Significance of Organizational Change-Free-Samples-Myassignmenthelp

Questions: 1.What is Organizational Change? 2.Discuss why it is necessary for Contemporary Organizations to appreciate the scale and scope of the change they are facing. 3.Discuss some reasons why some change programs in Organizations fail, or under-achieve, on the intended goals and then illustrate with a case example. 4.Why some change programs in Organizations fail, or under-achieve, on the intended goals, and then illustrate with a (different) case example. Answers: 1.Organizational change is pre defined as a continuous improvement which can inculcate the changes as a normal state. Process changes which can bring consistency deliver excellence. It is a framework within which effect of the new business or a process change along with the inclusion of the changes due to the culture or due to organization structure. The business continuity stability are all dependent upon the organization experience which happens due to the changes based on the experimentation. As defined that the organization society are dependent on the nature of the change process which streamlines the process or the operational business (Burr, 2015). The trigger of changes is an inclusion of the external internal drivers, factors to the organization. The external changes such as globalization, technologies internal changes include competitive advantage weigh it up improve the products/services life cycle. Objectivism the social constructionism which influence the organiza tion change resistance towards it Organizational changes can be based upon incremental changes that might or might not be visible to note the other are the transformational changes which can be deliberate drastic changes. OD occurs when the organization introduces changes by inculcating the planned approaches (Reissner, 2011). 2.It is imperative for the organizational to begin the process of the change management, by appreciating the scale and scope of the change as faced by the contemporary organizations. There are series of triggers of change, which persists the organization needs to change. As contemporary organization needs to weigh the consequences the repercussion effects before channelising the changes hence they need to measure the scale scope of the changes (Sheehan, 2009). There are triggers which can cause perpetual changes to happen which can affect include the factors, drivers of external and/or internal within the organization. It has been observed that the contemporary organizations will show the signs of the similarities and differences while inculcating the changes (Neely, 2011). There are series of similarities which can prevail while thinking in line of the external factors which require being addressed, such as globalization, due to which the organization can thrive/fall when penetrating into the new domain. Apart from this, the implications while foreseeing the competitive advantage also hold an impact such as the inclusion of the changes in technology if it is on account of the product/service life cycles, along with it the demands of customers or clients which can impact the public and private organization. It is purely dependent upon the organization adaptability as they operate within a complex and fragmented environment. 3.The changes on account of the monologic which involves blending of communication from top to bottom dialogic communication which includes multiple viewpoints while enabling changes can have a problematic failures while implementation (Mitchell, 2013). For example when the Windows company is aware of applying a process change of integration of the new software which will smoothen the allocation communication with the client, but they failed to match the employees calibre by providing them sufficient knowledge, skill-set to use it, along with the technical expertise training which lead to low or no understanding among the staff to use it effectively efficiently which resulted in under achieved goals (Hopkins, 2007). The changes which emphasize Me factor as seen in the Cartesian objective while in the rational responsive which emphasize on the social constructivism can have its own series of repercussion effects. If the organization changes due to the Cartesian objective it will lead to failures as the objectivity of integrating mixing the process excellence with the people ability will not be seen. While changes occurring due to the social constructivism, it will enable the blending of changes well with the process with the organization as changes are perceived from the people eyes. The perception of changes if Windows management would have seen through social construction it would have enabled an effective change, as management just focused on the implementation through their own perceived notion it resulted in failure while implementing changes. 4.Lack of acceptance, cultural hindrances in acceptance, cynicism or fear, lack of practical skills, applied knowledge, hidden conflicts which undermine the efforts, unwritten rules which cause deviation in the plans (Chaharbaghi, 2009). The change program is organization design changes, mergers, new product launch, lean transformation or application of the new IT system which can lead to failures to sustain, to lead to the launch stuck in diagnostics, managers accountable for performance, a resistance of employees while foreseeing the changes finally failure to scale. Apart from this, it has also been known that due to the inadequate resources budget, management behavior employees resistance towards the implemented change in process or programs can lead to failure rate. Example when the Tata Sky launched the new product of the digital TV set up box it lacked the technology expertise as the management perceived it through the Cartesian approach while the employees tried to decode the product through the constructing change (Buhalis, 2002). Hence there was a failure of the role of the language which resulted in the failure of the launch of the new product as it was visualized from the management point while it lacked understanding among the employees, the same skills set, technical know. References Buhalis, D., Licata, M. C. (2002). The future tourism intermediaries. Tourism management,23(3), 207-220. Burr, V. (2015). In Social constructionism (2nd Ed., pp. 1-12.) London, Routledge Chaharbaghi, K., Lynch, R. (2009). Sustainable competitive advantage: towards a dynamic resource-based strategy.Management Decision,37(1), 45-50. Hopkins, A. (2007). The problem of defining high-reliability organizations. National Research Center for Occupational Safety and Health Regulation. January. Al-Jabri, H. J. (2017).TV simultaneous interpreting of emotive overtones in Arabic presidential political speeches into English during the Arab Spring(Doctoral dissertation, University of Surrey).Mitchell, G. (2013). Selecting the best theory to manage planned change. Nursing Management, 20, 32-27. Neely, A., Bourne, M. (2011). Why measurement initiatives fail.Measuring business excellence,4(4), 3-7. Reissner, S. (2011). Patterns of stories of organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24, 593-609 Sheehan, M. (2009). Workplace bullying: Responding with some emotional intelligence.International journal of manpower,20(1/2), 57-69