Managing change in people is an example. How to ensure effective change management

To be successful and competitive, organizations must constantly implement the necessary changes. However, any change should not be an end in itself, a tribute to fashion, but a carefully thought-out action dictated by the need to eliminate emerging problems in order to increase efficiency. The need for changes in enterprises arises both under the influence of external factors (foreign economic conditions, social change, new discoveries, tougher competition, etc.), and internal — low efficiency, high production costs, financial problems, inefficient organizational structure, bottlenecks in production.

The concept of change

Change is usually understood as the adoption of a set of measures that can ensure the success of the company's transition from one level of development to another, higher one. Of course, changes are brewing even when, due to some circumstances, an enterprise is reducing or reorienting its activities.

Organizational changes may occur in the management structure, tasks and main activities, in the applied technology, management structures and business processes, in corporate culture, personnel management system, etc.

It is well known that there are factors that can slow down the implementation of changes in the organization, make them ineffective. A survey of managers in 210 North American companies showed that only a quarter of those surveyed rated their experience of implementing change as successful. Most managers tend to explain failures resistance to change.

This is also evidenced by many factors from the Russian reality.

Reasons for resistance

One of the main problems of unsuccessful implementation of changes is the mentality of employees, their potential for resistance to changes and novelty. After all, it is quite obvious that organizational change entails the need to abandon the established behavior, reassess the criteria and management structure, and this, as a rule, affects the interests of people, which causes their resistance.

There are different forms and degree of resistance. Some express it through the delay in the adoption and implementation of certain new decisions, which causes unforeseen delays, additional costs and instability in the process of change.

There are several reasons for resistance to change:

• economic - the potential threat of loss of wages or sources of income, fear of unemployment, deprivation of benefits and privileges, high costs of time and money to implement changes;
• organizational - unwillingness to change the existing system of industrial and personal relations, the established alignment of forces, fear for a future career, place of work, reaction to previous unsuccessful experience of changes;
• personal - unwillingness to change habits, inertia, fear of a new one, a threat to the position, personal power, status in the organization, loss of respect in the eyes of management and colleagues, awareness of one's incompetence to perceive the new, disbelief in personal capabilities, unwillingness to take on new responsibilities and making decisions.

To avoid negative consequences, it is necessary to carefully plan the implementation of changes, timely identify the causes and sources of resistance, and learn how to overcome them.

This requires a large preparatory work .

It is necessary to clearly articulate the purpose of the changes. The results to be achieved should also be properly defined.

The change process should be divided into stages ; at the end of each of them, certain intermediate solutions are implemented.

The famous American company management guru Daryl Conner writes: “If you want people to change, do not give them a choice ... If you want to make a major change, you need to completely convince the majority of ordinary workers, 75% of managers and almost all managers of its urgent need organizations?

John P. Kotter, an authoritative change theorist in the company, recommends a series of activities to convince employees of the need for change, as well as create in the company team of reformers, which will lead the development of content and implementation of changes. Such a team should be created from among the top management, it should be assigned the main guiding role.

For the successful implementation of the change program, it is necessary to identify? Agents? or? conductors? changes. ?Change Agent? must be an employee of the company, fluent in problems and ways to eliminate them. He must:

• clearly define goals and formulate tasks;
• be able to adapt goals and objectives to changes;
• have the skills to form a team and involve representatives of the main interested groups in its work;
• be tolerant of the state of temporary uncertainty;
• be able to assess the prospects and results of activities to implement changes.

Potential? agents of change? can become members of the working group on organizational development and members of working groups in areas of activity where changes are planned.

To overcome employee resistance, analysis of their behavior- to determine their attitude to changes, to identify in advance the reasons for possible resistance.

Based on conversations, interviews, questionnaires and other forms of information gathering, the management of the organization should try to find out what type of reaction to changes will be observed in the organization, identify employees who will either support changes or resist them, and in each case, the reasons for such behavior.

There are 2 types of resistance depending on its strength and intensity:

• Obvious forms of resistance (a form of open speech against perestroika), which manifests itself in the form of refusal to use new systems and procedures, avoidance of additional training, non-attendance of meetings devoted to discussing the project of changes, by delaying the implementation of instructions;
• Hidden forms of resistance, which manifest themselves in the diversion of resources, in setting restrictions on outgoing information and their deliberate dispersal.

After identifying the causes of resistance to change, it is necessary to choose best methods to overcome it.

There is no universal method here, each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Most often, it becomes effective to use several methods.

One of these methods is that the leader personally widely disseminates the necessary information about the upcoming change. If management succeeds in persuading people, then I3they will become active agents in bringing about change. Although this may take a long time, especially if a large number of employees are involved in the process.

The involvement of the maximum number of company employees in the process of implementing changes increases the sense of responsibility of each for the implementation of the necessary measures and turns them into active supporters.

A well-thought-out attitude towards change management in an organization will:

• detect and articulate the existence of problems;
• achieve freedom of expression of the participants in the discussions;
• provide support for out-of-the-box solutions and innovation.

It is also very important to give timely support to those who are afraid of the problems of adapting to new conditions. If necessary, negotiations should be held with them and even agreements should be concluded with the employees most vulnerable to change, which will also smooth out the heat of resistance.

If the measures taken do not achieve the desired result, one can resort to personnel changes, but in such a way that this does not give rise to additional problems and discontent. Of course, when the initiators of change and their supporters gain significant influence, some form of coercion can be applied to those who do not want to go along with the majority.

As for the fight against the opponents of change among key company managers who see restructuring as a threat own position, then John P. Kotter gives interesting recommendations on this matter. First but not the most effective method, he believes, is to get rid of such a manager. Further, you can give him maximum support without leaving him alone with his fears. Such a manager can be included in the leadership team, which will help him change his attitude to the overdue changes. And finally, try to determine in which area he can contribute to the changed company and offer new job. Realizing that a person cannot adapt to changes, stop fighting with him and, with the support of others, create an environment that would pull him along with those around him.

Case Studies

As practice shows, consultants provide significant assistance in overcoming resistance to change.

For example, when implementing a management system in one of the enterprises, the consultants met with unexpected resistance and resistance to changes from the staff. To carry out the project, an organizational development group (organizational change management) was formed, the main task of which was to implement the recommendations of consultants, as well as to coordinate the work of participants in the change process. At the first stage, forms of resistance were identified. Further, based on their nature, the main reasons for opposition were identified.

Based on the reasons identified, activities to help overcome staff resistance were included in the transition plan, and success was ensured.

When conducting a diagnostic of another company to assess the attitude of staff to change, track the level of resistance and fear of change, questioning company personnel.

To reduce the level of resistance at the very beginning of the development of the project to the process of implementing changes, involved reputable and competent staff. As soon as consultants began to actively involve the client's staff in this process, the level of passive resistance even began to rise. But gradually, as the work on the project continued, active information exchange within the company and more and more serious involvement of staff in the work, a positive approach to change began to prevail. At the final stage of the Project, it was still possible to observe the passivity of individual employees, however, the bulk of the personnel showed a constructive approach to changes and strove to actively participate in them.

The company also built internal communications systems. It has become a tool for communicating to all employees about the goals and successes of the work. This allowed for positive feedback.

All these steps of consultants helped to reduce the level of resistance to change on the part of the company's employees and to implement them.

Conclusion

Developing a plan for implementing changes, as well as implementing the changes themselves, is not an easy task. Inevitably, there will be resistance from the staff, which, at best, can delay the timing of the changes.

It is quite difficult for companies to overcome such problems on their own. To do this, you need to have extensive experience in the field of change management and appropriate resources. As a rule, independent consultants are invited to implement reengineering projects and other changes. Consultants develop an action plan, directly participate in their implementation, prepare implementation expertise, accompany individual key events, etc.

The form and degree of participation of consultants depend on the nature of the changes being introduced, the client's corporate culture, and the client's experience in similar work.

In the process of work, the client and the consultant jointly develop a project management mechanism, the procedure for interaction, procedures for informing about the progress of the project, throughout the project they train managers, the working group, and line personnel. Consultants carry out active explanatory work, convince the staff of the need for changes, and participate in the formation of the training program. As a result, the planned changes are effectively implemented, the working group from among the representatives of the enterprise gains experience in managing changes and the ability to independently develop and deepen the improvement process.

Take a look at our training programs:

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

Today, it is obvious that in order to survive in the market and remain competitive, enterprises must from time to time make changes to their economic activity. Moreover, the need for changes has become so frequent that their impact on the life cycle of an enterprise is no longer considered an exceptional phenomenon. in practice and scientific research more and more attention is paid to the analysis of methods and organizational capabilities of change management ("change management").

At present, many industrial enterprises are carrying out transformations in the forms and methods of management aimed at stimulating entrepreneurship and developing new economic relations.

The need for transformation is caused by the current socio-economic situation, which places high demands on accelerating the adaptation of modern industrial enterprises to rapidly changing living conditions and on increasing the competitiveness of manufactured products compared to foreign manufacturers. The main task of modern industrial enterprises is the transformation into effective subjects of a market economy, capable of self-preservation and self-development. To accomplish this task, enterprises need to change the approaches to organizational change, making them manageable.

Organizational changes will be effective, provided that they are carried out systematically in all major areas of the enterprise's life.

Fundamentally important question is as follows: how an enterprise can withstand changes in the external environment (occurring frequently, but irregularly and almost unpredictably), as well as through preliminary measures or response to maintain its viability and achieve its goals. The enterprise must constantly monitor the main components of the environment and draw conclusions about its needs for change. Usually, among these components, economic (for example, globalization of the market or its regional differentiation), technological (rapid spread of new technologies), political and legal (changes in legislation), socio-cultural (demographic shifts, changes in the system of values) and physical and environmental (climatic conditions, load on the ecosystem).

The concept of change management covers all planned, organized and controlled changes in the strategy, production processes, structure and culture of any socio-economic system, including private and public enterprises. "Change Management" deals with specific issues of enterprise management, including organizational, personnel, communication and information aspects.

To ensure the management of organizational changes, it is necessary to create a methodological base that will allow business leaders to design and implement change processes and evaluate their effectiveness. When deciding to carry out organizational changes, managers must clearly understand the position in which the enterprise is located and its desired state, as well as own the algorithm for implementing the desired changes.

Thus, organizational change management can be considered one of the key ways to ensure the development of an enterprise, and methodological support for organizational change management can be considered as an urgent scientific problem.

The problem of organizational change management has been studied most deeply by foreign experts. Recognized authorities in this field are I. Ansoff, L. Greiner, J. Newstrom, K. Davis, R. Blake, D. Mouton, X. Wissema, R. Grant, E. Shine, M. Hammer and D. Champi. A significant place in the studies of these scientists is given to the essence of organizational change, the development of strategies, methods and models for managing these changes. American researchers R. Kanter, B. Stein and T. Dzhik offer their own version of the program of organizational change. It is also necessary to note the great contribution to the development of the theory of change management by K. Levin and J. Kotter.

Western approaches to organizational change management are very diverse and can be useful for Russian theory and management practices, but it is also necessary to take into account the specific features of domestic organizations when applying foreign theories.

Among domestic researchers dealing with these issues, it is necessary to note O.S. Vikhansky, A.I. Naumova, O.K. Platova, V.I. Luneva, N.N. Treneva, I.P. Gerchikov, V.K. Tambovtseva, G.N. Chernetsov. However, these researchers focus on the development of strategies, and the issues of strategy implementation and, especially, change management do not receive proper coverage. But, at the same time, it is necessary to note the works of Goncharuk V.A., Kudinov A.A., and some others, who give practical recommendations based on experience.

The urgency of the problem and its insufficient development, the debatability of individual approaches and proposals led to the choice of topic, subject, goals and objectives of the thesis research.

The purpose of the work is to analyze the main methods of change management in a modern organization.

To achieve this goal, a number of tasks must be solved in the course of work. Necessary:

Ø Define the role of change management in corporate management

Ø Consider project change management methods, business process reengineering method and organizational development method.

Ш analyze the socio-psychological methods of managing changes in the organization (methods of overcoming resistance, methods of changing organizational culture)

Show, using the example of a specific organization, how various methods of change management can be applied.

The structure of the work includes an introduction, 4 logically interconnected chapters, a conclusion, applications and a bibliography.

The first chapter reveals the role of innovation management in the overall management of the organization, analyzes the importance of external consulting for changes in the organization.

The second chapter examines the organizational aspects of change management. In particular, project methods of change management are considered, incl. reengineering of business processes and methods of organizational development.

The third chapter touches upon socio-psychological methods of change management. The methods of overcoming resistance to change, methods of involving personnel in changes, methods of changing organizational culture as an important part of changing the entire organization are analyzed.

The fourth chapter is practical. It provides an analysis of the experience of change management on the example of the implementation of an ERP system in a particular enterprise.

1. Theoretical foundations of change management in an organization

1.1 The concept and content of organizational changes, the scope of implementation of changes

An organization is a complex organism. It intertwines and coexists with the interests of the individual and groups, incentives and restrictions, rigid technology and innovation, unconditional discipline and free creativity, regulatory requirements and informal initiatives. Organizations have their own image, their own culture, their own traditions and reputation. They develop confidently when they have a sound strategy and use resources efficiently. They are rebuilt when they cease to meet their chosen goals.

To stay competitive, better serve customers, and keep up with technology, organizations need to implement change more often, and often more radically, than ever before. The modern organization operates in increasingly uncertain conditions. Unexpected phenomena occur very quickly, and organizations must respond quickly to them.

It is the pace and unpredictability of events in external environment dictate the need for rapid change in the organization. Here are some of the key drivers of accelerating change Jeanie Danielle Duck The monster of change. Reasons for success and failure of organizational reforms - M.: Alpina Publisher, 2003. - 320 p. .

More demanding customers - intense competition in most areas means that customers receive better service, the best quality and a wider range of goods and services. The life cycles of goods and services are shrinking, and more and more new niches are appearing on the markets. To remain competitive, an organization must offer the best service, quality, and be able to create or penetrate new markets.

Ø Globalization - competition occurs on a worldwide scale, buyers are increasingly able to purchase any goods around the world. Goods and services move freely around the world, sources of supply have expanded significantly.

• Technology - Information technology has a major impact on how goods and services are produced, how organizations are managed and how goods and services are delivered to the market.

• Other non-information technologies also have a profound impact on products and markets. In particular, biotechnology enables the production of previously unknown products and impacts markets in unique ways.

Ø People are increasingly becoming a factor that distinguishes the goods and services of the organization in the eyes of buyers. The need to attract, retain and motivate workers is becoming crucial.

All of these factors create an unstable and unpredictable environment, which means that organizations are in a state of constant change. And even if things are going well and the organization is on the rise, it still needs to innovate if it wants to achieve or maintain a leading position in its field. Therefore, the renewal process is, in fact, continuous and is one of the most important objects of management.

Organizational change can be viewed from a variety of perspectives. First of all, they are planned and unplanned. The former are carried out within the framework of evolutionary development, the trends of which are well monitored, and on the basis of this, the most suitable moment for transformations is outlined in advance. Unplanned often have to be carried out spontaneously, in unexpected situations, so sometimes their process can become spontaneous, uncontrollable.

Transformations can be one-time or multi-stage, which is largely determined by their scale, available time, the internal flexibility of the organization, its ability to withstand the shock caused by change.

Changes, depending on their depth and nature, range from unchanged functioning to a complete restructuring of the organization, when its fundamental change occurs. Each type of change is due to changes in the external environment, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the organization itself.

If changes are forced on members of the organization, they cause dissatisfaction and reduce business activity. True, it is not always possible and expedient to agree on certain issues with the performers, however, it is recommended to do this whenever possible, for example, by involving ordinary members of the organization in joint decision-making, consulting, etc.

Any transformation requires the presence of certain prerequisites that weaken the resistance of the members of the organization and ensure ultimate success.

To identify the main methodological aspects of effective change management in an organization, it is necessary to determine the content and main types of organizational changes.

If we consider changes from the point of view of their direction, then we should speak separately about the development and degradation of economic systems.

Organizational development is a management activity that aims to change the main aspects of the organization, aimed at increasing its effectiveness Gini Danielle Duck Monster of change. Reasons for success and failure of organizational reforms - M.: Alpina Publisher, 2003. - 320 p. .

Burke gives a different definition: organizational development is a process and method of purposeful, fundamental change in corporate culture in order to realize the mission and adapt the organization to a changing external environment Burke W.W. Organization Development: A Process of Learning and Changing. 2 ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1994. .

The Austrian scientist I. Schumpeter identified five typical changes:

1) the use of new equipment, new technological processes or new market support for production (purchase and sale);

introduction of products with new properties;

use of new raw materials;

4) changes in the organization of production and its logistics;

5) the emergence of new markets.

I. Schumpeter formulated these provisions back in 1911. Later, in the 30s, he already introduced the concept of innovation, interpreting it as a change with the aim of introducing and using new types of consumer goods, new production and transport vehicles, markets and forms of organization in industry.

The Research Institute for System Research (RNIISI) has developed a classification of innovations, taking into account the areas of activity of the enterprise. On this basis, innovations stand out:

technological, industrial, economic, trade, social, in the field of management.

To identify the features of managing changes in economic systems, the following typology of changes can be proposed Marinets I.N. Content and classification of organizational changes // Vestnik SevKavGTU. Series "Economics". No. 2 (10), 2003:

change as a response to the crisis;

changes as a process of implementing a new strategy;

"quiet" changes that occur mainly as a result of personnel reshuffle under the influence of the personal characteristics of the staff (these are changes in the socio-psychological climate in the team, unspoken rules of conduct, organizational culture, management priorities that can significantly affect the development strategies and performance of the organization) .

According to D. Boddy and R. Payton Boddy D., Payton R. Fundamentals of Management. Per. from English. / Under. ed. Yu.N. Kapturevsky. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 1999. - 816 p. , organizational changes affect the following elements of the organization: goals, technology, business processes, people, culture, structure, power.

In the process of organizational development, management focuses on any one of these elements, although the systemic nature of the organization means that its transformation affects the state of other subsystems.

F.J. Guiyar and D.N. Kelly define business transformation as "an organized redesign of the genetic architecture of a corporation, which is achieved as a result of the simultaneous work - albeit at different speeds - in four areas: reframing, restructuring, revitalization and renewal" Guillard F.J., Kelly D.N. Organization transformation. Per. from English. - M .: Delo,

Thus, a high level of uncertainty, the complexity and variety of organizational changes necessitate a comprehensive study of these processes and the development methodological foundations managing them.

1.2 Management of organizational change as main part modern organization management

Any organization is in the process of continuous change, otherwise its ability to survive in a dynamic environment is compromised. Changes in organizations in some cases occur purposefully on the basis of systematically developed concepts of planned improvements, in others they are rather informal and adaptive in nature, when the organization (or parts of it) quickly adapts to the external environment by modifying its behavior (as a reaction to current events).

The top level of management initiates decisions on the introduction of innovations, appoints individuals or groups of employees responsible for certain aspects of change. According to some experts, it is desirable that the processes of change be led by new people Hentze J., Kammel A. How to overcome opposition to planned organizational changes // Management and Marketing 1997 No. 3. This is advisable not only due to a possible lack of qualifications or lack of readiness for active support of the project from the existing management staff, but also because of the fear that changes otherwise will not find the right direction and the necessary momentum.

Organizational change planning covers analytical and predictive activities, the development of possible measures and the selection of an appropriate strategy. This should take into account the various levels of intervention in the old structure (individual, group, unit, organization as a whole), as well as numerous organizational parameters, in particular the following Volume H. Change Management. // Problems of theory and practice of management. - 1998. - No. 1. :

Ш structure and processes (in recent times increasingly in the direction of "smoothing" the hierarchy and a strict focus on the process of creating wealth in "horizontal organizations");

Ø production and information technology (for example, the introduction of resource-minimized production);

Ø organizational culture as a model of fundamental values ​​and principles shared by the members of the organization (their fundamental change turns out to be extremely difficult);

Ø human resources, for example, through the selection, development of personnel, incentive systems and motivational (with the "transformation" of behavior and attitudes) personnel management.

It is essential to distinguish between partial and radical changes. The former are based on existing value systems, structures and processes. In the course of partial transformations, the practical suitability of the project dominates, and not the unconditional achievement of an ideal (conceptual) state.

Radical changes are urgently needed in connection with the rapid development of the surrounding market environment after a long phase of stability and a long neglect of the necessary adaptation steps. Such a "revolutionary" process of change to achieve competitive advantage may be strategically desirable, but met with determined personnel resistance.

The analysis shows that change management can be applied in a wide variety of situations and take on a variety of forms of implementation. An important area for further research is the relationship that can arise between intra- and extra-firm conditions, the personnel parameters of an organization, various types of crises, and the main tools for managing change. First of all, it is necessary to clearly identify these links, and then make empirically substantiated assessments of the adequacy of the state of the enterprise and the tools for implementing changes.

Between the extreme forms of change - economic reengineering and organizational development - lies a number of intermediate options. They may differ in the degree of participation of the members of the organization and the freedom of action of top management in the implementation of change. Depending on this, emphasis is placed on economic and / or social efficiency. The type of crisis determines the urgency of the changes and thus the degree of their radicalness.

The successful application of this or that method essentially depends on the activities in the field of personnel management. Along with measures to preserve employment, differentiated concepts of staff cuts cannot be ignored.

Leaders of the change agenda must address employment issues in a non-destructive way for those who are laid off and seek to secure their use in the labor market. The goal of change management is not to reduce staff, but to unlock and realize its potential to increase the competitiveness of the enterprise.

The transformation of an organization or individual aspects of its activities is a complex, ambiguous and, to a large extent, conflict process. To start the transformation, you need to get to know the organization, its problems and the expectations of the people well enough.

The implementation of changes in the organization should be preceded by a deep analysis of the previous development, the existing state and opportunities. The structure of the organization, its goals and objectives, management systems, personnel, socio-psychological atmosphere should be analyzed.

The transformation program should include a number of stages, including preparation, collection of information, determination of areas of work and their consequences, organizational, technical and social design, practical implementation of preparatory changes. The planned stages should be carried out sequentially. Completion of each stage represents an important milestone in the implementation of the entire project. Each stage is subdivided into tasks that are implemented in a different sequence: some before others, some one after the other, and a number of them in parallel.

Organizational change management model by L. Greiner Greiner L.E., Metzger P.O. Management consulting // Society. sciences abroad. Ser. 2, Economics: RJ. - M.: INION, 1984. - N 6. - S. 113-118. Ref. on the book: Greiner L.E., Metzger R.O. Consulting to management. - Englewood Cliffs (N.Y.): Prentice-Hall, 1983. - XIII, 367 p. is one of the most common and successfully used in practice.

It consists of six stages:

III at the first stage, the management of the organization must realize the need for changes and be ready to carry them out;

III on the second - the management conducts a clear analysis of the organization's problems, for this external consultants are often involved. Close cooperation between management and consultants is essential here;

At the third stage, there is a detailing and deepening of understanding of the problems facing the organization. It is important to effectively use the employees of the organization, to ensure a high degree of their participation in the diagnosis and subsequent decision-making; the delegation process is enabled;

III at the fourth stage, it is necessary to find new, not outdated solutions, and get the support of employees. This is important because there is always a temptation to apply old solutions to new problems;

At the fifth stage, it is necessary to identify possible negative consequences of the changes with the help of experiments and make appropriate adjustments. In addition, the experiment can give certain units and individuals additional authority, as well as training to more effectively carry out the change process;

III in the sixth stage, it is necessary to properly motivate people so that they accept the ongoing changes.

When implementing systematic organizational change, one can also use the organizational change process model developed by Kurt Lewin, K. (1951) Field Theory in Social Science, Harper & Row. . According to this model, organizational change occurs in three stages:

"Defrosting"

making changes;

"freezing".

At the first stage, activities are carried out to create conditions for the successful implementation of changes and at the same time weaken the forces that keep the organization in its current state. "Unfreezing" involves creating motivation for change (discomfort) and then providing a vision of the future (informing in which direction you are going to move) Ibid. This step is often as difficult as learning new methods. It is not uncommon for executives who are focused on upcoming changes to overlook the need for “unfreezing,” which can lead to increased levels of resistance to change.

At the second stage, the actual transition from the existing state of the organization to the desired one takes place, the process of developing new behavior, position assessments is carried out. The process of change is the stage during which new ideas and practices are explored, when management should assist employees in learning new ways of thinking and acting. For some employees, this is a time of confusion, disorientation, overload and hopelessness, and at the same time - hopes, discoveries, inspiration.

The third stage is necessary to create mechanisms that guarantee the effective operation of the organization. “Freezing” involves the integration of new patterns of action into real practice, when they are accepted not only by the mind, but also by emotions, and are built into the daily activities of workers. Familiarization with the new procedure is not enough to apply it.

1.3 The role of counseling and training in bringing about organizational change

When implementing organizational changes, it is advisable to use the services of external consultants. Not all consulting companies are able to provide effective assistance in training the personnel of a company implementing organizational change. In this regard, the personnel management service should, based on an assessment of the need for training, make a choice of one or more training companies. In order to maintain a unified approach to the implementation of reforms, it is preferable that the consulting company accompanying the project be involved to the fullest extent possible in staff training. When choosing a training company, one should pay attention to the experience of trainers in organizations that have carried out such changes.

Consulting is professional assistance from experts in management of the economy to managers and management personnel of various organizations (client) in the analysis and solving problems of their functioning and development, carried out in the form of advice, recommendations and solutions jointly developed with the client Posadsky A.P. Consulting services in Russia -M., 1995.

In essence, consulting means what in our country used to be called "the introduction of science into production." However, consulting is a concept of a market economy, and then it differs from research and development activities in the former USSR to the same extent that a market economy differs from a centrally planned one. Consulting is carried out on a commercial basis by independent producers of consulting services in a competitive environment. This makes high demands on the quality and efficiency of such services and causes them to be customer-oriented.

In countries with market economies, the invitation of professionals is a prestigious evidence that the company has sufficient business culture to use the intellectual capital offered by the market in the field of management. The absence of specialist consultants in the development of a responsible decision is considered the same as the absence of an architect in the design of a building, a doctor in the treatment of a patient, or a designer in the development of a new car model.

The advantages of external consultants over the organization's own managers are as follows: Posadsky A.P. Consulting services in Russia - M., 1995:

1) independence, impartiality of views;

2) a broader outlook, the possession of extensive information in various areas of management and management (due to the lower load on current management problems);

3) orientation towards a broad study and transfer of experience of other organizations (this mainly concerns external consultants).

Consulting services are most often carried out in the form of consulting projects, and not in the form of oral, one-time advice. They include the following main steps:

1) diagnostics (problem identification);

2) development of solutions;

3) implementation of solutions.

The implementation of such a project can take from several days to several months. Sometimes contacts with clients can be long-term.

From the point of view of methods, the following types of counseling can be distinguished: expert, process and training. At expert advice the consultant independently carries out diagnostics, development of solutions and recommendations for their implementation. The role of the client is mainly to provide the consultant with access to information and evaluate the results. At process consulting consultants at all stages of the project actively interact with the client, encouraging him to express his ideas, considerations, suggestions, to analyze problems and develop solutions with the help of consultants. At the same time, the role of consultants is mainly to absorb (collect) these external and internal ideas, evaluate the solutions obtained in the process of joint work with the client and bring them into a system of recommendations. At educational counseling the consultant not only collects ideas, analyzes solutions, but also prepares the ground for their emergence, providing the client with relevant theoretical and practical information in the form of lectures, seminars, manuals, etc.

It is better to start the presentation of consulting with the statement of one Western specialist who expressed the essence of the matter: “Many business owners mistakenly believe that a consultant is a person who has all the right answers. In reality, the opposite is true. A good consultant is a person who asks the right questions.” Of all the definitions in counseling, this is the most technologically advanced, placing all the important accents. Indeed, the consultant, when starting work, knows much less than the manager about the enterprise and its problems (here the common argument “how can an outsider come and advise something useful?”) Works. But, having performed diagnostics, the consultant knows much more, and in many situations this knowledge is simply impossible to acquire in any other way. In the same way, the doctor, having checked the patient's tests, comes to certain conclusions that the patient would not have made even if he had all the medical equipment.

The consultant's arsenal includes the study of documentation, participant observation, business games, surveys, testing, experiment. But the most effective and common research method is the in-depth one-on-one interview with key workers enterprises, managers and performers, with buyers, suppliers. An independent position allows him to obtain exclusive information: he does not lobby for the interests of individual groups, he is not interested in his future position in the hierarchy, he is not obliged to convey the careless statements of respondents “upstairs”. This is well understood by the respondents, who, in turn, take the opportunity to voice their burning problems, partly in the hope of finally solving them, partly because someone is finally listening to them. The head of the enterprise does not have a chance to hear the same thing from a grass-roots worker: between them there is an abyss of status and a wall of subordination. Buyers and suppliers are also willing to share information, hoping to solve their problems and / or sincerely want to help. Even competitors can sometimes get information without any special tricks if they consider the enterprise as a potential buyer or supplier.

The overall picture is formed by the consultant from the entire amount of information received, perceived and processed on the basis of previous experience and knowledge. This picture is always subjective (the situation can never be assessed completely objectively by anyone), therefore the quality of consulting is determined to a greater extent by the professionalism and personal merits of a particular specialist than by his belonging to a firm. As for the leader, he receives information in the form in which it can be useful to him, and the volume that he really needs. In the words of the American businessman McCormack: “Good consultants are independent. They will tell you what you should know, not what you would like to hear. Quoted from: Hentze J., Kammel A. How to overcome opposition to planned organizational changes // Management and Marketing 1997 No. 3 .

In general, it can be said that the successful use of counseling solves all the problems of the manager in terms of diagnosing the situation (if he manages to overcome the desire to “put his head in the sand” and isolate himself from some uncomfortable facts), as well as a significant part of the problems with planning and implementing changes.

However, there are limitations for this technology, usually due to the internal situation of the enterprise.

First, professional services are expensive. A good consultant requires good pay. Ultimately, the only significant reason for inviting a consultant is the economic effect, which the manager has to evaluate on the prompt of the same intuition.

Second, a consultant can help different firms to varying degrees. Leaders who are least capable of independent change are also less likely to accept professional help. Some, inviting a consultant, describe in detail his job descriptions, and as a result weed out professionals. Others (mostly authoritarian owners who are at war with their staff) invite a consultant as part of the entourage and do not receive information simply because they do not need it. Still others are ready to accept outside advice only as a justification for their own decisions.

Thirdly, it is quite difficult to choose a good consultant without experience. There are no big names in Russia yet, it is much easier to turn to a random company and get a conveyor-made product than to find a “piece goods” and achieve the desired result.

The decision whether or not to accept consulting can be simplified by considering whether the manager knows the answers to existing questions about the operation of his firm. If he is convinced that he knows everything, no consultant will lead him out of error. If he knows partially, then you can weigh resources and benefits, analyze approaches, meet people. The final decision “yes” should be taken after meeting with at least two consultants.

2. Methods of change management: organizational aspect

2.1 Project methods of change management

In a rapidly changing, turbulent environment, modern organizations are forced to continuously transform. Most often, these changes are carried out reactively, which often leads to loss of competitive advantage and sometimes to the death of organizations. Proactive (proactive) implementation of change requires knowledge of the basic patterns of this process, sources of resistance to organizational change and methods to overcome them.

Project management is a carefully planned and organized system of measures aimed at solving a specific problem (for example, building a house or creating a new computer system). The management of any project involves the development of a project plan with the obligatory definition of goals and a description of how to achieve these goals. In other words, the project developer must decide in advance how, in what time frame and with the involvement of what financial, human and other resources to achieve the goals of the project. This means that along with the plan, he needs to create a system of measures to ensure control over its implementation. During the implementation of the project, it is important not to "go behind" the schedule in the areas of work that lie on the "critical path" and link the most problematic parts of the plan, on which the timely execution of the project as a whole depends. In other words, the plan must be carried out according to the plan.

The main stages of the project implementation include: study of the fundamental feasibility of the project, planning, implementation, evaluation and provision of resources Hentze J., Kammel A. How to overcome opposition to planned organizational changes // Management and Marketing 1997 No. 3.

Most enterprises, unfortunately, do not have sufficient resources and qualified personnel to ensure effective management of reengineering projects. In addition, reengineering is a truly project-based, "hard" method of making changes, aimed at changing the organization's business processes, breaking down functional boundaries. Like any rigid method, it is associated with strong resistance to change. And not every company can go for it. In addition, all modern Western research suggests that pure project management methods are not suitable for change management, because. do not take into account changing goals as projects are implemented and overcoming resistance - a consequence of this is failure to meet deadlines, exceeding budgets, demotivating project teams).

Another difficulty, oddly enough, lies in the growing popularity of the very concept of reengineering. A systematic approach to reengineering is often replaced by frank attempts to “paint the facade” of a hopelessly outdated building. As a result, managers actively use fashionable terminology snatched from the context of the concept, but decisions are made on the basis of the “wastebasket” principle. Briefly, the essence of this approach is as follows. Faced with the need to improve performance, the manager looks for a set of “homemade” recipes and remedies from among those that worked well in the recent past, but were, in his opinion, undeservedly forgotten or sent to the wastebasket (by one of the higher officials). Next, the manager selects the most attractive among these time-tested drugs, effectively presents them to the authorities and opens a new improvement project ... Needless to say, such “permanent improvements” sooner or later end up in the same place where they came from.

The most effective way to improve an organization's performance is to harmonize all existing resources, strategies, work processes, technologies, organizational structures, training systems, etc., so that it is able to create products or services that meet customer expectations.

In the language of organizational process management, this purposefulness is denoted by the well-known term - "focus on the consumer." The work processes of the organization, according to the same terminology, are interconnected sets of functions and procedures performed over a certain time, leading to the achievement of certain results.

Projects, from the point of view of the process approach to managing activities, are the same full-fledged processes as other processes. This most often explains the "natural rejection" of the project when trying to implement it within a functionally oriented organization. In most cases, small businesses are forced to bring in external experts to the project management team, and the limited resources of such enterprises allow them to manage no more than three to five projects at a time.

Project change management can be done in a variety of ways. Consider the differences in the policy of applying design methods in more detail.

Directive policy Ansoff I. Strategic management. Per. from English - M.: Economics, 1989 - 536 p. . . Its essence boils down to the fact that innovations are carried out by the manager without the involvement of team members. The goal of such a policy is rapid change in a crisis situation, and team members will have to put up with changes because of their inevitability. A necessary condition is the strong personality of the manager, the availability of the necessary information and the ability to suppress the resistance of the team. At the same time, the manager must have significant authority, full power and the necessary stamina to bring the initiated changes to the end. It is clear that a policy of directive change is effective when other policy options cannot be applied.

Negotiation policy. The manager is the initiator of innovation; he negotiates with the team, in which partial concessions and mutual agreements are possible. Team members can express their opinion and understanding of the essence of innovations.

Policy for achieving common goals. Its essence lies in the fact that managers, involving consultants - specialists in the field of management, not only receive the consent of the team to introduce innovations, but also set goals for the introduction of innovations for each member of the organization, determining their responsibility for achieving goals, both personal and overall. organizations.

Analytical policy. The manager attracts specialists - experts who study the problem, collect information, analyze it and develop optimal solutions without involving a team of workers and without taking into account their personal problems.

Trial and error policy. The manager cannot define the problem clearly enough. Groups of workers are involved in the implementation of innovations, who try approaches to solving the problem and learn from their mistakes.

2.2 Methods of business process reengineering

In 1993, American management specialists M. Hammer and J. Champy Hammer M., Champy J. Corporation Reengineering: A Manifesto for a Revolution in Business. SPb., 1997. in general terms formulated the concept of business reengineering. In their opinion, economic reengineering is a fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of the enterprise and its critical processes. The result is a dramatic (order of magnitude) improvement in key quantifiable cost, quality, service, and time metrics. According to this concept, we should talk about a deep reorganization of the enterprise along the entire value chain. The process of meeting the needs of the client is also subject to a radical reorganization.

An important prerequisite for achieving such ambitious goals is the orientation towards the production process and the customer, as well as the creative use of the latest information technology in the workplace of competent employees. New solutions must be consciously implemented in a non-democratic way. Leadership is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals who are endowed with all the necessary legitimate power to vigorously and for short term implement the intended changes.

Business process reengineering is defined as: “The fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve significant improvements in such key performance indicators for modern business as cost, quality, service level and responsiveness” Ibid.

Business processes are interrelated types of work performed over a certain period of time and leading to the achievement of certain results. As a rule, these processes begin with the identification of requirements and end with the establishment of relationships with suppliers.

At the center of any revision of the business process is meeting the needs of internal and external customers. It depends on the strategy of the enterprise what needs to be accepted as key processes. But the focus should be on only a few of them (for example, the development of new products, the integration of logistics, etc.).

Auxiliary processes should not be optimized by themselves, but solely taking into account the needs of key processes.

It is also necessary to approach the problems of the so-called points of intersection of interests in a new way.

Particular attention is paid to information technology. The purpose of its implementation is the complete processing of information about customers and production. This is about completely new areas of application, and not just about automating processes.

Thanks to the targeted use of data banks, expert systems, telecommunication networks, it is possible to significantly expand the scope of employees' tasks.

A more advanced information base will not bring the desired result if the competence of the personnel is not changed, meaning not only organizational (duties, powers), but also purely qualification (capabilities, abilities, skills) parameters. In this regard, the authors of the concept of economic reengineering speak of "authorized" employees who must become "professionals of the process."

Collaboration among staff (eg in working groups) should be radically improved. As needed, an employee should have means of communication with any colleague.

Other changes in the field of personnel management are also needed. Thus, the new base of compensations (wages) is especially important. The incentive system should focus primarily on the actual abilities of employees, and not on their previous merits.

Each company implements business process reengineering in its own way.

"Own" approach to business process reengineering often allows the company to significantly increase its "index of success". This approach makes it possible to make the best use of organizational, economic and political factors to assist the company in its desire to take a unique, unique position in the market, in other words, to position itself and become recognizable to everyone. more real and potential consumers.

But this requires a deep understanding of the company's inherent strengths, opportunities, weaknesses and threats. Only then will it be able to meaningfully extract the essence of the results of business process reengineering in its own and other industries and successfully apply the solutions that are most suitable for it. This subtlety is often overlooked in the methodologies offered by some management consultants. When borrowing the results of previous successful and unsuccessful attempts at business process reengineering, it is very important to obtain the most complete (as far as possible) understanding of the specifics of the company for which this borrowing is carried out.

According to experts, the probability of success of a future business process reengineering program ranges from 25 to 75% Efremov V.S. Strategic Management in the Context of Organizational Development Management in Russia and Abroad No. 1 / 1999 . Filling the gap between theory and practice of business process reengineering is very important.

Change management must be based less and less on exaggerated hopes of success and more on facts and evidence. This implies the expediency of terminating some business process reengineering programs before they can be implemented. Recently, there has been a growing awareness of the importance of managing business process reengineering programs. It is worth emphasizing that the synchronization of redesign and implementation (implementation) of business processes is a rather difficult task. For example, intervening in the company's traditional supply chains (in the field of logistics) or in the development of the organization's strategy requires high managerial skill.

Companies with: 1) well thought out, 2) adequately resourced, and 3) properly implemented business process reengineering programs can achieve significant results.

If at least one of these three components of success is missing, then the results may differ significantly for the worse from the expected ones.

So, business process reengineering is systems approach to improve the performance of the organization, designed to optimize the value system of the organization over a period of time Hammer M., Champy J. Reengineering of the corporation: Manifesto of a revolution in business. SPb., 1997. . Improving the effectiveness of the organization in the long term should be the same daily concern of managers as the operational indicators of its current work.

The most critical resource of any organization is its people. Without their support and commitment to the interests of the organization, no company, even the most prosperous one, can survive. Therefore, the education and training of personnel should be as important to the organization as the reengineering of its processes.

However, reengineering, like the introduction of any other changes, must be carried out very carefully, taking into account the interests of people and with the full support of management. Reengineering teams should be small but include all levels of employees. In a small enterprise, each employee has his own daily duties, so the number of priority projects is strictly limited, not only during reengineering, but also during the daily work of a process-oriented organization.

The best results are achieved when all employees of the company are involved in the reengineering project as quickly as possible and the results of the implementation of each significant stage are summed up.

Of particular importance is the thorough preparation of employees for the transition from their functional tasks to process-oriented ones. Each of them needs some of the old duties to be preserved in his new status. This maintains a welcoming climate in the company, as well as a sense of confidence and readiness for change.

The concept of business process reengineering has a lot of different interpretations.

The areas of its application are so diverse and unlike each other that even among specialists in this field of management there is still no common point of view. From a corporate point of view, reengineering certainly represents a massive overhaul of activities based on the modernization of all work processes and the use of the latest information technologies. The media most often sees such a restructuring as a veiled way to carry out massive job cuts - "a forced measure taken by the administration to save business."

While differences in terms of terminology and scope of the concept of business process reengineering can usually be overcome, the situation is different with companies offering services in this market. Almost every consultant promotes his own know-how to the market, which, in his opinion, compares favorably with the proposals of competitors. As a result, methodology and tools vary from project to project and from one consulting firm to another. The lack of uniformity and approved standards is still a serious problem in building a reliable and mutually consistent theory of business process reengineering.

In addition, the reengineering and transformation of the business, which were carried out by companies like GE, IBM, ended in success only thanks to the leaders of the organizations (not one, but tens and hundreds in each) and the great work that they did with the staff Kanter R. Frontiers of Management (a book about modern management culture). M., 1999. .

2.3 Methods of organizational development

Organizational development refers to the concept of planning, initiating and implementing the processes of changing social systems with the involvement of a wide range of participants Efremov V.S. Strategic Management in the Context of Organizational Development Management in Russia and Abroad No. 1 / 1999 . Supporters of the evolutionary concept proceed from the fact that, first of all, the views, value ideas and behaviors of the members of the sociotechnical system should change, and then the system itself ("organization" in the institutional sense).

Similar Documents

Analysis of the concept of organizational change. The role of counseling and training in bringing about change in an organization. Methods of business process reengineering. The value of human resources for the success of the implementation of changes and the role of the personnel management service.

thesis, added 03/18/2010


Theoretical foundations of change management in the organization. Four stages of the change process. Four levels of organization activity. Phases of organizational change. Critical points of the phases of change. Practical application of management in the enterprise.

term paper, added 02/14/2007


The importance of human resources for the success of the implementation of changes and the role of the personnel management service in innovation management. Methods of business process reengineering and organizational development. The role of counseling and training in bringing about change.

term paper, added 05/19/2015


Problems of development and changes in organizations. Organizational response to development environment(connections, requirements and opportunities) as a prerequisite for changes in the organization. Hard, soft and integral methods of change management in the organization.

abstract, added 11/05/2009


Types of changes and their causes. Change management models. Processes and procedures aimed at introducing and implementing changes in the organization. Decision making in change management. Causes of resistance to change and methods for their elimination.

abstract, added 06/04/2014


Definition, concept, scope of changes. Change management models "Theory E" and "Theory O". Improving the efficiency of the enterprise by carrying out changes based on the integral method of changes according to the Rampersad TPS model.

thesis, added 03/22/2009


Factors that determine the possibilities of organizational development and features of organizational changes. Management principles and levels of change. success factors. Stages of planning organizational changes according to A.P. Yegorshin. Types of changes and their typology.

presentation, added 09/30/2016


Characteristics of organizational changes, specifics of diagnosing the needs for change, levels of change. Analysis of the field of forces, classification of approaches to the implementation of changes. Features of conflict management, interpersonal styles of conflict resolution.

abstract, added 06/14/2010


Analysis of transformations in the organization in the conditions of changes on the example of a banking institution. Characteristics of domestic and foreign experience in change management. The ability of managers and employees of an organization to adapt to a particular situation.

term paper, added 10/27/2015


Studying the essence and main tasks of organizational change management. Information prerequisites for updating. Biological business transformation model. The concept of reframing. Typology of changes in the organization - proactive and reactive nature.

Norbert Tom Director of the Institute for Organization and Personnel, University of Bern (Switzerland)
From the archives of the journal "Problems of Theory and Practice of Management"

Today it is obvious that in order to survive in the market and remain competitive, enterprises must from time to time make changes to their business activities. Moreover, the need for changes has become so frequent that their impact on the life cycle of an enterprise is no longer considered an exceptional phenomenon. In practice and research, more and more attention is paid to the analysis of methods and organizational capabilities of change management ("change management").

The concept of change management covers all planned, organized and controlled changes in the strategy, production processes, structure and culture of any socio-economic system, including private and public enterprises. "Change Management" deals with specific issues of enterprise management, including organizational, personnel, communication and information aspects.

Prerequisites for change

The fundamentally important question is: how can an enterprise withstand changes in the external environment (which occur frequently, but irregularly and almost unpredictably), and also, with the help of preliminary measures or a response, maintain its viability and achieve its goals. The enterprise must constantly monitor the main components of the environment and draw conclusions about its needs for change. Typically, these components are economic(for example, globalization of the market or its regional differentiation), technological(rapid spread of new technologies), political and legal(changes in legislation), socio-cultural(demographic shifts, changes in the value system) and physical and environmental(climatic conditions, load on the ecosystem).

An enterprise facing the need for change is greatly influenced by production and personnel options. The first category includes strategic business areas, the organization and course of the production process, corporate culture, the technology used, and property relations. Among the personnel parameters, the most important are such as the psychological ability of the members of the organization to perceive changes, personal ambitions, opportunities for professional development, readiness for cooperation.

As a rule, crisis situations are the impetus for change. From an economic point of view, crises should be distinguished by the areas in which they pose a danger to the achievement of corporate goals. So, liquidity crisis means a real loss of solvency. Therefore, urgent action is needed, otherwise the enterprise will be forced to leave the market (for example, as a result of its sale at an auction or other liquidation procedures).

Crisis of success characterized by a clear negative deviation of the actual state from the planned one (for example, in terms of sales, cash receipts, profits, profitability, costs, etc.). The causes of such a crisis may be errors in market research, production, investment, personnel policy.

Less visible and less immediate is strategic crisis. Although the position of the company at the moment (the situation of success) may seem quite satisfactory, its onset must be diagnosed if there are failures in the development of the enterprise, the potential for success is reduced, and the protective capabilities in competition are weakened. The emerging gap between likely and desired outcomes can only be bridged by changing or adopting a new orientation (eg, entering new markets, product or technology innovations). As a rule, such changes are calculated for many years.

Two extreme approaches to change management

Changes in strategy, processes, structure, and culture can be gradual, in small steps, or radically, in large leaps. In this regard, one speaks of evolutionary and revolutionary change models. In the spirit of such an "extreme" classification, it is expedient to present the concepts of changes in sociotechnical systems.

Revolutionary changes in the framework of "reengineering of economic activity"

In 1993, American management specialists M. Hammer and J. Champi formulated the concept of business reengineering in general terms. In their opinion, economic reengineering is a fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of the enterprise and its most important processes. The result is a dramatic (order of magnitude) improvement in key quantifiable cost, quality, service, and time metrics. According to this concept, we should talk about a deep reorganization of the enterprise along the entire value chain. The process of meeting the needs of the client is also subject to a radical reorganization.

An important prerequisite for achieving such ambitious goals is the orientation towards the production process and the customer, as well as the creative use of the latest information technology in the workplace of competent employees. New solutions must be consciously implemented in a non-democratic way. Leadership is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals who are endowed with all the necessary legitimate power to carry out the planned changes energetically and in a short time.

At the center of any revision of the business process is meeting the needs of internal and external customers. It depends on the strategy of the enterprise what needs to be accepted as key processes. But the focus should be on only a few of them (for example, the development of new products, the integration of logistics, etc.).

Auxiliary processes should not be optimized by themselves, but solely taking into account the needs of key processes. It is also necessary to approach the problems of the so-called points of intersection of interests in a new way.

Particular attention is given information technology. The purpose of its implementation is the complete processing of information about customers and production. This is about completely new areas of application, and not just about automating processes. Thanks to the targeted use of data banks, expert systems, telecommunication networks, it is possible to significantly expand the scope of employees' tasks.

A more advanced information base will not bring the desired result if the competence of the personnel is not changed, meaning not only organizational (duties, powers), but also purely qualification (capabilities, abilities, skills) parameters. In this regard, the authors of the concept of economic reengineering speak of "authorized" employees who must become "professionals of the process."

Collaboration among staff (eg in working groups) should be radically improved. As needed, an employee should have means of communication with any colleague. Other changes in the field of personnel management are also needed. Thus, the new base of compensations (wages) is especially important. The incentive system should focus primarily on the actual abilities of employees, and not on their previous merits.

Evolutionary change within organizational development

Organizational development refers to the concept of planning, initiating and implementing processes for changing social systems with the involvement of a wide range of participants. Supporters of the evolutionary concept proceed from the fact that, first of all, the views, value ideas and behaviors of the members of the sociotechnical system should change, and then the system itself ("organization" in the institutional sense).

Organizational development is defined as a long-term, rigorous, comprehensive process of changing and developing an organization and its people. The process is based on the training of all employees through direct interaction and the transfer of practical experience. The purpose of the changes is to simultaneously improve the productivity of the organization and the quality of work.

This definition already outlines the main normative provisions of organizational development. Changes must be made by the members of the organization. Internal and external consultants (so-called change agents) can act as an auxiliary force, but not as the main agents of change. This is expressed in the postulate "self-reliance" (without dependence on experts), as well as "people affected by change become their participants." In this way, organizational development can contribute to the democratization of labor. Unnecessary hierarchical levels should be eliminated, and power relations should be reduced to the level of partnership with an emphasis on mutual trust.

The expanded concept of organizational development includes both structural and personnel aspects. As part of structural approach an attempt is made through changes in organizational regulation (for example, organizational plans, descriptions of individual role functions) to create favorable framework conditions for achieving organizational development goals. Personnel approach consists in carrying out activities to improve the skills of employees (personnel development) and stimulate their readiness to accept and implement changes. Undoubtedly, the goal setting of organizational development (economic and social efficiency) should be based on a combination of both approaches.

Organizational development is carried out in several stages. First, there is a "defrosting" of the social system. The views, values ​​and behaviors of the members of the system are called into question and an examination of their suitability for achieving system goals (productivity, innovative activity, humanization of labor) is carried out. At the second stage, the movement towards change begins. New models of behavior and organizational regulation are tested and strengthened in the course of staff training.

Comparison of the main methods of change management

Processes of change require a logical conclusion, since it is known that they can last indefinitely. Therefore, it is necessary to stabilize and consolidate new, officially legalized models of behavior and organizational rules. This occurs at the stage of the so-called freezing of the process of change.

Within the framework of the concept of organizational development, it is important to establish where in the organizational hierarchy is the starting point for the process of change, which will subsequently become all-encompassing for the social system. The concept under consideration in this respect is very different from the concept of economic reengineering. If the latter is characterized by a top-down movement, then the concept of organizational development is much richer in options. It allows not only the reverse course of the process ("bottom up"), but also its initiation in the lower and upper parts of the hierarchy simultaneously (the so-called bipolar strategy).

The process of change can also start in several hierarchical links, different special areas and at different hierarchical levels (the "many points" strategy) or like a wedge in the center of the hierarchical structure, gradually spreading to adjacent layers of the social system (the "wedge" strategy).

It should be noted that the method of organizational development (at least its most significant components) is widely used in the organizational practice of modern enterprises.

Comparison of approaches

The assessment of the feasibility of using a particular method depends on many factors. Staff attitudes towards change and understanding of authority by both management and employees are critical. Situational readiness for change, in accordance with one of the extreme concepts, should be assessed depending on the type of crisis in which the social system finds itself.

Under the conditions of a liquidity crisis, organizational development cannot be considered as a serious alternative to economic reengineering, while the principles and techniques of the former provide sufficient opportunities for solving problems during a strategic crisis. It is especially important to make the right decision regarding the choice of approach in the event of a crisis of success. In this case, first of all, one should take into account the personnel factor, as well as economic parameters.

In the table, the considered methods are compared according to a number of the most important criteria.

The underlying idea of ​​each of the methods of change determines the role functions of the participants in the process. government representative ( in economic reengineering - a leader, in organizational development - a "catalyst of change"), by virtue of a high position in the organizational hierarchy, legitimizes the process of change, provides the necessary resources, and removes systemic barriers. In business reengineering, top management assumes the role of a powerful agent of change. In organizational development, a "catalyst of change" can speed up or slow down (which happens more often) the process of change.

Function responsible for the execution of the process(in case of economic reengineering - "master of the process", in organizational development - "agent of change") is to form project team, prevent bureaucratic interference, and directly inspire and motivate participants. They also have the function of the main coordinators. They provide information about the progress of change.

Finally, the role specialists(respectively "Chief Reengineering" and "Change Agent" in conjunction with "Client System") is to provide a change toolkit. This may include teaching change techniques (process analysis, creativity techniques, group exercises, etc.), as well as applying specific knowledge to problem solutions. Within the framework of organizational development, special knowledge is not monopolized by the “change agent”, the forces of the “client system” are consciously involved in cooperation, i.e. employees of the reorganized area. All participants in the process, of course, must cooperate effectively and work in an atmosphere of freedom.

The idea of ​​differentiated and integrated change management

The analysis shows that change management can be applied in a wide variety of situations and take on a variety of forms of implementation. An important area for further research is the relationship that can arise between intra- and extra-firm conditions, the personnel parameters of an organization, various types of crises, and the main tools for managing change. First of all, it is necessary to clearly identify these links, and then make empirically substantiated assessments of the adequacy of the state of the enterprise and the tools for implementing changes (see diagram).

Between the extreme forms of change - economic reengineering and organizational development - lies a number of intermediate options. They may differ in the degree of participation of the members of the organization and the freedom of action of top management in the implementation of change. Depending on this, emphasis is placed on economic and / or social efficiency. The type of crisis determines the urgency of the changes and thus the degree of their radicalness.

The successful application of this or that method essentially depends on the activities in the field of personnel management. Along with measures to preserve employment, differentiated concepts of staff cuts cannot be ignored. Leaders of the change agenda must address employment issues in a non-destructive way for those who are laid off and seek to secure their use in the labor market. The goal of change management is not to reduce staff, but to unlock and realize its potential to increase the competitiveness of the enterprise.

Starting Framework for Differentiated and Integrated Change Management

Change is inevitable. But they must and, to a certain extent, can be controlled. Change management is a process that has its own logic. There are several stages, each of which has its own characteristics and requires appropriate personal, team and organizational competencies.

1. SOW THE SEEDS OF CHANGE
2. CREATE IN And THE DAY OF THE FUTURE
3. PREPARE THE WAY
4. IMPLEMENT THE TRANSFORMATION
5. INTEGRATE CHANGES

Let us consider these stages in more detail in relation to the process of global organizational transformations. For more local changes, the logic will be the same, only the scale and depth of development will change.

1. SOW THE SEEDS OF CHANGE.

Recognize the need for change. Diagnose and identify root problems. Determine the leader of change and the core of the team.

This is the starting point of change, at this stage the need for change should be realized not only by its initiators, but also take possession of the minds of the public. From 1 to 6 months is enough for the idea of ​​the importance of making changes to take root in the mood of the team. If no further action is taken, then the stage of “fermentation” begins, decomposing the one that affects people and business, so you should not delay this stage.

In parallel with the promotion of the idea of ​​the importance of changes to the masses, it is necessary to diagnose the state of the organization in order to adequately assess the situation. Here you need to look at what is happening from different angles: shareholders, employees, customers, partners, competitors. The difficulty is that you need an “unblurred” professional look. For this, a person "from outside" can be invited, the main thing is that he be competent and independent in his conclusions.

Diagnostics should give an accurate snapshot of the state of the company: the stage of organizational development, organizational pathologies and gaps in the management system. High-quality diagnostics and discussion of its results with top management is already partly the treatment of congestion.

In diagnostics, it is important not only to state the existing organizational pathologies, but to identify the key problems that trigger symptomatic manifestations. For example, most employees may feel that the main problem in the wrong organizational structure. Perhaps the company really needs restructuring. However, if at the same time, the company has a contradictory corporate strategy that is not accepted by employees, or, for example, there is no clear motivation system - until these issues are worked out, changes in the structure can only give the appearance of improvements for a short period.

The central question of organizational change is who will carry it out. Of course, ideally, this is the first person of the company. However, not always he can and wants to do it himself, because he can have many representative functions, including key sales. One way or another, we need a person who will become the locomotive of the process of intra-organizational change. Finding such a person within the company is a great success. But this does not always work out, and it is understandable - if such a leader were in the company, transformations would already be underway. Maybe, of course, there is such a person, but he does not have enough authority. Then it is important to see it and help. If there is no such employee, you need to look for him in the market. And it's not easy, let's say it's a whole epic, but it must be done. Essentially, what is needed is an organizational development integrator, a person with leadership experience, transformational leadership competencies, managerial mindset, and entrepreneurial spirit.

In addition, it is important to start building a change team already. The core of this team should be caring employees, committed to the company, focused on the future, and able to pull others along. And, what is extremely important, those who want to work as a team for the result. Often young, yet underestimated talents with leadership potential can become such agents of change - it is important to be able to discern them.

1. at the organizational level - system diagnostics of the organization according to formal features and "weak" signals.
2. on the collective level - collecting information, "actively selling" the idea of ​​the need for changes to the team, forming the core of the change team.
3. on the individual - the choice of a leader of transformations, individual work with opinion leaders, "recruitment" of active supporters.

2. CREATE IN And DAY OF THE FUTURE.

State the values ​​of the organization. Define strategic goals organizations and a set of indicators of their achievement.

Now, when it is clear “where we are and what is happening to us”, when there is a change leader and the core of the team, it is necessary to “give birth” to the key ideas of self-identification and development, to formulate the company’s values, on the basis of which it will be built in and the company's direction.

AT and The company's development vision is a desirable image of the future, built on key values ​​and development ideas. To formulate in and It is necessary to integrate the past, present and desired future, so the following factors should be taken into account:

1. history and traditions of the company, its uniqueness, brand and reputation;
2. market position of the company, closest competitors;
3. target customers, products, company economics;
4. internal resources of the company - opportunities and limitations;
5. market development trends, possible industry development scenarios; opportunities and threats for the company;

AT and A vision can be formulated by one brilliant visionary, or it can be formed by a team of like-minded people. In any case, in and deniya carries a personal component, a particle of an individual subjective understanding of the desired future, reflects the values ​​of those who are in it and the vision creates, and who will implement it. This is very important point- before in and The creation will begin to live its own separate life, it is necessary to recharge with the energy of those who created it. Therefore, the participation of people who created in and in the process of its implementation.

AT and ion is a field of charged information, an energy that:

• evokes a distinct and positive virtual image of a future that is clearly better than the present;
• inspires pride, enthusiasm, creates a sense of accomplishment, weeds out the irrelevant and fills with confidence;
• clarifies the idea of ​​purpose and direction, gives meaning to the changes that are expected from people;
• reflects the uniqueness of the organization and sets standards of excellence that reflect high ideals;
• creates perspective, connects the present with the future, guides daily activities;
• moves people to action;

Create new in and only those who are dedicated to their cause can do it; is able to break away from the realities of today and for a while plunge headlong into the world of ideas; has a liveliness of mind, "intellectual agility", large-scale thinking that goes beyond stereotypes and clichés.

However, in and Thinking, no matter how creative and even insane it may look, makes sense only when it is clear how to go about it, and, therefore, should be decomposed into key strategic goals with clear criteria for achieving them.

Here the help of people with a critical mindset, people who stand firmly on the ground will be invaluable. These people are able to evaluate the feasibility of ideas, their practical viability.

These types of people can be described as "dreamer", "critic" and "realist". In order to formulate truly innovative in and ment, either one person should combine these roles, or there should be bright representatives of these types in the team. But the leader of change must integrate them together.

Of course, this is a simplified version of the alignment of forces in the change team. You always have to deal with the alignment of people, which, as they say, got the situation. And the main task of the leader is to skillfully, for the benefit of the business, dispose of this alignment.

At this stage, it is important not only to formulate in and mission and strategic goals. The composition of the team is quite "mobile". In discussions, people, their true face and attitude towards future changes are more clearly visible. There is a process of mutual grinding, sometimes developing into a "storm". The task of the leader is to help the team find integrity.

So, at this stage, the following steps are required:

1. at the organizational level - the formulation of the company's values ​​and vision;
2. on the collective - exchange of views, brainstorming, strategic sessions, team building;
3. on an individual basis - work with team members to integrate personal and group interests, personal work with opinion leaders.

3. PREPARE THE PATH.

Form a strong coalition of change. Develop a company strategy that includes a transformation program at the organizational, collective and individual levels, systematically covering production (services), finance, sales,H.R.

AT and The vision can be different (and this shows the individuality of its creators) - a general picture that gives only the outlines of the future or a very accurate detailed description of tomorrow. In any case, further and The goal should be decomposed into goals and objectives that form the way to achieve it. Without specifying what should be done, by whom, when and what are the criteria for achieving the goals, in and The day will remain just a beautiful dream.

This is how a strategy appears - a system of agreed and interconnected company targets that develops into business plans, projects, operational orders and procedures through which specific employees will achieve specific results.

The planned plan dictates the architecture of the company. At the same time, the organizational structure is formed under the pressure of three variables: strategic objectives, current functionality, personnel component. Matching these variables makes organizational design a non-linear process.

As a rule, it is the presence or absence of the necessary personnel that becomes the criterion for the speed and quality of changes. The right people to bring about change are needed at all levels of decision making. Obviously, it is far from always possible to find such people within the company or pick them up on the market. Therefore, before starting changes, it is important to assess whether people in managerial positions are able to carry out changes - this is a matter of worldview (how close the ideas of change are to these people), and competencies (how motivated and capable they are), and psychotype (how much the psychological constitution of these people corresponds to the tasks before them).

Finding the right people for key positions is, in many ways, the key to the success of further actions. Changes should be of a systemic nature, therefore, all key employees - managers, informal leaders - should gradually be included in the process of forming a change program. And through them, the rest of the staff. It is the process of forming a coalition of change.

The Coalition for Change is a wide range of people involved in change. Each of them has its own role, its own interests, but all of them can be useful in their own way for the transformation process. The following categories can be distinguished:

1. Sponsors. As a rule, these are the owners or the first person of the company. Their main role is to empower the change leader with the authority and resources to drive change. Enlisting such support is necessary before the start of the entire process, moreover, it is important, as they say, to agree on the shore on the rights, responsibilities of the parties and the rules of interaction, preferably on paper.
2. Leader. The ideological inspirer and locomotive of the process of change. This is a person who must take personal responsibility for the results of changes, and for this he must have real authority and power, up to the dismissal of employees.
3. fiery souls. Active supporters and conductors of the new course. The task of the leader is to find such people, involve them in the process of transformation and unite them, and help them work as a single team. These can be people of different status and degree of influence on the process. It is important to direct their energy in the right direction - to expand the coalition and achieve their goals.
4. Supporters. These are employees who generally support the ongoing changes, but are not the bearers of ideas and their conductors. They vote yes, but are unlikely to take active steps to introduce the new one. These people are useful in shaping public opinion
5. Users. These are people who use what is happening for their own purposes. They listen to public opinion and take the side of those with whom it is convenient and profitable. As a rule, they join those who have power. This category is present in any organization and it is necessary to work with them individually, negotiate and bring them to your side when their competence and experience are needed. Or gradually replace them with supporters, recruiting new employees.
6. Conservatives. Active defenders of the existing order. Often, under the slogan of "patriotism and the struggle for justice," they in every possible way impede the implementation of changes. As a rule, the behavior of these people is due to the fact that they are losing the "ground under their feet" due to changes, and they do not want to develop or can no longer. Often such people have authority in the company and can form a "guerrilla movement". This, of course, cannot be allowed. The benefit of conservatives for change, oddly enough, is in their critical approach, if it does not go off scale, it helps to see threats and obstacles. If you manage to negotiate with such people and build them in, then they can be very useful as controllers.
7. Performers. These are people who prefer to do their job and not interfere in political games. They are loyal to their immediate superiors. These people accept or reject change depending on how much it helps or hinders them from doing their job comfortably. They do not like stress and prefer a measured pace from 9 to 5. Such people are indispensable for routine processes. And for change, they are useful in that they provide stability during times of change.

All of the listed categories that make up the coalition of changes are important and necessary for a balanced effective movement. Of course, their specific gravity should be different. It is clear that it is necessary to strive to increase the number of supporters and fiery souls. On the other hand, it is necessary to take into account the size and stage of development of the business. As practice shows, rarely, where more than 20 percent of fiery souls can be reached. But what is important is that the leading corps be formed from among supporters and fiery souls. Taking into account, of course, their professional competencies.

So, at the stage of "preparing the path" the following actions are necessary:

1. at the organizational level - development of a strategy for change, organizational design;
2. on the collective level - the formation of a broad coalition of changes;
3. on an individual basis - the selection of key leaders capable of realizing the plan.

4. IMPLEMENT THE TRANSFORMATION

Consistently implement a program of change, responding flexibly to the situation. To achieve the implementation of the decisions made, forming a new direction of organizational development.

Once an action plan has been formulated, key personnel have been selected, and a broad coalition has been formed, it is necessary to implement the plan. This is a time for proactive decisive action. The qualitative execution of the planned plans requires a combination of discipline, creativity and cooperation.

Of course, it is necessary to adhere to a certain plan, consistently moving towards the designated goals. At the same time, it is important to understand that the plan is just a route to achieve in and denomination, which in turn is a verbalization of values ​​and key ideas of development. The plan can and should change according to the situation, but the intentions (values, ideas, vision) remain constant.

An important point: strategy, business plans must be consistently implemented, and for this, managers need to include managerial will, control and informal influence on employees. It is impossible to bend under laziness, unwillingness or inability of individual employees to achieve results. It is important to create a spirit of performing discipline. All adjustments should be driven by the desire to make things smarter, faster, better. Some are looking for excuses why the deed has not been done, others are looking for opportunities to bring their plans closer. The second needs to be updated. At the same time, it is important that each employee sees behind plans, orders, orders - values, ideas, vision, so that he understands why he personally needs this and really wanted it.

This is the main secret of successful change management - not to plant them, but, above all, to create the ground for the maturation of an internally conscious desire for them. Through the selection of the right people, a competent KPI system, thoughtful forms of non-material motivation, through individual work with people in a team. To do this, leadership positions do not require bosses, but leaders.

The leader is the seller of hope. This is a person who, above all, loves himself and believes in what he does. This is a whole person, radiating the energy of confidence. This is a person who knows how to set goals for himself, his employees and achieve them. This is a person who wins the trust and respect of employees, even if he was appointed to a position. Finding such people is difficult, they are generally few. But they can and should be grown in the company, giving them a chance to be realized in ambitious projects. Carrying out changes is just such an opportunity for them to open up, gain experience and competencies.

To establish cooperation along the vertical, horizontal and diagonal of the organization is the most important task of the leader. Transformations are much more than mechanical actions with plans, regulations and reports, it is a living work with information, energy, people. It is necessary to ensure that the company works as a single healthy body. Yes, there is a need to develop standard operating procedures, but what matters is that they help communication and achieve results, not hinder them. For example, one of such important management procedures is holding meetings where a spark of synergy should be struck, turning the interaction of employees into a process of achieving quality result rather than endless debate. Efficient Meetings, as practice shows, is far from a trifle. Skillful use of this tool significantly increases the chances of moving forward in achieving goals. Proper goal setting, case management, project methodologies - these and other routine management procedures form the overall managerial competence of the company.

The implementation of transformations can also be accompanied by resistance even in a trained team, this is normal, you do not need to be afraid of this, but you must be prepared for this. If at the previous stages a deep systematic study of the ideology, vision of the company was carried out, a broad coalition of support for the ongoing transformations was formed, then resistance will only be of a background nature.

At this stage, it is important to show people that the changes being made are real, so it is necessary to stick to the tactics of small wins.

Leadership at every point of decision-making, combined with competent regular management, as a mastery of performance, is a necessary condition for organizational change. At this stage, the following steps are required:

1. at the organizational level - the actualization of leadership, the introduction of effective procedures for regular management; ensuring performance discipline; formation of a flexible effective organizational structure;
2. on the collective - "selling" ideas of change and strategy deep into the organization; ensuring cross-functional collaboration;
3. on an individual basis - coaching of managers, selection and placement of personnel.

5. INTEGRATE CHANGES

Translate the process of restructuring the organization into a permanent state of integral development of both the system as a whole and its constituent parts: ideology, strategy, structure, processes, human capital.

Changes have been started. However, it is necessary to create a mechanism for the irreversibility of the transformations carried out. Moreover, the changes carried out are not a panacea for all ills forever. Progressive change must become an integral part of organizational life. How to achieve this?

First, the ideology of the company should be an emphasis on self-renewal and development, both at the organizational level and at the level of the individual. The development of an organization is impossible without the development of employees, while employees will not develop if the necessary conditions and environment are not created for this.

Secondly, the strategy must necessarily pay attention to this. In the personnel policy of the company, it is necessary to put emphasis on the training and development of employees, the creation of a strong HR brand to attract talent from the market, and the development of mentoring.

Thirdly, to develop a model of employee competencies. To achieve the introduction of procedures for improving the activities of departments and employees, to include this in KPI indicators.

And finally, when hiring, put clear, understandable training and development requirements for the employee at the entrance. Build a mentoring system. To achieve an assessment of employees in terms of the dynamics of personal and professional growth, and tie career growth, including how the employee develops himself, develops his subordinates, and how he contributes to the development of the unit.

In general, it is important for an organization to form a system of formal tools and an informal culture based on a kind of “cult” of improving and developing oneself, employees, business, and organization. This "cult" must become an integral part of the entire corporate body through symbols, traditions, procedures, communications, documents and examples given by leaders.

The article was published in the second issue under the title "Peculiarities of change management in Russia".

In an effort to increase the effectiveness of the changes being made in organizations within the framework of strategic projects, quality management, personnel development, efficiency improvement, etc., two areas have emerged that cause a wide discussion. Some experts (Hersey, Blankhard) believe that first of all, it is necessary to change the attitude of employees, and as a result, their behavior will change. Others ( , Eiseinshtat , Spector ) argue that attempts to transform an organization by changing values ​​and attitudes contribute to failure, and the most effective way is to place employees in such conditions (organizational context) that promote the redistribution of roles, the emergence of new responsibilities and relationships.

My analysis of change projects in Russia shows that leaders rely on both attitude change and conditioning. It depends on many factors, of which it is especially worth highlighting: the culture of the organization and the usual methods of management; the subject of the change (what) and what levels are involved; organization size.

In the West, the methodology of a recognized leader specialist has gained great popularity. At the heart of his idea is the involvement of employees in the work of transforming the company by promoting a picture of the future of the organization. The experience of participating in top-down reforms and the study of those transformations that I have been able to analyze show that the likelihood of a positive result of changes in Russian companies is more likely to be successful if managers emphasize the introduction of conditions that shape new behavior. And this in no way negates the importance of leadership qualities, staff involvement, etc.

By systematizing my experience and knowledge, I have identified eight steps that leaders rely on when using an alternative approach. Below, after listing the stages, in order to reveal the essence of each, I have described the mistakes made at each of them. Compare them with your own experience of participating in change projects (personnel policy, reorganization, IT systems, process or project management, corporate culture, development programs, etc.).

1. Confidently make an informed decision.

Analysis of information from different sources, breaking the subordination, taking into account the political relations in the organization in terms of ways to achieve the goal.

2. Appoint reformers. capable of making unpopular decisions.

Empowerment of leaders who share goals and how to achieve them, and who are able to implement long-term decisions in the life of the organization.

3. Provide Reformers with Compelling Guarantees

Support reformers in their commitment to the decision.

4. Formulate specific requirements for next steps

Development of an action plan that moves the changes from the dead point in the desired direction.

5. Get out of the comfort zone of key employees in the process of change

Creation of conditions for solving non-standard tasks.

6. Transmit interest in achieving the goal

Demonstration of interest by management in what is happening and monitoring of intermediate results.

7. Dosed to inform about the reforms, taking into account the situation and the goals set

Using communication as a powerful change management tool.

8. Implement key conditions that define roles and behaviors

Creating an environment that encourages action in a new way.

Mistake 1: The decision made is not able to contribute to the achievement of the goals of the organization

With top-down management, changes are implemented, the decision on which is made at the level of the company's management. And at this stage, a foundation can be laid in the basis of changes, which leads any further actions away from the desired result. Observing the selection process, I have identified errors associated with the decision-making process and its content.

The first thing that sometimes catches your eye right away is that the leader does not delve into the essence. Intuitively, relying on the opinions of certain individuals and briefly studying the issue in magazines, a decision is made. This is especially true for companies that do not experience resource constraints for project implementation. In this case, the likelihood of success depends on "maybe lucky", and the process of further work on the transformation is more like finding the right solution, unless employees sabotage the change in the absence of a vision of benefit from it.

Experienced leaders know that any change in an organization has secondary benefits that are not related to the subject of the change. The most common is to increase the activity of staff. This position of the leader contributes to the decision-making "at random" - if the organization does not change, then it will "warm up".

I will pay attention to the case when there is a unique solution and only it is analyzed. Here is a concrete example. The managing owner of a trading company read in a magazine about the benefits of budgeting to reduce costs. And then, subordinates “dig” what the essence of budgeting is, and who can implement it. The question of what the problem is and what other ways there are to solve it remains outside the scope of attention. Thus, the possibilities for making an effective decision are narrowed.

The situation is aggravated by cases when the decision is based on the arguments of specialists commercially associated with service providers. For example, they are going to implement an automated system, and the dealer of one of the software developers acts as a key analyst in the process of working on a problem. It would be surprising if he did not defend the interests of the product being sold.

I know cases when the first person makes decisions, develops a strategy at the mercy of the staff. Sometimes this happens in an attempt to involve employees, sometimes from a reluctance to waste time yourself. But it is very painful when later, at a certain stage of changes, the boss comes to the conclusion that “this vision of yours is a complete illusion.”

Observing successful changes, the following main features regarding the solution itself can be distinguished.

The decision to change the organization has no value in itself, but should contribute to the achievement of the organization's existing goals. Every organization has declared “Wishlist”. It is important to distinguish them from those for which management is willing to make efforts. For example, when a manager talks about the important role of "planning", while he manages situationally.

The feasibility of the change must be considered. To this end, managers analyze the opinions of different parties, political groups within the company. As G. Mintzberg showed in his study, obtaining information with violation of subordination is an important feature of successful managers. Also, do not forget that there is a limitation of opportunities and, for example, if the organization is a "bunny" - it makes no sense to build a "wolf" strategy. In an organization there are always germs of a future desired state, and to identify them means to find this very feasibility.

When decisions are made in such a way that they are perceived as irrevocable, it sets the pace for change from the very beginning and increases its value among other tasks. A leader who does not realize that he is part of a changing organization and is not ready to make efforts dooms himself and the company to additional difficulties. Leaders and reformers must understand that there is no turning back.

Along with the rational component of the decision, the emotional component is also important. If the confident position of the first persons and the formulation of the decision inspire reformers, this helps to overcome many objective difficulties on the path of transformation.

Mistake 2. Conformists Lead Change

The first person (or persons, owners performing management functions) sometimes assumes the management of the management project. But the volume of tasks facing them, or personality traits, do not allow them to fully manage this project. Therefore, sooner or later the question arises about the employees who will be responsible for the process and the result of the transformation. Top-down change management imposes special requirements on managers and, first of all, it is the ability to “swim” against the current. Therefore, there are few applicants for such a position. These are either people who are not aware of the difficulties they will face, or who are hungry for career growth, wages at any cost, or who are capable of managing change projects.

Organizations strive for stability, and employees, in general, for a comfortable existence, such activities that would not violate their usual working conditions. Therefore, everyone tries to cause as little inconvenience to others as possible (which is important for high-contextual Russian culture). It is difficult to find an employee from such an environment who will take on the responsibility of changing established relationships in the organization. In addition, the leader of the change project is faced with the fact that with his activities he somehow violates the usual rhythm of the work of those bosses who entrusted him with management. Therefore, the conformity of leaders is one of the important reasons low likelihood of change.

In continuation of what has been said, we can add the desire of managers to maintain the performance of current work at the expense of the tasks of transforming the company. On the one hand, the organization really wants to make a change without subsidence in indicators, without conflicts, cut down the forest, but so that the chips do not fly. On the other hand, many employees are focused on today's benefits and find it difficult to delay the satisfaction of needs.

A situation that has been observed more than once is when a specialist in what is being implemented is chosen for the role of a reformer. The latter often tend to work alone. They will draw processes themselves, write program code, and the issue of managing people will be in the background, or even third.

The reformer is not able to do all the work himself and therefore he has colleagues. In addition, the transformation may involve several key tasks and it is advisable to entrust them to several reformers. On the one hand, they can be called a team, on the other hand, each of the participants usually has relationships with top officials, which to some extent makes them competitors for attention and resources. This gives the management of the company the opportunity to get an objective picture of what is happening.

Mistake 3: Reformers lack confidence that the organization is interested in change

Change management is not a solution to an engineering problem, but rather a manifestation of the will in defiance. Different leaders, depending on the situation and personal characteristics, manage the transformation in their own way. Some are tough managers who go ahead, while others are soft and unobtrusively putting the organization in front of the fact of a new reality. But all of them are people who have doubts, sometimes do not know what to do next, sometimes feel lonely on the way to the goal. Therefore, everyone needs support. An important point is the guarantees of the first persons in the commitment to change.

The empowerment of reformers indicates new priorities in the organization and provides levers of control. Allocation of the necessary resources is a clear confirmation of the intention that draws in the change - if you refuse them, then you suffer losses. Financing scheduling further encourages compliance. Some reformers reserve the right to involve experts and consultants.

I witnessed how experienced reformers documented joint responsibility for the result with the first persons. They stipulated the participation of each of the parties up to the time and frequency of meetings on reform issues, described the inconvenience in connection with the transformations that may arise for the first persons and ways to overcome them (for example, training the first person to use the results of the implementation).

It happens that reformers have to play the role of a "bad cop", "whitening" the first persons. For these purposes, third-party specialists may be involved. For example, that part of the reforms, which is associated with staff reductions, is carried out by invited consultants. The first persons may not publicly support the reform methods, but provide support in shaping the conditions according to the principle “the tsar is good, but the boyars…” Such a seemingly simple manipulation serves as a good lightning rod.

Changing the organization is, in a sense, the formation of a new way of life, while habits and circumstances are persistently dragged into the past. It is important to support the reformers not only from within the organization. This is especially true for cases where the first person is leading the change project. And here professional associations, business clubs, consultants, and coaches come to the rescue.

Mistake 4. Trampling in one place.

According to popular wisdom, the most difficult thing is to start. Surely you have witnessed how organizations are marking time. And the list of specific actions that need to be done is the knowledge that is an important factor in getting off the ground. And research confirms this.

It is difficult to describe the management of sociotechnical systems in the form of a specific technology. The number of situations in which organizations find themselves, the factors influencing it, the unpredictability and uncertainty of the future, the ability to self-organize and the learning ability of such systems require different views, theories and approaches. Simplification of deep scientific knowledge to the list of implemented steps allows the leader to start moving in a given direction. These 8 steps are designed to support, give confidence and assist in the analysis of the transformation process, allowing you to avoid basic mistakes.

The transformations are in conflict with the current activities of the company. The latter is like a well-worn road, along which everyone in the organization strives to travel. Off-road scares both managers and subordinates. Therefore, by indicating concrete steps in the required direction, it is like raising the plane of change into the air. Concrete steps save you from pointless disputes, listening to explanations why this is impossible and an endless list of reasons.

In the mainstream of change management, they suggest paying special attention to ensuring that the first steps lead to achievable results. Thus, they gave confidence to the team that "we are going the right way, comrades." This is an important point! But I will pay attention to the positive impact of unsuccessful immediate actions - sticking when the efforts and resources expended create an atmosphere of irreversibility of the initiated transformations.

Mistake 5. The working conditions of key employees do not change.

Most of the tasks in the process of change do not have an unambiguous solution; it is difficult for them to prescribe processes and formalize activities. And the only way out is to create conditions under which employees will face new creative tasks. The main difficulty is that the solution of such problems affects the interests of those who solve them.

The more “mature” the organization, the more established relationships in it. Without a very special need, employees try not to create difficulties for colleagues and themselves strive to be in the comfort zone. Their work environment is a private world, infringement of which they try to avoid or suppress. Therefore, management has to be creative in order to transform the organization without destroying it.

Organizations have experience - management has developed methods for getting out of the comfort zone, and employees are something of an antidote to them. Some balance has been found between them. Thanks to him, the organization strives for a zone of stability. And here it is difficult to give general recommendations, besides the fact that this experience must be taken into account when developing new methods.

Some executives "create" crises for business. Observations show that in those cases when the entire organization is exposed to the exit from the comfort zone, employees try to preserve the "peace", sacrificing only an increase in activity. Therefore, one such factor is not enough.

Rather, it is better to simply “disturb” only the key employees for the transformation. Alternatively, a separate experimental unit is created. But, with a high probability, serious difficulties will arise with the dissemination of a radically different experience.

One thing is certain, getting out of your comfort zone is creating conditions that cannot be avoided. As if a person changes jobs or moves to a new place of residence. Therefore, the most effective way is to “knock out” the opportunity for employees to work in the old way. For example, when switching to a new automatic accounting system, deprive the opportunity to use the old one. Such radical methods are rarely possible. But the more interesting it is to lead the changes 🙂

Error 6. Formal expression of interest by management.

The habitual way of working for an organization is its natural state. And no matter how far employees swim in the sea of ​​change, they are drawn to the land of stability. Therefore, they need a constant force or magnet to promote/push the new state until the transformation takes root and becomes routine. In this process, the first persons are like a beacon that indicates the direction, inspires and attracts. Having studied the influence of the central groups, Ark Kleiner drew attention to the fact that employees act not so much in accordance with formalized rules, developed plans and strategies, but also pay attention to the attitude of the first persons to what is happening. People seem to be trying to guess the desires of the bosses, looking closely at the signs, behavior, attitude of the leaders.

In cases where the management of the organization does not pay due attention to the transformation processes, the likelihood of a positive result is significantly reduced. In cases where interest is constant, when the leader presents a picture of ongoing events, forming it not only on the basis of the reports of reformers, he not only signals the organization about the importance of change, but also corrects the work of change project managers.

When consultants are involved, the first persons have a request not only for consulting, but they expect that the invited specialist in the field of management will become some kind of force or circumstance that pushes to change, make efforts for this, creates conditions, as if the organization visited a fitness center . In this case, thanks to the consultant, the first person and the company need to “deal” with changes.

Error 7. Uncontrolled dissemination of information.

One of the reasons why people work “for their uncle” is the desire to live in conditions of stability. Therefore, announcing that changes are coming to the organization is a notification to people about the upcoming uncertainty, with all the pluses and minuses that follow from this.

Many employees of companies do not see a linear relationship between their own wages and the performance of the organization. This may be due to low manageability, but also due to natural patterns associated with the size of the organization.

And if the task of a good journalist is to report what he sees, then the task of a reformer is to present information in certain quantities and to those categories of employees to whom it is intended.

In the management of change projects, the goal of the transformation is the criterion for any action of the reformers. And manipulating (sorry for the use of a word that has a negative connotation) data for the sake of it is a natural practice of all organizations. The question here is not whether it is good or bad, but what result it leads to.

Observing the activities of successful reformers, we can say that they try to limit information about the problems of change to those who are able to solve the problem, and bring significant success to a large number employees.

Communication with line managers, going out to people allows reformers to feel the breath of change and determine the information that the team needs.

Mistake 8. The conditions for the past state of the organization are preserved.

With an understanding of how such a system works, there are a small number of key characteristics that Pareto (20/80) has a big effect on.

The effect of this approach was clearly shown by the criminologists Wilson and Kelling in the “broken windows theory”: “Crime is the inevitable result of a lack of order. If the window is broken and not glazed, then those passing by decide that no one cares and no one is responsible for anything. Soon more windows will be broken, and the feeling of impunity will spread throughout the street, sending a signal to the entire neighborhood. A signal calling for more serious crimes" [Malcolm Gladwell in The Tipping Point]. It is important that such key features systems could be implemented in the form of stringent conditions that are respected. For example, efforts to increase the customer focus of cashiers in the form of trainings, motivational programs, creating an atmosphere will not give such a result as installing video surveillance cameras over cash desks.

The very process of moving the organization to the desired state (i.e., change management) also has the main factors that contribute to effective progress towards the goal or slow it down. Typically, organizations have well-established rules for current activities, built on the basis of previous successful experience. If they are not corrected, then the employees will not have time to make changes. Such features are individual in different organizations, but general requirements can be distinguished: the constancy of control points at least once every two weeks; inclusion of transformation indicators in the assessment of the performance of key employees; delegating the solution of transformation tasks only to those who are looking for ways to solve them, and are not looking for reasons why it does not work; engaging key people who resist change as critics; decrease in percentage by 10 of the current workload involved in the reforms of managers.

A reformer, no matter how successful he may be, remains a man. Most of his effective ideas are not so much invented solutions, but the result of careful observation of the organization (the company has both the germs of a desired future and its inherent ways to make changes).

Some managers perceive the need to impose harsh conditions on employees as violence that causes resistance. Especially when the work is related to creative search. And, if you use control with the help of pressure and stress thoughtlessly, then, as you know, make a fool pray to God, he will hurt his forehead. Analyze how Bill Gates and Steve Jobs ran their innovative companies. Creating conditions that accumulate energy, stimulate the concentration of employees and “squeeze out of employees” results on time is a natural process for them. Photos of Google offices popular on the Internet with a free layout, bars are also conditions. Perhaps for your particular business it is useful to "break a couple of glasses."

The process of organizational change from top to bottom inevitably faces challenges. The point is to overcome them effectively and not create additional ones by your actions. Reducing change management to 8 steps is a big simplification. It does, however, enable budding reformers to form an idea of ​​the work ahead, and experienced reformers to reflect on the causes of success and failure.

Such a schematic representation helps me, as a visual tool, in educational activities and acts as beacons in the process of organizational change. I hope it will serve you well too!