Docstoc

Adam Johannes Raft

Document Sample
Adam Johannes Raft Powered By Docstoc
					Changing Management Culture : Research Report
Burning Platform or Promised Land
Is a burning platform - a visible crisis - needed to impel an organization to move?
Kotter speaks of a need for urgency. David Good worked through a burning platform
with daily screenings in Parliament and the media, and thinks it can be done better
without the spotlight.
The Harvard Management Communication Letter says if you don't have a burning
platform to push people away from the past, you need a compelling vision of the "The
Promised Land" that is strong enough to draw people to it. Don't overstate the extent
of the crisis, it warns, or you will destroy credibility. And involve everyone in the
solution, or they will go in all directions.
Art Daniels doesn't believe you need a "burning platform" to inspire change. "You
get more support when you say you are doing well and trying to improve," he insists.
Samson-Verreault finds a burning platform to be helpful. Without one, the change
will be slower. Although John Kotter calls for urgency (not necessarily a crisis),
Samson-Verreault believes that even urgently needed change won't be as quick as in a
crisis.
In the McKinsey Quarterly article, Corporate Transformation Without a Crisis,
Jonathan Day and Michael Jung say that organizations are not "frozen" - they change
continuously. Except where an accountability crisis has been identified, managers
should be cautious about using a crisis-change model. "We believe a company can be
transformed without experiencing a crisis, if the leaders understand what makes
individuals and groups transform their view of reality," they write.
They describe four conditions necessary, from which cultural change will flow. First,
everyone is both actor and observer. Well-ingrained habits and procedures must be
questioned and discarded, and new ones learned. It is difficult to question and change
one's own behaviour while actively immersed in it. Everyone therefore needs to
combine the behaviours of acting and observing, to be down on the dance floor,
acting, but also up in the balcony, watching.
Second, each individual crosses a threshold of conviction. Transformation of a large
organization requires hundreds and thousands of individual choices to adopt the new
future. Each person must be clear on "why" change is needed -- and the "why now"
must be persuasive. The "where to" must be clear and compelling. Each person must
understand and value the personal benefits of the program - the "what's in it for me?"
Third, each individual must cross a threshold of experience. They have to "try on" the
new activity. Speeches, memos, and videotapes will not give them that personal
experience. Fourth, the process balances redundancy and control. "Mistakes and
surprises are inevitable," they write. "Unless a transformation process is configured
to accommodate these unwelcome surprises, it can all too easily be undone."
Jim Collins, a management researcher, studied organizations that transformed
themselves from achieving good returns to attaining outstanding ones. He found they
did it without any huge crisis. They worked away steadily, getting the right team in
place - unexpectedly, that came before any vision - and then figuring out a solid
strategy.
In the public service, there is a tendency to pay attention to the urgent, at the expense
of the important. Making Modern Comptrollership important does not require


                                                                                       1
making it a crisis. The President of Treasury Board, in the 2001 report, stated:
"Canadians are fortunate to have a quality of life that is envied around the
world…Government of Canada programs and services make a critical contribution to
the day-to-day quality of life across this country." Most agencies are not in crisis,
although all face risks that could lead to a crisis. Making out there is a crisis, when
there isn't, will destroy trust.
The change model should fit with the organization's situation, following the general
strategy of plan, implement, evaluate, adjust. Work to build the capacity and
motivation to make the change, through leadership and infrastructure development,
and through giving meaningful experiences that affect values and feelings. Diagnose
the culture, and plan and execute the cultural transition. For organizations in a
comptrollership crisis, there may be a need for a more directive model initially, to
ensure short-term behaviour, but there will be a need to revisit the plan and ensure the
cultural changes that will support long-term adoption of the Modern Comptrollership
model are put in place.




                                                                                       2
”Governing the Present:
Administering Economic, Social and Personal Life”
P. Miller and N. Rose (forthcoming Polity Press, 2008).




                                                          3
http://forandringsledelse.wordpress.com/2007/02/03/kotter-læst-og-forstaet/

- Kotter læst og forstået -

Forandringsledelse
Forandringsledelse er blevet en populær og nødvendig disciplin de sidste 10-20 år.
Det hænger sammen med udviklingen i samfundet, der gør at alle mennesker og
organisationer må forholde sig til konstante forandringer. Forandring er blevet
normen i stedet for den stabilitet, som var i industrisamfundet, hvor forandringer kom
sjældent, havde en klart defineret start og slutnig og der var godt tid til at tilpasse sig
dem.
 
 Ændringer i marked, teknologi og samfundsmæssige krav presser de fleste
organisationer til forandring. Men forandringer kommer ikke kun fra omgivelserne,
de kan også komme indefra i forsøget på at gøre organisationen omstillingsparat.
Endelig er der mennesker der der flygter fra stilstand og søger forandring - for
forandringens skyld. Mennersker med denne profil er ofte de som rekutteres til
lederejob og dermed er forandringskulturen så at sige selvsuplerende og
selvforstærkende. Forandringsledelse handler om at gøre sin organisation fleksibel og
vænne den til forandringer ved løbende at tage initiativer, der gør medarbejderne mere
fleksible og robuste.
En af de store udfordringer for forandringsledelse er at udviklingen af teknologi og
udviklingen af mennesker og kultur foregår i to meget forskellige kurver. Teknologi
udvikler sig eksponentielt, mens mennesker skal have længere tid til at omstille sig.
Gabet mellem teknologi-kurven og menneske-kurven risikerer således at blive større
og større, hvis man ikke er bevidst om at få menneskene med. Risikoen ved det store
gab er, at organisationen ikke får nytteværdi af den nye teknologi. Forandringsledelse
er et værktøj til at udvikle mennesker, kultur og organisation, så man kan
implementere teknologi, der giver forretningsfordele.
Ifølge Kotter kuldsejler for mange reengineering projekter på grund af en række
hyppige fejltagelser, som går igen mange steder. Kotter identificerer 8 fejltagelser og
introducerer derfor en 8-trinsmodel for forandringsledelse. Han understreger
vigtigheden af at gennemgå alle otte trin for at etablere et grundlag der er solidt nok
og for at få forandringerne til at holde. I første omgang skal man indse, at store
forandringsprojekter ikke er nemme, og derfor arbejde bevidst og metodisk med
organisationen i et forsøg på at omstille den til forandringen (Kotter, 1997, s. 21-29).
Kotters otte trin er som følger:
1. Etablering af en oplevelse af nødvendighed
 Hvis selvtilfredsheden i
organisationen er udtalt, vil den aldrig komme i gang med forandringer. Årsagen til
selvtilfredsheden er som regel, at der ikke er nogle synlige kriser, kulturen er præget
af manglende åbenhed og forsøg på at undgå konfrontation, eller en
organisationsstruktur der får de ansatte til at fokusere på snævre, funktionelle
mål.
 For at skabe oplevelsen af nødvendighed og komme væk fra det interne
snæversyn må man tillade synlige kriser, f.eks. ved at tillade økonomisk tab, sætte
målene for indtjening og omsætning så højt, at de umuligt kan nås ved at fortsætte
som man plejer, holde op med at måle de mindre enheders resultater ud fra
funktionsmål, sende informationer til medarbejderne, der påviser dårlige resultater i
forhold til konkurrenterne, anvende konsulenter til at åbne op for mere åbne og
relevante diskussioner på ledelsesmøder osv. ( Kotter, 1997, s. 43-61).
2. Oprettelse af en styrende koalition
 I en verden, der ændrer sig så meget som i dag
har en enkeltperson eller en svag projektgruppe ikke de tilstrækkelige informationer


                                                                                         4
der skal til for at træffe strategiske beslutninger. Det er derfor vigtigt at have et stærkt
team, der kan nå at behandle information, holde magtfulde personer underrettet og
deltage i nøglebeslutninger. Når man skal sammensætte den styrende koalition, skal
man sikre sig at man har de vigtigste liniechefer med, den rette ekspertise med
forskellige synsvinkler, at medlemmerne er troværdige og har et godt ry i organisation
og at der er nok erfarne ledere i gruppen til at tage lederskab over
forandringsprocessen. I koalitionen skal der skabes et fælles mål, samarbejde og tillid,
gerne ved hjælp af teambuilding (Kotter, 1997, s. 63-82).
3. Udvikling af en vision og en strategi
 En vision for forandringsprocessen er vigtig
fordi den præciserer kursen for forandringen, motiverer medarbejderne til selv at gå i
den rigtige retning og medvirker til at koordinere medarbejdernes handlinger. En
effektiv vision giver et tænkeligt og ønskeligt billede af, hvordan fremtiden skal se ud.
Desuden indeholder den realistiske mål, er fokuseret, fleksibel og kan kommunikeres
på fem minutter. Det er vigtigt, at dette trin gennemløbes og der tages tid og
ressourcer til at skabe en fælles og realistisk vision og strategi (Kotter, 1997, s. 83-
103).
4. Formidling af forandringsvisionen
 En stærk vision er uden nytte, hvis ingen
kender til den. Der ligger derfor en stor opgave i at få den kommunikeret ud til
medarbejderne. Der er nogle råd til effektivt at kommunikere visionen. Det skal gøres
enkelt, uden fagudtryk eller indforståethed, anvend metaforer, analogier og
eksempler, kommuniker i mange forskellige fora, forsøg at skabe debat om visionen,
gentag budskabet, sørg for at især ledelsen handler efter visionen og forklar hvorfor,
når de ikke gør det (Kotter, 1997, s. 105-124).
5. Styrke medarbejdernes kompetencer
 For at få skabt forandringer er det
nødvendigt, at medarbejderne hjælper til. For at ruste dem til det, må man udvikle
deres kompetencer og fjerne eventuelle barrierer herfor. Den første type barrierer, der
skal fjernes er strukturelle barrierer i organisationen, der modsætter sig visionen.
Desuden skal medarbejderne uddannes, da manglende færdigheder underminerer
handling. Den tredje udfordring er at ændre de informations- og personalesystemer,
der er i modstrid med visionen. Endelig ligger der en udfordring i at konfrontere de
ledere, der er uvillige til forandring, og derfor blokerer deres medarbejderes udvikling
(Kotter, 1997, s. 125-143).
6. Generering af kortsigtede gevinster
 Det er vigtigt for forandringsprocessen succes,
at der på relativ kort sigt skabes synlige og utvetydige resultater. Allerede inden fra
seks til atten måneder, afhængig af organisationens størrelse og projektets
kompleksitet, skal der være synlige resultater knyttet til forandringsprojektet.
Resultaterne er et signal til medarbejderne, både tilhængere og modstandere, om, at
initiativet kan betale sig, give projektgruppen en oplevelse af sejr på vejen og giver
den styrende koalition en mulighed for at afprøve visionen i praksis (Kotter, 1997, s.
145-161).
7. Konsolidering af resultater og produktion af mere forandring
 Der er altid fra for at
fremdriften i en forandringsproces går tabt og fremskridt mistes. Det hænger sammen
med virksomhedskultur og den gensidige afhængighed, der skabes i foranderlige
miljøer. Som Leavitt siger, har ændringer ét sted konsekvenser for andre steder i
organisationen. Det komplicerer forandringsinitiativerne fordi man ikke kan ændre
løsdele, men er nødt til at forandre hele organisationen på en gang og det kræver en
høj grad af tålmodighed.
 Det betyder også, at flere forandringsprojekter er i gang
samtidig. For at det kan lykkes er topledelsen nødt til at koncentrere sig om det
overordnede lederskab, mens ansvaret for projekterne uddelegeres ned i



                                                                                          5
organisationen og så mange som muligt bliver engageret i projekterne (Kotter, 1997,
s. 163-179).
8. Forankring af nye arbejdsmåder i kulturen
 Kultur er adfærdsnomer og fælles
værdier for en gruppe af mennesker, der som regel ligger meget dybt i personerne og
derfor er meget svære at ændre på. Normer for adfærd er almindelige handlemåder i
en gruppe, som fastholdes af gruppen. Fælles værdier er sværere at ændre end normer
for adfærd, fordi de er mindre synlige og dybt forankrede i kulturen. Hvis
forandringer ikke stemmer overens med organisationskulturen vil den være svær at
implementere og risikoen for fiasko er relativ stor. Det er således vigtigt at være
opmærksom på at forankre forandringer i kulturen og de fælles værdier. Her gør flere
forhold sig gældende. For det første skal man være opmærksom på, at ændringer af
normer og fælles værdier kommer til sidst og ikke først i forandringsprocessen, at
forandringen først afspejles i kulturen, når den har vist resultater. Desuden kræver
ændringer i virksomhedskulturen meget fokus om det, det kan være nødvendigt at
udskifte nøglepersoner, der fastholder de gamle værdier og kriterier for forfremmelse
skal ligeledes tilpasses de nye værdier (Kotter side 181-197).




                                                                                    6
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/237685/change_management_models_a_lo
ok_at.html?cat=3


Change Management Models: A Look at:
   - McKinsey's 7-S Model,
   - Lewin's Change Management Model and
   - Kotter's Eight Step Change Model
Change Management Models

There are many different change management models. We will be discussing three
today and choosing which is the best fit a company needing many changes. I will be
discussing both the strengths and weaknesses of these three change management
models: McKinsey 7-S Model, Lewin's Change Management Model, and Kotter's
Eight Step Change Model. There are many differences to each of these models that
can be seen once we discuss them further. There are also many similarities between
the three models. Only one of these models can be considered as a best fit for a
company needing a large amount of change. Therefore it is imperative that we have a
thorough understanding of each of the three change management models presented
here today.

The McKinsey 7-S Model was created by Tom Peters and Robert Waterman while
they were working for McKinsey & Company, and by Richard Pascale and Anthony
Athos at a meeting in 1978 (12Manage, 2007). The McKinsey 7-S model is a holistic
approach to company organization, which collectively determines how the company
will operate (12Manage, 2007). There are seven different factors that are a part of the
model: shared values, strategy, structure, systems, style, staff, and skills, which all
work collectively to form the model (12Manage, 2007).

Shared values are the center of the model because it is what the organization believes
in and stands for, such as the mission of the company (12Manage, 2007). Strategy
represents what the company plans to do react to any changes of its external
surroundings (Recklies, 2007). The structure refers to the organizational structure of
the company (12Manage, 2007). Systems are the portion of the model that represents
"the procedures, processes and routines that characterize how the work should be
done" (12Manage, 2007). Staff is quite obvious in the fact that it is a proper
representation of who is employed by the organization and what they do within the
organization (12Manage, 2007). Style signifies the organizational culture and
management styles that are utilized within the organization (12Manage, 2007). Skills
indicate the abilities and competencies of either the employees or the organization
holistically (12Manage, 2007).

There are many benefits and disadvantages of the McKinsey Model. There are four
main benefits of the McKinsey 7-S Model: It is an effective way to diagnose and
understand the organization; it is a guide for organizational change; it is a
combination of both rational and emotional constituents; and all parts are interrelated,
so all portions must be addressed and focused on (12Manage, 2007). One major


                                                                                         7
disadvantage is that when one of the parts is changed, all parts change because they
are all interrelated (12Manage, 2007). Another major disadvantage is that this model
ignores differences (Morgan, n.d.). After five years many of the companies that used
this model fell from the top (Morgan, n.d.).

Lewin's Change Management Model was created in the 1950s by a psychologist
named Kurt Lewin (Mind Tools, 2007; Syque, 2007). Lewin recognized three stages
of change, which are still widely used today: unfreeze, transition, and refreeze
(Syque, 2007). The majority of people tends to stay within certain safe zones and is
hesitant of change (Syque, 2007). These people tend to become comfortable in this
unchanging environment and become uncomfortable when any change occurs, even if
it is a minor one (Syque, 2007). In order to overcome this frozen state, we must
initiate an unfreeze period, which is done through motivation (Mind Tools, 2007).
Motivation is important in any organization, even when it is not changing. The
transition period is when the change is occurring, which is a voyage and not a step
(Syque, 2007). The transition period takes time because people do not like change
(Syque, 2007). This is when leadership is critical for the change process to work.
Another important part of this stage is the reassurance that this is good for the
company as well as the employees. At the end of the transitional voyage, comes the
next stage: refreeze (Syque, 2007). This is the stage where the company once again
becomes stable (Syque, 2007).

As with the previous model there are many disadvantages and benefits of Lewin's
Change Management Model. Benefits include: that this is a simple and easily
understood model for change; the model is done through steps; this is an efficient
model that is used today (Mind Tools, 2007; Syque, 2007).

The main disadvantage of this model is that it is timely, but you must consider that it
is timely for any change to take place. Another disadvantage is that at the refreezing
period, many people are worried that another change is coming, so they are in change
shock (Syque, 2007). This change shock causes employees to not be as efficient or
effective in their jobs (Syque, 2007).

The third model is the Kotter's Eight Step Change Model. There are eight steps in this
model. Step One: Increase urgency for change (Chapman, 2006). Step Two: Build a
team for the change (Chapman, 2006). Step Three: Construct the vision(Chapman,
2006). Step Four: Communicate(Chapman, 2006). Step Five: Empower (Chapman,
2006). Step Six: Create short term goals (Chapman, 2006). Step Seven: Be persistent
(Chapman, 2006). Step Eight: Make the change permanent (Chapman, 2006). The
first step is to create urgency for change. This means that we have to convince the
employees that this change is necessary for the company to survive (Rose, 2002). This
also means that we must communicate that the change is achievable without any
detrimental effects on their jobs. The next step is to build a team for the change,
which has to be of some respected employees within the company (Rose, 2002). The
third step is to construct the vision, which will show clear direction to how the change
will better the future of the company and their jobs (Rose, 2002). The fourth step is to
communicate this vision. In order for the vision to work it must be fully understand
by the employees, which means that it is necessary for the leaders of the change group
to follow this vision (Rose, 2002). The fifth step it to empower the employees to
execute the change. It is still important that the management follow the same


                                                                                       8
guidelines as the employees are too (Rose, 2002). By creating short term goals, we
assist the employees to accept the change by showing them progress (Rose, 2002).
Rewards are very important at this step also (Rose, 2002). The seventh step is about
persistence because we should influence more change even after the short term goals
are met or the original plan for change will cease and die (Rose, 2002). The final step
is to make the change permanent by moving fitting it into the company's culture and
practices, such as promotion (Chapman, 2006).

As with the two aforementioned change models, Kotter's Eight Step Change Model
has many disadvantages and benefits. One advantage is that this is a step by step
model, which is easy to follow. Another is that it does not focus on the change itself,
but rather the acceptance and preparedness for this change, which makes it an easier
transition. One disadvantage is that you cannot skip any steps or the change process
will completely fail. As with the other two models, change still takes time with this
one too.

In my opinion the best choice for CF&F Tech Division is Kotter's Eight Step Change
Model. I think that this is the best choice because it is a simple model. I also feel this
way because it fully prepares the employees of the company before the vision is even
created, which means that the actual transition will be much easier in the long run.
There are fewer disadvantages to this model than others. Overall it is the best fit for
most companies because substantial change is needed for the divisions because it's
history. This will also help ease the transition because the division has quite a history
compared to the rest of the company, so people are not as set in the ways, as they
would be if the division had been around longer.

References

12Manage. (2007, April 9). 7-S framework (mckinsey). Retrieved April 12, 2007,
from 12Manage Web site: http://www.12manage.com/methods_7S.html

Chapman, A. (2006). Change management. Retrieved April 12, 2007, from Business
Balls Web site: http://www.businessballs.com/changemanagement.htm

Mind Tools. (2007). Lewin's change management model: Understanding the three
stages of change. Retrieved April 12, 2007, from Mind Tools Web site:
http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_94.htm

Morgan, O. (n.d.). Organization management part 1. Retrieved April 12, 2007, from
Oliver Morgan Web site:
http://www.omorgan.info/download/Part%20I/organisation_management_Part_I.pdf

Recklies, D. (2007, March 18). The 7-s-model. Retrieved April 12, 2007, from
Recklies Management Web site:
http://www.themanager.org/Models/7S%20Model.htm
Rose, K.H. (2002, February). Leading change: A model by john kotter. Retrieved
April 12, 2007, from Business Source Elite.

Syque. (2007). Lewin's freeze phases. Retrieved April 12, 2007, from Changing
Minds Website:


                                                                                             9
http://changingminds.org/disciplines/change_management/lewin_change/lewin_chang
e.htm




                                                                            10
http://forandringsledelse.wordpress.com/2007/02/04/evergreens-de-tre-klasiske-
teorier-om-forandring/

Evergreens - de tre klasiske teorier om forandring
4. februar, 2007 af Kim Jensen
Teorier og modeller om forandringsledelse kommer og går, men flere af gårsdagens
teorier holder dog stadig ved. Her omtaler vi tre af disse, nemlig K. Lewin’s
Unfreeze-Transition-Freeze model, H. J. Leawitt’s Diamant model og J. P. Kotter’s
8-punkts fase model.
[artiklen er planket fre lederne.dk]
 K. Lewin’s Unfreeze-Transition-Freeze model
(Optø-Forandre-Frys)
 Den amerikanske psykolog Kurt Lewin formulerede i
begyndelse af forrige århundrede en fase-model til beskrivelse af vellykkede
forandringsprocesser:
 
 Fase 1: Unfreeze (Optø)
 Det er et almindeligt menneskeligt
træk at søge situationer, hvor man føler sig sikker og i kontrol. Trygge og stabile
omgivelser danner grund-aget for den personlige identitet. Herved skabes en slags
komfort zone ud fra hvilken alle alternativer – selv dem der indebærer betragtelige
fordele – vurderes som ukomfortable. Der skal normalt ganske særlige
overtalelsesevner til for at bringe mennesker ud af denne komfort zone (den ”frosne”
tilstand). Hvis man kan tale om TRÆK og SKUB metoder i forandringsledelse, kan
man sige, at bringe nogen ud af den ”frosne” tilstand (unfreeze), normalt kræver et
skub, men herefter skulle trækmetoder være tilstrækkelige. At være
”forandringsparat” vil normalt betyde, at være kommet ud af den ”frosne” tilstand og
på vej til forandring.
Unfreeze-teknikker kan eksempelvis være: ”Den brændende platform”, inspirerende
udfordringer, kolde facts, destabilisering, uddannelse, MBO-teknik, omstrukturering
og vision.
Fase 2: Transition (Forandring)
 Selve den mentale eller fysiske forandringsproces
består ofte af flere steps. En klassisk ledelsesfejl er at bruge lang tid på at
gennemtænke de nødvendige forandringer, men tro at medarbejderne kan tage hele
processen i et hug.
Selvom forandring kan være vanskelig for den enkelte, er det vanskeligste øjeblik
måske at få startet – at få gang i selve forandringsprocessen. Tryghed er en vigtig del
af denne proces, og tryghed kan skabes ved eksempelvis at lempe på de normale
driftskrav, mens forandringen står på eller ved opmærksom dialog om de ting, som
processen fører med sig.
Transition-teknikker kan eksempelvis være: ”Boiling frog” (små skridt), atraktive
udfordringer, coaching, uddannelse, facilitator hjælp, gør de første trin lette, MBO,
Open Space samtaler, ny struktur som facilitator o.a.
Fase 3: Refreeze (frys situationen igen)
 Den sidste fase handler om at pakke tingene
sammen og fortsætte i den etablerede, nye driftssituation. Denne ”refreezing” er i
praksis ofte en ledelsesmæssigt lidt vanskelig periode. Det er sjældent muligt helt at
af-slutte en forandringsproces. Ofte er der behov for at forblive i en slags ”forandrings
mode” al den stund, den næste forandring højst sandsynligt lurer lige rundt om
hjørnet. Risikoen er selvsagt, at der i organisationen skabes en oplevelse af, at ingen
forandringsprojekter rigtig bliver til noget. På lidt længere sigt kan denne oplevelse
eller erfaring mindske motivationen for at deltage aktivt og engageret i nye
forandringsprojekter.



                                                                                      11
Refreeze-teknikker kan eksempelvis være: ”De brændte broers teknik”, fremhævelse
af positive resultater, belønning kobles til adfærd, institutionalisering i strukturer og
processer, bekræftelsesritualer o.a.
H.J. Leavitt’s forandringsmodel (også kaldet Diamanten)
 Leavitt’s model er
måske ikke så meget en forandringsmodel som en organisationsmodel. Modellen viser
organisationen som et system bestående af fire elementer:
De fire elementer har følgende indhold:
Opgaver: Omhandler i bred for stand mål, vision og mission samt de organisatori-ske
opgaver, der er knyttet til realiseringen af målene (indkøb, slag, regnskab etc.)
Struktur: Omhandler de stabile elementer i organisationen: Organisationsplaner,
stillingsbeskrivelser, kommunikationsmønstre, forretningsgange etc.
Teknologi: Omhandler de tekniske hjælpemidler samt den viden, der knytter sig til
brugen af disse hjælpemidler: IT, maskiner, bygninger, transportmidler etc.
Mennesker: Omhandler de ansatte dvs. deres kompetencer, værdier, holdninger,
normer, motivation etc.
Som figuren viser, er disse elementer indbyrdes forbundet. De påvirker hinanden og
påvirkes af hinanden. Modellen bliver herved til en systemmodel, hvor fokus er
på
 helheden og på relationerne mellem de enkelte elementer. Modellen søger i at sin
gribende enkelthed at fortælle, at ændringer i et af elementerne med stor
sandsynlig
 hed vil medføre ændringer (eller kræve ændringer) i de øvrige elementer.
Hele systemet påvirkes.
Leavitt’s model er ikke ny (1965) men er ikke desto mindre vidt udbredt. Det skyldes
ikke alene, at den har været en fast og sikker bestanddel i flere generations
lærdom
 om forandringsledelse – men også at modellen intuitivt er let at forstå og
forholde sig til. Og modellen opleves almindeligvis som værende en rigtig beskrivelse
af virkeligheden.
Modellen har i tidens løb været udsat for en del kritik – bl.a. for at være for lukket. I
en revision af modellen har Leavitt derfor tilføjet omverdenen som en slags femte
central variabel. Senere har andre forskere – heriblandt danske Jens Carl Ry Nielsen –
udviklet modellen, så den er blevet mere præcis og mere omfattende – men også mere
kompliceret.
Modellens væsentligste bidrag til forandringslitteraturen er imidlertid stadigvæk den
eksplicitte fokus på organisationen som et system af forbundne, gensidigt afhængige
elementer.
John P. Kotters 8-trins model
 Kotters model hører måske ikke rigtig til klassikerne al
den stund, at modellen i nedenstående udgave er formuleret i 1997. Men modellen er i
dag så vidt udbredt som arketypisk model for planlagte forandringer, at den er
medtaget her.
Modellen foreslår følgende otte faser i den planlagte forandring:
Fase 1: Gør forandring til en erkendt nødvendighed.

Fokuser og analyser markedet og konkurrencesituationen
Identificér og diskuter kriser, potentielle kriser og væsentlige muligheder.
 Det
handler om på alle måder at eliminere selvtilfredsheden og tillade eller måske
ligefrem opmuntre til en vis portion neurotisk ledelsesadfærd i forhold til
omverdenen.
Fase 2: Opret en styrende koalition.

Sørg for at der står en tilstrækkelig magtfuld, indsigtsfuld og troværdig gruppe af
interessenter bag forandringen
Sørg for at denne gruppe arbejder sammen som team.

Fase 3: Sæt visionen og strategien.



                                                                                      12
Sæt en vision, der kan styre forandringsprocessen
Formuler en realistisk og fornuftig strategi til realisering af visionen.
Fase 4: Formidling af visionen.

Anvend alle midler til konstant at kommunikere den nye version og strategien (Se i
øvrigt afsnittene Forandring og følelser samt Holdningsændringer)
Fase 5: Skab grundlag for handling på bred basis (=empowerment)

Fjern alle forhindringer og barrierer
Fjern eller juster systemer eller strukturer, som underminerer forandringsvisionen
Opmuntre til risikovillighed og utraditionelle ideer, aktiviteter eller handlinger.
Fase 6: Generer kortsigtede succeser/gevinster

Planlæg efter synlige præstationsforbedringer
Synlig anerkendelse af de umiddelbare succeser
Fase 7: Konsolider resultaterne
Undgå at snævre egoistiske interesser, misforståelser, mistillid, for-skellige
vurderinger og frygten for det ukendte kommer i vejen for en ”cementering” af
forandringen
Fase 8: Forankring af nye arbejdsmåder i kulturen
 Vis resultaterne og knyt
resultaterne til forandringen.

Husk at kulturen er det, der ændrer sig sidst!
 Fasemodellen er således et udtryk for,
at efter Kotter’s opfattelse bliver mange forandringsprocesser ikke den succes, de
skulle have været, fordi de indeholder en eller flere af følgende fejl: man tillader for
stor selvtilfredshed, man formår ikke at skabe en tilstrækkelig stærk styrende
koalition, man undervurderer visionens magt, visionen kommunikeres ikke
tilstrækkeligt godt, forhindringer får lov til at blokere for forandringerne, man
forsømmer at skabe kortsigtede gevinster, man fejrer før slaget er vundet, og man
forsømmer at forankre forandringerne i kulturen.
Kotters synspunkt om nødvendigheden af en styrende koalition er ikke ukendt i dansk
sammenhæng. Vi har en lang tradition for – specielt i den offentlige sektor, men også
i den danske ledelsesforskning – at have en politisk vinkel på forandringsarbejdet. En
vinkel som desværre ofte glimrer ved sit fravær i mange amerikanske forandringsmo-
deller.
Kotter råder til, at succesfuld forandring gennemgår alle otte faser. At springe en fase
over giver altid problemer. Flere af faserne kan gennemføres parallelt, men de må
igangsættes i den foreskrevne rækkefølge.
Det skal nævnes, at flere og flere forfattere giver udtryk for skepsis over for den
klassiske fasemodel’s anvendelse i den moderne forretningsverden. Synspunktet er
det, at fasemodellen fungerer bedst i overskuelige og relative stabile omgivelser,
hvilket så langt fra er tilfældet for alle virksomheder eller i alle forandringsprojekter.




                                                                                        13
http://changingminds.org/disciplines/change_management/lewin_change/lewin_chang
e.htm


Lewin's freeze phases

Disciplines > Change Management > Lewin's freeze phases
Unfreeze | Transition | Refreeze | See also

In the early 20th century, psychologist Kurt Lewin identified three stages of change
that are still the basis of many approaches today.

Unfreeze
A basic tendency of people is to seek a context in which they have relative safety and
feel a sense of control. In establishing themselves, they attach their sense of identity
to their environment. This creates a comfortable stasis from which any alternatives,
even those which may offer significant benefit, will cause discomfort.
Talking about the future thus is seldom enough to move them from this 'frozen' state
and significant effort may be required to 'unfreeze' them and get them moving. This
usually requires Push methods to get them moving, after which Pull methods can be
used to keep them going.
The term 'change ready' is often used to describe people who are unfrozen and ready
to take the next step. Some people come ready for change whilst others take a long
time to let go of their comfortable current realities.
                             See also: Unfreezing techniques

Transition
A key part of Lewin's model is the notion that change, even at the psychological level,
is a journey rather than a simple step. This journey may not be that simple and the
person may need to go through several stages of misunderstanding before they get to
the other side.
A classic trap in change is for the leaders to spend months on their own personal
journeys and then expect everyone else to cross the chasm in a single bound.
Transitioning thus requires time. Leadership is often important and when whole
organizations change, the one-eyed person may be king. Some form of coaching,
counseling or other psychological support will often be very helpful also.
Although transition may be hard for the individual, often the hardest part is to start.
Even when a person is unfrozen and ready for change, that first step can be very
scary.
Transition can also be a pleasant trap and, as Robert Louis Stephenson said, 'It is
better to travel hopefully than arrive.' People become comfortable in temporary
situations where they are not accountable for the hazards of normal work and where
talking about change may be substituted for real action.
                            See also: Transitioning techniques

Refreeze (og husk at Lewin IKKE selv skrev refreeze, men freeze! Det giver en lille,
men væsentlig forskel)
At the other end of the journey, the final goal is to 'refreeze', putting down roots again
and establishing the new place of stability.



                                                                                        14
In practice, refreezing may be a slow process as transitions seldom stop cleanly, but
go more in fits and starts with a long tail of bits and pieces. There are good and bad
things about this.
In modern organizations, this stage is often rather tentative as the next change may
well be around the next corner. What is often encouraged, then, is more of a state of
'slushiness' where freezing is never really achieved (theoretically making the next
unfreezing easier). The danger with this that many organizations have found is that
people fall into a state of change shock, where they work at a low level of efficiency
and effectiveness as they await the next change. 'It's not worth it' is a common phrase
when asked to improve what they do.
                              See also: Refreezing techniques




                                                                                     15
http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newSTR_91.htm

The McKinsey 7S Framework
Ensuring that all parts of your organization work in harmony
How do you go about analyzing how well your organization is positioned to achieve
its intended objective? This is a question that has been asked for many years, and
there are many different answers. Some approaches look at internal factors, others
look at external ones, some combine these perspectives, and others look for
congruence between various aspects of the organization being studied. Ultimately, the
issue comes down to which factors to study.
 
 While some models of organizational
effectiveness go in and out of fashion, one that has persisted is the McKinsey 7S
framework. Developed in the early 1980s by Tom Peters and Robert Waterman, two
consultants working at the McKinsey & Company consulting firm, the basic premise
of the model is that there are seven internal aspects of an organization that need to be
aligned if it is to be successful.
The 7S model can be used in a wide variety of situations where an alignment
perspective is useful, for example to help you:


       Improve the performance of a company;
       Examine the likely effects of future changes within a company;
       Align departments and processes during a merger or acquisition; or
       Determine how best to implement a proposed strategy.




The Seven Elements


The McKinsey 7S model involves seven interdependent factors which are categorized
as either "hard" or "soft" elements:




                                                                                      16
“Hard” elements are easier to define or identify and management can directly
influence them: These are strategy statements; organization charts and reporting lines;
and formal processes and IT systems.


“Soft” elements, on the other hand, can be more difficult to describe, and are less
tangible and more influenced by culture. However, these soft elements are as
important as the hard elements if the organization is going to be successful.


The way the model is presented in Figure 1 below depicts the interdependency of the
elements and indicates how a change in one affects all the others.




                                                                                      17
Let’s look at each of the elements specifically:


      Strategy: the plan devised to maintain and build competitive advantage over
       the competition.
      Structure: the way the organization is structured and who reports to whom.
      Systems: the daily activities and procedures that staff members engage in to
       get the job done.
      Shared Values: called “superordinate goals” when the model was first
       developed, these are the core values of the company that are evidenced in the
       corporate culture and the general work ethic.
      Style: the style of leadership adopted.
      Staff: the employees and their general capabilities.
      Skills: the actual skills and competencies of the employees working for the
       company.




How to Use the Model


Now you know what the model covers, how can you use it?
The model is based on the theory that, for an organization to perform well, these
seven elements need to be aligned and mutually reinforcing. So, the model can be
used to help identify what needs to be realigned to improve performance, or to
maintain alignment (and performance) during other types of change.


Whatever the type of change – restructuring, new processes, organizational merger,
new systems, change of leadership, and so on – the model can be used to understand
how the organizational elements are interrelated, and so ensure that the wider impact
of changes made in one area is taken into consideration.



                                                                                      18
You can use the 7S model to help analyze the current situation (Point A), a proposed
future situation (Point B) and to identify gaps and inconsistencies between them. It’s
then a question of adjusting and tuning the elements of the 7S model to ensure that
your organization works effectively and well once you reach the desired endpoint.


Sounds simple? Well, of course not: Changing your organization probably will not be
simple at all! Whole books and methodologies are dedicated to analyzing
organizational strategy, improving performance and managing change. The 7S model
is a good framework to help you ask the right questions – but it won’t give you all the
answers. For that you’ll need to bring together the right knowledge, skills and
experience.


When it comes to asking the right questions, we’ve developed a Mind Tools checklist
and a matrix to keep track of how the seven elements align with each other.
Supplement these with your own questions, based on your organization’s specific
circumstances and accumulated wisdom.


7S Checklist Questions
 



Here are some of the questions that you'll need to explore to help you understand your
situation in terms of the 7S framework. Use them to analyze your current (Point A)
situation first, and then repeat the exercise for your proposed situation (Point B).
 



Strategy:


      What is our strategy?
      How to we intend to achieve our objectives?
      How do we deal with competitive pressure?
      How are changes in customer demands dealt with?
      How is strategy adjusted for environmental issues?


Structure:



                                                                                          19
        How is the company/team divided?
        What is the hierarchy?
        How do the various departments coordinate activities?
        How do the team members organize and align themselves?
        Is decision making and controlling centralized or decentralized? Is this as it
         should be, given what we're doing?
        Where are the lines of communication? Explicit and implicit?


Systems:


        What are the main systems that run the organization? Consider financial and
         HR systems as well as communications and document storage.
        Where are the controls and how are they monitored and evaluated?
        What internal rules and processes does the team use to keep on track?


Shared Values:


        What are the core values?
        What is the corporate/team culture?
        How strong are the values?
        What are the fundamental values that the company/team was built on?


Style:


        How participative is the management/leadership style?
        How effective is that leadership?
        Do employees/team members tend to be competitive or cooperative?
        Are there real teams functioning within the organization or are they just
         nominal groups?


Staff:




                                                                                          20
         What positions or specializations are represented within the team?
         What positions need to be filled?
         Are there gaps in required competencies?


Skills:


         What are the strongest skills represented within the company/team?
         Are there any skills gaps?
         What is the company/team known for doing well?
         Do the current employees/team members have the ability to do the job?
         How are skills monitored and assessed?


7S matrix questions




 Using the information you have gathered, now examine where there are gaps and
inconsistencies between elements. Remember you can use this to look at either your
current or your desired organization.
Click here to download our McKinsey 7S Worksheet, which contains a matrix that
you can use to check off alignment between each of the elements as you go through
the following steps:


         Start with your Shared Values: Are they consistent with your structure,
          strategy, and systems? If not, what needs to change?

         Then look at the hard elements. How well does each one support the others?
          Identify where changes need to be made. 

         Next look at the other soft elements. Do they support the desired hard
          elements? Do they support one another? If not, what needs to change? 

         As you adjust and align the elements, you’ll need to use an iterative (and often
          time consuming) process of making adjustments, and then re-analyzing how
          that impacts other elements and their alignment. The end result of better
          performance will be worth it.




                                                                                        21
Key points:


The McKinsey 7Ss model is one that can be applied to almost any organizational or
team effectiveness issue. If something within your organization or team isn’t working,
chances are there is inconsistency between some of the elements identified by this
classic model. Once these inconsistencies are revealed, you can work to align the
internal elements to make sure they are all contributing to the shared goals and values.
The process of analyzing where you are right now in terms of these elements is
worthwhile in and of itself. But by taking this analysis to the next level and
determining the ultimate state for each of the factors, you can really move your
organization or team forward.




                                                                                     22

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags: Charlotte
Stats:
views:374
posted:4/26/2010
language:English
pages:22