managing change in organizations

31
Master of Business Administration Managing Change in Organisations Assignment Name: Heba M. Ali Prof.: Dr. David Newton Word count: 4000 Page 1 of 31

Upload: teimon

Post on 10-Feb-2017

175 views

Category:

Business


6 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Managing change in organizations

Master of Business Administration

Managing Change in Organisations

AssignmentName: Heba M. Ali

Prof.: Dr. David Newton

Word count: 4000

Date for Submission: 24 October 2011

Page 1 of 20

Page 2: Managing change in organizations

Table of Contents

Question 1:...............................................................................................................................3

Introduction:.........................................................................................................................3

The Need for Change................................................................................................................4

Question 2:...............................................................................................................................6

Management Objectives.......................................................................................................6

The Process of Change..........................................................................................................7

1. The Purpose of Change:................................................................................................8

2. Clear Shared Vision.......................................................................................................9

3. Establish the Capacity for Change...............................................................................10

4. The Actionable First Step............................................................................................11

Question 3:.............................................................................................................................13

Effective Management of Change.......................................................................................13

Resistance to Change..........................................................................................................15

Question 4:.............................................................................................................................17

The Success of the Change Process.....................................................................................17

Recommendation:..............................................................................................................18

Conclusion:.............................................................................................................................19

Page 2 of 20

Page 3: Managing change in organizations

Organizational Changes

Question 1:

Introduction:

In the last decade, many organizations have undergone organizational change in order

to take in to account the change economic environment. The advent of the internet

marketing and other technological advancement has lead to the need for change. One

such organization has undergone organizational change due to the changing market

environment is the GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). According to Datamonitor (2005),

GlaxoSmithKline is one of the 20 FT Global 500 organizations in the world. Further,

this is among the world’s 5 best pharmaceutical companies. GlaxoSmithKline has

branches in over 116 countries in the world and markets its products in more than 125

countries.

GlaxoSmithKline was formed after the merger between SmithKline Beecham and

Glaxo Wellcome in 2000. This change has had a great impact on the structure,

culture, strategy and stakeholders of the company. The objective of this change is to

make the organization the ultimate leader in consumer health and pharmaceutical

industry. As such, the management embarked on a change process that emphasized on

the need for creativity and innovation in the company. These aspects were identified

as the driving forces that would help the company achieve its goals. The change was

further necessitated by the growing competition and the expiry of many patents held

by the company. The new CEO identified R&D department as part of the company

that needed change.

The R&D department underwent transformational change from an autocratic form of

leadership to democratic style. It was divided into seven small centres of excellence

for drug discovery (CEDD) which were mandated to carry out research on new drug

molecules. This introduced competition in the department which was a caused major

Page 3 of 20

Page 4: Managing change in organizations

Resistance to change from scientists. But proper management of change and

communication of the need change led to successful transformation in the department.

The Need for Change

There were several drivers of change that made GSK to merge. Some of the internal

drivers that made the change necessary include the need for innovation and creativity.

Before the merger GSK had little innovations of new drug molecules. This was

brought about by the fact that they had patents to most of the drugs that they were

producing. The need to have new drugs in the pipeline can be considered as one of the

drivers of change in the R&D departments of GlaxoSmithKline. Lack of creativity is

also highly related to the lack of new drug molecules in the company. The new CEO

saw the need to instigate a change that would incorporate these two virtues in to the

company’s cultures. However, there were other external factors that led to the change

in R&D department. These external factors can be adequately analyzed using the

PESTEL analysis.

PESTEL analysis

Political

GlaxoSmithKline also experienced an increased competition from generic drug

manufacturers. Further, with the changing economic and political environment in the

world, GSK had to come up with new drugs that would compete in the market. With

China ending its quota systems in different segments of the economy (Datamonitor,

2005), GSK had a chance to expand its market the more than 1.3 billion people in

China. Moreover, with the inclusion of Baltic and Eastern European states to the EU,

many pan-European distributors were looking for manufacturers with competitive

supply prices.

Page 4 of 20

Page 5: Managing change in organizations

Economical

In economical front, the market for pharmaceutical products was estimated to grow at

6% annually since 2004 (Datamonitor, 2005). According to the HM Treasury (2005),

disposable income had risen by 14% over the last five years. Other external factors

that led to this change include cost, competition, decreasing innovation and stringent

laws.

Social

Further, GSK had an opportunity in the healthcare industry as National Health Service

had projected a constant growth in healthcare spending at a rate of 7%.

Technological

The increasing power prices have lead to increased spending in packaging materials.

This has caused an increase in polythene prices which are used to make sheets and

PET packaging by medical companies.

Environment

The company experienced pressure from the animal rights activists who were against

the use of animal in testing new chemical molecules. This is an important step in drug

discovery since it helps scientist to know the effects of the drug before using it on

humans.

Legislation

Since the enactment of Hatch-Waxman Act in 1984, competition from generic drug

manufacturers has increased throughout the world. Despite this legislation being

passed in the US, its effects were felt the world over since generic drugs are produced

soon after the expiry of the patents. Further, price controls have been a great

hindrance to research-based companies as they limit the amount of revenue generated.

Page 5 of 20

Page 6: Managing change in organizations

Question 2:

Management Objectives

The main objectives of change in the R&D department were to enhance innovation

and creativity. With the increasing competition from generic manufactures and many

of its patents expiring, GSK was faced with a daunting task of coming with a new

structural organization that would enhance innovation and creativity. The R&D

department was the segment of the company that would be greatly affected by this

change as most of drug discoveries were supposed to be done here.

Further, the management wanted GSK to remain competitive in the pharmaceutical

industry and the only way to do that was by establishing an elaborate R&D

department. In addition, the leadership style was to be changed from autocratic to

democratic. The management wanted to streamline organizational culture to be

performance focused. The change can be explained as planned transformational

diagram (GSK, 2004):

Page 6 of 20

Page 7: Managing change in organizations

The Process of Change

The best way to articulate how the managers planned the actions required to achieve

their objectives is by describing the change process itself. As it has been noted before,

change at GSK introduced seven CEDDs to R&D department. The change

management team had to come up with ways to make this necessary change work

within the department. In addition, the scientists, who were key players in that

department, were opposed to the change. Therefore, the management had to motivate

the scientists and keep them informed and satisfied for smooth transition. However,

on overall, the change process enjoyed considerable support.

Considering the market requirements that had necessitated the change, the

organizational culture, strategy, and leadership were the other issues that would affect

smooth transition in the company. Despite motivating other managers to accept the

change, the new CEO had a hard time convincing other staff of the need for change.

Therefore, the company had to come up with a process that would keep staff

motivated. A contingency plan was also important in case the change failed.

According to Atkinson (2005), the management should have concentrated on strategy,

people empowerment, team building, introduction of processes and tools, or

reconstruction. To determine which one is good for this company, GSK adopted a

four step approach which would introduce the new culture. To fit the situation at

GSK, the force field analysis process presented by Lewin (1951) was modified.

Kotter’s Change Model

The company used a modified Kotter’s model of change to effectively bring about

change in the company. The diagram below shows the process followed (Mind Tools

Ltd 1995):

Page 7 of 20

Page 8: Managing change in organizations

These steps covered the following points:

The Purpose of Change:

By creating the necessary pressure, the management ensured that the people involved

understood the need for change. According to Chorn (2004) and Atkinson (2005),

building pressure is important for the change programs to be effective. Accordingly, a

sense of exigency to establish the seven CEDDs was created which initiated cultural

change.

Page 8 of 20

Page 9: Managing change in organizations

To create urgency in the creation of the seven CEDDs the company did a stakeholder

mapping. Stakeholders were categorized as peripheral or core to the change and

grouped together to ensure effective change management. To establish urgency in the

R&D department, analysis was carried out to identify the competitiveness of the

company in the market. This analysis showed that the company lacked

competitiveness since it had been unable to produce new drugs. Further, it was

established that due to the expiring of many of its patents, the company needed to

rejuvenate and make new drugs that would propel it into the future.

Clear Shared Vision

The top management has to create the philosophy and vision that could serve as

guidance to those people involved in change plan. This is one way of demonstrating

to the organization that the top management is eager to support change plans towards

improving R&D department (Mind Tools Ltd. 1995).

It was paramount for the management to have a clear vision and to clearly

communicate this vision to all the people involved (Lewis, 1951). Atkinson (2005)

posits that in the absence of a clear vision, the change processes start quickly but do

not last long because people are unaware of their responsibilities. Since changes to the

R&D departments made managers insecure about their jobs, change management

team established several strategies that would cater for all different stakeholders and

ensure a smooth transition.

Some of these strategies involved establishing a list of push forces that existed in the

company. From different stakeholders, the pushing forces were established as

financial, territorial, social, and environmental. With different stakeholders involved

who included scientists, shareholders, doctors, distributors, consumers, regulators, and

pressure groups; the company had to establish each groups concerns and deal with

them accordingly.

Page 9 of 20

Page 10: Managing change in organizations

This segmentation of stakeholders allowed the company to successfully communicate

the vision and the purpose of change (GSK, 2004).

Establish the Capacity for Change

In terms of financial capacity of the organization and capability of employees, it can

be considered that they are ready for change. The company has sufficient resources to

implement employee motivation strategies. The employees have the capability to

adapt to the needed change, though they should be convinced first regarding the

benefits of that change.

When introducing cultural change in an organization, it is vital that organizational,

departmental, and individual capabilities are put in place for change to be realized. If

the necessary requirements are not put in place when contemplating change, then the

change process may bring frustration and anxiety among the staff in the organization.

In GSK, it was established that the people wanted to change but they were in a denial

state since they did not have the proper means to facilitate change.

Page 10 of 20

Key Stakeholders Impacts

Scientists Financial & Territorial

Shareholders Financial

Doctors & Consumers Social

Distributors Financial

Regulators Social & Environmental

Pressure Groups Social & Environmental

Page 11: Managing change in organizations

The management made clear the results that were required from every member of

staff; this enabled them to establish the right behaviour needed to accomplish these

goals. The right behaviour in turn helped them to identify the required competencies.

By analyzing the department’s capacity to change, the management was able to

establish the different support levels portrayed by different stakeholders. The

scientists were the least supportive group of stakeholders while the shareholders had

the highest. Distributors had to position on the issue. The overall support of the

process was identified as positive hence validating the effectiveness of the strategies

taken by the company.

The Actionable First Step

The management has to have an action plan that outlines what should be done to get

the process of change started (Andrew, 1995). GSK provided clear guidelines that

were to be followed by all the stakeholders involved in the change process. Taking the

advice of Andrew (1995) and Chorn (2004), the effectiveness of change is determined

by the programs set in place to initiate the change itself. The vision was of change

was well communicated and divided into different parts that were SMART: Specific,

Measurable, Achievable, Rational, and Time specific. The whole transformation was

set in specific framework.

The following diagram shows the important actions taken on each step during the

change process (GSK, 2004).

Page 11 of 20

Page 12: Managing change in organizations

These four steps comprise the techniques used by change management team at GSK.

However there are other techniques that could have been used to completely adhere to

Kotter’s change model. These techniques include establishing empower action; short-

term wins, keeping the pressure to perform, and making change stick.

Empower Action

Removing obstacles towards change requires identification of leaders who will lead

the change plan. The top management should also look on the organizational

structure, job description and compensation structure in order to ensure that they are

aligned with the intended vision. This will then be followed by identification of

people who resist change and communicate with them regarding their concerns and

make actions that could remove barriers (Mind Tools Ltd. 1995).

Create Short Term Wins

Creating short-term wins could further motivate people involved within the change

plan. For instance, the company should have been engaged in acquiring customer

feedback and those feedback can be analyzed every month so that the top

management would be able to determine whether they are starting to achieve their

goals—customer service improvement. Meanwhile, if the customer feedback is good,

Page 12 of 20

Page 13: Managing change in organizations

The top management should give bonus to those employees that provided better

results so that they could feel the sense of victory (Mind Tools Ltd. 1995).

Don’t Let Up

For every short term wins, the human resources department should examine what

went right and what aspects that requires improvement. They should establish specific

objectives in order to create further momentum and should conduct research for

consistent improvement (Mind Tools Ltd. 1995). In addition, the best way to keep

employees working in the vision without stop is informing them of the company’s

success also keep the motivation in high level.

Make Change Stick

In order to make the change stick, this must be integrated to the corporate culture.

This could be done through changing the mission vision statement of the company in

order to reflect the change (Mind Tools Ltd. 1995). The employee compensation

should also support R&D department improvement; for instance, the CEDD that

receives the highest score in terms R&D should receive specific bonuses such as extra

vacation leave or monetary bonus. Change plan should be incorporated when

recruiting and selecting candidates; for instance, candidates should have a good

experience in R&D department. R&D will also be incorporated to the performance

appraisal and it will also serve as criteria for promotion.

Question 3:

Effective Management of Change

The success of a change process is dependent on the way the organization has decided

and formed its figures. After the merger, the R&D department changes can be noticed

as transformational. This is because the outcome of change fulfils the key factors of

transformational change which changed the operations media and formed new

leaders. Further, the roles of individuals and teams in the R&D department we

affected by this change.

Page 13 of 20

Page 14: Managing change in organizations

In order to carry out the required change, the R&D department was divided into 7

CEDDs. These groups introduced competition among the scientist. This brought

resistance among scientist as they felt like they were being treated as sales people.

However, to cope with this resistance, the company introduced democracy in the

groups. Where it ensured that every member was heard and their views were taken

into consideration. This led to the change of leadership style from autocratic style to

democratic one. The change in leadership style successfully lured the scientist into

accepting the change that was happening.

Further, the company had an elaborate plan of introducing the change smoothly and

how to cope with any eventualities that may arise. As such, proper mapping of the

stakeholders in GSK was done to determine who the stakeholders in the change

process were. The analysis showed that the core players in the change process were

the scientists and the company’s shareholders; other peripheral stakeholders in the

change process included the patients, doctors, who comprised of the customers.

Pressure groups which represented the society were also identified as peripheral

stakeholders. Regulators and distributors were considered as business partners who

had an influence in the change process. The identification of these groups helped the

management to cater for the different needs and concerns that these groups had about

the change taking place (GSK, 2004).

Identifying these groups was just the first part of effectively managing change in

GlaxoSmithKline. The other process was to establish the influence of each group on

the change process. According to Lewis (1951), it is important to list the pushing

forces during the change process. The company determined the different impacts on

each stakeholder group and identified the proper methods of dealing with any

resistance. This enhanced smooth transition of the company.

Page 14 of 20

Page 15: Managing change in organizations

By analyzing the department’s capacity to change, the management was able to

establish the different support levels portrayed by different stakeholders. The

scientists were the least supportive group of stakeholders while the shareholders had

the highest. Distributors had to position on the issue. The overall support of the

process was identified as positive hence validating the effectiveness of the strategies

taken by the company.

Resistance to Change

For any change to be successful, resistance to change must be well tackled. GSK

ensured that the resistance from several stakeholders was reduced by properly

following a five step process. Some of the resistance came from the managers who

thought that their job was at jeopardy were the changes being carried out to succeed.

This resistance was dealt by ensuring that the purpose of change was well understood

Through clear communication of the vision and mission of the change. Change

managers at GSK ensured that all the necessary plans were in place to ensure that

pressure for change was well initiated and executed. Further analysis of the situation

in the company was carried out and it was established that many stakeholders were in

denial. Many of them wanted change but they did not know where to start.

To ensure that every group in the company was well catered for, the company

performed an analysis of the push forces in every group of stakeholders. Proper

mechanisms to deal with respective resistance from each group were put in place.

Scientists were considered as core stakeholders in the transformation. The impact of

change on scientist was identified as financial and territorial. For share holders the

impact was identified as financial and for doctors and consumers as social.

Distributors would be affected financially while regulators and pressure groups’

concerns were social and environmental.

Page 15 of 20

Page 16: Managing change in organizations

To cope with these challenges, GSK grouped regulators and scientist as the

stakeholders who had to be kept satisfied all the time through the change process.

Shareholders were supposed to be managed closely while pressure groups,

distributors, doctors and consumer were considered to have little influence on the

Change but high interest. This meant that they had to be monitored with minimum

effort but kept informed (Emerald, 2004).

For scientists who were more reluctant with the change, the company established a

democratic leadership style which replaced the autocratic leadership style that had

prevailed in the company. This gave scientists a sense of ownership of the process

which led to a smooth transition. Further, GSK established a new mission statement

which captured the new organizational culture. This helped to clearly communicate

the vision and purpose of change which is vital in dispelling any fears that might be

associated with the change.

These strategies were able to significantly reduce resistance in the company. The

management of resistance at GlaxoSmithKline can be posited as successful since all

players in change were kept informed and managed properly to ensure a smooth

transition in the R&D department.

Page 16 of 20

Page 17: Managing change in organizations

Question 4:

The Success of the Change Process

According to Pettigrew (1985), the content, sequence, and operation of change in an

organization should be evaluated to determine the performance, worthiness,

accessibility, properness and economically effects of the change. In GSK, this

assessment should be carried out to validate the successfulness of the change.

The only way to know how successful the change process was is by comparing the

performance of R&D department before and after merge. The objective of the change

was to establish innovativeness and creativity in the department. Analyzing the

company’s pipeline performance, costs, and operation efficiency before and after the

change will give a clear picture of how successful the change was. The appointed

CEO pointed out that the objective of transformational change this department aimed

to increase the productivity since the company had no drugs in its pipeline (Emerald,

2004).

Considering that the process of developing drug molecules is a long one, the results of

the changes made started to show after four years. By the year 2005,

GlaxoSmithKline had the largest pipe lines in the pharmaceutical industry. It had 140

projects that were in clinical development with 88 of these projects being new

chemical molecules. Further, the change had resulted to 32 new product line

extensions with the discovery of 20 vaccines (Datamonitor, 2005).

Today, GSK has one of the strongest pipelines in the pharmaceutical industry. This is

estimated to generate healthy outflow in the company making it one of the best

Page 17 of 20

Page 18: Managing change in organizations

Innovators of drugs. This will have achieved the objective of being creative and

innovative. The change process has also introduced new drugs in to the market hence

Making the company competitive. The appropriateness and accessibility of the change

can therefore be seen as a success.

According to GSK (2004), the company has invested heavily on the R&D department;

however, there have been a reduced sale since 2002 to 2005. Datamonitor (2005)

forecasted that R&D would produce less than 5% of total revenue of the company by

2007. This is an indication that the economy of the change would be weak. For the

first four years since the change, the company encountered reduced sales but

continued to invest heavily on the change programs. Continued investment in the

change programs is crucial for long term but for the short term the change was

uneconomical and expensive.

Recommendation:

With the changes made in the R&D department, there need to make considerable

changes in other areas of the company. To make sure that the new drugs produced by

the company are well received in the market, the company needs to conduct thorough

product awareness campaign to introduce the drugs in to the market. Further, there is

need to upgrade the production plants in order to produce the new drugs. With an

Expected 140 drugs in the pipeline, the company need to add the number of factories

manufacturing the drugs. This can be done through acquisition of the existing

factories from other companies or through joint ventures with other companies.

Other related changes that are needed are in marketing department, which would have

to change its marketing strategies in order to remain competitive in the market. In

addition, changes in the marketing department are important as the department needs

to market the new products being developed. Another department that would require

change is the supply department as the new products would require new raw

materials. The department would have to change to cater for the new products as well

as the new market.

Page 18 of 20

Page 19: Managing change in organizations

Customer service would also have to change in order to be aware of the new products

and be educated on all aspects of the new drugs. This would help them to cater for any

questions that patients and doctors would have about the new drugs.

The top management would also have to communicate their vision through

conducting special meetings and through presenting those visions to employees’

newsletters. The top management should also require the human resources department

and other managers to communicate that vision to each employee within their

Department. Communications should also address people’s concerns and issues

regarding the said change. For instance, the staff could approach their immediate

supervisor regarding their concerns about the action plan. The top management, the

human resources department and other relevant leaders should lead by example (Mind

Tools Ltd. 1995).

Conclusion

To conclude, it is pretty clear that the whole change process conducted by

GlaxoSmithKline has been extremely successful. In the last few years, the company

has made tremendous success and has seen its profits and sales being grown to the

new heights. By 2007, the company made its sales totalled to £22.7 billion which

comprised a profit of £7.8 billion. Since then the company has continued to acquire

new infrastructure as a bid to expand its production and marketing.

Page 19 of 20

Page 20: Managing change in organizations

Reference

1. Atkinson, P, 2005 ‘Managing resistance to change",  Management Services,

Spring 2005; Vol. 49: Issue 1, p14 - 19, 6-p

2. Andrew, M, 1995, "Creating a culture of change" Hospital Material

Management Quarterly; May 95, Vol. 16 Issue 4, p30

3. Chorn, N., 2004, " Strategic Alignment ", Richmond

4. Datamonitor, 2005, " Company profile – GlaxoSmithKline ", Datamonitor

Europe

5. Emerald, 2004, " Innovation at GlaxoSmithKline: Is it the Safest Way "

Strategic Direction; Vol. 20, No. 7, pp. 16-18

6. Glaxo, 2004, " Annual Report 2004 – GlaxoSmithKline ", www.gsk.com

[Accessed: 6th October, 2011]

7. HM Treasury, 2005, " Fiscal Policy in UK ", www.hm-treasury.gov.uk

[Accessed: 6th October, 2011]

8. Lewin, K., 1951, " Field Theory in Social Science ", London, Harper

9. Mind Tools Ltd. (1995). Kotter's 8-Step Change Model. Viewed October 09,

2011 from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_82.htm

10. Rosenhead, J., 2001; " Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited:

problem structuring; Methods for complexity, uncertainty and conflict " 2nd

ed., Wiley, c2001

Page 20 of 20