Assignment Set- 1

Q.1 What are the types of organizational change? Ans:There are many types of organisational changes: Organisation-wide versus subsystem change: Usually, organisations undertake organisation-wide change to evolve into a different level in their life cycle. Examples for organisation-wide changes are major restructuring, collaboration, cultural change. Examples of subsystem change include addition or removal of a product or service, reorganisation of certain department, or implementation of a new process to deliver products or services. Transformational versus incremental change: Transformational change is also referred to as quantum change. Examples of transformational change include changing an organisations structure and culture from the traditional top-down, hierarchical structure to a large amount of self-directing teams, Business Process Reengineering. Examples of incremental change include continuous improvement as a quality management process or implementation of new computer system to increase efficiencies. Sometimes, organisations experience incremental change, but its leaders fail to recognise that change. Remedial versus developmental change: Change can be used as a remedy to the current situation. Examples for remedial changes are to improve the poor performance of a product or the entire organisation, reduce burnout in the workplace, and help the organisation to become more proactive and less reactive, or address large budget deficits. Change can be developmental i.e., it can be applied to a successful situation and make it more successful. Examples for developmental change are, expand the amount of customers served, or duplicate successful products or services. Unplanned versus planned change: Unplanned change occurs because of a major, sudden surprise to the organisation, which forces its members to respond in a highly reactive and disorganised fashion. Planned change occurs when leaders in the organisation recognise the need for a major change and proactively organise a plan to accomplish the change. Note that the planned change often does not occur in a highly organised fashion. Instead, it occurs in a chaotic and disorderly fashion than expected by participants.

Q.2 Explain change management process? Ans:- Change management process is a part of change management. Change management is a process, tool
and technique for managing peoples side of change. It is not a separate process for designing a business solution. Tools or components of change management include: Process of change management. Assessment of readiness. Communication and communication planning. Coaching and manager training for change management. Development of training and employee training. Sponsor activities and sponsor roadmaps. Management of resistance. Collection of data, analysing feedback and remedial action.

 Celebrating and recognising success. But before going into change management process, it is important to know what change management is and what change management is not. Change management is not a process improvement method, but it is a method for reducing and managing resistance to change while implementing process, technology or organisational change. Change management is not a separate technique for improving organisational performance. It is a necessary component for any organizational performance improvement process to succeed. For example programs like Six Sigma, Business Process Reengineering, Total Quality Management, Organisational Development, Restructuring and continuous process improvement. It is all about managing change to get best business results. There are nine elements which contain the areas or components of the change management program. They along with change management process help in managing change. Good project managers apply these components successfully to bring about project success, avoid the loss of valued employees, and minimise the negative effect of the change on productivity and customers. The nine elements are: Process of change management. Assessment of readiness. Communication and communication planning. Coaching and manager training for change management. Development of training and employee training. Sponsor activities and sponsor roadmaps. Management of resistance. Collection of data, analysing feedback and remedial action. Celebrating and recognising success. These nine elements can be explained as follows: Process of change management The change management process is the series of steps or activities that a change management team or project leader follow to apply change management to a project or to a change. The change management process allows an organisation to deal with both the human and technical aspects of change. Assessment of readiness Assessments are tools that are used by change management team to assess the organisations readiness to change. This assessment can include organisational assessments, culture and history assessments, employee assessments, sponsor assessments and change assessments. Each tool provides an insight into the challenges and the opportunities that the project team may face during the change process.

Communication and communication planning Many managers believe that if they communicate clearly with their employees, their job is done. However, there are many reasons why employees may not understand what their managers are saying at the first time. That is because each employees readiness to hear is based on many factors. Effective communicators consider three components: the audience, what is said, and when it is said. For example, the first step in managing change is to build awareness about the need for change and create a desire among employees. Therefore, initial communications are naturally designed to create awareness about the reasons for change and the risk of not changing. Like this, at each step in the process, communications should be designed to spread the right message at the right time. Therefore, communication planning starts with a careful analysis of the audiences, the key messages and the timing for those messages. The change management team must design a communication plan that addresses the needs of front-line employees, supervisors, and executives. Each of the audience has particular needs for information that is based on their role in the implementation of the change. Coaching and manager training for change management Supervisors play a major role in managing change. Ultimately, the supervisor will have direct influence over an employees motivation to change than any other person at workplace. Unfortunately, it is difficult to convince supervisors about the need for change and they even become the source of resistance. It is essential for the change management team and executive sponsors to increase the support of supervisors and to build change leadership. Use of individual change management activities will help these supervisors to understand and implement the change process. When managers and supervisors are into the project, the change management team must prepare a coaching plan. They should provide training for supervisors including how to use individual change management tools with their employees. Development of training and employee training Training is the foundation for building information about the change and other skills required. Project team develops training requirements based on the skills, the knowledge, and the behaviours that are necessary to implement the change. These training requirements will be the foundation for the project team to develop training programs. Sponsor activities and sponsor roadmaps Business leaders and executives play a major role as sponsors in change management. The change management team develops a plan for sponsor activities and help key business leaders to carry out these plans. Sponsorship should be seen as the most important success factor. Avoid confusing the idea of sponsorship with support. The CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of the company may support your project, but that doesnt mean that they sponsor your initiative. Sponsorship involves energetic and visible involvement by senior business leaders throughout the process. Unfortunately many executives will not be aware of what this sponsorship looks like. A change management agents or project leaders role here is to help senior executives to do the right things to sponsor the project. Management of resistance Resistance from employees and managers at early stage is a normal behaviour. However, continuous resistance can threaten a project. So, the change management team must identify, understand and manage resistance throughout the organisation. The processes and tools used by managers and executives along with the support of the project team to manage employee resistance is called resistance management or management of resistance.

Collection of data, analysing feedback and remedial action Employee involvement is essential and integral part of change management. Managing change can not happen from one side. Feedback from employees is a key factor of the change management process. Analysis and remedial action based on this feedback aids in implementing change. Celebrating and recognising success Success at early stage and long-term must be recognised and celebrated. Individual and group appreciation is also a necessary component of change management in order to strengthen and support the change in the organisation. After-action review is the final step of the change management process. At this point you can stand back from the entire program, calculate successes and failures, and categorise process changes for the next project. This is part of the ongoing, continuous improvement of change management for your organisation and ultimately leads to change proficiency.

Q.3 Discuss the factors responsible for resistance? Ans:There are several factors that cause resistance to change. Here, we shall look into some of the critical reasons why employees resist change. These could include, their: Inability to understand change and its implications. Conviction that change is irrelevant and inappropriate. Difficulty to cope with the level and pace of work after the change. Speculated notion that change is a temporary phase. Perception that their superiors regard them as incompetent. Lack of influence or control. Lack of faith in their talent to learn new skills. Feeling of too many changes occurring too soon. Dislike to some managers/superiors and total mistrust in them. Feeling that it would involve a compromise on their income. Belief that the organisation does not need the extra effort. Unwillingness to use new technology to simplify work processes. Lack of proper communication channels between the management and themselves. We observe that the mentioned reasons broadly belong to basically two categories. These are:

 A lack of awareness about the change. Comfort with the way things are and hence a fear of the unknown. Given figures briefly explain the two broad categories. Figure 6.1, illustrates how a lack of awareness about the change gives rise to a fear of incurring a potential for loss on a personal level. Some of the losses on the personal level have been given in the diagram. Figure 6.1 illustrates the lack of awareness about the change

Figure 6.1: Lack of Awareness about the Change Figure 6.1 gives us an insight into how the potential for loss on a personal level acts as a reason for factor instigating the resistance to change; even though there isnt a potential threat, the individual believes that there is. Figure 6.2, on the other hand, explains how comfort with the way things are develops within us the resistance in change. When, in reality, there is no such thing as comfort. Comfort is something that we assume or rather create for ourselves. It is that situation, wherein, we make ourselves believe that the way the things are currently is good and safe, and that any change to this would require us to get out of our comfort zone. The figure illustrates some of the factors that influence this state of mind.Figure 6.2 illustrates the comfort with the status quo.

Figure 6.2: Comfort with the status quo Thus, figure 6.2 tells us how an individuals comfort with the ways things are causes him to raise a resistance to change. When actually in truth comfort is something an individual perceives in his mind, it does not exist. It is a creation by the human mind. It is important to note that fear of the unknown could also lead to the described. Resistance can also be classified into two other categories, which include: Resistance to the content of change. Resistance to the process of change. Resistance to the content of change: This involves the object of the change. An example of this type of resistance is that, when a specific change is introduced in technology, like the introduction of a particular reward system. Resistance to the process of change: This involves the way in which a change is introduced and not the object of change. An example of this kind of resistance is when the management re-structures jobs with no prior consultation with the employees who are affected by the change. Types of resistance There are three types of resistance involved in any resistance to change. These are: Level 1: I Do Not Get It. Level 2: I Do Not Like It. Level 3: I Do Not Like You. The following example will give us an insight into the different types of resistance. Let us consider a real life scenario wherein an executive announces that the company will restructure starting the following week. The employees and middle managers begin to resist. As the project unfolds, executives see resistance appearing in many forms malicious compliance, in-your-face arguments, even sabotage. The executives respond by

pushing the change even harder. They then start to make demands. Employees start to redouble their opposition and the change ends up either failing or going far over budget and way past deadlines. Let us now look into the types of resistance involved in the same. Level 1: I Do Not Get It: Level 1 involves information involving the facts, figures and ideas. It is the world of thinking and rational action. It is the world of presentations, diagrams, and logical arguments. This could also arise from lack of information, disagreement with data, and lack of exposure to the critical information or maybe even just the confusion over what it means. Many at times, we make the mistake of treating all resistance as if it were Level 1. Well-meaning managers supply their people with more information hold more meetings, and make more PowerPoint presentations when, in fact, something completely different is called for. And thats where Levels 2 and 3 come in. Level 2: I Do Not Like It: Level 2 concerns the emotional reaction to the change. Blood pressure rises, adrenaline flows, pulse increases. It is centred on fear: People are afraid that this change may cause them to lose face, status, control maybe even their jobs. When Level 2 is active, it makes communicating the change very difficult. People stop listening. So no matter how terrific your presentation is, once people hear "downsizing" their minds go elsewhere. This, however, is uncontrollable. They are not choosing to ignore you; its just that theyve got more important things on their minds like their own survival. Level 3: I Do Not Like You: This means, maybe they do like you, but they dont trust you or dont have enough confidence in your leadership. This is difficult to digest, but lack of attention to Level 3 is a major reason why resistance flourishes and changes fail as it is seldom talked about. In Level 3 resistance, people are not resisting the idea in fact, they may love the change you are presenting they are resisting you. But maybe it may not be you; they may be resisting those whom you represent. Whatever be the reason for this deeply ingrained resistance, you cant afford to ignore it. People may understand the idea you are suggesting (Level 1), and they may even have a good feeling about the possibilities of this change (Level 2) but they wont go along if they dont trust you. Thus, the example broadly classifies the types of resistance involved in an actual organisational change. However, the following section explains the methodology involved in reducing resistance to change.

Q.4 Explain challenges in implementing the successful change? Ans:- There are many challenges that have to be addressed for implementing the change.

It is human tendency to resist the changes since the change require learning new skills when we are very much comfortable with the old rules. There are many challenges that have to be faced by the organisation that have to be implemented by the organisation. They are: There is more competition from other countries in the market of today. In this situation we have to look with our organisation whether the organisation is able to cope with the market after implementing the change.

 There will be some socio, economic problems like the resource allocations and the impact of the resource allocation like depletion of resources on the environment. There are some changes may effect the life style of the people. There may be extra effort that is needed in the case of change process. There is a need to learn about the learning of new skills in the case of implementation of change that has to be carried out. There are many theories that explain why the people resist the change even when there is a necessity for the change. The resistance to change is the major challenge that is faced in all the organisations of todays world, Resistance to change can be averted via some factors. They are: Commitment: From the top level authorities in the organisation to the low level authorities, each employee has to commit for the plan. This begins at the top so that it shows the good leadership. A change mandate: it is necessary to tell the employee in a very convincing way that the change is necessary and it is not a choice. Input: Any employee who is going to undergo the change must be given an opportunity to raise their queries in the respected way. Accountability: Every individual those who are involved in the change process are responsible for implementing their own individual change activity. If they do not meet that responsibility then they may have to face some consequences. Rewards and celebrations: The successful implementation in the organisation should be well acknowledged. The organisation as a whole should honour the successful implementation. Evaluation: The Examination of the implementation is carried at the regular intervals for the success of the organisation. Whenever a change takes place in an organisation, the personal compact, that is, the relationship between the employers and employees gets affected. The personal compacts are of three types. They are: The formal compact: This involves the formal basic tasks and performance requirements as defined by the documents of the company like job descriptions, employment contracts and performance agreements. The psychological compact: This involves the trust between the employee and the employer. This is needed for the better achievement of the individual as well as the companys objectives. The social compact: This involves the employees opinion about the culture of an organisation and the success of that organisation. Change usually destabilises the relationship between the employee and the employer, since they will not be comfortable with these changes. These will cause the resistance to change. It is not simply the new idea that causes the resistance to change. As soon as the change is announced in the organisation, many employees will adapt some tactics to protect themselves. The position of the employees in the organisation will be:

 Argumentative: There are some employees who aggressively challenge against the change which is necessary. This is the time waster and it opposes the critical objectives that have to be met. The employee must agree that every idea is worth of consideration. We need to ask some suggestions from the employees those who challenge the change. Avoidance: Some managers and the members of the leadership team will simply avoid the change without refusing the change process. This is done by showing some kind of avoidance like not attending the meetings, denying the resources, or withholding the feedback. Leading the change is difficult in this as it requires the time and money for the change process management. Distraction: Many employees in the organisation show this type of attitude by showing some diversions during the change process that definitely reduce the effort. A distracted individual shows this by not involving physically as well as mentally in the change process. Once the resistances are identified, then we can use several strategies that are used to overcome the resistance to changes. All the employees must be given the same respect, since every individual will have their own opinion for the change. It is advisable to seek the agreement in all the stages of change process. When there are many on the board in the organisation then it is good to ask and address the few holdouts which are helpful to drive the goal. Finally the resistance is overcome by making sure that the change is communicated in the proper way that is in the multi dimensional format. Adult learning theory supports the need to propagate the messages that are seen, heard and felt.

Q.5 Write a note on transformation strategies? Ans:- The transformation strategies are the strategies and plans that are well designed for the development of
the organisation. The strategies of transformation are based on the transformation through Values, Organisation development, Reengineering, McKinseys Plan, Competitive Benchmarking, Six Sigma, Kaizen Principle which can be explained as follows: Transformation through Values The values are the important factors for the companies, and these reflect an ethic. The values are the foundation of the culture of an organisation. Usually organisations will have some of the core values. They should be: Very well suited with the societys core values. Based on the human interests. Very well suited for the purpose and operating context. Transformation through organisation development The organisation development depends on the three factors. They are: The organisation change will be present throughout all the stages. The organisation can be changed by changing the climate of the organisation. There is a requirement of social awareness in the organisation. Greiner has given the seven approaches for change that are commonly used. They are: The Decree Approach. The Replacement Approach.

 The Structural Approach. The Group Decision Approach. The Data Discussion Approach. The Group Problem Solving Approach. The T-Group Approach. Transformation through reengineering The reengineering process is revolutionary, and it improves the old way of doing the business. Transformation through through McKinseys plan The McKinseys Plan gives the ten ways of transformation for an organisation. They: Organise mainly the processes not the task. Minimise the subdivision of processes. Give in charge of the change process to the senior persons. Link the objectives to the customer satisfaction. Focus mainly on the teams rather than the individuals. Focus on combining both the managerial and non managerial activities as much as possible. Focus more on the development of competencies among all the individuals. Inform and train the people without the delay. Increase the supplier and customer contact with all the individuals in the organisation. Reward the skill development and team performance rather than the individual performance alone. Transformation through competitive benchmarking This involves the process of measuring the products based on the quality and standards. This also involves the viewing the good services and practices to the customers in comparison with the other competitors in the market. Transforming through Six Sigma This defines the statistical variation. This aims at reducing the defectsapproximately from 35000 to three defects per million operations. This makes use of the infrastructure of highly trained employees from different fields of the company. Transformation through Kaizen Principle This mainly depends on the factors like: Small improvement. Conventional knowledge. Personal involvement.

 Many people. Improve the process. Standardisation is needed.

Q.6 Differentiate between effectiveness and efficiency? Ans:In order to be successful, organisations have to be effective and efficient. Effectiveness is to achieve the right things and efficiency is to achieve the things right. Effectiveness and efficiency are generally used very closely or interchangeably, although both these terms have very clear and separate meanings the difference in these two terms can be explained as follows: Organisational effectiveness is commonly referred to as the degree to which predetermined operational and operative goals are achieved, but the concept of efficiency represents the benefit rate incurred in the search of these goals or in other words efficiency is the input to output ratio. It tells the number of inputs that is required to produce certain amount of outputs. For Example, Take two customer service representatives, the first representative is very fast with the customer. If the customer tells him unnecessary information, the first representative tells the customer that is not important and quickly resolves the issues. The first representative ends up handling more number of calls. The second representative is slow with the customer, shows empathy and concern, and resolves the issue, gains customer satisfaction by the end of the call. Here the first representative is efficient and the second representative is effective. There are some major differences between the effectiveness and efficiency. These are shown in the table 7.1. Table 7.1: Difference between Effectiveness and Efficiency Effectiveness Efficiency

Efficiency is defined as the output to Effectiveness is defined as the measureinput ratio and focuses on achieving the of actual output meeting the requiredmaximum output with minimum output. resources. It considers the present state and the process.

It considers in meeting the end goals.

This requires documentation and This encourages innovation and differentrepetition of same steps many number of ways to execute the required goal. times. It is about gaining success. This refers to quality. This is to achieve the right things. It is about avoiding errors. This refers to quantity. This is to achieve the things right.

Creating an effective and efficient organisation leads to the minimum utilisation of resources. The effective and efficient organisation brings to its customers the prize of superior quality and value for money.

Assignment Set- 2 (60 Marks)

Q.1

Explain Organizational structure.

Ans : An organizational structure consists of activities such as task allocation, coordination and supervision,
which are directed towards the achievement of organizational aims. It can also be considered as the viewing glass or perspective through which individuals see their organization and its environment. Organizations are a variant of clustered entities. An organization can be structured in many different ways, depending on their objectives. The structure of an organization will determine the modes in which it operates and performs. Organizational structure allows the expressed allocation of responsibilities for different functions and processes to different entities such as the branch, department, workgroup and individual. Organizational structure affects organizational action in two big ways. First, it provides the foundation on which standard operating procedures and routines rest. Second, it determines which individuals get to participate in which decision-making processes, and thus to what extent their views shape the organizations actions. Organizational structure types [edit]Pre-bureaucratic structures Pre-bureaucratic (entrepreneurial) structures lack standardization of tasks. This structure is most common in smaller organizations and is best used to solve simple tasks. The structure is totally centralized. The strategic leader makes all key decisions and most communication is done by one on one conversations. It is particularly useful for new (entrepreneurial) business as it enables the founder to control growth and development. They are usually based on traditional domination or charismatic domination in the sense of Max Weber's tripartite classification of authority [edit]Bureaucratic structures Weber (1948, p. 214) gives the analogy that the fully developed bureaucratic mechanism compares with other organizations exactly as does the machine compare with the non-mechanical modes of production. Precision, speed, unambiguity, strict subordination, reduction of friction and of material and personal costs- these are raised to the optimum point in the strictly bureaucratic administration.[5] Bureaucraticstructures have a certain degree of standardization. They are better suited for more complex or larger scale organizations, usually adopting a tall structure. The tension between bureaucratic structures and non-bureaucratic is echoed in Burns and Stalker's[6] distinction between mechanistic and organic structures. The Weberian characteristics of bureaucracy are: Clear defined roles and responsibilities A hierarchical structure Respect for merit.

[edit]Post-bureaucratic The term of post bureaucratic is used in two senses in the organizational literature: one generic and one much more specific.[7] In the generic sense the term post bureaucratic is often used to describe a range of ideas developed since the 1980s that specifically contrast themselves with Weber's ideal type bureaucracy. This may include total quality management, culture management and matrix management, amongst others. None of these however has left behind the core tenets of Bureaucracy. Hierarchies still exist, authority is still Weber's rational, legal type, and the organization is still rule bound. Heckscher, arguing along these lines, describes them as cleaned up bureaucracies,[8] rather than a fundamental shift away from bureaucracy. Gideon Kunda, in his classic study of culture management at 'Tech' argued that 'the essence of bureaucratic control - the formalisation, codification and enforcement of rules and regulations - does not change in principle.....it shifts focus from organizational structure to the organization's culture'. Another smaller group of theorists have developed the theory of the Post-Bureaucratic Organization.,[8] provide a detailed discussion which attempts to describe an organization that is fundamentally not bureaucratic. Charles Heckscher has developed an ideal type, the post-bureaucratic organization, in which decisions are based on dialogue and consensus rather than authority and command, the organization is a network rather than a hierarchy, open at the boundaries (in direct contrast to culture management); there is an emphasis on metadecision making rules rather than decision making rules. This sort of horizontal decision making by consensus model is often used in housing cooperatives, other cooperatives and when running a nonprofit or community organization. It is used in order to encourage participation and help to empower people who normally experience oppression in groups. Still other theorists are developing a resurgence of interest in complexity theory and organizations, and have focused on how simple structures can be used to engender organizational adaptations. For instance, Miner et al. (2000) studied how simple structures could be used to generate improvisational outcomes in product development. Their study makes links to simple structures and improviser learning. Other scholars such as Jan Rivkin and Sigglekow,[9] and Nelson Repenning [10] revive an older interest in how structure and strategy relate in dynamic environments. [edit]Functional structure Employees within the functional divisions of an organization tend to perform a specialized set of tasks, for instance the engineering department would be staffed only with software engineers. This leads to operational efficiencies within that group. However it could also lead to a lack of communication between the functional groups within an organization, making the organization slow and inflexible. As a whole, a functional organization is best suited as a producer of standardized goods and services at large volume and low cost. Coordination and specialization of tasks are centralized in a functional structure, which makes producing a limited amount of products or services efficient and predictable. Moreover, efficiencies can further be realized as functional organizations integrate their activities vertically so that products are sold and distributed quickly and at low cost.[11] For instance, a small business could make components used in production of its products instead of buying them. This benefits the organization and employees faiths. [edit]Divisional structure Also called a "product structure", the divisional structure groups each organizational function into a division. Each division within a divisional structure contains all the necessary resources and functions within it. Divisions can be categorized from different points of view. One might make distinctions on a geographical basis (a US division and an EU division, for example) or on product/service basis (different products for different customers: households or

companies). In another example, an automobile company with a divisional structure might have one division for SUVs, another division for subcompact cars, and another division for sedans. Each division may have its own sales, engineering and marketing departments. [edit]Matrix structure The matrix structure groups employees by both function and product. This structure can combine the best of both separate structures. A matrix organization frequently uses teams of employees to accomplish work, in order to take advantage of the strengths, as well as make up for the weaknesses, of functional and decentralized forms. An example would be a company that produces two products, "product a" and "product b". Using the matrix structure, this company would organize functions within the company as follows: "product a" sales department, "product a" customer service department, "product a" accounting, "product b" sales department, "product b" customer service department, "product b" accounting department. Matrix structure is amongst the purest of organizational structures, a simple lattice emulating order and regularity demonstrated in nature. Weak/Functional Matrix: A project manager with only limited authority is assigned to oversee the crossfunctional aspects of theproject. The functional managers maintain control over their resources and project areas. Balanced/Functional Matrix: A project manager is assigned to oversee the project. Power is shared equally between the project manager and the functional managers. It brings the best aspects of functional and projectized organizations. However, this is the most difficult system to maintain as the sharing power is delicate proposition. Strong/Project Matrix: A project manager is primarily responsible for the project. Functional managers provide technical expertise and assign resources as needed.

Q.2

Discuss the reasons for Business change.

Ans :- In many small and medium sized businesses there is little or no strategy to improve the fortunes of the
organization. This may happen in good times as well as bad and may result from a belief that: If it is not broke don't fix it The business is in a niche market with no competition No skills are available in-house to make proposed changes The business owner is retiring - it will be someone else's problem And so on The lack of a desire to continually develop and improve the business encourages a reactionary mode within the business, rather than a more desirable pro-active stance. Why is this important? Generally a reactionary organization fails to take business planning seriously and is more focused on resolving current issues than establishing a mechanism to allow problems to be anticipated and actioned prior to becoming an issue. The import of this can be found when comparing organizations that: gain success on an on-going basis are able to more easily attract skilled staff train staff in order to raise the skill set within the business have set their goals and know how they are to be achieved

with those businesses that do not. Pro-active focused businesses are generally the winners. Businesses do move into a pro-active mode, but what inspires the business owner to take such a step? Ten of the most frequent reasons for change within a business are: 1. Third Party Intervention A financial institution that has supported the business may seek improvements in the business performance to reduce a potential risk to their investment. This may prompt the business leaders to take improvement actions that were previously alien to satisfy the institution and reduce the risk to their own assets that may be held as a guarantee against the investment. 2. Sales Decline There may be a serious decline in sales. Competition, new technologies, a failure to meet the customer needs and expectations, a history of poor product development and introduction or poor marketing may all be contributory factors in reduced sales and be the catalyst for the business owner to change the approach to the business development. 3. Management Buyout The chief executive is removed through a buyout by the other directors and a changed business approach ensues. 4. Takeover The business is acquired and the policies and practices of the acquiring business are adopted and introduce a proactive approach to the business. This may follow the appointment of new executive directors. 5. Lack of Internal Skills The dearth of management skills within the business may trigger the appointment of an external senior executive who brings new methodologies, planning and enterprise to the business. ;6. Family Business 'Turmoil' The autocratic control of an owner may at times only be changed through the realization that permanent family divisions are undesirable. It may well be the opportunity for perhaps the 'university educated next generation of family' to demonstrate their abilities in setting and achieving sustainable growth strategies and managing the culture change. 7. Raise Capital The success of raising new funding may be dependent upon the appointment of an executive or non executive director to oversee the business on behalf of the provider. Such an appointment will add new skills to the management team as well as promote improved business practices. 8. Exit Strategy A business owner may realize that in order to optimize business value at the expected time of his/her exit,

changes in the way the business is run will be necessary. The delegation of responsibilities, training of staff and implementation of strategic plans may be areas exploited to reduce the dependence of the owner on the business. 9. Delegation or Renegade Action When the business owner does not have the skills necessary to effectively manage the organization authorities may be delegated to or sized by an opportunist director to manage the business. A weak unskilled business owner may be relieved that some responsibilities have been re-assigned, however, should the delegate or opportunist fail to match expectations more severe difficulties may arise for the business. 10. Project Based Change Should implementation of an improvement project be planned, but internal resources are not sufficient or capable of managing the change, the appointment on a fixed term contract of a consultant or interim manager may be a desirable option. Change can be implemented with less interruption on staff conducting their normal duties. The business owner should always control the business and this is easier to achieve if change is planned, well managed and is aligned to the goals of the organization.

Q.3

Explain Lewins model of change.

Ans :- Lewin used an analogy of changing the shape of a block of ice to convey his theory. If you want to
change the shape of a block of ice you must first melt it or break down its existing structure. Once its unfrozen, it becomes liquid and can be changed by guiding it in any direction you desire. Using a mold, you can cause it to take on a different shape from its original state. Finally, you freeze the liquid within the mold to crystallize it into its new shape. This is how Kurt Lewin explained his influential three-stage model of organizational change. Here are some key points to consider when thinking about three stages of change (Unfreeze, Change, Freeze). Unfreeze Before you can begin changing an organization in any meaningful way you need to overcome the inertia of the existing way of doing things. This starts by challenging many of the beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of people within the organization. As Lewin put it, Motivation for change must be generated before change can occur. One must be helped to re-examine many cherished assumptions about oneself and ones relations to others. You are breaking down the status quo. During the unfreezing process everyone feels that things are becoming off balance. This feeling becomes a strong motivator for people to seek out a new equilibrium. During this stage, you need to sell the benefits of the change. The more people that recognize that the change needs to occurs the more likely it will be successful. 1. Determine what needs to change 2. Sell the benefits of the change to everyone involved (this includes getting support from upper management) 3. Specifically address any doubts or concerns Change Once the organization has gone through the unfreeze stage, effective change can begin within the organization. People begin to look for new ways to do things and support the new direction. Time and frequent communication

are two key factors for the change to occur. People need to understand the changes as they occur and feel that they are part of the change. Some take a long time to recognize the real benefits. This can lead to fear and rumors that need to be handled quickly. 1. Involve people in the process and empower them 2. Communicate frequently 3. Dispel rumors quickly Freeze Once the changes have taken effect, the next stage is to freeze or crystallize the changes within the organization. Putting the proper processes and the organizational hierarchy in place to manage them is important to ensure this happens. Since change is always occurring, some might ask why bother to freeze things. Why not stay in a constant state of change? Constant change, without freezing things in place at least momentarily, leaves people without a clear sense of direction. It becomes more and more difficult as time goes on to convince people that something needs changing if you dont give the most recent changes time to fully crystallize. Also, taking the time to celebrate the successful completion of changes within the organization provide everyone with a feeling of reward and gives them closure. 1. Develop processes to anchor the changes into the culture 2. Provide clear communications, support and training 3. Celebrate the successful completion of changes

Q.4

Write a note on leadership framework.

Ans : Leadership is about understanding people, and about getting people pointing and acting in the
same direction. The unique role of a leader is then to provide the energy and commitment to see this job through, and ensuring execution is perfect. Leadership is about listening, and making a real "connect" with others. It is a process. We call this process the 4 Es of Envision, Enable, Empower & Energize. The framework has been developed by studying historical Leaders (live ones are notoriously difficult to summarize in a complete fashion, as things change so quickly), the current literature, and from personal experience of leading multinational & multicultural organizations across the world. The sidebar on Historical Examples summarizes how the first 4 Es apply to two very different Leaders Mohandas Gandhi and Genghis Khan. The 4 Es framework applies equally to Leadership in different cultural backgrounds important to Leaders of todays multicultural Enterprises. But before examining the 4 Es in detail, there is a simple set of fundamental truths about all Leaders to review. Leaders always create (and need) change Leaders always create (and need) followers Leaders have a rock-solid value system, which is congruent with their followers.

Leaders and Change Without a need for change, the concept of Leadership is meaningless. Leadership is not an abstract, Platonic concept - it is a practical activity, with a specific goal in mind. The situation in India pre-independence almost demanded that someone (like Gandhi) arose to lead and organize the cause. In the 4 Es framework, Change is central to the strategic choices made at the Envisioning stage.

Leaders and Followers Leaders are quintessential change agents, but they cant do it alone they still need the help of others to get things going. They find ways to create groups of followers, so they can together change things. We are not talking of manipulation or of mischief when we write "Leaders create followers". We mean that the job of a Leader is to encourage people to get things done. There is symmetry and symbiosis between Leaders and followers. Both need each other. Without followers, there are no Leaders. In this sense, Leadership varies by situation, as a good Leader in one circumstance may not be successful in another. A classic example of Leadership varying by situation is Winston Churchill, who succeeded in wartime and then failed in peacetime by loosing a General Election. He was unable to reflect peoples post-war needs. By contrast, Charles De Gaulle was a strong wartime Leader, who also managed to reflect the needs of the populace in peacetime. He still held his own views on the future of France so succeeding as a Leader in both situations. Followers must follow willingly. Coercion should certainly not be in the Leaders tool kit. Trust between Leader and Follower is essential to this willingness. Even Genghis enjoyed fierce loyalty from his troops a loyalty he returned in full. Our definition is built on the notion that Leaders can only really get other people to do things that are latent within them. To note Genghis again, the Mongol tribes wanted to stop their internecine, tribal genocide but needed him to show the way. Finally, with this process orientation to Leadership, we believe everyone can train, develop and enhance their Leadership skills. This is true regardless of the size or complexity of the Enterprise. And, because everyone can train, the results can be measured. You cant have Leaders without followers, and you cant have followers without Leaders. Paradoxically, therefore, the Leader is also a follower, in the sense of reflecting the wishes of others. Leaders and followers are thus fully interdependent. Leaders & Values congruence The Leadership job starts with a thorough understanding of the followers needs, aspirations and concerns, which needs excellent listening and facilitation skills. Most importantly, it starts with a thorough understanding of the value systems of all constituents. The Leaders value system must be congruent with that of the followers if the relationship is to prosper. Leaders must first understand and then communicate their own value systems if they are to be trusted and followed. Leadership comes from within us, in the sense that deeply held values and principles provide the road map for the way we lead, and the way other people respond. It is always the Leaders personal value system that sustains them in their quest, whether they are a person of impeccable moral fiber, or quite disreputable. On the negative side, without a clear sense of his or her own personal values, the Leader-to-be can get hopelessly lost, falling foul of inconsistency and insincerity as he struggles to handle the constituents. From the perspective of the total organization, the creation and Leadership of a value system for the Enterprise, which is in total synchronization with the values of its constituents, will be very powerful indeed. This needs a sense of balance in dealing with multiple constituencies and interest groups, whilst also achieving the Enterprise goals. Constituencies include employees, shareholders, customers and members of local communities. Often the very best (and longest lived) business Enterprises takes specific note of all their constituencies in their mission and strategies. It is with this in mind that we include values and culture in the Envisioning step of the 4 Es. Ideas and Values Let us now connect these thoughts on Leadership into the world of ideas. First, what is an idea, and what is a value, and what is the connection?

Idea: a thought to be presented as a suggestion, a thought about or mental picture of something such as a future or possible event, a realization of a possible way of doing something or of something to be done. In todays parlance, an idea tends to be thought of as an innovation, That is, an idea that can be practically executed and which creates value. So, we can all have ideas, and they result in changes, to a greater or lesser extent. They can be incremental, substantial or transformational innovations all are needed in any Enterprise to keep it moving forward. Clayton Christensen (in the Innovators Dilemma) calls the latter innovations disruptive technologies like the printed press, and the internal combustion engine, which changed everything [iii]. He also made the point that large Enterprises tend not to disrupt. Values: the accepted principles or standards of an individual or a group. What is interesting is that ideas lead eventually to values, if they are big enough. As we moved from hunting to agriculture, one assumes someone had the basic idea that not killing people was good. Later, the idea of the rule of law came along, and then liberal democracy. Both eventually became values in civil society. The idea of markets surfaced, and the values of capitalism took hold. On the other hand, Marx thought of the idea of communism, which lasted a while but never became an endearing value. Values emerge over time, and get consensus over time. Ideas can be born at Internet speed, but values take time and energy to createand to take hold in an Enterprise [iv]. Put another way, ideas are fast, and values are slow. Ideas sometimes lead to powerful values, but not always. So what is the relevance to Leadership, and to change? It is ideas that motivate people, but values that bind them together. When a Leader communicates, he or she must be clear whether the subject is ideas or values. Now this may sound simplistic, but how many times do we hear politicians claiming an idea as some kind of deep, culturally significant value? On the other hand, how often do business people refuse to discuss values, as something too intangible and emotional in a commercial context? If more business Leaders would discuss values, and their development, one wonders how many more enduring Companies there would be a point especially true for the New Economy high speed Enterprises. Values are also deeply related to strong brand equities a point to which we will return in another article. One aspect of a change Leaders job is thus to understand this difference in meaning and impact between ideas and values, and the difference in their speed.

Q.5

Write a note on learning culture.

Ans : To become a learning organisation is to accept a set of attitudes, values and practices that support the
process of continuous learning within the organisation. Training is a key element in the business strategy of an organisation dedicated to continuous learning. Through learning, individuals can re-interpret their world and their relationship to it. A true learning culture continuously challenges its own methods and ways of doing things. This ensures continuous improvement and the capacity to change. Leading management thinker, Peter Senge, has identified five disciplines of a learning culture that contribute to building a robust learning organisation. These elements are: personal mastery create an environment that encourages personal and organisational goals to be developed and realised in partnership mental models know that a persons 'internal' picture of their environment will shape their decisions and behaviour shared vision build a sense of group commitment by developing shared images of the future team learning transform conversational and collective thinking skills, so that a groups capacity to reliably develop intelligence and ability is greater than the sum of its individual member's talents

system thinking develop the ability to see the 'big picture' within an organisation and understand how changes in one area affect the whole system..

Q.6

Explain the open system approach to change management.

Ans : The open systems approach is an integrated technical and business strategy that defines key interfaces
for a system (or piece of equipment) being developed. Such interfaces generally are best defined by formal consensus (adopted by recognized industry standards bodies) specifications and standards. However, commonly accepted (de facto) specifications and standards (both company proprietary and non-proprietary) are also acceptable if they facilitate utilization of multiple suppliers. The use of de facto specifications and standards takes advantage of the fact that firms, particularly those in the commercial arenas, frequently develop hardware, software and systems standards of the design and fabrication of computing, telecommunications, display, sensing, and signal processing systems. Whether consensus or de facto standards are used to describe interfaces, the benefits only accrue if products from multiple sources are economically possible. Although the most common emphasis is on electronic systems, the open systems approach is widely applicable, from fasteners and light bulbs to jet engines. An effective open systems architecture will rely on physical modularity and functional partitioning of both hardware and software. Physical modularity and functional partitioning should be aligned to facilitate the replacement of specific subsystems and components without impacting others. The subsystems and components described by the systems design should be consistent with the system repairable level. Subsystems and components below the repairable level will normally not be under government configuration control. Therefore, repairs below the repairable level, if required, will be by the supplier. If the hardware and software is effectively partitioned, processing hardware can be replaced with new technology without modifying application software. Additionally, application software can be modified without necessitating hardware changes. As a preferred business strategy, the open system approach is becoming widely applied by commercial manufacturers of large complex systems. It has the attention of DoD management who have mandated its use by DoD systems developers to maintain continued superior combat capability affordably. System designs incorporating open systems concepts and principles more readily accommodate changing technology to achieve cost, schedule, and performance benefits by promoting multiple sources of supply and technology insertion.

OPEN SYSTEMS IN WEAPONS SYSTEMS ACQUISITIONS The adoption of open systems in systems acquisition is a pragmatic reality. The confluence of technological trends, business trends, fiscal constraints, and evolving threats has forced the government to recognize that systems can no longer be acquired and supported with traditional methods. Ideally, the logistician would prefer to hold a system configuration constant for its projected lifetime, procure a lifetimes worth of spares and provide operational support. Unfortunately that situation does not exist. Contemporary acquisition strategies are incorporating plans for modernization, just-in-time spares, horizontal technology insertion, single process initiative, performance specification, CAIV, IPPD, et al that leverages industrys creativity and efficiency. The support system will be affected by this too. Some support functions will benefit from open systems. Some support functions will have challenges. The open systems design approach allows a weapon system program office to achieve and maintain combat superiority in todays challenging acquisition environment. The design process is focussed on lowering the entire life-cycle costs of weapon systems in contrast to current practice in which a disproportionate focus is placed on the short-term goal of having the lowest development costs. The ability of the open systems design approach to improve life-cycle supportability is becoming an even more important issue as DoD limits the number of new weapon systems procurements and extends the life of the systems currently fielded.

It is a fact of today's acquisition environment that DoD is no longer the dominant force in the technological market place. Moreover, as the DoD procurement budget has been drastically reduced, DoD no longer has the luxury of technology dominance, funded by seemingly unlimited budgets. In prior decades, DoD weapons systems requirements drove development of new products and new technology. In the todays environment the opposite is true; commercial demand drives product and technology development. However, DoD can now take advantage of commercial innovation, research and development to drive down its cost of developing, acquiring and maintaining weapon systems, leveraging the commercial investment to make the most of a shrinking defense budget. An open systems approach, using open interfaces supported by commercial and non-developmental components, can substantially facilitates this leveraging. Most of today's legacy weapons systems were developed with their own, often unique and frequently closed, infrastructures, making upgrade or modification over their expected lifetimes (20 to 40 or more years) both problematic and expensive. The impact of reduced budgets and increased dominance of commercial technology made this approach to development obsolete. Acquisition managers now have to rely on commercial markets for affordable product development and support. However, as DoDs role shifts from technology producer to technology consumer, weapon systems will be based more on commercial products, whose design is not controlled by DoD and whose lifetimes are much shorter and more volatile than the weapons systems they support (e.g., years vs. decades). This, of course, presents an interesting logistics challenge. Application of the open systems approach is being applied to legacy systems as well. Legacy systems usually have size, space, power, cooling and shape factor constraints. For these systems, the open systems approach provides form-fit-function interface (F3I) solutions within existing packaging, power, and environmental constraints. In such cases, the open systems solution frequently requires less system resources by using newer, more efficient technologies. The open systems approach is similar to F3I except that the open systems approach emphasizes choosing interfaces that are broadly accepted in the marketplace to allow for as many suppliers as possible over the long term. For weapons systems acquisitions the issue is not just cost: continuance of our military superiority may depend on reduced technology insertion cycle times. In a global market, everyone, including our potential adversaries, will gain increasing access to the same commercial technology base. The military advantage goes to the nation that captures the latest commercially available technologies, incorporates them in weapon systems, and fields them first. Moreover, since coalition operations with our allies place a premium on interoperability, it is essential that our systems be compatible and capable of being sustained through a common logistics support structure. Open systems specifications and standards promote standard interfaces and interoperability with our friends and allies. As a result of this changing acquisition environment, DoD finds itself with few alternatives but to drastically alter the way it develops, produces and supports its weapon systems. It is neither economically nor technologically feasible to continue traditional closed design approaches. DoD has been compelled to move towards a more open weapon systems design alternative.