Page 247 - Managing Change in Organizations

CarnCh13v3.qxd 3/30/07 4:31 PM Page 230

Chapter 13 ■ Managing major changes
The company was organized into 12 regions, each managed by a regional
director. Property management at regional level was uncoordinated. Regional
directors took many of the decisions without being properly or formally account-
able. Refurbishment decisions were under regional director control yet the costs
of refurbishment were a charge on a head office account, and were not on the
region’s books. Moreover, the lack of cooperation between architects and survey-
ors diffused any professional input into property decisions taken at regional level.

The organizational culture: a major financial institution
1
Company B typifies the role culture under significant external and internal pres-
sures. Often stereotyped as bureaucracy, this culture is characterized by stability,
prescription, rules and standards. Functional departments are clearly specified.
This can be a very efficient culture in stable environments. Role cultures empha-
size high levels of commitment by individuals, either to a department or, in a
professional role culture, to a particular profession. In this culture, position
power is a predominant form of power. But in this case the stability of the 1960s
and 1970s had been replaced by the turbulence of the 1980s. Property manage-
ment expertise was now essential if the branch rationalization programme was to
proceed.
To detail briefly the organizational changes decided on, a property manage-
ment professional was brought in to take charge and develop a modern property
management strategy. This was only the second time in the history of company
B that a non-finance manager had been appointed to this level and the first time
such an appointment had been made from outside. Under his control property
management was decentralized to regional teams, managed by regional man-
agers. Small teams, closer to the regions, would be more likely to develop
improved working relationships both within teams and between the property
management team and region. Training and development was initiated for the
professional staff. A career path was now opening up for them. All this was mov-
ing property management towards a task culture. Here, influence is based on
expertise, i.e. the expertise needed to carry out the task. Teams of people work
together to achieve objectives and tasks. This culture places demands on people

but it also provides for the merging of individual and organizational objectives
in changing circumstances. It is an adaptable culture in which the needs of the
task, rather than systems and procedures, predominate. In this case, architects
and surveyors now work together more closely and manage the regional teams.
For professional purposes there is a professional development role played by a
deputy general manager in the now small head office property management
function. Arguably, company B has moved towards a culture that is more appro-
priate to the challenge that it faces.
Organizational issues which must be faced if more adaptable organizational
cultures are to be achieved are outlined by the following criteria:
1 Management autonomy, particularly with regard to reward systems: to what
extent should local management have the ability to make decisions about grad-
ings and salary dependent on market conditions and personal performance?
1 The terms ‘role culture’ and ‘power culture’ are taken from Charles Handy (see Handy, 1984).

230