Strategic Change Interventions

10,543 views
10,224 views

Published on

Published in: Business
1 Comment
8 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
10,543
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
307
Comments
1
Likes
8
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Strategic performance management is defined as: the process where steering of the organisation takes place through the systematic definition of mission, strategy and objectives of the organisation, making these measurable through critical success factors and key performance indicators, in order to take corrective actions to keep the organisation on track (Dr. Andre A. De. <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Waal) Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_strategic_performance_management#ixzz1ZbpopCoW
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • Strategic management is a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to enhance the performance of firms in their external environments.[1] It entails specifying the organization's mission, vision and objectives, developing policies and plans, often in terms of projects and programs, which are designed to achieve these objectives, and then allocating resources to implement the policies and plans, projects and programs. A balanced scorecard is often used to evaluate the overall performance of the business and its progress towards objectives. Recent studies and leading management theorists have advocated that strategy needs to start with stakeholders expectations and use a modified balanced scorecard which includes all stakeholders.Strategic management is a level of managerial activity under setting goals and over Tactics. Strategic management provides overall direction to the enterprise and is closely related to the field of Organization Studies. In the field of business administration it is useful to talk about "strategic alignment" between the organization and its environment or "strategic consistency." According to Arieu (2007), "there is strategic consistency when the actions of an organization are consistent with the expectations of management, and these in turn are with the market and the context." Strategic management includes not only the management team but can also include the Board of Directors and other stakeholders of the organization. It depends on the organizational structure.
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • Strategic management is a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to enhance the performance of firms in their external environments.[1] It entails specifying the organization's mission, vision and objectives, developing policies and plans, often in terms of projects and programs, which are designed to achieve these objectives, and then allocating resources to implement the policies and plans, projects and programs. A balanced scorecard is often used to evaluate the overall performance of the business and its progress towards objectives. Recent studies and leading management theorists have advocated that strategy needs to start with stakeholders expectations and use a modified balanced scorecard which includes all stakeholders.Strategic management is a level of managerial activity under setting goals and over Tactics. Strategic management provides overall direction to the enterprise and is closely related to the field of Organization Studies. In the field of business administration it is useful to talk about "strategic alignment" between the organization and its environment or "strategic consistency." According to Arieu (2007), "there is strategic consistency when the actions of an organization are consistent with the expectations of management, and these in turn are with the market and the context." Strategic management includes not only the management team but can also include the Board of Directors and other stakeholders of the organization. It depends on the organizational structure.
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • Strategic management is a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to enhance the performance of firms in their external environments.[1] It entails specifying the organization's mission, vision and objectives, developing policies and plans, often in terms of projects and programs, which are designed to achieve these objectives, and then allocating resources to implement the policies and plans, projects and programs. A balanced scorecard is often used to evaluate the overall performance of the business and its progress towards objectives. Recent studies and leading management theorists have advocated that strategy needs to start with stakeholders expectations and use a modified balanced scorecard which includes all stakeholders.Strategic management is a level of managerial activity under setting goals and over Tactics. Strategic management provides overall direction to the enterprise and is closely related to the field of Organization Studies. In the field of business administration it is useful to talk about "strategic alignment" between the organization and its environment or "strategic consistency." According to Arieu (2007), "there is strategic consistency when the actions of an organization are consistent with the expectations of management, and these in turn are with the market and the context." Strategic management includes not only the management team but can also include the Board of Directors and other stakeholders of the organization. It depends on the organizational structure.
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • Strategic management is a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to enhance the performance of firms in their external environments.[1] It entails specifying the organization's mission, vision and objectives, developing policies and plans, often in terms of projects and programs, which are designed to achieve these objectives, and then allocating resources to implement the policies and plans, projects and programs. A balanced scorecard is often used to evaluate the overall performance of the business and its progress towards objectives. Recent studies and leading management theorists have advocated that strategy needs to start with stakeholders expectations and use a modified balanced scorecard which includes all stakeholders.Strategic management is a level of managerial activity under setting goals and over Tactics. Strategic management provides overall direction to the enterprise and is closely related to the field of Organization Studies. In the field of business administration it is useful to talk about "strategic alignment" between the organization and its environment or "strategic consistency." According to Arieu (2007), "there is strategic consistency when the actions of an organization are consistent with the expectations of management, and these in turn are with the market and the context." Strategic management includes not only the management team but can also include the Board of Directors and other stakeholders of the organization. It depends on the organizational structure.
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • Strategic management is a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to enhance the performance of firms in their external environments.[1] It entails specifying the organization's mission, vision and objectives, developing policies and plans, often in terms of projects and programs, which are designed to achieve these objectives, and then allocating resources to implement the policies and plans, projects and programs. A balanced scorecard is often used to evaluate the overall performance of the business and its progress towards objectives. Recent studies and leading management theorists have advocated that strategy needs to start with stakeholders expectations and use a modified balanced scorecard which includes all stakeholders.Strategic management is a level of managerial activity under setting goals and over Tactics. Strategic management provides overall direction to the enterprise and is closely related to the field of Organization Studies. In the field of business administration it is useful to talk about "strategic alignment" between the organization and its environment or "strategic consistency." According to Arieu (2007), "there is strategic consistency when the actions of an organization are consistent with the expectations of management, and these in turn are with the market and the context." Strategic management includes not only the management team but can also include the Board of Directors and other stakeholders of the organization. It depends on the organizational structure.
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • Strategic management is a field that deals with the major intended and emergent initiatives taken by general managers on behalf of owners, involving utilization of resources, to enhance the performance of firms in their external environments.[1] It entails specifying the organization's mission, vision and objectives, developing policies and plans, often in terms of projects and programs, which are designed to achieve these objectives, and then allocating resources to implement the policies and plans, projects and programs. A balanced scorecard is often used to evaluate the overall performance of the business and its progress towards objectives. Recent studies and leading management theorists have advocated that strategy needs to start with stakeholders expectations and use a modified balanced scorecard which includes all stakeholders.Strategic management is a level of managerial activity under setting goals and over Tactics. Strategic management provides overall direction to the enterprise and is closely related to the field of Organization Studies. In the field of business administration it is useful to talk about "strategic alignment" between the organization and its environment or "strategic consistency." According to Arieu (2007), "there is strategic consistency when the actions of an organization are consistent with the expectations of management, and these in turn are with the market and the context." Strategic management includes not only the management team but can also include the Board of Directors and other stakeholders of the organization. It depends on the organizational structure.
  • CEOs set bullish performance targets – but can they deliver?New Hay Group performance management research highlights a mismatch between ambition and capability. Businesses need to approach performance management differently if they are to achieve their ambitious growth targets for 2011 and beyond. That’s the message from new Hay Group research among 1660 senior decision makers in large firms across more than 30 countries worldwide. On average, global firms are targeting 5.4 per cent growth in 2011, outstripping local economic forecasts in many markets. With executives remaining cautious about acquisitions, the majority of leaders we spoke to are looking to their workforces for this performance uplift. Yet nearly half think employees are too stretched. As Hay Group’s global head of strategic performance management Bibi Hahn comments: “This level of productivity improvement is a big ask from employees who have worked hard to help their firms through the three difficult years since the worst of the financial crisis. Stuck in crisis mentality, business leaders have become too reliant on the cost lever to stay afloat. It’s time for them refocus on growth by pulling the performance lever.” The leaders in our survey are all too aware of the risks involved in asking stretched employees to deliver more. Employee disengagement and high staff turnover are their top fears. Most respondents are aware of the potential of performance management to address this, yet few firms make the essential connection between performance management, strategy and business culture. As Bibi Hahn points out: “Ninety per cent of firms are failing to align performance management with their strategy and culture. Without an approach that does this, firms will not be in the right shape to deliver the growth expected of them.”
  • Strategic Change Interventions

    1. 1. Technostructural Interventions Chapter 14: Restructuring Organizations Chapter 15: Employee Involvement Chapter 16: Work design Nurul Amal Shaik Mohd Rodhi (G1126196) Fairuz Rusdi (G1122444) PSYC 6220-Organizational Change & Development
    2. 2. Technostructural Interventions Change programs focusing on the technology and structure of organizations (Cummings & Worley, 2009)
    3. 3. Restructuring organizations Organization structure describes how overall work of the organization is divided into subunits and how these subunits are coordinated for task completion. Designed to fit at least 4 factors : environment, organization size, technology & organization strategy
    4. 4. Common Organizational Structure 1) Functional structure
    5. 5. Advantages Promotes skill specialization Facilitate communication Reduce duplication of work Disadvantages Reduces communication & cooperation between departments
    6. 6.  2) Unit Structure / Divisional Structure
    7. 7. Advantages Provide employees with opportunities for learning new skills & expanding knowledge Recognize key interdependencies & coordinate resources toward an overall outcome Disadvantages May not have enough specialized work to use people‟s skill and abilities fully Specialist may feel isolated from their professionals colleagues & may fail to advance their career specialty
    8. 8. 3) Matrix Structure
    9. 9. Advantages Allows multiple orientation Disadvantages Can cause role conflict for the individual who can be caught between the demands of two managers Maintains consistency between different departments & projects Very difficult to introduce Provide mechanisms to deal with multiple sources of power in the org Heavy managerial costs & support
    10. 10. 4) Process Structure Senior Management Team Chair and Key Support Process Owners Developing New Products Process Process Owner Cross-Functional Team Members Acquiring and Filling Customer Orders Process Process Owner Cross-Functional Team Members Supporting Customer Usage Processes Process Owner Cross-Functional Team Members
    11. 11. Advantages The work flow & each department‟s connections to the customer are much clearer to all organizational members Disadvantages Less useful in organizations that have automated or outsourced many processes & thus do not have job assigned to them as the structure intends
    12. 12. 5) Network Structure Producer organization Designer organization Broker organization Supplier organization Distributor organization
    13. 13. Advantages Cost effective & flexible Focus the organization on its central purpose Disadvantages Can cause problems when the organization must rely on the performance of an external company over which it may have little control
    14. 14. Downsizing Refers to interventions aimed at reducing the size of the organization, accomplished by decreasing the number of employees through layoffs, attrition, redeployment or early retirement or by reducing number of organizational units or managerial levels through divestiture, outscoring, reorganization or delayering (Cummings & Worley, 2009)
    15. 15. Application Stages Clarify the organization’s strategy Assess downsizing options & make relevant choices Implement the changes Address the needs of survivors and those who leave Follow through with growth plans
    16. 16. Downsizing tactics (Cameron et al.,1993) Tactic Workforce reduction Organization redesign Systemic Characteristics Examples • Reduces headcount • Short-term focus • Fosters transition • Attrition •Retirement/buyout • Lay-offs • Changes organization • Medium-term focus • Fosters transition and transformation • Eliminate functions, layers, products • Merge units • Redesign tasks • Changes culture • Long-term focus • Fosters transformation • Change responsibilities • Foster continuous improvement • Downsizing is normal
    17. 17. Reengineering The fundamental rethinking & radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in performance (Cummings & Worley, 2009)
    18. 18. Characteristics of Reengineering in Organisations • Work units change from functional departments to process teams • Jobs change from simple tasks to multidimensional work • People’s roles change from controlled to empowered • The focus of performance measures and compensation shifts from activities to results • Organisation structures change from hierarchical to flat • Managers change from supervisors to coaches; executives change from scorekeepers to leaders
    19. 19. Re-engineering Process • • Prepare the organisation • Specify the organisation’s strategy and objectives • Fundamentally rethink the way work gets done – Identify and analyse core business processes – Define performance objectives – Design new processes • Restructure the organisation around the new business processes
    20. 20. Employee Involvement Seeks to increase members’ input decisions that affect organization performance and employee well-being (Cummings & Worley, 2009) Lead to quicker, more responsive decisions, continuous performance improvements & greater employee flexibility, commitment and satisfaction.
    21. 21. 4 key elements (Cummings & Worley, 2009) Power Rewards EI Knowledge & skills Information :
    22. 22. EI Applications: Parallel Structures (Cummings & Worley, 2009) Provide members with an alternative setting in which to address problems & to propose innovative solutions free from the existing, formal organization structure & culture 2 most common parallel structure: 1) Cooperative union-management projects 2) Quality circles
    23. 23. EI Applications: Parallel Structures 1 Define the purpose & scope 2 Form steering committee 3 Communicate with organization members 4 Create forums for employee problem solving 5, 6 5)Address the problems & issues 6)Implement & evaluate the changes
    24. 24. EI Applications: Total Quality Management (TQM) Quality is achieved when organizational processes reliably produce products and services that meet or exceed customer expectations (Cummings & Worley, 2009) Emphasize the concept of quality
    25. 25. Total Quality Management (TQM) Is a combination of a number of organization improvement techniques and approaches including the use of quality circles, statistical quality control, statistical process control, self-managed teams and task forces & extensive use of employee participation. (French & Bell, 1999)
    26. 26. EI Application: Total Quality Management (TQM) Gain long-term senior management commitment Train members in quality methods Start quality improvement projects Measure progress Rewarding accomplishment
    27. 27. EI Application: High-Involvement organizations (HIOs) Create organizational conditions that support high levels of employee participation Address almost all organizational features (org. structure, job design, information system, career system, selection, training, reward system, personnel policies, physical layout) (Cummings & Worley, 2009)
    28. 28. Work Design Focuses on motivational theories & attempts to enrich the work experience Sociotechnical systems approach Focuses on efficiency & simplification Motivational approach Engineering approach Work design – creating jobs & work groups that generate high levels of employee fulfillment and productivity Focuses to optimize both the social & the technical aspects of work systems
    29. 29. The Complete Job Characteristic Model
    30. 30. Hackman & Oldham have provided an OD approach to work redesign based on a theoretical model of what job characteristics lead to the psychological states that produce “high internal work motivation” (French & Bell, 1999)
    31. 31. STRATEGIC CHANGE INTERVENTIONS PSYC 6220-Organizational Change & Development
    32. 32. Understanding the Introduction UNDERSTANDING Balanced Scorecard STRATEGIC INTERVENTIONS “Without a strategy, an organisation is like a ship without a rudder, going round in circles. It’s like a tramp; it has no places to go.” (Ross and Kami)
    33. 33. What is Strategic Interventions ? Cummings and Worley (2009) describes Strategic Interventions as: “ Interventions that involve managing the organisation‟s relationship to its external environment and the internal structure and process necessary to support a business strategy”
    34. 34. What is Strategic Interventions ? Strategic interventions contribute to align the organization with its environment and that which links the internal functioning of the organization to the larger environment; transforming the organization to keep pace with changing conditions. – Cummings and Worley (2009)
    35. 35. What is Strategic Interventions ? Strategic intervention help organizations to gain a better understanding of their current state, and their environment, that allow them to better target strategies for competing or collaborating with other organizations – Cummings and Worley (2009)
    36. 36. Transformational Change 1 2 3 Integrated Strategic Change Organisation Design Culture Change Continuous Change Self-designing Organisatons Learning Organisation Built-to-change Organisation Transorganisational Change Mergers & Acquisitions Alliance Intervention Network Intervention
    37. 37. Understanding the Part 1 Transformational Change Balanced Scorecard “Without a strategy, an organisation is like a ship without a rudder, going round in circles. It’s like a tramp; it has no places to go.” (Ross and Kami)
    38. 38. What is Transformational Change? Organisation transformation implies radical changes from its members behavior, internal functions, corporate structures, company values and norms, and the organisational arrangement. -Cummings and Worley (2009) Organisational transformation involves creation of a new organizational vision (Porras and Silvers as cited in Smither, Houston, & McIntire, 1996) A change in which the organisation moves to a radically different, and sometimes unknown, future state. (Nelson & Quick, 2011)
    39. 39. Triggered by Environmental and Internal Disruption •Must experience a severe threat to survival • Some choose to change even though not subjected to external pressures due to seeing business opportunities •(Dunphy, Griffiths & Benn, 2007). Change Demands a New Organizing Paradigm Involving gamma types of change (Bartunek & Louis, as cited in Cummings and Worley, 2009) - discontinuous shifts in mental or organisational frameworks. 6 Characteristics of transformational change Change Is Aimed at Competitive Advantage • Uniqueness – unique bundle of resources which represent completive advantage • Value – higher-than-average price or exceptionally low in cost • Imitation difficulty Involves Significant Change Is Learning Systematic and • Transformational change Revolutionary requires learning and innovation. Members must learn to enact new behaviors to implement new strategic directions Involves reshaping organisation‟s design elements and its entire nature Triggered by Senior Executives and Line Management play key role in actively leading transformation in deciding the when, how, who and what
    40. 40. Understanding the Balanced Scorecard Integrated Strategic Change
    41. 41. Points on Integrated Strategic Change 1 Comprehensive OD intervention aimed at a single organisation or business unit. 2 Business strategy and organisation design must be aligned, changed together to respond to external and internal disruption 3 Helps members manage transition between current strategic orientation and the desired future orientation
    42. 42. Integrated Strategic Change Key Features (Cummings & Worley, 2009) ISC extends traditional OD process into a highly participative process. It has 3 key features Worley, Hitchin, and Ross (as cited in Cummings & Worley, 2009) 1. Unit of analysis: I) Strategy and II) Organisation design = Organisation’s Strategic Orientation Strategy and design that supports it must be considered as integrated whole. 2. Creating the strategic plan, gaining commitment and support, planning implementation and execution is one integrated process The ability to repeat such a process effectively is rare and difficult. 3. Individuals and groups throughout the organisation are integrated into the analysis, planning and implementation This is to create a more achievable plan, maintain strategic focus, direct attention, etc.
    43. 43. Stages of ISC Plan Implementation Strategic Change Plan Strategic Choice Strategic Analysis
    44. 44. ISC Stages STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIC PLANNING Strategic Analysis • Readiness for change • Senior management’s willingness to carry out change • Understanding current organisation design • Explain current performance levels Exercising Strategic Choice • Once existing orientation understood, new one must be designed • “what” of strategic change, define products/service • Markets to be served, way outputs will be produced Designing the Strategic Change Plan • “How” • Change plan: • Types, magnitude, schedule of change activities • Associated costs • Organisation Culture • Power and political issues Implementing the Plan • Alignment issues • Teamwork • Organisational/per sonal learning • senior managersinitiate actions, allocate resources, set goals, give feedback
    45. 45. Why is Integrated Strategic Change Valuable ? Aligns thinking Facilitating future state and needed changes Shows distance to finish line Strategy helps the organisation by Rationalizes & justifies Guides actions a focus on culture Informs key relationships
    46. 46. Understanding the Balanced Scorecard Organisation Design
    47. 47. Organisation Design Organisation design is “the process of constructing and adjusting an organisation‟s structure to achieve its business strategy and goals” (p. 518). Nelson and Quick (2011) Configures the organisation „s structure, work designs, human resources practices, management and information systems to guide members behaviors in strategic direction. Cummings and Worley (2009) Key notion : “fit”, “congruence” or “alignment” among elements The idea that the organisation is designed to support particular strategy (strategic fit) . Different design elements must be aligned with each other Better fits, More effective Lawrence and Larsch (1986)
    48. 48. Organisation Design Model Organization Strategy Strategic Fit Organisation Design Management and Information Systems Structure Design Fit Human Resource Practices Work Design
    49. 49. Organisation Design Types (Burns & Stalker, 2009; Cummings & Worley, 2009) Mechanistic Design Strategy Structure • Cost minimization Organic Design • Innovation – competing on new products • Formal/hierarchical • Works best in stable environment • Flat, lean, and flexible •Works best in dynamic and uncertain environment Work Design • Traditional jobs • Traditional work group • Enriched jobs • Self-managed jobs Human Resource Practices • Selection to fit job • Training only when needs arise • Job-based pay • Selection to fit organisation • Training is continuous • Skill-based pay Management and Information System • Command and control • Centralized decision-making • Closed, exclusive • Employee involvement • Decentralized decision-making • Open, inclusive
    50. 50. Organisation Design Stages Organisation design follows three broad steps (Galbraith et al., as cited in Cummings and Worley, 2009): STRATEGIC PLANNING Clarifying the design focus • Organisation assessment for framework • Gap analysis – problems to address Designing the organisation STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION Implementing the design • Configure design • Putting into place • “How” Designing (practices, • Upper leadership for the Strategic structures, systems) Change Plan Members must be overall direction • • Results in design, motivated to component design, implement and how to • Stakeholders must implement support
    51. 51. Understanding the Balanced Scorecard Culture Change
    52. 52. What is Corporate Culture ? The shared beliefs and values that organisations pass on to newcomers, such as accepted ways of behaving, roles and norms Smither, Houston and McIntire (1996) The pattern of assumptions, values, and norms that are more or less shaped by organisation members (Cummings & Worley, 2009) A pattern of basic assumptions considered valid and taught to new members as the way to perceive, think , and feel in the organisation (Nelson & Quick, 2011) Schein suggests that organisation culture has three levels : (1) visible artifacts, (2) testable values (3) invisible basic assumptions (as cited in Nelson & Quick, 2011)
    53. 53. Elements of Corporate Culture (Cummings & Worley, 2009) Basic Assumptions Values Norms Artifacts
    54. 54. Organisation Culture and Organisation Effectiveness Most theorists regard strong cultures as desirable, since having employees holding similar views about the company and its environment can make organisations more effective (Smither, Houston, & McIntire, 1996). Culture affects performance indirectly through its influence on the organisations‟s ability to implement change. However, certain accounts where change failed due to the culture not supporting the new strategy. (Cummings and Worley, 2009)
    55. 55. Guidelines for Cultural Change (Cummings and Worley 2009; Senior, 2002) 1 Formulate Clear Strategic Vision 3 Display Top Management Commitment Model Culture Change at Highest Levels 4 Modify Organisation to Support Organisational Change 2 5 Select and Socialize Newcomers
    56. 56. Evaluating Culture Change Large scale cultural change may be necessary in certain situations such as if the firm‟s culture does not fit a changing environment or if the industry is extremely competitive (Cummings and Worley, 2009). Changing corporate culture is not always easy but at times risky due to organisational culture, is much less visible and with many layers, dimensions and types therefore more difficult to change (Senior, 2002). Failure of culture change efforts due to change introduced to employees requires them to function in new and different ways which contradict with powerful norms and values of organisation. (Smither, Houston, & McIntire, 1996)
    57. 57. Understanding the Part 2 Continuous Change Balanced Scorecard “Without a strategy, an organisation is like a ship without a rudder, going round in circles. It’s like a tramp; it has no places to go.” (Ross and Kami)
    58. 58. What is Continuous Change? Continuous change interventions extends transformational change into a nonstop process of strategy setting, organisation designing, and implementing the change (Lawrence, Dyck, Maitlis, & Mauws, as cited in Cummings and Worley, 2009) Focus is on learning, changing, and adapting and on how to produce constant flow of new strategies and designs and not only transforming existing ones (Cummings and Worley, 2009) Continuous learning at individual level : changing behavior of one‟s skills, knowledge, and worldview At organisational level: deepening and broadening of organisational capabilities (Sessa & London, 2006)
    59. 59. Understanding the Balanced Scorecard Self-Designing Organisations
    60. 60. Self-Designing Organisations Developed by Mohrman and Cummings in response to demands of organisations in adapting to turbulent environments (adaptive change). This approach helps members translate corporate values and general prescriptions for change into specific structures, processes and behaviors suited for change (Cummings and Worley, 2009). This intervention includes considerable innovation and learning as organisations gain the capacity to design and implement significant changes continually (Cummings and Worley, 2009).
    61. 61. Application Stages The self-design approach is described in three stages (Cummings and Worley, 2009): STRATEGIC PLANNING Laying the foundation • Acquiring knowledge about how the organisations function • Valuing corporate values that guide change process • Diagnosing to determine what needs to be changed Designing STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION Implementing and assessing • What needs to be • Involves ongoing refined and modified Designing cycle of action for the change Strategic learning: changing the Change Plan structures and behaviors, assessing progress and making necessary modifications
    62. 62. The Self Design Strategy enables organisations to adapt to demands of change from five important perspectives: (Cummings and Worley, 2009) Attends to interest of multiple stakeholders Constant organisational learning Adaptive Change Demands Occurring at multiple levels of the organisation Systematic change process Dynamic change process
    63. 63. Understanding the Balanced Scorecard Learning Organisations
    64. 64. Learning Organisations Senge (1990) defines the learning organization as “…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” (p. 14). This intervention is aims at helping organisations develop and use knowledge to change and improve themselves constantly (Cummings and Worley, 2009). At the organisational level, learning is demonstrated through changes in vision, strategy, policies, structure, products or services (Sessa & London, 2006) Includes two interrelated change process: (1) Organisation Learning (OL) and (2) Knowledge Management (KM).
    65. 65. OL Processes Organisations may apply learning process to three types of learning: 1 Single-loop learning 2 Double-loop learning 3 Deutero-learning Improving the status quo Changing the status quo Learning how to learn
    66. 66. 3 Types of Learning Single –loop Learning • Where an objective or goals is defined and an individual works out the most favored way of reaching the goal however which the goal itself is not questioned (Argyris, as cited in Senior, 2002). Double-loop Learning • Where error is detected and corrected in ways determining why the error occurred in the first place (Sessa & London, 2006). Deuterolearning • Where members of an organisation learn how to carry both single and double loop learning(Sessa & London, 2006).
    67. 67. How OL Affects Organisation Performance Organisational Learning Organisation Characteristics • Structure • Information system •Human Resources practice • Culture • leadership Knowledge Management Organisation Learning Processes: • Discovery • Invention • Production • Generalization Competitive Strategy Organisation Knowledge: • explicit • tacit Organisation Performance
    68. 68. What are Knowledge Management Interventions ? KM interventions focuses on tools and techniques that enable organisations to collect, organize and translate information into useful knowledge (Cummings and Worley, 2009) Includes formal debriefing sessions, organized learning programs, attended and supported by senior managers and executives. Recognition and reward systems are key ingredients of effective KM process (Oden, 1999)
    69. 69. Application Stages for KM Generating Knowledge • Identifying the kinds of knowledge that creates most value Organizing Knowledge • Organizing the valued knowledge into a form that members can use readily Distributing Knowledge • Creates mechanisms for members to gain access to needed knowledge
    70. 70. Understanding the Balanced Scorecard Built-To-Change Organisations
    71. 71. Built-To-Change (B2C) Organisations B2C organisations are designed for change, not stability. They are based on design guidelines that promote change capability in the management, reward systems, structure information, decision processes, and leadership (Cummings and Worley, 2009) “In a rapidly changing environment, this change capability can be a source of sustained competitive advantage” (Cummings and Worley, 2009).
    72. 72. Design Guidelines for B2C Managing Talent Reward System Selection practices Enhance employee motivation level • Seek quick learners wanting to take initiative, desire professional growth and thrives change • Key role : motivating and reinforcing change Structure & Leadership Internal Structure and Leadership importance • Flat, lean, flexible organisation structures • Shared & spread leadership Information and Decision Process Dynamic flow of information & transparency • Moved throughout the organisation, information is transparent and current
    73. 73. B2C Stages Lawler and Worley (2006) The following 5 initiatives can help the transition to a B2C organisation : Create a ChangeFriendly Identity • Addresses organisation identity – core values, norm s, beliefs Build an Orchestrat ion Capability Pursue Proximity • Intervention looks outward to gain insight of environmental demands • Seniors executives commit time to think about future paths – scenario-planning i. ii. iii. Establish Strategic Adjustment as a Normal Condition Skills for change developed among employees Organisation effectiveness function created Members learn how to apply change • Employee empowerment practices Seek virtuous spirals • Periods in the life of an organization • Involves bringing all prior processes together
    74. 74. The Built to Change Logic Lawler and Worley (2006) Organization Design Is the Issue Change is Inevitable and Normal Traditional Design Is a Problem Human Nature is Not The Problem Competitive Advantage is Change
    75. 75. Understanding the Part 3 Transorganizational Balanced Scorecard Change “Without a strategy, an organisation is like a ship without a rudder, going round in circles. It’s like a tramp; it has no places to go.” (Ross and Kami)
    76. 76. Transorganizational Change Cummings and Worley (2009) states that transorganzational change involves interventions that move beyond the single organization to include merging, allying or networking with other organisations. Transorganizational strategies allows organisation to perform tasks that are too costly and complicated for single organisations to perform. (Cummings and Worley, 2009)
    77. 77. Mergers and Acquisition Mergers and acquisition (M&As) involve the combination of two organisations (Cummings and Worley, 2009) “Merger” • Integration of two previously independent organisations into a new organisation “Acquisition” • Involves the purchase or “buyout” of one organisation by another for integration into the acquiring organisation
    78. 78. Why M&As are Done? (Cummings and Worley, 2009; Galpin & Herndon, 2009) 1 2 Improve innovation To gain access to global markets, technology, etc 3 4 5 To achieve operational efficiencies To grow revenue Resource sharing
    79. 79. Why Do M&As Fail ? The high failure rate of M&As are the results of serious limitations in how companies approach it (Saint-onge & Chatzkel, 2009). A set of factors has been found to be to be consistently associated with poor M&A efforts according to Galpin and Herndon (2007): Cultural Incompatibility Lack of Communication, Leadership and Decision-making People-Related Issues Differences in Management Styles
    80. 80. M&As Application Stages (Cummings and Worley, 2009) 1. Pre-combination Phase Search/Select Candidate Create an M&A Team Establish Business Case Perform a Due Diligence Assessment Develop Merger Integration Plans 2. Legal combination Complete financial negotiations Close the deal Announce the combination 3. Operational combination Day 1 activities Organisational & technical integration activities Cultural integration activities
    81. 81. Recommendations for M&A Success For M&A efforts to succeed, Galpin and Herndon (2007) have suggested the following: Select dedicated, capable people for the team Provide continuous communication and feedback Conduct duediligence analyses Strategy for M&A Success Determine the required or desired degree of integration Speed up decisions Gain support of senior managers Select a highly capable leader Clearly define integration approach
    82. 82. Understanding the Balanced Scorecard Strategic Alliance Interventions
    83. 83. Strategic Alliance Defined Long-term agreements between firms that go beyond normal market transactions but fall short of merger. Forms include joint ventures, licenses, long-term supply agreements, and other kinds of inter-firm relationships (Porter, 1990). Roll (2009) describes it as an approach in which two or more companies agree to pool their resources together to form a combined force in the marketplace different from mergers, in which does not involve the emergence of a new combined entity. Child, Faulkner, and Tallman defines strategic alliance as a “formal agreement between two or more organisations to pursue a set of private and common goals through the sharing of resources” (as cited in Cummings and Worley, 2009, p. 568).
    84. 84. Alliance Application Stages (Cummings and Worley, 2009) Involves four major stages: Alliance Strategy Formulation • Clarify business strategy • Understand why alliance is appropriate Partner Selection • Search for appropriate partner • Compatible management styles, cultures, etc. Alliance Structuring and Start-up • Structuring partnership • Relational quality – Trust Issues Alliance Operation and Adjustment • Diagnosing strategic alliance state • Making appropriate adjustments.
    85. 85. The Need for Strategic Alliances Hamel, Doz and Prahalad (2002) states the need for collaboration due to the following reasons: The need to absorb skills of the partner To reduce costs and avoid investments To penetrate new markets To provide short-cuts for some companies
    86. 86. Benefits of the Strategic Alliances (Soares as cited in IsoraIte, 2009) 1 Ease of market entry 2 Shared risks 3 Shared knowledge and expertise 4 Synergy & Competitive Advantage
    87. 87. Understanding the Balanced Scorecard Network Interventions
    88. 88. Network interventions help organisations join together for a common purpose (Cummings and Worley, 2009). Two types of change are involved in managing the development of multiorganisation networks: Creating the initial network Managing change within that network
    89. 89. Creating the Network (Cummings and Worley, 2009) Involves four major stages: 1. Identification • Identifying members (existing/potential). 2. Convention • Face-to-face meeting • Costs and benefits • Task perceptions 3. Organization • Task performance organization 4. Evaluation • Assessing how network is performing • Feedback
    90. 90. Managing Network Change Create Instability in the Network • In order for change to occur within a network, relationships among member organisations' must become unstable • OD practitioners can facilitate instability by changing patterns of communication among members. Manage the Tipping Point • Gladwell (as cited in Cummings and Worley, 2009) suggested the following in facilitating network change: • The Law of the Few (Connectors, Mavens, Salesperson) • Stickiness – the memorable impact of ideas or practices • The Power of Context – relevance and meaningfulness of a message to network members Rely on SelfOrganisation • Networks tend to exhibit “self-organising” behavior • OD practitioners can rely on this feature to refreeze change – once change has occurred in the network, variety of controls can be leveraged to institutionalized it
    91. 91. Actualizing The Network Within Organization can realize its network and collaborative potential by pursuing the following path: (Camson, 2010) 1 Be clear about and publicize common goals and objectives that can drive network collaboration. Support high quality conversations and exchanges and 2 high quality actions to build competencies and relationships 3 Build competencies and utilize technology that will support knowledge flow, relationships, high quality conversations 4 Identify practices, attitudes and business models that impede knowledge flow, relationships, high quality conversations and exchanges.
    92. 92. References Burns, T. & Stalker, G. M. (2009). Mechanistic vs. organic organisational structure: Contingency theory. Retrieved from: http://www.businessmate.org/Article.php?ArtikelId=44 Camson, B. (2010). Actualizing The Network Within. Retrieved from: http://www.barrycamson.com/2010/11/actualizing-the-network-within.html#more Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2009). Organization development and change (9th ed.). Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning. Dunphy, D., Griffiths, A., & Benn, S., (2007). Organisational change for corporate sustainability. New York, NY: Routledge. French, W. L., Bell, C. H. (1999). Organizational development: Behavioral science intervention improvement. United States, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. French, W. L., Bell, C. H., & Zawacki, R. A. (2000). Organizational development and transformation : Managing effective change (5th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. Galpin, T. J., & Herndon, M. (2007). The complete guide to mergers and acquisitions: Process tools to support M&A integration at every level. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hamel, G., Doz, Y. L., & Prahalad, C. K. (2002). Harvard business review on strategic alliances. In Collaborate with your competitors and win (pp. 1–22). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corp. IsoraIte, M. (2009). Importance of strategic alliances in company’s activity. Intellectual Economics, 1(5), 39–46.
    93. 93. Lawler, E. E. & Worley, C. G. (2006). Built to change: How to achieve sustained organizational effectiveness. Retrieved from: 213.55.83.52/ebooks/Leadership/Built%20to%20Change.pdf Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (2011). Organizational behavior: Science, the real world, and you. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. Roll, M. (2009). Merger, acquisition, alliance - Which is the best? China Business Philippines. Retrieved from: http://chinabusinessphilippines.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=a rticle&id=249:merger-acquisition-alliancewhich-is-the-best-&catid=31:asian- brandstrategy&Itemid=73. Saint-Onge, H. & Chatzkel, J. (2009). Beyond the deal: A revolutionary framework for successful mergers & acquisitions that achieve breakthrough performance gains. USA: McGraw Hill. Senior, B. (2002). Organisational change (2nd ed.). London: Financial Times/Prentice Hall Books. Sessa, V. I., & London, M. (2006). Continuous learning in organizations: Individual, group, and organizational perspectives. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Smither, R. D., Houston, J. M., & McIntire, S. A. (1996). Organization development: Strategies for changing environments. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

    ×