Organisational Change Management: A Critical Review

The management of change plays an important role in the development of any organization in the
competitive and continuously evolving market. In creating a new framework for organizational
managing change, the goal of this article is to provide a critical evaluation of some of the major
theories and approaches to organizational change management.
Introduction:
Change management can be seen as ‘the process of continually renewing an organization’s
direction, structure, and capabilities to serve the ever-changing needs of external and internal
customers’ (Moran and Brightman, 2001: 111). Furthermore, organizational strategy and
organizational change cannot be divorced from one another (Burnes, 2004; Rieley and Clarkson,
2001). Therefore, the management of organizational change is essential in the highly competitive
market, which is considered a highly required managerial skill. (Senior, 2002). Organizations need to
define where it needs to be in the future and how to manage changes effectively. In the context of
globalization, the rapid pace of technological innovation, a growing knowledge workforce, and
shifting social and demographic trends.
Since the need for change is frequently unanticipated, it frequently results from innovation in the
organization and is reactive, discontinuous, and ad hoc in nature. However, Balogun and Hope
Hailey (2004) report a failure rate of around 70% of all change programmes initiated. Given that
academics and practitioners presently have access to a broad range of conflicting and perplexing
theories and techniques, it may be argued that this low success rate demonstrates a basic absence
of a solid framework for how to conduct and manage organizational transformation.
There are two important issues of a framework for organizational change management: 1. the pace
of change has never been greater than in the current business environment; 2. change is being
triggered by internal or external factors that come in all shapes, forms, and sizes. Thus, they affect
all organisations in all industries.
However, very little empirical evidence has been provided in support of the different theories and
approaches suggested (Guimaraes and Armstrong, 1998). The purpose of this article is to provide a
critical review of theories and approaches currently available in a bid to encourage further research
into the nature of organisational change with the aim of constructing a new and pragmatic framework
for its management of it.
Change Characterised by the Rate of Occurrence
In the past, it was argued that organisations could not be effective or improve performance if they
were constantly changing (Rieley and Clarkson, 2001) and people need routines to be effective and
able to improve performance (Luecke, 2003). However, in the present day, it is of vital importance to
organisations that people are able to undergo continuous change (Burnes, 2004; Rieley and
Clarkson, 2001) A state of continuous change can become a routine in its own right (Luecke, 2003).
Change is considered a normal and natural response to internal and environmental conditions
(Leifer,1989).
There are some main types of change such as discontinuous change, incremental change, bumpy
incremental change, continuous change, and bumpy continuous change. The distinction between
incremental change and continuous change is to enable the differentiation between operational,
ongoing changes, and strategies implemented throughout the whole organisation to enable it to
constantly adapt to the demands of both the external and internal environment. Bumpy continuous
change is suggested as an additional category with the assumption that there will be periods of
relative serenity punctuated by an acceleration in the pace of change when it comes to operational
changes (Grundy, 1993; Senior, 2002). Bumpy incremental change is characterised by periods of
relative peacefulness punctuated by the acceleration in the pace of change (Grundy, 1993;
Holloway, 2002). Burnes’ (2004) and Balogun and Hope Hailey’s (2004) term for this type of change
is punctuated equilibrium. Incremental change is when individual parts of an organisation deal
increasingly and separately with one problem and one objective at a time (Burnes, 2004) and it is
concerned with organisation-wide strategies and the ability to constantly adapt these to the demands
of both the external and internal environment. Continuous change describes departmental,
operational, ongoing changes. Continuous change is the ability to change continuously in a
fundamental manner to keep up with the fast-moving pace of change (Burns,2004). Discontinuous
change allows defensive behaviour, complacency, inward focus, and routines, which again creates
situations where major reform is frequently required. There seems to be a consensus among
contemporary authors that the benefits from discontinuous change do not last (Bond, 1999; Grundy,
1993; Holloway, 2002; Love et al., 1998; Taylor and Hirst, 2001). Additionally, the planned method
emphasizes the need of comprehending the many phases that an organization will experience in
order to transition from an unsatisfactory condition to a determined ideal one (Eldred II and Tippett,
2002).
Change Characterised By How It Comes About
Although there is not anyone, a widely acknowledged method for managing organizational change
that outlines the adjustments organizations must make and how to put them into practice, the
planned approach to organisational change attempts to explain the process that brings about
change. Additionally, the planned method emphasizes the need of comprehending the many phases
that an organization will experience in order to transition from an unsatisfactory condition to a
determined ideal one (Eldrod II and Tippett, 2002). A successful change project must thus include
the three processes of unfreezing the current level, shifting to the new level, and refreezing this new
level, according to Lewin (1952 in Eldrod II and Tippett, 2002). This change model understands that
in order to successfully implement new strategies, it is necessary to get rid of outdated behavior,
structures, procedures, and cultures (Bamford and Forrester, 2003). However, Bullock and Batten
(1985) developed a four-phase model of planned change that splits the process into exploration,
planning, action and integration. This is a highly applicable model for most change situations, which
describes the methods employed to move an organisation from one state to another, and the phases
of change, which describe the stages an organisation must go through to achieve successful change
implementation.
The planned approach to change has a long history and is seen as being very successful. However,
it has come under increasing criticism since the early 1980s (Kanter et al., 1992; Burnes, 1996).
First, it is stated that because the technique focuses on small-scale and gradual change, it cannot be
used in circumstances that call for quick and transformative change. Second, the intended strategy
is predicated on the idea that organizations may transition predictably from one stable state to
another and operate under constant conditions. Thirdly, the approach of planned change ignores
situations where more directive approaches are required. Therefore, the responsibility for
organisational change has to become increasingly devolved (Wilson, 1992).
The emergent approach to change emphasises that change should not be perceived as a series of
linear events within a given period of time, but as a continuous, open-ended process of adaptation to
changing circumstances and conditions (Burnes, 1996, 2004; Dawson, 1994). As the emergent
approach to change is relatively new compared to the planned approach, it is argued that it still lacks
coherence and a diversity of techniques (Bamford and Forrester, 2003; Wilson, 1992). The
contingency approach to change is founded on the theory that the structure and the performance of
an organisation are dependent on the situational variables that it faces (Dunphy and Stace, 1993).

Change Characterised by Scale

Change identified by scale can be divided into four different characteristics: fine-tuning, incremental
adjustment, modular transformation, and corporate transformation (Dunphy and Stace, 1993). Fine-
tuning is known as convergent change and describes organisational change as an ongoing process
to match the organisation’s strategy, processes, people and structure. The purpose is to develop
personnel suited to the present strategy linking mechanisms and creating specialist units.
Additionally, the adjustments should build trust in conventional ideas, conventions, and myths, define
established roles, and foster both individual and collective commitment to the organization's
objective and the quality of its departments. Modular transformation is change identified by major
shifts in one or several departments or divisions. In contrast to incremental adjustment, this change
can be radical.
Recommendations for Further Research
The recommendation is to increase the knowledge of organisational change management in order to
enable the identification of critical success factors for the management of change and construct a
valid framework for change management.
Conclusion
Change is an ever-present element that affects all organisations. The successful management of
change is a highly required skill. In order to construct such a framework, it is recommended that
further exploratory studies of the nature of change and how it is being managed should be
conducted.