Anas Alam Faizli, Master of Proj MGMT: Assignment Change Management, EMOM5103

Assignment Questions EMOM5103 – Change Management
May 2010 Dr David Goh Tee Teck
Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Center of Graduate Studies MPM Intake: January 2009
MAY SEMESTER 2010

CHANGE MANAGEMENT – EMOM5103
ASSIGNMENT (50%)
LECTURER
DR DAVID GOH TEE TECK
STUDENT
ANAS BIN ALAM FAIZLI

ASSIGNMENT (50%)
INSTRUCTIONS: ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS IN PART A AND PART B.
PART A
Question 1
From manager’s perspective, explain the nature of organizational change. List FOUR
(4) changes and briefly explain each of the changes.
Heraclitus quoted that change is the only constant. How can he be wrong? Change is defined
as to alter; to make different; to cause to pass from one state to another; to change the
position, character or appearance of a thing; to change the countenance. Change in a process
is an observed difference in form, quality, or state over time in an organizational entity, such
as an individual’s job, a work group, strategy, a product, or the overall organization (Van de
Ven & Poole, 1995).
Organizational changes are paramount to the lifeline of an organization; it is a process by

which organization moves from their present state to a desired state to achieve effectiveness.
Significant organizational change occurs, for example, when an organization changes its
overall strategy for success, adds or removes a major section or practice, and/or wants to
change the very nature by which it operates. It also occurs when an organization evolves
through various life cycles, just like people must successfully evolve through life cycles.
For organizations to develop, they often must undergo significant change at various points in
their development. That's why the topic of organizational change and development has
become widespread in communications about business, organizations, leadership and
management.
Managers continually make efforts to accomplish successful and significant change as it is

inherent in their jobs. Some are very good at this effort, while others continually struggle and
fail. That's often the difference between people who thrive in their roles and those that get
shuttled around from job to job, ultimately settling into a role where they're frustrated and
ineffective.

John Hayes (2010) suggested that there are three main categories of organizations that may
not experience periods of discontinued change:
1. Self organizing and continuously changing learning organizations as identified by
Brown and Eisenhardt. Intel, Wal-Mart, 3M, Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft are good
examples of companies that have the ability to change rapidly and continuously. As
changes have become an everyday thing, these companies turn it into a habit and thus
changes are made easy.
2. Companies operating in niche markets or slow-moving sectors where they have yet to
encounter the requirement of change. These companies are yet to encounter the kind
of environmental change require them to transform their deep structures. As they feel
there is no need for a change this companies will face resistant when trying to
implement changes.
3. Organizations that is able to continue functioning without transforming themselves
because they have sufficient ‘fat’ to absorb the inefficiencies associated with
misalignment. This organizations have big profits and possess a very strong market
presence and this organization cannot feel their inefficiencies thus hinder their ability
to sense that they are in need of a change.
However, beside these exceptions, most organizations experience change as a pattern of a

punctuated equilibrium. Gersick (1991) has studied change models in different domains and
has suggested that the paradigm has the following components: ‘relatively long periods of
stability (equilibrium), punctuated by compact periods of qualitative, metamorphic change
(revolution). The essence of this punctuated equilibrium paradigm is that systems evolved
through the alternation of periods of equilibrium. Academicians like Pettigrem (1987) and
Tushman et al (1986) has supported the punctuated equilibrium paradigm.
Every organization has their different pattern which we can categorize into several different
change types. Nadler and Tushman (1995) make the point that incremental changes can also
be large changes and may not necessarily be small. These are in reference to the resources
required and needed and the impact to the people involved. This can be defined as
incremental change. According to the punctuated equilibrium paradigm, incremental change
happens when the industry is in the equilibrium and focus to do things better through a

process of continuous tinkering, adaptation and monitoring. Incremental changes focus on

individual components, with the goal of maintaining or regaining congruence (Nadler and
Tushman 1989). The gradualist paradigm however suggested that incremental change can be
cumulative and after a period of time can lead or cause transformational change.
Transformational change as suggested by the punctuated equilibrium paradigm, happens

during the periods of disequilibrium. Academicians refer to this as either transformational or
revolutionary. However, most writers such as Tichy and Devanna (1986), Kotter (1999) opt
for the name transformational. Transformational change is based on new relationships and
dynamics within the industry that may undermine basic core competencies, and questions the
organizations purpose. It might necessarily be a better things but it is about doing things
differently and to transform and change the entire organizations strategy and method of
business. An example would be IBM which was only making machines and computer
hardware and was focusing their entire business strategy to providing the hardware required
for the computer. After Microsoft came into the picture IBM tried to challenge the operating
system industry by elevating its own in-house Lotus Smartsuite. This is a big transformation
move for IBM and various change methods had to be taken for this to be effective.
Tushman and Nadler suggested that most companies do not only go through periods of
continuous incremental and discontinuous transformational change. These companies will
see that the pattern of change repeats itself with some degree of regularity and different
industry will see different period cycles. However, in general all industry will see that the
rate of change increase and the time between this period of discontinuity decrease. An
example in the cement industry it takes 30 years for a change to occur – this is because of the
stall in the cement technology but in the automobile industry changes occur in every 5 years.
At the moment the information technology industry will be seeing the fastest change which
sees changes every year as the technology is growing very fast. In a way this relates to the
technology movement of where the industry is in. The faster the technology changes the
faster the need for a change occurs.
It is imperative that these organizations adapt with these changes or become obsolete and fail
to supply the demand to the rising markets. Forester and Kaplan (2001) provide chilling
evidence of the consequences of failing to adapt. A case study was done referring to the

Forbes top 100 companies between 1917 and 1987. Of the 100 original companies, 18
survived until 1987 and 61 of those companies no longer existed which suggest their failure
to adapt to changes and market forces or sentiment which is ever changing. Their ability to
change affects the entire organization which subsequently dooms the organization to failure.
There are infinite reasons why an organization needs to change. An organization that wishes
to prevail and succeed will need to anticipate the requirement to change. There are changes
which can be anticipated and some changes which are totally unanticipated. An example is
like when new regulations are introduced which affects the way organization do businesses,
this is normally anticipated as new public policies take time to be implemented and the
business communities are well aware of the changes to take place. Unanticipated changes are
like the after effects of the 9/11 terrorist attacks or the SARS epidemic. The post effect of
this incidents and happenings calls for new market forces and demands which lead to
requirement of change for industry that are serving these markets. Example for SARS would
be the vaccination and health industry. This can be seen as an opportunity to change to reap
the benefits from these happenings.
Some organizations prevail, adapt and do better dealing with anticipated changes and some
are not. These organizations that have anticipated change will always seek out potential
threats and opportunities by being proactive. Some also have special departments looking out
for new opportunities and threats which require the organization to adapt to these changes.
They are always in the lookout and are careful for all major happenings. Some other
organizations are just reactive and did not anticipate these changes and when the time for
change come, they fail to react or resort to last minute desperate measure of changes which is
unplanned and this subsequently will create bad results. Failing to plan is planning to fail. If
the organizations is prepared up-front the options and resorts available at the company
disposal is more and well thought out and helps to make an informed planned decision.
The smaller the organization the easier it is to adapt to changes which in some cases might
not be true also, depending on how organized the organization is. However, generally the
size of the organization will have an impact on how fast a change implementation can be
executed. If a change is unanticipated managers will have less option to choose from as they
will have inadequate time for a good planning. Careful planning requires time and this will

not be the luxury that they will have if they do not anticipate the changes upfront. Time will
also be required as these will involve many people. A good change process will require
every body’s effort and it takes time. Participation from employees and employers will
definitely assist in adapting the changes, which however does need time, the more time they
have the better it will be. An unanticipated change will also be facing problems as they do
not have the luxury to experiment the changes they wanted to implement. If they fail when
changing to another state, it will take time for them to change to another state and once they
do this, they will likely fall behind from other organizations which have already change to
adapt to this need for change. Another point to note is when technology and market shifts. If
the organization changes to this need at a later point, the market demands will definitely go
for those organizations that can offer the supply earlier and the organization will lose out to
the those organizations that has adapted changes earlier on.
Thus, it is advantageous for organization to anticipate change which will lead them for a
better planned change process.
In summary, there are organizations which are proactive and anticipate changes and there are
also organizations which are reactive and did not anticipate changes. Combining the two
dimensions of changes which have been elaborated before lead to four (4) types of changes as
identified by Nadler et al (1995):
1. Tuning (Incremental and Proactive)

Tuning is a change that occurs when there is no imperative requirement for a change in a
proactive organization. It is just like when you send your engine for tuning. You do not
need to change for a new engine but all you need is for the mechanics to do some tuning
to the engine to suit some minimal changes that you need. Tuning involves looking for
better ways to achieve / maintain the current strategic vision of an organization. For an
example, it involves improving policies, methods, procedures, introducing new
technologies, or even redesigning processes in place to reduce cost, time to market or
even to enrich the intellectual skills by developing more people with the required
competencies. Normally tuning is done internally in order for the changes to be minor
adjustment to maintain the alignment that has already existed between the internal
elements of the organizations and between its strategy and the external environment.

2. Adaptation (Incremental and Reactive)

Adaptation occurs when there are pressing demands from external for a change which is
incremental and is an adaptive response to these demands. It happens to reactive
organizations. It can either be a response to a successful new marketing strategy adopted
by a competitor or to a change in the availability of key resources. For an example when
Blackberry comes out with its smart phone that has the business connectivity to the
internet that attracts the corporate market, Nokia, Ericcsson and other phone makers rivals
out to make the same smart phone that has the same capability to match or even outwit
Blackberry’s capability. If these organizations do not change or move towards a change
process, it will definitely lose out to their competitors which are offering better products.
Another good example to note when Mars reduce the price of its confectionary products,
Nestle is force to respond and adapt change either by reducing its price or offering other
variants of products which can challenge the cheaper Mars product. This change is about
doing things in a fundamentally different way.
While tuning and adaptation can involve minor or major changes, they are changes that occur
in the same time frame which are bounded by existing parameters. Tuning and adaptation
does not involve doing entirely different things like changing the playing field or breaking the
rules of the game. It is more like changing the way a particular game is played. It is also not
major and involves many parameters as opposed to re-orientation and re-creation which
entirely change the whole game and shift the goal post. This will be further elaborated
below.
3. Re-orientation (Transformational and Proactive)

Reorientation change happens in a proactive organization that most of the times have
anticipated for these changes to occur. It is a redefinition of the organization which is
initiated in anticipation of future opportunities or threats. These organizations are ready
to adapt these changes. This however can involve a big transformational change but since
it is already anticipated it can be done graciously and gracefully. Small change can be
done in a smaller time period but a big major transformational change will require more
time and perseverance. A good example are like of Nestle in the mid-1980s where they
embarked on a major change programme to ensure that they are sensitive and remain

align to the market forces over the medium term. Nestle has initiated a top-down review
to decide which businesses it should be in and which business it should drop out. It has
also re-engineered the supply chain across the business and performed a bottom-up
analysis of the added value contributed by their main activity. These changes are major
and involved everybody in the organization. However, since these changes are well
planned out and are not obvious to all as it is an anticipated change, and are not an urgent
confirmed required change, it will take hard work to create the sense of urgency and
acceptance by the organization for the willingness to change.
4. Re-creation (Transformational and Reactive)

Re-creation is a change in a reactive organization. It involves transforming the
organization through the fast and simultaneous change of all its basic elements. Nadler
and Tushman (1995) suggested that it inevitably involves organizational frame breaking
and big changes and removal of some elements which is already in the system which can
be disorienting. An example was the change by Lee Iacocca when he became the new
CEO at Chrysler. He executed a process of revolutionary change that involved replacing
almost all of the senior management team, withdraw the company from their familiar
large car market but not making the margins and divesting in many foreign operations.
This change is like re-inventing the wheels. It takes a lot of efforts and involved the
entire organization. This change requires everybody in the organization to move together
towards the change process and need high level of commitment from all participants of
the change process.
Of the four type of changes, the most common is incremental both tuning and adaptation.
However, it is also common for an organization to be in different type of changes at one time.
An organization can be doing tuning and also at the same time doing re-creation or even
having re-orientation and at the same time doing the adaptation or any combination of the
four (4) category type of changes.
The more the manager understand these change requirements and process the better the
organization will fare and perform compared to its competitors.

Question 2
Describe the disciplines of the learning organization as expounded by Peter Senge. List
FIVE (5) disciplines and briefly explain each of the discipline.
According to Pedler et al. (1997) A learning organization is the term given to a company that
facilitates the learning of its members and continuously transforms itself. Learning
organizations develop as a result of the pressures facing modern organizations and enables
them to remain competitive in the business environment. Pedler et al. (1997) also emphasize
that change should not happen just for the sake of change, but should be well thought out
According to Peter Senge (1990: 3) learning organizations are:

…organizations where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they
truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective
aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning to see the whole together.
The very reason behind this is that only organizations that can survive rapid change are those
organizations that are flexible, adaptive and productive. For this to happen the organization
need to be able to discover and utilize people’s commitment and capacity to learn at all levels
using the learning organization model.
Employees normally have the ability and capacity to learn, the question is if the organization
allows them the environment and structures in which they function which are often not
conducive to a learning organization. Furthermore, they might lack the tools and guidance to
make sense of the situations that they face. Organizations that set themselves as a learning
organization will be able to continually expand their capacity and embrace changes.
Peter Senge in his book “The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization”
outlines the five disciplines which he said to be converging to innovate learning
organizations. They are:
1. Systems thinking – the cornerstone of the learning organization
System thinking is the conceptual cornerstone of Senge’s approach. It is the discipline that
interfaces and integrates the other four disciplines, combining it into a coherent body of
theory and practice. Peter Senge also argues that a better appreciation of systems will lead to

a more appropriate action. People normally tend to focus on certain parts or components and
fail to seeing the whole, and also fail to see the organization as a dynamic process. ‘We learn
best from our experience, but we never directly experience the consequences of many of our
most important decisions’, Peter Senge (1990: 23) argues with regard to organizations.
Peter Senge also advocates to see everything as a whole, and not to see solutions that are only
close by. We tend to focus and think that cause and effect is normally relatively near to one
another. However it might not always necessarily be the case. Classically we look to actions
that produce improvements in a relatively short time span. However, when viewed in systems
terms short-term improvements often involve very significant long-term costs. Some of the
problems which we fail to realize is that part of the problems comes from the nature of the
feedback or output we receives. This somethings are not true. Later when we resolve the
problem or think that the problem have been resolved but in reality it remains a problem
which can later grow into a bigger problem. A small action snowballs, with more and more
and still more of the same, resembling compound interest’ (Senge 1990: 81).
Another example is that by cutting advertising budgets, we will see the benefit in terms of
cost saving. In the short run, it might be little impact but on a longer term the decline in the
demands for goods and services might severely been affected.
Peter Senge (1990: 92) concludes:

The systems viewpoint is generally oriented toward the long-term view. That’s why delays
and feedback loops are so important. In the short term, you can often ignore them; they’re
inconsequential. They only come back to haunt you in the long term.
Peter Senge also strongly advocates the use of ‘systems maps’ – diagrams that show the key
elements of systems and how they connect. However, people often have a problem ‘seeing’
systems, and it takes work to acquire the basic building blocks of systems theory, and to
apply them to your organization. On the other hand, failure to understand system dynamics
can lead us into ‘cycles of blaming and self-defense and the failure of an organization to
survive.

In summary, systems thinking is about seeing and viewing the system as a whole, a
conceptual framework for providing connections between units and members. It is the shared
process of reflection, re-evaluation, action and reward.
2. Personal mastery
‘Organizations learn only through individuals who learn. Individual learning does not
guarantee organizational learning. But without it no organizational learning occurs’ (Senge
1990: 139). Personal mastery is the discipline of mastering ourselves. Meaning is to
continually clarifying and deepening our personal vision. It goes beyond competence and
skills, although it involves them. It also goes beyond spiritual opening, although it involves
spiritual growth. Personal mastery is about a special kind of preciency in the subject matter.
People with high personal mastery live in a consistently learning mode. In definition
personal mastery means being a master or a subject matter, but this is not the case as Peter
Senge would want to explain. It is about the process of learning. People with personal
mastery remain aware of their ignorance, their fallbacks, and their incompetence. This will
lead them to a journey of self improvement. Paradoxical? Only for those who do not see the
‘journey is the reward’. (Senge 1990: 142)
In summary personal mastery is a call for individuals to achieve their maximum potentials as
experts in their fields and to address opportunities and problems in new and creative ways.
3. Mental models
These are ‘deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations, or even pictures and images that
influence how we understand the world and how we take action’ (Senge 1990: 8). Mental
model starts with looking beyond the mirror and learning to unearth our internal reflection of
the world, bring it out to the surface and hold to them. It includes the ability to converse and
carry learningful conversations that balance inquiry and ideas where people expose and are
articulate about their thinking ability.
In order for organizations to develop a capacity to work with mental models then people will
necessarily learn new skills and develop new orientations. Moving the organization in the
right direction entails working to transcend the sorts of internal politics and game playing that

dominates traditional organizations. In other words it means fostering openness (Senge 1990:
273-286).
Mental models are culture and assumptions that shape how an organization’s members
approach their work and its relationship to society, relationship of employees to the
organization, peers and clients.
4. Building shared vision

Peter Senge starts from the position that if any one idea about leadership has inspired
organizations for thousands of years, ‘it’s the capacity to hold a share picture of the future we
seek to create’ (1990: 9). This kind of vision is very uplifting and it encourage
experimentation and innovation. It is also crucial that this will foster a sense of the long-
term, which is something that is fundamental to Peter Senge’s fifth discipline.
It is imperative to harness the idea that people excel and learn, not because they are told to
but because they want to. It is a vision that is shared by everybody in the organization.
However, many leaders failed to translate their personal visions into shared visions that are
shared by everybody in the organization. Their ability lacks the discipline of translating
vision into a shared vision. Providing a cookbook that needs to be followed defeats the
purpose but a set of principles and guiding practices that can shared together.
The practice of shared vision involves the skills of unearthing shared ‘pictures of the future’
that foster genuine commitment and enrolment rather than compliance. In mastering this
discipline, leaders learn the counter-productiveness of trying to dictate a vision, no matter
how heartfelt. (Senge 1990: 9)
Visions spread because of a reinforcing process. Increased clarity, enthusiasm and

commitment rub off on others in the organization. There are ‘limits to growth’ in this
respect, but developing the sorts of mental models outlined above can significantly improve
matters. Where organizations can transcend linear and grasp system thinking, there is the
possibility of bringing vision to fruition.

Colloborative creation of organization goals, that is identified, visions, and actions shared by
every members will be an outcomes and result of teamwork where every individual will share
and works to achieve.
5. Team learning
Such learning is viewed as ‘the process of aligning and developing the capacities of a team to
create the results its members truly desire’ (Senge 1990: 236). It builds on personal mastery
and shared vision – but these are not enough. People need to be able to act together. When
teams learn together, Peter Senge suggests, not only can there be good results for the
organization; members will grow more rapidly than could have occurred otherwise.
This discipline should start with a dialogue. Grouping every member and get them into a
genuine thinking together by putting the thinking hat together. …. [It] also involves learning
how to recognize the patterns of interaction in teams that undermine learning. (Senge 1990:
10)
A collective thought by a large group could become a large flow of intelligence. When this
proposed dialogue is joined with systems thinking, it is possible to create a language that will
be more suited for dealing with complexity, and of focusing in-depth issues and forces rather
than being diverted by questions of personality and leadership style.
He adds to this recognition that people are agents, able to act upon the structures and systems
of which they are a part. All the disciplines are, in this way, ‘concerned with a shift of mind
from seeing parts to seeing wholes, from seeing people as helpless reactors to seeing them as
active participants in shaping their reality, from reacting to the present to creating the future’
(Senge 1990: 69). It is to the disciplines that we will now turn.
Peter Senge five disciplines are very insightful and revolutionary. However, not many
organizations have taken this concept and have remained geared for a quick fix.
Organizations that take Peter Senge five discipline will gear towards a learning organization
and will be able to adapt to any misalignment that can arrives.

While there are some issues and problems with conceptualizing of the five disciplines, at
least it does carry within it some questions around what might make for human flourishing.
The emphases on building a shared vision, team working, personal mastery and the
development of more sophisticated mental models and the way he runs the notion of dialogue
through these does have the potential of allowing workplaces to be more convivial and
creative.
The drawing together of the elements via the Fifth Discipline of systemic thinking, while not
being to everyone’s taste, also allows us to approach a more holistic understanding of
organizational life towards a learning organization.
Below are what other writers have written in using Peter Senge’s fifth discipline and using it
for proposing on how to transform colleges and universities into a learning organizations and
ways on how faculty learning communities could enable Senge’s component in a learning
organization.
Transforming Colleges and Universities Into Learning Organizations

Patrick & Fletcher (1998)
Systems Thinking
Creation and recovery of a common language and processes across departments and
divisions; setting and honoring institutional missions, goals, actions, and rewards
Personal Mastery
Support for faculty to continue as experts in their disciplines, yet broaden their scholarship
beyond discovery to include integration, application, and teaching, particularly
multidisciplinary perspectives
Mental Models
Change from a culture of autonomy and rewards for individual work to one of community
building; rewards for faculty contributions to institutional goals and solutions of problems
Building a Shared Vision


Sharing of departmental and disciplinary visions across disciplines; identifying joint

approaches to issues such as implementing student learning communities, improving student
learning, integration of technology, creation of an intellectual community
Team Learning
Colleges and universities with “learning communities for teaching and research with
colleagues and students”
Ways That Faculty Learning Communities Enable Senge's Five Components of a

Learning Organization
Systems Thinking
Time, funding, safety, teams, and rewards to enable multidisciplinary participants to discover,
reflect on, and assess pedagogical and institutional systems; members' discovery and
appreciation of the synergy of connected campus units
Personal Mastery
Development of individual teaching projects to address opportunities or shortcomings in
one's teaching and learning; a developmental introduction to and practice of the scholarship
of teaching with multidisciplinary perspectives; becoming an expert teacher inside and
outside one's discipline
Mental Models
Members' opposition to the isolation and fragmentation of the academy; high value of
colleagueship across disciplines; participation an honor with financial rewards; discovery and
appreciation of differences among students and their development; value of students as
associates and sojourners
Building a Shared Vision

Development of pedagogial goals and joint approaches in each community and sharing these
with the campus, e.g., using technology in teaching, inclusiveness of classroom and
curriculum, active learning, assessment of learning; discussion of campus-wide issues; taking
positions and action

Team Learning
Team learning—the heart and purpose of a faculty learning community


Question 3
Explain the types of intervention used in an organization. List FOUR (4) interventions
and briefly explain each of the intervention.
Interventions plainly put are agents of change that helps manage changes in an organization.
It is a method of executing the change by introducing new agents and actions into the current
setup of an organization. Cummings and Worley (2001:142) define interventions as ‘a set of
sequenced planned actions or events intended to help an organization increase its
effectiveness’.

Burnes (2004) identifies the three main perspectives which he said these perspectives focus
attention on different aspects of organizational life and have implications for the focus of
change efforts and how the change is managed. It will be elaborated further in-depth below
that there are two different contrasting typologies presented to provide a brief overview of the
wide range of interventions available to change agents.
The first typology is suggested by Weisbord (1989) and focuses on who does the intervening
and what is it they do to bring about changes. He has identifies four main types of
intervention as follows:
1. Experts applying scientific principles to solve specific problems

Experts or specialist are normally invited to solve problem when there is a need that requires
special expertise from outside when the organization cannot solve the problem by
themselves. Normally this is due to a requirement for a particular expertise or there is a need
for cutting-edge expertise. However, if not manage properly problems can arise. Experts
come into the picture and do everything they need and there are instances where they
disregard local knowledge. This can lead to further problem and does not solve the problem
intended for the experts to solve. Furthermore the insiders will be reluctant to share their
knowledge and experience with the expert. Not just that, the solution and prescription to the
problem might then be rejected by the insiders / existing employees which will in turn be
difficult for the organization to implement. On another note which works totally the
opposite, the insiders also can be too dependent on the experts and might become a problem
too as they will not be independent and all future problems will have to be relied to the

experts. The best method is to ensure that transfer of technology is done between the experts
/ specialist to the internal employees whenever a specific problem is being solved.
2. Group working collaboratively to solve their own problems

People are normally resistance to change but however they are much more accepting of
change when they are involved in the process of planning and implementing the change.
Thus a group working together to solve the problem will bring a feel of belonging to the
change requirement and will lead them to have a feeling of ownership of the proposed
solution. The group will then be more involved and geared up to implement these changes.
Another method is to bring a consultant / facilitator to guide and get the insiders / employees
to work together, brainstorm and present a solution that everyone agrees which should be
implemented. Since the insiders / employees feel that it is their own idea for a change, the
change process or problem solving execution requirement will be much easier to implement.
Cartwright (1951) has summarized eight principles which emerged from the early research on
group dynamics, which then has influenced the design of interventions. The first five
principles are concerned with the group as a medium of change. The group will be the avatar
of change while the final three focus on the potential benefits of making the group the target
of change. Evidence has suggested that by changing the standards, style, leadership and
structure of the group, it will be possible to then influence and change the behaviour of each
individual group members. The eight principles are as follows:
1. If the group is to be used as a medium of change, those people who are to be changed
and those who are to exert influence of change need to have strong sense of belonging
for the group. This can be achieved by appointing supervisor / coordinator which
commands strong influence in the group.
2. The more attractive a group to its member, the greater the influence it will exert upon
its members. Dividing the group which have similar interest and specialization will
help assist this execution as the members will have more passion for the group.
3. A group has most influence over those matters that attract members to it.
4. The greater the reputation of a group member in the eyes of other group members the
more influence the member can exert. This can be done by having a balance
distribution of strength in each group and ensure strong personnel are placed in each
of the group.

5. Efforts to change individual members or subparts of a group, which, if successful

would have the effect of making them deviate from the norms of the group, and will
encounter strong resistance.
6. It is possible to create strong pressures for change in a group by establishing a shared
perception of the need for change, thus making the source of pressure for change lie
within the group.
7. Information relating to the need for change and the consequences of change, or no
change, must be shared by all relevant people in the group. Good communication
between group members has to be groom for this to be a successful endeavour.
8. Changes in one part of the group or systems produce strain in other parts of the group
or system that can be reduced only by eliminating the initial change or bringing about
readjustments in the related part.
These principles suggested are all about correct alignment of each individual component of
the organization. Enhancing each individual group will then create a chain of reaction that
will bring all employees together in a grouping and will then create an intervention that will
change the entire organization across the board.
3. Expert working to solve system‐wide problems

This is more to changing the technical aspects of the system. Normally operations
researchers, systems analysts and manufacturing system engineers will come in and focus on
changing the technical system. Changing the social and technical systems together is
important for this. Attention has shifted from solving isolated individual problems to more
systematic system wide issues. Organizations have then begun to employ experts to do this.
There are normally plenty of system to choose from and this give rise to the questions of
which system that will provide the best optimum conditions and can contribute most to the
outcomes valued by the stakeholders. Study by Trist and Bamforth (1951) has indicated how
new technology had a profound negative impact on miners and their social system. This
study led to further work that explored ways to minimize this negative impact. The outcome
was another technology which has not only produce impressive improvements, but marked
increase in the group cohesiveness, personal satisfaction and attendance, and also a great
significant improvement in performance.

This development gave rise to proliferation of other interventions in different settings that
were directed towards systemic issues such as managing the organization’s relationship with
its environment and helps promote better alignment of the elements within the organization.
This development has taken a stage further in whole systems interventions.
4. Everybody working to improve the capability of the whole system for future
performance
The latest development has been whole systems interventions in which everybody is involved
in the whole system improvement. This will invite everybody’s participation and encourage
them to take responsibilities in what changes they wanted to implement.
Some of the principles that underpin the whole system approach are summarized as below:
1. Parallel organization versus whole system in the room approaches: This attempts
to introduce change at strategic level and depends on the action and behaviours of
everybody that are affected by the change. This intervention encourages
representatives from different groups and levels to work and produce results. Another
approach is to get everybody and permits everybody to contribute. However, in a
very big organization this will be hard to execute.
2. Problem solving versus preferred future approaches: This encourage group
members to solve problem using ‘preferred future’ approach. The group will restrict
themselves to problem identification and action planning based on the future they
preferred. This approach is seen to associate with higher levels of energy, greater
ownership of the situation and more innovative and future-oriented goals and plans.
3. Organizational biographies: understanding the past and present as a basis for
exploring a preferred future: This is to develop a better understanding of where the
organization has come from, where it is today and how it moved from where it was to
where it is. This is a study of the consistent patterns that has been guiding the
organization and learning from the past.
4. Overcoming resistance to change: Change occurs when organizational members
feel the tense where there is discrepancy between their awareness of the current
reality and their desired future state. They are motivated to reduce this tension by
helping the organization to move towards the desired future state.

5. Open systems planning: All stakeholders and external participants of the

organization are invited to a conference method, to contribute their views about the
current performance and the opportunities and threats it will have to respond in the
future. Large group methods can help promote bottom up change but they do not
need to take away management responsibility for charting the way forward.
We have gone through great depth in explaining the first typology of change that was
suggested by Weisbord (1989).
The second alternative contrasting typology is suggested by Cummings and Worley (2001) in
classifying interventions based on the kinds of issues that they are designed to resolve. These
four interventions suggested are as follows:
1. Human process issues

Human process intervention focus on the development of better working relationships and the
processes people use for communicating, problem solving, and decision making and so on.
This can be applied at the organizational level to deal with more systematic issues. Four
interventions under the human process issues are confrontation meetings, intergroup
relations, and large group and grid interventions.
Confrontation meetings are interventions that are designed to mobilize organization wide
resources to identify problems, set priorities and targets for action.
Intergroup relations interventions are like microcosm groups with members representing
different interest coming together to work on many issues. These interventions are designed
to help two or more groups work to resolve dysfunctional conflicts.
Large group interventions are designed to involve many people, including external
stakeholders, in the management of issues that affect the whole organization.
Grid interventions are normative in the sense that they specify one best way to manage
organizations and involve processes that help organizations move to this ideal.

In short, human process issues are interventions that show how to communicate, solve
problems, make decisions, interact and lead.
2. Technology/structural issues
Techno-structural interventions are typically associated with shifts from rigid and
bureaucratic to more adaptive and cost-efficient organizational forms, and address such issues
as the division of labour, coordination between departments, processes used to produce goods
and services and the design of work.

It focuses on three areas of structure, task methods and job designs. Interventions in the
techno-structural which involves the design of the organization include:
Structural design are where this involve interventions that are aim to identify and move
towards more effective way to structure activities. It is more towards process based and
network based structures to provide the flexibility to cope with increasing uncertainties. In
short, it is a change process that tries to specialise task performances aimed at moving from
traditional ways to a more integrative and flexible forms such as process-based and network-
based structures.
Downsizing interventions is the interventions of reducing the size of the organizing by

letting go wastages of an organization. This reduces costs and bureaucracy through various
methods of reducing personnel layouts, organization redesign and outsourcing.

Business process re-engineering involves a fundamental rethink and redesign of business
processes to achieve a step of change in the performance involved. It normally require the
help of IT personnel to help organization control and coordinate work processes more
effectively. It is more concern in designing work for work groups and individual jobs. It
includes engineering, motivational and socio-technical systems approaches which are ot
produce job enrichment, job varieties, increase of autonomy and voluntarily feedback about
results. It hopes to in calculate the employees’ awareness of self managing which they can
govern their own task behaviours with limited external management control.


Then there are other interventions in the techno-structural category which are designed to
increase employee involvement and enhance their commitment and performance. These
normally involve moving decision making and involve employees from the ground.
Employees at all level will be provided with the power, information, knowledge and skills to
act effectively and the interventions in this category are:
General interventions which are designed to improve work quality such as jobs enrichment,
self managed teams and labour or even management committees.
Interventions of various types involve creation of a parallel structure that operates in

tandem with the formal organization to provide alternative settings, such as team building,
away days, project group gathering, family days, in which the organization can address for
problem and search for a solution.
Other broad based interventions are designed to increase the employee involvement. This
needs involvement from the employee and the managers to redesign the organization and
promote high level of involvement and performance. This is normally a long term effort
designed to focus all the organization’s activities around the concept of quality.
The final category of interventions in the techno-structural areas are work/job design
interventions for groups and individuals:
Engineering approaches to work design focuses on efficiency and job simplification. This
is to ensure that jobs are executed in the most efficient method.
Motivational approaches focus on enriching work experience and are designed to motivate
employees to work more effectively. Organization can hire outside consultant for
motivational speeches or activities or even offer incentives to boost motivation.
Sociotechnical approaches to work design focuses on integrating and interfacing the

technical and social aspects of the work. This involve introduction of self managed work
groups.

3. Human resource issues

Human resource interventions focuses on the employees code of work and research where
that this attributes can be use to integrate people into the organization. This address issues on
how to keep competent personnel, set goals and reward personnel, develop and manage the
personnel and all human resource issues.
This intervention focuses on all human resources issues from hiring to their career growth
and the benefits entitlement and salaries. Three main interventions designed to help, develop
and assist organizational members can be grouped under three headings:
Career planning and development interventions are introduced for employees to manage
their careers and prepare themselves to respond to lack of job security which is now a main
feature of an organizational life especially in the project line.
Workforce diversity interventions are designed to respond to various needs in the

organization, which can come from various groups of employees who have different resource
and perspectives in the organization. This is important to help organization retain a diverse
workforce and utilize it for competitive advantage and benefit.
Employee wellness interventions are designed to promote the wellbeing of organizational

members and to contribute to the development of a productive workforce. This can include
various employee assistance programs and welfare initiatives which can help employees deal
with mental, marital and financial problem which can contribute to poor work management.

Performance management interventions focus on how goal setting, performance appraisal
and reward system can contribute to organizational effectiveness by aligning employees with
business strategy and workplace technology. It involves introducing clear and challenging
goals for the employees and establishes a better fit between employees and organizational
objectives. After clear goals are defined, a performance appraisal of the achievement of an
employee can be appraised and a reward system will be in place to reward deserve
employees.


This intervention involves developing and implementing a ‘bundle’ of HR practices which is

consistent and are aligned to the organization’s strategy to achieve enhancement and
improvement in organizational effectiveness. Various existing HR practices can be further
improve or enhance to help bring about the changes required.
4. Strategic issues
Strategic interventions address issues such as the creation, formulation and implementation of
organizational strategy, and ensuring that the strategy is aligned with organizational vision,
structure and culture. It also needs to ensure all are aligned with the external environment,
and seeking and maintaining the competitive advantage.
Cummings and Worely (2001) suggested that there are three interventions designed to
improve the organization-environment fit:
Open systems planning is an intervention designed to help organization systematically

assess its environment and develop the strategic response to it. Open systems planning are a
powerful process for managing personal and organisational change. It treats organizations as
an open system that must interact with a suitable environment to survive and develop.
Integrated strategic change interventions are directed towards integrating strategic

planning and operational and tactical actions. It is a comprehensive intervention that
examines how plan change that can add value to strategic management. The integrative piece
looks at a synthesis of business strategies and organizational systems responding together to
external and/or internal disruptions.
Trans-organizational development is an intervention that focuses on the creation of

beneficial partnership with other organizations to perform tasks or solve problems that are
way beyond the capability of a single organization. This helps organizations enter into
alliances, partnerships, and joint ventures to perform tasks or solve problems that are too
complex for single organizations to resolve.


Other interventions to know in this category are those that focus directly on changing the
organization’s culture and mental models. It involves diagnosing the existing culture and
assesses the cultural risks with the planned changes.
Effective interventions are based on valid information about the organization’s functioning.
Interventions provide organization members with the opportunity to make free and informed
choices and gain member’s internal commitment to these selected choices. An accurate
diagnosis of the organization’s functioning is pivotal for valid information which can reflect
fairly on what the organization team members feel about their primary concern and issues.
Weisbord (1989) suggested that on his observation that there has been a continuous
development of new types of intervention over the past century. He even suggested that this
could be responses to environmental changes, particularly the trend towards greater
turbulence and uncertainty.
Weisbord suggested that there are a range of interventions available to change agents into
four categories according to who does intervening and what are the improvements that they
bring along. According to this theory, which is categorized from 100 years ago, is that
typically intervention are relied on experts to solve specific problem. The different now 100
years later is that today interventions often involve the whole system, including experts. For
100 years there have been movements and shifts from problem solving past mistakes in a
particular part of the system to improving the capability of the entire system for future
performance.
While in between he said in 1950 groups work on their owns problems and in 1960 experts
improve whole systems. Today’s organizations still employ experts to solve specific
problems, for example to develop a new internet gateway system or design a new database.
Experts are used when an organization has the need to do something that the organization
lack the capability. They are used when the organization need which can only be obtained
from specialist or external consultants.


PART B
Question
Develop diagnostic model. The model should have the following elements:
• Organization level
• Group level, and
• Individual level
A change process involves five major steps which are:

1. Recognizing the need and start a change process.
2. Diagnosis step to review the present state and identify future state as a vision by
developing diagnostic models.
3. Planning and preparing to change.
4. Implementing the change.
5. Sustaining the change.
Here we will elaborate and go into depth on step two of this major steps in a change process
which is the diagnostic model. Explanation of what the diagnostic models are will be given
and a model will be developed to further enhance the understanding of what a diagnostic
model is.
Organizational diagnosis is concerned with identifying what it is that need to be changed.

Organizational behaviour at all different levels is a complex phenomenon and it would be
impossible for the managers to pay attention to every aspect of organizational function.
Diagnostic models offer helps to managers to cope with this complexity.
Managers always tend to try and simplify the real world by developing models that focus
their attention on a limited number of key elements that they feel represent the real world.
They also focus on the way these elements interact with each other and focuses on the outputs
produced by these interactions, which they feel will provide the basis for evaluating
performance and assessing effectiveness.

In general, organizations develop models on the basis of their experience. These models is
hoped to provide good basis of understanding on what is going on and predicting what kinds
of actions or interventions that would produce the best result.
There are many theories and models. These can have motivation, decision making, group
functioning, organization structure and many more. It is a change agents that can be use to
help organization understand the function of each component in the organization.
Before we develop a diagnostic model, below will be an elaboration of what diagnostic

models that are available and a description of each model.
Open System Models

Open system models provide framework of an organization as a system of interrelated
components that transact with a larger environment. From the perspectives of open model
systems, some of the main characteristics of organizations are that they are:
1. Embedded within a larger system
Organizations are normally dependent on the environment for the resources, information
and feedback they require in order to survive.
2. Able to avoid entropy

Organization has the ability to avoid entropy by continuing to receive various inputs that
they transform and exports as outputs. This has to be maintained favourably with the
environment.
3. Regulated by feedback
Systems heavily rely on the feedback to change or regulate their inputs and the
transformation processes. This loop exists so that input and transformation can be
changed to suite the feedback received.
4. Subject to equifinality
A system can be change and transform to provide the same output even if receiving
different input.

5. Cylical in their mode of functioning

Events are patterned so that they are able to occur in repetitive cycles of input, throughput
and output.
6. Equilbrium seeking
Open system have the tendency to gravitate where all the component parts of the system
are in equilibrium and where a steady state exists. If a change occur and upset this
balance, different components will move within the system to restore the balance.
7. Bounded.
Open systems have boundaries where external boundaries differentiate the organization
from the external and regulate the input while internal boundaries differentiate various
components from each other and regulate input and output.
Open system models take alignment as a very pivotal and important part in determining
organization effectiveness. It is pivotal that changes to any of the internal or external
elements of the organization will cause changes to other elements. Kotter (1980) elaborated
this proposition when he developed his integrative model of organizational dynamics which
has seven major elements which are employees and other tangible assets, formal
organizational arrangements, social system, technology, external environment and dominant
coalition. These six major structural elements all interact with key organizational processes
such as information gathering, communication, decision making, matter/energy for
transporting and conversion. It interacts as a source of potential behaviour and constraint and
gives impact on. It will be noticed below that this six structural elements are pivotal for
organization to ensure its effectiveness.
Kotter further elaborated that these are different within a short run, medium term and long
term period of time.
In the short run, organization effectiveness can be defined in terms of the nature of the cause-
effect relationships. It recognized how dominant coalition will play its role in the short run.
Effective organizations are those that have key processes that are characterized by levels of
decision making effectiveness and matter/energy efficiency that help to ensure resources are

used effectively. Basically, key player in the affected industry reacts most effectively in the
short run as they are the dominant coalition in the game.
Medium term wise, which Kotter defined as a few months to a few years, is different. An
effective organization is the one that is able to maintain its short run effectiveness. It is
pivotal that the organization maintain key process elements in an efficient and effective
manner to ensure all six elements are aligned to each other. If misalignment occurs, waste
will grow and threaten the organization. Misalignment normally occurs when phasing
changes in the external environment and growth. This can be resolved by realignment the six
elements.
Kotter defined long term as six to sixty years. It is predicted that the organization’s driving
force and adaptability of the six structural elements will be pivotal to its effectiveness. It is
key that the organization be able to adapt and maintain its external alignment. This
adaptability is important because it determines whether or not the organization will be able to
maintain the required degree of alignment over long term. Therefore it is important that an
organization ensure the six structural elements are as adaptable as possible in order to
survive.
An alternative open system models which is proposed by Nadler and Tushman (1982),
highlights the effect of the congruency of the components part of the organization on its
effectiveness. Nadler focuses more attention on the role of strategy. His model identifies
four class of input:
1. Environment: This includes what the organization is a part of in the market chain,
and also include cultures within the organization operates.
2. Resources: This is such as liquid capital, physical asset, raw materials, technologies
and labour or manpower.
3. History: An important aspect as past strategic decision and the development of
leadership can affect current behaviour of the organization.
4. Strategy: This involves strategizing how the organization resources can be fully
utilized in relation to the opportunities, constraints, and demands of the environment.
Again, like Kotter he reiterated that effective organizations are the one that is able to

align the organization with the external environment and reposition the organization
to ensure that the alignment is maintained.
Nadler and Tushman further elaborated that the major components of the required
transformation processes are:
1. Task, which is viewed in terms of its complexity, predictability, interdependence and
skill demands.
2. Individuals who are members of the organization and how their response capabilities,
intelligence, skills and abilities, experience, training, needs, attitudes, expectations
and so on.
3. Formal organizational arrangements that include all the mechanism used by the
organization to direct, structure or control behaviour.
4. Informal organization, including informal group structures, the quality of intergroup
relations, political processes and so on.
Many of the components that Nadler and Tushman choose to focus on are different from
those that figure in Kotter’s model. Nadler proposed that it is the congruence or alignment
between the organization and the environment and between the internal components of the
organization is the key concept that will aid the organizational diagnosis and the development
of the change strategies.
However alignment concept receive some criticism which academicians suggest is difficult to
apply in practice. Some view the organization and the environment as ‘objective’ as if they
are easily readily open to description and definition. This makes it difficult to establish any
shared understanding of the current and required level of alignment. Another criticism is that
alignment have problem when the focus is the management of incremental change. When
faced with discontinuous change where alignment cannot assist to break with the past and
introduce radical innovation before seeking to re-establish a new state of alignment around a
new task and new structural elements. These criticisms have some merit but system models,
alignment can make effective and an important contribution to effective change management.
Postma and Kok (1999) describe organizational diagnosis as a process of research into the
functioning of an organization. This leads to recommendations for improvement. In practice,

diagnosis is a process that beings with change managers using some kind of holistic model of
organizational functioning to look at the whole organization and then moving on for a
particular each components of the organization.
There are a number of models that focus on assessing the environment and how these
changes can affect organizational performance. Below are other holistic models that can be
used to aid diagnosis.
PEST / SWOT Analysis

PEST is an analytical diagnosis model that is used to examine and assess the environment
and search for evidence that might signal a problem or opportunity. Kotter (1998) claims that
PEST analysis is a useful strategic tool for understanding market growth or decline, business
position, potential and direction for operations. The headings of PEST are a framework for
reviewing a situation, be applied by companies to review a strategic directions, including
marketing proposition. The use of PEST analysis can be seen effective for business and
strategic planning, marketing planning, business and product development and research
reports. PEST also ensures that company’s performance is aligned positively with the
powerful forces of change that are affecting business environment. PEST is useful when a
company decides to enter its business operations into new markets and new countries. The
use of PEST, in this case, helps to break free of unconscious assumptions, and help to
effectively adapt to the realities of the new environment.
PEST as the name indicates is an acronym for political, economic, socio-cultural and
technological factors:
1. Political factors includes all political environment and variables that can affect the
organization which ranges from new legislation, environmental management,
consumer protection, regulations of markets, regulations on telecommunications and
broadcasting, new government policies and everything that is politically related.
2. Economic factors include issues such as exchange rates, cost of borrowing, change in
levels of disposable income, cost of raw materials, and security of supplies, new
competitors, and world economic cycle and so on.
3. Sociocultural factors include demographic trends such as a fall in the birth rate or an
ageing population. This also includes shifting attitudes towards education, training,

work and leisure which can have knock-on effects on the availability of trained
labour, consumption patterns and so on. Cultural factors can also affect business
ethics and the way business is done in different parts of the world.
4. Technological factors include issues such as the levels of investment that
competitions are making in research and development and the outcome of this
investment. The availability of new materials, products, production processes, means
of distribution and so on.
These four factors will be the key categories that a PEST model will work on when doing a
diagnostic model of an organization.
SWOT analysis which is an acronym for Strength, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats
offers a more comprehensive to diagnosing organization-environment fit.
SWOT has a long history as a tool of strategic and marketing analysis. It has features in
strategy textbooks since at least 1972 and can now be found in textbooks on marketing and
any other business disciplines. It advocates say that it can be used to gauge the degree of “fit”
between the organisation’s strategies and its environment, and to suggest ways in which the
organisation can profit from strengths and opportunities and shield itself against weaknesses
and threats.
Strengths - Determine an organisation’s strong points. This should be from both internal and
external environment. It is a distinctive competence when it gives the firm a comparative
advantage in the marketplace. Strengths arise from the resources and competencies available
to the firm.
Weaknesses - Determine an organisation’s weaknesses, not only from its point of view, but
also more importantly, from customers. Although it may be difficult for an organisation to
acknowledge its weaknesses it is best to handle the bitter reality without procrastination.
Opportunities - Another major factor is to determine how organisations can continue to grow
within the marketplace. After all, opportunities are everywhere, such as the changes in
technology, government policy, social patterns, and so on. An opportunity is a major situation
in a firm’s environment. Key trends are one source of opportunities. Identification of a

previously overlooked market segment, changes in competitive or regulatory circumstances,

technological changes, and improved buyer or supplier relationships could represent
opportunities for the organization.
Threats - A threat is a major unfavourable situation in an organization’s environment. Threats

are key impediments to the firm’s current or desired position. The entrance of new
competitors, slow market growth, increased bargaining power of key buyers or suppliers,
technological changes, and new or revised regulations could represent threats to an
organization’s success.
Strebel’s evolutionary cycle of competitive behaviour

Strebel’s (1996) model can be used to anticipate technological and economic changes in the
environment and initiate planned organizational changes that will enable an organization to
be ahead of others. Strebel suggested that there is an evolutionary cycle of competitive
behaviour with different phases that are marked by break points. This break points can be
observed by looking at its competitive trends and can be predicted in advance. The two
phases of the cycles are innovation and efficiency. The phase starts with the innovation
phase by having a sharp increase in divergence and begins when an innovation by a
competitor is seen as an opportunity. This process continues until there is no more
innovation to be added. After this the divergence begins to slow down and starts to decline.
The next phase begin when one competitor started to pay attention on efficiency and start to
reduce cost, this will see the cycle move towards going for the most efficiency in a test for
the survival of the fittest. The cycle can start again when efficiency has been optimized and
there is room for another innovation. Strebel posits that convergence are easier to anticipate
than divergence because every organization will at a point of time looks forward for
efficiency and cost reduction while innovation is something that comes along the way.
Greiner’s five phases of growth

Greiner (1972) cautions managers about the danger of only attending to the external
environment and the future. He goes on further and asserts that for many organizations, the
most pressing problems are rooted in the organization’s past decisions compared to present
events and dynamics. He noted that organization evolves over five phases of development
and each phase involves and created their own crisis due to misalignment. Greiner suggested

that each period is characterized by a dominant management style and also its dominant
problem which has to be resolved in order for the organization to continue to grow. The five
phases are:
1. Growth through creativity leading to a crisis of leadership: This is a typical
example of when an organization started off with a founder having found the
creativity to innovate and create a product. Over time, the needs for specialist and
external managers to manage the organization occurs and if not managed will create
problem for the organization.
2. Growth through directing leading to a crisis of autonomy: The second phase of
growth happens when organization start to structure themselves properly with
organization structure with clear hierarchy and created more bureaucracy. After a
while the needs for greater autonomy occur to solve this problem.
3. Growth through delegation leading to a crisis of control: As the organization
grows the need to delegate power and decision making in order for the organization to
function better arises. However, if not managed properly, will give rise to parochial
mindsets and employees begin to work too independently and may deviate from the
organization’s objectives and vision.
4. Growth through coordination leading to a crisis of red tape: The fourth phase
involves better control and coordination of the work delegation. However, slowly the
organization will be facing with bureaucratization which will eventually stifles
initiative and strangles the growth of the organization.
5. Growth through collaboration: The final phase would be when the organization has
matured enough and ensure greater spontaneity which is encouraged through
developing interpersonal competencies, matrix and network structures and associated
systems that enable people to work together in ways that rely more on social control
and self-discipline rather than formal control and close monitoring from the top.
The important task and critical is for change managers to be aware of the organization’s
history and its current phase of development and identify new set of organization practices
that will provide the way forward into the next period of evolutionary growth as the five
phases that Greiner has suggested.

Flamholtz’s organizational life cycle model

Flamholtz (1995) framework for organizational diagnosis brings together a model of
organizational effectiveness. He refers this as the pyramid of organizational development.
This is also considered by him as an organizational life cycle model and points to a number
of key transformation points. He identifies six tasks which determine an organization’s
effectiveness:
1. Markets: The first challenge is to identify market for good or service.
2. Products and services: The second is to develop, design and produce a product
capable of satisfying that need.
3. Resource management: From the start, organization have to acquire or develop the
resources by financial, technological, physical and human which is necessary to
facilitate current and anticipated levels of production.
4. Operational systems: Organization needs system in order to run the business on a
day to day basis like accounting, billing, human resources and so on.
5. Management systems: This is imperative for an organization to ensure planning,
organizing, management development and control are functioning on a long term
period.
6. Corporate culture: Organizations also need to develop good culture that are aligned
with its mission and strategy to ensure the priorities are consistently attended to.
All this six tasks have to be performed to some degree at the organization’s development.
The first two tasks reflect the business the organization is involved in while the next four
tasks reflect the organization’s infrastructure.
Flamhortz further asserted that organizations progresses through a seven stages of

development cycle from new venture to decline-revitalization which are as follows;
1. New venture
2. Expansion
3. Professionalization
4. Consolidation
5. Diversification
6. Integration
7. Decline-revitalization

It is a good point to note that both Greiner and Flamholtz agrees that managers can use
organizational life cycle models to help the organization recognize their development stage
and identify the kind of issues that might be adversely affecting organizational performance.
Phelps et al. states framework for firm growth

Phelps et al. (2007) proposed an alternative conceptualization of firm growth. Different from
both Greiner and Flamholtz, he makes assumption on linearity, predictability and sequence.
Phelps et al. (2007) argue that in order to continue growing, an organization must
successfully resolve the challenges presented by each tipping point. To do this the
organization must have the capability to find new knowledge suited to resolve these new
challenged which is posed at different tipping point. He continues to draw the notion of
absorptive capacity which was proposed by Cohen and Levinthal, 1990. He goes on to
propose that:
1. The base state is ignorance: The organization does not realize that it is facing
important key issues.
2. The second state is awareness: Once the organization is aware, new knowledge can be
actively sought or passively received to help resolve it.
3. The final state involves the implementation of the action required to achieve real
change.
This model can be applied to help managers become more aware of the issues confronting
their organization with regards to the potential tipping points and the organization’s capacity
to identify, acquire and apply the knowledge it needs to address emerging challenges.
We have gone through the extent of explaining how internal alignment is pivotal to be
managed in order to ensure an organization’s survival. Below is an explanation of two
models use for diagnosing internal alignment.
The McKinsey 7S model

The McKinsey 7S model highlights seven interrelated elements of organizations which when
aligned make important contribution to organizational effectiveness (Pascale and Athos,
1981). The seven elements are:

1. Strategy: Purpose of the business and the way the organization seeks to enhance its
competitive advantage
2. Structure: Division of activities; integration and coordination mechanism; nature of
informal organization
3. Systems: Formal procedures for measurement, reward and resource allocation,
informal routines for communicating, resolving conflicts and so on.
4. Staff: The organization’s human resources, its demographics, educational and
attitudinal characteristics.
5. Style: Typical behaviour patterns of key groups, such as managers and other
professionals, and the organization as a whole.
6. Shared Value: Core beliefs and values and how these influence the organization’s
orientation to customers, employees, shareholders, and society at large.
7. Skills: The organization’s core competencies and distinctive capabilities.
This model can be use for change managers to assess the degree of alignment between the
seven elements.
Weisbord’s six-box model

Weisbord (1976) presents his systemic model as a practice theory that synthesizes knowledge
and experience from change agents. It provides a conceptual map of six boxes that can be
used to apply theories to the assessment of these elements in a way that can unveil new
relationships and connections between elements. The effectiveness of an organization’s
functioning depends on what goes in and between the six boxes. The six boxes are:
1. Purpose: What business are we in.
2. Leadership: Is someone keeping the six boxes in balance.
3. Structure: How do we divide up the work?
4. Relationships: How do we manage conflict among people? How do we manage
relationships with our technologies?
5. Helpful mechanisms: Have we adequate coordination technologies?
6. Rewards: Do all needed tasks have incentives.

By tracing the reasons for any dissatisfaction to what is happening in or between the six
boxes that represent the unit or organization under consideration will be a useful starting
point in a diagnostic exercise.
The Burke-Litwin causal model of organizational performance and change

The Burke-Litwin (1992) open system is able to diagnose both internal and external
alignment. It points to the relative weight of the elements of organizational functioning and
the causal linkages that determine the level of performance and affect the process of change.
The model is also able to determine the different between transformation change and
transcational change. This model comprises of 12 interrelated elements. It is an open
systems model in which the inputs are represented by the external environment element at the
top of the figure and the outputs from the individual and organizational performance at the
bottom. The 12 interrelated elements are:
1. External environments [Top figure – Input]
2. Mission and strategy
3. Leadership
4. Organizational culture
5. Structure
6. Management practices
7. Work unit climate
8. System (policies and procedures)
9. Tasks and individual roles
10. Motivation
11. Individual needs and values
12. Individual and organizational performance [Bottom figure – Output]
The model is presented vertically to reflect causal relationship and the relative impact of
elements on each other. The elements which are on top [item 2-4] exert greater impact on the
elements that is on the lower of the model [item 9-11].
Having said this does not mean that change should start from the top. It is a predictive rather
than a prescriptive model. Burke and Litwin (1992) present an impressive summary of
studies that provide empirical support for the causal linkages hypothesized by their model.

Characteristics of a good model

All the models that have been considered and presented are rather simplifications of the real
world. None of these models actually are guaranteed to accommodate all circumstances and
provide a reliable basis for why things are the way they are but it provides some indication of
where things goes wrong or what actions that can be taken to produce the desired result.
Three characteristics of a good model are as follows:
1. Are relevant to the particular issues under consideration.
2. Help change agents recognize cause-and-effect relationships.
3. Focus on elements that they can influence.
SWOT Analysis Model

A case study will be simulated for Talisman Malaysia limited, an Oil & Gas company to
demonstrate how a SWOT model to be used as a diagnostic model in order to identify and
start planning the changes required for the organization.
Talisman Energy (Talisman) is an independent international upstream oil and gas company
undertaking exploration, development, production, transportation, and marketing of crude oil,
natural gas, and natural gas liquids (NGLs). The company primarily operates in North
America, the North Sea, and Southeast Asia. It is headquartered in Alberta, Canada and
employs over 2,600 people.
Talisman Energy (Talisman) is one of the largest independent oil and gas producers in
Canada. Its main business activities include exploration, development, production,
transportation, and marketing of crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids (NGLs). It has
about seven operating subsidiaries.
Talisman has ongoing production, development, and exploration operations in North

America, the North Sea, Southeast Asia and Australia, North Africa, and Trinidad and
Tobago.

Talisman’s interests in Southeast Asia include operations and exploration acreage in

Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Papua New Guinea, and Australia. In FY2007, Southeast Asia
production averaged 92,057 boe/d.
Talisman’s subsidiaries hold operated interests ranging from 33% to 60% in three blocks in
Malaysia; PM-3 CAA/46-Cai Nuoc, PM-305 and PM-314. In FY2007, Malaysia production
averaged 37,540 boe/d.
In Vietnam, a Talisman subsidiary holds a 30% interest in a joint operating company, which
operates Block 46/02 adjacent to PM-3 CAA on the border with Malaysia.Talisman holds
non-operated interests ranging from 25% to 40% in the Laminaria and Corallina fields and
the Joint Petroleum Development Area (JPDA) 06-105 in Australia.Talisman’s subsidiary
holds a 48% operated interest in a natural gas discovery and a 35% interest in exploration
acreage, both offshore Papua New Guinea.
Talisman Energy is an independent international upstream oil and gas company. The
company's products and services include:
Products: Crude oil, Natural gas, Natural gas liquids, Synthetic oil, Sulphur
Services: Exploration, Development, Production, Transportation, Marketing
For this SWOT Analysis we will have one model for each level:
1. Organizational Level
2. Group Level
3. Individual Level

1) Organizational Level – Talisman Energy Ltd.

INTERNAL
STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
1) Strong market position 1) Lack of scale
2) Diversified geographical presence 2) High debt
EXTERNAL
OPPORTUNITY THREATS
1) Acquisition and agreement 1) Economic slowdown in the US and
2) New oil and gas production Eurozone
2) Environmental regulation
3) Saturation of resources
SWOT SUMMARY
Strengths
Strong market position

Talisman Energy is an independent, international upstream oil and gas company whose main
business activities include exploration, development, production, transportation, and
marketing of crude oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs). In North America,
Talisman is a leading deep gas explorer and has significant unconventional natural gas
potential. In the North Sea, the company operates more than 40 oilfields and has extensive
exploration acreage in Norway. In Southeast Asia, Talisman has substantial long-life natural
gas reserves and highly prospective exploration acreage.
Diversified geographical presence

Talisman Energy has ongoing production, development, and exploration operations in North
America, the North Sea, Southeast Asia and Australia, North Africa, and Trinidad and
Tobago. The company's operations are conducted principally in five geographic segments:
North America, UK, Scandinavia, Southeast Asia, and others (comprising North Africa,
Trinidad and Tobago, Colombia, Peru, and Qatar). A diversified geographical presence
enables the company to reduce business risks arising in a particular geography.

Weaknesses
Lack of scale
The company lacks the desired scale to compete with large players in the industry. Many of
the company's competitors are much larger in size in terms of revenue generated, number of
employees, and their presence in Europe and other developing market. British Petroleum
(BP), generated revenues of about $288,951 million and employed about 97,600 people
worldwide for the financial year ended December 2009 (FY209). Exxon Mobil Corporation
(Exxon Mobil) generated revenues of about $390,328 million and employed 81,000 people as
on FY09. However, Talisman generated revenues of $7,409.4 million FY09, and employed
about 2,550 people worldwide. Owing to its relatively small scale of operations, the company
could find it difficult to face competition.
High debt
The company has a significant amount of debt. For the FY09, the company has an
outstanding debt of $4,549.1 million. The company’s substantial debt could limit its ability to
obtain additional financing to operate its business. Further, it would make it difficult for the
company to satisfy its obligations including making interest payments on debt obligations.
Opportunities
Acquisitions and agreements

The company has been expanding its geographic reach through acquisitions and agreements.
In January 2008, Talisman announced that one of its subsidiaries have acquired the Tangguh
LNG Project, located in West Papua, Indonesia. Talisman has also entered into agreements
with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) within Iraq for interests in Blocks K44 and
K39 respectively. Talisman Energy has also announced that its wholly-owned limited
partnership FEI Shale (Fortuna) reached agreement to acquire properties in Texas, Arkansas,
and Louisiana, for a total of 108,000 acres (net to Fortuna). Talisman has also recently been
awarded with two deepwater blocks in Sabah namely SB09 and SB10. These agreements and
acquisitions would provide Talisman with growth opportunities and drive its revenue growth.

New oil and gas production

Talisman Energy has considerably increased its oil and gas production in recent times. First
oil production from the Song Doc field in Block 46/02 offshore Vietnam is producing gross
production from five pre-drilled wells is expected to reach approximately 25,000 bbls/d. An
additional three development wells are currently being drilled. Talisman's share of proved
and probable reserves in the Song Doc field is estimated at six million barrels (mmbbls), with
proved reserves of three mmbbls. Talisman Energy announced first gas production from the
Rev Field in Norway. The field is expected to produce at a plateau rate of 100 mmcf/d of gas
and 6,000 bbls/d of condensate and natural gas liquids from two subsea wells. The new oil
and gas production would increase the company’s output which in turn increases its revenues.
Threats
Economic slowdown in the US and Eurozone

The US and European Union are the two key markets for Talisman. According to
International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) World Economic Outlook, January 2009, the US and
Eurozone economies could face slowdown in 2009. The GDP growth rate in the US has
decreased from 2% in 2007 to 1.1% in 2008 and is projected to record a negative growth of
1.6% in 2009. The GDP growth rate in the Eurozone has declined from 2.6% in 2007 to 1%
in 2008 and is projected to record a negative growth of 2% in 2009. A weak economic
outlook for Eurozone and the US would put pressure on the revenues of the company.
Economic slow down in the US and Eurozone could impact industrial development, which
could adversely affect demand for Talisman's products.
Environmental regulations
As a result of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, stringent new regulations have been enacted.
These regulations pose the possibility of unlimited financial liability for pollution damages.
Companies operating in the oil and gas industry are subject to strict environmental
regulations. Distribution and storage houses need to strictly comply with environmental
regulations which keep changing frequently. Compliance with these regulations forces
Talisman, to incur high costs. These factors can have a potential negative impact on the
company's margins.

Saturation of resources
The maturity of the North America basin reserve continues to give rise to increases in both
replacement costs and operating costs. Larger companies are finding it increasingly difficult
to increase their North American production as conventional production is declining in these
more mature basins. Furthermore, output from proven natural gas reserves in Canada has
been declining significantly. There has been a succession of dry holes being drilled in the
region in the last two years. The saturation of reserves in North America would severely
impact the company's operations.
SWOT Element Comment on Current Strategy Gap or

No Gap
Leveraging Strengths
To continue expanding and command market
Strong Market Presence No
presence
To continue diversifying geographical presence and
Diversified geographical
expansion to focus on south east asia region which is No
presence
currently booming especially in deepwater projects
Mitigating Weaknesses
Lack of scale No strategy in plan yet Yes
High debt No strategy in plan yet Yes
Taking advantages of opportunities
To aggressively compete and involves in new bids
for new acquisitions and agreements, hire more
Acquisitions and business development executives and continue to
No
agreements foster good relationship with PETRONAS and other
facilitator in other countries that is involved in
awarding blocks.
To produce and develop more oil and gas production
New oil and gas in areas that is currently under exploration, to
No
production execute oil and gas increase recovery program and
encourage such technology. To expedite project

which are under development for fast track in

producing new oil and gas production.
Mitigating Threats
Economic slowdown in No strategy in plan yet, but would be able to go
Yes
US and Eurozone work more further outside the US and Eurozone
No strategy in plan yet, but would be able to spend
more money on environmental issues. Prevention is
Environmental regulations better than cure. To hire environmental specialist Yes
that can hire the company in ensuring all regulations
is checked and followed.
No strategy in plan yet, but would be able to actively
Saturation of resources bid out for more oil & gas blocks to ensure higher Yes
oil & gas reserves.

2) Group Level – Project Team Department:

INTERNAL
1) Strong personnel 1) Manpower status
2) Teamwork 2) Uncertainties
EXTERNAL
OPPORTUNITY THREATS
1) Design optimization 1) Increase of steel price
2) Additional platform 2) Drop of world oil price
SWOT SUMMARY
Strengths
Strong personnel
Talisman project team are blessed with experience personnel as the company pays the highest
in the market compared to its competitors ExxonMobil, Shell and Petronas Carigali.
Comparison of the compensation paid is made in Malaysia. The project team comprised of
personnel with a minimum of fifteen (15) years of experience specializing in a particular
discipline with experience ranging from small satellites to big mother platforms. In fact, the
same team was the team that has successfully installed BO-A platform offshore Kota Bharu,
Kelantan at the Malaysian – Vietnam claim waters. It was the biggest ever installed single
piece platform in South East Asia weighing a proud 11,000 MT. Most of the personnel are
previously employed by ExxonMobil and other major Oil & Gas players in the world.
Teamwork
The strength of Talisman project team also lies in its teamwork. The working culture
illustrates the close bonding similar to those of a family. This occurred as the same project
team has been working together at various sites and location often far from their own home
and family which nurture the close bonding. As an example, the project team has spent 15
months together in Vung Tau, Vietnam when fabricating the three (3) wellheads for BO-B,
BO-C and BO-D Wellhead Riser Platforms. The project team also experience the lowest rate
of staff turnover and we have the same team in the project since year 2000 with very minimal
changes.

Weakness
Manpower status
All 60 project personnel are third party contractors employed through various manpower
agency. Only the project manager is of permanent status with the company. This opens the
room for the personnel to have less feeling of belonging to the company. Their feeling is
working just purely for money like mercenaries. Thus, there are times when they will not
work more than what their duty calls for and this is a weakness of the setup.
Uncertainties
Project team face uncertainties in every phases of the project, this uncertainties is bigger on a
rapid track project where the management will be pushing for immediate commencement of
fabrication / construction whereas the engineering has yet to be completely finalized. This
open room for changes, cost overrun and major re-works on some cases and in some cases
might ballooned the cost to double and gives bad reputation to the project team. This could
be mitigated with a proper engineering design but without the time allowance this cannot be
materialized. This is a weakness that the project team needs to mitigate.
Opportunity
Design optimization
The new project for IOR Phase II which comprises of possible two or three additional
platforms in the Southern Field offshore Kota Bharu, Kelantan in Vietnam – Malaysia claim
waters design is currently not final. However, budget submission was done on an average
cost design. This open the room for design optimization and the opportunity for the project
team to get the best and most cost effective design for implementation on the project. A
thorough conceptual engineering study can be conducted to catch this opportunity.
Additional platform
The first design calls for only a single platform to be built for IOR Phase II Project.
However, there are reasons and concerns that might implicate this plan and the need to
introduce another platform to ensure a more optimized processing of the crude is required.

There is also an exploratory drilling being made near BO-D fields and if this proves to be
abundant of oil, another new platform would be build. Economic of scale will give the
project team better bargaining power with vendors and suppliers to get better price as the
purchasing requirement increase from a single platform requirement to three platforms. This
is an opportunity for the project team to save costs and budget.
Threats
Increase of steel price

The sudden unanticipated increase of steel price which are way out of control can damage the
project team costs and budget. Apparently the increase is so uncertain that when expected an
increase of 10% it turns up to be an increase of almost 200% in price. This market
unpredictability is a threat to the project team ability to control the costs and budget.
Drop of world oil price

The current economics of the project development for this project is at USD30/bbls. If the
price of world oil drops below this figure, the project will be in the red. Currently it is
hovering at USD70-80/bbls. However it might drop again. This is a threat to the project
development.

No Gap
Better controls of engineering design, and execution
and stronger monitoring of vendors and
Strong personnel No
subcontractors. Project team to assist and verify
heavily on the subcontractors work.
Interface gap between discipline and stronger
Teamwork coverage on all the interfacing issues will be use to No
ensure better results and performance.
Manpower status Project team members that are pivotal to the Yes

company should be absorbed into the direct hire

system or offered a permanent position with a non
significant pay drop.
More time should always be allocated for
Uncertainties Yes
engineering phase to reduce uncertainties and risk
This should be one of the top priorities of the project
team where design optimization should always be in
Design optimization the mindset of each project team member. Since it No
is currently on conceptual engineering stage, this is
the best time to take advantage of this opportunity.
Additional platform will give the project team more
Additional platform purchasing power and a higher bargaining capability No
with vendors, suppliers and subcontractors.
Mitigating Threats
To minimize the use of structural steel by design
Increase of steel price Yes
optimization
No strategy yet, except for reducing the cost of the
Drop of world oil price Yes
project and making it more economics

3) Individual Level for Anas Alam Faizli:

INTERNAL
1) Confident. 1) Careless.
2) Persistent. 2) Stress.
3) Competent and Comprehensive 3) Non-engineering background
EXTERNAL
OPPORTUNITY THREATS
1) Opening for Project Engineer 1) Project development of IOR Phase II
2) Permanent position in Performance suspension.
Improvement Department 2) No discovery in SB09 and SB10.
SWOT SUMMARY
Strengths
Confident
I am very confident in doing what I do. I approach problems with the idea that the problem
can be solved no matter how difficult it is. As a result of this, my colleagues and supervisors
have a high confident in myself when executing a job. This also help gets the
acknowledgement from the team. I also earn the respect from my subordinates and they
always give me the best that they can in ensuring project completion.
Persistent
My superior always complaint that I am persistent when I want to get things done. I push
things to the maximum. However this is a positive strength which normally ends up getting
things done no matter how difficult or faced with time constraints. Despite the fact that
everyone says that something cannot be done or completed doesn’t stop me and this is one of
my strength point.
Competent and Comprehensive


I possessed solid experience in the upstream oil & gas industry working with Talisman
Malaysia Limited, Petronas Carigali and Sime Sembcorp Engineering, throughout
development phase; serving under various roles and multiple responsibilities primarily as
Project Engineer in charge of overall project execution with international exposure working
overseas onshore and offshore with expertise as Site Engineer with construction and planning
exposure at fabrication yards.
Competent in project management elements of contracts management, strategic planning,

project risk management, cost controls, critical change project management and also
technical knowledge in construction and capability in facilities engineering throughout its
development phases.
Comprehensive exposure from initialization of Field Development Plan (FDP) formulation,

select engineering, front end engineering, conceptual & basic design, detail engineering,
procurement, fabrication, offshore installation, hookup & commissioning to FIRST OIL /
GAS (startup).
Weakness
Careless
I always strive to complete everything ahead of time and try to be as efficient as possible.
However I notice that at some point of time, there are works execution which could have
been done on a higher quality grounds if more time was properly taken to consider and plan
for the work. As a result of this often I found that some of my works is not as of high quality
as intended.
Stress
I found that some of the time I am bad at handling stress. This works as a weakness, if I can
maintain my cool and unruffled under all circumstance I will be able to perform better.
Normally I will be stress when doing multi tasking with limited amount of time or getting
resistant from subordinates. This affects the outcome of my decision making and work
execution which is a weakness.

Non-engineering background
I come from a computer science degree. This set me behind compared to other peers coming
from engineering background despite the fact that I have been in the oil & gas industry for
more than 8 years. Colleagues and peers are at times tend to have the tendency to under
estimate my opinion and this is something that needs to be overcome.
Opportunity
Opening for Project Engineer
There is a new development in the company. IOR Phase II is kicking off and is now
currently under conceptual engineering. It is a golden opportunity that after I complete my
assignment in Telok Kalong, Kemaman with striking colors. My manager is strongly
pushing me for this position which is a step in my career growth. Having served as a project
engineer will definitely boost up my management skills and exposure which will open the
path for me to strive to become a Project Manager. This is indeed an opportunity that cannot
be resisted.
Permanent position in Performance Improvement Department

There is a new department in the company which is called the Performance Improvement. It
has recently been setup with a manager from Calgary, Canada. There is a vacancy there and
my manager has given me an offer. He mentioned that this is more of a corporate exposure
and will expose me most of the times with the senior management of the company giving
presentation and new ideas to the company which is opening very hard for performance
improvement initiatives. This is an opportunity for a permanent position with the company
and a move to the corporate ladder and society of the industry.
Threats
Project Development of IOR Phase II suspension
IOR Phase II which will involve the development of two new platforms has not received the
greenlight from PETRONAS (Petroleum Nasional Berhad) yet. It is currently under the
formulation of development plan stage with conceptual engineering being executed by
Technip (M) Sdn Bhd. There is a high possibility that the project will receive the nod and

greenlight from PETRONAS for development but if the economics of the project shows red,
there is a risk of the project being suspended. If the project is suspended there will be no
project in the company for next year and will put contract personnel like myself in danger of
job security and have the potential of being release of my contract.
No discovery in SBO9 and SB10

Talisman has been awarded two deepwater blocks in Sabah. However exploration is still
ongoing and there has been no good positive findings yet. This is pivotal and critical for the
next phase of life for Talisman in Malaysia. If they do not find anything in Sabah, there will
be no more projects in Malaysia as all the existing blocks have been fully developed. This
will put my job security at jeopardy and risk losing my contract for the year 2012 onwards.

No Gap
To continue having the confident and building up
self-esteem and to use it to gain respect and
Confident No
acknowledgement from colleague, superiors and
subordinates and contractors.
To continue building up persistency and ensure
Persistent everything get done no matter how difficult things No
are.
To further enhance and improve capability and
Competent and
move towards personal mastery as proposed by No
Comprehensive
Senge’s fifth discipline
To always remind myself to double check my works
Careless and ensure quality of the highest order every time Yes
prior to submitting my works.
To delegate some of my works to subordinate and be
Stress more organized to minimize stress and if possible to Yes
evade stress and maintain coolness

To pursue and graduate from Master of Project

Non-engineering
Management course and gain recognition from Yes
background
fellow colleagues and superiors
To continue pushing and giving the idea to manager
Opening for Project
to ensure the role is secured and I will be able to get No
Engineer
the job.
To continue pushing and giving the idea to ensure
the role is secured and I will be able to get the job.
Permanent position in
To also highlight and shows to management that I’m
Performance Improvement No
doing my Master’s thesis on Performance
Department
Management which will increase my credibility and
integrity.
Mitigating Threats
No strategy in plan yet, however will be able to
Project Development of
work my level best to ensure the project gets the Yes
IOR Phase II Suspension
greenlight and go ahead from PETRONAS
No discovery in SBO9 and
No strategy in plan yet Yes
SB10

REFERENCES
Burke, W.W. and Litwin, G.H (1992) A causal model of organizational performance and
change, Journal of Management, 18(3):523-45.
Cartwright, D. (1951) Achieving change in people: some applications of group dynamics

theory, Human Relations, 4 (2):381-92.
Cummings, T.G and Worley, C.G. (2001) Organizational Development and Change,
Cincinnati, OH: South Western.
Flamholtz, E. (1995) Managing organizational transition: implications for corporate and

human resource management, European Management Journal, 13 (1): 39-51.
Gersick C.(1991) Revolutionary change theories: A multi-level exploration of the punctuated

equilibrium paradigm, Journal of Management Studies.
Greinel, L.E. (1972) Evolution and revolution as organizations grow, Harvard Business
Review, 50:37-46.
John Hayes (2010) The Theory and Practice of Change Management: Third Edition,
Palgrave Macmillan
Kotter, J.P (1980) An Integrative model of organizational dynamicsm in E.E Lawler, D.A.
Nadler and C. Cammann (eds), Organizational Assessment, New York: Wiley.
Kotter, J. (1999), Ten observations. Executive Excellence, August, 1999, 15-16.
Nadler, D., R. Shaw and A.E. Walton (1995) Discontinuous Change: Leading Organization
Transformation, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Nadler, D and Tushman, M. (1982) A Model for diagnosing organizational behavior:

applying a congruence perspective in D.A. Nadler, M.L Tushman and N.G. Hatvany (eds),
Managing Organizations, Boston: Little, Brown.

Nadler, D and Tushman, M. (1989) Organisational framebending. Academy of Management

Executive, 3: 194-202.
Pascale, R. and Athos, A. (1981) The Art of Japanese Management, New York: Warner
Books.
Patrick, S. K. & Fletcher, J. J. (1998) Faculty developers as change agents: Transforming

colleges and universities into learning organizations. To Improve the Academy, 17, 155-170.
Pedler, M., Burgogyne, J. and Boydell, T. (1997) The Learning Company: A strategy for
sustainable development. 2nd Ed. London; McGraw-Hill
Phelps, R., Adams, R. and Bessant, J. (2007) Life cycles of growing organizations: a review
with implications for knowledge and learning, International Journal of Management Reviews,
9(1): 1-30.
Postma, T. and Kok, R. (1999) Organizational diagnosis in practice: a cross-classification

analysis using the DEL-technique, European Management Journal, 17 (6): 584-97.
Senge, P.M (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization:
Doubleday
Strebel, P. (1996) Breakpoint: how to stay in the game, Mastering Management, Part 17,
London : Financial Times.
Tichy, Noel M, Devanna, M.A (1986) The transformational leader, Chichester: Wiley.
Trist, E.L. and Bamforth, K.W. (1951) Some social and psychological consequences of the
long-wall method of coal-getting, Human Relations, 1:3-38.
Tushman, M. L., Newman, W. H. and Romanelli, E., (1986) Convergence and Upheaval:
managing the unsteady pace of organizational evolution, California Management Review,
29, 1, pp. 29-44.

Van de Ven & Poole (1995) Explaining Development and Change in Organizations, AMR,
Journal of Management Studies
Weisbord, M. (1976) Organizational diagnosis: six places to look for trouble with or without
a theory, Group and Organization Studies, 1(4): 430-47
Weisbord, M. (1989) Building Productive Workplaces: Change Strategies for the 21st
Century, Blue Sky Videos.

Anas Alam Faizli, Master of Proj MGMT: Assignment Change Management, EMOM5103

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Anas Alam Faizli, Master of Proj MGMT: Assignment Change Management, EMOM5103

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Assignment Questions EMOM5103 – Change Management

May 2010 Dr David Goh Tee Teck

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

MAY SEMESTER 2010

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Organizational changes are paramount to the lifeline of an organization; it is a process by

Managers continually make efforts to accomplish successful and significant change as it is

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

However, beside these exceptions, most organizations experience change as a pattern of a

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

process of continuous tinkering, adaptation and monitoring. Incremental changes focus on

Transformational change as suggested by the punctuated equilibrium paradigm, happens

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

1. Tuning (Incremental and Proactive)

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

2. Adaptation (Incremental and Reactive)

3. Re-orientation (Transformational and Proactive)

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

4. Re-creation (Transformational and Reactive)

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

According to Peter Senge (1990: 3) learning organizations are:

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Peter Senge (1990: 92) concludes:

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

4. Building shared vision

Visions spread because of a reinforcing process. Increased clarity, enthusiasm and

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Transforming Colleges and Universities Into Learning Organizations

Building a Shared Vision

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Sharing of departmental and disciplinary visions across disciplines; identifying joint

Ways That Faculty Learning Communities Enable Senge's Five Components of a

Building a Shared Vision

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

1. Experts applying scientific principles to solve specific problems

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

2. Group working collaboratively to solve their own problems

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

5. Efforts to change individual members or subparts of a group, which, if successful

3. Expert working to solve system‐wide problems

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

5. Open systems planning: All stakeholders and external participants of the

1. Human process issues

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Downsizing interventions is the interventions of reducing the size of the organizing by

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

Interventions of various types involve creation of a parallel structure that operates in

Sociotechnical approaches to work design focuses on integrating and interfacing the

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

3. Human resource issues

Workforce diversity interventions are designed to respond to various needs in the

Employee wellness interventions are designed to promote the wellbeing of organizational

Student Name: Anas Alam Faizli Student ID No. CGS 00385017

This intervention involves developing and implementing a ‘bundle’ of HR practices which is

Open systems planning is an intervention designed to help organization systematically

Integrated strategic change interventions are directed towards integrating strategic

Trans-organizational development is an intervention that focuses on the creation of