Future strategies were planned, with the intention of improving the overall efficiency of the department.
The conclusions drawn up suggest that a structural and cultural change should occur to build solid foundations for future growth and to achieve a competitive advantage over other universities. The department needs to undergo revolutionary change and effectively start again, promoting an ‘Adventurous Culture’, with a clearly defined strategy. Long-term and short-term goals need to be identified, and distribution of this strategy must be to all employees. The department needs to become a decentralised organisation, where new ideas are welcomed.
Main Body
“Culture can powerfully reinforce the competitive advantage a generic strategy seeks to achieve, if the culture is an appropriate one”(competitive advantage pg 24)
The company does have its own culture, which has been highlighted as ‘leadership by example,’ ‘not letting colleagues down’ and ‘commitment’.
The values which help the university to prosper are ‘leadership by example’ this promotes the idea of each individual being a role model to others, ‘not letting colleagues down’, a value which builds trust in an organisation and ‘commitment’ this promotes hard work to achieve strategic targets. The current values, which the staff regard as important are values, which bestow everyday life; they are moral values rather than inspirational values. The current culture, which is employed by Dunlop University, has benefits but is also detrimental towards achieving innovation. An example of inspirational culture is ‘don’t imitate, innovate’- Hugo Boss. This would fit the Molecular Sciences Department culture very well.
The organisation is regarded as ‘mechanistic’ (Burns and Stalker 1961), as there seems to be a rigid structure, where the knowledge is centred at the top. The staff have commented that there is little chance for new ideas as they have ‘ very little real involvement in the development of the strategic plan’.
Suggestions are that the company needs to become more organismic, allowing a distribution of knowledge throughout and allowing the company to become more proactive rather than reactive. At present the department is centralised and this undermines the strategic aims of the organisation.
A Centralised organisation is one in which, senior management retains the authority to make the majority of decisions. A decentralised organisation is one in which, management has granted authority to lower management, supervisors or operatives or one in which senior management has in practice lost control to others. There are advantages of a centralised organisation as it gives top management an overall perspective on the organisation allowing them to see how particular activities fit into an overall pattern. It also makes it possible to build up a group of highly qualified specialists economically, obtaining the best and avoiding the expense of duplication and it is easier for centralised organisations to unite in a crisis e.g. making rapid decisions on redundancies when the firm is in economical difficulties. However, for this particular organisation the disadvantages outweigh the advantages, as there is usually excessive workload for top managers. Heavy workload leads to inadequate reflection and consideration of alternatives as well as to put pressure on the managers concerned. It undermines the initiative of lower managers, leading to lower managers being dissatisfied with their jobs as well as making it difficult to train the next generation of top managers. Local managers are closer to the day-to-day problems than top management and are more likely to understand the full local picture, and are therefore in a better position to adapt general policies to local circumstances. Delegation leads to more rapid decisions, as the problem does not need to be referred to senior level management
Change needs to occur in all three areas of the ‘Big Three Model’ illustrated by Moss, Kanter et al. This shows the factors for change under three main headings of Macroevolutionary, Microevolutionary and Political. As there is massive competition for ‘scarce resources’ change needs to occur for the organisation to compete in a dynamic market. The major need for change is concerned with ambiguity in communication pathways. The bureaucratic centralised style is ineffective in the department and has lead to a change being urgently required. To manage a culture change the current culture must be understood and the future culture must be analysed, (Brooks & Bate, 1994). For the new structure to work communication should be enhanced.
Staff, employed by the university, feel undervalued and this is an area, which needs urgent attention as this does little to inspire a workforce. The culture held within most Japanese companies is that each member of the team is equally important. This effectively decreases any animosity between colleagues and achieves greater production as every member of the workforce feels they are important. This culture was born from the paddy fields where each person had a separate job, but without each individual performing their job to the best of their ability the crop would be a failure and all would suffer. (Appendix 5)
The internal competition within the workforce is detrimental towards the strategic goal and requires bonding and other team building exercises on a regular basis. The department would be wise to follow the same strategy, which Hewlett – Packard devised (Appendix 4). In this example the company commonly held social gatherings and used them as bonding sessions with the effect of uniting the workforce and airing problems.
A main concern for any organisation undergoing change must be how staff interact with the new systems, as they have been set in their traditional ways of doing things. An example of this was shown when Linda Smircich studied the top executive group of an American insurance company (Appendix 3) where staff that had been employed after the change took the approach of “This is how we did it at…”
Change within the organisation could be achieved easier now, as the organisation does not seem to be set in old cultures. The common feeling within the department is that change is required; this is a major advantage for the department managers, as they will receive support rather than opposition, which is usually received when change is mentioned.
Gagliardi, (1986) suggests that there are three types of change, these are apparent change, revolutionary change and cultural incrementalism. The department would benefit most from a ‘revolutionary’ change as there is no significant culture, which has been identified. It is more detrimental to apply revolutionary change to an organisation which has a history of culture and is deeply set in tradition.
The management of any change within an organisation is important, there needs to be clear understanding of future aims, present cultural and structural state and all employees should be kept updated on strategies and reasons behind them. It is important that employees are kept informed, as it will lead to less resistance.
Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), identified six strategies to overcome resistance to change. These were Education and Communication, Participation and Involvement, Facilitation and Support, Negotiation and Agreement, Manipulation and Cooperation and finally Explicit and Implicit threats
Whenever an organisation undergoes cultural change there are many factors, which affect the way in which change is achieved. The initial problem of resistance to change needs to be overcome. There are many reasons why change may be resisted within an organisation, these can be economical, fear of job losses, reduced earnings or reduced promotion prospects, social factors, e.g. break-up of work groups or psychological factors which may include insecurity, inability to adjust, loss of control or power and misunderstanding the nature of the change.
Dunlop University can overcome the resistance to change by consulting and informing the whole department as early as possible and keeping them informed throughout the process, as well as making them aware of the long-term benefits of the change. A cultural web showing the current state of the organisation (Appendix 1) allows the analysis of the organisation to be compiled under headings in a model format, showing the complete picture. The future cultural web (appendix 2) shows the expected state of the company and comparisons can be drawn.
Conclusions
With current analysis providing evidence of a fragmented culture within the department, coupled with the fact that there is discontent amongst a rapidly growing departmental team, now seems the ideal time for change.
Many problems stem from the split culture, which exists within the department. There are signs of a ‘Task Culture’, where employees act in a way they consider suitable for the task, but with the increasing political alliances within the department the culture is becoming more ‘Person Culture’, where the individual does his or her own thing. The ideal culture to adopt in the best interests of the organisation is an ‘Adventurous Culture’, where new ideas are welcomed, staff are allowed autonomy and are able to show initiative and the emphasis is on taking advantage of new opportunities.
For the change to be successful the management must ensure a sound distribution of up-to-date knowledge, which includes the strategic plan, aims of the change, future goals and new systems. Staff need to be reassured of their value to the department.
It is important for the department to adopt the correct culture from the change, as a culture has many benefits, which include, motivation for employees, positive images of the organisation as a whole, quality of work and increase competitive advantage.
Bibliography
Armstrong, M. (1999) A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 7th ed. Konan page.
Charnov, Bruce H. and Montana, Patrick J,. (2000) Management, 3rd ed.,Barron’s
Martin, R. and Moores, B. (1985), Management Structures and Techniques, Phillip Allen
Jewell, Bruce R.(2000), An Intergrated Approach to Business Studies, 4th ed.,Longman
Morgan, G.(1998) Images of Organization, The Executive Edition, Sage Publications
Bowditch, James L. and Huse, Edgar F. (1973) Behaviour in Organisations – Systems Approach to Managing., Addison-Wesley.
Porter, Michael E.(1985) Competitive Advantage- Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press
Boje, David M. et al (1996) Postmodern Management and Organization Theory, Sage
Bennett, Roger, (1997) Management.3rd ed. Pitman
Dransfieild, Robert and Needham, David, (1990) Business Studies. 2nd ed. Stanley Thornes
