Literature Review of Research Aims and Objectives

Literature Review of Research Aims and Objectives Organizational change is a broad term which can be explained by both content and process. For better understanding of this term both of its components should be considered. Both process and content can be independent or dependent, it depends upon the nature of change and scenario of change .Most of the researches focus on only one component. To understand organizational change a better understanding of organizational approach is necessary which is employed to bring about change. Following is a literature review of some articles, cases and research papers related to organizational change; David Chaudron. (2003). Assessing and improving your organization, It states that to assess whether an organization really need organizational change or not, an organization need to undergo four stages. These of four stages are, get started, assess problem and identify cause, choose treatment and periodically evaluate. For bringing successful change it is very important to identify problem and solutions to that problem. In my research this article would help me because it would tell me how organizations come to know that they really need change and how this process of change is started and carried on. I would be better able to write on organizational change if I am aware of starting point of change. William P. Barnett. (1995). Modeling internal organization change, William talks about two theories of change. Adaptational and selectional mechanism of organizational change. Adaptional model states that Change occurs mainly through adaptive response of individual firms to prior change in technology, environment or whatever. He also talks about internal and external factors responsible for change. Organizations with this type of approach are more innovative and discovery driven. To save them self from being obsolete and outworn such organizations have a close eye on environment and successful environment scanning leads them to successful change. Second approach says organizations cannot change easily. Whenever they do change greater risks are entitled. This approach talks about resistance to change and hesitation of top management in bringing about change. Organizations following this approach are more conservative and do not anticipate change. Effort to bring change is only made wh en it is necessary to survive. For instance, technology change in market makes such organizations to change existing technology to remain competitive. Internal factors such as culture, organization politics force an organization to change while internal factors like competitors, suppliers and customers and legislation make an organization to change. These variables are very important for me because it would help me to base my research on these factors. These factors would guide me to understand type of change and factors involved in change. Booz, Allen, Hamilton. (2004). Overall approach to change management, It creates relation between logical and emotional approach to change, change team and change ladder. Integrating logical and emotional approach means that focus should not be only on process and structure of change, people factor should also be considered. For instance, in changing technology, if technological and structural aspect is considered only and behaviors of people are overlooked then it is very difficult to bring about this technological change. For better and successful change process task/system and people/teams both should be kept in mind. To minimize resistant to change, people should be convinced and shown incentives in upcoming change so that they could propose change for personal benefit that would lead to organizational benefit in long run. It also says that the team which is communicating change should be credible. Once top management has decided to bring change, now its up to change team that ho w affectively they communicate the positive change message to every stake holder of organization. Change ladder part of article talks about communicating change around the organization from top management to lower staff. The higher the ladder of change, the more chances of successful change are created. Jonathan Becker, Roy Gill, Susan Moy, Veena Seshasdri. (1989). Managing change. T his case study addresses different problems and difficulties in implementing change. It also gives recommendation that how to overcome resistance to change. This is more helpful for a student of change management because with theoretical knowledge it is also giving hint about practical knowledge. It says about a medical center which had to face many challenges when they decided to change processes and facilities but with great courage and decision making like training and better communication network helped them to implement change successfully. Henry Mint Berg, Francs Wesley. (1992). cycles of organization change, authors talk about two types of organization changes; change in state and change in direction. Change in state is concerned with culture, structure, system and people. While change in direction is concerned with vision, position, programs, facilities. It also talks about inductive and deductive changes. Change process starts with inductive change and then it reaches to deductive change. In inductive we need to change our vision, mission and goals while when it leads us to deductive changes it needs the change of organization like culture, system and people behavior and power hierarchy. This research paper also talks about different stages in life of an organization that lead an organization to stage of revolution. According to comprehensiveness model of change discussed in this research paper, Change starts as an incremental process like adding value to some process or product/service but it reaches to different s tages of comprehensiveness like incremental to isolate, isolated to focused, focused to piecemeal, in the end it becomes revolutionarily .The sequence of stages is as follow; stage of stability, stage of adaptation, stage of struggle and stage of revolution. This article has specific relevance with my research topic because it deals with all stages related to change in organizational life. To understand complete change process all stages need to be understood. J.T.Hage. (1999). organizational innovation and organizational change, It differentiates innovation from change. According to writer, innovation is an isolated process. It neither has long lasting impact on organization nor does change organization as a whole. It is like innovating a process or product. For innovation, you have to focus on single innovation but set of innovations lead to change when innovation is not centered upon a single process but centered upon organization as a whole. Most of the research students confuse innovation with change and use both terms interchangeably. In my research, this article is a good piece of information that helps to differentiate two most important concepts in change management topic. Craig Eric Schneier. (1994). The training and development source book, in which writer talks about organizational change and members behavior change. According to write the first step towards change is to develop appositive perception about change among all members of organization. One chapter of this book talks about organizational life cycle stages which are; setup, survival and change. Organization starts with Entrepreneurial stage and reaches to decline then reengineering stage starts it includes continuous improvement and involving employees to ensure change. This book also talks about different agents involved in change and reengineering, as mature organizations need to involve both internal and external agents both because internal agents like employees endorse change while external agents like customers perceive change. This chapter of source book is very important for me in this research because it talks about agents in change thats why this part of literature is very consis tent with my topic. Curtis M. Grimm, Ken J. Smith. ( 1991). Research notes and communication management and organizational change this article talks about characteristics of management that what type of managerial expertise can lead to successful change and ensure acceptance of change by all the agents involved in change process. Attributes included in this research were education, experience in related field and age. Results showed that managers who succeeded to bring change are young and dynamic since they are young their industry experience is less but still they are very successful in bringing about change. In education those managers with MBA degree are more likely to bring change in organization. This type of research paper is very much relevant to my topic because it assist me to understand relation between change and managerial characteristics and attitudes, it also help me to understand multi dimension field of change management. John Holt. (1989). Managing change in extension, explains some forces of change what make an organization to change. These forces include perspective, niche, competition, people and program. These forces can be elaborated as perspective of an organization can be the market leader in low cost products for that they may need to change organizations processes and work system. To create a niche for a new product they may need to change approach like from mass customization they may opt for full customization. For this very reason organization would need to change complete approach and perspective to cater a specific niche for their product. Because capitalizing on tomorrows niches will require system-wide cooperation, from university presidents to county agents. A shared sense of mission and a renewed sense of its importance are vital in improving teamwork, especially as diverse as these team members are. The competition is fierce and increasing for all our niches. That is as it should b e: education, that long term national treasure, is far too important to be left in the hands of a monopoly. Monopoly there is not; competition for extension education markets abounds. In commercial agriculture, there are consultants of all stripes; universities such as Harvard and Stan- ford conduct agribusiness seminars; input companies are entering management consulting by dangling the carrot of financing well- planned operations. Dr.Kathleen K. Reardon, Dr. Kevin J. Reardon, Dr. Alan J. Rowe. (1998). Leadership styles for the five stages of radical change. It talks about leadership style and change. Top level leadership is most important agent in organization change. This article explains different type of organizational leadership and results in enforcing change. These types are commanding, logical, inspirational and supportive. Commanding leader is directing and focuses on results thus this type of leaders brings changes rapidly. Logical leaders are innovative and they are very careful about change. They have a thoughtful process before undertaking any change. Inspirational leaders focus on opportunities so change is radical there is no guarantee for change. Supportive leaders are those who facilitate work and involve others thats why they are very slow in bringing about change. This article also talks about change phases and leadership style needed for each phase. Planning phase require logical while launc hing phase require commanding leadership. This article is very relevant to my topic because it talks about most important agent in change that is leader. Aims and objectives of Research: The research seeks to determine: description of variables explanation of relationship between different variables and factors broadening the knowledge of field evaluation and diagnosis of problem statement solution to problem