managing change in ion (1)

8/4/2019 Managing Change in ion (1)

1/32

MANAGING CHANGE IN ORGANIZATION

Q.1.

HOW CHANGE CAN BE INITIATED IN BOTH INTERPERSONAL AND BEHAVIOURAL AS KRUGER ASSERTS

SUCH A CHANGE TO POWER AND POLITICS MANAGEMENT AND TO MANAGEMENT OF PERCEPTION AND

BELIEFS. DISCUSS IN THE CONTEXT OF AN ORGANIZATION OF YOUR CHOICE?

Here are some rules for effective management of change. Managing organizational

change will be more successful if you apply these simple principles. Achieving personal

change will be more successful too if you use the same approach where relevant. Change

management entails thoughtful planning and sensitive implementation, and above all,

consultation with, and involvement of, the people affected by the changes. If you force

change on people normally problems arise. Change must be realistic, achievable and

measurable. These aspects are especially relevant to managing personal change. Before

starting organizational change, ask yourself: What do we want to achieve with this

change, why, and how will we know that the change has been achieved? Who is affected

by this change, and how will they react to it? How much of this change can we achieve

ourselves, and what parts of the change do we need help with? These aspects also relate

strongly to the management of personal as well as organizational change.

See also the modern principles which underpin successful change.

Refer also to Psychological Contract theory, which helps explain the complex

relationship between an organization and its employees.

Do not 'sell' change to people as a way of accelerating 'agreement' and implementation.

'Selling' change to people is not a sustainable strategy for success, unless your aim is to

be bitten on the bum at some time in the future when you least expect it. When peoplelisten to a management high-up 'selling' them a change, decent diligent folk will generally

smile and appear to accede, but quietly to themselves, they're thinking, "No bloody

chance mate, if you think I'm standing for that load of old bollocks you've another think
http://www.businessballs.com/organizationalchange.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/psychological-contracts-theory.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/psychological-contracts-theory.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/organizationalchange.htm


2/32

coming" (And that's just the amenable types - the other more recalcitrant types will be

well on the way to making their own particular transition from gamekeepers to poachers.)

Instead, change needs to be understood and managed in a way that people can cope

effectively with it. Change can be unsettling, so the manager logically needs to be a

settling influence.

Check that people affected by the change agree with, or at least understand, the need for

change, and have a chance to decide how the change will be managed, and to be involved

in the planning and implementation of the change. Use face-to-face communications to

handle sensitive aspects of organizational change management (see Mehrabian's

research on conveying meaning and understanding). Encourage your managers tocommunicate face-to-face with their people too if they are helping you manage an

organizational change. Email and written notices are extremely weak at conveying and

developing understanding.

If you think that you need to make a change quickly, probe the reasons - is the urgency

real? Will the effects of agreeing a more sensible time-frame really be more disastrous

than presiding over a disastrous change? Quick change prevents proper consultation and

involvement, which leads to difficulties that take time to resolve.

For complex changes, refer to the process ofproject management, and ensure that you

augment this with consultative communications to agree and gain support for the reasons

for the change. Involving and informing people also creates opportunities for others to

participate in planning and implementing the changes, which lightens your burden,

spreads the organizational load, and creates a sense of ownership and familiarity among

the people affected.

See also the excellent free decision-making template, designed by Sharon Drew Morgen,

with facilitative questions for personal and organizational innovation and change.
http://www.businessballs.com/mehrabiancommunications.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/mehrabiancommunications.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/project.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/innovationdecisionmakingfacilitation.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/innovationdecisionmakingfacilitation.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/project.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/mehrabiancommunications.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/mehrabiancommunications.htm


3/32

To understand more about people's personalities, and how different people react

differently to change, see the personality styles section.

For organizational change that entails new actions, objectives and processes for a group

or team of people, use workshops to achieve understanding, involvement, plans,

measurable aims, actions and commitment. Encourage your management team to use

workshops with their people too if they are helping you to manage the change.

You should even apply these principles to very tough change like making people

redundant, closures and integrating merged or acquired organizations. Bad news needs

even more careful management than routine change. Hiding behind memos and middle

managers will make matters worse. Consulting with people, and helping them tounderstand does not weaken your position - it strengthens it. Leaders who fail to consult

and involve their people in managing bad news are perceived as weak and lacking in

integrity. Treat people with humanity and respect and they will reciprocate.

Be mindful that the chief insecurity of most staff is change itself. See the process of

personal change theory to see how people react to change. Senior managers and directors

responsible for managing organizational change do not, as a rule, fear change - they

generally thrive on it. So remember that your people do not relish change, they find it

deeply disturbing and threatening. Your people's fear of change is as great as your own

fear of failure.

Responsibility for managing change

The employee does not have a responsibility to manage change - the employee's

responsibility is no other than to do their best, which is different for every person anddepends on a wide variety of factors (health, maturity, stability, experience, personality,

motivation, etc). Responsibility for managing change is with management and executives

of the organization - they must manage the change in a way that employees can cope with

it. The manager has a responsibility to facilitate and enable change, and all that is implied
http://www.businessballs.com/personalitystylesmodels.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/workshops.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/personalchangeprocess.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/personalchangeprocess.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/personalchangeprocess.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/personalchangeprocess.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/workshops.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/personalitystylesmodels.htm


4/32

within that statement, especially to understand the situation from an objective standpoint

(to 'step back', and be non-judgmental), and then to help people understand reasons, aims,

and ways of responding positively according to employees' own situations and

capabilities. Increasingly the manager's role is to interpret, communicate and enable - notto instruct and impose, which nobody really responds to well.

change must involve the people - change must not be imposed upon the people

Be wary of expressions like 'mindset change', and 'changing people's mindsets' or

'changing attitudes', because this language often indicates a tendency towards imposed or

enforced change (theory x), and it implies strongly that the organization believes that its

people currently have the 'wrong' mindset, which is never, ever, the case. If people are

not approaching their tasks or the organization effectively, then the organization has the

wrong mindset, not the people. Change such as new structures, policies, targets,

acquisitions, disposals, re-locations, etc., all create new systems and environments, which

need to be explained to people as early as possible, so that people's involvement in

validating and refining the changes themselves can be obtained.

Whenever an organization imposes new things on people there will be difficulties.Participation, involvement and open, early, full communication are the important factors.

Workshops are very useful processes to develop collective understanding, approaches,

policies, methods, systems, ideas, etc. See the section on workshops on the website.

Staff surveys are a helpful way to repair damage and mistrust among staff - provided you

allow people to complete them anonymously, and provided you publish and act on the

findings.

Management training, empathy and facilitative capability are priority areas - managers

are crucial to the change process - they must enable and facilitate, not merely convey and

implement policy from above, which does not work.
http://www.businessballs.com/mcgregor.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/workshops.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/workshops.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/mcgregor.htm


5/32

You cannot impose change - people and teams need to be empowered to find their own

solutions and responses, with facilitation and support from managers, and tolerance and

compassion from the leaders and executives. Management and leadership style and

behavior are more important than clever process and policy. Employees need to be ableto trust the organization.

The leader must agree and work with these ideas, or change is likely to be very painful,

and the best people will be lost in the process.

Change management principles

1.

At all times involve and agree support from people within system (system =environment, processes, culture, relationships, behaviours, etc., whether personal

or organizational).

2. Understand where you/the organization is at the moment.

3. Understand where you want to be, when, why, and what the measures will be for

having got there.

4. Plan development towards above No.3 in appropriate achievable measurable

stages.5. Communicate, involve, enable and facilitate involvement from people, as early

and openly and as fully as is possible.

John P Kotter's 'eight steps to successful change'

American John P Kotter (b 1947) is a Harvard Business School professor and leading

thinker and author on organizational change management. Kotter's highly regarded books

'Leading Change' (1995) and the follow-up 'The Heart Of Change' (2002) describe a

helpful model for understanding and managing change. Each stage acknowledges a key

principle identified by Kotter relating to people's response and approach to change, in

which people see, feel and then change.


6/32

Kotter's eight step change model can be summarized as:

1. Increase urgency - inspire people to move, make objectives real and relevant.

2. Build the guiding team - get the right people in place with the right emotional

commitment, and the right mix of skills and levels.

3. Get the vision right - get the team to establish a simple vision and strategy, focus

on emotional and creative aspects necessary to drive service and efficiency.

4. Communicate for buy-in - Involve as many people as possible, communicate the

essentials, simply, and to appeal and respond to people's needs. De-clutter

communications - make technology work for you rather than against.

5. Empower action - Remove obstacles, enable constructive feedback and lots of

support from leaders - reward and recognise progress and achievements.

6. Create short-term wins - Set aims that are easy to achieve - in bite-size chunks.

Manageable numbers of initiatives. Finish current stages before starting new ones.

7. Don't let up - Foster and encourage determination and persistence - ongoing

change - encourage ongoing progress reporting - highlight achieved and future

milestones.

8.

Make change stick - Reinforce the value of successful change via recruitment,promotion, and new change leaders. Weave change into culture.

Kotter's eight step model is explained more fully on his

website www.kotterinternational.com.

Related to Kotter's ideas, and particularly helpful in understanding the pressures of

change on people, and people's reactions to change, see a detailed interpretation of the

personal change process in John Fisher's model of the process of personal change.

Other points about people and change

Strong resistance to change is often rooted in deeply conditioned or historically

reinforced feelings. Patience and tolerance are required to help people in these situations
http://www.kotterinternational.com/http://www.businessballs.com/personalchangeprocess.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/personalchangeprocess.htmhttp://www.kotterinternational.com/


7/32

to see things differently. Bit by bit. There are examples of this sort of gradual staged

change everywhere in the living world.

The Psychological Contract is a significant aspect of change, and offers helpful models

and diagrams in understanding and managing change - potentially at a very fundamental

level.

Also, certain types of people - the reliable/dependable/steady/habitual/process-oriented

types - often find change very unsettling.

People who welcome change are not generally the best at being able to work reliably,

dependably and follow processes. The reliability/dependability capabilities are directly

opposite character traits to mobility/adaptability capabilities.

Certain industries and disciplines have a high concentration of staff who need a strong

reliability/dependability personality profile, for example, health services and nursing,

administration, public sector and government departments, utilities and services; these

sectors will tend to have many staff with character profiles who find change difficult.

See the personality styles page to help understanding about different types of people.

Age is another factor. Erik Erikson's fascinating Psychosocial Theory is helpful for

understanding that people's priorities and motivations are different depending on their

stage of life.

The more you understand people's needs, the better you will be able to manage change.

Be mindful of people's strengths and weaknesses. Not everyone welcomes change. Take

the time to understand the people you are dealing with, and how and why they feel like

they do, before you take action.

Business development driven change

Business development potentially includes everything involved with the quality of the

business or the organization. Business development planning first requires establishing
http://www.businessballs.com/psychological-contracts-theory.htmhttp://www.businessballs.com/psychological-contracts-theory.htm


8/32

the business development aims, and then formulating a business development strategy,

which would comprise some or all of the following methods of development.

sales development

new product development

new market development

business organization, shape, structure and processes development (eg, outsourcing, e-

business, etc)

tools, equipment, plant, logistics and supply-chain development

people, management and communications (capabilities and training) development

strategic partnerships and distribution routes development

international development

acquisitions and disposals

Generally business development is partly scientific, and partly subjective, based on the

feelings and wishes of the business owners or CEO. There are so many ways to develop a

business which achieve growth and improvement, and rarely is just one of these a single

best solution. Business development is what some people call a 'black art', ie., difficult to

analyse, and difficult to apply a replicable process.

Fast changing environments

Planning, implementing and managing change in a fast-changing environment is

increasingly the situation in which most organizations now work.

Dynamic environments such as these require dynamic processes, people, systems and

culture, especially for managing change successfully, notably effectively optimising

organizational response to market opportunities and threats.

Key elements for success:


9/32

Plan long-term broadly - a sound strategic vision, not a specific detailed plan (the latter

is impossible to predict reliably). Detailed five years plans are out of date two weeks

after they are written. Focus on detail for establishing and measuring delivery of

immediate actions, not medium-to-long-term plans.

Establish forums and communicating methods to enable immediate review and

decision-making. Participation of interested people is essential. This enables their input

to be gained, their approval and commitment to be secured, and automatically takes

care of communicating the actions and expectations.

Empower people to make decisions at a local operating level - delegate responsibility

and power as much as possible (or at least encourage people to make recommendations

which can be quickly approved).

Remove (as far as is possible) from strategic change and approval processes and teams

(or circumvent) any ultra-cautious, ultra-autocratic or compulsively-interfering

executives. Autocracy and interference are the biggest obstacles to establishing a

successful and sustainable dynamic culture and capability.

Encourage, enable and develop capable people to be active in other areas of the

organization via 'virtual teams' and 'matrix management'.

Scrutinise and optimise ICT (information and communications technology) systems to

enable effective information management and key activity team-working.

Use workshops as a vehicle to review priorities, agree broad medium-to-long-term

vision and aims, and to agree short term action plans and implementation method and

accountabilities.

Adjust recruitment, training and development to accelerate the development of people

who contribute positively to a culture of empowered dynamism.

Q.2.


10/32

A BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS CREATES ITS RULES AND PROCEDURES WHICH FACILITATES

CREATING CONTRADICTORY AND RECURSIVE RULES. HENCE IT IS BELIEVED THE BUREAUCRACY IS

EXPANDED TO MEET THE NEED OF EXPANDING BUREAUCRACY. DISCUSS?

Bureaucracy

The purpose of a bureaucracy is to successfully implement the actions of an organization

of any size (but often associated with large entities such as government, corporations,

and non-governmental organizations), in achieving its purpose and mission, and the

bureaucracy is tasked to determine how it can achieve its purpose and mission with the

greatest possible efficiency and at the least cost of any resources.

The Eight Major Characteristics of the Bureaucratic Organization

There are eight major characteristics of what is called the "bureaucratic form." Your

organization likely uses most of these. Virtually all organizations that use the

bureaucratic form seem to suffer the same suffocating and immobilizing symptoms that

people call "bureaucracy." The characteristics of the bureaucratic organization are:

1.Most employees blame their organizations "bureaucracy" on senior management.

They assume that management must want it, or it wouldnt be tolerated.

2. Senior managers dont want or like "bureaucracy" any more than the rest of the

employees. The detestable effects of bureaucracy victimize everyone, regardless of level.

Senior managers havent known what to do to get rid of it. Executives have tried many

things to eliminate "bureaucracy," but the "program-of-the-year" approach generally

hasnt worked, because they have been fighting symptoms, not the root cause.

3. The root cause of "bureaucracy" is the organizing model, the "bureaucratic form." Yet,

the bureaucratic form is so pervasive that its destructive nature is seldom questioned.

4. If you were starting a new enterprise today, you could avoid "bureaucracy" by using a

new organizing model called the "mission-driven" model.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organization


11/32

5. Existing bureaucratic organizations can reduce the amount of "bureaucracy" by

changing one or more of the basic organizing principles, either temporarily or

permanently. The steps for de-bureaucratizing by changing basic organizing principles

are:

a. Make an assessment of the present state of the organization to learn how much

permission to change and commitment to change is available from stakeholders and

senior management.

b. Depending on the amount of available commitment, choose the optimal goal state:

a modest goal, a moderate goal, or an ambitious goal.

c. The goal state will suggest the strategy for changing the organization. The strategy

will range from a minimum effort based mostly on training to a maximum effort based on

reorganization and a new way of managing called "continuous improvement."

d. Continuous improvement is an entirely new way of operating in which the people

closest to the product or customer, working in teams, are empowered to continuously

improve the organizations quality, service, or both. Continuous improvement requires

three things:

I. A "shadow" organization chartered to make the changes necessary in the

existing organization to achieve the desired goal state.

ii. New forms of qualitative customer feedback from internal and external

customers to be used to drive changes in quality, service, or both.

iii. Training for employees enabling them to work in teams, to accept the offered

empowerment, to identify and prioritize root causes of problems, and to find solutions

they will use to continuously improve quality, service, or both.


12/32

6. Management people in the existing organization will need to learn and use new ways

of managing. They will need to learn what they have been doing that adds to the

"bureaucracy" in the organization. They will need to learn new ways of doing their jobs

that diminish the amount of bureaucracy within the organization. Most importantly, theywill need to provide empowerment for those who work for them, and protection and

coaching to those who accept and act upon the offered empowerment.

7.People in the organization who currently arent managing will play a vital new role in

the de-bureaucratized organization. The labor/management war, if it exists in your

organization, must end. Everyone in the organization will need to act as one unified team,

driven by a common mission, and aligned by a common vision of the new organization.

People who today are not formally managing will be grouped into teams in which the

brainpower, skills, talents, and experience of the individuals will be harnessed to

continuously improve the organizations quality, service, or both.

People who are presently not in managerial positions will be drawn to enroll in the

change effort because their new, expanded role offers less bureaucracy and more

opportunity for motivation through personal growth, achievement, responsibility,

recognition and more interesting work.

8. Finally, the vision of what your organization might look like, and be like, when you

have achieved your desired goal state is outlined in detail in "Busting Bureaucracy." You

will discover the rewards that come from working in an organization of empowered

people who are satisfying or even dazzling their customers, and are doing so with few, if

any, of the immobilizing and suffocating effects of bureaucracy.

Q.3.

DISCUSS THE ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESTS ON ITS 2 CENTRAL PREMISES EFFECTIVENESS AND

VIABILITY. RECOMMEND A SET OF ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE A

TASK PERFORMANCE IN AN ORGANIZATION OF YOUR CHOICE?


13/32

THE ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Any organizational development process starts with the identification of problems that

can be solved within the organization. This process progresses through different stages

and determines satisfactory progress made for additional involvement. The procedure is

cyclic and terminates only when desired result is obtained. It can also be a series of trial

and error and a discovery of the best practices that can be implemented in the

organization.

Here are the different stages or phases of the organizational development process:

Problem identification

Situational assessment

Action planning/ planning of the intervention

Implement plan/ implementing the intervention

Gather data/ collect data to evaluate the intervention

Determining the results

Feedback

Organizational development recognizes and tests the impact of problems on the growth oforganization and changes the system if required. It begins with the leadership as a vision

to progress and improve the organizational activities. It is not always recommended to

execute development process when the organization in trouble, we can also execute a

process to better the performance of the organization. First decide which parts of the

organization require to be changed. Once choice is made, review the condition to

understand the problem better. Reviews are of different types such as citation review,

directorial review, focus review and surveying. Normally, assessments will be performedby the experts or members of the organization.

Once assessment is understood, the next step is to plan for involvement or intervention.

Intervention can include teaching, improvement and team interventions through training


14/32

and brainstorming sessions. Focused group discussions could also be implemented for

this purpose. Team intervention in turn includes structural and individual interventions.

The next step in the organizational development process is to implement the planned

interventions. In this phase, information is collected and goals are created. The data

gathered is used to verify the efficiency of the involvement. Report back the data to the

organization's decision makers. If the desired goals are met the organizational

development process will continue but will take on a different focus until such time that

the goals of the organization are met. Chances are, however, organizational goals change

over time, so there is always a need for such a process to continue.

Organizational development process assumes great importance in today's social

organizations or non profit organizations. Since they move from survivability to the

sustainability development is necessary. The OD process is commonly applied to the

various phases of the organization such as defining the organizational purpose, evolving

strengths, value creation, strategic intervention and partnership convergence. Social

sector is the best known place to implement the organizational development process.

FOUNDATIONS FOR MANAGING CHANGE IN ORGANIZATIONS

Introduction

Why Is It Critical for Leaders and Managers to Be Successful at Organizational

Change? Because It's Their Job

Significant organizational change occurs, for example, when an organization changes its

overall strategy for success, adds or removes a major section or practice, and/or wants to

change the very nature by which it operates. It also occurs when an organization evolves

through various life cycles, just like people must successfully evolve through life cycles.

For organizations to develop, they often must undergo significant change at various

points in their development. That's why the topic of organizational change and


15/32

development has become widespread in communications about business, organizations,

leadership and management.

Leaders and managers continually make efforts to accomplish successful and significant

change -- it's inherent in their jobs. Some are very good at this effort (probably more than

we realize), while others continually struggle and fail. That's often the difference between

people who thrive in their roles and those that get shuttled around from job to job,

ultimately settling into a role where they're frustrated and ineffective. There are many

schools with educational programs about organizations, business, leadership and

management. Unfortunately, there still are not enough schools with programs about how

to analyze organizations, identify critically important priorities to address (such as

systemic problems or exciting visions for change) and then undertake successful and

significant change to address those priorities. This Library topic aims to improve that

situation.

Don't Do Change for the Sake of Change -- Do Change to Enhance Organizational

Performance

Organizational change is undertaken to improve the performance of the organization or a

part of the organization, for example, a process or team. Therefore, it's very useful for the

reader to scan the topic Organizational Performance in the Library, to get a basic sense of

an overall framework to enhance the performance of an organization. Then return to this

topic on organizational change to learn more about how to guide successful change

within that framework.

Focus and Scope of This Library Topic

The focus of this Library topic is on principles and practices to successfully accomplish

significant change in organizations.Successful organizational change can be quite

difficult to accomplish -- it can be like trying to change a person's habits. Fortunately,

there is an increasing body of research, practice and tools from which we all can learn. A
http://managementhelp.org/organizationalperformance/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/organizationalperformance/index.htm


16/32

major goal of this Library topic is to make this body of information much more

accessible to many -- to give the reader more clear perspective on overall organizational

change and development, along with sufficient understanding to begin applying

principles and practices for successful change in their roles and organizations.

The following resources are not sufficient to guide a large, comprehensive and detailed

organizational change effort -- that amount of resources comprises a significantly sized

book -- and besides, there is no standard procedure for guiding change. However, the

following resources might be sufficient to provide the reader at least a framework that

takes him or her from which to begin guiding change in smaller efforts for organizational

change -- and then to begin to learn more.

There are many approaches to guiding change -- some planned, structured and explicit,

while others are more organic, unfolding and implicit. Some approaches work from the

future to the present, for example, involving visioning and then action planning about

how to achieve that vision. Other approaches work from the present to the future, for

example, identifying current priorities (issues and/or goals) and then action planning

about to address those priorities (the action research approach is one example). Different

people often have very different -- and strong -- opinions about how change should be

conducted. Thus, it is likely that some will disagree with some of the content in this topic.

That's what makes this topic so diverse, robust and vital for us all.

Broad Context for Organizational Change and Development

Understanding Organizations, Leadership and Management

To really understand organizational change and begin guiding successful change efforts,

the change agent should have at least a broad understanding of the context of the change

effort. This includes understanding the basic systems and structures in organizations,

including their typical terms and roles. This requirement applies to the understanding of

leadership and management of the organizations, as well. That is why graduate courses in


17/32

business often initially include a course or some discussion on organizational theory. This

topic includes several links to help you gain this broad understanding. The following

links (broadly reviewed in the following order) might be helpful to establish some sense

about organizations, and their leadership and management.Introduction to Organizations (to get a sense for the system, forms, roles and structures)

Introduction to Leadership (to get a sense for what leadership is, its scope, and where it

might fit during change)

Introduction to Management (to get a sense about planning, organizing and controlling

resources)

Understanding Organizational Performance Management

Organizational change should not be conducted for the sake of change. Organizational

change efforts should be geared to improve the performance of organizations and the

people in those organizations. Therefore, it's useful to have some understanding of what

is meant by "performance" and the various methods to manage performance in

organizations.

Basics of Performance Management

Employee Performance Management

Group Performance Management

Organizational Performance Management

It's also to have some sense of what it takes for an organization to be sustainable. See

Organizational Sustainability

Systems Thinking

The past few decades have seen an explosion in the number of very useful tools to help

change agents to effectively explore, understand and communicate about organizations,

as well as to guide successful change in those organizations. Tools from systems theory
http://managementhelp.org/org_thry/org_thry.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/leadership/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/leadership/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/management/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/management/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/performancemanagement/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/employeeperformance/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/groups/evaluating.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/organizationalperformance/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/organizationalsustainability/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/organizationalsustainability/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/organizationalperformance/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/groups/evaluating.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/employeeperformance/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/performancemanagement/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/management/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/management/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/leadership/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/leadership/index.htmhttp://managementhelp.org/org_thry/org_thry.htm


18/32

and systems thinking especially are a major breakthrough. Even if the change agent is not

an expert about systems theory and thinking, even a basic understanding can cultivate an

entire new way of working. The following link is to many well-organized resources about

systems thinking and tools.

3 Stages of Organizational Development

Written by Roger K. Allen, Ph.D.

Prescriptions for Achieving Outstanding and Sustainable Results

By understanding a simple model of three stages of organizational growth, organizations can design

themselves to move beyond chaos to high performance.

Most organizations experience chaos. In fact, a complete absence of chaos would mean that an organization could not

respond to changing demands, a sure prescription for stagnation and death. Nevertheless, chaos that immobilizes an

organization and results in its inability to respond effectively to the demands of the environment is unproductive and

should be minimized if an organization is to succeed. This article presents a simple model that describes three stages

of organizational growth and developmentfrom chaos to stability to high performance. It also outlines some of the

initiatives which leaders can take to move beyond chaos and eventually to high performance.

Stage III: High Performance (Outstanding, sustainable results)

Clear statement of mission that creates sense of esprit de corp.

Well defined values which result in distinctive culture

Respect for people that is a deeply ingrained part of culture

Good communication and information sharing systems

High involvement and empowerment of people

Design (work flow, structure, systems) that supports mission and values

Stage II: Stability (Back to the Basics)

Clarity of goals and direction

Consistency in priorities
http://www.centerod.com/articles/84-3-stages-of-organizational-development.htmlhttp://www.centerod.com/articles/84-3-stages-of-organizational-development.htmlhttp://www.centerod.com/articles/84-3-stages-of-organizational-development.html


19/32

Well-defined policies and procedures (technical and personnel)

Agreement on roles and responsibilities

Basic management processes rewarded and practiced (goal-setting,

performance reviews, etc.)

Stage I: Chaos (Fire-Fighting Mentality)

Crisis/short-term focus

Lack of clear direction and goals

Shifting priorities

Unclear policies and procedures

"Us" vs. "them" attitude

Blame and lack of ownership

Alienated work force

Chaos

The chaotic organization operates on the fringes of being out of control. It is problem-oriented.

People are reactive and manage by attending to the pressure of the moment. Expectations, policies,

standards, etc., are unclear, not agreed upon or poorly enforced. Good ideas and intentions abound,

but there is not enough unity, commitment or follow-through to carry them out. Work is unpleasant

for most individuals. People act out of self-protection by blaming and criticizing others, and hence,

set up a climate that perpetuates fear, suspicion, hostility, and frustration. The problems of the chaotic

organization are the lack of routine, lack of clarity, and hence, anxiety about what to expect from

moment to moment. Needed are more formalized structures, routines, accountability, and

clarification of policies, expectations, and roles.

Stability

The stable organization is characterized by predictability and control. Structure, routine, policies,

etc., have been established to remove uncertainty from the environment. Goals are clear and people


20/32

understand who is responsible for what. The major focus of the organization is to ensure an efficient

daily operation. People within this climate tend to be dutiful and expect fairness. Conformity is the

watch word, and people are rewarded for compliance rather than risk-taking and innovation. The

purpose of the organization is subservient to its efficiency. The limitation of an organization that failsto grow beyond stability is that efficiency is more important than innovation and development. Doing

things by the book and following the procedures becomes more important than the purpose and

mission of the organization. Such companies are eventually left behind as customers find more

responsive competitors. Needed are a long-term vision, emphasis on growth and development and a

culture in which people exercise greater autonomy in making decisions and solving problems.

High Performance

The essence of high performance is shared ownership. Employees feel like partners in the business

and assume responsibility for its success. These organizations are highly participative. Their

members have extensive decision-making and problem-solving responsibilities. The mission of the

organization, rather than rules and policies, guides day-to-day decision-making. Such an organization

is founded on a unique and strong culture derived from a clear set of values expressed and reinforced

by its leaders. Those values provide focus on what is important while allowing flexibility and

innovation. The processes, systems and structure of the organization are designed to be in alignmentor harmony with the values of the organization. The high performance organization adopts a long-

term point of view. The development of people is seen as a primary management task. Trust and

cooperation exist among organization members. People don't blame or attack others because doing

so is not in their own best interest.

An important learning from this model is that an organization cannot become high performing

without a foundation of stability. Ironically, high performance requires not only participation,

flexibility, and innovation, but order, predictability and control. The leaders of many an organization

have attempted to grow from chaos to high performance without the underlying foundation of

stability and consequently failed or been frustrated in their efforts. Leaders who want to create high

performance work systems must be certain that they implement processes that ensure stability as


21/32

well.

Initiatives to Create a Climate of Stability

Creating stability has to do with getting back to the basics of good, sound management practices.

Consider that the first step a good sports coach will take when his team is floundering is reinforcing

the fundamentals: blocking and tackling; motion and passing.

Likewise, senior managers within a chaotic, floundering organization need to get back to the

fundamentals of good management by creating structure and order. There are two paths to structure

and order. One, harmful in the long-run and contrary to a high performance philosophy, is control

(directing and telling) which represents a short-term, knee jerk response to symptoms rather than root

causes. The second and more productive path to stability is clarity; clarity of direction, goals and

priorities; clarity of roles, responsibilities and performance expectations; clarity and documentation of

processes and procedures. Clarity communicates the boundaries within which people do their work

and make decisions. It doesnt rob them of their responsibility but establishes the rules of success.

The consequence is structure and order that form the foundation of a strong organization.

Initiatives to Create a Climate of High Performance

Although there are many aspects of high performance, it begins by defining an inspiring ideology

which consists of the deepest beliefs and values of the leaders of the organization. An ideology,

thoughtfully developed and implemented, establishes the attitudes and habits of people throughout

the organization and forms the boundaries within which people make decisions and conduct

themselves in their relationships with others.

An ideology must be translated into a way of life reinforced by the entire the infrastructure of the

organization. Core business processes, policies and procedures, layout and use of facilities, reporting

relationships, information-sharing, planning, recruiting and selection, training, compensation, and so

on, must be aligned with the ideology and strategy of the business. Such alignment results in dramatic

improvements in quality, cycle time, and productivity and employee commitment.


22/32

Another aspect of a high performance organization is that people are deeply valued. Decision-making

and problem-solving are pushed to as low a level as possible. Problems are solved when and where

they occur. Jobs are enriched so people have the authority, training and support to do whole and

complete tasks. Such empowerment, however, does not happen by decree. It is a process which mustbe charted by an organizations leaders. This includes specifying the boundaries within which teams

of people will work, identifying the tasks and responsibilities for which people should be

accountable, designating leadership roles within teams, developing a time-line for taking on new

roles, and providing the information, training, and resources needed for people to be successful. As

this transfer of responsibility occurs, the motivation of organization members changes from mere

compliance to commitment and a genuine desire to contribute.

Q.4.

HOW TO IDENTIFY THE CRITICAL MASS IN AN ORGANIZATION WHICH CAN DRIVE CHANGE UNDER

EITHER GENERIC MULTI-ORGANIZATION CHANGE PROGRAM OR GENERIC ORGANIZATION WIDE

CHANGE PROGRAM?

Why Use Critical Mass Models?

Critical mass models have several advantages over the traditional design committee.First, critical mass models gain from the premise that successful implementation is most

likely when the people who do the work are the ones engaged in the redesign of both the

technical and social systems (Levine & Mohr, 1998, p. 305). People tend to support

what they create, thus reducing resistance to change (Bunker & Alban, 1997). Second,

since critical mass models utilize methods of including the whole system in the room to

consider change, they are faster and encompass more viewpoints. Third, the diversity of

knowledge utilized through such large scale involvement leads to greater creativity and

innovation in both the technical and social system arenas (Bunker & Alban, 1997).

Finally, a benefit that is not recognized enough is that, by participating in the design of

the organizations future, participants begin to evolve necessary attitude, skill, and belief

changes concurrently. By structuring critical mass intervention activities to prompt the


23/32

use of new skills and behaviors, the participants cannot help but be changed by the

experience (Levine & Mohr,

1998). Thus, the intervention begins immediately in the meeting, as opposed to the

traditional design committee approach of waiting to begin changes until the fullassessment process is completed and recommendations made.

What Are Critical Mass Interventions?

Although several variations of the critical mass intervention exist, they all share some

common characteristics. The following section outlines some generic characteristics of

critical mass interventions.

People to Include

The key premise behind critical mass interventions is to bring the whole system beingaffected by the change into the room for the meetings. This incorporates all stakeholders

in the process, possibly comprising, but not limited to: employees and managers from all

affected departments and at all levels, internal and external customers, and community

members. While having everyone in the system in the room is ideal, it is not always

feasible, especially in large-scale change efforts. A good rule of thumb for minimum

participation is to include ten percent of the people undergoing the change (Filipczak,

1995). Whoever participates should represent the system you are changing; in other

words, you must include members of all constituencies and stakeholder groups, and

attempt to have a representative sample of that population.

Another crucial aspect of participation is that members comprise a common database of

information. In other words, all the information needed to make a decision should be in the

room. Every viewpoint and area of expertise, from front-line worker to supplier to customer to

executive to stockholder, should be present (Filipczak, 1995).

Time Required

A common length of time for critical mass events is three days (Filipczak, 1995). However, some

interventions require multiple sessions of three days each. The rule of thumb seems to be to

match the time required with the scope and the magnitude of the change needed.

Purposes to be addressed


24/32

Critical mass techniques are not suitable for small changes, because they are rather time

consuming and involve lots of people. Rather, they are for alterations that are large in magnitude

and scope, such as to change business strategies, develop a mission or vision about where the

company is headed in the next century, or foster a more participative environment (Filipczak,

1995, p. 36). Critical mass interventions are also often used to kick off other popular initiatives

that require lots of thought and participation from many people, such as Total Quality

Management or Teams.

The scope of the changes to be addressed in the critical mass meeting can be from as small as

developing a work group mission to as large as attempting to create ways to impact society. One

of the attractions of the critical mass meeting is that they can be used for many different

purposes, as long as a critical mass and representation of the system to be affected are present.

Task Force to Plan Event

Before the critical mass event, a task force or steering committee from the organization works

with one or more consultants to set up the event to ensure maximal probability of success. This

committee is responsible for planning the scope and magnitude of the changes to be addressed,

the ensuing range of participants to be present, and logistics for the meeting. In this way, critical

mass events are very similar to traditional OD efforts.

Alignment

A crucial outcome of effective critical mass interventions is alignment, the point at which

people begins to see how the organization fits together as a whole system (Filipczak, 1995). In

Future Search terminology, this is called finding common ground (Weisbord, 1987). When

aligned, everyone should pull in the same direction, understand how to best make organizational

trade-offs, and appreciate how something that is done in one area affects another area. The end

result is speed and improved quality in decision-making for the organization as a whole.

Develop Action Plans

Another significant outcome to an effective critical mass intervention is successful action

planning. Action planning is an essential piece, as it is the beginning of real change in the

organization. Since the key decision makers are in the room, no one has to wait for a decision

from above to implement a plan. Furthermore, since all the information is in the room, there is

no need to wait for information from others in the organization before making the decision


25/32

(Filipczak, 1995). Perhaps most importantly, since members from all parts of the system

participate in the events leading to and resulting in action planning, the level of commitment to

the action is high. However, like most OD efforts, the actual implementation is left up to

members of the system, and may not be reviewed. For action plans to be successful, review and

renewal activities must be incorporated.

Implement Change Quickly

Perhaps the most significant outcome of critical mass interventions is that organizations should

see results immediately. Within the critical mass meeting, decisions are made, behaviors are

changed, and new processes are used. Therefore, participants will never be the same. These same

participants, when they return to the workplace, affect the system and change it fundamentally

and quickly (Rogers, as cited by Filipczak, 1995).

Variations of Critical Mass Interventions

Many variations on the critical mass intervention theme exist, with the crucial point being to

match the intervention to the purpose, number of people involved, and expected outcome. The

amount of structure utilized in these techniques for organizing meetings ranges from no structure

(Open Space) to a good deal of structure (Future Search). The six most popular critical mass

techniques will be covered here: Open Space, large-scale interactive process, real-time strategic

change, participative work redesign, Conference Model, and Future Search. After the general

overview, more attention will be given to Future Search.

Open Space, created by Harrison Owen, is the least structured event, and is a technique for

holding better meetings, not just large-group events. In Open Space meetings, diverse, often

conflicted groups of up to 1000 people manage hugely complex issues in minimal amounts of

time, with no advance agenda preparation, and little to no overt facilitation (Owen, 1998).

Large-scale interactive process, created by Kathleen Dannemiller, is used to implement

organization-wide changes, and usually lasts three days. Real-time strategic change grew out of

work on the large-scale interactive process, and is also used to implement organization-wide

changes. The key difference between large-scale interactive process and real-time strategic

change is that real-time strategic change is an approach to work, rather than just an event. The

Conference Model is a comprehensive system created by Dick Axelrod that is used to

accomplish a top-to-bottom redesign of the organization. It consists of up to four separate two or

three day events. Future Search conferences have the goal of finding an ideal future and aiming


26/32

for it. The recognized experts on future search are Marvin Weisbord and Sandra Janoff, and the

event is typically 16 hours over three days. Participative work redesign, created by Fred Emery,

emphasizes a democratic approach to job design, and involves a three-day event (Filipczak,

1995). Open Space and Future Search, opposites on the continuum of structure needed to

conduct the meetings, will be discussed in further detail in the next sections.

Q.5.

HOW SUCCESSFUL WAS THE BBC ADOPTION OF BURKE AND LITWIN MODEL TO DRIVE ITS CHANGE

PROGRAM KNOWN AS @PRODUCER CHOICE@ IN EARLY 80 DISCUSS?

The Burke-Litwin change model

The Burke-Litwin change model revolves around defining and establishing a cause-and-

effect relationship between 12 organizational dimensions that are key to organizational

change. Lets take a look at how this change model can make the process easier.

Assessing Key Factors

The Burke-Litwin change model strives to bring in change in the performance of a team

or an organization by establishing links between performance and the internal and

external factors which affect performance. This change model is based on assessing the

organizational as well as environmental factors which can be tweaked so as to ensure a

successful change. The Burke-Litwin change model begins with outlining a framework,

comprising the affecting factors which can be manipulated to guarantee a smoother

transition from one phase of the change process to another. The most critical aspect here

is establishing the links between the twelve dimensions of this change framework.

Before we talk about these 12 dimensions, here is a little insight into the basic philosophy

on which this change model is based.

The Basic Philosophy of Burke and Litwin Change Model

Here are some of the key points of this change model:
http://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/58912.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/58912.aspx


27/32

1. The most dominant factor that triggers organizational change is the external

environment. It is the external environment that makes an organization to change

its mission, culture, leadership and its operating strategies.

2.

The changes in the 12 key dimensions, as identified by the Burke and Litwinmodel, bring about a series of changes in the structure, practices and the system of

the organization.

3. All the affecting factors put together affects the motivation level of the individuals

in an organization, which in turn impacts the overall performance.

4. The 12 key dimensions of the change model interact with and affect each other.

And understanding the linkage between these supportive pillars is the key to

effective and smoother change.

12 Dimensions of the Burke-Litwin Change Model

Here is a brief description of each of the 12 dimensions identified by the Burke-Litwinchange model. For practical use it would be better to look at these key factors andquestions and seek answers to them.

1. identified and their direct and indirect impact on the organization should be clearly

established.

2. Mission and Strategy: the vision, mission and the strategy of the organization, as

defined by the top management should be examined in terms of the employees

point-of-view about them.

3. Leadership: A study of the leadership structure of the organizationshould be

carried out, which clearly identifies the chief role models in the organization.

4. Organizational Culture: An organizational culture study should seek information

on the explicit as well as the implied rules, regulations, customs, principles andvalues that influence the organizational behavior.

5. Structure: The study of structure should not be confined to hierarchical structure;

rather it should be a function based structure focusing on the responsibility,
http://www.brighthub.com/office/home/articles/76450.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/53552.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/53552.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/home/articles/76450.aspx


28/32

authority, communication, decision making and control structure that exists

between the people of the organization.

6. Systems: Systems includes all types of policies and procedures with regards to

both the people and the operations of the organization.7. Management Practices: This would entail a study of how well the mangers

conform to the organizations strategy when dealing with employees and the

resources.

8. Work Unit Climate: It is a collective study of how the employees think, feel and

what do they expect. The kind of relationships the employees share with their team

members and members of other teams is also an important aspect of work unit

climate.9. Tasks and Skills: This involves understanding what a specific job position

demands and the kind of kind of skills and knowledge that an employee must have

in order to fulfill the task responsibilities of that job position. Its important to see

how well jobs and employees have been matched.

10.Individual Values and Needs: This dimension seeks to explore the employees

opinion about their work so as to identify the quality factors that will result in job

enrichment and better job satisfaction.

11.Motivation Level: Identifying the motivation level of the employees will make it

easier to determine how willingly they would put in their efforts to achieve

organizational goals. This would also involve identifying motivational triggers.

12. Individual and Overall Performance: This dimension takes into account the level

of performance, on individual and organizational levels, in key areas like

productivity, quality, efficiency, budget and customer satisfaction etc.

Putting the Burke-Litwin Change Model to Effective Use

Burke-Litwin model provides an effective strategy to manage organizational change, but

its effectiveness is subject to how well each of the twelve dimensions identified by it are
http://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/79734.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/79734.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/human-resources/articles/84855.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/human-resources/articles/84855.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/79734.aspxhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/79734.aspx


29/32

explored and put to use. The other most critical aspect is how well the management and

the staff collaborate to achieve the new strategies and goals as proposed in the change.

Q.6.

IN THE PARTICULAR BP AMOCOS CHANGE DRIVE CONFORMING TO A PARTICULAR MODEL OF CHANGE.

REFER TO HOST MODEL OF CHANGE SUCH A CLINICAL APPROACH, LINEAR APPROACH SYSTEM

APPROACH AND EMERGENT CHANGE TO EVALUATE BP MODEL OF CHANGE?

BP Amoco is one of the world's largest companies and a leader in energy and

petrochemicals, with 1998 revenues of over $83 billion. The company's main activities

are exploration and production of crude oil and natural gas; refining, marketing, gas

marketing, supply and transportation; manufacturing and marketing of petrochemicals,

and a growing activity in solar power generation. BP Amoco has well-established

operations in Europe, North and South America, Australasia and parts of Africa.

BP Amocos Climate change policyBP has adopted its strategies from the beginning of its establishment for being a major oil

company. During the beginning decades of its establishment, the company demonstrated

adaptive strategies in response to the political changes in Iran and changed its focus from

Middle East to US oil rich regions. In late 1990s, with its ambitious American strategy, it

purchased Standard Oil of Ohio (Sohio) and later also merged with Amoco Corporation

forming BP Amoco and became a significant name in the world oil industry. Furthermore

BP Amoco adopted a precautionary approach to the issue of climate change in 1997 in

pursuit of competitive advantage after the Royal Dutch Shells Brent Spar incident in

1995. The company also targeted the emission reduction commitment in time and

quantity to which industrial countries would be committed if the Kyoto Protocol entered

into force. It could be the opportunity for the industry to materialize the benefit of

emission reduction if they could get early action credit for emission reduction. With the

history of the company of laying pipelines and drilling oils in offshore regions despite the

passionate opposition of the environmental community, BP Amocos approach on


30/32

emission reduction seems guided from hardheaded business standpoint along with the

perspective of social responsibility.

Q.7.

WHILE EMBARKING ON A CHANGE DRIVE DO YOU THINK BP HAD PLANNED THE IMPLEMENTATION

WELL TO OBTAIN THE DESIRE OUTCOME? IF YOU CONCLUDE THE IMPLEMENTATION WAS SUCCESSFUL

WHY IT DID NOT PREPARE THE COMPANY THE COMPANY WELL ENOUGH TO DEAL WITH THE CURRENT

GULF OF MEXICO OIL SPILL CRISES?

Former BP boss Tony Hayward has defended his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil

disaster claiming he was right to take part in a yacht race during the height of the crisis.

In an interview which could incur the wrath of Americans already infuriated by the

world's worst oil-related environmental disaster, he insisted better PR would not have

changed the outcome of the April 20 accident which killed 11 people.

Speaking on a BBC documentary, he said that if he had a degree in acting from 'Rada

rather than a degree in geology I may have done better' in handling the fallout.

And he spoke of his reaction to media criticism of his decision to take part in the Isle of

Wight Round the Island Race in his yacht.

He said: 'I was pretty angry. I hadn't seen my son for three months.

'I was on the boat between midnight and six in the morning U.S. time. I'm not certain I'd

do anything different.

'The only way I could see my son was to be with him on a race he was on.'

After pictures of 'America's most hated man' were published showing him on the yacht,

senior Republican Senator Richard Shelby called his actions the 'height of arrogance'.

It was not his only gaffe - during one tour of the polluted region, he told a reporter: 'I

want my life back.'

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill (also referred to as the BP oil spill, the Gulf of Mexico

oil spill, the BP oil disaster, or the Macondo blowout) is an oil spill in the Gulf of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BPhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spillhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Mexicohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Mexicohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spillhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BP


31/32

Mexico which flowed for three months in 2010. It is the largest accidental marine oil spill

in the history of the petroleum industry. The spill stemmed from a sea-floor oil

gusher that resulted from the April 20, 2010,explosion of Deepwater Horizon, which

drilled on the BP-operated Macondo Prospect. The explosion killed 11 men working onthe platform and injured 17 others. On July 15, 2010, the leak was stopped by capping the

gushing wellhead,[12]after it had released about 4.9 million barrels (780,000 m3) ofcrude

oil. An estimated 53,000 barrels per day (8,400 m/d) escaped from the well just before it

was capped. It is believed that the daily flow rate diminished over time, starting at about

62,000 barrels per day (9,900 m/d) and decreasing as the reservoir of hydrocarbons

feeding the gusher was gradually depleted. On September 19, 2010, the relief well

process was successfully completed, and the federal government declared the well"effectively dead".

The spill caused extensive damage to marine and wildlife habitats and to the

Gulf's fishing and tourism industries. In late November 2010, 4,200 square miles

(11,000 km) ofthe Gulf were re-closed to shrimping after tar balls were found in

shrimpers' nets the amount of Louisiana shoreline affected by oil grew from 287 miles

(462 km) in July to 320 miles (510 km) in late November 2010 In January 2011, an oil

spill commissioner reported that tar balls continue to wash up, oil sheen trails are seen in

the wake of fishing boats, wetlands marsh grass remains fouled and dying, and that crude

oil lies offshore in deep water and in fine silts and sands onshore. A research team found

oil on the bottom of the seafloor in late February 2011 that did not seem to be degrading.

Skimmer ships, floating containment, anchored barriers, sand-filled barricades along

shorelines, and dispersants were used in an attempt to protect hundreds of miles of

beaches, wetlands, and estuaries from the spreading oil. Scientists have also reported

immense underwater plumes of dissolved oil not visible at the surface as well as an 80-

square-mile (210 km) "kill zone" surrounding the blown well. By mid-June, 2011, there

was a total of 9,474 days of oil-related closings, advisories and notices on Gulf coast
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Mexicohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_gusherhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_gusherhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_explosionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macondo_Prospecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellheadhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#cite_note-Yahoo7-20100715-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#cite_note-Yahoo7-20100715-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#cite_note-Yahoo7-20100715-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crude_oilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crude_oilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_degradationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_industryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_marshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estuaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#Underwater_oil_plumeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#Underwater_oil_plumeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estuaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_marshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_industryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_degradationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crude_oilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crude_oilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#cite_note-Yahoo7-20100715-11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellheadhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macondo_Prospecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_explosionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_gusherhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_gusherhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Mexico


32/32

beaches. Clean-up crews are still working to remove oil that continues to wash ashore in

Alabama, Louisiana, Florida and Mississippi. Four beaches in Louisiana remain closed

The U.S. Government has named BP as the responsible party, and officials have

committed to holding the company accountable for all cleanup costs and other

damage.]After its own internal probe, BP admitted that it made mistakes which led to the

Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

References

http://www.businessballs.com/changemanagement.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy

http://www.busting-bureaucracy.com/excerpts/theorg.html

http://managementhelp.org/organizationalchange/

http://ezinearticles.com/?Organizational-Development-Process&id=3913243

http://www.centerod.com/articles/84-3-stages-of-organizational-development.html

www.pyramidodi.com/papers/change.pdf

http://www.brighthub.com/office/project-

management/articles/86867.aspx#ixzz1T9xDkeKq

http://skhanal.blogspot.com/2010/01/bp-amocos-climate-change-policy.html

http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=2000052

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1327948/BP-oil-spill-boss-Tony-

Hayward-defends-handling-Gulf-Mexico-disaster.html#ixzz1TDeXfSyo

http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/changemanagement.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#cite_note-22http://www.businessballs.com/changemanagement.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracyhttp://www.busting-bureaucracy.com/excerpts/theorg.htmlhttp://managementhelp.org/organizationalchange/http://ezinearticles.com/?Organizational-Development-Process&id=3913243http://www.centerod.com/articles/84-3-stages-of-organizational-development.htmlhttp://www.pyramidodi.com/papers/change.pdfhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/86867.aspx#ixzz1T9xDkeKqhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/86867.aspx#ixzz1T9xDkeKqhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/86867.aspx#ixzz1T9xDkeKqhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/86867.aspx#ixzz1T9xDkeKqhttp://skhanal.blogspot.com/2010/01/bp-amocos-climate-change-policy.htmlhttp://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=2000052http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1327948/BP-oil-spill-boss-Tony-Hayward-defends-handling-Gulf-Mexico-disaster.html#ixzz1TDeXfSyohttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1327948/BP-oil-spill-boss-Tony-Hayward-defends-handling-Gulf-Mexico-disaster.html#ixzz1TDeXfSyohttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1327948/BP-oil-spill-boss-Tony-Hayward-defends-handling-Gulf-Mexico-disaster.html#ixzz1TDeXfSyohttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1327948/BP-oil-spill-boss-Tony-Hayward-defends-handling-Gulf-Mexico-disaster.html#ixzz1TDeXfSyohttp://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/changemanagement.htmlhttp://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/changemanagement.htmlhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1327948/BP-oil-spill-boss-Tony-Hayward-defends-handling-Gulf-Mexico-disaster.html#ixzz1TDeXfSyohttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1327948/BP-oil-spill-boss-Tony-Hayward-defends-handling-Gulf-Mexico-disaster.html#ixzz1TDeXfSyohttp://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=2000052http://skhanal.blogspot.com/2010/01/bp-amocos-climate-change-policy.htmlhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/86867.aspx#ixzz1T9xDkeKqhttp://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/86867.aspx#ixzz1T9xDkeKqhttp://www.pyramidodi.com/papers/change.pdfhttp://www.centerod.com/articles/84-3-stages-of-organizational-development.htmlhttp://ezinearticles.com/?Organizational-Development-Process&id=3913243http://managementhelp.org/organizationalchange/http://www.busting-bureaucracy.com/excerpts/theorg.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracyhttp://www.businessballs.com/changemanagement.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States

managing change in ion (1)

Documents