“Assignments instructions
You are to select a topic from among the weekly topics and examine an aspect of that topic in greater depth than we are able to review it during the course.

The only requirement is that the topic you
select relates to the focus of the course, i.e. deals with managing or leading
change. There is no specified length
beyond what is needed to address the topic you lay out. I do not require a specific writing style,
but do expect you to follow one of the widely accepted styles (MLA, ASP,
Chicago, etc.).
Actual Paper
William Hung
Professor Ken Sloan
MBA 654
26 June 2015

Why
Organizations Wont Change
In
the current rapidly changing economy, it would be natural for organizations to
consistently improve their technology, restructure their organizations, and
change their corporate culture. Yet, about 70% of the all change initiatives
fail (Harvard Business Review 137). Despite the clear
long-term economic benefits for these organizational changes, many
organizations wont change because they have competing commitments and
persisting mental models.
One
of the main barriers for organizational change are competing commitments. As
Robert Kegan and Lisa Laskow Lahey described in their article The Real Reason People Wont Change,
competing commitments are subconscious, hidden goal[s] that conflicts with
their stated commitments (Harvard Business Review 121). A great example can
be how the organization knows they need to hire additional software developers,
but decided to not act on this because they are not confident about their
returns on investment. If they focus on hiring additional contract
administration staff instead, they can more accurately quantify their long-term
cost savings.
Another
barrier for adopting organizational change are persisting mental models.docx#_msocom_1″”>[WH1]. These mental models persist based on how the change agents with
authority view their organizations. The three organization metaphors that help
explain why organizations wont change are organizations as machines,
organizations as political systems, and organizations as instruments of
domination. These metaphors help provide different perspectives for examining
the challenges for implementing organizational change.
First,
managers with power often view their organizations as machines. It is
convenient for managers to support this view, as it minimizes their daily
stress by believing that all processes are supposed to operate perfectly. In
other words, whenever they invest their inputs (i.e. time, money, and effort),
they expect predictable outputs (i.e. $X for Y number of hours). Clearly, these
outputs are often not optimal. They require consistent monitoring in order to
make appropriate adjustments. Unfortunately, for changes that are potentially
high risk and high reward, managers often reject these opportunities. They
would prefer the status quo with predictable inputs and outputs instead.
Next,
managers who view their organizations as political systems are concerned about
maintaining their formal authority and control of scarce resources. Suppose
they are aware that integrating two separate departments into one can help
improve organizational effectiveness. However, one of these department heads
will lose their formal authority and control of the staff members he used to
supervise. If this is true, then that department head is very likely to become
a resistor. Also, openly discussing politics within most organizations is considered
taboo. This makes it harder for them to accept this aspect of organizational
reality.
Finally,
managers who view their organizations as instruments of domination will be resistant
to any changes that are unfavorable for them. For example, in my local countys
public health department, some of the division leaders have secretaries to help
mitigate their heavy workloads. Imagine if this resource is taken away to hire
additional medical staff. For this case, the division leaders losing this
resource will clearly do everything they can to object this change. They may
perceive the decision makers as unfair, doing whatever they want simply because
they have more power. With enough resistance, the organization will have a
difficulty implementing this change, even if this change will benefit the
organization in the long-run.
To
overcome these fallac[ies] of programmatic change, the changes managers
implement needs to be part of an integrated change effort, not as a magic
bullet to solve all of the organizational problems (Harvard Business Review 185). In other words,
before implementing any changes to the organization, it is imperative for managers
to have a clear end goal. In addition, managers need to uncover the different
competing commitments, both at the individual level and at the organizational
level, as doing this can help overcome their objections for change.

You are to select a topic from among the
weekly topics and examine an aspect of that topic in greater depth than we are
able to review it during the course. The only requirement is that the topic you
select relates to the focus of the course, i.e. deals with managing or leading
change. There is no specified length
beyond what is needed to address the topic you lay out. I do not require a specific writing style,
but do expect you to follow one of the widely accepted styles (MLA, ASP,
Chicago, etc.). William HungProfessor Ken SloanMBA 65426 June 2015Why
Organizations Wont Change In
the current rapidly changing economy, it would be natural for organizations to
consistently improve their technology, restructure their organizations, and
change their corporate culture. Yet, about 70% of the all change initiatives
fail (Harvard Business Review 137). Despite the clear
long-term economic benefits for these organizational changes, many
organizations wont change because they have competing commitments and
persisting mental models. One
of the main barriers for organizational change are competing commitments. As
Robert Kegan and Lisa Laskow Lahey described in their article The Real Reason People Wont Change,
competing commitments are subconscious, hidden goal[s] that conflicts with
their stated commitments (Harvard Business Review 121). A great example can
be how the organization knows they need to hire additional software developers,
but decided to not act on this because they are not confident about their
returns on investment. If they focus on hiring additional contract
administration staff instead, they can more accurately quantify their long-term
cost savings. Another
barrier for adopting organizational change are persisting mental models.docx#_msocom_1″”>[WH1]. These mental models persist based on how the change agents with
authority view their organizations. The three organization metaphors that help
explain why organizations wont change are organizations as machines,
organizations as political systems, and organizations as instruments of
domination. These metaphors help provide different perspectives for examining
the challenges for implementing organizational change. First,
managers with power often view their organizations as machines. It is
convenient for managers to support this view, as it minimizes their daily
stress by believing that all processes are supposed to operate perfectly. In
other words, whenever they invest their inputs (i.e. time, money, and effort),
they expect predictable outputs (i.e. $X for Y number of hours). Clearly, these
outputs are often not optimal. They require consistent monitoring in order to
make appropriate adjustments. Unfortunately, for changes that are potentially
high risk and high reward, managers often reject these opportunities. They
would prefer the status quo with predictable inputs and outputs instead. Next,
managers who view their organizations as political systems are concerned about
maintaining their formal authority and control of scarce resources. Suppose
they are aware that integrating two separate departments into one can help
improve organizational effectiveness. However, one of these department heads
will lose their formal authority and control of the staff members he used to
supervise. If this is true, then that department head is very likely to become
a resistor. Also, openly discussing politics within most organizations is considered
taboo. This makes it harder for them to accept this aspect of organizational
reality. Finally,
managers who view their organizations as instruments of domination will be resistant
to any changes that are unfavorable for them. For example, in my local countys
public health department, some of the division leaders have secretaries to help
mitigate their heavy workloads. Imagine if this resource is taken away to hire
additional medical staff. For this case, the division leaders losing this
resource will clearly do everything they can to object this change. They may
perceive the decision makers as unfair, doing whatever they want simply because
they have more power. With enough resistance, the organization will have a
difficulty implementing this change, even if this change will benefit the
organization in the long-run. To
overcome these fallac[ies] of programmatic change, the changes managers
implement needs to be part of an integrated change effort, not as a magic
bullet to solve all of the organizational problems (Harvard Business Review 185). In other words,
before implementing any changes to the organization, it is imperative for managers
to have a clear end goal. In addition, managers need to uncover the different
competing commitments, both at the individual level and at the organizational
level, as doing this can help overcome their objections for change. “