Business

Master Thesis Cand.
merc HRM
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM Synnve Holgersen Mentor: Stine Staffeldt (external)
Research question: Change Management Theories - is there an optimal way of implementing change in an organisation, and how can this be seen in an intercultural perspective?
Problemformulering: Endringsledelsesteorier - finnes det en optimal mte implementere endring i en organisasjon, og hvordan blir dette sett p i et interkulturelt perspektiv?
Copenhagen Business School Total number of pages: 79 January, 2011
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM
ABSTRACT
This text presents the different sciences related to change management rationalism, functionalism and social constructivism, and with the basis of these three fundamentals, one has tried to identify ways that change can be implemented in an organisation. The aspect of culture has further been brought in to perspective, by looking at how theories of change and organisational development (OD) can be seen and implemented in the different national cultures. Are there some models which are better suited in some cultures, or is it one model that in general could be used in all organisations and / or cultures?
First one look at the reasons for change, where this may be due to planned change, as well as change as a coincidence, where one in the text focus on implementing change as a planned change. The basis of the analysis and discussion are functionalism and Kotters eight step model, together with the new and not quite finished research area of social constructivism and the Appreciative Inquiry (AI) model. The two different models are compared, and in the social constructivism one say that humans think, feel and see the things they want to see hence some things are being taken into consideration in a process of change, while others are left out. This contributes to the fact that there is not only one reality, and that in the communities of practices, together one create meaning within the organisation. In a social constructivism approach this means that change does not happen and make sense until the change is negotiated and meaningful within the communities of practice. Functionalism looks at both the classic rational approach and the visionary approach, which emphasise on a more analytic approach; whereas Kotters eight step model and a linear approach are the basis for the implementation of change (Guldbrandsen, 2010).
The models used for comparison are Organisational Development (OD) and Total Quality Management (TQM), where an OD definition and model is used as material for the analysis and discussion. Further the TQM and quality programmes are themes which may be used as an example and key determinants for implementing change, with focus on quality throughout the change process. These are both models where a common goal is for the organisations to be more competitive, and where a strategic change could benefit the entire company by simple steps, concerning both a quality concept and a definition characteristic which departs substantially from a traditional approach. 2
When relating these different theories of change and culture, one seek to explore if there is a best possible and optimal way for an organisation to handle and implement change at every level of the organisation, both on a short and long term basis. The main models of Kotter and the AI model, together with OD and TQM are reviewed and when looking at the different evaluations in this paper, it is difficult to see and explore which is the most optimal for implementing change, and consequently one may say that there is not only one way of doing it, or one culture that is better suited compared to the others. Suggestions are made when comparing change models and different cultural features, and evaluations are made, both concerning the comparison of the two main models, but also the comparisons related to OD and TQM, as well as involving the cultural aspect. One may presume that there does not exist only one optimal model for change, however,based on the discussion and analysis one have found, that this is something that depends on the entire situation as a whole. Something that works in one situation does not necessarily work in another organisation, and for that matter, another country. The findings of the text suggest that the choice of change model should be situational, where the organisations history, management style and what kind of change one has to deal with are important aspects to consider, before starting the process of change (Guldbrandsen, 2010). To have knowledge about this and the existing composition of cultures within the organisation, could be an important advice for the future, because then, one may be able to know and recognise what to do in specific situations involving change.
Contents
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... 2 1. 2.
2.1. 2.2. 2.3.
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 5 METHOD ........................................................................................................................ 6

Research question: ................................................................................................................... 7 Research design and ontology ................................................................................................. 7 The three isms ...................................................................................................................... 9 Rationalism ...................................................................................................................... 9 Functionalism ................................................................................................................ 11 Social constructivism..................................................................................................... 12
2.3.1. 2.3.2. 2.3.3.
3.
3.1.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................ 15

Types of change what is the reason for change? ................................................................ 15 Planned change .............................................................................................................. 15 Change as lifecycle ........................................................................................................ 16 Change as evolution ...................................................................................................... 17 Change as dialectic process and power battle ............................................................... 19 Change as contingency / coincidence ............................................................................ 20 Different models competitive or complementary? ..................................................... 22 3.1.1. 3.1.2. 3.1.3. 3.1.4. 3.1.5. 3.1.6. 3.2.
The two main models ............................................................................................................ 24 Kotters eight step model............................................................................................... 24 The Appreciative Inquiry (AI) model............................................................................ 27 Change Management ..................................................................................................... 28
3.2.1. 3.2.2. 3.2.3. 3.3.
Comparative models .............................................................................................................. 31 Organisation Development and Change ........................................................................ 31 Total Quality Management (TQM) ............................................................................... 37
3.3.1. 3.3.2. 3.4.
National cultures and demand of management...................................................................... 46 The four dimensions ...................................................................................................... 48 Practical differences of culture - a Norwegian perspective. .......................................... 54
3.4.1. 3.4.2.
4. 5.
5.1.
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................. 61 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 75

Further research ..................................................................................................................... 77
6.
6.1. 6.2.
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 78
Books and articles: ................................................................................................................ 78 Internet sources: .................................................................................................................... 79
1. INTRODUCTION
Change can vary in complexity, from introducing relatively simple changes into a small work group to transforming most features of the total organisation, and although change management differs across situations, it is important to address some points that need to be performed when managing any kind of organisational change. Aspects like motivating change, creating a vision, developing political support, managing the transition and sustaining momentum, are some of the theories that needs be taken into consideration when implementing change (Cummins & Huse, 1989). The culture is seen as the invisible web in a society, and it is a prerequisite for theories to be valid and secure that behaviours such as managerial behaviours are effective, when managing change. As long as we are in the culture, there is a tendency where one may have troubles with discovering it, or taking it for granted. However if one try to manage and organise after ones own well-known principles in an unknown and different social and cultural context, one may experience that some of the fundamentals one relies on, no longer are valid, and that one needs to open up ones mind and use the differences to something that could benefit the entire organisation.
I start by looking at the sciences of change management, which both Kotters eight step model and the situational Appreciative Inquiry (AI) model are mentioned and based upon. Rationalism is mentioned, but the main argument involves mostly functionalism and the theory of social constructivism. These are the sciences that the theories are based upon. The Further in the theoretical framework I examine the different reasons for change, whereas this is seen as the basis for understanding change, before one begin exploring the different change models and their applications. The main models are, as mentioned above, Kotters eight step model and the AI model. The models which they are compared with are the OD model and TQM. I finalize my theoretical framework with including culture and the four cultural dimensions of Hofstede, which also are the basis for analysis and discussion, together with the change theories mentioned above. The analysis looks at different change theories and different international cultures, to seek to find a correlation between change theories and cultures, and a possible optimal solution for implementing change.
2. METHOD
Social science tries to understand and explain phenomenons that occurs. To give rich, wellinformed and well-substantiated descriptions is one of the responsibilities of social science, as well as explaining and trying to understand how the human world is put together. The basis for science is the causal belief; meaning that one thing leads to another. The quantitative and qualitative approaches do not demand strong causal coherence. It explains the probability of a phenomenon occurring, and that some degree of regularity is present. The aim is to look for tendencies, regularities or correlations (Skog, 2005). The object of this chapter is to
substantiate the chosen methods, and give an account for the rational, functional and social constructivist assumptions and theories, together with the more ontological assumptions and the theoretical basis and paradigm pragmatic constructivism.
First one may consider some general qualitative and quantitative theoretical assumptions, where these quantitative and qualitative ontological assumptions vary. Quantitative researchers isolate and define variables and variable categories to frame hypotheses. Hypotheses are often produced before the data is collected, and are then tested upon the data. Variables are the means of the analysis. It is often pictured like a researcher looking through a narrow lens, at a specific set of variables (Brannen, 1992). Quantitative method is according to Jacobsen (2005) and Skog (2005) mainly based on a deductive approach. Data collection is based on survey where different alternatives for an answer are given. The goal is to perform an affective statistical analysis, and present the results in enumerative analysis. The purpose is to find frequencies, and how many and what kind of people in general have the characteristic which has been found to exist in the sample population (Brannen, 1992). The object is to make connections or to reveal regularities between variables.
With qualitative research it is the concepts and categories that matter. One of the purposes is to test theory, and participate in analytic induction. Brannen claims that analytic induction, which often begins without a clear hypothesis, can be combined with deductive methods, and the testing of hypothesis. Qualitative researchers may begin with defining general concepts. During the process of the research program the definitions may change. Variables constitute the product or outcome. The research is described as looking through a wide lens, searching for patterns of inter-relationships between a former unspecified set of concepts (Ibid.). Qualitative method collects information often of a more interpretive and descriptive character.
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM Interviews, group interviews, observation and documentary research are the main approaches (Blaikie, 2000; Jacobsen, 2005). Qualitative research can also be descriptive.
Enumerative and analytic induction have different starting points therefore: enumerative induction abstracts by generalizing whereas analytic induction generalizes by abstracting (Brannen, 1992, p. 7).
Several schools discuss whether designs and methods should be mixed, combined or triangulated (Blaikie, 2000; Creswell, 1994; Ellefsen, 1998; Jacobsen, 2004; Morgan 1998). Traditionally quantitative and qualitative research is seen to belong to different paradigms. It is assumed to be a connection between epistemology, theory and method.
2.1.
Research question:
Change Management Theories is there an optimal way of implementing change in an organisation, and how can this be seen in a intercultural perspective?
2.2.
Research design and ontology
The object of this study is to complete an analysis of different change management theories compared to international cultures, and to look at how cultural similarities and differences relates to and accepts the different terms of change in an organisation. By answering this research question, our contribution is placed within the literature concerning voices in organisational fields, especially considering theories of change management and culture.
The paper is based on secondary data and literature, where other researchers and authors have made some distinctions of the different theories described in the paper. It is worth mentioning that not all of their theories and aspect have been used in this paper, only the terms that were seen as preferable in relation to the argumentations of the text. I have used Guldbrandsen`s paper Den fjerde isme as a basis or fundamental for the theories concerning the implementation of change, the discussion and analysis, and also the summary and conclusion of this paper. The main arguments are based upon functionalism and social constructivism, whereas John Paul Kotter`s eight step model is one of the models, which are seen as a tool to understand and implement change. The models counterpart is the model within social constructivism and Appreciative Inquiry, the AI model. In comparison with these two models I have used OD and TQM, where Almaraz (1994) and French and Bell Jr. (1999) are used as empirical sources. The reason for choosing OD is the substantially difference from the
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM traditional approach to implementing change, whereas this could be seen more similar to both Kotter`s model and the AI model. The TQM model or initiative is chosen due to wanting to explore further the aspect of quality as a way of implementing change. One can also mention that both models, OD and TQM, contains some perspectives on the behaviour of humans, when implementing change, and this is something that I, personally. Think is an aspect that is interesting, but also a crucial determinant to consider when handling change. Further I have used literature from known authors like Schein and Hofstede, where both of them are well known voices within cultural theory. I also choose to take an Norwegian perspective in the evaluations concerning cultures, and this is due to my own nationality, but also in the sense of looking at the Scandinavian countries like a unity, when comparing it to the other continents, countries and cultures that are mentioned in that section. In general one can say that most of the mentioned literature used in the paper, including books and articles except for Guldbrandsen, are part of the curriculum in the master programme Change Management at the University of Stavanger, Norway, this is also one of the reasons for my choice of literature, however only to some degree. The following will represent the ontological assumptions used in this paper, whereas pragmatic constructivism is the practice paradigm involved.
In this paper a paradigm is taken to mean, a set of ontological and scientific assumptions that make up a framework within which knowledge can be obtained, acted upon, evaluated, and developed. It follows that a paradigm includes the basic presumptions made about the nature of our environment and our place within it. They are based on what we consider to be truth and knowledge and reflect on how these are obtained and used (Nrreklit, Nrreklit & Mitchell, 2010). Not only do they reflect on how people behave and why they do so, but also why a particular behaviour is appropriate. A paradigm can be implicit or explicit. It is widely recognized that validity is determined by inter-relationships between the paradigmatic components of ontology and epistemology where certain ontological assumptions imply a particular epistemology with the task to safeguard the validity of our knowledge. In particular, the modern founder of the concept of scientic paradigm, Kuhn, points to a paradigm as a disciplinary matrix involving: Some general metaphysical assumptions about the composition of the field under consideration; Some general laws, principles and concepts for analyzing questions and presenting the 8
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM results; Shared values of what forms the qualities of a scientic theory that are applied in the choice of competing theories/paradigms; and An exemplary result including artefact paradigms as the ideal norm to be transferable to other closely related problem areas.
Pragmatic constructivism is based on the thesis that four dimensions of reality must be integrated in the actor-world relation if the construct is to be successful as a basis for undertaking actions. These four dimensions are facts, possibilities, values and communication. The argument for the inclusion of these four dimensions and the relationships among them is as follows. Facts are necessary as a basis of action, whereas facts alone are insufficient. If there are no possibilities, there can be no action and if one has no possibilities then one is dead. The possibilities must be grounded in the facts, if not they are ctional. Further, possibilities create room for choice, but they only function if there is a reason to choose and prefer one possibility to the other, hence if the actor has values and the values lie within the range of ones possibilities. Finally, the integration of facts, possibilities and value must be expressed in communication in order to enable action in a social setting. If the integration of facts, possibilities, value and communication dissolves, then the ability to act intentionally breaks down because the distinction between true and false in the pragmatic sense, for example between successful and unsuccessful action, breaks down (Ibid.). Further the paper will represent the quantitative and qualitative ontological assumptions, which the literature relies on.
2.3.
The three isms
2.3.1. Rationalism The management theory and practice within change management has its roots in three schools or isms, where rationalism is the first one. Rationalism has its source from the metaphorical picture of an organisation as a goal-seeking machine and it the goal is to be as effective as possible considered the problem and the different solutions to the problem (Guldbrandsen, 2010). To execute this, the management has some structural and administrative measurements;
1. Organisational structure, which defines the different units purposes, references and authority.
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM 2. Job descriptions, which connects the tasks and authority of the actual positions 3. Process descriptions, which describe the best way to execute the work 4. Explicit performance criteria, which makes the goals clear for the employees 5. Recruitment procedures ensuring the proper qualifications 6. Control, sanctions and reward, which ensures that structure, rules and procedures are being delivered
The rationalists recognize that there are irrationalities in the organisation, but these are meant to be reduced as much as possible because they are in the way of the optimum, which have been created by the existing order and structure. The aspect of rationalism can be expressed in the way rationalism relates to culture, where culture and cultural leadership are not very widespread. Instead they use norms to explain the irrationality that exist in the organisation and the term normative control to bring the irrationality under control and the means to control this is done by classic bureaucratic management and control (Ibid.). The rationalist saw a change as something disturbing to the organisation and therefore the changes should be executed as fast as possible to recreate stability and efficiency. This should be done through a top-down access and change management were, due to this, not seen as an important management discipline, but more as an opportunity to those management disciplines, which are connected to the normal managerial optimization. Later, a tendency which was called planned change rose within rationalism and behind this idea one can seek to find that a change should be planned and executed by a change agent, which often should be the senior manager or an external consultant. The change agents task is to secure that the necessary changes are carried out, which means that the organisation needs to adapt to the environmental changes outside the organisation (Ibid).
The theorist that contributed most to the development of the rationalistic view on planned change was Kurt Lewin. Lewin says that change occurs, when there appears a disturbance in the tension which ensures organisational stability and when the powers that wants the change are stronger than the powers that seeks to maintain the already existing state. In the process of change, the change agents first task is to ensure that the change can happen by staggering the existing equilibrium, and the second assignment is to take initiative to ensure that the activities that are being done due to the change can ensure re-freezing around a new equilibrium. This is stated in Lewins tree-stage model for planned change and this model contradicts some of the other models for change management, where Lewins models is 10
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM empirically grounded from World War 2, where he did a survey for the U.S. Government. Even though Lewins model is more than 50 years old, can the linear and one-dimensional change strategy be seen as base for much organisational theory. For example the tree-phase model is seen as soundboard for Kotters eight step model, which we will look closer at later in the text. In organisational practice the models for planned change are still very popular today and many management practices take their impetus in rationalistic thoughts, where the change agent is seen as the most important actor for recreating order, with a top-down strategy, with structure, culture and systems as the primary areas of effort (Ibid.). The second ism is functionalism and has its roots in the system theories and is based upon the perception of that an organisation is a living organism, which needs to take care of four important functions to survive: Ensure access to the necessary resources from the environment - adaption, formulate and follow goals, coordinate activities integration, and also maintain and adapt the mindset through the culture. To maintain, develop and coordinate the four important aspects described above the functionalism has developed a new management discipline; Strategic management, which is described as a process that consist of two separated steps: The formulation of the strategy and the implementation of the strategy. Within functionalism there are two schools which have different permissions related to strategy and change management and the two will be further addresses below (Ibid.). 2.3.2. Functionalism There are two approaches / models within functionalism, whereas the first one to be described is the classic rational approach and the second one, which is to be described later, is the visionary / ideological approach to strategic management (Guldbrandsen, 2010).
The classic rational approach to strategic management consists of a set of steps, where the first thing is to make some assumptions about the future and the strengths and weaknesses of the organisation, where a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis could be a suggestion. The next step is to set the goals and to describe the actions to which the goals are reached. After this the plan is tested for its acceptability can it generate the wanted results? How will stakeholders and competitors react and does the strategy march the cultures, or does the culture also need to change? Finally the plan is tested for how it fits to the situation; Product portfolio (lifecycles), financial resources and cash flow, in addition to the human resources (competencies). The result of the process is a written plan for the future, where success demands effective implementation (Ibid.). John P. Kotter wrote the book Leading Change, where he presents the eight step model, which is a model that need to be 11
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM executed in the right order to succeed with the implementation of the change. A second model is the visionary / ideological approach to strategic management, where this model seeks to be inspired by best practice from other organisations, and with this create an attractive vision for the future, which can be the driving force in the organisations strategic development. We will address further attention to these models in the theoretical framework section below. 2.3.3. Social constructivism The third and last ism is social constructivism which is a practice field that is still under research and development and due to this is not entirely solid cast yet. One of the most important messages in this way of thinking is that humans do often look at things differently; we have a different focus and / or goals. We therefore, consciously or unconsciously, choose to see something and to overlook something else (Guldbrandsen, 2010). Secondly we experience what we see differently, we have our own attitude, moral and ethic, which is a part of the way we see and experience things the way we do. This term within the social constructivism is called selective perception and leads us to the first important point: In an organisation there is not only one reality. The second important point in this theory is: Together we create our reality. The reality and the truth are born through dialogue and negotiation together with those that we attach importance and meaning to. Within the theories of management one often use the term communities of practice, when referring to the network we use when we constructs reality. This is where we together create meaning within the organisation. In a social constructivism approach this means that change does not happen and make sense until the change is negotiated and meaningful within the communities of practice. First, the consequences is that the change should be facilitated and adapted as a process, where all are involved, and where there is room for meaning creation in the communities of practice. Second, there is also a consequence related to that it is hard to predict the outcome of a change, which again challenges the process of change as a planned change, which consist of a number of limited steps. A third principal within the social constructivism is: The positive expectations of refugees magical power - the thought of organisations as heliostats tropical systems that grows with the sun, just as plants. Thus, when there is a change it is important that the energy is directed towards the positive expectations to the future, instead of directing it towards the problems in the past. Therefore, with function in the terminology from the functionalism approach, this means that one in the process of change should be based on the vision, rather than the burning platform. Further we will describe these to aspect within a social constructivism approach to change. The burning platform gives a negative emotional reaction, where feelings such as fear, guilt, uncertainty, anger, powerlessness and 12
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM hopelessness are prominent. This leads to defensive actions, whereas people start blaming each other, or they do nothing at all, and / or thirdly they could start fighting against it and resist to the change. However, the visions the burning wish, contributes with positive feelings to the process of change. This could be feelings like trust, curiosity, happiness, optimism and openness. These feeling will again create actions like creativity, commitment and involvement, and vigour (Ibid.).
The fundamentals that the social constructivism rests on challenges the whole fundamental of the modernism and functionalisms approach to change management, and there exist some critique from the social constructivism towards the classic approach to change management. The change is not a deviation, but a state and the consequence is that complex models cannot handle the turbulence we face. At the same time the fundamental attitude (disorder) is contributing to create a mood, where change is considered something unpleasant, which needs to be over and done with as fast as possible. According to Kotter the source is to get the humans to change their behaviour and behind this definition there is an assumption that some people do the change and use power, while others are being changed and feel powerlessness. The social constructivism approach says that resistance to change appears when one feel powerless and the negative feelings are further enhance when dealing with the problems in the past and there is no room for meaning creation within the communities of practice. If the change also relies on simple cause and effect relationships and does not reflect the complexity that characterizes social systems, the meaning creation will have very narrow circumstances and this could easily result in distrust towards the management and resistance. The organisational world is not linear, but circular everything affects everything. The phase section relies on a thought that it is possible to separate the analysis, recognition, plan and influence. This idea is rejected within the social constructivism where life is lived forwards, but acknowledged backwards. We learn as we act, and learning leads to new insights and new actions. Learning and action cannot be separated the phases should be more floating and contain many reflection and reorientation points. The meaning of resistance to change is an important aspect within this and from a social constructivism view the classic approach to this is quite critical. The problem is that the basic assumption, disregard from the things mentioned above, prevents a more nuanced view on the changes that are being executed. If the employees express doubt of parts of the change due to for example that the management have not considered the what type of information the employees possess and that there is a chance or risk that they will not be heard they are immediately stamped as opponents. 13
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM The problem becomes amplified when the employees have experienced this psychological mindset and further in the future does no longer want to contribute with their knowledge and information, because they have learned that it is wrong to be negative. The consequences of this are repressed emotions, frustration and apathy, which confirms the leader saying resistance to change is the biggest challenge when it comes to change management. From a social constructivism approach one can say that the assumptions that the classic approach relies on when considering change management, creates a self-reinforced negative spiral, whereas we experience, that the biggest challenge in relation to change is to handle the employees resistance, the problem is really within ourselves. The resistance appears due to the way we think and act i relation the change. When we think of top-down, the burning platform, and linear process, we create resistance to change (Ibid.) Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is a model that has been more and more widespread as a method within social constructivism, which can be used in several classic management tasks including change management (Ibid.).
14
3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK UNDERSTANDING CHANGE
3.1.
Types of change what is the reason for change?
One can find four different models for change that represents fundamental different sequences of happenings and causal mechanisms which explains how and why change occurs (Jacobsen, 2004).
3.1.1. Planned change The first model is a teleological model which shows planned change. Planned change occurs because people see some problems they want to solve. Organisations change because people want a change to reach a new goal (Ibid.). This model have some requirements, where the most important one is the one we can call intentional. This means that there are certain intensions or goals behind the process of change. A group of people have analyzed the problems, new possible solutions and then taken actions to solve the given challenges (Ibid.). It can be illustrated as follows:
Phase 1: Diagnosis: recognition of need for a change experienced problems / possibilities Phase 2: Solution: descriptions of a future ideal state of mind for the organisation and a plan to further execution Phase 3: Execution of planned action interventions in the organisation Phase 4: Evaluation of planned actions and stabilization of the new improved state
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
Figure 3.1.1: The four central phases in a planned change process (Jacobsen, 2004, pp.20)
15
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM One can call this an analytic and rational approach to change, which means that the change is based on a perception that there is a need for change, problems have been analyzed and strategies been made for improving and give solutions to the foreseen problems. In phase 1 one recognize these problems, whereas this could be a decrease in the overall sales, conflict between major group internally in the organisation or failing customer loyalty (Ibid.). In phase 2, one tries to find the reason for the problems. Why have the overall sale decreased from one period to another? What are the reasons for the internal conflicts that have appeared the last couple of years? Typical activities related to this could be surveys, interviews and focus groups, often organized by external consultants or scientists. Phase 3 is where the plan is being settled with a time limit, prioritized activities and key personnel for each activity. The activities are being executed in form of teaching, advice from experts or work groups. At the end in phase 4 one evaluates the activities that have been executed. Has the overall sale increased? Are the internal conflicts sorted? Can we see an increase in customer loyalty? If the change is seen as successful, one needs to stabilize or institutionalize the change, which means that one wants to get the support from the employees and the management to enhance the change. This is often done by adapting the payments systems, structures and procedures to the changes that have been made (Ibid.).
This way of thinking is strongly used in western cultures, but it is not the only way a change in an organisation can happen. One major feature with social organisations is that they are undetermined, which means that it is not possible to say what is going to happen, even in near future, so planned change does not always lead to the results one wishes to achieve, which leads us to the other models (Ibid.).
3.1.2. Change as lifecycle In this model change can happen due to intentional choices, but there is a perception that organisations develop in a special and a pre-determined way. The changes follow a particular development pattern, so that every organisation, from birth, has an underlying form, logic, program or code which regulates the process of change, and moves the units from one start point to a finished form. This means that changes happen because every organisation goes through a set of phases in their life (Ibid.). Henry Mintzberg says that when organisations are established born they often have a simple structure, they are small and consist of a few number of people. Once time goes by the organisation grows larger and more people start working there, a need for more formalities arises and this often means that the organisation 16
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM develop a more sophisticated system for surveillance and control, through more extended hierarchies. As the organisation increases in both size and number of people, it creates problems due to the divided structure, and the result is an organisation that has difficulties coordinating the different divisions and keeping it together. Mintzberg suggests in these situations, the possibilities to make a structure matrix, where one could integrate the different division by creating more lateral connections where several units work together for example in projects. Mintzberg is describing organisations that move through a set of phases of life due to growth, where an increase in size implies a need for change in the structure. Age and size are the two most significant elements which provokes an organisational change (Ibid.).
Larry Greiner suggests that organisations that grows, always goes through five phases, where there always is a possibility that the organisation makes it from one phase to another. The phases are the creativity phase, management phase, delegation phase, coordination phase and cooperation phase. In between every one of these phases one find different crises, which are the reason for all the different phases the organisation has to go through. In this approach there is always room for what we call human choices and if an organisation can`t go from one phase to another it will die. The point of action is that when an organisation reaches a certain size, there are few choices concerning the planned change to get to the next phase the alternatives are in some way given. This can be seen as a sort of planned change, the only different is that there are fewer options to choose in this model, but if the organisation wants to make it to the next level it is crucial that the right decisions are made at the right time according to the situation and also in relation to where the organisation is situated (Ibid.).
This model of change has been criticized because of its deterministic nature, which means that the development of the organisation follows a permanent pattern. Empirical research has also questioned the necessity of the different phases. Many of today`s organisations are bureaucracies, while others manage to grow without establishing any bureaucratic or divisional organisation forms. Change from one form to another could also often happen where an organisation skips some phases or goes back to a previous phase, so even if this model, together with the planned change model, can explain a lot of the reason for change, there is still a need for other models (Ibid.). 3.1.3. Change as evolution This model focuses on change as a natural development, a perspective which gets its inspiration from theories on evolution amongst living organisms. The model focuses on 17
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM change on a population level and a central term in this is organisational fields which means an area or marked where a set of organisations compete for limited resources. This could be banks or insurance companies that rivals over customers, or universities which competes over students (Ibid.). In large companies there are powers that resist to the effort of change and there are certain features by an organisations environment which resist change and makes sure that stability is maintained (ibid.). Three aspects in the evolutionary model are central; variation, selection and maintenance. This can be illustrated in the figure below.
Variation
Selection
Maintenance
New "spicies" arrives
Figure 3.1.3: Central elements in evolutionary change (Jacobsen, 2004, pp. 26). The idea behind this model is that only the organisation that are best adapted or fit to their environment, will make it against hard competition, others who fail to adapt will die and be exchanged with other and new organisations. This could happen with establishment of new small organisations in a small part of the initial field and that this steals whats left of the market. In this perspective change happens due to changes in the mix of populations of organisations, but still there is no consistent rule on who lives and who don`t. As a part of some fields there are strong ideals on how organisations should look like and behave. Some organisations are connected to certain values and it is difficult to exchange these fundamental institutions with new ones, because of their knowledge, seniority and depth. The process of change is seen, in this situation, as a natural selection where the environment and surroundings decides which organisations who lives and which dies. This model is not far from what we call planned change, because those who wants to be the best, has to make
18
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM adjustments along the way to adapt to its surroundings, to create a balance between the demands of the environment and organisation form (Ibid.). The powers behind these types of changes are, at first, the competition of scarce resources, but secondly new theories have suggested that the competition is also about legitimacy. In some fields there are norms which are based on how an organisation should look like, be established and behave. The organisations that symbolize these messages out to its customer and clients in a best possible way will also get the most support from its environments. In this way it creates a pressure, which is called isomorphic, where the organisations are getting more and more similar trying to satisfy and fulfil the dominating values and perception of its surroundings. Change then often happen like imitation where organisation imitates other organisations that are considered as the best. Either way, organisational changes are seen as a reflection of the changes which exists in the environments. When preferences, utility curves and perceptions on whats hot and whats not changes, organisations also change and there exist an interpretation that the process of change is a change for something better or together with the relations to society (Ibid.). The evolutionary model could also exist, whereas outside changes transfers into organisations, and the change in the organisation reflects the changes in the environment. Overall changes in this model adapts to changes in the environment, where the central aspect is that the changes are not something that the organisation can control (Ibid.). 3.1.4. Change as dialectic process and power battle This model gets its inspiration from the fact that the development of the society happens through a confrontation between different parties. Change is a result of a power battle between different interests, where a hypothesis meets an anti hypothesis and ends up as something new - a synthesis. This can be seen at an organisational level, where the change in the organisation happens because problems are confronted, bases of power are activated and the part that wins changes the organisation after their interests. Politics and power battles, becomes the reason for change, and the result depends on the conflicts and their solutions. In a given point of time there will always be a dominated coalition, which creates a stabile state of mind for the organisation. This coalition creates structures, systems and values, and as long as one accepts that there are different groups of interests, the existence of resistant groups will always be valid. Over time, changes internally in the organisation and the environment may and can affect the base of power. An example of this could be the power balance between employer and employee, depending on weather there are good access for labour supply or not. If the unemployment rate is high and the supply of labour is high, the wages decreases and the 19
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM working terms and conditions for the employees are less attractive, while if you have the opposite situation the wages decreases and the employees have more influence on the terms and conditions that are being settled in relation to employment (Ibid.). One could also look at the situation where the power balance in an organisation is more even, the change in these situations will often appear after negotiation between the different parts, and the outcome will often be a compromise. This could turn out to be a worse outcome than either of the parties wanted and the rational participant could end up in a relatively less rational solution. The dialectic perspective has a less positive fundamental idea, where it is not necessary the best who wins, but rather the strongest one. One example of this could be where a financial company buys up another company with the intention of closing it down and in this way one dispose one of the competitors. It could well be that this organisation is better adapted to the environments and more effective, but it dies because a strong part wants it to. This type of change has been in focus within what we call horizontal integration change happen, but it is not always that this change is for the best (Ibid.).
3.1.5. Change as contingency / coincidence This model looks at change as a result of coincidences something that appears without any life phases, solution to a problem, competition of scarce resources, or politics and power battles. James March quotes: Organisations are in a continuous process of change, routine, practical and respondent, but not always controllable. Organisation seldom do what they been told to do. (Jacobsen, 2004, p. 31).
Behind this statement there is an assumption that organisations are complex units, where there happen many things at the same time without any participants having control or a total overview over the specific situation. A central point in this is uncertainty and ambiguity and on a general basis one can say that change happens when there is a modern (temporary) concurrence of different organisational streams. It is fundamental that humans (participants) meet each other on an arena (a decision opportunity), where everybody has a different set of ideas and ways to solve a problem. Who meets where and when, will determine how the connections of problems and solutions happens. It is not the best solution to the problem that is the main choice, but rather the solutions, which are available at that particular point in time (Jacobsen, 2004). The main point in this model is that it is where and when the different participants connect, which creates the outcome. Which participants who meets at the different arenas of decision will in many cases be quite structured, but it could also be more 20
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM random who meets, and then also how problems and solutions resolves. Change can appear with individuals or groups changing their routines in the daily work. This could be change in systems, structures, routines, which maybe not have the function that the participant wants, so he or she changes it. These small adjustments takes place on an individual level, but summed together it makes a difference in total, for the organisation (Ibid.).
Another source to a more incoherent development in an organisation comes from the number of turnovers some people resign and new ones begin. One should often think that once a new person enter a new position, he or she would do close to the same as the previous did, but research has shown that this is in fact, not true. A position or job will never be totally defined and there will always be room for execution of assessment, which leads to personification of the position in favour of the new employee. On a more aggregated level, organisations often experience big changes when changes in so-called cohorts occur. In periods with a lot of new arrivals it may be that the organisation gets in a large group with one particular education, for example lots of women or men, or many young of age. In this way the power balance between the different groups varies, which often leads to changes in important elements in the organisation. This may be part of a large plan for the company, but in many cases these changes will occur without a plan and without being a solution to a defined problem (Ibid.).
A third source to an incoherent development we can find in undefined structures and a planned change can be seen as a decision process, where one evaluates possibilities and threats, find solutions and implement them. However a more anarchistic view on a decision process challenges this approach whereas we look at the decision process over time with different decision arenas and a set of participants, one could get a larger feature of coherency. This will again depend on who participates, which depends on the formal structure of the organisation who has the right and energy to participate? If a person is occupied with something else, someone else might replace him or her, and this person possibly has other ideas, values and solutions to problems. In this way a change can appear spontaneously without this being an answer to a well-defined problem. The result can be that organisations changes in several levels at the same time, without a united plan. Kjell Arne Rvik says that this looks like multi standard organisations which means that different parts of the organisation has adopted various solutions at different times, so change has happened, just not at the same time and in different ways and parts of the organisation (Ibid.).
21
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM The fourth and last source to incoherent change one may find in the environments. The organisations surroundings are seldom clear and uniform, which leads to interpretation of the environments. When changes are made, this is often based on an assumption on how the surroundings look like and not how they actually are. The change gets engraved by coincidences, more based on what one thinks is necessary not on what really is necessary. This perspective does not stand in direct inconsistency to human choices. Many things of the above mentioned are rational choices, made by individuals, but this does not always mean that it is rational choices in an organisational perspective organisations change, but not according to an implemented plan (Ibid.). 3.1.6. Different models competitive or complementary? Practitioners implies that change has parts of all of the above mentioned aspects and perspectives, but that the reason and explanation behind the different perspectives always will vary from organisation to organisation, from phase to phase and on different levels of analysis some models are better suited for explaining change on a single organisation level, while others are more used at an aggregated point of view (French & Bell Jr., 1999). Second, the models differs in the way they give room for humanly, free action and thinking on the one hand they emphasize for individuals making their own choices and creating something new, while on the other hand this is toned down. All of this can be summarized in the following figure, which entails the different perspective discussed above:
Several Organisations Level of change The single Organisation
Evolutionary
Dialectic
Lifecycles
Technological and Coincedence Non-deterministic
Deterministic
Logic of change Figure 3.1.6: Classification of different changes after change level and logic of change (Jacobsen, 2004, pp. 35)
22
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM This discussion is important because it makes us aware that not all change has to be a result of conscious and planned human choices and actions. Change is a complex phenomenon and can appear in many ways. Further in this text we will focus on the term planned change, which you may find at the bottom-right in the figure above. This means that we will look more closely at single organisations, and less at changes at an aggregated level. It is worth noticing that change as contingency is placed in the same square as planned change this implies that there does not have to be a contradiction between the two perspectives. People are always trying to change organisations, but this does not mean that they always succeed, and sometimes changes can happen as a coincidence, all though the initiative were a planned change contingency and methodical are terms that naturally belongs together (Ibid.).
The literature on the aspect of change only describes techniques and processes on how to achieve change in an organisation, as well as a lot of the models are normative, which means that they tell us something on how things should be or how one should proceed in these situations. One could also say that they are universal, which implies that the models are valid in every organisation and situations. However this is in large contrast to the more normal demands from a scientific point of view, where the foundation of literature is based upon empirical description as to understand why change happens, and also where the importance of context, plays a central role when defining which opportunities one have to generalize the empirical research compared to other situations. Through empirical research on the processes of change and those features that is close to them, one can make some constructive conclusions, and this means that one can achieve a certain knowledge on how to execute a process of change, how one should proceed in the different contexts and situations and also how likely one is to succeed using different models for change in different situations. A theory on planned change has to be complex, because the units one are trying to change, organisations, are complex (Jacobsen, 2004).
In the section above I have tried to explore further the underlying reasons for change and its outcome, were this can be seen as a lifecycle, as an evolution, as a dialectic process and power battle between different parties, and also as a coincidence. These different models and theories contain and say something about what is it that makes people do the change in the organisation or unit they are involved in? Thus, what are the powers behind the change, and how do these powers affect the different organisations. These models needs to explain the change, what it entails and also the magnitude of the change, and one should also expect that 23
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM these models uses the same terms and understanding frames as the theories on organisational stability. It is important to include the context and the situation surrounding the planned change, and its field and culture needs to be defined. One must explain the change process, both in time and which parties that are involved in the change, and also it could be crucial to be open for the fact that there is not necessary compliance between intentions and the actual result of a change (Ibid.).
CHANGE MODELS AND MANAGEMENT
3.2.
The two main models
3.2.1. Kotters eight step model The first model come from functionalism and the classic rational approach to strategic management, where John P. Kotter have developed a eight step model, which needs to be executed in the specific order mentioned below, for the implementation to be successful. The eight steps are as follows:
Establish an experience of necessity:
Investigate the marked and the situation of
competition. Identify possible and potential crisises, and significant opportunities. Provoke any emergency or set unreachable goals, if this is necessary. Change does not happen until at least 75 % of the management in the organisation are convinced that business-as-usual are not acceptable.
Create a governing coalition: Establish a group of people with sufficient competence, knowledge and power, to execute the change. The group conduct several meetings and workshops, where the problems are analyzed and the opportunities are explored. The top manager is always a part of the team.
Develop a vision and a plan: Create a vision which can manage the work of change. The vision should be easy to communicate and attractive to the stakeholders. Formulate plans that can make the vision a reality.
Convey and communicate the change vision: Use every term and conditions to communicate the new vision and the strategies. Use the controlling coalition as role models.
24
Create a fundamental for action on broad basis: remove obstacles in systems, structure and humans, which may block the change. Encourage risk taking and action.
Generate short term benefits: Plan and realizations of fast and visible victories. Reward them who made the victories possible.
Consolidate the results and produce more change: Use the change increased credibility to change all systems, structure and policies that does not harmonize with the vision. Hire and promote employees that live the vision.
Anchor the new approaches in the culture: Achieve new results through successful behaviour and more effective management. Clarify the connection between new behaviour and results. Recruit and develop management after the vision.
Kotters eight step model clearly has relations to Lewins model for planned change and rationalism, as well as to the functionalism rational approach to strategic management. In this way Kotters first four steps can relate to Lewins first phase, and Lewins next phase can be found in Kotters step five to seven, whereas the last eight steps in Kotters model covers the last phase in Lewins model. At the same time many of the fundamentals of the rationalism are found in Kotters model: Change as a planned process, Top-down approach, change agent ( the controlling coalition), data and rationality as basis for decisions. Kotters book were seen as the first qualified text on how to handle resistance to change, which were considered one of the most challenging aspects for leadership in the 90`s. He also introduced new terms like: The burning platform creating a feeling of necessity, the power of the vision, walk the talk management`s visible and symbolic actions, and pick the ripe fruit generation of short term results. Thus, he did not only develop a continuous model, but also development of a new language in relation to change management. At the same time Kotter used culture as an important function to see if the change was in fact a sustainable and persistent change and his view on culture takes basis in the modernistic instrumental approach, where culture is seen as a component which relatively easily can be influenced. Even thought this part of Kotters eight step model were in some degree criticized, especially of the Scandinavian management circuits, his model were still considered as the model of change management (Ibid.). 25
The second model and the visionary / ideological approach to strategic management seeks to be inspired by best practice from other organisations and with this create an attractive vision for the future, which can be the driving force in the organisations strategic development (Guldbrandsen, 2010). The thought of using an ideal or a vision when one creates the future, also influenced the theories on change management, so a new school raised the school of vision. This school seeks to create and develop a vision that attracts stakeholders and the subsequent sale of the vision. The changed focus from the rational to the ideological approach to change is to find in Kotters book Heart of change, where he still holds on to the eight step model and the linear approach it builds on, but he emphasise for that the biggest challenge when change happens, is to get the people to change behaviour. The solution to this is to transfer the focus from rational analyze approach to a more emotional see-feel approach, where the primary source to change the employees behaviour is to create positive feelings. The most important tool to do this is to create a vision with great appeal and a burning platform, which is to feel and touch and that clearly illustrates the seriousness of the situation The important thing in relation to this school of vision, is to be able to sell the change and create assumptions such that the new behaviour can unfold. The model can be used to explain the different phases in a change course and also as inspiration in relation to facilitations to practical measures that can be implemented to support the process of change (Ibid.). The first prediction for support from the employees is that the change makes sense, and for the change to make sense one need to create something that is better than what already existed. How does it look like when the change has become a reality? What do the stakeholders get out of it? And what`s in it for me? In the rational approach to strategic change one emphasized hard analytic thinking and a small dream, whereas in the school of vision it is 80 % the dream that gives the change meaning and that dream creates positive feelings and that positive feeling again is the way to create new paths and changed behavioural patterns. After the vision and the burning platform are conveyed, the next step is to create a safety net so that the employees dare to take the first step into the new an unknown. This contributes to give the employees a good gut feeling and a good safety net could be an education plan, a parent project plan, a study trip or maybe a pilot project. The fourth and last element in this theory is a good audience which are aware of the change process, someone that cheers the first initiatives in the process and that can give feedback when things are not going as planned according to the change plan and schedule. In practice a visible and committed management is an important step in securing an enthusiastic audience, 26
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM while other important elements are internal change agents with a license to act, celebration of targets and successes which have been reached along the way and ongoing dialogue meetings where one share different concerns. This model is called the trapeze model and is often used as inspiration in change situations (Ibid.). 3.2.2. The Appreciative Inquiry (AI) model The second model, or third if one also includes the visionary model to strategic management, is the model based on social constructivism and the AI model. The last years Appreciative Inquiry (AI) has been more and more widespread as a method within social constructivism, which can be used in several classic management tasks including change management. Appreciative stands for the attitudinal foundation or basic principle within the method and symbolizes that what we are focusing on are what we really appreciate and care about, and thereby one can create enthusiasm about the change our successes, strengths and potentials. The principle has its background from the generally recognized and in some degree empirical well-founded psychological principle the Pygmalion effect. Behind this principle there is an assumption which says that the expectations we seek to meet others with, contributes to do them to what they are. For example will positive expectations towards our employees bring out the best in them, and yet the positive expectations are confirmed. In the same way, our negative expectations will influence our actions towards the employees and it will become difficult for them to their positive sides. The conclusion is that; our expectations contributes to create our reality .
The word Inquiry is based on a wish to create a better world for example increase the efficiency, improve the cooperation and/ or increase the quality of the work. The road from the challenge to the action is widely different from the classic approach to problem solving. In the classic problem solving method one uses the basis of past sins to find an optimal solution, by using proven and well documented solutions. In AI one seeks to find a model that uses situations that has worked best and our dreams about the future. The five steps in the 5D circle and AI model, could entail the following elements:
Definition: What is it that we want to promote? The change is being given a motivating headline.
Discovery: In this phase the best moments are explored. When are we closest to achieve what we want to achieve? What do we do when it works best? Which circumstances promote the 27
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM best moments?
Dream: What is it that we dream about? How does it look like when we have reached the goal? How can we be able to determine that this is it? What do we say, feel and do? Can it be measured in some way and what is the first thing we will see when we have reached it?
Design: What can we do to make the dream a reality? How can we create several of the circumstances that form the framework of the best moments? Every possible solution shall be included
Delivery: What do we like to do together and by ourselves? How will we be able to see if we succeeded? When and how should we make up a status, learn and find initiatives?
(Guldbrandsen, 2010).
3.2.3. Change Management Organisations and working places are in continuous change, and these changes occur because of external powers, which are making the organisations adapt to the environment, or internal organisational challenges may appear. Organisational Change can be the result of decreasing productivity, changes in the core production or organisational structure. It is natural to separate between planned change and change as a reaction to the surroundings or internally within the organisation. A common model for change management is to see the process dynamically, like a conceptual business model (Busch & Vanebo, 2003). The models point of view is that the company consists of different subsystems;
1. The Behavioural System, 2. The Transformation System 3. The Leader System, and 4. The Coalition System
In addition to this it lays institutionalized and technical surroundings, such as regulations and practice, related to the Coalition system. Change within a subsystem, will effect and create change in the other systems. Change Management as a term conception and ideology lays in the breaking point between these systems. Jacobsen (2004) uses a coarse bisection in type of 28
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM change strategy, which is likely to be used in change situations, where strategy E and strategy O are the two in focus. The authors imply that the different situations of change have different elements and features and that the situation may appear differently in each case (Jacobsen, 2004).
Beer and Nohrias, the authors of Breaking the Code of Change, represents two fundamental different strategies for change - strategy E represents economy and has a economic rational ideology, where a formal structures and systems are in focus, and also the rate of return to the owners. At the opposite end one find strategy O, which goals are to develop the organisations human resources in a way that they are capable to execute strategies and learn from the experiences one has from earlier change initiatives. Strategy E is a top-down-oriented model for change management, where the management give clear and formal instructions, guidelines and directives during the whole change process. The process is seen as linear and as a fundamental rational process, where one begins the process of change with an analysis of the situation and evaluates the possibilities and limitations. It is important to set clear and defined goals on what the organisation wishes to accomplish / achieve with the change(s), followed by solutions and efforts one wants to use, to gain these specific goals, through the implementation phase (Cummings & Huse, 1989).
Strategy O is, in contrast to strategy E, a bottom-up strategy, which is seen as a development process and the change in this perspective is not necessarily a onetime occurrence including the linear elements one finds in strategy E. However this is a continuously process of development and adaption in a wanted direction to achieve the defined goals. Organisation Development (OD) as a traditional aspect within organisational theory, can be placed in this category. The strategy emphasize for learning and participation from all levels in an organisation and the management does not have to be absent in these situations, but rather delegate responsibility and create commitment amongst the employees on lower levels in the organisation. Legitimacy and influence are in this strategy one of many criteria of success, for achieving the most wanted result (Jacobsen, 2004).
One can further take a look at a third strategy, which can be seen as a more Scandinavian oriented direction, where one finds the tradition of cooperation. This trend has its origin from the 1960`s in Tavistock and the foundation behind the strategy is sosio- technological theory, which builds on a principle on how to see social and technical systems in relations to each 29
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM other. If one of the systems changes without considering the other, this may imply lower efficiency, degenerate quality and increased absence due to sickness etc. To find an optimal solution to a change, both systems needs to be taken into consideration participation and involvement in a process of change are one of the most elderly principles to counteract resistance (Cummings & Huse, 1989).
It could be interesting to compare these strategies with the different sciences we just mentioned in chapter 2.0. Strategy E could be compared to the rational approach, where an economic and rational ideology and approach is in focus, and where one emphasize on structures and systems distributed from a top-down access. Also, since Kotters eight step models clearly has relations to Lewins model, one could also assume that strategy E has in some degree aspects from the classic rational functionalism, where John P. Kotter is seen as one of the most well known authors within change management. The ideological visionary approach within functionalism is harder to place within these strategies, but one could maybe recognize some aspects within strategy O. The vision model seeks to change the employees behaviour with creating positive feelings, whereas this could in some degree be assigned with strategy O`s bottom-up approach, were the management may create commitment amongst the employees and include all parts of the organisation. However it is important to mention that strategy O is seen as a continuous process of development and adaption in a wanted direction, while the functional vision model still holds on to the linear approach it builds on, but it emphasize more for that the biggest challenge is to get people to change behaviour. Maybe this could be achieved or obtained by involving and committing people to the change? Finally the social constructivism approach is considered, and one can try to identify aspects which can be recognized in the third strategy mentioned above. This strategy is maybe more a combination of strategy E and O, rather than similar to the social constructivism model. However, the strategy is originated from the sosio-technological theory, which seeks to find and recognize social and technical systems in relations to each other. Could this be seen as in organisations there is not only one reality, which are described in the theory of social constructivism? Can it be seen as we create our own reality, by combining the two aspects of social fundamentals and technical systems. Could this be seen as one way of thinking about the social constructivism model, in practice? If it is the right way or not is difficult to know, however, it could be seen as a suggestion on one way of looking at it, and further it is up to other researchers to validate the interpretation of the term social constructivism.
30
3.3.
Comparative models
3.3.1. Organisation Development and Change There are several definition of Organisation Development (OD), but one could be: Organisation development is a planned process of change in an organisation`s culture through the utilization of behaviour science technologies, research and theory (French and Bell Jr., 1999, p. 25).
Several authors agree upon the fact that OD applies behavioural science to achieve planned change, that the target of change is the total organisation or system and that the goals are increased organisational effectiveness and individual development (French and Bell Jr., 1999). Organisation culture and processes are high-priority targets in most OD programs and several authors emphasize achieving congruence among the components of the organisation such as strategy, structure, culture and processes. Porras and Robertson suggest that OD is a package of theories, values, strategies and techniques, and this package gives OD its distinct character compared to other improvement strategies. Bennis calls OD both a response to change and an educational strategy intended to change beliefs, attitudes, values and organisation structure all of these directed toward making the organisation better able to respond to changing environmental demands (Ibid.).
Beer`s definition mentions developing the organisation`s self-renewing capacity a central goal in al OD programs but all the authors agree with the desirability of creating selfrenewing learning organisations. All together the different definitions of OD convey a sense of what organisation development is and do, and they describe in broad outline the nature and methods of OD. It is interesting to mention that there is no set definition of OD and no agreement on the boundaries of the field, that is, what practices should be included and excluded, but these are not serious constrains given that the field is still evolving, and that practitioners share a central core of understanding (Ibid.).
Wendell L. French and Cecil H. Bell Jr. have made their own definition of OD, which includes characteristics that they think are important for the present and future of the field;
Organisation an development is a long-term effort, led by top management, to improve an organisation`s visioning, empowerment, learning, and problem-solving processes, through an ongoing, collaborative management of organisation culture with special emphasis on the culture of intact
31

work teams and other team configuration using the consultant-facilitator role and the theory and technology of applied behavioural science, including action research
(French and Bell Jr., 1999, p.26).
By long-term the authors mean that organisational change and development takes time several years in most cases. There are no quick-fix when it comes to lasting organisational improvement, rather the opposite where one describes improvement as a never-ending journey of continuous change (French and Bell Jr., 1999). The phrase led and supported by top management indicates an imperative: Most OD programs that fail do so because top management were ambivalent, lost its commitment, or became distracted with other duties. To avoid this, top management must lead and actively encourage the change effort. Organisational change is hard, serious business; it includes pain and setbacks as well as successes, and the top management must initiate the improvement journey and be committed to seeing it through (Ibid.).
Visioning processes are these processes through which organisation members develop a viable, coherent and shared picture of the nature of the products and services the organisation offers, the ways those goods will be produced and delivered to the customers, and what the organisation and its members can expect from each other. Visioning can be defined as creating a picture of the desired future that includes salient features of the human side of the organisation and then working together to make that picture a reality (Ibid.). Empowerment processes in this definition is meant as those leadership behaviours and human resource practices that enable the organisation members to develop and use their talents as fully as possible toward individual growth and organisational success. By empowerment, they mean involving large numbers of people in building the vision of tomorrow, developing the strategy for getting there, and making it happen it is crucial that the empowerment must be built into the very fabric of the organisation, this means its strategy, structure, processes and culture (Ibid.).
The newt aspect of the definition is learning processes, which are those interacting, listening and self-examining processes that facilitate individual, team and organisational learning. Peter Senge describes learning organisations as:
..organisations where people continually expand their capacity to create the result they truly desire,
32

where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together
As Argyris advises, people and organisations must avoid the trap of defensive routines, those habitual reactions that prevent embarrassment and threat, but also prevent learning.
By problem-solving processes they mean the ways organisations members diagnose situations, solve problems, make decisions, and take actions on problems, opportunities, and challenges in the organisation`s environment and its internal functioning. Further they believe that solutions to problems are enhanced by tapping deeply into the creativity, commitment, vitality and common purposes of all members of the organisation, in contrast to having only a select few involved. To create the best climate for effective problem solving by all the organisation`s members they suggests a compelling, widely shared vision of a desired future and empowerment means involving people in problems and decisions letting them be responsible for results (French and Bell Jr., 1999).
By ongoing collaborative management of the organisation`s culture they mean, first, that one of the most important things to manage in organisations is the culture: the prevailing pattern of values, attitudes, beliefs, assumptions, expectations, activities, interactions, norms, sentiments and artefacts. Secondly, managing the culture should be a collaborative business with widespread participation in creating and managing a culture that satisfies the want and the needs of the individuals at the same time that it fosters the organisation`s purposes. Collaborative management of the culture means that everyone, just not a small group, has a stake in making the organisation work. In the same way that visioning, empowerment, learning and problem-solving processes are opportunities for collaboration, so is managing the culture. Including culture prominently in the definition, affirms our belief that culture is the bedrock of behaviour in organisation and the reciprocal influence among culture, strategy, structure and processes makes each important, and each influences the other. However, culture is of primary importance and Edgar Schein defines culture as follows:
Culture now be defined as (a) a pattern of basic assumptions, (b) invented, discovered, or developed by a given group, (c) as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaption and internal integration, (d) that has worked well enough to be considered valid, and therefore (e) is to be taught to
33

new members as the (f) correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems
In short, culture consist of basic assumptions, values and norms of behaviour that are viewed as the correct way to perceive, think and feel that is why culture change is necessary for true organisational improvement (Ibid.). The definition place further consideration to organisational processes, how things get done, where they highlight the importance of visioning, empowerment, learning and problemsolving processes. Processes are relatively easy to change, so they are the place OD often begin getting people to change the way they do things, but change becomes permanent when the culture changes and people accept the new ways as the right ways. So when the culture promotes collaboration, empowerment and continuous learning the organisation is bound to succeed (Ibid.).
Intact work teams and other configurations recognize that teams are central to accomplish work in organisations teams are the basic building blocks of an organisation, and when teams function well, individuals and the total organisation function well. To ensure effectiveness team culture can be collaboratively managed and the most prevalent form of teams in organisations is intact work teams consisting of superior and subordinates with a specific job to perform. Team building and role and goal clarification interventions are standard activities in OD programs directed toward intact work team. However, in many organisations today the intact work teams operate without a boss in the traditional sense the teams manage themselves. These self-managed teams assume complete responsibility for planning and execution of work assignments and the different members are trained in competencies such as planning, maintaining quality control, and using management information. One can see that over time, self-directed teams control performance appraisals, hiring, firing and training, and the results are highly gratifying both for the team members and for the organisation (Ibid.).
One can see an increase in use of ad hoc teams that perform a specific task and disband when the task is completed, and the method for getting this complex task done is to assemble a cross-functional team comprised of members from all the functional specialities required to get the job done, such as design, engineering, manufacturing and procurement. The old method for solving these particular tasks has been to have functional specialists work on the 34
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM problem sequentially when one function is finished with its part of the project they pass it on to the next functional unit. This method resulted in loss of energy, wasted time, much rework and considerable antagonism among the separate functional specialists. Tom Peters uses the terms multifunctional projectization and horizontal systems to describe these teams and their work and further he predicts that temporary, multifunctional, constantly shifting teams will be the dominant configuration for getting work done. His thesis Liberation Management describes that contemporary bureaucratic structures with their functional specialities and rigid hierarchies are all wrong for the demands of today`s fast-paced marketplace. The phrase using the consultant facilitator role implies that leaders can benefit from seeking professional assistance in planning and implementing OD initiatives. The services of a third-party consultant-facilitator are desirable in early stages of the OD and its role is powerful; that person is typically seen as bringing objectivity, neutrality and expertise to the situation. Also the third party is not captive to the culture of the unit undertaking the program and this need for objectivity does not mean that the third party cannot be a member of the organisation, rather it means that he or she should not be a member of the particular unit initiating the OD effort (Ibid.).
By the theory and technology of applied behavioural sciences they mean insights from the sciences dedicated to understanding people in organisation, how they function and how they can function better. OD applies knowledge and theory and therefore in addition to behavioural sciences, such as psychology, social psychology, sociology, applied disciplines such as adult education, psychotherapy, social work, economics and political science make contributions to the practice of OD.
The last comment is about action research, whereas the participative model of collaborative and iterative diagnosis and taking action in which the leader, organisation members and OD practitioner work together to define and resolve problems and opportunities. This extensive applicability of this model in OD could contribute to another definition, such as: organisation improvement through participant action research (French & Bell Jr., 1999, p.29).
All of the above mentioned characteristics of organisation development depart substantially from traditional consultation models; this can be illustrated below where Schein identifies three basic models of consultations: 35
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM 1. Purchase of expertise model in this model a leader or a unit identifies a need for information or expertise the organisation cannot supply, and hires a consultant to (a) survey customers or employees about some matter, (b) find out how other organisations organize certain units, or (c) search out information such as the marketing strategy of a competitor, and then the consultant makes recommendations. 2. Doctor-patient model in this model a leader or a group detects symptoms of ill in a unit, or in the organisation, and employs a consultant to diagnose what is causing the problem or problems. The consultant, like a physician, then prescribes a course of action to remedy the ailment. 3. Process consultant model in this model the consultant work with the leader and group to diagnose strengths and weaknesses, and to develop action plans. The consultant assists the client organisation to become more effective in diagnosing and solving problems. The first two of these models depict traditional management consulting and the third model is more typical of OD consulting, whereas the clients receive help in the way they think and how they are solving problems. The consultant suggests general processes and procedures and helps the clients generate valid data and learn from them in short, the OD consultant is an expert on process how to structure effective problem solving and decision making (French & Bell Jr., 1999).
In this section i have tried to define the term organisation development and change. There exists several definitions, but the one explained here is from the authors W.L. French and C. H. Bell Jr., where they have sought to find a well suited definition that could be used for today`s and future organisations, seeking to understand the process of change and organisation development. They involve terms like visioning, empowerment, learning and problem-solving processes, which are all processes that needs to be seen in a long-term aspect and also led by the top management. They emphasize for the importance of managing the culture, and that this should be a collaborative business with widespread participation, that satisfies both the needs of the individuals as well as the purpose and goals of the entire organisation. They recognize that the work teams are the building blocks of an organisation, and when these function well, so does the entire organisation. To achieve this one may use team building, but also role and goal clarification for each individual or team, even though in some organisations today there exists self-managed teams, which also could function well. Theory and technology of applied behavioural sciences, together with action research helps us 36
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM to understand the people in the organisation, how they function and also how they can function better, and how they can work together to define and resolve, both problems and opportunities. At the end of the section, some models for managing change are displayed, where Schein seeks to give us an understanding on the differences between the traditional approach to organisation development and change, and the OD approach to this, whereas we can see that in the traditional approach the consultant or the outsider only makes recommendations, while in the OD approach he or she works together with the a group to solve problems and be more effective (Ibid.). Further this can be compared to the AI model and Kotters eight step model, whereas one may say that some of the terms in the OD definition could be linked to Kotters model, while other aspects are more similar to the AI model. The long-term aspect, even the time aspect in general, is absent in both Kotters model and the AI model, while the aspect where the change should be led by the top management is more similar to Kotters model. This could also be the case with aspect like visioning and, to some degree, the learning an problem-solving processes, whereas Kotters model focus on finding problems and obstacles in the past, so that one may avoid these in the future, and also that the top management or a group of the top management together with the a change agent should lead the change process. Also the vision aspect is to be recognized in Kotters model, but maybe even more in the second model of functionalism, the ideology - visionary approach / model. However, there is some features that are more similar to the AI model, such as where they emphasize for that the work teams and the employees are the building blocks for the organisation, they want to let everybody participate in the change, and they focus on understanding how the people behave this could be a key component to implement the change, both in the AI model and within OD, because one understand peoples emotions and may use them in a way that could make them understand the change better, with no or less resistance. Compared to the traditional models described above, one may think that the OD approach is more similar to Kotters eight step model, however, when one look at an overall view of the definition of OD, done by French and Bell Jr., one might get the impression of that this is more similar to the AI model, whereas human aspect, team involvement and cultural aspect are taken more into consideration.
3.3.2. Total Quality Management (TQM) Quality management has a resultant impact on organisational behaviour, where one needs to redefine quality programmes as a major determinant of organisational change. The implementation of quality programmes often leads to major change within an organisation, 37
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM and this change may be studied at a variety of levels (Almaraz, 1994). At an organisational level this implementation could represent a strategic move to be more competitive. And at a unit level, one can see that different units or teams are made to maintain the different goals on quality and that these units or teams are empowered through the quality paradigm. The key determinants for success, from top managers and down to the various employees, are the issue of resistance to change and the institutionalization of quality concepts, and at all levels, the successful implementation of a quality programme requires top management commitment (Ibid.). The authors hope that sampling of quality management research, both conceptual and empirical, will focus our attention on the magnitude as well as the profound relevance of organisational research possibilities within the quality management paradigm. They emphasize that such research is needed to show the relationship between quality management programmes and organisational behaviour and change this information has great value for both those practitioners trying to implement quality programmes and also for those researchers trying to focus their effort on the most relevant issues in their organisational research (Ibid.).
The evolution and development of the quality management programmes is not typical of a traditional organisational research issue and the result is that many organisational researchers have ignored the behavioural side of the quality phenomenon. Operations researchers have provided some valuable insights into the degree of implementation of quality programmes, as well as some instrument and theory development. However, the issues of organisational behaviour (top management commitment and the impact of organisational change) receive only cursory attention in this research (Ibid.).
One can often find resistance to change when new ways of thinking and doing things occur, and this is a phenomenon often studied in organisational research. It is also ironic that this phenomenon is to be found among the organisational researchers themselves and the support for research on quality comes from a surprising source the business community. A second factor inhibiting research on quality is the fact that the implementation of quality programmes on an organisational level represents a paradigmatic shift, from the traditional form of management to a new a more team based leadership version. The need to work together in teams, at all levels of the organisation, including cross functional, is vital to organisational survival. Change of such kind and magnitude is not incremental, but rather a frame braking change in organisational functioning and organizing, making it both difficult to 38
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM implement and study (Ibid.).
One aspect that could make this implementation process easier could be to define the quality construct. It inhibits the research on quality, because the term quality has a multi-faced nature, where there are two cognitive definitions, based on perceptions of individuals assessing quality of a product or service, and three definitions are concrete in terms of operationalising the meaning of the quality and the ease of comparison with other organisations. The value based definition of quality is viewed in terms of cost and prices the provision of a product or service at acceptable cost or price. The determination of value is a subjective judgement on the part of the consumer and this is the anchor of the majority of research in the service sector exploring the gaps between perceived expected value and actual value. The last three definitions, mentioned above, are most heavily utilized in the writings of the operations management literature and quality gurus such as Deming (1986), Juran (1998) and Crosby (1984). The three definitions are more specified below:
(1) User-based definition Quality is measured by the degree to which the wants and needs of customers are satisfied. (2) Product-based definition Quality refers to the amount of desired attributes obtained in the product. (3) Manufacturing-based definition quality is measured by the percentage of scrap or rework required during the production process. (Alamaraz, 1994, pp.8-9) Given these different definitions on quality the generalisation of research on quality is very low and whenever researchers talk about improving quality it is most likely that they refer to different aspects of quality (Ibid.).
Another aspect of the quality term is that, while quality programmes have existed in organisations for quite some time, research on quality issues has lagged far behind. The authors suggest that the implementation of quality programmes invariably leads to changes in the organisation, affecting people, tasks, technology and structure. The question is whether we can infer a causal relationship between quality management and organisational culture? What is the relationship of management to organisational change? This discussion of quality management in the context of organisational change theory is to be discussed further below in the text (Ibid.). 39
Total Quality Management (TQM) refers to a management process directed at establishing organized continuous process improvement activities, involving everyone in an organisation in a totally integrated effort towards improving performance at every level (Alamaraz, 1994). There are a lot of organisations which have experienced that their survival is dependent on making major changes now, but to achieve the level of cultural change required by TQM is not an overnight process, such a change must be planned and carefully implemented. It is said that change of this magnitude and complexity is not adequately defined by traditional stage models of change, so there is a great need for more research on this matter. Earlier, change theory focused on only one organisational subsystem, such as the human and technological subsystems. However when we now have reached the twentieth century, organisations and their environment have become increasingly complex, as well as the types of changes that occur. The text implies that:The study of TQM in organisations provides a valuable opportunity for research on the complexity of change and the chance for theory development on frame braking change and, further it defines major organisational change as:non-routine, non-incremental, discontinuous change which alters the overall orientation of the organisation and / or its components (Alamaraz, 1994, pp. 10). These components depict the interconnection of people, task, technology and structure, where a major change can happen in any of these four components. The magnitude of the change will be such that all components will make some adjustments to the change, and may in fact incur major changes as a result. Again these changes will affect the culture of the organisation the values, the beliefs, and the expectations of organisation members, and will transform the organisation. There is a great need for focusing on change theory research on the radical, transformational changes occurring in organisations and both scholars and practitioners have a need to know what the implications of such changes are, how to design and implement such changes and what leadership qualities are required for success (Ibid.).
As we have mentioned earlier, it is well known that people are, for the most part, resistant to change of any kind and this is especially true when it comes to transformational change. There are a lot of new factors that must be included, such as fear for the unknown, habit, the possibility of economic insecurity, threats to social relationships, and failure to recognize the need for change. In these situations organisation leaders must step in to facilitate acceptance for the change (ibid.).
40
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM One can also question how the organisation looks at present situation and how it is expected to look after the change and the importance of identifying organisational parameters prior to the change is a vital aspect of the process in total. Depending on the existing culture and the degree to which a change, such as TQM, differs from that culture, an organisation may be more or less ready for such a change. It is important to create a need for change; in effect, opening up the organisational culture to be receptive to the change. This is particularly difficult when there are no apparent crises or reason for the change, but rather the long-range vision of a leader who anticipates the time it takes to implement organisational change. If the vision of a leader differs from the values and beliefs of the existing organisational culture, resistance to change is especially relevant, and this part of the process is easy to overlook in major change efforts. If the organisational culture fails to assimilate the vision and its implications, desired change will never become accepted by the organisation members, and will ultimately fail (Ibid.).
It is further important to look at the aspect of leadership when discussing transformational change, which often occur in the implementation of quality programmes. Traditional change theory focuses on the manager of the day-to day operations, while newer theories emphasize for focus on the leaders of transformational change. However, researchers have not implemented or incorporated leadership theories into their discussion (Ibid.). Another important aspect on this matter is the commitment from the top management it is them who allow quality improvements to occur in an organisation. Sometimes it is important to address the managers beliefs and values, in order to support and nourish a new cultural reality represented by quality. The authors say that as quality moves from a process of inspections of finished products to a continuous process, which permeates all facets of the organisation, the importance of these to aspects, top management commitment and issues of organisational culture, cannot be underestimated. If one present quality management as a determinant of organisational change, many questions arise which address change theory, organisational behaviour and organisational research. One can say that the quality management paradigm easily fits within the bounds of organisational research and lends itself neatly to questions suited for theoretical exploration and empirical testing. The outcome of this could greatly advance our knowledge and could provide practitioners with something of true value (Ibid.). Further one would define quality programmes as determinants of major organisational change, and in this way we can address some of the challenges the organisation can face when dealing with quality programmes, whereas three issues are mentioned below: 41
1. Quality as a strategic choice. The goal of these programmes is to have a positive impact in the areas so designated for improvement and they are implemented in many different forms in terms of process, product and customer satisfaction. The decision of quality implementation has moved from the quality assurance level of inspections into the boardroom of top management and executives, who seek to integrate quality into the strategic game plan of the organisation and in this matter it is important to consider the organisational context in which quality management decisions are being made (Alamaraz, 1994). Further definition on strategy will be described in section 3.4.2.
2. The team concept. The Total Quality Programme (TQM) in U.S. organisations, can be described as frame breaking change, because quality facilitates a move from the more traditional, individualistic structure of American organisations to one in which emphasis is placed on teamwork. However, to achieve this level of culture change needed by TQM is not an easy and overnight process, and needs to be planned and carefully implemented. Several authors points out the systemic orientation of quality programmes, arguing for the need to align performance management systems with the team-based philosophy of quality programmes and also a special technique, namely self-managed work teams, where they discuss the benefits ( and problems) which may result from these choices (Alamaraz, 1994).
3. Implementation of Quality programmes. One can say that implementation refers to the front-end effort to operationalise some aspects of quality, where this could be in terms of the product or service itself, the process of creating such a product or service, or even the perception customers have regarding the product and or services. The implementation of such quality programme focused on any of these dimensions may be short term and immediate and such efforts can easily be measured and recorded. A former study, made by Steven Sommer and Deryl Merritt, presents an empirical study of TQM in health care and this study is indicative of the professionals empirical research that quality programmes may produce, and shows the value of TQM possible even in the short term (Almaraz, 1994).
From these lines, mentioned above, we know that the issue of quality exists in most 42
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM organisations in some degree and the decision to implement a quality programme has become a necessity for many organisations and firms. In relation to this drive or necessity, the way in which the top management chooses to support such a new programme will determine its ultimate success. The issue of quality management and change place quality management in the realm of organisation development, and even within organisational behaviour (Ibid.).
Development and adaption of a new reality implies implementation skills and management of new actuality politics and structure. This is part of the core in the change management discipline and formulations of new goals, acknowledgement of actual state / condition and plans for how one can achieve the new and wanted reality are important aspects in this process. One can use the change as a tool for redefining and implementation of the new reality and the main task for the management is to realize new intensions for the future and implementation of new ideas in the organisations (Hennestad, Revang, & Strnen, 2006). One of the main points emphasized by Hennestad, Revang og Strnens is the inadequate reliance on implementation in practical good executed change management. The authors implies that many good change projects begins with good intensions and lustily courage, but often fail when this is not followedup in a correct way after the start-up. There are a lot ways on how to approach change, some changes can give large organisational changes, while others can be of a less size and character. Information regarding why and how one intend to change to reach the goal are things that needs to be clear early in the process and should be valid in every change situation. Information and communication to all affected / involved members of the organisation, is a postulation if the process should go smoothly and efficiently. In most change processes it is usual to put up a time line for planning, execution / implementation and a finalization or closure, where this time limit is a hypothetically wanted scenario for the process. However, a few of all change processes begins and ends at a certain point in time and it can be difficult to visualize the entire process before it starts, which again emphasize for a competent management. The ability to predict, react and take action during the process plays a central role and can be defined as change competence (Hennestad, Revang, & Strnen, 2006). 3.3.2.1. Strategy There is not a simple, easy and accepted definition of strategy and the practitioners uses the term in different manners and situations. Some include goals into the definition of strategy, while others separate strategy and goals, and further one will try to explain what strategy is, more than making a correct definition of it (G.Roos, G. Von Krogh, J. Roos & L. Fernstrm, 43
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM 2007). In normal terms, one can say that a strategy is a continuous line of planned actions, planned and executed to reach a certain goal. The strategy is always made on advance and is often documented in a plan. Different tools and framework have been used during the last years to help understand the development of strategy and how it affects the daily operations of the organisations. Henry Mintzberg is one of the most known researchers within this area, and he emphasizes strategy not just as a plan, but also as a continuous process. He means that just to focus on the plan can mislead the organisation and give a wrong picture of the total situation (Ibid.). Mintzberg has developed a framework which is called the five P`s within strategic theory and includes: Plan Ploy Pattern Position Perspective
One can also look at strategy as generic approaches, whereas we have four very different ones to consider further on. These four approaches have different perceptions on what strategy is, what it contains and predicts, together with implications for practical management (Whittigton, 2002). The classic and traditional approach represents a rational, objective and sequential approach, predicted as a universal norm. It seek to maximize profit and focus on internal planning, the process is analytic, the main influence is economic and / or military systems and it has its origin from the 1960`s. Both the evolutionary and processual approach are more sceptic and doubt the strategists abilities to control and manage the strategy effectively in an rational and hierarchical way. According to the evolutionists changes in the environment are too fast and unpredictable, so that the strategy is to survive and try to have every possibilities open. The approach appeared in the 1980`s and focus on the external marked with a Darwinistic process and where it has its influence from economy and biology. The processual approach one can find in the opposite end, whereas they seek a patient strategy with incremental adaption and maintenance of core competencies. They focus on internal politics and knowledge, the process consists of negotiation and learning and their main source of influence is psychology. The last approach is the system theoretical perspective which has more relativistic perceptions where they mean that the strategies goals
44
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM and terms depends on the social systems characteristics. They focus on the external society, whereas the process is social, the main source of influence is sociology and it has its origin from the 1990`s (ibid.). From these approaches one can better understand the different choices countries and cultures have made, when considering business strategy. The different contradictions, such as the capitalistic America and the communistic Middle East can contribute to a wider understanding of the different structures in marked economies and their several connections to the rest of the society. Both success and failure, for example for the Asian countries have made us aware of the different social structures that are the foundation of their business systems and strategies. Even in the Western countries, with the privatization, different approaches has made organisations compete more with each other, while they are being driven by social and economic motives and also dependent upon resources outside the marked. The profit maximizing entrepreneurs and high-competition markets are not the only thing the strategists need to handle and struggle with, whereas a strong and competitive strategy in complex environments demands a system theoretical sensitivity for the magnitude and diversity in todays economic practice (Ibid.).
In this section I have looked at Total Quality management (TQM) as a way of making and implementing change, where this implementation seek to help the organisation be more competitive, and that the quality is maintained and increased through different units or teams on different levels of the organisation. Resistance to change and the institutionalization of quality concepts, and top management commitment are the key determinants for success, and different authors emphasize for more research related to the relationship between quality management programmes, and organisational behaviour and change. The reason for this enthusiasm for the quality management programme is the lack of research and interest within the behavioural side of the quality aspect. There are several definitions of quality that are being used, but the question is whether we can make a causal relationship between quality management and organisational culture? This discussion of quality management in the context of organisational change theory leads us to TQM, which is a management process directed to establish organized continuous process improvement activities, involving everyone in an organisation in a totally integrated effort towards improving performance at every level. This is a large change, and with the complexity of both the today`s organisations and its environments, this is not something that comes easily. We therefore seek to find quality as a strategic choice, as a part of a team concept and where implementation of quality programmes may foster both short and long term results (Ibid.). If one should further link the TQM to the 45
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM main models, one could start with mentioning that there is a similarity to Kotters model concerning the change as a strategic choice, where a strategy could be seen as a clear goal and that there is a meaning with the change, which is the third step of Kotters model. However, considering change as a part of a team concept is more similar to the AI model, whereas Kotters model seems to emphasize more for individuals who support the change and live the change. The last concept of TQM concerning change focus on the implementation of quality programmes on a long and short basis. This is an aspect that separates a bit from the two main models, whereas quality is something that have not been brought up, and also the time aspect is just mentioned i Kotters model, where the focus in on a short term basis, while the AI model does not mention the time aspect at all.
THE CULTURAL ASPECT
3.4.
National cultures and demand of management
It is the rapid pace of change that makes us aware of different cultures and fundamental management theory, where new technological changes result in unforeseen consequences and where the different cultures and organisation dont change values and beliefs united (Strand, 2004). The inter connections with strangers can create confusion and unexpected contradictions, which may not be surprising considering the different and underlying values, beliefs and behaviour that the different cultures and nationalities represents. The culture gives an implication on how we understand and approach things, both regarding communication and how organisations are being structured. In addition, we find different types of management and leadership, and how these are implemented and executed. It is this question together with cultures one wants to examine further on this text, where one can take a look at different frames of interpretation, that is, different national cultures (Ibid.).
The phenomenon of culture is difficult to handle and the practitioners do not agree upon the contents of the term. One can say that culture is a common expression for a fundamental set of perceptions, which in great terms is common for, for example a nation, and affects the behaviour of the people included in this case, an organisation and its management. As a careful definition on can say that features of culture is presumptions and understandings, which is common for the majority of the nation, where they are being learned and transferred and in this term are relatively continuous and permanent. There can also be an emotional side
46
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM to culture and especially when its being challenged , and it is very often not spoken of, but a useful understanding is that it says something about the communication between the members of the nation. One understand the spoken words and the meaning behind it, one act in ways that is understandable for other members, it gives implications on whats good and whats bad and, it gives the possibility to draw a line between members, where one have us and them. Cultures are also connected to professions, regions and gender and one will further try to explain cultures and the differences between them. In this attempt one want to try to find dimensions where one can measure abilities, which can be called characteristics for each culture. Some anthropologists suggest that there are fundamental problems in every society which needs to be handled and made a common attitude towards, whereas the sum of this can be called culture (Ibid.). These are as follows:
The individual: Does one presume that the individual is good or evil, or both? Do they have the possibility to choose freely and are they to be trusted? The relationship to nature: Do the human beings have a dominating relationship to nature, or do they live in harmony and partly submission? Are there powers which shouldnt be challenged and are there destiny determined lifelines? The relationship to others: Does one relate to people like they are individuals or members of a group? Can decisions be made by individuals or does one need an agreement from a group? Can people be hired because of documented experience and competencies or due to family relations or friendship? Are the members of the society worth the same or is it an apparent hierarchical structure? Activity: What is the fundamental set of activities working to achieve goals or working as a limited and natural part of life? Is the meaning with life to do something or to be someone? Is it possible to achieve results with extra effort and is it possible to control the universe? Space: Is the physical space around us limited, or is it for everybody, public? Is this united, or are there several mixed and shifting forms? In Western cultures it is normal to have meetings in large rooms behind closed doors, while in other cultures decisions are made in less formal surroundings with a larger set of openness regarding space. Time: Are one oriented with the past, present or future? In some cultures one can experience resistance to long-term goals and commitments, where as profits gain on a short basis seems more reasonable. Others could have long-term goals and plans, or be strongly occupied with the past. The attitude towards time as a regulating dimension of behaviour, also varies between cultures. Timely precision and punctuality are seen as polite in the North of Europe, 47
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM while in the Latin countries and Africa one will experience a whole different attitude towards time (Ibid.).
Research on culture does not show us a systemised picture, but instead show some contrasts and one can illustrate culture as a sort of pattern of society deposits in three phases The traditional the modern or industrial and the post modern. These forms of culture will vary with the different dimension mentioned above, and one can with this, characterize states of cultures in societies, both in geographical space and time. Geert Hofstede has made an effort in characterize and classify national cultures based on four chosen, statistical determined dimensions: Individualism, distance of power, uncertainty avoidance and feminism.
Stabile and common frames of performances, which we call cultures, exist in several levels:
1. A national level considering which country one comes from. Not every country has a united culture 2. A regional and ethnical / religious / language level, whereas most countries exist of regions and other different groups of people. 3. A level of gender if one are born female or male 4. A social class level related to the level of education possibilities and the persons profession. 5. An organisational level for those in labour, and that has responsibility for the way employees are being socialized where they work.
One can also identify features of culture in different levels and depths, where at the bottom one can find continuous presumptions that are not spoken of just know to members of the certain culture. This could be trust, relations to others, time and the meaning of other surrounding elements, like values. The next level, closer to the surface, one can find the ways in which we communicate, this could be buildings, rituals, heroes and other symbols representing the culture. These features can be difficult to interpret depending on if one knows the deep lying features of the culture, or not (Ibid.).
3.4.1. The four dimensions Geert Hofstede has made an effort to classify and measure different cultures against each other, where he has done two surveys with at total of 116000 schemes in 53 countries, spread 48
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM all over the world (Strand, 2004). It is the personnel at the sales and service department at every level, that have answered the questions and due to the control over the technology, procedures and the set of genders on the respondents, one could find the national differences. With help from factor analysis Hofstede could identify four fundamental dimensions which can contribute to separate between the different national cultures. These dimensions are:
1. Distance of power 2. Uncertainty avoidance 3. Individualism versus collectivism 4. Masculinity versus femininity
Further, one will try to give a closer description to the four dimensions, whereas the first one is distance to power. This dimension is an expression for how much the culture allows a superior to execute power. In cultures with high distance to power it is fundamental and normal to empower and protect the role of the powerful ones, while others will be looked at with suspicion because they could be a possible threat to the powerful position. Domination and dependency are the fundamentals for co-operations. High distance to power is typical for countries like Asia, Africa and the Latin countries. However, in a culture with low distance of power, like Norway and Israel, one will have a more collegial relationship and a common perception that the differences should be minimal. Trust is the fundament for cooperation, and leaders cannot show others the power they posses. This culture is typical for the Northern European countries (Ibid.).
The uncertainty avoidance dimension describes to which degree a culture encourage taking risks. All organisations have to deal with changes and uncertainties in the environment and try to learn and adapt to these. This happens in every country, but Hofstede has found that there are some variation to which the different countries cope with this. Countries where one strongly avoids uncertainties, like Greece and Portugal, people feel threatened and nervous towards uncertain situations. This state of mind can be defined by hard work, job safety and intolerance for aberrancy. One seeks to honour absolute values and show great respect for, for example, age and one has a strong need for formal rules. In countries that has a lower need to avoid uncertainty, like Norway and Denmark, one does not need the same amount of formal rules to avoid experiences of anxiety (Ibid.).
49
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM Individualism versus collectivism is a dimension which measures how cultures emphasize for individualists compared to collectives or group needs. In individualistic cultures, like USA and Great Brittan, identity is often strongly connected to what the individual are and what they do. It is expected that they take care of themselves and the family, and that effort and performance are being rewarded. Everybody has the right to their opinion and private life, and can only have one determined, calculated relationship to work. In collective cultures, like Pakistan and Peru, the social relations are closer and the people are members of big families, which protect them i exchange for loyalty. They emphasize for affiliation and the goal is to be a good member, while in the individualistic perspective the ideal is to be an outstanding individualist (Ibid.).
The last dimension is regards to masculinity and femininity. In the masculine cultures, like Australia, Japan and Italy, performance is the only thing that counts. Money and material standards and ambitions are the driving force. It is beautiful to be big and fast, manliness is sexy and there is a clear distinguish between male and female activities and attitudes. In feminine cultures, like the Netherlands and the Northern countries, life quality is the most important aspect, together with people and environment, and the relationship to others is a motivational factor. Small-scale and unisex are attractive. In masculine cultures gender roles are separated, the men are dominating and ongoing, while the women are set to be caregivers. A dominating woman is not seen as feminine. In the feminine cultures gender roles are more flexible and one beliefs in similarity between the genders, in principal. The men can also be caregivers and the state should be more oriented towards inner and outer help tasks, and less towards power assertion (Ibid.).
Hofstede groups the 53 cultures in clusters, which means groups of countries which are most alike regarding some factors, and different compared to other factors. He makes a world map over the different cultures, where he claims to find eight groups. In Europe there are three; one Germanian, one Anglo-saxian and one Nordic group. In the Asian countries he also finds three groups, whereas Japan might be a special case. Within the Latin countries, but also Europe, he establishes two groups. Later studies give an additional two groups, East- and Vest-Africa. Hofstede`s dimensions are expressed, in the different culture, through school systems, relations at the work place and how the governmental organisation reduces or increases, for example, the distance of power. The Scandinavian countries, together with the Netherlands, have very low distance to power, average collectivism / individualism, a high 50
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM degree of feminism and average low degree of uncertainty avoidance (ibid.).
As it is described above, it is difficult to explain what culture could be and is in relation with organisation forms and management styles, and it is difficult to give an exact connection between the different aspects. However, as some organisation forms are more typical or normal in certain national and regional cultures, one can say that there is coherence between culture and which organisational structure that is preferred. Cultures probably gives some fundamental ground stones on how one should organize and structures a company, and also how management and authority are executed within the organisation / country. One can see this due to the different organisation forms emerging and operating in the different geographical areas and by minorities that bring their traditions and way of living into foreign cultures. As an example, this could be the Chinese bringing their family oriented structure into businesses in San Francisco and Montreal, where they live. French small bakeries, Japanese car manufacturers, Norwegian cooperatives within agriculture and American large enterprises must be understood as a phenomenon within the culture they are a part of (Ibid.). Further, if one wants to find out how culture effects organisations and management, one has to select some dimensions which are considered important and vital to the situation. A good beginning towards this is to imagine where the society and organisations are situated on a scale or dimension from traditional to post modern culture. However, this is not an unambiguous way to characterize an organisation or culture, but with the help of Hofstede`s four dimensions, one gets a map of different organisational and management cultures. Possible examples on how these dimensions are combined can be as described below: Where there is large distance of power and little tolerance for uncertainty an organisation will have many layers and rules, and one example of this could be the French bureaucracy, both in public and private sector. It could be that with this there exists an obesity of such organisation forms, and the management is likely to perform and operate through formal structures, but may at the same time keep distance and retain the privileges. Slightly less distance of power one may find in Germany, but the need for order and rules are still apparent. This gives some conditions for what one may call the German emphasize for expert organisations or professional bureaucracy. Order and quality 51
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM characterize such organisations, and the professional is primarily the one that has the authority to lead and manage. In Nordic countries the less formal leader, who also accepts the womens role, is more typical than in France and Germany. There exist a less need for rules, and organisations will have a more informal character. The last aspect also goes for England, and something that can be compared to group organisations or cooperatives in England, the village market, will be an ingrediance in the organisation life. The management styles are less obvious and clear. In USA the strong individualism is prominent, where the strong leader gets mandate to lead and the masculine qualities are emphasized. The attitude is to handle and deal with much uncertainty. For other reason than mentioned here, American organisations may also be large, but there is room for leadership and management at the same time as there is bureaucratic arrangements and systems.
Cultures seem to contingent not only valid authority forms, but also how economic rational business can or may be executed. Some cultures are closer than others, with many and stabile formal and informal norms. This also gives the basis for exercising authority and the membership in the culture or group can be virtually mandatory. This will, for example, apply to many of the Asian countries, including Japanese business organisations. However, one can imagine cultures and situations where there are fewer and less binding general features of culture that provides a basis for organisation and leadership. A variation that probably occurs occasionally, but usually not referred to in texts about organisation and management, the situation where there are many standards, but it has not formed groups that influence and are included in the standard system. The individuals are fatalistic. Cultures may be, more or less, close and have obvious consequences for the organisation and management style one get, but in general, one perceive it in a way that the culture is not something that surrounds the organisations and management, rather it is within the organisations and management (Ibid.).
We have now seen how the phenomenon culture can be understood as a, more or less, visible connection for organisation and management: Cultures can be understood as basic fundamental common assumptions, values and orientations which are typical within a national area, but does not always apply for all 52
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM and may sometimes have competitors through professions and regions etc. Cultures gives the basis for that particular organisations and leadership forms are the most likely or are preferred by the culture. Cultures can in different scale be controlling for these organisations and leadership forms, and they may also have varied conditions within a culture. The organisations and leadership forms are characterized by the culture the culture lies within them.
Examples on how the culture and the environment, in different scale, affect the organisations are illustrated by combinations of the dimensions institutionalized environment and technical environment. The table below illustrates possible outcomes.
Institutionalized environment Close Technical environment Close Banks Hospitals Courts Looser Schools Social offices Churches Wellness clinics Cafes Day care Looser Industrial
Table 3.4.1 Norms in the environment and organisation forms (Strand, 2004, pp. 212).
This is a way of perceiving cultures or the environment surrounding the organisations in a way that separates between the norms that are incorporated in the environment and the technical solutions that are available and applicable (Ibid.). A hospital will, for instance, be characterized by strong, institutional norms, such as health, care and the patients best interest. At the same time the hospital will practice techniques for diagnosis and treatment. Biochemical and radiographic tests, together with complex technology for treatment constitute a close technological environment. In the other corner of the table, one can find for example day care for children, who are loosely organized with regards to the norms that apply, and not much of technical equipment characterizes the organisation.
53
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM A particularly interesting subject for further studies are the question regarding how different organisations creates links between their own organisation and the network surrounding them, such as suppliers, clients, resources and information, and stakeholders and supporters. Normally, one will find that these connections are rather close and that the organisations cannot exist as something that differs from the norms and the normal possibilities that exists in the environment. An important task for the management will be to find these codes for transaction between the environment and organisation, and negotiate and administrate relations. 3.4.2. Practical differences of culture - a Norwegian perspective. Culture will be the basis for communication - the possibility to keep stable and sensible towards each other. One chooses to see the things that are important to us and one excludes information, which we not perceive as right and important. In this way, culture becomes a way of distinguish ourselves from others and the differences one may see when travelling to other countries, as a part of a student exchanges, trying to co-operate with other states and / or trading across borders. Further, one will try to give some examples on experienced culture features and differences, based on a Norwegian way of thinking ( Strand, 2004).
In Norway, it is a virtue to be as similar to everyone else as possible, and the picture below, is a perfect example of this. This picture show King Olav of Norway taking a trip with the tram during the oil rationing in 1972, whereas he pays a ticket and sits down together with everybody else on the tram (Ibid.).
54
Picture 3.4.2: King Olav takes a ride on the tram in 1972 (NRK, 2005).
Compared to other countries and cultures, like France, Germany, Spain and England, this is quite abnormal, and they use in their language a polite speech form, which has a clear language of expression, such as Sir or Madame. This could create some problems in cultures where one emphasize for such polite name calling, especially when it is virtually absent in modern Norwegian. In France it is normal to use the polite speech form vous for people who one wishes to show a minimum of respect. The personally form tu is only used by very young people and within the family. It is important to keep the formal distance sufficiently big, and especially in France, face-to-face contact is seen as not very desirable. Problems may occur when Norwegians in the face of foreigners do not select the authority they should have had by virtue of their position or power. If for instance a Norwegian with a leader position tells a Pakistanian employee to do a certain thing whenever he has got the time for it, one may experience that the task will not be executed, due to a misunderstanding between the different cultures. The Pakistanian may perceive the weak endorsement as a kind of conversation, and implicit as an expression of weakness, and not as a binding order. The author also confirms that this could be the case for interaction with certain African students, whereas friendly guidance and minimising the rank difference between the professor and the student may be seen as an opportunity to bargain the students see this as a possibility to
55
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM achieve benefits, while the professor thinks he have paved the way for improvement and logical solution of the task. A Norwegian leader may face problems if his communication about duties and tasks are unclear towards Norwegians as well as foreigners. Norwegian will think that a clear voice, rank signs and expression of privileges are inappropriate selection of differences in rights, duties and rank, while this is something that the foreigners are used to and expect. In this way the power of distance dimension would create problems, both at home and away from home (Ibid.).
If one take a look at individualism and collectivism, one can see that there is a major difference between Norway and for example USA, whereas being outgoing and the person of the situation is considered as positive in USA, while in Norway it is more important to be considered, not taking a chance to insult someone or make a fool out of one self. Earlier in the oil industry when Norwegian oil workers worked under American leaders, their methods were seen as direct and though, which in a way could insult the Norwegians. This can be understood and explained by the American values of culture, individualism and a higher degree of masculinity in the way they work. However, in Eastern cultures one can see examples of the opposite, whereas Norwegians are more individualistic oriented and have difficulties with understanding the collective orientations. In collectivistic cultures age is honoured and is being used as characteristic as the most honourable form for membership and must not be defended this applies for most of the non-Western cultures. To change profession or leave a company, we see as a normal thing to do, but in Eastern cultures, with family oriented work structures, this is seen as abnormal and in many cases reprehensible. In Japan, lifelong loyalty to the company is also seen as honourable and obvious, although young Japanese seem to move away from this tendency and more towards individualistic orientation. Likewise, the basis for social inclusion a collective attitude, in some cultures may be expressed by rarely given off on either request. In the East it is normal to smile and express consent, even in cases where the answer would be no in the West. In Arabian societies and in the East Scandinavia one may experience very long preambles before doing business. They talk about family, literature and seemingly irrelevant topics, forever. While the Scandinavians wants to get down to business, the counterpart wants to provide security to create trust between the two parties, and to make sure that the two parties make the business relationship as fruitful as possible. This is done by committing like friends commit to each other, and in this way if one can create close and personal relationship, it is possible to do business. One has then developed its own group and included new members, and a majority 56
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM of people all over the world lives under these circumstances, where this is a natural approach to doing business (Ibid.).
Further, one will talk about uncertainty avoidance in a Norwegian perspective, but indeed compared to other cultures and countries. This is a dimension where Norway separates from other countries, also the other Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands, which are generally more influenced by the continental forms of rank expressions. Japan is a country which has a high degree of uncertainty avoidance, and when they buy Norwegian fish, they send their own inspectors for quality assurance. They have a big need for documentation and confirmation. In Austria one needs to be prepared to document ones status and competency, and also show that one acknowledges others` status. This is also the case in Germany and France. In United Kingdom one may experience that there are other ways to reduce the uncertainty, whereas they look at how people dress, their language and signs on social affiliation. This is the basis for trust and advancement in many circles. Sometimes it is more important which University one has gone to, than your grades and which courses and subject you have taken (Ibid.).
At last we want to discuss masculinity versus femininity orientation and take a closer look at some examples of features in the different cultures. In some Arabian countries it is very difficult to have female representatives in business and / or scientific delegations. Women needs to be protected or controlled and cannot think as individuals, in the same way as men. As an example of this one can mention when a conference in Saudi Arabia were moved to Dubai, because the authorities found out that there were women participating without their father, brother and husband present. Another example is when highly educated women from Pakistan came to Norway on an introduction of a Norwegian University, and the Norwegian professor wanted to shake their hands, but they backed off and did not want to touch the strange man despite their high education and status. They had not adapted to the Western culture, where men and women mingle freely and even touch each other. The Norwegian gender equality policy where fathers may have granted leave in connection with childbirth, is unique in the world context. The normal is that house, children and cooking are the womens domain and this is extreme in the advanced industrial nation Japan, where the proportion of married women employed is low for the industrial nations and where the man lives out his role as family provider and protector of hard work while requiring that he show his manly strength by participating in the company's competitive behaviour and parties. Japan is, not 57
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM surprisingly, on top of Hofstedes masculinity index (Ibid.).
Our next question is how to meet other cultures and does this have any affects on organisation development and implementation of change?
The short and few examples mentioned above shows some of the difficulties and challenges one has to face when people from different cultures meet. The basis for communication is not necessarily present. What seems correct and fruitful behaviour in one situation, seems strange and repulsive in another. To try to make meetings between individuals and organisations from different cultures fruitful, and make it possible to communicate, it is nearby to recommend language skills and tolerance. Language skills do not only give the technical ability to communicate, but also an opportunity to a deeper understanding of terms and ways of thinking, and thus knowledge of the other parties world. The experience with learning and understand another language, normally makes you humble, and this is a good basis for a tolerant and experimental approach. Surveys and interpretations about what is mentioned above, may give you the assumption that one could learn a strange culture by reading books and studying statistics. General insights might be to some help, but may also lead to hasty conclusions, which could result in barren behaviour. A survey of managers, who were characterized as little / much international oriented, by themselves and other observers, shows some interesting differences between the two groups (Ibid.). An important difference was that the international oriented group had described, impression-based and almost private perceptions of other people. They did not base their answers on general theories or widely recognized stereotypes. They were careful with generalizations and draw experiences from one situation to another. They put emphasis on observing and listening, experiment and make trials, and above all, active involvement with their contact parties. The other group had more of a tendency to explain their procedures and their experiences, based on analytic categories, both theoretical and even distant. The international oriented group used stereotypes, but only as tentative and fluid categories, and they were highly aware of their own use of them. The non-national oriented group perceived the other group as extremely adaptable, even as chameleons. Another feature with the international oriented group is that they acknowledged their own stress and possible culture shock when confronted with other people. They used their experience and were taking in to account the differences among the employees and realized that it may process the experiences. They may also withdraw to more stabile areas, such as think brakes, diaries and other forums for reflection of experiences. The main 58
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM differences seems to be what we may call learning style: the ones that succeed the most in the international environment may have general assumptions about other cultures and groups, but fails to let it have a direct impact on the behaviour (Ibid.).
In this section I have tried to explain some of the different aspects of the term culture, and what it contains. We want to take a closer look at the fundamental set of perceptions, which in great terms are common for a nation or a group of people. Culture is the common understandings and presumptions that exist within a unit, and further one tries to give some characteristics of some of the different cultures and behaviours that may occur in an organisational setting. Aspects like individuals, the relationship to others and the nature, activities, space and time are only some dimensions, which can contribute to explain or characterize certain cultures or cultural features. Culture can exist at different levels, from a national level to an organisational level. Geert Hofstede is a well-known author within this field, and he has managed to find some national differences, and with the help from factor analysis he could identify four fundamental dimensions, which can contribute to separate the different national cultures. These four are: Uncertainty avoidance, distance of power, individualism versus collectivism, and masculinity versus femininity. He groups the 53 different cultures in to clusters groups that are alike in relation to some factors, and different compared to other factors. It is likely that cultures give some fundamentals on how one should organize and structure a company, and also how management and authority are being executed in the different organisations or even countries. France is a country that has a large distance of power, while Germany has a more need for order and structure. The Nordic countries are more feminine, and have a bigger tolerance for women as leaders and partners, while in the US one can see a strong tendency to an individualistic culture. It is important to understand that in a situation where people do business with each other, either within an organisation or between different organisations, culture can be the basis for communication. This could be the breaking point to which one cooperates well with one another, and also to get a potential client to trust and have faith in the negotiations and business deals that you are planning to do. We have tried to look at the different features and aspects of culture in a Norwegian perspective, because this is a natural base to execute comparisons with. I also assume that the Nordic countries like Denmark and Sweden are countries with almost the same similarities. These cultures are typical feminine, has a low degree of distance to power and uncertainty avoidance, while Norway also seem to be a collective culture compared to USA, but a more individualistic culture compared to Eastern countries. Further one will try to 59
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM look at the challenges and differences that one have to face when working with people from other countries, and also one wants to try to relate this to the process of change, which is something that happens in many organisations and countries all over the world, today.
60
4. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

In this section one wants to look at the different change management theories compared to different cultural contexts, and one may ask the question if there could be some theories that are better suited for some cultures, or does this vary in accordance to the different situations and organisations?
One could start with comparing Kotters eight step model with the Appreciative Inquiry (AI) model 5D, where Kotter starts with creating an experience og necessity and discovering potential crises and opportunities in the market. Further he suggests creating a governing coalition, which means a group of people with sufficient competency, knowledge and power, to execute the change (Guldbrandsen, 2010). The AI model starts with definition what is it that we want to promote? In this phase the change is given a motivating headline, and further in the discovery phase, one seeks to find the best moments. When is this? What do we do when it works the best, and which circumstances promote the best moments? Already here one can see a difference between the two models, were the functionalism and Kotter seek to find both the negative the crisis, and the positive the opportunities, the social constructivism and AI seek only to find the positive, the best moments and the best opportunities for the organisation.
The third step in Kotters model is to convey and communicate the change vision, where he suggests to use every term and condition in the organisation to communicate the new vision and the following strategies, where the controlling coalition are used as role models. He wants to create a fundamental for action on a broad basis by removing all obstacles in the system, structure and humans, which may block the change, and further encourage risk taking and action amongst the employees. In the AI model one looks at the dream, what is it that we dream about? How does it look like when we have reached the goal, how and when can we determine this? The model emphasize for what we do, say and feel, and wonders if this state can be measured in some way, and what is the first thing we will see when we have reached the dream? (Ibid.). When comparing the above mentioned steps of the different model one may get a picture of Kotters model as somewhat cynical, whereas the obstacles that could block the change should be removed. Does this mean that if a person doesnt like or resist to the change, that it will be moved, or worse, dismissed from the organisation? In contrast one could get a feeling when considering the AI model that they are including everybody in the 61
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM process of change, whereas they are asking the question; What is it that we dream about? . The phrase gives an impression of and including and collective point of view, where all parties of the organisation are involved. Another aspect is that in the AI model it is not mentioned who execute the change is it everybody, like suggested above, or is there a certain group, like in Kotters model, that has the responsibility of doing this? It could also be interesting to see that one express the word goal in the dream phase, and immediately one could think of rationalism and its beliefs, which is characterized as a goal-seeking machine. Could this mean that social constructivism and AI have some similarities with rational theory of management? Maybe it could be important to say that both the models and sciences have a goal, but what exactly the goal is, could be different in the two aspects.
The sixth step of Kotters model is to generate short term benefits, where one plan and realize fast visible victories, and also reward the ones that made these victories possible. Further the model next step is to consolidate the result and produce even more change, by using the change increased credibility to change all systems, structures and policies that do not harmonize with the vision. One should hire and promote employees that live the vision (Ibid.). The first thing I wish to question about this is the increased change credibility to achieve even more change one have to rely on that the change credibility has in fact increased. If, for example, the credibility has not increased and the scepticism and resistance to change holds the change back, the entire model could fail, and this step cannot be conducted and completed as scheduled. It could and may be risky to the process, if one just assumes that the credibility will increase it is not always the things we plan to happen, happens, and it could be crucial to take this into consideration. The second thing is based on comparison with the design phase in the AI model, where they ask what to do to make the dream a reality? How to create the circumstances that forms the framework that captures the best moments? It is emphasized that every possible solution should be included, and compared to Kotters credibility step this could give the impression of a more human approach to the way one implement change, whereas Kotters models seem to want to get rid of everything and everyone that is not in harmony with the new vision. One could question if this is the best possible way to implement change and get people to breathe and live the vision? Maybe this way of implementation only creates the opposite of what they want to achieve more resistance to change and less actually living the vision.
62
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM The last step of Kotters models is about anchor the new approach in the culture, whereas one shall achieve new results through successful behaviour and more effective management and leadership. One seeks to find and clarify the connection between new behaviour and results, and one should recruit and develop management after the vision. The last step or phase in the AI model is the delivery phase, where they focus on what they like to do together, and also what they like to do by themselves. They question how they will manage or be able to see if and how they succeeded, and they wonder when and how they are going to make up a status, learn even more and find further initiatives (Ibid.). It could seem like the focus in Kotters model is more result oriented than process oriented, the important thing is that the change process bring both short term and long term results and that this should be brought upon with successful behaviour. What is successful behaviour? Who and what determines what successful behaviour is? Is it something everybody has to feel, and does in fact everybody behave like this? Is it the top management which decides what successful behaviour is, and if so what and how have they made for this to happen? Is successful behaviour one determined behaviour or could it be different from person to person? Do we want to manage robots or machines that think, speak and do exactly the same, or do we want do manage individuals that in their own special and unique way contribute to the success of the organisation? These are questions that come to mind when examining and comparing these two models. It seems like the AI model in a larger degree thinks of everybody in a team spirit how can we cooperate and contribute to this change process to make sure that both the organisation succeeds, but also in a way that the employees are content with the consequences of the change and the new state it brings. However, it is important to see that the model also ask what the individual likes to do by themselves, so the individual is also in focus, as well as the organisation as a whole. I think that this could be a major factor that people actually believe and want to change, it think it creates less resistance to change and people are more motivated to make an effort towards the change because they that they are a part of it and may benefit from it. This is maybe were the most significant difference between the two models evolves, because I think where the AI model motivates people to participate in the change, Kotters model could struggle with reaching the same level of motivation at every part of the organisation.
However, it is worth mentioning that were Kotters model could seem a bit cynical, the AI model can be perceived as in some degree vague and a bit too tangible, there is nothing in this model that one can physically see or get your head around, and it could also be that some of the employees are more result oriented than process oriented and need to see that this gives a 63
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM higher profit or reduced costs, or even better working conditions for the employees. Although the word Inquiry stands for a wish to create a better world, such as increasing the efficiency, improve the cooperation, and also uses situations which have worked well or even best before and also dreams for the future, it may be somewhat diffuse and it could be difficult to reach all of the employees to believe and participate in the change process.
In general it could also be worth to mention that neither of the models mentions the time aspect within the different steps or phases. It could make a difference to the process if one knew exactly what to do at what time, and who were involved in this. Then again, it is important that the theory are open for the possibility where the intentions not come out as the wanted and actual result there could always happen things one cannot predict, and thats when it could be important to a plan or at least be ready in case this happens.
Another aspect to this is that I have not compared it to the second approach which also underlies functionalism the visionary / ideological approach. However, Kotter emphasize for that he maintains the eight step model and the linear approach it builds on also in this approach so I will therefore only describe some small and general comparisons. Even though the visionary model builds on the eight step model of Kotter it is at the same time inspired of the best practice from other organisations, where one seeks to create an attractive vision to follow in the future (Ibid.). This could be a similarity to the AI model, where they both focus on the future and also on something positive, something that has worked in other situations. However, while the AI model seeks to look at something which was a good situation for the organisation, the visionary looks at other organisation and wishes to follow their example. The visionary model could also be seen as more human than the classic rational approach to strategic management, where one look at the biggest challenge as changing the behaviour of the employees, where one further seek to do this by focusing more on a see-feel approach, where the primary source to change the behaviour is to create positive feelings. This could also relate to the AI model, however, as we have discussed earlier, the AI model could seem to lack some steps of definition and clarity, whereas the visionary model builds on Kotters eight step model and in addition takes more into account the humans feeling, behaviour and sense-making towards the vision and change. In this model it is 80 % the dream that gives the change meaning, the dream creates positive feelings and the positive feeling creates new paths and new behavioural patterns. The model also creates a safety net for the employees, so that they could dare to take the first step into the unknown. This is something that separates from 64
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM both the AI model and the classic rational approach, and it could be seen as a positive adding, for securing the employees. The model also emphasize for someone or somebody to give feedback, either if it positive or if is not going as planned. This clearly has a parallel to the classic rational approach, where there is described that a group, together with the top manager, leads the change. This is not described in the AI model and supports the argument of lack of clear steps and definitions in the process of change.
Further I want to look at these models mentioned above compared to the different culture and dimensions of cultural features, which we have described in section 3.5. The basis for the analysis and discussion will be the four dimensions, described by the author Geert Hofstede; Masculinity versus femininity, individualism versus collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, and distance of power, but one will also include some of the aspect like individual, the relationship to nature, the relationship to others, activity, space and time if and when this is suitable for the discussion. It could also be sensible to include the level to which culture can exist in some sections of the analysis.
The first aspect of the theories of change management that one discussed were the difference in focus, either on the positive and future, or the past and both the possibilities, but also the negative and threats. If one compare this to the cultural dimensions, such as for example the dimension of uncertainty avoidance. Could one draw a parallel where one assume that cultures that have a high degree of uncertainty avoidance would both analyze the threats and the negative incidents from the future, just to make sure that this would not happen again. However it could also be likely that they focus on the opportunities for the future, but just to be sure also find potential crisiss just to avoid this and avoid the uncertainty of not knowing what might happen. Could this mean that a country like France would use Kotters eight step model to implement change, where there exists many hierarchical layers, rules and structures? Opposite, would a country like Norway, which have a low degree of uncertainty avoidance, use the AI model to implement change, whereas the only thing is in mind are the future dreams and how one together can create our own reality. Because we tolerate uncertainty and dont avoid it, are our perceptions more positive and future minded? If one should say that Germany is a country that lies more or less in between France and Norway, could this mean that they could benefit from using the visionary model when implementing change in an organisation? It entails both structure and clear steps and definitions on the process of change, but at the same time it focus on a dream and other best practice examples as role models for 65
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM implementation. In addition it could be worth mentioning that such cultures as Germany emphasize for order and quality and that maybe a total quality management, where the quality aspect in focus, could be a well suitable program and management style for them to follow.
One could also mention the time aspect in relation to this, where one question if one are oriented with the past, or the future? Considerations about long term goals and commitments are in some cultures meet with resistance, where profit gains on a short basis seems more reasonable, while other organisations in other countries or influenced by other cultures, may have long term goals and be satisfied with this. The attitude towards a regulating dimension of behaviour, may also vary between cultures. For example is timely precision and punctuality seen as polite in the North of Europe, while in the Latin countries and Africa on may experience a different attitude towards time, whereas sometimes people comes and goes as they wants, even though meetings are planned and scheduled with others (Strand, 2004).
The next aspect is where Kotters model could seem a bit cynical in relation to the people within the organisation, whereas the AI model seems more considerate towards the people working in the organisation. Kotter wants to promote and reward those who contributes to victories through the change process and those who lives the vision, while the AI model seeks to include everybody and seek to find what they together do best, but also what they like to do separately. Could this be seen in relation to the dimension individualism versus collectivism, where more individualistic cultures would chose Kotters model, where they strongly connects to what the individuals are or what they do. Effort and performance are being highly rewarded in such cultures, and everybody has the right to their own opinion and private life, and can only have one determined and calculated relationship to work. At the opposite end where more collective cultures occurs, the social relationship are closer and the employees are seen as members of a big family within the organisation or the unit they are a part of, where protect each other in exchange for loyalty. Could this mean that organisations in the US would chose Kotters model, where individuals are rewarded after effort and performance, and if one dont manage to deliver at the standards that the organisations or top management demand, one could risk getting dismissed. In Pakistan and Peru, which are collective cultures, could one expect that they would use the AI model, where the collective is in focus and where everybody should contribute and be considered.
66
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM It could further be interesting to include the characteristics like individual, the relationship to others, and activity, in this section, where the dimension of behaviour of the individual asks if the human beings are good or evil, or even both. Do they have the possibility to choose freely and are they to be trusted? These are aspects one might have to consider when working with different cultures in an organisation, also when implementing change? When combining different cultures in an organisation the individuals may have different perceptions of this and act in accordance, so the management task could be to give clear guidelines towards this so that there wouldnt be any misunderstandings. The relationship to others is another dimension of behaviour one has to consider. Does one relate to others like they are individuals or members of a group? Are the decision making based on and made by individuals or based on an agreement from a group? These are aspects that every organisation or business unit need to consider when planning a change process with different cultures people from individualistic cultures could be used to that it one person, maybe the leader, who makes the decisions, while an employee from a collective culture is more used to that decisions are made together within a group. Also, when looking at employment one could experience some challenges where in some cultures it is normal to hire a person based on that he or she either is family or a good friend, while in other cultures this is considered highly unprofessional and demands that employment should be based on documented education and experience. This probably depends on the organisational structure within the organisation as well, where strongly hierarchical organisations may not tolerate family or friendship hiring, while more flat, unstructured and collective cultures would maybe not have a problem with this. The next dimension of behaviour is activity, where one needs to consider if the employees are working to achieve goals or just as a natural part of life. Id the meaning with life to be someone that could easily be compared to the individualistic cultures, or is it to do something meaningful which could compared to all types of cultures, either one do something together in an collective view, or separately within an individualistic approach.
The third aspect is related to the treatments of the human being in the different models, as we have said before Kotters eight step model could seem both cynical and cold whereas to how one treat the employees, while both the visionary and the AI model seem to take the employees into more and careful consideration when implementing the change. One could be able to draw two parallels to this, whereas the first one could be to a masculine culture, where performance and effort is the only thing that is important, and where money and material welfare and ambitions are the driving force. These could be seen as a cynical world, where 67
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM good human relations sometimes might be though to achieve. It is attractive to be strong, big and masculine and there is a clear distinguish between male and female activities and attitude. Could this mean that masculine cultures like Australia, Japan and Italy would be most compatible with Kotters eight step model, and that the more feminine cultures, like the Netherlands and the Northern countries, would be more compatible with the AI model, where one takes the whole human into consideration. Life quality is predicted as the most important thing, together with people and environment, and the relationship to others is seen as a motivational factor. One believe in similarity between the genders, where both men and women can be care givers, whereas in a masculine culture gender roles are separated, where the men are dominating and ongoing, while women should only be care givers. The models does not say anything about genders in their phases or steps concerning the change process, so one could only speculate that a masculine culture would fit better to the classic rational approach, while a feminine culture should be better suitable for the AI model as care givers in an professionally way.
The second parallel in this matter and also concerning the last dimension of Hofstede`s cultural characteristics, is distance to power. This dimension is an expression for how much the culture allows a superior to execute power. It could be reasonable to think that the classic rational approach containing Kotters eight step model could be the model for implementing change that would fit the cultures with a high level of distance to power. In these cultures it is fundamental to empower and protect the role of the powerful ones, while others will be looked at with suspicion because they could be a possible threat to the powerful position. Domination and dependency are the fundamentals for cooperation, and with some similarities to other cultures, like the masculine and the individualistic, Kotters eight step model could seem like a compatible match, where it could seem like there exist somewhat hierarchy, order, structure and where results and performance are rewarded and in focus. Organisation or situation containing these circumstances, could experience a battle between the different positions within the organisations, both internally and externally. Typical countries where this could appear are Asia, Africa and the Latin countries. Opposite, one has countries that have a low level of distance to power, where one operate with a more collegial relationship and a common perception that the differences should be minimal. Trust is the fundament for cooperation, and leaders and management cannot show the power they posses. Countries where this culture is typical are Norway, Israel and also the Northern European countries, and it could be likely that organisations in these countries would chose or be most compatible 68
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM with the AI model when implementing change. This is due to the nature of the model, where one could get an impression that it takes all employees into consideration in the process of change, where every solution shall be brought to the table and also where trust could be one of the main fundamentals of the model, whereas everybody has something to contribute with.
When looking at these models and the comparison with the different cultures, and the dimensions we have characterized them with, it could seem like there are a lot of possibilities on how to implement change. One could also get an impression of that there are several similarities between masculine, individual, and cultures with a high level of distance to power and a high degree of uncertainty avoidance. Opposite, collective, feminine and cultures with a low level of distance to power and a low degree of uncertainty avoidance, could seem more alike, then the other cultures describes above. This is not something that is empirical tested and adopted, just a possible observation when executing the analysis above. Which of these cultures and models that are considered most suitable to use in an change process is not clear, and it could be that the best and optimal way to implement change and organisation development, are not only dependent on the culture and model, but also the entire organisational situation, and the scope and depth of the change.
It is important that one also include the comparative models, OD and TQM, into this analysis. When considering OD, the definition done by French and Bell Jr., have many aspects to consider, but an overall picture seem to emphasize towards a more collective and AI model approach, but at the same time it have some features related to Kotters model. In relation to the different cultural aspects, one may assume that a collective culture would use an OD approach to change. However, since we also have mentioned that this approach have some similarities with Kotters model, a culture which is combined with both collective and also feminine, masculine and individualistic features may use this approach. It is also a model that emphasize for top management commitment and leadership, whereas a culture with a high level of distance to power could prefer this approach, even thought it entails collective features. According to the uncertainty avoidance aspect of Hofstede`s cultural dimensions it could seem like the OD approach lies on a middle range as to this concern, where one both wants to consider the problems or challenges which have happened i the past, but also with a focus on the possibilities ahead. One aspect, barely mentioned in the theoretical framework of OD, is that there is slightly different focus concerning the definition of OD and the actual Process consultant model, which represents an OD approach to implementing change, 69
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM whereas the model takes a more comprehensive access to what OD is about, while the model is more narrow in it descriptions. It could be that the model is just in some degree described in the text, and that it could be further divided in to further sub-steps which allow one to take more consideration to the whole aspect of OD.
TQM is another aspect, which also could be used as an example for implementing change with focus on quality, rather than a model. Either way, it is important that we take it into discussion related to the four cultural dimensions addressed by Hofstede. The first thought is that TQM could be a compatible model or approach to implementing change in collective and feminine cultures, whereas the quality programmes are team oriented, however, as mentioned in the theoretical framework of TQM, it have also some parallels to Kotters model, which are more masculine oriented. Considering the quality aspect one may connect that to a somewhat high degree of uncertainty avoidance, where as one in this model seek to implement, maintain and sustain quality throughout the whole process, which could be something that is linked to uncertainty avoidance. If the quality is maintained at all levels and at every point in time, one may also think that the organisation could avoid any uncertainty along the way. Does this mean that TQM would be suitable for countries like Portugal and Greece, and not a preferable choice for a country like Norway? This could be a fact, but it is also important to consider that maybe quality is an aspect that is important to maintain in every culture and organisation, so this model could be an options for everybody to consider, not just the cultures that find it compatible with the culture and organisation. The last dimension; distance to power related to TQM could be difficult to define, but one may think that cultures with a middle to a high level of distance to power would appreciate the TQM model, because the top management is such a central role in the change process. However, this is not a guaranteed assumption because it the management could also be involved in a culture or organisation with a low distance to power, but in this paper one choose the first assumption based on the following argument. This could for example be countries in Asia and Africa, as well as the Latin countries, while opposite one find Norway and Israel.
I have further tried to summarize the different change models with Hofstede`s four culture dimension in a figure to create a comprehensive and general overview of the similarities and differences of the different theories aligned.
70
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM Change Theories Hofstede`s four cultural dimensions Masculine vs. feminine Masculine More feminine, but with masculine features Individual vs. Collective Individual Collective inspired More feminine, but with masculine features More collective than individualistic Uncertainty avoidance High degree of uncertainty avoidance Middle range of uncertainty avoidance Somewhat high degree of uncertainty avoidance Level of distance to power High level of distance to power Middle range level of distance to power Somewhat high level of distance to power Low level of distance to power Low degree of uncertainty avoidance Collective Feminine Kotter OD TQM AI
One can further look at two models when analyzing different features on how to implement change, which gives a basis for the depth of the change and suggests that this is an important matter to consider when facing change. It is important to know that the models are just a support to the important intuitive perceptions one may have, and the models do not take the history of the organisation into account. The first thing one may look at is how change should be managed, and with inspiration from the contingency schools, one may illustrate three management styles which are often used in change processes;
1. The narrator 2. The seller, and 3. The facilitator
71
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM Their management styles can, in short, be described as the following. The narrator informs of the new terms of change, the seller sells, listens and adjusts after needs, and the facilitator change and learn together with the other employees.
To support the parent management style one need to look at the depth of the change, where the degree of concreteness is something that separates the changes from one another. These changes could be illustrated in an iceberg, where the different changes are situated on three different levels of the iceberg, one on top, one in the middle, and one at the bottom (Ibid.).
Tangible changes in sub systems
Less tangible changes in organizational design
Intangible changes in mental models
Figure 5.0: The depth of the change (Guldbrandsen, 2010, pp. 35).
First you have tangible changes in the physical systems, which lays above the less tangible changes in the organisational design, such as structure, processes and systems, and at the bottom, one have the more intangible changes, where the focus is directed towards the mental model, such as the culture (Ibid.).
The point is that changes in sub systems, design changes and changes in the mental models have very different consequences for the employees. For example if one have to deal with tangible changes in sub systems, there are seldom demand for new ways of thinking and take action. When there are changes in the organisational design, the consequence and the goal for
72
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM the future is that the tasks and actions are being handled and resolved in a different way. Changes in the mental models includes both changes in the action pattern and also has a goal to change the way people look at the world, which means changed attitudes, perceptions and emotions (Ibid.).
From the terminology of the two models, The AI model and the linear model of problem solving (define the problem, find reasons, find solutions, implement), intangible changes goes in the direction, when putting the organisations norms and values at stake, of the management style number 3, the facilitator. If one also use the three isms, social constructivism have more to offer when dealing with the challenges one have to face in the social universe. One cannot order or market themselves to a new culture. An attempt to this could for example lead to headaches for the employees and loss of management credibility. However, if it concerns changes in the organisational design, management style number 2 the seller could be a good base to start. If the possibilities for actions are limited, and there is no room for listening, it is important that this model is not overdone. This could for example mean that if a bigger company made changes on a management level and if the decision is made and there is no room for involvement, one should not try to give another impression. Finally, emergency situations will draw in the direction of management style 1, also when the changes are intangible (Ibid.).
However, if the changes in the organisational design also want to make a solid imprint in the culture, an advice could be to use management style 2 the seller but move over to management style 3 the facilitator when the changes have been conducted. This means that there will be room for negotiation and a common opinion formation in the communities of practice, during the process. If for instance, the changes happen in the physical universe, management style 1 with a touch of management style 2, would be comprehensive for the start of the process (Ibid.).
Based on the three isms, social constructivism has the most to offer when dealing with intangible change and mental models, where cultural attitudes, moral, behaviour and emotions need to change. At the opposite end, modernism, has its strength when dealing with changes situated on top of the iceberg, tangible changes in sub systems. This is where the linear mindset can be best established, and where the modernism and the metaphor of the machine are at home (Ibid.). 73
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM A potential explanation for the many change processes that do not live up to their potential and expectations, can be found in the linear mindset and the following rational problem solving method, which are being used outside their context, the physical universe, and instead are applied in the social universe, where this model has nothing to offer. Most changes comes from changes on an organisational design level, but have derivative effects in the mental models, which result in that the classic approach to change management fall short. However, when this have been said, it is important to underline that the choice of management style should take the base in the situation, where circumstances like the organisational history and culture, should play a significant role.
If for example it is a tradition for a linear mindset and management style 1 and 2, it is not certain that the organisation is mature enough for the AI model and management style 3, also when one are dealing with intangible changes. Correspondingly, management style 1 could be a bad choice for an organisation that are used to management style 3, also even though one have to deal with tangible changes (Ibid.).
74
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Based on the discussion and analysis above, it is difficult to find or conclude that one model is better for implementing change, or even that one culture due to their cultural features may adapt the change better or easier, with less resistance. One could suggest that it seems likely that the AI model and social constructivism are concepts and sciences which are more appealing to feminine, collective and cultures with a low level of distance to power, whereas soft values like team spirit and performance, belonging, unity, prosperity and work environment are seen as aspect that are important to perform well, also in change situations. However, this is also dependent on the organisational culture within the organisation, even though a company is situated in Norway, it could be an American owned company, which means that there could be a mix of different cultures working there, maybe in large Norwegians, but also Americans and other nationalities. The model of change one wants to use in this matter, is then dependent on the choice of the management, how do they think the new change will be implemented and adapted in the best possible way for the entire organisation? The choice of change model is then based on the specific situation of the organisation, both concerning the different cultures involved, and also the method of implementation that should be taken in to use in this matter. Opposite it could be valid to suggest that Kotters eight step model would be preferable to use in masculine and individualistic cultures, and also cultures with a high level of distance to power, and the last dimension of Hofstede, which in this case could be cultures with a high degree of uncertainty avoidance. The validation to this suggestions lies in the cultural features where one seek to emphasize for rules and regulations, honour the ones or the one that contributes the most to a certain task, and where one seek to find both former risk and future possibilities before implementing the change. However, the same as for the above mentioned cultures, one could have a mix of different cultures, even though the company are situated in a country with a strong cultural dimension. One could further suggest that organisation that are situated in their own country, with most of their employees from the home country, would choose a model that are comparable and compatible with both the organisational and the international culture, whereas this could be seen as based on a generic evaluation and choice, which assumes that this choice relies on a common perception of all the involved parties in the organisation and culture that this is the right choice to make. In the other case mentioned above, it could be slightly different, where one could have a situation where an organisation is 75
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM situated in one country, but the employees working there are from all over the world and from all different cultures what is then the right choice to make, and will everybody agree upon this choice? This is difficult to answer and I dont think there is one way that is the best and optimal to do it, rather that the optimal and best way of implementing change would depend entirely on the entire situation and the organisation, and even case to case. It is up to the management to decide which tactics and models to use when trying to reach and commit all involved parties of the organisation in the process of change. In this situation it is not given that all of the employees and even the management group are unified in which model to use and even have the same perception of what would be the best model to use, because of their different cultural values and beliefs. In it not a matter of a generic choice, but rather a situational evaluation of the specific situation the organisation is in, whereas one seek to find the best an optimal way to implement change in this situation, and for this organisation. Another thing to consider in the process of change, is that one meet the organisation and culture where it is, and change should take into account the unique history of the organisation, the challenges the organisation experience and the possibilities that occurs, also including resources (Guldbrandsen, 2010).
One may further take OD and TQM into consideration, whereas both of them can be seen as more feminine than masculine, and also more collective than individualistic, which could give an assumption that both of these models could be more compatible for implementing change in countries like Peru, Pakistan and also the Netherlands and Northern countries. However, one may also suggest that TQM could be a suitable model for cultures and organisation with a high level of uncertainty avoidance and distance to power, such as Asia, Africa and the Latina countries, as well as Greece and Portugal. When looking at these dimension and the OD model, one may find a culture that have a middle range of both of these aspect, because one may suggest that these dimension does not stand out as particular strong or weak related to the OD approach.
Based on the analysis, the three isms, rationalism, functionalism and social constructivism, and a fourth ism applied by Klaus Guldbrandsen - pragmatism, one may conclude with the fact that the choice of which approach and access to use to change management, should be situational. The things that should determine which management style to chose, is partly the subject field of the change, tangible to intangible, and partly the organisations history and management culture. The most important points when considering change management, is 76
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM that the choice of management style and school, should be a conscious choice. Too often, one experience that leaders and change agents uncritical reproduces the approach that themselves have experienced. If one just reproduces the existing approach to change management, one may instead risk that the culture lead you, whereby you will be the biggest obstacle to your own success. A prerequisite for the choice one makes in relation to the change management approach is to have solid knowledge of the different schools and the tools, which you may support and relay upon, in the process of change.
A quote from the cultural theory`s father, Schein, states an important message for the future;
As a leader you have one, and just one, important choice: - will you lead the culture or will you let the culture lead you (Guldbrandsen, 2010, pp. 39).
5.1.
Further research
Further research should be enrolled around making awareness of these theories, so that the right decisions are made in each individual case of change, and also at the beginning of the process. One may question what kind of change are one dealing with, what is the history of the organisation, how should this change be managed and which change theory approach should one use, to achieve the best result, both considering efficiency and quality, but also the organisations as a whole, with its contributing and committed employees. The cultural feature and the organisational culture or the mix of cultures, could also be comprehensive to have knowledge of, before the implementation of the change starts. Making awareness and information of these matters could contribute to make change processes in the future and all over the world, more effective and successful.
77
6. REFERENCES
6.1. Books and articles:
Almaraz, J. (1994). Quality management and the Process of Change. Journal of Organisational Change Management, Vol. 7 No 2, pp.6-14. MCB University Press, Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Blaikie, N. (2000). Designing social research: the logic of anticipation. Cambridge: Polity Press. Brannen, J. (1992). Mixing methods: qualitative and quantitative research. Aldershot: Avebury. Busch, T., & Vanebo, J. O. (2003). Organisasjon og ledelse: et integ[r]ert perspektiv. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design, Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications , Inc Cumming, T.G., & Huse, E.F. (1989). Organisation development and change. St. Paul: West Publishing Company. Ellefsen, B (1998). Triangulering eller hvorfor og hvordan kombinere metoder? I Lorensen. M. (red) (1998). Sprsmlet bestemmer metoden. Forskningsmetoder i sykepleie og andre helsefag. Universitetsforlaget. Oslo. French, W. L., & Bell, C. H. (1999). Organisation development: behavioural science interventions for organisation improvement. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Guldbrandsen, K. (2010). Den fjerde isme Fire Veje til forandringsledelse, Strategi & Ledelse, Brsen Forum A/S Hennestad, B. W., Revang, ., & Strnen, F. H. (2006). Endringsledelse og ledelsesendring: endringslring for praktisk orienterte teoretikere og reflekterte praktikere. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Jacobsen, D. I. (2004). Organisasjonsendringer og endringsledelse. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget Jacobsen, D. I. (2005). Hvordan gjennomfre underskelser?: innfring i samfunnsvitenskapelig metode. Kristiansand: Hyskoleforl. Morgan, D. L. (1998). Practical Strategies for Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Application in Health Research. Qualitative Health Research, 8(no 3), 362376. Nrreklit, H., Nrreklit, L., Mitchell, F. (2010). Towards a paradigmatic foundation for 78
Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM accounting practice. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Vol 23, No. 6, pp. 733-758. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Roos, G., Krogh, G.V., Roos, J., Fernstrm, L. (2007). Strategi en innfring. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Skog, O.-J. (2005). forklare sosiale fenomener: en regresjonsbasert tilnrming. Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk. Strand, T. (2004). Ledelse, organisasjon og kultur. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Weichel, J., Buch, M., Urban, D., & Frieling, E. (2009). Sustainability and the ageing workforce: Considerations with regard to the German car manufacturing industry. I P. Docherty, M. Kira & A. B. Shani (red.), Creating sustainable work systems. London: Routledge. Westenholz A. (2002). Cross-Hierarchical Management, Inaugural Lecture. Westenholz, A. (2009). Institutional Entrepreneurs Performing in Meaning Arenas: Transgressing Institutional Logics in two Organisational Fields, Research in the Sociology of Organisations, Vol. 27. Whittington, R. (2002). Hva er strategi? Og spiller den noen rolle? Oslo: Abstrakt Forlag AS.
6.2.
Internet sources:
NRK (2005) : Picture of the Norwegian King Olav the Fifth: http://www.nrk.no/programmer/radio/norgesglasset/1.896748 (Reading date: 20.11.10).
79

Business

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Business

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Master Thesis Cand.

Copenhagen Business School Total number of pages: 79 January, 2011

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 5 METHOD ........................................................................................................................ 6

2.3.1. 2.3.2. 2.3.3.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................ 15

3.2.1. 3.2.2. 3.2.3. 3.3.

3.3.1. 3.3.2. 3.4.

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................. 61 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 75

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Research design and ontology

The three isms

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK UNDERSTANDING CHANGE

Types of change what is the reason for change?

New "spicies" arrives

Several Organisations Level of change The single Organisation

Technological and Coincedence Non-deterministic

CHANGE MODELS AND MANAGEMENT

The two main models

Establish an experience of necessity:

Investigate the marked and the situation of

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM best moments?

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

(French and Bell Jr., 1999, p.26).

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

(French and Bell Jr., 1999, p.26).

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

(French and Bell Jr., 1999, p.27).

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM implement and study (Ibid.).

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

THE CULTURAL ASPECT

National cultures and demand of management

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

4. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

1. The narrator 2. The seller, and 3. The facilitator

Tangible changes in sub systems

Less tangible changes in organizational design

Intangible changes in mental models

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Master Thesis Cand.merc HRM

You might also like