Management in an Organization - PDF

Management 1
MANAGEMENT IN AN ORGANIZATION
Name
Course
Tutor
University
City/State
Date

Management 2
Question 1
A new set complex challenges that are qualitatively different from those faced during the earlier
days faces the twenty first century. These problems are said to be wicked problems (Anderson
and Kolko 2008 p.80). They are, in many ways, issues that are multi-dimensional, unstructured
or have no easy straightforward solutions. During the implantation of structural change,
organizations are likely to face some wicked problems. This document examines the how and
why wicked problems materialize during grafting of organization changes.
Significant restructuring within an organization might spring from influences either internal or
external. A number of such influences could be; new acquisitions, emerging technologies,
changes in management, marketplace evolution or a change in the normal way of doing business.
Successful implementation of the new structure requires that an organization understands the
reasons behind the strategic changes. Contemporary strategic-planning process however does not
capture the increasingly complex environment by which companies operate. The techniques use
in the planning process by most companies lacks the ability to generate innovative ideas to
describe emerging policy problems. Before determining the root of such issue it is paramount to
understand the characteristics and nature of wicked problems.
Wicked problems are emerging hiccups that are complex and systematic in nature. They are
extremely unpredictable with a tendency to erupt when least expected leading to a disruption in
the normal way of doing business. Additionally, it is difficult to clearly define and seek solutions
for the wicked problems. This is because they consciously evolve and have the nature to be
utterly unstable. New flexible strategies have to be put in place to fix them. If not dealt with,
they could cause a major crisis for the organization. It requires innovativeness and fresh

Management 3
cognizance to counter their effects. According to Carey, Buick and Malbon (2017) one cannot
solve wicked problems by simply using sequential methods normally used to puzzle out other
concerns. On top of that, they require a coordination of different perspectives and knowledge
relevant.
Majority of organizations assume that clarity in goals and objectives, as well as a sufficiency in
information and methods, is enough to achieve the intended purpose of the strategic change.
Bridging the polarity between ambitious goals and successful performance is contingent on
accommodating wicked problems during implementation. Conklin (2008) critically holds the
viewpoint that even technical expertise or scientific knowledge is not enough to tackle modern-
era problems. The wicked problems are brought about unforeseen evolutions in time.
Modern life today stimulates complexities, variations and uncertainties. Camillus, J.C. (2008)
alludes that almost every aspect of the business environment has changed in the twenty first
century.
Social complexities can bring about wickedness. In this context, wickedness is about diversity in
individuals, groups, and organization. A diverse number of players involved in collaboration
make the situation to be more complex. Everyone individual in the collaboration is likely to have
different outlooks on matters. And each person may believe that his or her standpoint is superior
in solving a problem. These disparities allow wicked problems to work their way into a situation
and cause people to point fingers. Social complexities lead to disagreements, discord and
confusion amongst stakeholder. Conklin (2008) explains that all these are not because of an
inadequacy of skills, or incompetence of management but as a consequence of the inherent
characteristics of wicked issues.

Management 4
A large organization such as Wal-Mart has numerous stakeholders ranging from, shareholders,
employees, trade unions, investors, suppliers, debtors, creditors, authorities of nations and the
consumers. All who monitor the company’s actions? Each of these stakeholders has different
interests. Their roles in the company influence different decisions by the company. The company
is faced with legal battles from organizations such as labor unions. They have to deal with
changing interests from the consumers, legal policies by government authorities, critics from the
public and media and shifting interests of the shareholders. Wal-Mart may adopt a number of
strategies to deal with the social interests so that it maintains market share and remain profitable.
Whichever strategy the company chooses to follow is likely to be accompanied by challenges.
For instance, if the company chooses to increase prices in order to increase profits, consumers
may look for other markets to make purchases. The enterprise then has to develop other
strategies to increase profits that do not lead to loss of customers. Wal-Mart could alternatively
decide to alter its brand image such that convinces consumers of the need to increase prices. It is
not certain however whether this will work.
There is no specific way to deal with the unpredictable wicked problems occurring when
implanting structural changes but organizations can learn how to address them (Boyer et al. 2011
p.120). Dealing with wicked problems entails moving away from the systematic traditional
processed. Key stakeholders in the decision-making process ought to come together and
brainstorm to develop future strategies that take into account the varying aspects of a wicked
problem. Though ultimately the decisions lie with the key players, all stakeholders should be
allowed to participate in the structural changing process (Kjellberg & Helgesson, 2010 p.279).
This may increase the complexity of it all but at the same time it creates a larger pool for more
innovative and progressive ideas. At core of implantation of structural changes is

Management 5
communication. To tackle the wicked issue thus requires clarity of communication such that each
member regardless of their position in the organization understands the goals of the business.
The evidence amassed in this report confirms that opportunities, multidimensional challenges,
and uncertainties are to be expected in the grafting of structural changes. In this compilation, it is
clear that in bringing change to an organization, many complex difficulties are bound to emerge.
However insoluble or complex a wicked problem may seem, it can be controlled. Basically, this
means that solutions to issues should be an iterative, adaptive and flexible process. Therefore,
while implementing structural changes, the system designed for change should understand the
implicit dynamics of the change for it to be successful.
Question 2
Change come due to the generation of more tough stimuli in the environment thus calling for
evolution or total turn in the way of doing things to influence or help achieve the set goals of an
organization. this can be termed as evolution (Charles Darwin) survival of the fittest by
developing the best traits so as to outdo others in the area of interest in this case the business
arena. 2015) Resistance to change can be refered to as the attempt in a person or members of a
particular organization or firm to protect themselves from change which is made up of four
stages namely initial denial, resistance, gradual exploration and commitment (Carpenter &
Moscow 2017, P. 89). A number of researchers also argue that resistance does not originate from
an individual but rather form the scene or environment/ context where the change wants to occur
(Burnes 2015). More so, it can also emanate from the production of psychological disposition
and this is because people want to maintain their status quo (Bolognese, 2010)

Management 6
Resistance to change can undermine the transformation of an organization since it brings out
skepticism in the stocks of competence of a given firm hence making it difficult or complicated
and likely even a tall order to bring enhancement in the firm (Bolognese 2010). The
misunderstanding generated by the stocks of competence due to prejudgment of the changes that
are to be experienced in the firm may generate worse ignorance that may reduce the commitment
of workers towards their work in the firm thus leading to slow rate or no changes in the
organization. it also undermines the progress of the firm in the essence that those termed as
resistors will tend to detach their personal individual focus/interest and commitment, disobey
their binding agreements and lower their standards and quality of performance in the
organization thus leaving the company in jeopardy with no initial force to push it towards
change. This is a major way in which the resistance to change can undermine the change in the
organization
on the contrary resistance to change can also lead to organizational change and this depends
mostly with the source of change for instance it can either be external or internal. The origin of
the change can cause firms to adopt to the new systems more especially if it comes from external
sources as in the case of changes in customers fashion, test and preferences facilitated by shifting
demands of clients which may necessitate a change in the structure of the firm so as to suit the
demands of the market (Alvesson 2012).
The resistance also plays a critical role to bring about change in the organization depending on
how the issue is dealt with within the constrains of the firm. Firstly, when the company is in the
process of initiating major changes in the way it carries its activities with the aim of satisfying its
clients, when it takes the step to of clarifying the need of change to its stakeholders as it is the
focus of the initiative, this will help reduce the skepticism of those involved and pave way for

Management 7
the expansion and development opportunity since those resisting the change will start
questioning their integrity of the reason as to why they don’t what change (Carpenter & Moscow
2017, P. 89).
Skepticism is a trait associated with resistance to change. The success of change in the
organization entirely depends on the right questions asked by the individuals who either may be
interested in the change taking place or are interested. The empowerment and ability to ask the
right question as to why the change is being propagated in the organization. whether political,
cultural or social change that may be occurring in the firm, the need to accept oneself all the
opinions of them is quite rudimentary to enhance change in the organization. when the
management takes the initiative of bringing the change using a lesser subjective manner will tend
to make the efforts of change to take place easily and in a quicker way.
The realization of the stocks of competence that their voices and matters raised due to changes in
their run of resistance will subtly cause them to reform and accept change in the organization. as
mentioned earlier that resistance to change always undergoes four stages, it is crucial to note that
workers will initially deny the fact that change is on the way, this will be followed by resistance,
as time goes by in the course of bringing change in the organization those resisting the change
will find themselves gradually trying to explore the package of benefits that comes with the
underlined changes and within no time, they will end up refocusing commitment towards the
achievement of the organizational goal thus showing that resistance can also lead to change.
According to the psychological contract theory (Guest, Isaksson, & De Witte 2010), resistance to
change may influence or undermine the change in the organization since there exists a number of
expectations that are unwritten and operates between the stocks of competence and the leaders at

Management 8
all times. Given the fact that the degree of aversion or wadding off varies from one person, thus
if a firm contains employees whose level of dispositional resistance is low, they will be inclined
rather influenced to accept change thus leading to organizational transformation since they
cannot raise their voices high or they may not have the power to resist fully.
It is also worth noting that the presence of personal or group dispositional resistance to change
may not necessary predict their real eve of resistance which may influence the occurrence of
changes in the organization or any change initiative. This also largely depends on the
context/nature or setting of the change. The company is thus likely to experience change despite
the difficulty of the employees catch up with the changes (Giuclea & Bold 2012).
The involvement of the employees in the process of changing the organization will also lead to
enhancement of the firm. Convincing the workforce by using constructive engagement which
will involve them to reenter into new ways of doing things will initiate change in the firm
(Bennett 2015, P. 67). This is because the workers will see the importance of them being part of
the change rather than mere beings forced to accept the change. On the other hand, the
disengagement of workers in the process of change in the organization may raise the levels of
resistance. Thus, undermining the change initiative that has been put in place since the stocks of
competence will feel that their expectations have been ignored thus will not be committed to the
changes leading to their failure.
Question 3
Effective leadership has become a vital role for every executive management team that seeks to
achieve organizational goals and objectives. The success of an organization can, therefore, be
linked to the level of leadership in the organization. However, during the leadership process

Management 9
organizations have continued to change direction and have recognized that it is impossible to
separate organizational change from individual change (Jones &Harvey, 2017, p. 131). Change
leadership in any organization, therefore, refers to the ability of a leader to influence others or the
whole organization system through personal advocacy and drive in a move to access resources to
build a stable platform for change. Most leaders, therefore, employ this strategy as a move to
power to the whole organizational change process and thus making it go faster, smarter and even
more efficiently. However, the method of change leadership has been characterized by
complexity, uncertainty, and paradox and therefore this essay seeks to establish why and how.
The process of change leadership has been characterized to be complex mainly because, for
effective administration to be achieved, the executives have to dig deep into the problem facing
the organization, have to understand the history of the problem, its context as well as the people
involved in handling the issue. Therefore such a process in its way makes the process a central
function of complexity leadership (Lam et al. 2018, p. 252). It happens when the executive of an
organization has to consider the interaction of the organizational systems by exploring the people
involved in making the change. Therefore for the leadership of an organization to achieve
effective complexity leadership, they are required to stimulate the organization or business with
innovative ideas and developing new ways of working. It also involves having different
perspectives and establishing interdisciplinary teams that will help the organization achieve its
objectives. Complexity change leadership also consists of the leader’s ability to maintain a high
productivity degree by provoking change through tension as well as ensuring that the pressure is
kept within productive changes by avoiding causing the people involved emotionally (Uhl-Bien
& Arena, 2017, p. 34). Lastly, it requires the management executives to understand the
importance of including the collective effort of others in the management of the organization in a

Management 10
move to help them to be fully identified with the organization purpose and the changes the
organization is making.
Change in leadership has also been characterized to be a paradox. This means that the
organization management executives have to develop ways of managing the tension between the
organization supportive leadership that the people in the organization want to see during the
change times and the hard collaborative leadership efforts that will help in sustaining in the
organization (Hazy & Prottas, 2017, p. 11352). In most cases, the top management and
executives of the organization have been found to sacrifice the interests of their employees in a
move to meet the needs and expectations of their shareholders. However, effective change
leadership is defined through a personal resolution that seeks to reduce the tension between the
organizational, personal goals and those of the entire organization system (K. Smith et al.2017,
p. 19). The paradox in change leadership, therefore, requires that the executive management or
any leaders should find and develop a conscious and creative solution by trying to achieve a win-
win situation. When a win-win situation is resolved, neither the needs of the organization nor
individual needs are sacrificed but instead helping to achieve the goals and objectives of the
organization.
Lastly, the process of change leadership has also been characterized to be uncertain.
Organizational leadership process is subject to uncertainty in a move to achieve the set goals and
objectives. And therefore risk has been used to define active leadership and therefore during
uncertain change times in an organization weak leader are guided primarily guided by the
concerns of their decisions towards change. On the other hand, active leaders during uncertain
change times are usually conducted by a clear view of their sacrifices required to preserve
strategic direction (Sahin et al. 2017, p. 41). The decisions taken by leaders in implementing

Management 11
change in an organization are not individual, and therefore it is essential for leaders to develop an
attitude of sacrificing the short-term goals in a move to achieve the long-term objectives. Getting
worried about the decisions taken deprives the leaders the strength to focus on the objectives
because in the course of choice making a problem may arise. Weak leaders will then shift their
focus towards solving the immediate problem and lose focus of the set objective (Obolensky,
2017, p. 14). A strong leader during uncertain seasons or periods during change implementation
can maintain the center of the organizational goals by sacrificing the short term concerns arising
and developing a clear view and vision even during uncertain times.
Uncertainty in leadership is scary for most leaders and has been argued to impact on leadership
focus, productivity, and morale significantly. Therefore, it is essential for organization top
executive and management during uncertain times in change implementation should be focused
on understanding how they can support their teams or the entire organization system. However it
is essential for the leaders to focus on what they can control and in most cases the future may not
be under their hands and therefore it is necessary to focus on their strategies which have been
developed to achieve the set goals (Gaffney et al. 2018, p. 28). They should also seek to
understand what is known and unknown to them in the organization during uncertain times. This
helps them in assuming that what is known to them is of great value to organizational
development compared to the unknown of the future and therefore will help them to focus more
on their strengths compared to their future fears. Lastly, it is essential for them to understand that
their goal and that of the organization is always bigger than the next concerns brought about by
uncertainty.
Conclusion

Management 12
Change leadership is therefore important in organizational development and requires
effective organization and development of organizational resources towards achievement of set
goals and objectives. Its complexity, paradox and uncertainty nature is an opportunity to develop
effective leadership strategies by understanding the need, its origin and context in relation to
change management and developing human relationships or organizational relationships which
are important in change leadership.

Management 13
List of References
Alvesson, M. (2012). Understanding organizational culture. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Bennett, S 2015, 'Empower Integrated health care delivery: Rapid Review of Change
Management Across Healthcare Organizations', International Journal Of Integrated Care (IJIC),
15, pp. 35-37, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 13 May 2018.
Bolognese, J (2010) Understanding Resistance to Change-Building on Coch and French. Journal
of Change Management, 19, 2, pp. 19-45, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 13
May 2018.
Carpenter, S, & Moscow, J 2017, 'A Note to Physicians: Protect Your Practices from Fraud by
Management Service Organizations (MSOs)¹', Journal Of Health Care Compliance, 19, 2, pp.
19-45, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 13 May 2018.
Gaffney, A.M., Rast III, D.E. and Hogg, M.A., 2018. Uncertainty and influence: The advantages
(and disadvantages) of being atypical. Journal of Social Issues, 74(1), pp.20-35.
Giuclea, M, & Bold, O 2012, 'The Impact of Change Management in Organizations - a Survey of
Methods and Techniques for a Successful Change', Review Of International Comparative
Management, 13, 1, pp. 5-16, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 13 May 2018.
Hazy, J. and Prottas, D., 2017. How Complexity Leadership Enables Both Organizational
Efficacy and Resilience. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2017, No. 1, p. 11352).
Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
Jones, S. and Harvey, M., 2017. A distributed leadership change process model for higher
education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 39(2), pp.126-139.

Management 14
K. Smith, W., Erez, M., Jarvenpaa, S., Lewis, M.W. and Tracey, P., 2017. Adding complexity to
theories of paradox, tensions, and dualities of innovation and change: Introduction to
organization studies special issue on paradox, tensions, and dualities of innovation and
change.pp.18-24.
Lam, W., Lee, C., Taylor, M.S. and Zhao, H.H., 2018. Does proactive personality matter in
leadership transitions? Effects of proactive personality on new leader identification and
responses to new leaders and their change agendas. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1),
pp.245-263.
Obolensky, N., 2017. Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty.
Routledge.pp. 14.
Sahin, T., Karabulut, A.T. and Civelek, M.E., 2017. The effect of organizational change on trust
and an application. International Journal of Commerce and Finance, 3(1), p.41.
Spear, S 2017, 'Impression Management Activity in Vision, Mission, and Values Statements: A
Comparison of Commercial and Charitable Organizations', International Studies Of Management
& Organization, 47, 2, pp. 159-175, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 13 May
2018.
Uhl-Bien, M. and Arena, M., 2017. Complexity leadership: Enabling people and organizations
for adaptability. Organizational Dynamics.pp. 23-36.