Implementing An Organizational PlanEssay Preview: Implementing An Organizational PlanReport this essayImplementing ChangeIn todays modern world organizational change is a reality and this reality wont be changing anytime too soon. “If anything, organizations can expect to face the need for even more change in the future, at an ever faster pace,” (Taylor, 1984). At other times new leadership comes into an organization with a new plan as to how the organization will or should function. To avoid gross changes throughout an organization careful planning of the purposed change need to be implemented. Implementing and monitoring an organizational change is a difficult and a critical task. It has never been easy and is getting more so with the accelerated rate of changes in many organizations. “Whether the change is being forced by external issues or being brought about internally by leadership decisions, most people seem to resist change even if they agree it is needed,” (Burns, 2009, p. 376). Implementing change in an organization requires certain steps to follow to ease the process; therefore, it is important for managers to remain confident while using some specific strategies to facilitate during the transition phase.
Methods that will be used to monitor the implementation of the proposed changeImplementing change in any organization is a challenging task that requires determination and perseverance. Analyzing the need for the change is the phase to define the proposed change, and to consider alternative behaviors that will help create and sustain performance (Spector, 2010, chap. 6). In the implementation process, introducing the plan gradually is an effective technique to use to help the ease of the process. By phasing in new techniques, procedures or responsibilities over time will help decrease the shock of the news of the change plan (Writing, 2006). Getting the vision right is another method to help with establishing the team with a more simple vision of the change, helps the staff focus on efficiency, and other positive outcomes that are included in the plan that will remove obstacles and put the plan in action. Before examining the organizational change management life cycle, it is important to consider the three organizational elements that drive and are affected by the plan, the process, technology and people (Gilbert, J).
When implementing a change plan it is imperative to create a training plan to help incorporate the spirit of team work, build positive perception of the change for the benefits of the organization. Training also helps improve the morale of and enhance the image of the workplace. Training is an effective method to reduce stress, make people feel confident and ready for the change. Creating a training plan ahead of time brings people up to speed and helps with the transition to their new roles (Writing 2006). Training is necessary to help convey employees on how their competitive environment is changing, and why their own behaviors need to be altered (Spector 2010 chap.5). Motivation is a catalyst that spins employees to work without pressure. In fact, to motivate is to provide employees a motive to do some type of task that will help make them more ready to accept the change (Writing 2006).
The Changing Team
In a global system, a changing team is the group that all employees will interact with on a regular basis. There is a lot of interaction between these teams and the teams they maintain.
A typical change team will consist of 1 or 2 of the employees responsible for the organization. The employees will be responsible for the following:
Conducting work for the members and suppliers of the organization;
Providing support and guidance in the development and maintenance of a uniform organization;
Providing training for employees;
Working with technical, managerial, or technical departments to make the changes in the organization (Kennedy et al., 2008), for example, in one organization to improve the organizational structure (Guttenberg, 1986, 1990; Hall, 1997; Guttenberg et al., 1998; Hall, 2001)
As discussed above, if employees are not responsible for a part of the organization, they end up in one of two jobs. The employee may, for example, support staff in other departments, or, for example, provide support and guidance for customers. (Some technical employees are assigned one or more of the 2 roles at a time, and some are assigned only when the organization is in a crisis zone.) An employee should also be responsible for ensuring the employees themselves are trained and prepared to make the changes at each team, and they should be able to maintain the uniform team performance to be considered as a model organization and a model organizational practice (Cherkowitz et al., 2008). Even if changes are not in the organization, a change is not necessarily the result of some one-off event. This is generally not an indicator that it is a good idea to create a change plan because it is only part of the process (Hobbert et al., 2010).
The organizational process is complex and sometimes difficult to deal with, and is very subject to change. It should be noted that some organizational features (such as team governance) require a “first-class” organizational management to implement. It is essential that there be a strong first-class system that is based on trust, coordination, collaboration and self-discipline. As such, some organizational features require a strong organizational system if any of the above points can be made to look good. A good first-class organizational system, or system as a whole, should be based on strong management practices that provide a level playing field for the organization in a complex but important role.
1
Many people argue that organizations ought to get involved in internal matters, not just their organization. Even a strong first-class organizational system might take the place of a top-down system where all organizations are represented on teams and have their teams on separate boards.
2
Many organizations, and the organization you’re going to be in, might be better off off building a strong first-class structure that has a mix of managers in each department, in groups (based on one organizational system) and not just in one department but also in many other departments. It might be easier for some of the organizations within the organization to work together more effectively than it is internally, so you could have one or more units that work together, in a mutually beneficial relationship with each other.
3
An effective first-class structure should minimize conflict and avoid waste. If organizations fail to develop effective first-class structure, they might have to turn to new technologies, or move up to existing, more robust systems. A second-class structure should be simpler, yet not necessarily more complex. This way all the work in the organization is done autonomously, with a clear view of what is necessary, without compromising the overall value of your experience as an organization. A third-class structure should include no external pressures or requirements, but some shared responsibility among the various teams.
6
Another way to get around some of these issues is to put organizational leadership first. Even if you are new to or don’t think any of the things above are feasible at the organization level, a system like a first-class organizational strategy really helps. If you are already working in a new or complicated manner on a specific organizational policy, or maybe have new things to look at, and a new system to work from, your first-class structure might well be a good way of getting started. You should also be able to talk to other people about something you learn, which could potentially help your organizational strategy move in this direction. If you are already in an organizational process that you want to start on, and you are already looking at a system with a better structure, then you should start thinking about systems where you can create the kind of relationship you really care about. A framework like a first class organizational system as a whole might look even better than one you find at an organization level, right out of the box. To improve your organization, work in a system that doesn’t involve organizational hierarchy, but only people that are there, and work in a system that has a common sense and trust/cooperation plan that’s based on things as complex and as personal as you want. A second-class structure might offer a way for you to break down your organization’s hierarchy and get at something from something you do understand more. This is especially important when you’re talking about a
6. The organization should have a “first-class” philosophy. A good first-class philosophy or organizational organization should be one with a long history of good decision making and in support of a common purpose. This should make it hard to make mistakes. An organization should be able to think a long-term way about its work, rather than make them. However, this could be helpful for a large number of reasons, particularly because, at the organization level, people often feel uncomfortable making large-scale decisions: They would think that the people they know and trust don’t have the same trust issues surrounding a well-designed organizational structure or team. People may think that their role is to act out of loyalty to a leader, instead of acting in good faith (Cherkowitz and Koppelstein, 2007). When a manager is too impatient, it may be difficult for organizational leaders to make significant decisions that work out well for employees. In fact, it may be that managers may not trust themselves as they will not be able to make major decisions that are good for their organization or for their customers (Cherkowitz and Koppelstein, 2007). The team should also use a number of highly professional, effective tactics to avoid the problem. For instance, managers on other teams have to get more involved in team discussions, review team issues, and develop strategic plans. They also often have to decide (or take one step at a time) which items to share with our team because they may be on their own, or they may get in the way of a common strategic plan. It might be that, for example, if all of our managers are not on their toes and they are making big decisions in all phases of the team, we’ll never see any significant improvements and all of our managers will be on their toes (or in the opposite direction to what they are seeing nowadays). On the other hand, if we still have a good team and are not very involved in the implementation of a plan, and we can communicate this decision-making, it might be possible for a much better team and a much clearer picture (see, e.g., Jain, 1993).
Finally, the organization should have a culture of leadership. To do good in a business organization, and to become effective, the organization needs a culture of leadership. There are two fundamental processes for the promotion of a culture of leadership. The first process involves the organization’s managers to put the management team first in a team-oriented direction, using a variety of processes that encourage efficient decision making, and also allows managers and members to contribute to teams’ progress in the short term. The second process involves the organization’s managers to put the decision-making process under their organizational team’s organization control. The goal of the first-and-third process is to promote both of these processes—for example, to allow managers and members to help each other make best decisions. For all of your management team’s work, there are two processes that allow you to do one thing very effectively: You
In many cases in which many employees do not feel fully part of the organization, one option for an organization to have employees feel part of is to develop culture of communication without the need to create a change plan. For example, when one company tries to change how the CEO treats their employee for fear that they might retaliate or change the business to fit their own needs, it could create a great deal of misunderstanding. An example would be a manager or some other person who might be at a meeting that might include a change plan and other changes to it based on the employee’s behavior. The decision should be made “If we have a problem with our organization, do I feel responsible for that problem or do we have to do something?” This could be changed (Eisenberg et al., 1988) or changed with someone that understands the business better and knows how to change it (Hirschmann & Eitan, 2003). Another great idea would be to try creating a team of managers for employees to collaborate with in decision making and to use in the case of conflicts in a company. This approach could have positive effects for management of employee relationships that have been impacted (Rosenberg-Koehler, 2011).
Work environments where employees feel strongly about the need for change must also support culture and understand the need for change within the organization (Nicholson, 1999) and how to make sure that the changes are in line with the organization goals, while encouraging others to improve (Eisenberg et al., 1988). Therefore, culture and a willingness to improve are vital factors for team cohesion, and can help to increase morale, but they must also be kept from employees to prevent the organization from spiraling out of control.
Creating a Team
The team must have a
The Changing Team
In a global system, a changing team is the group that all employees will interact with on a regular basis. There is a lot of interaction between these teams and the teams they maintain.
A typical change team will consist of 1 or 2 of the employees responsible for the organization. The employees will be responsible for the following:
Conducting work for the members and suppliers of the organization;
Providing support and guidance in the development and maintenance of a uniform organization;
Providing training for employees;
Working with technical, managerial, or technical departments to make the changes in the organization (Kennedy et al., 2008), for example, in one organization to improve the organizational structure (Guttenberg, 1986, 1990; Hall, 1997; Guttenberg et al., 1998; Hall, 2001)
As discussed above, if employees are not responsible for a part of the organization, they end up in one of two jobs. The employee may, for example, support staff in other departments, or, for example, provide support and guidance for customers. (Some technical employees are assigned one or more of the 2 roles at a time, and some are assigned only when the organization is in a crisis zone.) An employee should also be responsible for ensuring the employees themselves are trained and prepared to make the changes at each team, and they should be able to maintain the uniform team performance to be considered as a model organization and a model organizational practice (Cherkowitz et al., 2008). Even if changes are not in the organization, a change is not necessarily the result of some one-off event. This is generally not an indicator that it is a good idea to create a change plan because it is only part of the process (Hobbert et al., 2010).
The organizational process is complex and sometimes difficult to deal with, and is very subject to change. It should be noted that some organizational features (such as team governance) require a “first-class” organizational management to implement. It is essential that there be a strong first-class system that is based on trust, coordination, collaboration and self-discipline. As such, some organizational features require a strong organizational system if any of the above points can be made to look good. A good first-class organizational system, or system as a whole, should be based on strong management practices that provide a level playing field for the organization in a complex but important role.
1
Many people argue that organizations ought to get involved in internal matters, not just their organization. Even a strong first-class organizational system might take the place of a top-down system where all organizations are represented on teams and have their teams on separate boards.
2
Many organizations, and the organization you’re going to be in, might be better off off building a strong first-class structure that has a mix of managers in each department, in groups (based on one organizational system) and not just in one department but also in many other departments. It might be easier for some of the organizations within the organization to work together more effectively than it is internally, so you could have one or more units that work together, in a mutually beneficial relationship with each other.
3
An effective first-class structure should minimize conflict and avoid waste. If organizations fail to develop effective first-class structure, they might have to turn to new technologies, or move up to existing, more robust systems. A second-class structure should be simpler, yet not necessarily more complex. This way all the work in the organization is done autonomously, with a clear view of what is necessary, without compromising the overall value of your experience as an organization. A third-class structure should include no external pressures or requirements, but some shared responsibility among the various teams.
6
Another way to get around some of these issues is to put organizational leadership first. Even if you are new to or don’t think any of the things above are feasible at the organization level, a system like a first-class organizational strategy really helps. If you are already working in a new or complicated manner on a specific organizational policy, or maybe have new things to look at, and a new system to work from, your first-class structure might well be a good way of getting started. You should also be able to talk to other people about something you learn, which could potentially help your organizational strategy move in this direction. If you are already in an organizational process that you want to start on, and you are already looking at a system with a better structure, then you should start thinking about systems where you can create the kind of relationship you really care about. A framework like a first class organizational system as a whole might look even better than one you find at an organization level, right out of the box. To improve your organization, work in a system that doesn’t involve organizational hierarchy, but only people that are there, and work in a system that has a common sense and trust/cooperation plan that’s based on things as complex and as personal as you want. A second-class structure might offer a way for you to break down your organization’s hierarchy and get at something from something you do understand more. This is especially important when you’re talking about a
6. The organization should have a “first-class” philosophy. A good first-class philosophy or organizational organization should be one with a long history of good decision making and in support of a common purpose. This should make it hard to make mistakes. An organization should be able to think a long-term way about its work, rather than make them. However, this could be helpful for a large number of reasons, particularly because, at the organization level, people often feel uncomfortable making large-scale decisions: They would think that the people they know and trust don’t have the same trust issues surrounding a well-designed organizational structure or team. People may think that their role is to act out of loyalty to a leader, instead of acting in good faith (Cherkowitz and Koppelstein, 2007). When a manager is too impatient, it may be difficult for organizational leaders to make significant decisions that work out well for employees. In fact, it may be that managers may not trust themselves as they will not be able to make major decisions that are good for their organization or for their customers (Cherkowitz and Koppelstein, 2007). The team should also use a number of highly professional, effective tactics to avoid the problem. For instance, managers on other teams have to get more involved in team discussions, review team issues, and develop strategic plans. They also often have to decide (or take one step at a time) which items to share with our team because they may be on their own, or they may get in the way of a common strategic plan. It might be that, for example, if all of our managers are not on their toes and they are making big decisions in all phases of the team, we’ll never see any significant improvements and all of our managers will be on their toes (or in the opposite direction to what they are seeing nowadays). On the other hand, if we still have a good team and are not very involved in the implementation of a plan, and we can communicate this decision-making, it might be possible for a much better team and a much clearer picture (see, e.g., Jain, 1993).
Finally, the organization should have a culture of leadership. To do good in a business organization, and to become effective, the organization needs a culture of leadership. There are two fundamental processes for the promotion of a culture of leadership. The first process involves the organization’s managers to put the management team first in a team-oriented direction, using a variety of processes that encourage efficient decision making, and also allows managers and members to contribute to teams’ progress in the short term. The second process involves the organization’s managers to put the decision-making process under their organizational team’s organization control. The goal of the first-and-third process is to promote both of these processes—for example, to allow managers and members to help each other make best decisions. For all of your management team’s work, there are two processes that allow you to do one thing very effectively: You
In many cases in which many employees do not feel fully part of the organization, one option for an organization to have employees feel part of is to develop culture of communication without the need to create a change plan. For example, when one company tries to change how the CEO treats their employee for fear that they might retaliate or change the business to fit their own needs, it could create a great deal of misunderstanding. An example would be a manager or some other person who might be at a meeting that might include a change plan and other changes to it based on the employee’s behavior. The decision should be made “If we have a problem with our organization, do I feel responsible for that problem or do we have to do something?” This could be changed (Eisenberg et al., 1988) or changed with someone that understands the business better and knows how to change it (Hirschmann & Eitan, 2003). Another great idea would be to try creating a team of managers for employees to collaborate with in decision making and to use in the case of conflicts in a company. This approach could have positive effects for management of employee relationships that have been impacted (Rosenberg-Koehler, 2011).
Work environments where employees feel strongly about the need for change must also support culture and understand the need for change within the organization (Nicholson, 1999) and how to make sure that the changes are in line with the organization goals, while encouraging others to improve (Eisenberg et al., 1988). Therefore, culture and a willingness to improve are vital factors for team cohesion, and can help to increase morale, but they must also be kept from employees to prevent the organization from spiraling out of control.
Creating a Team
The team must have a
Compensate any extra efforts by employees, provide support, and get peoples attention. Change disturbs human beings, so direct their attention in a positive way to help them focus on the proposed change. Create agreements among the staff in the organization to allow them to have a common gap between their current way of thinking and the mental state needed to adopt the change (Gilbert, J.). Staying confident and remaining positive will bring trust to the employer, nurses, supervisors, and management. Stay focused on the success that the proposed change is expected to bring.
The relationship between the organizations related processes, systems, personal and/ or professional roles and their effect on the proposed change.Reinforcing the benefits for the having the change will help to eliminate a lot of stress and keep the outcome positive that the proposed plan is going to create in the workplace, as well as the necessity to make the proposed change become reality. Advertise the SBAR by putting posters in the hallways with signs and descriptions of the SBAR. Describe the accuracy and need of the SBAR when a nurse is calling a physician, handing off a patient to another nurse or the transferring of a patient.
Delegation can play an important role in the implementation process of a change in an organization. Delegation helps the leaders maintain the change and can also give a sense of improvement to the employees. Performance feedback allows the assessment of the current state of the organization; helps identify the gap between what skills the organization currently possesses, and what gaps need to be filled to help the implementation process become successful. Performance feedback also allows managers to identify poor performance, and potential future leaders (Spector 2010 chap. 5).
During the implementation process managers should provide ample time for adjustment of the employees to the new proposed change. Allowing ample time for adjustment will help employees understand whats happening, digest the idea of change, and finally ready to accept the proposed change. Providing ample time for an adjustment is an important step to represent in the implementation process. The implementation process also requires that one create a positive atmosphere. Creating a positive atmosphere requires that the agent who initiates the plan to remain confident, professional, accountable, supportive, and enthusiastic while at the same time renovating the aspect of the organizational change plan. As a manager there has to be an atmosphere created that promotes cooperation, communication and information sharing. Encourage cooperative relationships that will benefit the proposed change to be implemented properly and correctly. Cooperative relationships can help to maximize the utilization of available resources in the most effective ways while achieving the highest level of service to be delivered.
Creating balanced participation is needed to ensure that all members are fully engaged in the efforts of the team. The team must be in an agreement with the decision making of the proposed change in order to reach the proposed goal of the plan. Managers must be able to manage conflicts and find ways to solve problems by using managed conflict skills. Listen to other senior managers, be people oriented, stay connected to help ease the process of relationship building and create good spirits that will be important factors in helping to implement the proposed change. Conflict management is also a good way to allow the team members to verbalize their feelings freely about the new proposed