Change is an essential part of any organization. Without progress, a company is doomed to a failure since it is crucial to adjust to the ever-changing requirements of quality, as well as learning to meet the new needs of the target population (Judge, 2013). Therefore, learning to promote organizational change is a crucial step toward becoming successful in the target market and raising the levels of customer loyalty and satisfaction.
Personally, I view the idea of organizational change as the continuous process aimed at altering a significant part of the company’s strategies or a complete redesign of some of the company’s departments. In other words, an organizational change implies that a firm should introduce innovations at essential levels of its functioning, including the corporate values, the organizational behavior, the communication process, etc. (Goksoy, 2015).
Therefore, it seems that an organization cannot exist without change. Alterations to the organizational structure, the way in which the relationships between the stakeholders are managed, the enhancement of quality, etc., serve as the catalysts for the company’s success in the target market. It would be wrong to claim that any change will inevitably lead to success; however, when carried out with the needs of the key stakeholders in mind, alterations to the company’s design are likely to have a massively positive effect on the overall efficacy of the firm (Judge, 2013).
When choosing between the two available options for promoting organizational change, however, one must keep in mind that people need to be empowered yet also guided to specific goals that will contribute to the desired improvement. Therefore, despite the evident benefits of the grass-root movement framework, it needs the support of an efficient leadership strategy that will direct the participants and provide them with the assistance that they need. One must give credit to where it belongs and admit that the grass-root framework contributes to a rapid and impressive increase in the levels of engagement among the target population. The identified effect is especially important in the context of a company. However, an efficient leadership strategy, such as the transformational one, will also be required since the participants will have to be assigned new roles and responsibilities and, thus, will need further directions. Therefore, combining the two approaches seems to be the best solution possible.
In some cases, change may be viewed as unnecessary. Furthermore, the staff members may be resistant to change because of the challenges associated with adjusting to the new standards. However, accepting the new quality requirements as soon as they appear is crucial to the company’s success. Change, however, should be administered only when needed. Fixing something that was never broken, to begin with, may cause problems in the firm’s performance. Thus, a balanced approach to change is necessary (Iveroth & Hallencreutz, 2015).
Thus, change can be defined as a rather complex issue that requires a careful and thought-out approach. Being an integral part of progress, change may affect the company’s position in the target market in different ways. Herein lies the significance of managing organizational change with the help of an efficient leadership strategy. Change as a concept cannot be deemed as positive or negative; it is the way in which it is handled that makes the outcomes as such. Therefore, a detailed analysis of extraneous and internal factors is crucial for introducing the necessary changes successfully.
References
Goksoy, A. (2015). Organizational change management strategies in modern business. New York, NY: IGI Global.
Iveroth, E., & Hallencreutz, J. (2015). Effective organizational change: Leading through sensemaking. New York, NY: Routledge.
Judge, W. (2013). Focusing on organizational change. Washington, DC: Flatworld Knowledge.