MBH1683 | Leading Organisational Change · 2016-12-06 · the need to support the change, and...

1

MBH1683 | Leading Organisational ChangePrepared by Dr Khairul Anuar

L7 – Hard systems models of change

www.mba638.wordpress.com

2

• Recognize change situations (problems/opportunities) characterized

mainly by hard complexity, where the use of hard systems

methodologies are appropriate;

• Describe the main features of hard systems methodologies for

defining, planning and implementing change;

• Explain the hard systems model of change (HSMC) as

representative of hard systems methodologies of change;

• Discuss the limitations of hard systems methodologies of change

and, therefore, the need for other change methodologies more

suited to situations of soft complexity.

Learning Objectives

3

1. The hard systems model of change

2. Using the hard systems model of change

3. Comment and conclusions

Content

4

• The HSMC is a method that has been developed for designing and

managing change.

• Its roots lie in methods of analysis and change associated with

systems engineering, operational research and project

management, that is, where there is an emphasis on means and

ends – in other words, on the means with which particular set goals

are to be achieved.

• The HSMC is especially useful when dealing with situations that lie

towards the ‘hard’ end of the hard–soft continuum of change

situations.


5

• It provides a rigorous and systematic way of determining objectives (or

goals) for change; this is followed by the generation of a range of

options for action; the last step is testing those options against a set

of explicit criteria.

• The method is also useful where quantitative criteria can be used to

test options for change. However, it is also possible to use

qualitative criteria – a possibility that is discussed later in the lecture.


6

• The process can be thought of as falling into three overlapping

phases:

1. the description phase (describing and diagnosing the situation,

understanding what is involved, setting the objectives for the

change);

2. the options phase (generating options for change, selecting the

most appropriate option, thinking about what might be done);

3. the implementation phase (putting feasible plans into practice

and monitoring the results).

• Within these three phases a number of stages can also be identified.

Handout: Illustration 7.3, page 313, Senior


7

• The stages

• Illustration 7.3 shows how the stages relate to the phases and

provides an indication of likely actions at each stage.

• Although Illustration 7.3 presents the phases and stages as a series

of sequential steps that follow logically on, this rarely happens so

neatly in reality; nor is it desirable,

• ‘Iterations will be required at any point, within or between

phases, owing to developing environmental factors.’ (Paton and

McCalman, 2000)

• There will be times when there is a need for iteration or

‘backtracking’, from one stage/phase to earlier stages/phases, as

insights generated at later stages reveal the requirement for

modifications to previous ones.


8


9


10


11

Phase 1: Description

• Stage 1: Situation summary

• The basic idea in Stage 1 is to start by describing the system

within which change is going to be made.

• This is an important stage in the change process and should

not be rushed.

• People who are centrally concerned with the change (those

sponsoring it and those who will carry it out) should be

consulted.

• Unless the specification of the problem and description of the

situation are done carefully, the subsequent change

objectives and process will be flawed.


12


• Stage 2: Identification of objectives and constraints

• An objective can be defined as something that is desired;

• A constraint is something which inhibits or prevents achievement of

an objective.

• In reality, objectives are likely to be things over which members of

organizations may have some control.

• Constraints are frequently things in an organization’s environment

(internal or external to the organization) over which it has little

control.

• This stage addresses both objectives and constraints.

It involves being clear about where the decision makers want to

go and which ways might be impassable or perhaps temporarily

blocked.


13


• Stage 3: Identification of performance measures

• The question to be answered in identifying performance

measures is:

‘How will I know whether or not I have achieved my

objective?’

• If at all possible, use quantifiable measures, e.g. costs (in

monetary terms), savings (in monetary terms), time (years,

days, hours), amount of labour, volume etc.


14

Phase 2: Options

• Stage 4: Generation of options (routes to objectives)

• The setting up of objectives to be achieved is based on the

concept of what needs to be done to bring about change.

• By contrast, the generation of options stage is the stage of

finding out how to achieve the objectives.

• If the objectives tree is well developed, as Figure 7.1

shows, some of the lower-level objectives may actually be

options.

• There will, however, almost certainly be more. In addition,

therefore, to any options that ‘creep into’ the objectives tree


15


16

Phase 2: Options

• Stage 5: Editing and detailing selected options

• At the stage of editing and detailing some options, it may be

necessary to sort the options, in terms of those that are likely

to be feasible given the particular situation described in Stage

1 and the constraints identified in Stage 2.

• The selected options should then be described in more detail

– or ‘modelled’ – in terms of what is involved, who is involved

and how it will work. It may be that some options cluster

together and are better considered as a group.

• Other options will stand independently and must, therefore, be

considered in their own right. There are many ways of testing

how an option might work. (How ????)


17

(a) Physical models (architectural models, wind-tunnel test pieces, etc.).

(b) Mock-ups (make mock-ups of new products – sewing machines, aircraft, clothes dryers, etc.).

(c) Computer simulation models (for complex production systems, financial systems, etc.).

(d) Cashflow models (either manually produced or computer driven).

(e) Experimental production lines, or laboratory-scale plant.

(f) Scale plans and drawings (alternative office layouts, organizational structures, etc.).

(g) Cost/benefit analyses (as models of the likely trade-offs that would take place if a particular option were exercised; can be qualitative as well as quantitative).

(h) Corporate plans or strategies (any one plan or proposal represents a ‘model’ of how the corporation or organization could develop its activities in the future).

(i) Organization structure plans and proposals (for example, a chart of a new organization structure would show how the formal communication links or reporting channels would work if the structure were adopted).

(j) Organizational culture analyses (methods of describing organizational

17

18

Phase 2: Options

• Stage 6: Evaluating options against measures

• The evaluation stage of the change process is a decision area.

It allows choices of options to be made against the criteria identified in

Stage 3.

• Figure 7.4 shows a generalized evaluation matrix that compares one option

against another on the basis of the measures set during Stage 3.


19

Phase 3: The implementation phase

• Stage 7: Implementation

• In problems of a definite ‘hard’ nature, implementation will rarely be

a problem. With problems tending towards ‘softness’,

implementation will be a test of how much people involved in the

change have participated in its design.

• There are 3 strategies for implementation:

1 pilot studies leading to eventual change

2 parallel running

3 big bang.


20

• Phase 3: The implementation phase

• Stage 7: Implementation

• Pilot studies help sort out any problems before more extensive

change is instituted, but they can cause delay – a factor that is

particularly important in a fast-moving, dynamic situation.

• Parallel running applies most frequently to the implementation of

new computer systems, but can be applied to other kinds of change.

The new system is run, for a time, alongside the old system, until

confidence is gained that the new system is reliable and effective.

• Big bang implementation maximizes the speed of change, but can

generate the greatest resistance. Big bang implementations carry a

high risk of failure unless planned very carefully.


21

Phase 3: The implementation phase

• Stage 8: Consolidation – ‘carry through’

• It takes time for new systems to ‘bed in’.

• It is at this stage that there tends to be a decline in concentration on

the need to support the change, and nurture both it and the people

involved.

• Yet this is one of the most crucial stages if the change is to be

accepted and successful.

• Even after the implementation process further changes can be

forced on the situation at any time if the imbalance between the

system and the environment becomes too great. There is no

justification for ‘sitting back’.


22

• Illustration 7.4 describes concerns about the way large

plant and machinery is acquired and maintained for use

on the building sites of the Beautiful Buildings Company.

• What follows is a description of the process Gerry

Howcroft went through to identify a number of options for

improving this situation to put before the senior

managers’ meeting.

• The description takes the form of notes made by Gerry,

interspersed with comments on the method he used.

• Refer Handout – pages 321-330, Senior

2. Using the hard systems model of change

23

• The HSMC provides a practical approach to change that has been designed to be applied to situations – such as the

Beautiful Buildings Company example – of low to medium complexity (difficulties).

• It is particularly useful when an area of the organization may need to be changed but may not infringe on other areas and

when choices based on rational decision making can be made

• The HSMC can also be effective to begin to diagnose a change situation before categorizing it into more simple or more

complex change.

• For instance, using the HSMC in the case of Shire County* was useful for setting out the commitment to change, carrying out

(with the help of diagrams) a situational analysis of the forces for and against the change and formulating some objectives

and measures of performance in preparation for planning and implementing the change.

• What this methodology was less good at doing was identifying the political and moral issues surrounding the implementation

of radical change of this kind.

• In addition, current organizational, professional and institutional cultures were clearly going to work to make changes of this

kind difficult to achieve.

• This was a case where the changes desired were going to take some time to come to fruition and these would involve

changes not only to the buildings and teaching areas (i.e. physical changes) but also in people’s attitudes and behaviours –

changes that would include both staff and students (present and potential students).

• The changes being proposed here were more in line with what has been described as ‘organizational development’, that is,

change that is ongoing, which involves most parts of the organization and most of its members and that will not succeed

without the involvement of all concerned at all stages in the change process.

• The next lecture describes in more detail a change process more relevant to situations of soft complexity – in other terms,

situations known as messes.

* Covered in Lecture 11

3. Comment and conclusions

MBH1683 | Leading Organisational Change · 2016-12-06 · the need to support the change, and...

Documents

Transcript of MBH1683 | Leading Organisational Change · 2016-12-06 · the need to support the change, and...