Manual For Managing Organizational Change, Without MBA

[email protected]

• Publisher: Babelcube Inc.
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781071546758
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Leadership
• Index: Business

This manual builds on a millennial heritage to apply strategy that has come down to us from ancient Asia. Because the recommendations provided by its author, Sun Tzu, do not lose validity despite being more than 2, 500 years old. It is known that it inspired many historical figures such as Napoleon or Machiavelli, and even in the strategies of the Vietnam revolutionaries. But all these applications were in the context of the war. Instead, the adaptation I made focuses on change management for managers. Because this treatise provides wisdom, common sense recommendations. Because in my own experience of studying commercial engineering and even obtaining a MBA, I felt many times that I did not have the wisdom to apply an organizational change. I will give a concrete example of the adaptations that I will make in the next chapters. The art of war says "The best victory is to win without fighting", my adaptation to the theme of this manual being the following "The best organizational change is that it is achieved without demands, disassociations or a worsening of the organizational climate". Because when I speak of wisdom, I am actually speaking of common sense.

Chapter One: Evaluation

One

We are generally hired by a company board, the owners generally, to make an organizational change. And since making a change is a very sensitive issue, it is highly likely that this need exists for some real threat to the company's existence. Otherwise they would not have called us to make the change. One thing that enhances the delicacy of making a change is that adapting the company to an adverse environment can generate exactly the opposite, accelerating the crisis of the company and therefore its closure. Thus, those of us who manage organizational change are like the doctor who hires him to operate, knowing that this operation, if it is very invasive, can end up killing the patient.

––––––––

Dos

Organizational change generally seeks to correct an organizational weakness in the face of an external threat. The decisions we make are vitally important to the survival of the company. It will affect the domain of the main asset of today's companies, its people. And our actions can make the company survive, grow or fail. When I say that the company can survive and grow, it is because we can make it diversify through innovation. When I say that it can go bankrupt, I am saying it because there may be such a bad organizational climate that we lose the best officials, worsening the weaknesses they already had.

Three

For this reason and those that I will explain below, before making the organizational change for which we were hired, we must seriously evaluate all the benefits, costs and potential consequences of our work. And if the owners of the company, the general manager or the shareholders pressure us to apply the change as soon as possible without prior evaluation, it would demonstrate tremendous indifference and responsibility in case of failure in applying the change. And we would share the blame with them for agreeing to apply the changes without this prior evaluation. We must be very aware that hundreds or sometimes thousands of families are economically dependent on the survival of the company.

Four

So, the first thing we must do before applying organizational change will be the construction of a sociogram. The sociogram, according to Wikipedia, is a technique that aims to obtain a group radiograph, that is, it seeks to obtain graphically, through observation and contextualization, the different relationships between subjects that make up a group, thus highlighting the ties of influence and preferably that exist in it. These types of relationships are not necessarily formal, in most cases they are informal. Jacob Levy developed the sociogram technique in the mid-1930s as a tool for exploratory and diagnostic purposes, aimed at teaching and workplaces. Currently it is widely used in various organizational fields, from small schools to large companies, it is also used in intelligence work to detect criminal networks. A short definition could refer to: "They are graphics or tools used to determine the sociometry of a social space."

For example, and to do a specific exercise, I will present the following sociogram obtained from the opinion of various groups of managers, secretaries and other people who cooperate with us, talking about the groups of friends within the company. Thus being able to understand the organization chart that really exists within the company and that we will then use to compare who will support the changes and who will oppose it.

Table 1: Sociogram INITIAL EVALUATION

PROBABILITY TO ADD

SOURCE: SELF MADE

In this sociogram that I present as an example in Table 1, you can see several groups that I symbolized with animals that are so every day for us such as the turtle, the owl, the dogs, the cats and the dinosaur.

The owl. This bird represents us before the organization. I have represented us with a bird that culturally represents wisdom. Our location on the map is due to the fact that both turtles, dogs, cats and dinosaurs must trust in the neutrality that we have in the face of changes (Horizontal or x-axis) even though they know that the probability that we will join is very high (Vertical or y-axis). I also wanted to use the owl because we usually come to the organization to make the change and then fly to another company.

The turtle. Represents the manager who supports organizational change (x-axis) and who has a high probability of adding to the changes we need to make over time (y-axis). I represent him as a turtle due to the slowness with which the changes requested by the owners adapt or install. Also, if they hired us to make the change, it must be precisely because of that slow internal leadership. I also represent them as a turtle because they have a very long life, and it may be that managers support us more for fear of losing their jobs, given their age, than for a deep conviction of the need to make changes.

Dogs. These represent optimistic young people who like change. Although they are neutral in this initial situation (x axis). They have an average probability of adding to the changes that need to be made (y-axis). It can be average probability, but it is greater than the probability of the cats or the dinosaur. Dogs also act as a group and tend to follow another larger dog, which will be essential to add to the change. In Table 1, I added a blue line showing that dogs have a higher affinity for the turtle.

The cats. Although they have similar characteristics, they are independent of each other. It is difficult to find a leading cat so they must be added individually. They tend to represent mature people within the organization. Although they are neutral to change (x axis) they are less likely to add to the necessary adjustments (25% on the y axis) because they have the burden of prejudice like the following: This was tried to do years ago and did not work; That works out in theory, but is impossible in practice; they treat us as a number as far as I'm opposed to whatever; I don't know what it is, but I still disagree and so on. Some cats may be friends with the dinosaur, which could make it difficult or slow down the necessary changes. So in Table 1 I added a red line to show that cats are more dinosaur-like.

The dinosaur. This character is the leader of those who do not want to make changes. I do not want to demonize it, or to associate it with the past or give it a trade union connotation. Dinosaurs generally represent a thought from another era, they are opposed to everything and they are very unlikely to support any idea other than themselves. They tend to misrepresent what they hear to lead others because they generally say "be against the system." In this manual it will be the symbol of that leader that we always find ourselves openly or in the shadows and who prevents the changes necessary to survive.

Next, I will show how the organization should look after the organizational change. To exemplify it I only present two possible endings. An ideal ending (2.A) where almost everyone joined the change and the dinosaur at least became neutral. And the expected end (2.B), which is more likely, where much of the organization is added, but the dinosaur added a cat to reject the necessary changes.

Table 2: Sociograms after organizational change

2.a. Final Ideal	2.b Final esperado

SOURCE: SELF MADE

I hope that the recommendations that I will make in the course of this manual achieve an ideal or even better final sociogram, where everyone is and feels part of the changes.

Five

Using the sociogram, we must assess the possibilities of success or failure of organizational change with five fundamental factors. Thus we will make comparisons of these factors with the groups of people that make up the sociogram. Obviously knowing who previously supports the change and who opposes it. Based on the previous comparison of these five factors, we will have an initial evaluation of the probability of success or failure to implement the change. And to make the change more concrete, I will say that the main problem that the turtle manager has is the constant opposition that the dinosaur leader presents.

Six

The five factors with which I will compare the leadership of the turtle and the dinosaur within the organization are: Doctrine, time, terrain, command, and discipline. All these factors will be presented on a scale of 1 to 5. Being 1: a very low evaluation of the factor; 3: An average evaluation and 5: A high evaluation.

Doctrine. It refers to the harmony that the members of a company feel with the leader of the change or with the opponent. The higher this factor is evaluated, the easier it will be for people to follow it without fear that their decisions will cause them to lose their jobs or bring them negative consequences.

Weather. It is used to compare the work environment with which the turtle manager or the dinosaur opponent is associated. It is also well known that mood is highly influenced by weather. For example, suicide rates are highest in the spring. Or it is also known that at the beginning of the year people have all the energy to support the changes. On the other hand, in the period before the holidays, people are tired and in a bad mood, so it is not convenient to propose the least adjustment in the organization. It may be that the turtle manager is under pressure to make changes at the end of the year and that is why he is poorly evaluated in this factor. Instead, you can give the dinosaur to have a collective bargaining at the beginning of the year having the time in their favor.

It might seem like time is given, but it's like ying and yang. That is, if the initial evaluation says that people are bored of the same, ying, it is recommended to make changes, yang and vice versa.

Ground. This factor refers to the distances that the manager or the opponent must travel before the changes. It may be that the opponent must meet certain schedules where he cannot coordinate others to make opposition. Or, the manager may not have time to explain the needs for organizational change due to what happens in meetings. This factor will be better evaluated to the extent that it is a differentiating factor to achieve changes or to oppose. Another case, which characterizes the terrain, is that the leader can easily access stakeholders or influence groups. It could be that the dinosaur easily accesses customers, as an influence group, to generate resistance to change from outside. In this case the terrain would be favorable to the dinosaur. While the leader has greater mobility to reach internal or external influence groups, the higher his score will be on this factor.

Mandate. This factor speaks of the characteristics of the leader before the organization. They could be real, false or they could even have been manipulated, but they will always refer to the opinion that you have of him within the organization. The command will be greater the better the following components of the command are evaluated: wisdom; sincerity; benevolence; courage and discipline. It is very important to understand that a boss does not have to exercise leadership within a company. In fact, these lack of leadership generally lead to another official taking this place. So it can be given that the dinosaur occupies the leadership that would be expected of the turtle. Or it could be that the turtle has command, but needs to improve its sincerity with the community. And this could be diminishing its influence.

The last factor is discipline. This refers to the internal order that is perceived by the community. It can be clarity for profit. At the other extreme are organizations that have no discipline because there are no consequences if there is unwarranted resistance to change. Discipline is also undermined if there is no clarity to obtain human or material resources to make the change. In this situation, it is not that people are opposed to organizational change, but simply that they do not know how to proceed. It could be that people know that they can jump onto the turtle to achieve their personal goals and get straight to the owners. Or it ma...