By Lesallan
Reply to the Student’s and Dr. P.: Organizational Models Related to Change Theory
Greetings Dr. P & Students:
Students, your discussions have provided an excellent foundation for understanding how various change models—from Lewin’s three-step process (Lewin, 1947) to more integrative frameworks like the Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model (Nadler & Tushman, 1980)—can serve as diagnostic and intervention tools during organizational change. In your real-life examples of implementing a client success team, you have illustrated that misalignment among people, work processes, structure, and culture can hinder the effectiveness of new initiatives (Smith, 2020).
In response to Dr. P’s inquiry regarding the challenge of aligning these elements in an organization with its own distinct culture, several approaches backed by recent research can be considered.
First, conducting a comprehensive diagnostic assessment of the organization’s current state is crucial. Tools such as cultural audits and employee surveys can help identify gaps between the existing culture and the desired state (Cameron & Green, 2015). Such diagnostics reveal where misalignment exists and serve as a baseline for developing targeted interventions. Once these discrepancies are identified, leadership must communicate a compelling vision for change. Appelbaum et al. (2012) emphasize that leaders’ clear, consistent communication and participative decision-making can bridge the gap between diverse departmental practices and individuals’ personal values, thereby creating a more unified approach to change.
Transformational leadership also plays a pivotal role in this process. As Marks and Mirvis (2011) assert, leaders who actively engage with employees and model adaptive behaviors help create an environment where change is accepted and embraced. By involving employees in the planning and executing change, organizations can tailor training programs and development initiatives to reinforce the value of new roles or processes—in Jade’s case, the integration of Client Success Managers across departments.
Moreover, continuous feedback and iterative adjustment of strategies are essential for sustaining alignment over time. Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) propose that engaging employees throughout the change process—by soliciting input and making necessary adjustments based on that feedback—ensures that the evolution of organizational practices remains coordinated with the strategic objectives and the prevailing culture. This comprehensive approach—diagnosing misalignments, facilitating open communication, adopting transformational leadership, and implementing continuous improvement measures—provides a robust framework for aligning work, people, structure, and culture despite the inherent complexities of each unique organizational context.
While aligning these diverse elements presents a significant challenge, scholars suggest that integrating diagnostic assessments, targeted training and leadership initiatives, and adaptive feedback systems can facilitate smoother transitions. These strategies not only address immediate misalignments but also help embed a flexible and cohesive culture, thereby paving the way for sustained organizational success.
Blessings,
Lesallan
References:
Appelbaum, S. H., Habashy, S., Malo, J.-L., & Shafiq, H. (2012). Back to the future: Revisiting Kotter’s 1996 change model. Journal of Management Development, 31(8), 764–782. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711211258442
Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2015). Making sense of change management: A complete guide to organizational change models, tools, and techniques (4th ed.). Kogan Page. Retrieved from https://www.koganpage.com/product/making-sense-of-change-management-9780749470110
Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. A. (2008). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review, 86 (7/8), 130–139. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2008/07/choosing-strategies-for-change
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100103
Marks, M. L., & Mirvis, P. H. (2011). Introduction to special issue: Organizational change research. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24 (3), 307–315. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534811111147059
Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (1980). A diagnostic model for organizational behavior. In J. R. Hackman, E. E. Lawler, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Perspectives on behavior in organizations(pp. 36–48). McGraw-Hill.
Smith, J. (2020). Aligning organizational structures for success. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 33(4), 456–472. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2020-0078
0 Comments