Transformational change is a fundamental change within the organisation requiring a shift in strategy, structures, systems, processes and culture. (Balogun, 1999) Meanwhile, Dunphy and Stace(1993, cited by Senior) bring up the mode of scale types of change (seen below) Fine Tuning Incremental Adjustment Modular Transform CorporateTransformation They split the transformational change into two parts—‘Modular Transformation’ and ‘Corporate transformation’. This is a useful development in detailing more clearly the different levels at which Transformational change can take place.
(Senior, 2002) According to the scale of change developed by Dumpy and Stace(1993), Modular transformation, is characterized by major realignment of one or more departments/divisions. The process of radical change is focused on these subparts rather than on the organization as a whole. Corporate transformation, which is corporation-wide, characterized by radical shifts in business strategy and revolutionary changes throughout the whole organisation. Changes that is intended to be transformational will affect many aspects of an organisation and levels within it.
It will require the creation of a new mission and organisation with fundamental implications for the organisational paradigm and distribution of power, new structures and methods of working. In this sense, such change is seen as radical and discontinuous. (Beckhard,1992) On contrast, incremental adjustment/change (Dunphy,D. cited by Senior, P43) refers the changes involves distinct modifications (but not radical changes) to corporate business strategies, structures and management processes.
The whole case study is about the old CEO and three other senior managers bought out the company and replaced new managers from outside to save the corporation from the difficulty situation by means of a series of change. The buy-out, replacement new executive officers from outside, and introduce new work process system and human resource structure are corporate transformation. Because these changes are focused on the whole organisation rather than a subparts; in the mean time, setting up work team and other training programmes for the workforce as motivation are more likely to e modular transformational change.
Because processes of these radical changes are focused on the certain departments, like workforce in the case study, rather than on a whole company change together. In conclusion, changes happened at Byrashi Mouldings are mostly prescriptive (top-down) and transformational changes except the buy-out company is an emergent and transformational change. Therefore the changes take place inside Byrashi Mouldings is a hybrid mixed with emergent and prescriptive change, that is to say, a multiple paths to change.
A sophisticated modernist view of the world would see changes as transformational, revolutionary, periodic, following a circular path. (senior, 2003)Before embarking on any discussion of cultural change, it is important to define exactly what is meant by the term ‘culture’. A widely accepted definition from Senior(2002) is that “Culture consists in patterned ways of thinking, feeling and reacting, acquired and transmitted mainly by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievements of human groups. Including their embodiment in artefacts; the essential core of culture consists of traditional(i.
e, historically derived and selected) ideas and especially their attached values. Attempting to bring about cultural change presents a great challenge, for the simple reason that it is not readily quantifiable or alterable in a predictable manner. Once this is known and accepted, a discussion can progress. Rosenfeld(1999) used to list seven major factors which may make the corporate culture difficult to manage and change. He talked about the issues of level, pervasiveness, implicitness, imprinting, political, plurality and interdependence respectively.
To change the corporate culture in Byrashi Mouldings is apparently not easy. The first hiccup managers would encounter is the level issue. Since the old structure is very top-heavy and over-large workforce which lead to unprofitablity, to implement a radical change in the corporation structure must meet many resistances from people at different level and departments. In addition, cultural change not only refers the company structure, manufacturing process but also stuff’s view and attitude to their work and the whole organisation.
To change people’s thought is the most difficult change to implement of all. Because it takes time and efforts to convince and motivate people and get them support and involve in the development of the corporation. In the medium term, it is possible to manage to change the culture norm such as payment agreement but hard to change employees and workforce. But in the long term, this would be possible if the new leaders adopt the right ways to get their idea understood by the stuff work for them company.
This will not only depend on the right change programme, but also on the skill and leadership charisma, which will be discussed in depth in the Q3. In summary, besides these seven issues, culture change is like an iceberg(After Edgar Schein, handout) which looks a relatively easy to manage on the surface, but it is vastly more complicated and full of unknown variables. Therefore right decision makings on what to change and skilfully-using leadership are essential to achieve a successful company cultural change and put the company back from the edge of death, both on the medium and long term.