence organizational decisions.
If the consultant is not perceptive enough, in his eagerness to be helpful, he or she may
make the organization dependent on him or her. If he or she enjoys this dependency, the
results may be bad for the organization as well as for the consultant.
The organization should have the capacity to assimilate the influence and expertise of the
outside consultant; necessary preparations should be made to make use of the consultant in
the organization. It is important that continuous communication is maintained with the
consultant at all the stages of the process of change.
The Counterpart
Even if the expert is from outside, some people from the organization must work with him
or her. They represent the same expertise the consultant has or, at least, they propose to
develop that expertise. This role we shall call the counterpart role. This may already exist
in an organization or may be created. For example, if a new management information
system is to be introduced, people with technical experience and expertise need to be
involved. If such expertise does not exist in the organization, new people may have to be
recruited.
The counterpart helps in implementing the policies and activities worked out and accepted
and in stabilizing these in the organization. It is only through the counterpart that the
change becomes a part of the organization. Several issues need to be explored in relation to
the counterpart: whether the counterpart should be an independent individual or group;
whedier members from different groups constitute a team which functions as the
counterpart; how to legitimize the counterpart role in the system; the length of time
required for the counterpart to develop the necessary expertise, etc. In many cases, jealousy
develops when the counterpart becomes successful and effective. His or her success may
produce some threat to other members of the organization, leading to various prejudices
and jealousies. All such issues require careful attention and proper handling.

472 The Organization

The Implementation Team
The implementation team consists of a group of people from various departments or areas
of the organization who have been given the responsibility for monitoring, deliberating on,
and making recommendations on the programme from time to time. The team must ensure
proper motivation of people throughout the organization and take steps to ensure effective
implementation. The following are the main functions of the implementation team.
The collaboration-building function The implementation team helps to build
collaboration amongst various sections and departments of the organization. It should
therefore be a cohesive team, every member having respect for the others and collectively
evolving a consensus in spite of differences in views. An effective team is one which has a
representation from various kinds of expertise and diverse experiences relevant for the
change. Yet people in this team must be prepared to listen to each other and take collective
decisions which are not necessarily unanimous or even endorsed by the majority although
consensus is developed.
The gate-keeping function The implementation team helps keep the communication
channels between those who are planning and implementing change and the rest of the
organization open. This is done by developing a liaison between all the various
departments and sections of the organization. Since the team has representatives from these
departments and sections, it is able to convey various matters to the departments and raise
various questions there. Similarly, it receives feedback from the departments for discussion
with the implementation team in its entirety.
The reviewing function The implementation team reviews the progress of the change
programme from time to time and makes the necessary adjustments so that the
implementation is efficient. The reviewing function involves both stock-taking as well as
making the necessary modifications so that implementation is not hampered.
Policy-formulating function The implementation team makes recommendations and
formulates policies in the light of the review to ensure that the programme of change is
both effective and smooth. This helps in making the programme more realistic.
The Chief Implementer
Organizational change need not be implemented by those who are working in one
particular area. In fact, it is much better to make such implementation independent of
functional responsibility in an organization. The chief implementer is usually the
chairperson of the implementation team. But his

Organizational Change 473

or her responsibility is not confined only to discussing the problems and making
recommendations. The chief implementer takes the responsibility of monitoring the
programme and ensuring proper implementation. The main difference between the role of
the chief implementer and the implementation team is that a group can never take on
executive responsibility. This can be taken on only by an individual. However, the group
can help the chief implementer to perform his or her function more effectively in several
ways. The following are the main functions of this role:
The monitoring function The chief implementer monitors the programme of change. He
or she has to be a tough person, a go-getter, in order to relentlessly keep the programme on
schedule. He or she ensures that the programme design and the time schedule are followed.
The diagnostic function The chief implementer reviews the programme from time to time
to find out whether anything is preventing its smooth functioning and progress. This is the
diagnostic function of the chief implementer. He or she collects the necessary information
through specially designed questionnaires or interviews and uses these to discuss the need
to either modify the programme or provide additional input for its proper progress with the
implementation team.
The executive function The chief implementer has the responsibility of implementing the
programme. This is an executive function. It involves not only making recommendations
but ensuring that action is taken on whatever has been decided. He or she thus mobilizes
the necessary resources and works on the implementation of the programme.
The chief implementer should be systematic in his or her approach and should concern
himself or herself with systematic planning, going into the details of the various steps
planned. At the same time, he or she should be flexible. If the individual has strong views
and ideas and so finds it difficult to accept others' points of view, he or she would not make
a good implementer.
The chief implementer needs to be creative and imaginative. He or she will come across
several problems and have to find solutions for them. He or she should search for various
ways of dealing with problems, sometimes unconventional ones. He or she should also be
resourceful and should be known for the ability to implement and for concern for the
organization and the people.
Task Forces
Task forces are set up for specific purposesto prepare material, collect information,
generate ideas, and take on a specific responsibility, which is

474 The Organization

time-bound. Many task forces get dissolved as soon as their particular task is over. Task
forces make use of the various kinds of expertise and skills available in the organization.
The relationship between these roles and their involvement in organizational change is
presented in Exhibit 25.1. As the exhibit shows, all the roles contribute to the process and
to the task. For example, the corporate management and the consultant are primarily
contributing to the process: their major function is to facilitate the process so that the
necessary movement towards organizational change is possible. The counterparts also
contribute to the process, although they experience increasing preoccupation with the task.
The maximum concern for and involvement in the task is that of the task forces and
implementation team. The chief implementer of the organizational change is certainly
involved in the achievement of the task; he or she i? also involved in smoothening the
process.
Every role is concerned, to some degree, with the process as well as with the task.
However, there are differences in terms of relative emphasis: some roles are primarily
involved in the process while others are involved in the task. It would, for example, be
dysfunctional if the chief executive or the corporate management were concerned directly
with the task. Similarly, the focus of the external consultant may be on developing the
necessary understanding of the process through diagnosis and preparation of
recommendations but his or her involvement in implementation of the task may not be
useful. This does not mean that the corporate management and the consultants are
indifferent to the task or the implementation of recommendations. They are not directly
involved in taking action nor do they take the primary responsibility for implementation
but they do provide the necessary climate and support.
Exhibit 25.1 also indicates the relative involvement of the different roles in process or in
task that is likely to make them effective at different stages of the change process.
In the initial phases, the involvement required with the process is much greater than that in
the subsequent phases when, gradually, greater involvement in the task may become
possible. When the process of change has begun, all the roles concerned with it should pay
more attention to processes. If this is properly done, task performance becomes easier.
Towards the end, all roles can pay attention to the task. The exhibit also indicates that, even
towards the end, the top management has to be concerned with the process, though the
intensity and the time spent will be less. As a matter of fact, the involvement of the top
management will always be predominantly with the process whereas the task force(s)
would need to pay attention mainly to the emergent tasks.

Organizational Change 475

Exhibit 25.1 Key Roles in the Sequential Process of Organizational Change
Corporate management
Key Roles

Consultant

Involvement in Process

Counterpart
Involvement in task
Chief implementer
Implementation team
Task force
Motivation
initiation
Diagnosis
Information collection
Deliberation
Action proposal
Implementation
Stabilization

The Sequential Process

EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION
Change is alien to an organization yet needs to be accepted. Unless a change is internalized
and integrated, it remains 'alien'. Introduction of change in an organization is akin to the
transplantation of an organ in a body. An organism (a body) and an organization have some
common features. The transplanted part in a body has to be integrated with that body. It
may be rejected and so a watch has to be kept to ensure that it is not and steps taken to
facilitate integration. The same applies to an organization: it is necessary to ensure that the
change gets integrated into the organization, is stabilized, and becomes a part of the
working of the organization. This is a part of the implementation process.
Implementation can be defined as the institutionalization and internal-ization of a change
after it has been accepted by an organization and a decision has been taken to accept and
make it an ongoing activity. Implementation starts after a decision has been taken to plan a
programme of change. Several contextual factors have been found significant to the
success of implementation.
Fullen and Pomfret (1997) have suggested four different dimensions of implementation.
These relate to the characteristics of the innovation (its explicitness and the complexity, or
degree and difficulty, of change), strategies

476 The Organization

and tactics (in-service training, resource support, feedback mechanisms, and participation
in decision-making), characteristics of the adopting unit (the adoption process, the
organizational climate, environmental support, and demographic factors), and
characteristics of macro socio-political units (design issues, incentive system, evaluation,
and political complexity). Implementation has been treated as an issue of control versus
decentralization and facilitation of change through participation.
Implementation may be seen as a multidimensional process. Paul (1980) has proposed the
concept of strategic management for the implementation of public programmes as an
interaction between four dimensions environment (opportunity, needs, constraints,
threats, scope, diversity, and uncertainty), strategy (service-client-sequence and demandsupply-resource mobilization), process (planning and allocation, monitoring and control,
human resource development, and motivation-compliance), and structure (differentiationintegration of tasks, structural forms, degree of decentralization, and degree of autonomy).
The end result of implementation is the institutionalization and stabilization of change.
Institutionalization implies making the change a permanent part of an organization;
internalization means stabilization of the change so that it becomes a natural part of an
organization's working stylethe former is more structural and the latter more processual.
In order to achieve the end results, one starts with planning the whole process of
implementation. Implementation primarily consists of monitoring the change, taking action
in relation to the change, and making the necessary adjustments in the programme which
has been accepted for implementation (which may be called adaptation). This three-phase
implementation process (monitoring-action-adoption) is possible if the necessary support is
provided at the various stages. This gives us a basic model of the implementation process,
which is shown in Exhibit 25.2. As the exhibit indicates, planning is the initial process
followed by the circular process of implementation, in which the feedback loop goes from
adaptation to monitoring. This leads to institutionalization and stabilization of change. The
various aspects of this process are briefly discussed in this section.
Planning
The main purpose of planning is to have an overall understanding of the nature of
implementation. Here, 'planning' refers to the planning of the implementation process after
a decision has been taken on making a change. Reviewing several Asian experiences in
implementation of curriculum change, a group of experts have suggested that the
preparation should include broad-based participation by people involved in the
implementation of the programme itself, public support, and adequate resources for
implementation of the programme. The following three dimensions are involved in
planning.

Organizational Change 477

Phasing Planning may be focused on the phasing of implementation. Implementation may
be a short-term or a long-term programme. Depending on the nature of the change, the
implementation process may have to be phased. Phasing may be either temporal (in terms
of time) or spatial (in terms of the various parts or locations of an organization).
Temporal phasing would involve preparation of a plan in which some elements of the
innovation may be introduced later. For example, in some organizations, when a new
system of human resource management is introduced, performance appraisal is
implemented first; then, after it gets stabilized, the potential appraisal system is
implemented. Thus the whole system may not be implemented at one time. Phasing allows
some elements of the change programme to stabilize before the next elements are
introduced.
Phasing can also be in relation to the various parts of the organization. For example, the
programme of change may be implemented in some parts of the organization first,
followed by implementation in other parts later. If the organization is a large one, it may be
a good idea to implement the programme in that part of the organization where
acceptability is high first. Experience may be collected from that part to see what new
changes and modifications are needed in the programme. Such attention to phasing is
necessary in the beginning.
Processes Planning should also play attention to the various processes involved in
implementation. Often these processes are neglected. Most of the time, the processes
underlying implementation are taken for granted, which can lead to several difficulties.
Attention needs to be paid to the process of collaboration, increasing the capability of the
organization to cope with problems as they arise, establishing norms of openness and
various other values which are necessary for the implementation of the change, developing
creative relationships to deal with problems, self-reliance, etc. If attention is paid to these
processes in the beginning, implementation will become easier. It may be useful to
understand which human processes and values are critical and therefore will require special
attention to ensure effective planning.
Strategies The strategy of implementation needs attention in the beginning, at the planning
stage. The following questions, for instance, need to be included in the strategy: Will any
help be taken from outside agencies? Who will be put in charge of the implementation
programme? When will a more or less permanent structure be evolved (institutionalization)
and set up in the organization? Which parts of the organization will be selected for
experimentation and initial implementation if phasing is used? How will support be
ensured for the various groups involved in implementation? What interlinkages need to be
built for effective implementation? All such questions need to be answered before a plan of
implementation is finalized.

Exhibit 25.2 Model of Implementation of Change in an Organization

Support
Training
Resource
Commitment
linkage

Planning
Phases
Processes
strategies

Monitoring
Implementation team
Minimum control
Review and feedback
communication

Action

Adaptation
Institutionalization
General and local
Coping with consequences
Stabilization

Organizational Change 479

Havelock and Huberman (1977), analysing the responses of 81 experts to several questions
on implementation of educational innovations, came up with five factors of effective
strategy formulation: (i) participative problem-solving (innovation should be controlled by
local
people, responsive to their needs, and emphasize local resources and
self-help) (ii) open input (innovation should be flexibly designed to make maximum
use of all ideas and resources from inside and outside) (iii) power (innovations should be
clearly directed from above using laws,
formal procedures, a chain of command, and designated agents for
technical assistance) (iv) diffusion (innovation should be spread through maximum use of
the
media and informal networks), and (v) planned linkage (innovation should be carefully
planned, based on
clear and realistic objectives, dialogue between innovators and all relevant
others, and high sensitivity to the user's actual situation).
Monitoring
A World Bank document from 1977 defines 'monitoring' as 'the gathering of information on
the utilization of project inputs, on unfolding of project activities, on timely generation of
project outputs, and on circumstances that are critical to the effective implementation of the
project'. A document issued by the United Nations in 1978 on monitoring and evaluation
defines the concept of monitoring as follows: 'The term monitoring usually refers to the
process of routine periodic measurement of programme inputs, activities and outputs
undertaken during programme implementation. Monitoring is normally concerned with the
procurement, delivery and utilization of programme resources, adherence to work
schedules or progress made in the production of outputs.' Both these definitions agree that
the function of monitoring is to provide early warnings concerning shortfalls in inputs or
outputs in order to enable the programme management to undertake timely corrective
measures.
Monitoring is necessary to make implementation effective. Monitoring means ensuring that
a plan proceeds according to the original design. It is necessary to set up a mechanism of
monitoring and reviewing a programme of change and its implementation.
Monitoring and institutionalization may be kept independent for some time in an
organization. Further, the monitoring function may precede institutionalization of the
change (in the form of setting up a permanent or semi-permanent unit to take over the
programme) so that the advantages of monitoring may be fully utilized. There are several
reasons why monitoring and institutionalization should be kept independent for some time.
While a monitoring group may be a temporary system, the group that takes over

480 The Organization

the programme of change and through which the programme is institutionalized in the
organization will be a permanent or a semi-permanent system.
First, it is necessary to involve a wide cross-section of people in the monitoring function.
This is not possible if the programme is institutionalized too quickly and a permanent unit
or department takes over this function and the monitoring function. In order to make the
monitoring broad based, it may be useful to have a representation of various groups in the
implementation team, which should be a temporary system.
Second, if the function is institutionalized too early, the new department or unit will have a
need to justify its existence and may therefore not pay attention to several factors which
can create problems in the implementation of the change. An independent and temporary
group, not having any vested interest in the programme, is more likely to pay attention to
acknowledging and sorting out these difficulties.
Third, if the monitoring group continues to be an independent one, it may be able to attend
to the several dimensions which require continuous attention that might be neglected by a
permanent or semi-permanent group (because it would be too busy with day-to-day
activities and may thus neglect some important dimensions in favour of the urgent issues,
hoping to come back to those later and never finding time).
Lastly, being a broad-based group, the implementation team may be able to garner support
from others in the organization more easily.
The following dimensions of monitoring require attention.
The implementation team A broad-based task group or implementation team should be
set up to implement and to monitor such a programme effectively. It is useful to have an
almost whole-time coordinator for such a group. This group may have representation from
several parts of the organization. It should include people who are known for their
creativity, who are positive while critical, and who are interested in providing support to
new ideas. The convenor of the team should have a high enough status in the organization
to be able to garner the necessary support for the group. He or she should also enjoy high
acceptance in the organization, should have high task concern with an eye to being
effective, should enjoy creative work in which there is no authority involved, and should be
interested in the field of the change in question.
In one organization where a new human resource development system was being
implemented, a task group for implementation was set up even before the new department
was created. This task force continued for some time. The convenor of the task force was
well known for his implementation skills and for his high task orientation. The task group
had representation from several units of the organization. After the task group had
functioned for some time, a new department was created in order to institutionalize the
HRD system and a senior person, a director, was put in charge of this new

Organizational Change 481

function (the convenor of the task group was a general manager). However, the task group
still continued to function and the chief of the new department attended the meetings of the
task group as a permanent invitee. Although he was from a senior grade, he continued to
attend the meetings and provide the necessary information about the functioning of the
HRD system while the implementation team continued to work on new dimensions and
transfer to the HRD department those dimensions on which stability had been reached.
The above experience indicates that in some organizations it is acceptable to continue to
have a parallel temporary system for some time in order to provide support and critical
feedback to a new permanent unit.
Minimum control Monitoring will be most effective when it is able to keep track of what
is happening at various levels in the organization, provide support for local
experimentation, and make any necessary modifications in the programme. Monitoring is a
delicate affair. In one sense it is a control function, getting feedback from time to time in
order to take decisions, ensuring that the programme is carried out according to the design,
and reminding people and communicating to them the need to meet schedules; on the other
hand, it also attempts to develop new norms of creativity, diversity, and experimentation.
This combination is possible if the implementation team uses minimum formal controls
and yet is able to keep control of the implementation of the programme.
Review and feedback Implementation requires getting data and experiences about the use
of a particular innovation. Periodic reviews may be based on continuous feedback.
Monitoring also involves providing feedback to people on how well they are implementing
the programme. The function of a review is to know what difficulties people are
experiencing in implementing a programme so that the necessary support can be provided.
Dissemination of information As a result of review and feedback, the implementation
team collects information about what is happening in various parts of the organization with
regard to the change being implemented. It may prepare its own strategies of collecting
information and disseminating information on experiences of success to reinforce
confidence and optimism in other people. Information which is needed to implement the
programme may also be disseminated from time to time. The implementation group may
wish to prepare a programme of how such information is to be disseminated and what will
be the form of the dissemination in advance. It may issue written instructions and send
written communication. It may also convene special seminars and meetings in order to
discuss problems and experiences.

482 The Organization

Action
A programme of change requires certain steps to be taken. 'Action' covers all the details of
actual implementation, which involves various phases and the steps people take.
Adaptation
Fullen and Pomfret (1977) have suggested two main dimensions of implementationwhat
they call fidelity (the actual use corresponding to the intended or the planned use) and
mutual adaptation (flexibility, so that a programme develops and changes during the
process of implementation). Adaptation has been suggested as being one of the two main
criteria for the effectiveness of implementation of a change. A programme in which no
modifications are introduced later does not indicate effective implementation.
Implementation requires understanding and analysis of the experiences people have with
the programme as well as learning from them. This should be reflected in the modifications
which are made in the programme. Adaptation may be both general (in the sense that some
modifications may be made in the original plan) and some may be local (indicating that
while the programme is being implemented throughout the organization, some units in the
organization may make the necessary modifications in it to suit their own requirements).
Such an approach gives flexibility.
Dealing with the consequences of change Change introduces an alien element and causes
some disturbance. When a change is introduced in an organization, it may produce a threat
for some people. Such threats are more imaginary than real. It may also produce some
'negative' results in the short term. For example, the introduction of a job enrichment
programme or work redesign programme may result in an initial fall in productivity, initial
dissatisfaction among people who have to learn new things, and initial concern among the
supervisors about their functions. (The term 'initial' has been used to indicate that these are
temporary symptoms of the disturbance which is a necessary part of change.) The
organization has to deal with such consequences. If attention is not paid to the
consequences, the symptoms may accumulate and contribute to a rejection of the change.
This is once again similar to the problem of organ transplantation in a human body.
Transplantation produces some disturbances, shown in the form of a high temperature,
change in blood pressure, etc. These symptoms have to be controlled. If the early postoperative period can be managed properly, the transplantation may be successful.
It has been reported in cases of new job enrichment and work redesign systems that
immediately after the change is introduced in the organization, there is a fall in production.
In work redesigning efforts, the dissatisfaction of supervisory staff increases gradually
when they perceive that their roles

Organizational Change 483

are becoming redundant. Unless the new programme does something about this
dissatisfaction (e.g., redesigning their roles, involving them in critical decisions, etc.), the
change may not succeed as the supervisory staff create obstacles.
In one organization, a new human resource system was introduced which included a new
performance appraisal system. As a result of open discussion of the employees' objectives
with their managers and later discussion of favourable and unfavourable factors for
performance (which were part of the new appraisal system), the employees wanted to know
more about ratings. Some managers felt uneasy and thought that the new system was
increasing 'indiscipline'. The problem was solved by organizing training programmes for
employees (appraisees) and managers (appraisers) on how to receive and give feedback
and counselling (coaching). In another organization, similar consequences were anticipated
and similar action was taken as a preventive prior to the introduction of the new system.
This helped to reduce the problem considerably.
Support
Support of various kinds is required for the implementation of a programme. The main
sources of support are administrative and managerial groups. Some important dimensions
of support are suggested below:
Training New skills are needed for the implementation of a programme. It is necessary to
provide training for such skills. This may include process skills such as collaboration,
openness, problem-solving, and decision-making, or these may be specific technical and
work-oriented skills such as those of planning and using information and collecting
information for specific purposes.
Resources Implementation requires support in terms of various types of resources, such as
human, financial, and material resources. The implementation team provides such support
by identifying needs from time to time. Resource support may be needed for all the three
aspects of managing organizational changefor monitoring, for implementing an action,
and for bringing about modifications and adaptations.
The top management's commitment A critical dimension is support from the top
management. The involvement of the top management is necessary for effective
implementation of change. This may come about as signals from the top management that
they consider the change important, that they are interested in its implementation, and that
they themselves are involved in the change.
In one organization where a new HRD system was being implemented, there was little
enthusiasm during the first year. Next year, it was reported that the chief executive had sat
down with his secretary himself and had

484 The Organization

helped him to prepare the next year's plan and spent some time on performance review; the
implementation of the HRD system was much faster this year. This was a mode of top
management support where the top management does what it wants other managers to do.
In another instance, the chief executive attended seminars organized to discuss the
problems in the implementation of the HRD system. This sent a signal of support from the
top management.
Linkages Support may also be required in terms of building linkages both with external
experts and various other agencies and with internal departments and groups who may
provide the necessary help in the implementation of the programme. While the programme
may officially be the responsibility of one group, it should be the responsibility of the
whole organization to implement it. The development of internal linkages between the
implementation team and the permanent department or unit, between the implementation
team and the line management, between the implementation team and top management,
etc., helps to provide the necessary support for the change.
Linkages are also needed between the internal people (or the internal facilitator) and the
external consultants. An external consultant does not work alone. The implementation team
depends to a great extent on vital linkages between the external consultant and internal
people.
RESTRUCTURING THE STATE BANK OF INDIA
A caselet on effective planning and implementation of change in a large organization
illustrates several of the points discussed above.
'The Stale Bank is India's largest bank. The old Imperial Bank was nationalized in 1955 to
promote rural development, broadbase entrepren-eurship, and provide finance to the public
sector. The State Bank grew phenomenally after its rationalization, and by 1970 it had
increased the number of its offices from about 400 to over 2100 (in the early eighties it had
some 6000 offices and over 100000 employees). In 1969, several other banks were
nationalized, and from having a monopoly over public sector business, the State Bank was
suddenly confronted with a lot of competition for this sector of business. Huge size,
bureaucratic structure, the lack of expert staff support to the branch manager lost near the
bottom of the vast managerial hierarchy, and having to compete compelled the State Bank
of to reorganise its structure with the help of outside consultants. The objective was to
devise a structure that could facilitate the pursuit of profitability and growth but keeping in
mind the bank's social responsibility.
* Reproduced with permission from Khandwalla, 1992

Organizational Change 485

'A SWOT analysis was performed to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the
organization and it was agreed that organization change should be implemented to improve
the bank's competitive position, facilitate decentralization (with accountability for
performance), develop resilience and challenge taking [sic] capacity in the organization,
and bring about greater clarity in the staff about the bank's tasks, thus facilitating the
development of managers. Several "principles" of reorganization were articulated, such as
greater emphasis on catering to different market segments, increasing performance
orientation by adopting performance based budgeting and review of performance, bringing
about greater unity of command over the branch managers, and the separation of operations
from planning and staff function.
'A participative process was used to usher in the changes. The following major changes
were made:
Accounting was now done on market segment basis and managers of market segment
divisions were appointed to report to each branch manager. These included the commercial
and institutional banking, small industries and small business, agricultural banking, and
personal banking divisions.
Annual budgeting was introduced with monthly performance reporting and review from
branch level upwards.
A unified chain of command was introduced starting from managers of divisions
reporting to branch manager, who in turn reported to the regional chief, who in turn
reported to the general manager (operations) at the local head office, who in turn reported
to the chief general manager of the local head office, who in turn reported to the managing
director at the central office. A regional manager controlled about 75 branches and a
general manager (operations) controlled 5-6 regional managers. There were 12 local head
offices.
Specialized staff and functional support at local head offices was provided under a
general manager (planning). Development managers who were specialists in each market
segment, a planning manager, a personnel manager, specialists like the organization and
methods officer, and other service functionaries reported to this general manager. At the
central office, the managing director was assisted by deputy managing directors (in charge
of operations, development and planning, personnel and services, and associate banks) and
these were assisted, in their functional areas, by specialists in their fields.
Overall corporate coordination was provided by the Central Manage ment Committee
consisting of the chairman, managing director, and deputy managing directors. Similarly, at
each local head office there was a "Circle" management committee consisting of the chief
general manager, general manager (planning), general manager (operations), and chief
regional managers as invitees, and a "Circle" Coordination

486 The Organization

Committee of the same officials. At each branch there was a Branch Management
Committee consisting of the branch manager, managers of sectoral divisions, and accounts
manager.'
A RADICAL APPROACH: DOMAIN RESHUFFLING
Organizations operate in an environment with which they have a close relationship in terms
of getting human, material, technological, and financial resources. When the operating
environment of an organization becomes unfavourable or hostile (e.g., due to a change in
the governmental policy of not using a particular raw material or a High/Supreme Court
ruling that bans mining), the organization may resort to what Khandwalla (1992) has called
'domain reshuffling'. This is the strategy of giving up some domain (area of business) and
adopting some other(s) that seem to be favourable. The following examples (reproduced
from Khandwalla, 1992, p. 163 with permission) demonstrate how Third World
organizations were able to manage change.
'Organizational sickness is frequent in the Third World. A common response to sickness in
the West is for sick organizations to exit from depressed domains and enter buoyant
domains. But in many Third World countries there are legal and other restrictions on
choosing what domains or business the organization can operate in. And yet, there are
many examples, some ingenious ones, of how sick Third World organizations have
successfully sought to get into more buoyant environments and/or out of unfavourable
environments:

Gambia Produce and Marketing Board owned by the government of

Gambia, Africa, was originally set up to trade in oilseeds, cotton, rice, etc. It also operated
oil mills and river transportation facilities, and traded in fertilizer, lime, soap, etc. The
company began to make losses. As part of its turnaround effort, it withdrew from the lossmaking import of rice and fertilizers and from dealing in other loss-making products.

Richardson and Cruddas, India, a producer of structurals and various

machineries, began to make losses in the mid-seventies. As part of its turnaround strategy,
it sought to get out of the highly competitive and loss-making low-valued structurals
business, reversed its proposed expansion of structurals making capacity, and moved more
aggressively into high-valued structurals. It also doubled sales of scrap, moved
aggressively into foreign markets, capitalizing in part on Indian aid to other countries, and
pressured various government bodies for orders.

Jamaica Railway Corporation, operating in Jamaica, West Indies,

was a loss-making railway. It sought to make its environment more buoyant by helping to
reopen a port, and by organizing luxury and educational

Organizational Change 487

tours and excursion trips. It also aggressively sought to carry greater passenger traffic and
bulk cargo, such as petroleum products.

Sylvania and Laxman, an Indian producer of lamps and bulbs, began

to lose money in the mid-seventies. It aggressively penetrated the hitherto neglected rural
market as part of its turnaround strategy.

Standard Motors, an Indian producer of cars and a loss-making unit,

moved away from producing vehicles that used petrol, and into vehicles using the much
cheaper diesel, the latter being a growth segment of the automobile industry.

Enfield, an Indian producer of two-wheelers and agro-engines,

sought to diversify into the high growth chemicals and electronics industries. Based in
South India, Enfield had hitherto neglected North Indian markets. Enfield aggressively
sought to penetrate these markets.

State Timber Corporation, owned by the Government of Sri Lanka, a

producer of timber, sought forward vertical integration into such buoyant product markets
as teak paneling, doors and window frames, and charcoal.

Tinplate, India contracted with its holding company, Tata Steel, a

giant steel maker, to galvanize the latter's steel sheet.

Air India embarked on a major image revamping exercise to turn

into a truly international airline from being mainly an ethnic airline catering mostly to
Indian passengers. It aggressively sought to tap the first class and business class travellers
businesses, and also sought new routes.

Bharat Heavy Plate and Vessels, a Government of India owned

producer of sophisticated heat exchangers, pressure vessels, and cryogenic equip-ment, and
loss making since its inception did an ABC analysis of its orders, and found that small
orders contributed the bulk of its losses. Accordingly it decided not to take small orders. It
sought to expand business in the lucrative area of systems selling (as opposed to marketing
pieces of equipment).

Bharat Heavy Electricals, a producer of electrical equipment, another

Government of India undertaking, made losses in the early seventies. As part of its revival
strategy, it set up an exports division, and sought and landed foreign turnkey projects. It
began to emphasize the marketing of energy systems rather than of just electrical
equipment.'
DEALING WITH RESISTANCE TO CHANGE
An organization often has to deal with resistance to change. There may be several reasons
for resistance to change. If these reasons are understood, effective steps can be taken to
reduce resistance. Most of these steps can be of a preventive nature, reducing resistance to
a great extent. Some action can also be taken when resistance is experienced. We present
below some ideas on dealing with resistance to change. Exhibit 25.3 summarizes the
sources of resistance and the steps that can be taken to deal with such resistance.

488 The Organization

Exhibit 25.3 Sources of Resistance and Coping Mechanisms
Sources of Resistance
1 Perceived
peripherality
change
2 Perception of imposition
3 Indifference
of
the
management
4 Vested interests

Coping Mechanisms
ofParticipation in diagnosis
Participation and involvement
topActive support from the top
Fait accompli

5 Complacency and inertia

Fait accompli
6 Fear of large-scale disturbance Phasing of change
7 Fear of inadequate resources
Support of resources
8 Fear of obsolescence
Development of skills
9 Fear of loss of power
Role
redefinition
and
re10 Fear of overload
Role clarity and definition
Perceived peripherality of change If executives perceive that the change being
introduced in the organization is not critical for them or their units, they are likely to resist
such a change. Implementation of change can be effective if the change introduced is seen
as critical and useful. This can be achieved by involving the concerned managers in the
diagnosis of the issues or problems so that they appreciate the need for change. The attitude
to the innovation introduced will then be positive.
Perception of imposition Similarly, if the managers in an organization see the change as
being imposed upon them by the corporate management or the head office, they are likely
to resist the change. Such resistance can be reduced by involving them in the introduction
of change at several stages. This can be done through seminars, work groups to evolve the
various parts of the strategy, task forces to work out details of implementation, etc.
Participation of managers at the various stages increases their commitment to the change.
Indifference of the top management The behaviour and attitudes of the top management
are critical factors in the implementation of change. If the top management do not show
much enthusiasm or interest in the change, people at the lower levels will have increased
resistance to it. The top management can show their interest by frequently requesting
information and feedback on the progress of the programme, participating in seminars
organized to discuss experiences with the new system, meeting the occupants of new roles
created as part of the change, providing positive strokes (encouragement and appreciation)
on success experiences, mentioning the experiment in significant documents such as the
annual report, etc.
Vested interests Change produces some disturbances, and sometimes some dislocations.
For example, if an organization creates new units which are located in small towns, people
moving there from capital cities will face

Organizational Change 489

problems and experience some inconvenience. As a result, they are likely to resist the
change. They may, of course, formally give other reasons which appear logical. However,
once they go and work in the small towns, they may find they enjoy the change and see its
positive aspects.
Complacency and inertia As a general rule, change produces discomfort. People develop
a complacency from being in one state. A change of state is somewhat painful. The solution
to the problem is to introduce the change and help people experience the new conditions.
Then the resistance usually goes down.
Fear of large-scale disturbances Resistance may also increase if the implementation of a
change requires additional resources in the form of new skills, additional recruits, or a
considerable budget. Provisions for such resource support may reduce resistance. However,
it is necessary to examine whether there is a genuine need for the resources. For example,
if a new unit is created with considerable autonomy, the support of planning, personnel,
and technology must be provided to help the unit to succeed in meeting its objectives.
Fear of obsolescence Resistance to change may also be high if the change requires new
skills. Existing employees may feel that they may become obsolete because of the lack of
these skills. This may be a real threat. Resistance can be partly reduced if the concerned
people are given an orientation and are trained in the new skills needed. For example,
introduction of HRD may succeed if the existing functionaries in the personnel or
organizational planning departments are given enough training in the new functions so that
they feel confident in carrying these out effectively.
Fear of loss of power Sometimes resistance to a change is high because there is a feeling
that, as a result of the change, some roles will lose power. For example, creation of new
planning roles may raise such a fear as the planning functionaries may not get operational
powers. Creating a new unit may 'deprive' the existing top managers of the operational
powers being delegated to the units. Such resistance can be reduced if the roles are
redefined and redesigned so that the concerned role occupants can perceive that they may
have different kinds of power that may be of a higher order, although different in nature.
The involved roles may be helped to realize their potential power, and develop ways of
effectively using the power.
Fear of overload If some people feel that the change will increase their workload, they are
likely to resist change. This may happen if they perceive new functions being assigned to
their roles. However, if their roles are defined, and they are able to prioritize the functions,
and decide which

490 The Organization

functions can be delegated to their subordinates, the resistance can be reduced. This would
require seminars on role definition and clarity, and negotiation for delegation of some
functions.
SUMMARY
Organizational change is a complex and continuous process, having several sequential
aspects. In the process of planned change, several actors are involvedthe corporate
management, the external consultant(s), the counterpart, the implementation team, the chief
implementer, and the task forces. Every actor performs specific functions.
The investment of time and energy in the process work in the beginning helps to smoothen
progress on task achievement later. The implementation of change is itself a complex
process and requires a great deal of attention. Planning is followed by action, leading to the
institutionalization and stabilization of change. The monitoring of progress is necessary
and forms a small feedback loop in correcting action (adaptation).
There is always resistance to any change being introduced. Sometimes resistance plays a
positive role in warning the organization of possible consequences. Generally, resistance is
caused by various kinds of fear and lack of attention to the actual process. Effective
strategies for coping with resistance can be achieved by understanding and dealing with the
sources of resistance.
GLOSSARY
deliberation stage evaluating the various fidelity
actual use corresponding to the
alternatives generated for dealing with the intended
problems or issues associated with the or the planned use implementation
change
translating the proposed ideas
diagnosis an attempt to search for the main into action initiation
the stage of
cause of the symptoms encountered
vocalization of the need for
domain reshuffling giving up certain a change stabilization
internalizing a
domains (areas of business) and adopting change and making it
others which
a part of the system

REFERENCES
Fullen, M. and A. Pomfret (1977), 'Research on curriculum and instruction
implementation', Review of
Educational Research, 47 (2), pp. 337-97.
Havelock, R.G. and A.M. Huberman (1977), Solving educational problems, Paris: Unesco,
p. 308. Paul, Samuel (1980), 'Strategic management of public programmes', Cambridge,
Mass.: Harward University,
Kennedy School of Government (mimeographed).

Organizational Change 491

EXERCISES
Concept Review Questions
1. What are the main sequential phases of organizational change?
1. List the functions of the external consultant and the implementation team in managing
organizational change.
2. What are the main aspects of the process of implementing change?
3. Who are involved in monitoring an effort to make a change and how can it be made
more effective?
4. What are the sources of resistance to an effort to implement change?
5. Take any two sources of resistance and suggest ways of dealing with them.
Classroom Projects
1. In groups of two or three, identify one recent change which has been successfully
accepted/adopted at your institution and prepare a note on the process elements of its
success.
2. The idea of student participation in the management of institutions has been much
discussed but rarely implemented. Form groups of three and prepare a plan of
implementation for your institution. Give a brief outline of the sequential process you
would adopt.
Field Projects
1. All the banks are now computerized. Interview the manager of a bank in your
neighbourhood to find out how this change (computerization) was introduced and how it
got institutionalized. Trace the whole process of successful implementation of this change.
2. VAT (value-added tax) has been proposed as a major economic change. Interview
some businesspersons to 'find' out why there has been resistance to this change. Find out
which processes were overlooked in the introduction of this change.