Change process models and change dynamics

Kotter and Schlesinger (2008, p. 2) in the beginning of their paper highlighted the difficulty of a successful change management process by making reference to Machiavelli’s statement: “It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things”. Indeed, many change models have been promoted for the purpose of providing a better understanding of organizational change and handling change management process. According to Amstrong (2006, p. 347) Lewin’s (1951) three-step model and Beckhard’s (1969) model are the “best known change models”. Lewin’s (1951, 1958) model of planned change considered an organization to be in equilibrium due to the balance of the opposing forces, the driving forces and the restraining forces. The driving forces could guide the organization towards change (a new position) while the restraining forces could oppose to change effort and try to retain the prevailing (the old position). Lewin’s model proposed a process that constitutes of three phases such as unfreezing the old, moving to new and refreezing the new behaviour. The first phase of unfreezing, preparing the climate for change, creates discomfort with the status quo and alters the present stable equilibrium which supports existing behaviours and attitudes.

The moving phase involves evaluation and analysis, the design and implementation of a new dispensation developing thus new responses. Institutionalisation of change is achieved in the refreezing phase through the reinforcement of the new equilibrium of the organisation at a different level. The model suggested that the old organisational behaviour needed to be abandoned when a new one is adopted successfully as an effect of the change process (Burnes, 2004). Lewin’s (1951, 1958) three-step model of planned change is still considered to be a very accurate descriptor of the occurrence of change. It identified the different change stages and describes change as a series of transitions between them. According to the model, change will occur after the system unfreezes, and change will last when the system refreezes again. According to Burnes (2004) Lewin’s model was implied group dynamics and suggested how individuals will usually go along with the group norm. Armstrong (2006) also noted that Lewin’s model suggested a “Field Force Analysis” by analyzing and assessing the restraining or driving forces of change and taking actions to increase or decrease respectively the driving or restraining forces. However, Lewin’s (1951, 1958) model of planned change has received criticism for being very simplistic and static as well as for not offering adequate practical information regarding the practical carrying out of change (Burnes, 2004; Eldrod II & Tippett, 2002; Kanter et al., 1992). According to Kanter et. al. (1992, p. 10)

“Lewin's model was a simple one, with organizational change involving three stages; unfreezing, changing and refreezing ... This quaintly linear and static conception- theorganization as an ice cube-is so wildly inappropriate that it is difficult to see why it has notonly survived but prospered”.

Contradictory to this criticism, Burnes (2004, p. 319) supported that Lewin did not consider organizations “as rigid or fixed” and made reference to Lewin’s claim that 'Change and constancy are relative concepts; group life is never without change, merely differences in the amount and type of change exist' (Lewin, 1947a, p. 199). Many authors have expanded further Lewin’s work in an attempt to identify and describe the change process phases which enhance change efforts towards a successful change. For instance, Beckhard (1969) supported that change process should be evolved by:

1. setting goals and defining the future state or organizational conditions desired after the change

2. diagnosing the present condition in relation to these goals

3. defining the transition state activities and commitments required to meet the future state

4. developing strategies and action plans for managing this transition in the light of an analysis of the factors likely to affect (Armstrong, 2006, p. 348).

Later, a four-phase model of planned change was developed by Bullock and Batten (1985): exploration, planning, action and integration. It was based on the view that organizations state in different states at different times. Thus, change means organizations to undergo from a stage to another. The model described the change phases and the various stages that an organisation needs to undergo in order to successfully implement change (Figure 2.3). Judson (1991) considered predictable people reactions and resistance to change and suggested a change process model including five change phases: analysing and planning change, communicating change, gaining new behaviours acceptance, changing from the status quo to the new state, consolidating and institutionalizing the new state.

Figure 2.3: Bullock and Batten’s model of change (adapted from Sharma, 2008, p. 51).

Kanter et al. (1992) criticized Lewin’s model as simplistic and highlighted the continuance of the change process and suggested “ten commandments” for bringing about executing and lasting change:

1. Analyze the organization and its need for change 2. Create a shared vision and a common direction 3. Separate from the past

4. Create a sense of urgency 5. Support a strong leader role 6. Line up political sponsorship 7. Craft an implementation plan 8. Develop enabling structures

9. Communicate, involve people and be honest

10.Reinforce and institutional change (Kanter et al., 1992, p.383).

Robertson and Seneviratne’s (1995) three phases’ model referred to changes in organizational work settings, to behavioural changes and to organizational changes that finally result to organizational performance and people development.

Exploration Phase

Planning Phase Action Phase Integration Phase

*Checking organizational preparedness for change *Diagnosis of the problem *Designing action plan *Implementing change *Focusing on transition *Consolidation and * Integration of the initiative in the organization

The phase model provided by Kotter (1995, 1996) is also one of the most popular ones (Table 2.4). The author developed an eight stage process of change and suggested that changes are associated with a process that consists of particular phases towards a successful change implementation while he also highlighted the importance of all phases throughout the change process.

Kotter’s eight step phase model

1 Establishing a sense of urgency by examining market and competitive realities and by identifying and