Eight Dimensions of Organizational Capacity for Change

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.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Trusting Followers
Capable Champions
Involved Middle Management
Systems Thinking
Communication Systems
Accountable Culture
Innovative Culture
Reference

Introduction

A trustworthy leader is competent, passionate, and open to experiments. Seeing an organization’s interests and successful development as the topmost priority is another feature of trustworthy leaders (Judge, 2013). The role of a leader for any organization is critical because leaders both represent the company and motivate employees to improve the organization’s economic outcomes and thus become more successful. Consider, for instance, the experience of Toyota. If leadership were not interested in organizational change, the company would not have implemented lean management and thereby become one of the leaders in the automotive industry.

Trusting Followers

Trusting followers is another dimension of the organizational capacity for change. It is inseparable from the first aspect, as this characteristic is related to following leaders’ recommendations and believing in the value of their experience as a basis for an organization’s success. It is also critical for each company, and the abovementioned Toyota company’s experience can be used to support this statement. Therefore, if Toyota employees did not pay attention to constant improvement, lean management philosophy would not be efficient.

Capable Champions

This dimension is associated with identifying people within an organization who can drive the process of change based on their authority, experience, skills, and knowledge (Judge, 2013). This aspect is significant as well because leaders alone cannot motivate all people to embrace change. To prove this statement, think of any international company (e.g., General Motors) that has offices across the globe, and all of them have numerous departments. In this way, one leader alone is unlikely to foster change, while having several capable champions is more likely to result in the desired change.

Involved Middle Management

This dimension is associated with heads of departments—managers communicating senior management’s initiative to ordinary employees as well as sharing employees’ needs with senior management. Productive organizational development is impossible without involved middle management because they are the link that assures that any initiative will be supported rather than criticized and opposed (Judge, 2013). The example that could support the abovementioned statement is the experience of any large company with several departments working on different tasks. When implementing universal initiatives, middle managers may point to their advantages for different departments, thus minimizing opposition risks.

Systems Thinking

Systems thinking is associated with perceiving an organization as a complex whole. In this way, the implementation of any change should be viewed from the perspective of its influence on all departments and their performance. It is one of the most critical dimensions of organizational change because it is directly connected to operations. Think, for instance, or introduce any innovation (e.g., the introduction of smart bolts in General Motors plants). This decision was made once all needs were estimated (technological, investment, and human), i.e., all aspects of the company’s operation were taken into account.

Communication Systems

Another infrastructure dimension that is related to converting knowledge into practice and assuring adequate and timely distribution of the latest news (Judge, 2013) is connected to effective communication skills (in the case of small companies) and communication technologies (for large companies). Recall the introduction of Web 2.0-based communication systems at most large companies (e.g., Siemens). These aimed not only at sharing information but also knowledge, thus potentially improving employee productivity and performance.

Accountable Culture

In this case, the focus is on the results, not the process. For instance, special attention is paid to meeting deadlines or budgets (Judge, 2013). The influence of this dimension of organizational change is less significant compared to others, though it is still critical. Think of any research organization. Creating an accountable culture is imperative for such an organization’s successful operation, especially in the case of monitoring key performance indicators of all employees. Analyzing it may help identify future change directions.

Innovative Culture

This dimension is linked to the focus on constant improvement of equipment that is especially critical in the twenty-first century—an era of varying technological advancements and their growing role in everyday life. An innovative culture is the foundation of change. One appropriate example is the case of Emirates Airlines paying special attention to innovating their transportation services and using this as one of the strengths for outperforming competitors.

Reference

Judge, W. Q. (2013). Focusing on organizational change. Boston, MA: FlatWorld Knowledge.

Click Here To Order Now!