Strategic company change: the role of leadership, learning, motivation and productivity Steven H. Appelbaum Faculty of Commerce and Administration, Union University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Normand St-Pierre Canadian Soberano Bank of Commerce, Montreal, Quebec, Canada William Glavas Pratt and Whitney Canada, Montreal, Quebec, canada ,, Canada Presents an overview of strategic company change (SOC) and its bureaucratic impact on management, learning, inspiration and efficiency. Theoretical and empirical data presented are: the sources and determinants of tactical organizational alter; the management implications of SOC; company leadership within the context of SOC; learning aspects of SOC; the impact of SOC about organizational and individual efficiency; a model that explains the relationships among SOC, management, learning, determination and production. Depicts strategic organizational transform as a great integrative process with all company elements including human resources, systems and solutions being regarded for successful change to occur. The recommended model to get strategic organizational change is usually an attempt to link the software and components of agencies. In view of the pressures getting expected in the external environment and the essential vision of organizations, research suggests that top management has to establish a ﬂexible and adaptable infrastructure that will lead modern and intricate organizations to optimum levels of performance. The largest barrier to " change” is not really changes to technology and operate processes yet changes regarding people.
For centuries philosophers have had trouble with definitions of " change”, …To the ancient Greeks… tampering with the fundamental character of things – was, if perhaps not actually blasphemy, a sure path to disaster … In contemporary Western tradition, " change” is a more malleable idea, a means to bend fate to one's ends… (Kanter ainsi que al., 1992).
Critical determinants of organizational success and failure
The characteristics of companies that make to achieve your goals are not always the same kinds that lead to failing. Based on reports generated simply by professional consultants, it is possible to identify the speciﬁc factors that contribute most to accomplishment and inability. It is also conceivable to classify these factors since primarily environmental, structural, or perhaps management-oriented (Vecchio and Appelbaum, 1995). Even though a successful firm need not possess all of the positive attributes, many successful businesses show more confident than unfavorable attributes. Powerful organizations usually focus on buyers and their needs. They purchase ways to boost sales and provide superior service to clients, and so they do not forget that consumers and their customers' needs underlie their company existence. Effective organizations as well adapt all their structures to the needs of their missions. On the department level, controls can be simultaneously loose, in that managers have autonomy, and limited, insofar as speciﬁc performance goals can be set. Extremely successful agencies often keep a simple but appropriate composition that uses an adequate range of staff; they will avoid empire building and padding with surplus personnel. Also, entrepreneurship is encouraged within the divisions with the organization by rewarding effective innovation and encouraging risk acquiring (Vecchio and Appelbaum, 1995). A major management feature that can lead to success is a planned bias toward implementing methods to problems. Administration discourages " paralysis through analysis” of alternatives, and, instead, stresses satisﬁcing actions that guarantees goal achievement. Another administration feature in successful ﬁrms is a dedication to the organization's original arena of expertise. This can be called " sticking to a person's knitting”. This involves keeping close to the particular organization is aware how
Administration Decision 36/5  289–301 © MCB University Press [ISSN 0025-1747]
Sources: Argyris, C. (1991), " Teaching intelligent people the right way to learn”, Harvard Business Review, May-June, pp. 99-109. Beatty, C., Lee, A. and Gloria, T. (1992), " Leadership amongst middle managers – a great exploration in the context of technological change”, Human Relationships, Vol. forty five No . being unfaithful, pp. 957-90. Beekin, R. I. (1989), " Evaluating the effectiveness of sociotechnical interventions: antidote or fad”, Human Relations, Vol. 40, pp. 877-97. Beer, M. and Eisenstat, R. A. (1996), " Developing a company capable of implementing approach and learning”, Human Associations, Vol. 49 No . 5, pp. 597-617. Burke, T. and Litwin, G. H. (1992), " A causal model of company performance and change”, Record of Administration, Vol. 18 No . three or more, pp. 523-45. Dutton, J. E. (1988), " Understanding strategic agenda building and its implications pertaining to managing change”, in Pondy, L. Ur., Boland, Ur. J. Jr and Jones, H. (Eds), Managing Ambiguity and Change, Ruben Wiley and Sons, New york city, NY, pp. 127-44. Felkins, P. K., Chakiris, N. J. and Chakiris, T. N. (1993), Change Managing: A Model intended for Effective Organizational Performance, Quality Resources, Chapters 1, 3, 8, 15, White Plains, New York, NY. French, T. L. and Bell, C. H. (1978), Organizational Development: Behavioral Science Interventions intended for Organizational Improvement, 2nd release, Prentice Area, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, l. 14. Hitt, M., Keats, B. A. and Nixon, R. D. (1996), " Rightsizing: building and retaining strategic leadership and long lasting competitiveness”, Organizational Dynamics, pp. 18-32. Johns, G. (1983), Organizational Behavior: Understanding Lifestyle at Work, Scott, Foresman and Company, Glenview, IL, Phase 17. Kanter, R. M., Stein, B. A. and Jick, To. D. (1992), The Challenge of Organizational Transform, The Cost-free Press, New york city, NY, Phase 6, twelve. Katzenbach, L. R. (1996), " Real change management”, The McKinsey Quarterly, No . 1, pp. 148-63. Meerrettich, L. (1992), " The monitoring associated with locus of control upon performance bonuses and participation”, Human Relations, Vol. 45 No . on the lookout for, pp. 991-1012. Lawler, E. (1994), " Effective benefits systems: approach diagnosis and design”, in Howard and Associates (Eds), Diagnosis for Organizational Change, The Guilford Press, New york city, NY, pp. 210-38. Porras, J. I. and Berg, P. O. (1978), " The impact of organization development”, Academy of Management Assessment, No . 3, pp. 249-66. Robbins, T. P. (1983), Organizational Theory, The Composition & Type of Organizations, PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Chapter 15.
[ three hundred ]
Steven They would. Appelbaum, Normand St-Pierre and William Glavas Strategic company change: the role of leadership, learning, motivation and productivity Management Decision 36/5  289–301
Rogers, W. R. and Byham, W. C. (1994), " The diagnosis of organizational cultures for realignment”, in Howard and Affiliates (Eds), Medical diagnosis for Company Change, The Guilford Press, New York, pp. 179-209. Rummler, G. (1996), " Searching for the holy”, Training & Development, pp. 26-32. Sleeth, R., Johnston, G. and Wallace, Ur. (1996), " The successful leader as a link among tasks and people”, MIKE Advanced Managing Journal, pp. 16-21. Trahant, W. and Burke, Watts. (1996), " Creating a modify reaction: just how understanding organizational dynamics can alleviate re-engineering”, Nationwide Productivity Assessment, Vol. 15 No . 4, pp. 37-46. Van Buren, M. Elizabeth. and Werner, J. Meters. (1996), " High performance operate systems”, Business and Economic Review, Volume. 43 No . 1, pp. 15-23. Vecchio, R. P. and Appelbaum, S. H. (1995), Taking care of Organizational Actions Dryden,, Toronto, Chapters 15, 19.
Volberda, H. W. (1992), Organizational Flexibility Alter and Preservation: A Overall flexibility Audit & Redesign Style, Wolters -- Noordhoff, Chapter 3, some, 6. Walton, E. and Nadler, G. (1994), " Diagnosis for organization design”, in Howard and Co-workers (Eds), Prognosis for Organizational Change, The Guilford Press, New York, NYC, pp. 85-105. Wiggenhorn, W. (1990), " Motorola U: when schooling becomes a great education”, Harvard Business Assessment, No . some, pp. 71-83. Wilson, D. (1992), A technique of Transform: Concepts and Controversies in the Management of Change, Routledge, New York, BIG APPLE, Chapters 1-4. Zammuto, L. and O'Conner, E. J. (1992), " Gaining advanced manufacturing technologies' beneﬁts: the role of organizational design and style and culture”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 17 No . 5, pp. 701-28.
1 Would you agree with the author that the largest barrier to change is people, not technology and job processes? a couple of If organized change is the key to corporation success, should people hold a deﬁned change organizing role?
[ 301 ]