MASTERS OF EDUCATIONAL MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING

Mr Livinus M. F. Ndibalema.
(Dip: Phil & Reli. Studies, BA: Phil, MA: Sociology, MA Cand: MEMP)

THE IMPORTANCE OF ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE IN SCHOOLS OR IN

ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS A SCHOOL.

@2016
 INTRODUCTION
The main aim here is to understand why does an organization such as a school need

organizational change? This is a question that also Jones (2004) asks himself when he writes

“Organization Theory, Design, and Change.” Organizational change is an important issue in

organizations, and in this case it is very important in schools. The education environment is

constantly changing, and the school organization must adapt to these forces in order to remain

relevant and effective. Additionally if the organization such as a school is to suit in that changing

environment then, it has to adhere to the changes that come along the way.

The main concern is to explain why organizational change is important. However to capture the

real picture of what an organizational change is and what it entails, the paper has gone further to

treat some few issues briefly. They include; the types of organizational change, the theories to

organizational change and the processes to organizational change, then after the main concern of

the paper will be dealt with.

Definitions

Many scholars have tried to define what Organizational change is, and for the sake of this paper

we shall treat a few of them. For Fred (2010) organizational change is the movement of an

organization away from its present state and toward some desired future state to increase its

effectiveness. While, for Jones, (2004), it is a process in which an organization optimizes

performance as it works toward becoming its ideal state. By looking the definition we realize that

both of them wanted to tell us that, organizational change must be geared towards something

positive, either to achieve more results or for effectiveness sake.

1
From a passive perspective, Jones (2004) says, organizational change occurs as a reaction to an

ever-changing environment or as a response to a current crisis situation. But on the other hand

according to Haveman et al (2001), on a more proactive viewpoint is that, it is triggered by a

progressive manager. Just as it is put in the introduction, the environment is not static – it

changes and this forces even the organization to change according to the dictates of the time.

What we are made to understand is that even the manager plays very vital role in organizational

change, likewise in schools the school leader is in the same position. The school leader must be

the primary catalyst in order for the change to be both positive and lasting (Fullan, 2010;

Hargreaves, 2011; Marzano & Waters, 2010). Furthermore, Haveman et al (2001) asserts that

organizational change is especially evident when the organization has just undergone a transfer

of executive power

The different types of organizational change

Managers or organizational heads such as a school, continually face choices about how best to

respond to the forces for change. There are several types of change that managers can adopt to

help their organizations achieve desired future status and there might be as many types of

organizational change as possible, however this paper has adopted the types presented by

George, & Jones (2007) and that of Anderson & Anderson (2011). According to George, &

Jones (2007), the types of change fall into two broad categories: evolutionary change and

revolutionary change.

Evolutionary change according to George, & Jones (2007), is gradual, intermittent, and

narrowly-focused. Its main purpose is to make continuous improvement in order to adjust to the

environment changes (Weick, & Quinn, 1999).

2
Revolutionary change on the other and is rapid, dramatic, and broadly focused. It often happens

when the current operation method can no longer fulfill the demand of the external environment,

and a significant change has to be made in a short period of time to keep the organization work.

However there is another category of the types of change is that one which has been discussed by

Anderson and Anderson (2011). According to them, there are three main types of organizational

change. Each requires different types of effort and leadership actions, and each carries different

risks. These types of changes include the following;

Developmental Change: This deals with improvement, refinement or

enhancement of what already exists.

Transitional Change: This means moving from an old to a new state

with activities oriented towards creating the new and ‘switching off’ the

old. This type of change lends itself to a planned project approach.

Transformational Change: This tackles fundamental changes in

strategy, identity, worldview, mindset, culture; changes in ‘who we are’

and ‘what we do’. This is sometimes referred to as discontinuous or

disruptive change. With this type of change, while the imperative for

change is clear at the start, the end point and full impact of the change

are less so. Clarity only emerges as a product of the change activities,

which, themselves, will be non-linear.

Transformational change is often the hardest to achieve because it

requires staff to change aspects of who they are. It also requires leaders

to change their own identity, worldview and mindset. Many people,

3
 including organizational leaders, have little willingness (or incentive) to

adopt radically different ways of making sense of, and interacting with,

the world around them. And yet this is exactly what is required during

transformational change, (Anderson and Anderson 2011, p. 51)

There might be other categories of the types of organizational change, but as already hinted out,

this papers intends to discuss only those two categories of organizational change.

Theories of Organizational Change

To capture the whole concept of organizational change we included this part where we‟ve

discussed a few theories. We have discussed these theories according two great writers of

Organizational change, that is Van de Ven and Poole. According to Van de Ven and Poole

(1995) proposed that the causes of organization change can be explained by one of the following

theories: teleological theory, life-cycle theory, and dialectical theory.

The teleological perspective believes that organizational change is an attempt to achieve an

ideal state through a continuous process of goal-setting, execution, evaluation, and restructuring.

Teleological theories locate organization achievement in the consequences of organizational

activities. According to teleological (or consequentialist) model, all rational human actions are

teleological in the sense that we reason about the means of achieving certain ends. Orgnisatonal

activities ansbehavior is therefore, a goal-directed. Thefore in school, if there is a change in the

course of performing its activities, plus all the efforts done in achieving the set out goals and

objectives, then that change must be geared towards the telos, ie the end goal.

4
Life-cycle theory claims that the organization is an entity that depending on the external

environment, cycles through stages of birth, growth, maturation, and declination. The revelation

is that in this cycle, there is a always a change from one stage to the next. For instance it is

considered a change from birth to growth, but also it is considered a change from birth to

maturation, and it is considered a change too from maturation to declination. So according to

Van de Ven and Poole, organizations too undergo such stages and the school is no exception.

Dialectical theory hypothesizes that the organization is like a multi-cultural society with

opposing values. When one particular force dominates over others, a new organizational value

and goal is established, resulting in organizational change. Likewise in school, opposing values

and opposing forces are bound to happen. This is because an organization such as school is

considered as a complex organization because of the many and different tasks that it has to

accomplish. When these forces and values override each other, then a change is bound to happen.

According to this model, that always in organization there will emerge contradictions and when

contractions emerge, it force different interpretation, (Isabella and Flavio 2012). The existence of

contradictions that accumulate and are perceived by the social actors is, in fact, what drives

the organization‟s historical change, according to dialectics, According to Isabella and Flavio

2012), with time, the contradictions between theory and practice increase, resulting in new forms

to question the system, which generate new social practices. Now these new social practices are

what are called (praxis), of which the objective is to

transform the pre-existing social system according to this model.

5
 Forces in organizational change

According to Lewin‟s force-field analysis model, an organization is an open system. There are

two forces in organization change (Lewin, 1951), one is the pushing of the organization to a new

direction; it is the driving force. The other is preventing organization from changing; it is the

restraining force. When driving force is stronger than the restraining force, organizational

change occurs, and the organization will move towards a new direction. When restraining is

stronger than the driving force, organization will stay where it was; and when these two forces

are equally powerful, it will stay stable temporally.

When organization is about to change, there are different forces to prevent them from change,

which is the above-mentioned restraining forces. Restraining forces can be divided into three

levels: organization level, secondary unit level, and individual level (Yang, Zhuo, & Yu, 2009).

 Factors in the organizational level include the organizational structure inertia and system

pressure, organizational culture, and the pressure from past success.

 Factors in secondary unit level include the standpoint difference and interest conflict

between different departments.

 Factors in individual level include the misunderstanding, lack of trust, own benefit threat

feeling, uncertainty, custom, etc.

How to manage these factors that may hinder the successful change of the organization. The

active ways to gain organization members' support includes education, communication,

participation and involvement. The passive ways to eliminate members' resistance include

6
assistance, negotiation control, and coercion (Kotter, & Schlesinger, 1979). These methods are

most effective in different situations therefore the superintendent must manage the organization

change according to the situation, and use the combination of suitable methods to implement the

change.

The processes of organizational change

The process of change in organizations according to Anderson and Anderson (2011) means how

change will occur in the organization. Considerations about process include who will direct and

be accountable for aspects of the change, the speed of change, communication about the change,

and monitoring change success. Organizations such as schools undergo a certain process when

encountering change, because it is not an overnight phenomenon. Regardless of what type

change an organization adopts, managers face the problem of getting the organization to change.

Most of the written works that are devoted to the study of organizational change process, follow

Lewin‟s “Force Theory of change”. Based on the observation of real world organizational

change, Lewin cited in George & Jones, (2002), proposed a three-step process for successful

organizational change.

These steps are; unfreezing, moving and freezing

Unfreezing
Unfreezing starts from the members‟ understanding of the organizational crisis or vision that

motivates them to change. Even unfreezing itself will normally go through three stages.

 First of all, there must be enough information indicating that the current organizational

condition is not ideal.

 Secondly, this information has to be related to the important goal of the organization,

thus elicits members‟ anxious feeling.

7
  Finally, a solution has to be proposed that will reduce the members‟ insecure feeling and

resistance to change (Schein, 1992)

Moving
Moving is taking certain actions to transform the organization to an expected condition. The

moving process is quite complicated; according to (Schein, 1992) it involves goal setting,

support seeking, resource finding, planning and execution. There are two forms of moving, and

these are: problem-solving orientation, and vision orientation. The organization may adapt

either one according to their specific situation.

Freezing
Freezing is to stabilize the change achieved in moving stage. The individual, the department, and

the organization, all have an inertial way of thinking and doing, so that the change achieved in

moving state will return to the status quo ante if freezing is not done. Form new rules, regulate

members‟ new behavior directly, reinforce appropriate responses, are all possible ways to

internalize the new value or behavior into the organizational culture.

The targets of organizational change

The targets of organizational change, sometimes are referred to “what an organization can

change. The influential factors of organizational effectiveness are widespread, including factors

that are related to external environmental changes, and factors which will improve the internal

managerial effectiveness. The organization must consider the reasons for change, the external

environment, and the internal situation to decide which factors to change.

8
The most common known targets of organizational change include vision, strategy, culture,

structure, system, production technology, and leadership style (Yang, Zhuo, & Yu, 2009).

Vision includes a firm‟s organizational core value but one that also adapts accordingly to the

external environment. When an organization undergoes change, its core value needs to be

determined so that in the process of transformation, it can be preserved.

Strategy: This refers to the organization‟s long term goals and the steps and resources needed to

be considered in its decision-making. The strategy change can be divided into the enterprise

strategy change (Ex: low cost strategy), the overall strategy change (Ex: multiple-angle

management), and the global expansion strategy change.

Culture: This is referring to its members‟ collective value, norm, and basic assumptions. The

change involved is altering the content of this collective value and/or basic assumption.

Typically, the explicit culture is more easily manageable or changed than the implicit culture.

Structure: This is an official system of the duty and the authority relations of an organization.

Structural change is transforming the organization‟s vertical disintegration or horizontal

differentiation, power allocation, and level of formalization.

System: This is the formal regulations, policies and procedures such as reward system,

performance evaluation methods, goals budget system, etc. that are used to operate the

organization.

9
Production science and technology: This is the technology, the knowledge, the ability, the

material, the machine, the computer, the tool and other equipments which transforms inputs to

outputs. Leadership is the influential force within the organization. Leadership style impacts the

group dynamic and also the interaction of its members.

The above targets of organizational change will influence each other. For example, the

actualization of vision depends on the incorporation of suitable strategy and the organization‟s

culture. Therefore, in the process of organization change, the “systematic viewpoint” has to be

taken, so that different change targets can be considered as a whole to achieve the organizational

change successfully.

10
THE IMPORTANCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN ORGANIZATIONS SUCH
AS SCHOOLS.
Organizational change is a fundamental strategy for ensuring that a public organization remains

relevant in a changing environment. Anderson and Anderson (2011) convey that an organization

that is able to manage change well will maintain its productivity and relevance over time. That

an organization that is not able to change will become increasingly dysfunctional, unproductive

and irrelevant. An organization in which change is not managed well will suffer greater costs-in

terms of finances, opportunity, productivity and reputation-than necessary when trying to

change, (Anderson and Anderson 2011).

Hereunder are some of the reasons why organizational change is important in organizations such

as schools:

Performance Gaps: Organizational change in organizations such as schools is important

because of the presence of performance gaps. This is where the organization's goals and

objectives are not being met or other organizational needs are not being satisfied. In schools for

instance, one of the goals that cuts across all of the school institutions is to achieve high

academic excellence. But other school institutions like seminaries always foster a high level of

discipline. If all these are not seen they we say there gaps. Therefore changes are required to

close these gaps.

Crisis : Another factor that brings the importance of Organizational change is Crisis. Change

becomes a necessity when an organization finds itself in a crisis. It helps it rectify some of its

processes or activities that may have become ineffective. Initiating changes to discard these

processes assists the organization to withstand the turbulent times. Crisis are deemed to be

negative changes in the security, management, administration, economic, political, societal, or

11
environmental affairs, especially when they occur abruptly, with little or no warning. Crisis in

such areas could trigger a change and that‟s where organizational change would become

important. As Anderson and Anderson (2011) elucidates, the fact that these organizations such as

a school live in a changing environment, then change also is bound to occurs in the organization,

and one of the might be due to the crisis factor. On one hand organizational crisis might look

similar to organizational crisis, but with a critical perspective there are elements of differences.

This is where is the crisis could come as unexpected phenomenon in the organization, though

this does not rule out the expected ones. For instance in school, there might be security crisis. For

a very keen management this would bring some reconsideration on how security matters are

treated in schools, hence some changes might follow. Likewise, if there is management crisis, or

administration crisis, these might necessitate organizational change. Another crisis which trigger

changes most is financial crisis. This is because to run any institution, any organization, the

finances play a very vital role, and so if there is any crisis concerning the finance, then the

organizational will be forced to make some changes in order to meet the demands of the time.

Since the school is one of the organizations, its of no exceptional. Therefore we say

organizational change is very important, and its importance comes when it addresses such crisis.

Reaction to Internal & External Pressure: Organizational change is very important in meeting

or addressing the external or internal pressure. Robert (2014) says the management and

employees, particularly those in organized unions often exert pressure for change. External

pressures come from many areas, including customers, competition, changing government

regulations, shareholders, financial markets, and other factors in the organization's external

environment. In the educational settings we have teacher‟s union in particular and workers union

in general. For instance in Tanzania we have Trade Union Congress of Tanzania (TUCTA) and

12
Zanzibar Trade Union Congress (ZATUC). These two bodies in Tanzania are responsible for

advocating the rights of workers in general. But specifically for teacher we have Tanzania

Teachers Union (TTU) and Tanzania High Learning Institutes Trade Union (THTU). These

bodies can influence how schools operate their daily activities. This is what we call external

pressure, but there might be internal pressure as well. For instances some teachers might

organize themselves and demand something from the administration. Organizational change

becomes very important in meeting these pressure.

However for those who discuss external factors to change, mostly include the issue of

globalization. That change helps the organization cope with globalization, which can be a threat

or opportunity.

New Technology and Technological Advancement: Technology is changing at a very high

speed, in order to keep the pace of the changing technology, it‟s important for the institutions and

organizations to go with this pace. Robert (2014) says identification of new technology and

more efficient and economical methods to perform work can trigger organizational change. That

there might come a time when there are efficient and economical methods, then it becomes wise

for the institution to embrace such methods. But also some improved technologies may come

along which cam maximize the results. This is where organizational change becomes important,

whereby it changes according to the new technologies available. Therefore change is important

in coping with emerging technological advancements in the society. Transforming the school‟s

ways of performing work in line with new technologies helps it to edge out its competitors,

thanks to increased productivity and efficiency. The introduction of CDs in the 1980s is a prime

example of the significance of change in technological developments. Later on there was an

introduction of flash disks/sticks in the 1990s. For instance, instead of the school, writing and

13
keeping a lot of manuscripts in hard copies, which might consume space that would be used for

something else, it can decide to store the soft copy files in the flash sticks to save more spaces

but also for efficiency purpose. That is one example, there are many examples to do with

technological advancements. For instance in Tanzania there is the issue of „TEHAMA‟ which is

a new phenomenon in schools. So in order to cope up with this new strategies have to be

introduced in the system which will necessitate change, considering the fact that formerly

recruited teachers are not used to this phenomenon.

An urge to increase work performance. One of the importance of organizational change is that

it increases work performance. There might not be performance gaps necessarily, but there might

an urge just to increase work performance. May be due to the fact that an institution doesn‟t want

other institution to catch up. A school for instance, which has been doing better in the

neighborhood, might want to make some changes so that other schools do around do not catch

up. It does so just to increase the work performance, so that it continues its domination in the

neighborhood.

Poor performance: Another related factor to the above is poor performance. An organization

such as a school might not be performing well in the execution of the its activities, which might

threaten the chance of meeting the goals and objectives. When such situation happens it‟s when

the organization makes changes in the operations of its activities, and this is where

organizational change becomes important. For instance if the school has been performing well,

both academically and other areas, and all the sudden poor performance becomes a phenomenon,

then the organization if forced to change. In this way we say organizational change is very vital

at tacking issues to do with poor performance.

14
Maintenance of organizational culture. Organizational change is very important at keeping the

organizational culture. This happens when there are some issues in the institutions that are

threatening the institution culture. The best way to keep the institution culture when such issues

arise, is to make some few changes which might yield to positive results in keeping the culture.

That‟s where organizational change becomes very important. For the case of school settings for

instance, the school might be known for its high level of discipline all, the sudden there is moral

decadence, then it will be forced to review where it has gone wrong and make some changes

where necessary and this is where organizational change becomes very important.

Identification of Opportunities: Mostly this happens in organizations and companies that

produces products for sale to cater for the outside market. Opportunities are identified in the

market place that the organization needs to pursue in order to increase its competitiveness.

However in educational setting it can still be discussed. This is where according to the changing

environment and the changing needs of the time, a school may see an opportunity in such

situations. Taking for instance the growing need of the Chinese language at present. The school

might see this as an opportunity and decide to include this in the school programs so that people

are interested to take their students to such schools, especially private. We may call this winning

of the outside market just as in companies that produce for sale. When such changes occur to

capture the beneficial outside market its when we regard organizational change to be important.

15
Conclusion.

Much as the main concern of the paper was to explain why organizational change is important in

organizations, it also treated other issues concerning organizational change for a better

enlightenment of what organization change entails. These issues include; the types of

organizational change, the forces of organizational change, the theories to organizational change

and the processes to organizational change, the targets of organization change, then after the

main concern of the paper was also dealt with. Organizational change is a good thing if its

carried out keenly, and it can yield much better results if the concerned are conscience of what

necessitated the change to happen. There are those who do it for the sake of change, that is

change for its sake. Often times an organization will appoint a new CEO. In order to prove to the

board he is doing something, he will make changes just for their own sake. But also there are

those embrace change because it sounds good. An organizations may institute certain changes is

that other organizations are doing so. It sounds good, so the organization tries it.

16
 Reference
Anderson, D & Anderson LA, (2010). The Change Leader’s Roadmap, San Francisco: Pfeiffer

Anderson, D & Anderson LA (2011). Conscious Change Leadership: Achieving Breakthrough

Results, Leader to Leader, Fall Inc

Fred C. Lunenburg (2010) Forces for and Resistance to Organizational Change, National Forum
Of Educational Administration And Supervision Journal Volume 27

George, J. M., & Jones, G.. R. (2002). Understanding and ManagingOrganizational Behavior
(3rd). New York: Pearson Education, Inc

Haveman, H. A., Russo, M. V., & Meyer, A. D. (2001). Organizational environments in Flux:
the impact for regulatory punctuations on organizational domains, CEO succession, and
performance. Organization Science, 12, 253-273.

Isabella Freitas Gouveia de Vasconcelos and Flávio Carvalho de Vasconcelos (2012) The
dialectic model of organizational change and the phenomena of resistance to the
established order in Brazil: a critical analysis of systemic strategies to maintain the
status quo, ISC Paris

Jones, G. R. (2004). Organization Theory, Design, and Change. New York: Addison-Wesley
Publishing Company.

Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1979). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business
Review, 57, 106-114.

Robert W. Swaim (2014). Nine Reasons Organizations Need To Change. Retrieved from.
http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com

Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership (2nd. ed.). SanFrancisco: Jossey-
Bass.

Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations.
Academy of Management Review, 20, 510-540.

Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of
Psychology, 50, 361-386.

Yang, R. S., Zhuo, X. Z., & Yu, H. Y. (2009). Organization theory andmanagement: cases,
measurements, and industrial applications. Taipei: Yeh-Yeh.

17