Change refers to a strategic change in an organizations structures,

systems, culture, managerial approach and technology.

Strategy is the direction and scope of an organization over the long
term ideally which matches its resources to its changing
environment in particular its markets, customers or clients so as to
meet stakeholders expectations.











Environmental, Cultural and Political
Influences and their Implications for Change
Implementation and Impact of
Change
1. Resistance from senior managers
2. Dominant Culture
3. Conflicts due to Transformational change
4. Resistance due to organizational routines and ideological
objections
ORGANISATIONAL PREREQUISITES:
1. Senior management commitment
2. Equipping mangers for change
3. Documentation
4. Maintaining Open communication
5. Training participants
6. Shared awareness
7. Assembling a body of KEY managers
8. Facilitate necessary resources
9. Acceptance
Role of HR strategies in implementing change

Proper Planning
Designing and Management of Personnel
systems
Matching HRM to explicit business strategy
People as a strategic resource

WHAT DOES CHANGE MEAN?
An organisational Change is defined as the adoption of a new idea or behaviour
by an organisation. It is a way of altering an existing organisation to increase
organl effectiveness for achieving its objectives.. OC is structural in
character and aims at bringing about the structural changes.
Response to change depends upon the employees perception about the
change.
Theories of change
Evolutionary change- continuous cycle of change. Outcome can be radical or
gradual.
Dialectic theory- organisational existence in pluralistic world of ambiguous &
contradictory forces that compete with one another.
Life cycle theory- change process as a linear irreversible sequence of prescribed
stages which facilitate an orga. To move to the desired stage.
Teleological theory- talks abt. The orgas. Interaction with the external n
internal construct n its efforts to reach the goal. Its a deliberate process of
reaching the predetermined goal as the ultimate objective.
WHAT DOES CHANGE MEAN?
Typically, the concept of organizational change is in regard to
organization-wide change, as opposed to smaller changes such as
adding a new person, modifying a program, etc.
Examples of organization-wide change might include a change in
mission, restructuring operations (e.g., restructuring to self-
managed teams, layoffs, etc.), new technologies, mergers, major
collaborations, "rightsizing", new programs such as Total Quality
Management, re-engineering, etc.

Some experts refer to organizational transformation. Often this
term designates a fundamental and radical reorientation in the
way the organization operates.
There are two types of change that challenge and impact organizations

Internalstructured shifts or programs that are an ongoing
phenomenon within an organization. These changes may be
undertaken to avoid deterioration of current performance or
to improve future performance of a process or system. In this
sense they are controlled and managed from within the
organization in an orderly, planned, and systematic way

Externalenvironmental changes that come from outside the
organization, and the organization exercises little or no control
over them. In business, this could mean shifting economic
tides, new competitors, or radical technology developments.
In government, it can mean changes in the world situation, the
administration, legislation, budgetary issues, or management
reform.


Managing Change: where they come
from?`
1.Management as a control
2.Management as shaping
CHANGE OUTCOMES
a) intended change outcomes
b) partially intended change outcomes
c) Unintended change outcomes
ROLE OF CHANGE MANAGERS
1) Change manager as Director
2) Change manager as Navigator
Control is still seen. Intended outcome will be achieved.
Outcomes are partly emergent rather completely planned.
Cross functional teams- history of distrust etc. navigating the
process may not be intentional.
3) Change manager as Caretaker
A control process, but influenced by many forces. Despite
the Change agents intentions to initiate a process, ppl may
think it as a failing one.
In this case inexorable growth and the issue are outside
the control of any manager. This is pessimistic image.

4) Change manager as Coach
Assumption is that change managers are able to intentionally
shape the organisations capabilities. Coach may rely upon
building the right set of values, skills etc.
5) Change manager as Interpreter
Creates meaning for the others. Helps them to make sense. It
is in essence constitute a changed orga. Competing interests
may be present.
Change agents provide legitimate arguments.
E.g. downsizings interpretation.

6) Change manager as Nurturer
This image assumes that even a small change may have
large significance and managers may not control the
outcomes of such changes.
They may nurture, facilitate organisational qualities to
enable a positive self organising to occur.
The future outcomes are nurtured/ shaped but the ability
to produce the intended outcomes is restricted due to
forces, chaotic forces.
Specific outcomes and directions of change cannot be
intentionally produced but they emerge and are shaped
thru the qualities and capabilities of orga.
Hewlett-PACKARD CHANGE STORY
* In 2001 HP AND COMPAQS merger was proposed.
Walter Hewitt-son of founder of HP opposed the merger. And filed a lawsuit.
The Dutch Bank-a stakeholder voted yes for the merger.
On March 19,2002, the merger was approved.

PRE-MERGER STORY:
*In 1999 PC Division faced growing competition from Dell and Sun
Microsystems.
*HP was losing market share, sales force needed better coordination etc.
*The CEO wanted to change the HP culture.
*To achieve this, it was decided :-
*to work with ad agencies and head of HR to create a set of rules from the
garbage, that outlined what HP culture would become.
*Customer defines a job well done.
*Invent different ways of working.
Restructuring the company.


Contd.
*customers such as Ford and Boeing got frustrated.
*Uncommunicative systems.
CEO reorganized the company by creating:-
a) front end section which includes: sales and marketing
b) back end section which includes: manufacturing and research.
The CEO faced lot of resistance.



2

POST MERGER
*During the merger there was a lawsuit that led to opposition.
*The integration of two cultures led to strained relations between the two
groups. Staff questioned the merits of mergers.
*The transition was made bit easier by adding 65000 new personnel to the
HP community.
*CEO embarked on a series of technological symposiums and coffee talks
with HP engineers.
*Although many employees were not convinced of the HPs riskiest move
and became the victims of the job cuts.
*To win over 1,47,000 employees worldwide CEO used methods like
management by walking around style within the organization.
*Unfortunately the HP faced severe competition from Dell and IBM and in
Feb,2005 the CEO was sacked.


3
SOME MISTAKESIN NUTSHELL
*Although the CEO could win the confidence of Dutch bank, she was
aware that change involves different interests that need to be
identified and managed.
*Customer pressures made the CEO to go for front end and back end
sections.
*At HP the merger established a new culture.
*CEO faced resistance at both the family level and at the staff level.
*The CEO employed two styles: a) to get the merger formalized and
b)sell it to staff.
*The change was not properly diagnosed by the CEO. She was under
the pressure to change but not very clear as to what to change.


4
SOME LESSONS.?
*Different interests need to be recognized and addressed during the
change.
*these interests are likely to provoke different reactions.
*organisational politics and lobbying are common aspects and they
need to be managed.
*negotiations and persuasions are the key communication skills.
* Communications should touch the concerned people.
*communicating change often entails providing vision of the future.
*pressures to change often come from both inside and outside.
*restructuring is a common organisational change when confronted
with problems.
*any organisational change involves paying attention to organisational
culture.

5
KODAKS CHANGE STORY
After more than a century of producing traditional film
cameras, Kodak announced in September 2003 that it would
cut this line of production.
In western countries, this involves the complete move away
from traditional products within the film industry by the end
of 2004 and a full scale launch of digital technology.
This move is slated to generate $ 16 billion revenue by 2006
and $20 billion by 2010.
CEO David A. Carp announced that Kodak is more
competitive, growing profitably, have balanced earning
stream and lower cost structure.
Implementing this change would require Kodak to cut their
dividend and to raise capital for new technology purchase.
This strategy helped in saving $800 million and $1 billion by
2007.
Kodak needed to make 2 physical changes to the organization-
a. there would be a reduction in the Kodak facilities
worldwide by consolidating current operations and divesting
unnecessary assets.
B. Kodak intended to reduce employment worldwide with up
to 15,000 jobs to cut by 2007.
Investor Reactions:
The announcement in 2003 took many external experts by
surprise and their reactions were not supportive particularly
to the news that their dividends would be cut.

They were aware of the promises to increase the companys
revenue which was not realized.
It was feared that this would become another half-hearted
transition as with the $1 billion launch into APS cameras in
1996 ended in failure.
They also pointed out to the risk of moving in this direction
as there were rival like HP, Canon Inc., and Seiko Epson Corp.
which were already ahead in digital technologies.
But CEOs response was firm.
Staff reactions
For many of the Kodaks employees future looked bleak.
They were concerned about loosing their jobs in the light of
proposed 20% worldwide cutbacks.
Downsizing is not new in Kodak. From 1997 to 2003 the co.
reduced the workforce by 30,000.

One union representative explained that the stress on
workers in Kodak has been worsened than necessary
because management has not reassured that they have got
any long term future.
Some lessons:
Organisational change involves handling reaction of
both internal and external stakeholders.
Communication strategies need to be designed for
internal and external groups
Reactions to change are likely to be influenced by
the success of previous changes and the extent to
which there has been delivery on past promises.
Change invokes risk and uncertainty
The consequences of change cannot always be
predicted
Managers of change need to address the question
for staff how will I be affected?