Page 227 - Managing Change in Organizations

CarnCh12v3.qxd 3/30/07 4:29 PM Page 210

Chapter 12 ■ Diagnosing change
the implication for management is not that there is a single strategy to adopt but
that management must be flexible in adapting to a variety of abilities and
motives. This in turn means that management must be sensitive in diagnosing
the differences, and must have the ability to vary managerial style and behaviour.
This sensitivity is an important part of the interpretation of data collected from
the organizational assessment techniques described.
Let us return to International Engineering for a moment. The management
style had been autocratic and directive. Yet it is clear enough from the data pre-
sented here that the company was not organized to be fully effective. Part of the
answer lies in restructuring. Partly, it lies in developing a ‘sharper’ performance
and commercially orientated culture. Thus, in part, it is about placing increased
demands on people. Any attempt to interpret these data through assumptions
of either ‘rational–economic man’ or ‘self-actualizing man’, or a combination of
these, may not help.
It seems likely that management have adopted some combination of these
assumptions in the past. They may have believed that the engineers wish to pur-
sue technical excellence alone. In any event the technical training was admit-
tedly excellent: ‘Let the engineers get on with the technical work and all will be
well’ seems to have been the view of many managers. In an increasingly com-
petitive world this has proved to be inadequate. It is risky to believe that these
engineers cannot be trusted beyond the technical contribution they offer. There
needs to be a recognition that the situation is more complex, that many engi-
neers can and will respond to performance and commercial orientation.
Creating change at International Engineering involves the adoption of new
organization structures and management styles compatible with the implica-
tions of the assessment data.

The change equation

But we can only go one step at a time. We must first create recognition that some-
thing is wrong. Moreover, change creates risks, uncertainties and costs, both eco-

nomic and psychological. To engage commitment to change we need to generate
a shared vision of how the situation can be improved and shared aims for the
future. We also need to generate a clear understanding of the first practical steps
forward. If I recognize that what I am doing is ineffective I need to be able to visu-
alize a better way and see some steps that I can take to make progress towards that
vision. Many people believe that generating the commitment to, and energy for,
change depends on all these factors.
The change equation provides a useful way of dealing with questions such as
‘Should I attempt to make change?’ and ‘What more can I do to improve the
chances of introducing change effectively?’ It can be expressed as follows:
EC = A B D

where EC is the energy for change, A is the felt dissatisfaction with the present
situation, B the level of knowledge of the practical steps forward and D the
shared vision.

210