Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Such a process as organizational change is of great interest to many business administrators who want to understand the factors that affect the transformation of companies. Moreover, it is critical to understand the factors that can shape the outcome of this activity. This paper is aimed at discussing several sources that can give readers deep insights into this process.
At first, it is possible to consider the article written by Kevin Dooley (1997) who examines the functioning of the so-called complex adaptive systems that are involved in the process of organizational change. Overall, this author describes an organization as a complex set of elements that can interact with one another (Dooley, 1997, p. 69). In this case, the term complex implies that the relations between different components of a system cannot be easily traced. By studying the behavior of the organizations from the perspective of adaptability, researchers can better understand the process of change. Certainly, practitioners may not use this article for the development of clear-cut guidelines. However, this research article can demonstrate why the attempts may not be successful. This article is partly based on the idea that organizations can be compared to living organisms (Agard, 2010, p. 553). Researchers indeed notice similarities between living entities and organizations; but the main problem is that practitioners may not derive any distinct lessons from this approach (Agard, 2010). Overall, business administrators should take into account that companies do not always act according to pre-determined patterns.
The notion of adaptability is described by other researchers as well. For instance, Allesandro Lomi, Erik Larsen, and Ari Ginsberg (1997) note that organizational adaptation is governed by complex non-linear patterns. In other words, the actions and choices of separate decision-makers do not necessarily lead to the expected outcomes (Lomi et al, 1997). This argument is supported by various researchers who point out that the attempts to introduce changes can lead to unanticipated consequences (Agard, 2010). Additionally, business administrators focus on those factors that can undermine their decisions. These authors’ arguments are partly based on the assumption that organizations are represented by different stakeholders who may have different backgrounds and interests. This point is recognized by managers who set stress on the need to reconcile such conflicts or differences. In turn, scholars emphasize the need to understand the impact of such factors as the results of organizational change.
Furthermore, one can mention the article written by Dennis Gioia and Kumar Chittipeddi (1991) who focus on such notions as sense-giving and sense-making. In particular, researchers argue that senior managers should show why a previous mode of operation is not effective. Moreover, it is critical to explain how and why a change should be implemented (Gioia & Chittipeddi, 1991, p. 446). Overall, the authors’ argument may not be new because researchers have long emphasized the importance of proper communication for the implementation of change (Hill & Jones, 2009). Moreover, the authors’ findings can be relevant to practitioners who need to make sure that the new policies are supported by employees. Overall, the writers rely on the assumption that a change can better be implemented if a person understands the rationale for the change and knows how it can be implemented (Gioia & Chittipeddi, 1991). This premise is important for many scholars who want to understand the factors that contribute to the success of the organizational change. In turn, senior executives should rely on this principle while designing new policies.
Additionally, one can speak about the article written by Andrew Van De Ven and Marshall Poole (1995). It is aimed at providing a single framework that can be used to interpret existing theories of organizational change. The authors speak about first-order change and second-order change. The first type of transformation leads only to some modification of the current operations, while the second type means that a company completely departs from the existing tradition (Van De Ven & Poole, 1995). This distinction is supported by researchers discussing the impact of changes. In particular, they often speak about the transformations that involve dramatic shifts in the work of businesses (Hill & Jones, 2009, p. 231). The distinctions identified by the authors are important for managers who need to understand what kind of goals organizational change should achieve. This study is partly based on the premise that organizational change is not always accompanied by drastic change in the everyday practices of businesses. This premise is supported by researchers, and it is normally taken into account by the managers when they map out the future policies of the company.
In turn, other researchers take a different approach to the study of change. For instance, Karl Weick and Robert Quinn (1999) focus on the two types of changes which can be either episodic or continuous. The first approach implies that change is necessary to achieve some specific goals or address certain problems. In contrast, the notion of continuous change means that a company is open to innovation and learning since this attitude can make it more responsive to changes (Weick & Quinn, 1999, p. 376). Overall, these arguments are accepted by scholars who argue such organizations can be more or less open to change. This is one of the main premises that can be identified. Moreover, this argument has significant implications for managers and entrepreneurs who need to understand what kind of organizational culture will be most applicable for their needs.
On the whole, the discussion of these sources shows that the study of organizational change can be related to various issues such as the dissemination of information, learning within companies, and the impact of individual decisions on the work of the enterprise. Understanding these questions is important for the work of business administrators.
Reference List
Agard, K. (2010). Leadership in Nonprofit Organizations: A Reference Handbook. New York, NY: SAGE.
Dooley K. (1997). A complex adaptive systems model of organizational change. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Science, 1(1), 69–97.
Gioia, D., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991) Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation, Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448.
Hill, C., & Jones, G. (2009). Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach. New York, NY: Cengage Learning.
Lomi, A., Larsen, E., & Ginsberg, A. (1997). Adaptive Learning in Organizations: A System Dynamics-Based Exploration. Journal of Management, 23(4), 561-582.
Van de Ven, A., & M. (1995). Poole ‘Explaining development and change in organizations, Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510–540.
Weick, K., & Quinn, R. (1999) Organizational change and development, Annual Review of Psychology, 50(25), 361–386.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.