Introduction

Organisations are never completely static. Dynamic changes in the

environment leave people totally unprepared to cope with it. Tomorrow’s
world will be different from today’s world. Therefore, if organisations are to
continually create value for customers, they must be able to adapt to an
ever-changing environment. In order to do this effectively, there is an
element of foresight required, which is a complex and conflicting process of
analysing, experiencing, interpreting and absorbing uncertainties. To
combat the unknown, therefore, organisations have to develop strategies
that allow them sought after sustainable growth and the opportunity to
build their businesses of tomorrow. The process of building a vision, a
strategy and ultimately seeing that vision go through to fruition through
successful implementation of organisational change

There is need for a proactive rather than a reactive workforce. Therefore,

today’s managers and leaders need a new mind-set – one that values:

 Flexibility
 Speed
 Innovation
 Adaptive

While most organizations focus on deciding what to change to improve

company performance and quality, the human element of executing these
decisions is often left unattended. To successfully implement major change,
companies must find the connection between the organization, the worker,
and the change initiatives being introduced. That connection is achieved by
fostering resilience among individuals in the organization.

The results and outcomes of workplace changes are intrinsically

(fundamentally) and inextricably (inseparably) tied to individual employees
doing their jobs differently. Neither does a perfectly designed process that no
one follows produces improvement in performance nor a perfectly designed
technology that no one uses or understands creates additional value to the
organisation.
What is change management?

Change is the coping process of moving from the present state to a desired
state that individuals, groups and organisations undertake in response to
dynamic internal and external factors that alter current realities. Change
involves the crystallization (manifestation) of new possibilities (new policies,
new behaviours, new patterns, new methodologies, new products or new
market ideas) based on the reconceptualised patterns in the institution. It is
also any alteration occurring in the work environment that affects the ways
in which employees and organisations must act e.g. structure, technology,
and people. And "Manage" is defined as: to handle or direct with a degree of
skill or address or to succeed in surviving or in achieving something despite
difficult circumstances; cope.

Therefore, Change management is a structured approach to transitioning

individuals, teams, and organizations from a current state to a desired
future state, to fulfil or implement a vision and strategy . It is also the
process, tools and techniques to manage the people-side of change to
achieve the required business outcome. It incorporates the organizational
tools that can be utilized to help individuals make successful personal
transitions resulting in the adoption and realization of change It is an
organizational process aimed at empowering employees to accept and
embrace changes in their current environment. There are several different
streams of thought that have shaped the practice of change management.

Change management enables employees to adopt a change so that business

objectives are realized. It is the bridge between solutions and results and is
fundamentally about people and collective role of transforming change into
successful outcomes for our organisations.

To achieve the most optimal result via Change Management, it is critical

that each organization member works collaboratively and maximizes their
capacity. From the management-level to entry-level employees, they should
make one voice based on the business vision and goals. However, there are
always various types of people in the organization for the matter of change;
passive, active, stubborn, or indifferent. Because of these diversities, a
leader has to lead his/her members to one direction. In this way, the role of
the ‘change manager’ is important to control the variable inside of its
organization.

CORE CONCEPTS FOR CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Every change management process has factors that promote and hinder the
process which managers need to keep in mind because they play an
important role in the success or failure of the change process as well as offer
opportunities to re-examine and improve their change implementation
process. These factors or central concepts include and are not limited to

 Senders and receivers

 Resistance and comfort

 Authority for change

 Value systems

 Type of change (Incremental vs radical change)

 The right answer is not enough

 Change is a process

Senders and receivers – every change can be viewed from the perspective of
a sender and a receiver. A sender is anyone providing information about the
change. A receiver is anyone being given information about the change.
Senders and receivers are often not in a dialogue at the onset of a sender of
a change. They can talk right past one another as a sender focuses on the
business issues and the receiver processes the personal implications.

Resistance and comfort – a common mistake made by many business

leaders is to assume that by building awareness of the need for change, they
have also created a desire among employees to engage in that change.
Resistance from employees takes these managers by surprise and they find
themselves unprepared to manage that resistance. Rather than waiting for
resistance to happen, or being taken by surprise when key employees
resisted the change, the leadership and the project team could have
assumed that resistance to change is normal and natural.

Authority for change – the notion that we need people to set direction,
solve problems, create a vision and lead us to a better future is part of our
heritage. Change cannot be accomplished without the commitment and
involvement of the organization's leaders. The leaders are the individuals or
group who has the power to sanction or legitimize change. The leaders
should actively and visibly participate in the change, build coalition of
sponsorship between key business leaders, and should communicate
directly with employees about why the change is needed.

Value systems

Communication is essential yet there is often a disconnect between senders

and the receivers; resistance is a normal human reaction to change; leaders
bring authority and legitimize change within an organisation. Overlaying
each concept is the reality that the culture and values of an organisation
uniquely and tangibly impact how these concepts will play out for any given
change. The value systems reinforce compliant behaviour and employees
understand how they will be rewarded or punished.

Incremental vs radical change – employees will react differently to a

change that is incremental as compared to a change that introduces a
dramatic shift to what they know that is radical change. Incremental change
is a change that takes place over a long period of time. The objectives of the
change are small and deliberate.

Radical change is immediate and dramatic change required over a short

period of time. Often driven by a crisis or significant opportunity, as these
changes are meant to produce dramatic performance improvements in
business processes, structure or systems. E.g. mergers and acquisitions.
6. The right answer is not enough

Managers often assume that if they are able to provide the right or correct
answer to a business problem, it will be sufficient to overcome employee
resistance. Unfortunately, change leaders who take this approach and force
their solutions onto employees increase the chances of failure of the change
they desire. Even the best solutions require proper change management
since employees will not simply go for it because it is good. They need to be
explained why it is necessary and what impacts will it have on their lives.

7. Change is a process – Managers leading a change should avoid treating

it as a single event or a meeting. It is not possible to implement change in a
single moment. The change process should be broken down into discrete
time periods or phases and strategies/techniques should be developed that
addresses the unique needs of that phase. The change leader’s role must be
active and visible in all phases and he should make sure that the sense of
urgency of change or the desire for change does not fade out from the minds
of the employees throughout the process.

Types of change

To be able to adapt to or deal with the impact of change forces,

organizations may plan for, experience or undergo change. They are many
classifications of change but the most common and practical classification of
organizational change, is according to the process. It consists of two
fundamental change processes- planned change and unplanned change.
The two types are different – while planned change is formal, unplanned
change is informal; the former is imposed within the organization while the
latter has its origins outside it.

Planned change

Planned organisational change is a deliberate attempt to modify the function

of the total organisation or one of its major parts in-order to bring about
improved effectiveness. Planned change is a rationally controlled, orderly
process. It is initiated by the members of the organisation (management
driven). In planned change (top-down), senior executives generally conceive,
plan and direct implementation. Middle management is responsible for the
detailed coordination and internal management of change, while non-
managerial employees are vital with respect to embedding change, even
though they have little say in the decision-making process. Planned change
is thought to be particularly appropriate when the change is strategically
important and entails departures from the present organisational forms and
functions. It is a direct response to management’s perception of a
performance gap—a discrepancy between the desired and actual state of
affairs. Performance gaps may represent problems to be resolved or
opportunities to be explored.

External pressures to change combined with potential internal resistance

are thus cited as strong reasons for the employment for planned changed.
Therefore, planned change must have a specific purpose in order for the
organisation to remain in a viable state.

The metaphor that help us understand how planned organisational change

happen is the calm waters. It is a description about organizations that
likens the organization to a large ship making a predictable trip across a
calm sea. Change surfaces as the occasional storm, a brief distraction in an
otherwise calm and predictable trip.

The prevailing model for handling change in calm waters is using Lewin’s
three step model of planned change. The first stage involves “unfreezing” or
challenging the status quo to prepare the organization for change.
“Changing” or transitioning between states is the second stage. Finally,
during the “refreezing” stage, the organization institutionalizes the change to
provide a sense of stability Inherent in the planned change approach is a
heavy reliance on managers and change agents to design and carry out a
prescribed sequence of steps and activities for change (Wilson, 1992). The
implication is that outcomes can be directly connected to a deliberate action.
Weaknesses of the planned approach (calm waters)

 Planned change initiatives are often criticized as slow, static and only
suitable for times of stability, not dynamic interrelatedness and complexity.

 If the environment is turbulent and the new destination state is

unclear, company is impossible to move clearly from one state to another.

 Planned change can be an unethical, fear-producing “vehicle for

domination” (In Burns, 2006:146) that extends existing top-down power
structures. (authoritative decision making)

 This approach has also been criticized for ignoring environmental

factors that are inconsistent with planned change initiatives. This is
especially true in our increasingly complex, interconnected and global
corporate world

 Where major learning of new methods or substantial long-term

investment is needed for the new situation, it may not even be clear when
the new refrozen state has been reached.

UNPLANNED

Not all change in organizations is the result of a management’s direction.

Unplanned change is change that occurs spontaneously or within a very
short time as a result of something natural or a particular random
occurrence. Unplanned changes occur spontaneously or randomly. They
may be disruptive, or beneficial, but, more often than not, unplanned
changes are disruptive. This type of change is forced on the organisation by
the external environment. It is not prepared for, it simply occurs. When the
forces of unplanned change begin to appear, the appropriate goal is to act
quickly to minimize any negative consequences and maximize any possible
benefits. (Technological changes, for example, force the organization to
invest in modern technologies)
White water rapids metaphor is used to explain how unplanned change
happens in an organisation. This envisions the organization as a small raft
navigating a raging river with continuous white water rapids. Ito considers
organisational macro environment as non-static and dynamic. In order to
manage change the organisation has to manoeuvre swiftly in rapid waters .
The only certainty is continuing uncertainty in this environment.

This metaphor is consistent with the discussion of uncertain complex,

turbulent and dynamics of rapidly challenging environments. As soon as the
organisation digests one change, another one comes along. Be alert to
problems and opportunities

 Become change agents in stimulating, implementing and

supporting change in the organization

 Executives today are overpowered by constantly changing

information and work tasks. E.g

Change in white water rapids metaphor is handled using the

APPROACHES TO CHANGE

Burnes (2009) sketches out three approaches to change, which feature

different management interventions and leadership behaviours.

Bottom up approach
This approach encompasses activities related to change in the demeanour of
top management. Apart from their main responsibilities, they need to be in
charge of encouraging and empowering their subordinated to execute their
day to day tasks at ease.
Essentially, this approach involves subordinates proposing ideas and
concepts to their managers and the latter are expected to realise the best
ideas (Balogun and Hope-Hailey, 2004. In view of this, the approach yields
team building by developing internal team strategies across different
organisational functions which translate into implementation of the
corporate strategy. The major disadvantages are that it takes a lot of time to
take a decision with many people (Hoag et al., 2002) and that the strategy is
governed by existing structure, rather than by business processes, which
might be subjective and slow down crucial decision making.

Complexity approach
It broadly suggests that more complex targets (goals) should be prioritised
for treatment (action) because that will trigger change within the system.
Those organisations which support the complexity approach must ensure
equal delegation of power, very strong customer concentration and strategic
objectives and plan built on the premise of constant learning and update of
knowledge.
Within the complexity approach organisations are considered to be complex
entities and the behaviours of employees are not unstructured and
unplanned (accidental), but rather depend on circumstances. proponents
complexity theory believe that Lewin’s three step model to change is
inappropriate because it considers companies as functioning in unwavering
(steady) circumstances.

According to the complexity approach most cases change fails because

managers are trying to cope with the problem in an ordered way instead of
employing structural reformations (complicated versus complex problems).
Eventually, complexity approach supports the thesis that organisations are
continuously adjusting and change is initiated by self-organising rules
(Metcalfe et al., 2000). However, complexity approach does not lead to any
structured and extrapolative models. Instead there are few guiding
principles, which are self-adjusting, and which can be executed without a
leader, which on the other hand may cause troubles because its unplanned
nature (Shaw, 1997).

Emergent approach to change

The underlining principles of this approach to change imply that change is a
multifarious (diverse) process, which cannot be put into operation in a top-
down form (Stacey, 1996). Instead it materialises from the everyday
operations and actions of the members of a particular company. Change
emerges simultaneously as actors organise work in given structures and it
involves improving the existing enabling conditions in the organizational
environment. In other words, the emergent approach does consider planned
goals and preparations to lower extent, but rather employs emerging
strategies and establishes change priorities when they occur (Dawson,
2003). According to the Emergent approach, the reciprocal relationship
between an organization and its environment has deep implications for how
organizations understand and manage change. And the ability to scan its
external environment is considered a vital competence for organizations.

Supporters of this approach argue that the Emergent approach considers

elements that the planned approach does not, such as;

 The rapidly changing environments in which organizations operate,

 Changes even in stable situations tend to have an emergent and

unpredictable nature.

 Managers cannot be relied on 100%, commitment to change might not be

achieved

 Plans or methods might not be understood and can be hard to be

implemented.

The emergent approach to change disregards various perceptions of unified

rules that can foster change. Instead what it proposes focuses on five
essential organisational elements (By (2005), Buchanan et al. (2005). These
can either reinforce or mitigate the impacts resulting from change.

1. Organisational structure
2. Organisational culture
3. Organisational learning
4. Power and politics
5. Managerial behaviour as catalyst and coordinator of activities related to
change process
Organizational structure

The organizational structure is considered being an important facilitator of

change. Galbraith (2000) notes that: A flat organization tends to be more
flexible and less change-resistant than a hierarchical organization (Kotter,
1996). Semi-structured organizations have the ideal structure for successful
change, because they possess some kind of structure that enables organized
change, but its structure is not rigid enough to obstruct change. Bear in
mind that factors such environmental stability, strategies, the competency
of employees, size of the business, culture will influence changes in the
organisational structure

Organizational culture

If proposed changes contradict cultural biases and traditions, it is inevitable

that they will fail to embed in the organization. That is why to successfully
manage change, it is necessary to understand which part of the
organizational culture needs to be changed and to anchor the change in the
organization’s culture (Clarke, 1994; Kotter, 1996). Organisational change
will only be brought about by first changing the people’s attitudes and
values in other words changing the culture at the deeper levels of is
meaning.

To ensure that the change will happen it is important that organizations

include change as a part of the way they do all things; i.e. as a part of its
organizational culture.

Organizational learning

Learning allows employees to understand their environment so as to detect

and solve errors. It is an important factor for successful change, because a
willingness to change often only comes from the feeling that there is no
other option (Argyris, 1999; Pettigrew et al, 1992). To achieve organizational
learning, it is important to have an effective top-down communication and
the promotion of self-development and confidence (Clarke, 1994; Nadler,
1993). They need to be involved in the diagnosis of problems and the
development of solutions, because these enable them to challenge the status
quo (existing norms and established practices), and to be able to own the
change process (Clarke, 1994); this is the essence of bottom-up change,
rather than managers pushing the staff towards change.

Managerial behavior

The manager’s role plays a very important part in the change process. In the
past, managers where only seen as a controlling and directing figure; but
nowadays they are expected to be coaches and facilitators that empower
employees to identify the need for, and achieve change (Bennis, 2000;
Carnall, 2003). Kotter argues that the main skill a manager must have to
bring about successful change is leadership, because ‘Leadership defines
what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires
them to make it happen … ’ (Kotter, 1996: 25). Other important managerial
tasks will be to; identify sources of inertia, evaluate the skills existing within
their organization and analyze whether their own managerial attitudes and
styles are appropriate.

Power and politics

To bring about successful change it is necessary to manage appropriately

the political dynamics of change by involving ‘those [actors] whose
involvement really matters…’ (Kanter et al, 1992:508) Nadler (1993)
recognized the importance of shaping the political dynamics of change so
that power centers support the change rather than obstruct it. Senior (2002)
describes in four steps what an organization needs to do to manage the
political dynamics of change.

Criticisms (students to look at them)

 First, it seems less a coherent (logical) approach to change.

 Second, it is criticised for its over-emphasis on the political dimension

of change.

 Third, it is limited in terms of both the types of organizational change

to which it can be applied, and how it can be applied. (Burnes, 1996:
 P316) In other words, increased turbulence of the environment is
assumed as a justification for the emergent strategies.

 Fourth, there is no guarantee that the organizational learning that has

already taken place will be relevant to the crisis. (Lynch, 2005: P772)

Drivers of Organizational Change

Organizations are systems that exist in the context of an external
environment, an interdependent relationship, and interact with it in order to
survive and grow. Any factor in the environment that interferes with the
organisation’s ability to attract the human, financial and material resources
it needs, or to produce and market its services/products becomes a force of
change. Internal to itself, a number of forces operate in the organization that
could facilitate or hinder its functions, processes and actions. An
organization is thus subject to two sets of forces: those of the external
political, social, economic and competitive environment and those internal to
the organization

i) Internal Drivers For Change

 Change in leadership

 Implementation of new technology

 Decline in profitability

 Changes in employee profile

 Labour union actions

 New strategies
 ii) External Drivers For Change
External Forces: (beyond the control of the organization)

 Economic Factors; eg hyperinflation, deflation, recession, etc.

 Social Factors; social responsibility obligations eg Community
Ownership Scheme, providing jobs for locals, indigenization drive etc.
 Technological Factors; increased new production technologies and
information systems eg Delta’s automated plant in Harare,
 Political Factors; change in leadership in government, change of
government resulting in new ideologies eg changes brought about in
1980 in Zimbabwe after gaining independence.
 Legal/legislation requirements
 Competition
 Changing customer needs and preferences

THEORATICAL FOUNDATIONS OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT

 Individual perspective which is subdivided into two
- Behaviourist theory
- Gestalt theory
 Group dynamism
 Open systems – focus of change is on the organisation and its context

BEHAVIOURISTS
Behaviourists have a functional view of human behaviour (mental life). In
this view individuals are thought to be conditioned to behave according to
training that they received or assumptions or schemas as they are
sometimes referred to. This view of individual behaviour would be similar to
the functionalist view of organisations in which external interventions are
the primary means of effecting change. In this view, the individual is
conceived as complaint body awaiting stimulus in order to make change
possible.
Behaviorists seek to achieve organisational change solely by modifying the
external stimuli acting upon the individual. In practice, behaviour
modification involves the manipulation of reinforcing stimuli so as to reward
desired activity. The aim is to reward immediately all instances of wanted
behaviour, but to ignore all instances of the unwanted behaviour (because
even negative recognition can act as reinforce).

GROUP DYANAMICS

On this theory, Lewin made the group the primary vehicle of achieving
individual change of attitude and the assimilation of required beliefs about
prospective changes at work.

Its emphasis is on bringing about organisational change through teams or

work groups rather than individuals (Bernstein 1968). The rationale
according to Lewin is that because people in organisations must be seem
modified or changed in the height of group’s prevailing practices and norms.
He postulated that group behaviour is an intricate (complicated) set of
symbolic interactions and forces that not only affect group structures but
also modify individual behaviour.

Therefore he argues that individual behaviour is a function of the group

environment or “field” as he termed it. The field produces forces, tensions,
emanating from group pressures on each of its members. According to him
a group is never in a “steady state of equilibrium” but a continuous process
of mutual adaption which he termed “quasistationary equilibrium”.

To bring about change: Therefore it is useless to concentrate on changing

the behaviour of individuals according to the group dynamics school.

Organisational Renewal - A model of adaptive orientation – orientations

used by managers to manage change

Organisation renewal is defined as an ongoing process of building

innovation and adaptation into the organisation. Every organisation must
have enough stability to function satisfactorily and still prevent itself from
becoming too static or stagnant to changing conditions. Both stability and
adaptation are essential for continued growth and survival. A stable
environment is characterized by unchanging basic products and services,
static of competition, a low level of technologic innovation, a formalized and
centralized structure, and a steady, slow rate of growth.

A hyper turbulent environment is characterized by rapidly changing

products lines, increasing and changing set of competitors, rapid and
continued technological innovation and rapid market growth.

Therefore a static organisation can no longer survive, to survive,

organisations must develop methods of continuous self-renewal.

Model of adaptive orientation organisations: model considers 2 dimensions:

(i)- Degree of change in organisation’s environment (the stability of the

industry in which the organization operates)

(ii) – degree of adaptiveness (adjust) or flexibility present in the internal

orientation or the organisation.

Several orientations may be used by managers.

Environmental
Stability
hyper turbulent

Renewing transformational Reactive

Satisficing Sluggish thermostat

Stable high Adaptive orientation low

1. Sluggish thermostat (Stable environment and low adaptation)

Many organisations have their thermostat set so low they become insensitive
to change. Sluggish management refers to a style of management based on
low risk, with formalized procedures and a high degree of structure and
control. Thus organisations depicted by this quadrant usually have very
stable goals and a highly centralized structure, have more managerial levels,
higher ratio of superiors to subordinate and emphasis on formal control
systems, there may be a tendency to value tradition, to keep on doing things
as they have been done, value seniority more than performance, an aversion
to accepting new ideas. Although this is a low risk style of managing it may
lead to serious problem in the long run e.g. inability to meet new customer
demands.

2. Satisficing Management (Stable environment, high adaptation)

It is a style that emphasizes a more centralized decision making structure

with problems referred to the top. Tends to be more levels of management
with coordination done by formal committees, planning and decision making
are usually concentrated at the top, with high clarity of procedures and
roles. Change is accomplished at a rate that is “good enough’ (moderate) to
keep up pace with the industry, but certainly behind the state of art,
strategies used are “good enough’ because of low level of pressure for change
from the environment

3. Reactive management (hyper-turbulent environment, low

adaptation)
Organisations that have a low level of adaptation exist in a rapidly changing
environment. Reactive management refers to the style of reacting to a
stimulus after conditions in the business environment have changed. It is a
management style that deals with problems on a crisis basis. This may
involve reduction of personnel or product lines, hasty reorganisation,
replacing of key personnel, or freezing promotions. (It might be
experiencing product failures, decline in profitability, competition).
Fundamentally, this management style implies inaction until problems
occur. So the lack of challenge and stimulus for organisations in this area
ultimately leads to their demise, unless some form of artificial stimulation
can be administered

4. Transformational management (hyper turbulent environment,

high adaptation)
Renewing/transformational management refers to introducing change to deal with situations
before the situations actually occur. Organisations that exist in a hyperturbulent environment
must go beyond reacting to a situation but must innovate as a result. These companies tend to
be champions of new innovation with a faster development of ideas (Sensitive thermostats).
Change can provide new avenues for growth and managers are constantly fighting entropy.

MODELS OF PLANNED ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE

A variety of models and theories exist in the literature for implementing

change in organisations. Coupled with models of change is the issue of
approaches to change. Models of change, as opposed to strategies of change,
are best presented as basic frameworks that guide the strategies for change
to be implemented in the organisation. According to Tichy (1983, p. 38), ‘the
use of the term “model” refers to a set of assumptions and beliefs which
together represent reality’. Stemming from this definition, some key models
of change are discussed.

The most common models are;

 Kurt Lewin’s model

 Bullock and Batten (1985)

 Beckhard and Harris (1987)

 Kotter’s 8 Step model

 Action Research model

Kurt Lewin 3 step model

Kurt Lewin (1951) introduced the three-step change model. This social
scientist viewed behavior as a dynamic balance of forces working in
opposing directions. Driving forces facilitate change because they push
employees in the desired direction. Restraining forces hinder change
because they push employees in the opposite direction. Therefore, these
forces must be analysed and Lewin’s three-step model can help shift the
balance in the direction of the planned change

This three-step model is associated with intentional change in the

organisation and change initiators may choose to use a range of strategies to
implement the intended change. The three steps are unfreezing, change, and
refreezing.

Unfreezing

Unfreezing is the first step in the change process in which people within the
organisation are given necessary preparation to change. It is about making
them aware about the importance and the essence of change. Schein (1996)
developed this concept of unfreezing into the application of three
psychological steps: “disconfirmation of the validity of status quo, the
induction (stimulation) of guilty or survival anxiety, and creating
psychological safety. The role of survival is very important in this stage to
increase the urgent for change and therefore, change managers should
cleverly indicate to employees that current practices or working methods etc,
are not any more appropriate in the new environment. By making them
dissatisfied with the existing state, they will be more easily motivated to
move out from the current comfort zone. When feeling of crisis is around,
employees will be more open to change.

Moving

This is where the change happens, after the preparation period have
finished. With insufficient support and understanding from staff, change is
hardly implemented. In this stage, strategic plan, new mission, clear vision
and objectives can be formed. Although employees can all be well prepared
and persuaded towards change, it is essential that adequate support is
given in this stage. Proposed objectives and program actions need to be
carefully planned and should be attainable, within organization’s resources
and ability

Refreezing

This is the last stage in the process and aims at making the change stick by
reinforcing and maintaining the new behaviours and practice. Without this
final stage, change may only be short-live one and employees may return to
old way of doing thing. The change is only regarded as success if change
managers can make the new practices become part of organisational
culture. In this instance, reward serves to recognise that the new behaviour
is valued and prevents previous behaviour from reoccurring.

Evaluation about change process can be carried out to aid the

implementation of this stage and keep change momentum. Benefits that
change brought should be reviewed as well as costs and any drawbacks,
problems that occurred during the changing stage should be well analyzed.

Weaknesses of this approach

• The model is based on the assumption that organisations operate

under stable conditions and can move from one stable state to
another in a planned manner, meaning this model might not be useful
in more turbulent and chaotic business environments.

 The planned approach is too simplistic and mechanistic (systematic)

in the present climate of organisational change. Critics point out that
organisational change is a continuous and open-ended process
(Dawson 1994; Pettigrew 1990a, 1990b; Stacey 1993; Wilson 1992).

 This approach is only beneficial when incremental change is

introduced in an organisation and has relevance only for isolated
change projects. That is it fails to incorporate radical,
 transformational change (Dunphy and Stace 1992, 1993; Harris 1985;
Miller and Friesen 1984).
 Lewin's work ignores the role of power and politics in organisations
and the nature of conflict existent in organisational life (Hatch 1997;
Pettigrew 1980; Pfeffer 1992; Wilson 1992).

• It assumes that the approach is suitable for all organisations and all
situations, making it kind of a “universal approach”, which is
apparently not true since the fact is that each organisation is
influenced by its own different internal and external environmental
forces.

• This approach advocates a top-down, management-driven approach to

change and ignores situations requiring bottom-up change (Dawson
1994; Kanter, Stein and Jick 1992; Wilson 1992).
Bullock and Batten

Bullock and Batten´s planned change model (1985) is also comparable to

the two aforementioned model as it describes four stages of planned change.
These phases include:

 Exploration
 Planning
 Action
 Integration
KOTTER’S 8 STEP MODEL

1. Create a sense urgency

2. Build the guiding team
3. Get the vision right
4. Communicate for buy-in / Communicate the change vision
5. Empower action
6. Create short-term wins
7. Don’t let up / Consolidate gains
8. Make change stick
Create a sense of urgency
Raising a feeling of urgency is the first and most critical step in a successful
change effort. With low urgency and complacency, the change effort cannot
get off the ground. Once an individual realizes that change needs to take
place, it is important to increase urgency throughout the organization.
People must know why the need is important in addition to knowing what
the actual need entails.

Build the guiding team

Change cannot be successfully implemented by one person, irrespective of
their position in the organisation. It is important to get the right people in
place who are fully committed to the change initiative, well-respected within
the organization, and have power and influence to drive the change effort at
their levels. This team must have the right mix of skills and diversity to
achieve results, as well as the capacity for trust and teamwork. The purpose
of this guiding team is to establish the vision and strategy for change.

Get the vision right / Develop a vision

While creating a shared need and urgency for change may push people into
action, it is the vision that will steer them into the new direction. The vision
should be a concise (brief) statement of where the team sees the
organization in the future that is it has to direct. Strategies should also be
outlined so that they explain how the vision will be achieved or delivered.

TRANSITIONING / MOVING
Communicate for buy-in / Communicate the change vision
Once a vision and strategy have been developed, they must be
communicated to the organization in order to gain understanding and buy-
in. Sending clear, credible, and heartfelt messages about the direction of
change establishes genuine gut-level buy-in or commitment, which sets the
stage for the following step: getting people to act. The vision should be
communicated by both in words and actions, multiple of ways of
communication should be used.

Empower action
Empowering action should be seen as removing barriers to those whom we
want to assist in pushing the change effort. Removing obstacles should
inspire, promote optimism and build confidence around the change effort.
Remove obstacles to change like organisational policies or structures that
seriously undermine the vision.

REFREEZING
Create short-term wins
Short-term wins nourish faith in the change effort, emotionally reward the
hard workers, keep the critics at bay, and build momentum. By creating
short-term wins, and being honest with feedback, progress is achieved and
people are inspired. These short-term wins provide “credibility, resources,
and momentum to the overall effort” (Kotter, 2002, p.5).

Don’t let up / Consolidate gains

Not letting up refers to avoiding complacency (satisfaction) after short-term
wins. For example, managers should replace a time-consuming and
painstakingly detailed monthly activity report with a one-page summary
that highlights only major milestones and key information
Continue to remove organisational policies and processes that inhibit
change. Hire, promote, reward and develop employees who engage positively
with the change. Establish new related change projects.

Make change stick / Embed the change in culture

Making change stick refers to the effort involved in avoiding slipping back
into old habits. Demonstrating a commitment to change through a major
signal to employees, promotes a sense of commitment to the new vision
Because change can be fragile, as evidenced by an organization slipping
back into old habits, a conscious effort must be made to firmly establish
change into the organizational culture.

PERSONAL CHANGE MODELS

The JOHARI window of self-awareness model - Joseph Luft and Harry
Ingram 1955
Known to self unknown to self
Open area Blind area

Hidden area Unknown

It is model that helps individuals on how they can manage change through
self-awareness, relationship building and improved communication through
feedback. By self-awareness we mean being conscious of what one is good at
doing while acknowledging what they still have to learn.

The model represents information on feelings, experience, views, attitudes,

skills, intentions, motivation, etc - within or about a person - in relation to
their team, from four perspectives. It can also be used to represent the same
information for a team in relation to other teams. In order to be self-aware
you need feedback from others

The Four areas, regions or quadrants include;

OPEN AREA/ PUBLIC ARENA (Known to others; Known to self)

Also known as the 'area of free activity’. Information about the person -
behaviour, attitude, feelings, emotion, knowledge, experience, skills, views,
etc - known by the person ('the self') and known by the team ('others').

The aim in any team should be to develop the 'open area' for every person,
because when people work in this area with others they are at their most
effective and productive, and the team is at its most productive too. The
open free area, or 'the arena is the space where good communications and
cooperation occur, free from distractions, mistrust, confusion, conflict and
misunderstanding.

How to increase the open area

 Increasing the open area, by reduction of the blind area, by asking for
and then receiving feedback

 Can also be developed through the process of disclosure, which

reduces the hidden area

 The unknown area can be reduced in different ways: by others'

observation (which increases the blind area); by self-discovery (which
increases the hidden area), or by mutual enlightenment - via group
experiences and discussion - which increases the open area as the
unknown area reduces

There is personal growth

ii) BLIND AREA/ BLIND SELF (Known to Others; Unknown to self)

This is what is known about a person by others in the group, but is

unknown by the person. Could also be referred to as ignorance about
oneself, or issues in which one is deluded. This is not an effective or
productive space for individuals or groups. The aim is to reduce this area by
seeking or soliciting feedback from others and thereby to increase the open
area, i.e., to increase self-awareness. Team members and managers take
responsibility for reducing the blind area - in turn increasing the open area -
by giving sensitive feedback and encouraging disclosure. Managers should
promote a climate of non-judgemental feedback, and group response to
individual disclosure, and reduce fear.
 iii) HIDDEN AREA/ AVOIDED FAÇADE (Known to self; Unknown to
others)

What is known to ourselves but kept hidden from, and therefore

unknown, to others. It represents information, feelings, etc, anything that
a person knows about self, but which is not revealed or is kept hidden
from others. It also include sensitivities, fears, hidden agendas,
manipulative intentions, and secrets - anything that a person knows but
does not reveal. Relevant hidden information and feelings, etc, should be
moved into the open area through the process of 'self-disclosure' and
‘exposure process'. The extent to which an individual discloses personal
feelings and information, and the issues which are disclosed, and to
whom, must always be at the individual's own discretion

(iv) UNKNOWN SELF (Unknown to others; Unknown to self)

Information, feelings, latent abilities, aptitudes, experiences etc, that are

unknown to the person him/herself and unknown to others in the group.
These can be prompted through self-discovery or observation by others, or
through collective or mutual discovery. Counselling can also uncover
unknown issues. Managers and leaders can create an environment that
encourages self-discovery, and to promote the processes of self-discovery,
constructive observation and feedback among team members.
Types of people found in Johari window

A BA A BA

HA UA
HA UA

Idea participant interrogator

A BA A BA
HA UA

HA UA
Arrogant secretive

3.1. The ideal participant

The ideal participant reflects a high degree of trust awarded to the group
and to all the significant relations. In this window the dimensions of the A
are large because of the high degree of confidence shown to the group. Inner
group rules regarding the giving and receiving of feedback facilitate such
exchanges. The huge dimensions of the A suggest that a large part of the
individual’s behaviour is accessible to the group, thus reducing the risk of
misinterpretations and misunderstandings.

3.2. The interrogator

These are individuals who participate in the group mainly by asking
questions, but who do not offer any feedback. The dimension of the HA is
related to the volume of information provided to the other members. These
subjects will come up with questions like: “What do you think about this?”,
“What would you have done in my place?”, “How do you feel about what I
just said?”, “How do you feel about the group?”. The subject described by
this window has the tendency to check other people’s opinions before
expressing his/her own. Expressing their own point of view is seldom done
by them, which makes group perception more difficult.

3.3. The arrogant

This is a person who participates in group activities mainly by giving
feedback, while at the same time having a very low demand for it. These
subjects openly express their opinions, their own feelings regarding group
activities and their position on debate topics. These subjects may excessively
criticize other members or the entire groups and expect such actions to be
taken as open and appropriate. This is why they may be regarded as
insensitive to the feedback received, or even as ignoring it. These subjects
are either poor listeners, or they have such a manner of responding that
causes the others to withhold information in the future. If these behavioural
patterns are not corrected, they will be perceived as evasive, false and
inaccessible. They will continue to act inefficiently because of their
unilateral communication style (from the arrogant to the others). As these
subjects are not open to accepting the indications and suggestions of the
group, they are not able to identify the elements that need to be changed.

3.4. The secretive

This is a person who participates in group activities by merely observing.
These subjects do not have much information on themselves, nor does the
group. They are the silent members of the group, who do not provide nor
require any feedback. The members of the group encounter difficulties in
identifying a way to relate to them. These persons appear to be surrounded
by a shell„ isolating them from the rest of the group. When criticized for the
lack of participation, they argue that they “learn better by listening”. Those
in this category make considerable efforts to maintain this closed system
because of the high pressure put on their own behaviour by the group rules.
Johari window configuration for various management styles. (Blake
Muton)
A similar analogy exists in the managerial grid. Most individuals would
prefer a 9,9 or team oriented manager (ideal Johari window type) but many
times are supervised by a 1.1 or impoverished manager (turtle type) which is
illustrated by the Johari window with a large unknown pane.

Principles of Change Within The Johari Window

 A change in any one quadrant will affect all other quadrants.
 Threat tends to decrease awareness; mutual trust tends to increase
awareness.
 Forced awareness (exposure) is undesirable and usually ineffective.
 Interpersonal learning means a change has taken place so that
Quadrant I is larger, and one or more of the other quadrants has
grown smaller.
 Working with others is facilitated by a large enough areas of free
activity. This means more of the resources and skills in the
membership can be applied to the task at hand.
 The smaller the first quadrant, the poorer the communication.
 There is universal curiosity about the unknown area; but this is held
in check by custom, social training, and by diverse fears.
 Sensitivity means appreciating the covert aspects of behaviour, in
Quadrants II. III. IV and respecting the desire of others to keep them
so.
In summary
• Self-disclosure reduces the hidden area
• Feedback reduces the blind area
• Together they reduce the unknown area
THE CHANGE CURVE – ELIZABETH KUBLER ROSS

In the event of a tragic event in a business – whether it is layoffs,

redistribution of responsibilities, or re-assignments of roles– this Ross
Kubler’s model can assist in understanding the situation. Organizational
change has an element of loss inherent in the process, and it is a loss that is
often deeply felt by employees and deal with it differently from others. The
change curve model provides a basis for understanding the emotions
employees often encounter during change and as such managers will be
better prepared to facilitate the change process .
The Change Curve consists of four phases, which usually happen in
sequence namely denial, resistance, exploration and commitment. While
people may move more slowly or more quickly through change, complete
mastery of the change involves transition through each of the four phases,
especially if the individual did not initiate the change. This does not mean
that every individual will move through each phase in order. Sometimes
people move back to a previous phase or get stuck in one phase. Despite
these different patterns, however, one must eventually reach Commitment in
order to perform effectively within the changed organization.

The four phases of change curve

Denial

The first emotional state experienced during change is denial. The first
phase begins when people hear about the change. This may take the form of
rumour or rumblings before the actual announcement, or it may be a
sudden and unexpected announcement of a change initiative. During denial,
employees want to believe that the change is still optional, probably a
mistake, that it will go away and life will get back to normal. Communication
and getting employees involved in the change will move them quickly out of
denial. It is important to reinforce that the change is required for business
survival, explain what factors are causing the change, focus on a clear goal,
and institute robust two-way communication to deal with issues and move
people out of the denial phase.

Resistance

As people start to react to the change, they may start to feel concern, anger,
resentment or fear. They may resist the change actively or passively. They
may feel the need to express their feelings and concerns, and vent their
anger. Resistance can also occur after what seemed like acceptance of the
change, at a point when individuals feel discouraged or disillusioned. During
this phase, employees attempt to slow down or derail the change initiative. It
is helpful to discuss with participants why they feel resistant to the change.

Exploration
The mood suddenly turns positive during the exploration phase. In a healthy
change initiative participants will move through resistance, reach a
transitional point and begin to identify personal opportunities to flourish
based on the change. First, employees become willing to explore the change
and look for ways they can contribute. Communication and personal
reinforcement must be maintained and managed. Employees must be
rewarded for even small increments of involvement (Short-term “wins” are
necessary to keep enthusiasm levels high). During exploration comfort zones
are being rebuilt and existing skills are being applied to new and challenging
tasks, relationships and processes. Any failure to support the employee
during exploration will result in an immediate and final retreat into
resistance or indifference.
Commitment
A successful journey through exploration will lead employees to commitment
and change adoption and integration into the organization. This is probably
the most difficult phase to attain, but the easiest to manage. Mutual
commitment is established for the change effort. Obstacles have been
removed and the focus is on successful implementation of the changes. The
commitment phase is also the time to devote effort to teambuilding.
Rewarding those individuals who respond positively and help move the
change effort forward is critical.

In conclusion, while these phases appear to be linear they are actually

iterative with slight movement into and out of each phase as people put a
tentative foot forward, retreat slightly, and make a larger foray. How the
organization communicates, rewards, and supports the iterations will
determine whether change is successful.

Change agents (catalyst)

The individual or group that undertakes the task of initiating and managing
change in an organization is known as a change agent (CA). A change agent
can either be an internal change agent, who are most frequently a sub-set of
organizational leaders, or an external change agent, who are most likely to
be consultants brought in to invoke change. Internal change agents are
individuals working for the organization who know something about its
problems and has experience of improving situation in the same
organization. These internal change agents, when assigned a responsibility
of intervening in a system come from entirely different department or
division of their organization

External are temporarily hired or employed in the organization to remain

engaged only for the duration of the change process. For major
organizations-wide changes, companies frequently will hire external change
agents because they are from outside and not bound by the firm’s culture
and politics or tradition particular expertise that is unavailable internally
and can also bring a different and potentially more objective perspective into
the organisation development process.

 They are also afforded some deference and power because of their
perceived expertise and objectivity, and the

 y can use this influence to mobilise resources for change .

 Outsider is less constrained by organizational politics and

conditioning as they do not depend upon the organisation for raises,
approval or promotions.
 With broader experience, the external agent can provide
benchmarking and best practices as well as insights into potential
pitfalls learned from other clients.

 Provides fresh ideas, concepts and objective perspective with less

resistance

 They have the ability to probe difficult issues and to question the
status quo and organisational culture . They are neutral and have no
stake in the institution

 Brings skills, technique, information and experience from other

institutions experiences that are not available from within the
organization.

 Freedom from distraction from day to day operating responsibilities

Disadvantages of external consultants

 Organisational members may be wary of outsiders and may not trust

them enough to give them pertinent information as they are seen as
having relatively little invested in the organisation.

 Might lack a good understanding about organisation’s culture, values

and beliefs and therefore they need extra time to study the
organisation and to gain a working knowledge of it.
  External consultants are not the one affected by the change and they
may attempt to promote a tough, radical change on organisation.

 They do not have anything do with the repercussion (consequence)

after the change is implemented
 May or may not be available when needed by the organization; may
split time and commitments with other clients.

 High expense – fees can be costly

 Takes time to become familiar with system

 If problems arise, the external consultants can simply walk away with
little negative consequence.

The external –internal practitioner team exclusive

The implementation of a large scale – change program is almost impossible
without the involvement of all levels and elements in the organisation. One
approach to creating a climate of change uses a team formed of an external
agent and internal agent to initiate and facilitate change programs. The
agents bring complementary resources to the team; each had advantages
and strengths that offset the disadvantages and weaknesses of the other.
The external practitioner brings expertise, objectivity and new insights to
organisation problems. The collaborative relationship between internal and
external agents provides an integration of abilities, skills and resources. The
team approach makes it possible to divide the change program’s workload.
The external-internal team is less likely to accept watered-down or
compromised change programs. Another reason for using an external-
internal agent team is to achieve greater continuity over the entire change
program. The external-internal combination may provide the stimulation
and motivation needed to keep the change program moving during the
periods of resistance.

Change agent style

Change agents be they internal or external have a variety of styles or

approaches they use in any change program. One way to view the styles is
based on the degree of emphasis the agent places upon two interrelated
goals or dimensions of the change process. One of the goals is
effectiveness, the degree of emphasis upon goal accomplishment. The other
goal is morale, the degree of emphasis upon relationships and participant
satisfaction. Based upon the two dimensions of accomplishing goals and
member satisfaction, five different types of styles can be identified:

 The stabilizer style

 The cheerleader style

 The analyzer style

 The persuader style

 The pathfinder style

HIGH
CHEERLEADER PATHFINDER

MORALE PERSUADER

STABILIZER ANALYZER

LOW LOW EFFEC high

The stabilizer style

The goal of the stabilizer is neither effectiveness nor participant satisfaction.
Rather the agent is trying to keep from rocking the boat and to maintain a
low profile. The underlying motivation is often survival, or merely following
the directives of top management. This style is usually forced upon the
agent by the organisational pressures, so the practitioner has to learn to
conform and to suppress any other motivations.
The cheerleader style

The cheerleader style places emphasis on the satisfaction of organisational

members and is chiefly concerned with employee motivation and morale.
The agent seeks warm working relationships and in general is more
comfortable in non-confrontational situations. Effectiveness per se is not
emphasized, the assumption being that if member satisfaction is high
effectiveness will also be high. The cheerleader style strongly minimizes
differences and maintains harmony.

The analyzer style

Places emphasis on effectiveness and gives little emphasis to member

satisfaction. Agents of this type may be quite confrontational, usually relying
on authority to resolve conflicts and rational problem solving process. (The
analyzer style has a background of specialized expertise, knowledge and
experience applicable to the solution of specific problems. The style is based
on the belief that the client does not need to know or cannot learn the skills
to solve its problems.

The persuader style

It focuses on dimensions, effectiveness and morale yet optimizes neither.

Such a style provides a relatively low risk strategy yet avoids direct
confrontation with other forces. This approach may be used when the agent
has little power or leverage relative to other participants. It is motivated
primarily by a desire to satisfy something that is good enough. A great deal
of effort is applied in attempting to satisfy the different forces thus gaining a
majority bloc of support for prepared changes.

The pathfinder style

It seeks both high degree of effectiveness and high degree of member

satisfaction, believing that greater effectiveness is possible when all
members are involved and problem solving done through team work. There
is an awareness that confrontation and conflict are often means to a more
effective organisation and to more satisfied individual members

In summary these five agent styles are not mutually exclusive. All styles can
be effective and they are interrelated. An agent may transition from one style
to another to meet changing client system needs and deal with diverse
situations. Often a combination of the styles may be used

Contingencies (incidents) that influence the choice of a CA

• Trade-offs between the internal/external advantages/ disadvantages.

• Time and availability

• Duration of consultations required.

• Cost

• Seriousness of the problem and level of expertise required

• Receptiveness of the organizational members and legitimacy of

internal and external CA’s

• Philosophy (beliefs, ideas) and style of a CA and compatibility with

organisational culture and values (But it may that a person with very
different c ulture and values is exactly what is needed to help
transition the organisational).

• The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid

Leading People and Producing Results

 
When you recruit a new team member, what's your priority? Is it to focus on
tasks by explaining the first year's objectives to him or her? Or, do you
spend time understanding his strengths and interests so you can give him
tasks that he'll enjoy?

No one leadership style is best for all situations, but it's useful to
understand what your natural approach is, so you can develop skills that
you may be missing. It's unwise to neglect either tasks or people. But,
equally, a compromise between the two approaches will likely result in only
average team performance, because you neither meet people's needs nor
inspire excellent performance.
In this article, we look at the Blake Mouton Managerial Grid, a popular
framework for thinking about a leader's "task versus person" orientation.

Also known as the Managerial Grid, or Leadership Grid, it was developed in

the early 1960s by management theorists Robert Blake and Jane Mouton. It
plots a manager's or leader's degree of task-centeredness versus her person-
centeredness, and identifies five different combinations of the two and the
leadership styles they produce.

Understanding the Model

The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid is based on two behavioural dimensions:

 Concern for People: this is the degree to which a leader considers

team members' needs, interests and areas of personal development when
deciding how best to accomplish a task.
 Concern for Results: this is the degree to which a leader emphasizes
concrete objectives, organizational efficiency and high productivity when
deciding how best to accomplish a task.
Blake and Mouton defined five leadership styles based on these, as
illustrated in the diagram below.

Figure 1 – The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid

The Leadership Grid® figure from "Leadership Dilemmas – Grid
Solutions," by Robert R. Blake and Anne Adams McCanse (formerly the
Managerial Grid by Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton). Houston: Gulf
Publishing Company, Copyright 1991 by Grid International, Inc.
Let's take a look at each quadrant in detail.

Impoverished Management – Low Results/Low People

The Impoverished or "indifferent" manager is mostly ineffective. With a low

regard for creating systems that get the job done, and with little interest in
creating a satisfying or motivating team environment , his results are
inevitably disorganization, dissatisfaction and disharmony.

Produce-or-Perish Management – High Results/Low People

Also known as "authoritarian" or "authority-compliance" managers, people

in this category believe that their team members are simply a means to an
end. The team's needs are always secondary to its productivity.

This type of manager is autocratic, has strict work rules, policies and
procedures, and can view punishment as an effective way of motivating team
members. This approach can drive impressive production results at first,
but low team morale and motivation will ultimately affect people's
performance, and this type of leader will struggle to retain high performers.

She probably adheres to the Theory X approach to motivation, which

assumes that employees are naturally unmotivated and dislike working. A
manager who believes people are self-motivated and happy to work is said to
follow Theory Y. You can learn more about these theories in our
article, Theory X and Theory Y .

Middle-of-the-Road Management – Medium Results/Medium Peop/.le

A Middle-of-the-Road or "status quo" manager tries to balance results and

people, but this strategy is not as effective as it may sound. Through
continual compromise, he fails to inspire high performance and also fails to
meet people's needs fully. The result is that his team will likely deliver only
mediocre performance.
Country Club Management – High People/Low Results

The Country Club or "accommodating" style of manager is most concerned

about her team members' needs and feelings. She assumes that, as long as
they are happy  and secure, they will work hard.
What tends to be the result is a work environment that is very relaxed and
fun, but where productivity suffers because there is a lack of direction and
control.

Team Management – High Production/High People

According to the Blake Mouton model, Team management is the most

effective leadership style. It reflects a leader who is passionate about his
work and who does the best he can for the people he works with.

Team or "sound" managers commit to their organization's goals and mission,

motivate the people who report to them, and work hard to get people to
stretch themselves to deliver great results. But, at the same time, they're
inspiring figures who look after their teams. Someone led by a Team
manager feels respected and empowered, and is committed to achieving her
goals.

Team managers prioritize both the organization's production needs and their
people's needs. They do this by making sure that their team members
understand the organization's purpose , and by involving them in
determining production needs.
When people are committed to, and have a stake in, the organization's
success, their needs and production needs coincide. This creates an
environment based on trust and respect, which leads to high satisfaction,
motivation and excellent results. Team managers likely adopt the Theory Y
approach to motivation, as we mentioned above.

Note:
Blake and his colleagues added two more leadership styles after Mouton's
death in 1987, although neither appears on the grid itself, for the reasons
explained below.
 Paternalistic Management. A Paternalistic manager will jump
between the Country Club and Produce-or-Perish styles. This type of
leader can be supportive and encouraging, but will also guard his or her
own position – and paternalistic managers don't appreciate anyone
questioning the way they think.
 Opportunistic Management. This doesn't appear on the grid because
this style can show up anywhere within it. Opportunistic managers place
their own needs first, shifting around the grid to adopt whichever style
will benefit them. They will manipulate and take advantage of others to
get what they want.

Applying the Blake Mouton Managerial Grid

It is important to understand your management or leadership style, so that

you can then identify ways of reaching the target position of Team manager.

Step One: Identify Your Managerial Style

 List five or six recent situations where you were the leader.

 For each situation, place yourself on the grid according to where you
believe you fit.

 Use our self-assessment leadership quiz  to help you spot your traits.

Step Two: Identify Areas Where You Can Improve and Develop Your
Leadership Skills

 Look at your current approach. Are you settling for "Middle-of-the-

Road" because it's easier than reaching for more? Think about whether
your style suits the situation you are in.

 If you feel that you are too task-oriented, then you can try to involve
your team members in creative problem solving , improve how
you communicate with them, or work on your mentoring skills. Or, if
you tend to focus too much on people, it may mean becoming clearer
about scheduling  and monitoring project progress , or improving
your decision making .
 Continually monitor your performance and watch for situations where
you slip back into bad old habits.

Step Three: Put the Grid in Context

The Team management style is often the most effective approach, but there
are situations that call for more attention to one area than the other. For
example, if your company is in the middle of a merger or some other
significant change, then it can be acceptable to place a higher emphasis on
people than on production, to guide them and reassure them through a
potentially difficult time. Likewise, when faced with an emergency, an
economic hardship, or a physical risk, concerns about people may be put to
one side, for the short term at least, to achieve good results and efficiency.

The Blake Mouton Managerial Grid is a practical and useful way of analyzing
your leadership style. The Managerial Grid considers leadership style based on
their focus on task and/or people - Via Abey Fra