Managing strategic change u6 p73

Implementing strategy involves change. Most organisations are operating in continuously changing circumstances and so some level of continuous change is inevitable. Therefore structures, cultures and systems together should be continously reviewed and updated. This is the definition of the dynamics of strategy implementation.

Change has an impact on strategy implementation.

Many factors can cause change
external factors such as technological advances changing how you interact with your suppliers or your customers, or opening up new ways to sell to your customers (eg e-commerce)
Internal factors, such as managers attempting to pre-empt changes required for growth.
Or in $EMPLOYER's context, the dramatic changes to funding in our sector.

Change may have consequences. For example, sudden strike action by employees unhappy with the proposed change. So you need to understand the dynamics and consequences of change in context.

Change has
content (what is changed)
process (the way it is implemented)

It's reasonable to approach managing change in a manner contingent on the situation or context.

You should evaluate your internal and external environments as a starting point to change.

Perspectives of change

The planned perspective. Similar to the planning school of strategy, this is where the outcome is based on careful, objective analysis and planning by management. An example is to modify an existing product line to meet an immediate competitive move. Or a planned change in strategic direction to enter new markets based on existing resources. This perspective ignores, for example, the cultural "way we do things round here" of the organisation - a problem. Planned change approaches like this therefore do not address the in-depth problems required to make the change a success.

The incremental perspective - "logical incrementalism". Change that proceeds incrementally in sensible small stages. In this way past decisions are built on by future decisions, and past decisions help shape future strategy. This is in tune with the process view of strategy, and sees change implementation as a negotiated process, characterised as a series of decisions, compromises and adjustments subject to managerial and cultural influences. This type of change also has drawbacks - you become a prisoner of your own paradigm. The momentum needed to break out of this increases as the number of years of incremental change increases. "Unlearning" may be necessary.

This type of "Convergent change" refers to adaptations within the existing ways of doing things, leading to extension and continuity from past successes, but also the momentum or inertia described. "Revolutionary change" prokes a culminating crisis due to long periods of convergence maybe.

The consequences of change often vary by organisation. The debate centres on whether the consequences vary as change proceeds through incremental and continuous steps, or through alternating periods of convergent change and revolutionalry change. In the former scenario, your change happens on an ongoing basis in keeping with the changing environment. In the latter scenario, change "emerges as an undramatic, unglamourous process of continuous manoeuvre ... punctuated occasionally by brief moments of opportunism and achievement (Whittington 2001 p114) - the punctuated equilibrium model. This happens where environmental changes happen less frequently, resulting in longer periods of sustained competitive advantage. Where these periods are shorter the organisation is forced to change in a more dynamic way. Exmaple - sao paulo state symphony orchestra, p75.

Both models are equally vallid and can apply to you. Continuous change models usually apply to organisations experiencing rapid changes in products, markets and technologies. Some argue that continuous change can achieve the same results as revolutionary change by doing so incrementally over time, leading to less disruption.