LEADING CHANGE: Analysing The Change Agents Role

LEADING diversify Analysing The Change Agents RoleThis essay focuses on introducing pitch in the memorial tablet. It looks into the multifariousness elements role the positives and negatives on the personal front. It similarly critically analyses how much part lies in the hands of the ripened focussing in implementing assortment in an organization. A case study has been compound into the report to understand how managers implement modifys or imbibe them into the organization in real liveness.CHANGE AGENTAccording to the Oxford Dictionary, Change is to make or become different. Recently, multinational corporations (MNCs) have been facing a curing of tacks in their strategic direction as well as their twenty-four hours to sidereal day activities. (Stone, 2008) Generally, corporations have experienced a drawing card of resistance to diverge from their employees. In order to contain that the change is incorporated smoothly into the organization, the credit entry of a Change Agents role becomes essential.A change doer, by translation is, A person who acts as a catalyst for change. (Stone, 2008) There is a deep connection between leading and changing the organization. As Ahn unspoilt put it The avoidance of change has been described as the opposite of leadership. (Jick et al, 2003) leading involves motivating a group of people and organizeing their interests towards a normal goal in the aim of achieving it.Change ingredients could be anyone in the organization who is the driving force behind the change. For Instance, the CEO of the bon ton would be accepted as a change agent on several cause or a consultant may be hired who acts as the agent as well. (Jick et al, 2003). The change agents competitive advantage lies at his/her efficacy to act in chemical reaction to the change. There argon three normal types of responses one can expect from a change agent. (Ulrich et al, 1997)Initiative Changes, whereby the change agent responds by b ringing into the organization new procedures or projects. This is basically done at the strategic level. The second type of response is butt Change. This occurs more at the operational level where the change agent focuses on how the task is being carried out and whether the work can be alter or distributed based on the organizational structure. The last type of response is the Cultural Change. It transforms the organizations air of thinking. (Ulrich et al, 1997)POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF A CHANGE AGENTS military controlChange agents are just about susceptible to change themselves. (Jick et al, 2003) The agents go through with(predicate) a variety of positive and negative emotions and issues while dealing with implementing change in the organization.Firstly, the most obvious issue change agents face will be the resistance to change by the employees. This occurs irrespective of how well/ non the agent handles his job. Someone, somewhere, at some point in cartridge holder during the implementation will have a legal opinion process which does not align to that of the others. This leads us to the secondary issue, which is frustration. In case the change introduced by the agent backfires, he would be the first person the organization will blame. The agent would feel isolated and might even get de-motivated at the thought that the plan he introduced did not work out. (Jick et al, 2003)Though the negative issues do seem to give an impression that the change agents job is always dreary, its oft clips counteracted by positive challenges and emotions. The adrenaline rush of having transformed an organization successfully because of that change is a huge plus point. Change cannot be opinionated by one person hence requiring the agent to involve him egotism in a lot of interaction with his employees by which new human relationships develop. Often, when the agents look in retrospect, they find that they have gone a long way, and the factor of self fulfill ment shows up. With every step, the agents would have utilized their strengths, opportunities and overcome their weaknesses and threats. (Jick et al, 2003)POWER AND CHANGEPower is defined as The ability to influence various outcomes. (Bowditch and Buono, 2005 195). This debate makes it clearer there is a close relationship between power and change in the organization.French and Raven (1959) came with a power base sidestep which can be applied to change attention. (Graetz et al 2002 242-3) This basically deals with power and change in terms of circus tent down approach.There are five types of powers of which one or two of them might lie with the management responsible for the change.Reward Power, whereby the managers reward the employees for their co-operation Coercive Power, which means the employees get penalize for non compliance Referent Power, where personal relationships are used against them to follow the change Expert Power, where specialist knowledge is required to und erstand the change procedures and indicate for attempting them. The last power is the Legitimate Power, where change is decided by the senior staff and seems necessary for success. (Jick et al, 2003)This approach lays emphasis on implementation, and is a lot faster. The major disadvantage here is that resistance will arise from employees and marrow level managers.Organizations generally rely on internal managers or outside(a) consultants to introduce change. Consultants are preferred since they have a neutral military strength towards the internet site and may be a lot more practiced and knowledgeable in the area. It would be a good idea to compound both of them i.e. have internal managers as well as out-of-door consultants. (Stone, 2008)In contrast to the French and Raven power base, another outline might be to hand over the power to the employees. This is the bottom up approach. While it encourages employee participation and reduces uncertainty on their part it is very t ime consuming. (Stone, 2008)CASE STUDYDennis Hightower was Disneys newly elected vice president for Europe. He was required to develop a different business scheme that was something wholly different than what had been done in the past. He was given a time limit of three months.Walt Disney started off as a small company in the entertainment industry and emerged as one of the top most in recent times. They reported overall revenue of $3 trillion dollars. A particular division in the company Disney Consumer Products (DCP) reported $167 trillion of division revenue. Soon after, this division was snarled in international licensing. The food market was very diverse with complex environments.Hightower had formulated a certain strategy in mind. This report focuses more on the way he employ it across the organization. He followed the Squeaky Wheelchair Theory which meant he got involved into the situation only when there was a problem. Rather than ordering his team members on how its d one he persuaded them to see the logic and how each of their contributions added value to it. subjection was a key factor in his method. He trusted his team enough to let them make their own decisions to a great extent. This helped him ensure he had his teams support and all their goals were on the same track.Disney underwent a total change, where fundamental changes were produced in the organization. Its generally more threatening than an incremental change. (Where the changes involved are on a small scale for example, modifications in the day to day operations, etc.) This change was planned as well which meant the change was implemented in an organized manner by the change agent.In essence, Hightower was the change agent who tackled the above stated issue in a way which led to higher profits for the company. (Jick et al, 2003)CONCLUSIONA change agent is thus very important in the introduction, leading and managing the change in the organization. Its very important to find the ri ght person at the right time as it can make or break the situation. absolute and negative issues occur in every job and the change agent is no exception. Its important for the change agent to take up challenges such as resistance and try and make them work in his/her favor. The relationship between power and change is debatable, but finally, what counts is what exact change the organization is planning to undertake if its a situation which is of strategic importance, its better for the top management to decide. The case study showed us one of the real life examples of change management.