• Like
S hr (aai)ppt
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

S hr (aai)ppt

  • 286 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Business , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
286
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. ORGANISATIONATIONAL CHANGE
    PLANNING
    &
    IMPLEMENTATION
    AN OVERVIEW
    On
    AAL and IPS
    BY
  • Q-1 Why was the change thought necessary?
    AAL
    1.Shrinking Margins in the products
    2. need to stay competitive.
    3. Cost cutting by the New ( CEO – Dick Gunderson ) $50 million.
    4. Positive dissatisfaction – [ Can do Better]
    IPS ( Insurance Product services department)
    1. Considered to be truly customer oriented
    2. Decisions taken at a higher level,(-ve impact ) + Underutilization of manpower
    3. Productivity was taken as a functional perspective not integrated.
    4. Excessive Growth in the mind of top management.
  • 5. Q-2 How did AAL- IPS change process influence and shape organization strategy?
    AAL change Process
    GAP closing
    -- Internal managers changed the structure ( 2 Management
    level through consciousness of top management)
    -- Technology Strategy changes
    -- Precise vision to of desired management style (employee
    evaluating the managers)
    Organizational Change Results
    -- early retirement Window ( 250 – positions)
    -- continued employment ( innovation with protective shield)
    -- skill judgmental array of work force and later IJP, transfer, or
    voluntary outplacement options given.
  • 6. IPS change Process
    Identifying the needs
    Change process without approval of senior management in the department.
    IPS head was changed – with regionalized strategy.
    RISK averse culture changed -- to – calculated risk culture
    Setting Parameters
    Customer driven organization and team relationship was emphasized.
    Flat hierarchy and fewer supervision.
    Participative management style and tabbing the terms like.
    Agents = Primary customers policy holder = ultimate customers
    Design and development
    Communication
    -- communicating the change
    -- news letters and 100 people gathering to communicate change process or any
    reengineering to be done.
  • 7. Design teams
    -- 10 teams were formulated (125 employee each)
    -- Distinct role clarity was given to all the teams.( readily decreased employee
    confusion and goof-ups)
    Decision Making and Implementation
    -- proper research was carried out for implementation of any policies.
    -- sociotechnical management that helped ( to get desired outcomes and mission)
    -- Flat hierarchy and full service plus self regulations was implied.
    Implementation
    -- Specific Implementation team was named from employees.
    -- even physical movement of employees was considered.
    Employee Assignment
    -- Timing and disbursement of employees was done.
    -- Storming]+[norming was given high frequency category for the same in group formation
    Security
    -- supervisory positions reduced.
    -- Employment assistance was provided.
    Self Managed Teams
  • 8. Q-3 What is your Assessment of the positive and negative impact of the
    change itiative?
    Positive Impact
    Motivating to hard working employee
    less friction between the evolved teams
    clear job descriptions
    better organizational communication and control.
    power decimation would be proper and broad banding would help in it.
    Positive and negative outcomes for any change or strategy implementation could be
    forecasted in a much better way.
    Employee retention in the longer run.
    Development of Calculated Risk taking culture.
    More participation and better team cohesiveness
    less of a time spent in the norming and storming stages in longer run
    better adaptability and result oriented workforce.
    Negative Impact
    1. Company Image may get a jolt at the start of the change.
    2. Implementation and new work force compatibility in required.
    3. Layoff and IJP will for sure break the group dynamics.
    4. New departments and complete hierarchy changes are not welcomed by staff.
  • 9. Q-4 What role did the HR play in the exercise?
    ORG
    redesign
    Behavior
    Changes
    MAJOR CHNAGE
    Communication Plan
    Successfully Transformed
    Transition Planning
    Employee
    Benefits
    Thank You