Implementing Change
Aldo Sade BS, MSF, CFA Lvl II, FMVA?, BIDA?
Solution Senior Consultant / Accounting and Internal Controls @ Deloitte | SAP 4/ HANA, BI, GFEBS, ADVANA, Oracle, and WorkDay
Organizational Change Related to People, Processes, or Structures that Believe Would Improve Organization
The Burke-Litwin Model serves as a thorough framework for comprehending organizational change and performance. It outlines 12 elements that shape change in an organization, divided into external and internal categories, with a dynamic interrelationship among them (Burke & Litwin, 1992; French et al., 2021). These elements encompass the external circumstances, purpose and approach, guidance, corporate culture, hierarchy, operational methods, frameworks (rules and protocols), team dynamics, duties and personal capabilities, personal aspirations and principles, drive, and accomplishments (Burke & Litwin, 1992; French et al., 2021). The model's unique advantage is its causal foundation.
Company X encounters various obstacles concerning personnel, procedures, and organization that could be addressed using the Burke-Litwin framework. These challenges encompass adapting to swiftly changing technological landscapes, upholding high morale among personnel during extended deployments or periods of peace with few engagement chances, guaranteeing efficient communication throughout hierarchical structures, and merging varied units into unified operational teams (Burke & Litwin, 1992).
Improving leadership effectiveness and aligning organizational culture with modern military demands are crucial organizational changes that could greatly benefit the comapnay. Perform a comprehensive evaluation of existing leadership styles across different levels to pinpoint strengths and areas for enhancement (French et al., 2021). Develop targeted training programs focusing on adaptive leadership skills necessary for modern warfare environments characterized by rapid technological advancements (French et al., 2021). Implement mentorship initiatives where experienced leaders guide younger officers in navigating complex operational scenarios (French et al., 2021).
Perform a cultural assessment to understand prevailing norms, values, beliefs within different units. Foster an inclusive culture that values diversity as a strength rather than a challenge by promoting policies encouraging equal opportunities regardless of gender or ethnicity (Burke & Litwin, 1992). Ensure that cultural values align closely with the companies’ mission statement emphasizing readiness for future conflicts while maintaining ethical standards (Burke & Litwin, 1992; French et al., 2021).
Leverage digital tools such as secure communication platforms enabling real-time information sharing across ranks without compromising security protocols (Burke & Litwin, 1992). Encourage leaders at all levels to utilize data analytics tools providing insights into troop readiness levels or potential logistical bottlenecks before they escalate into larger issues (Burke & Litwin, 1992). Implementing these changes would likely have several positive impacts on organizational performance (Burke & Litwin, 1992).
Improved decision-making abilities due to enhanced leadership skills tailored towards contemporary military challenges (Spangenberg & Theron, 2013). Increased morale among troops resulting from clear communication channels coupled with supportive cultural practices promoting inclusivity (Burke & Litwin, 1992; French et al., 2021). Greater operational efficiency achieved through seamless integration of technology into daily processes facilitating faster response times during critical missions (Spangenberg & Theron, 2013).
Explanation of Why the Change is Needed
The requirement for this change is driven by the barriers in the current communication structure, slowing down decision-making and compromising organizational flexibility (Burke & Litwin, 1992). In a fast-paced environment like the one experienced by the organization, the timely sharing of information is essential for sustaining operational effectiveness (French et al., 2021). Potential consequences of communication delays include missed opportunities or inadequate responses to changing threats (Musaigwa, 2023). The organization can boost its responsiveness and adaptability through the enhancement of communication processes. This improvement is expected to lead to better performance and mission success, as it allows for quicker and more precise decision-making (Martins & Coetzee, 2019).
Various significant challenges are responsible for the necessity of shifting the communication framework of the company. The existing communication methods impede the speed of decision-making. Timeliness plays a critical role in companies’ operations, as even a slight delay could lead to missed opportunities or inadequate responses to threats (Filej et al., 2009). The current setup does not facilitate quick adjustment to changing circumstances.
The organization's capacity to adjust rapidly is essential for ensuring operational effectiveness in a fluid environment. The efficiency of a mission could be jeopardized by delays in disseminating information (Spangenberg & Theron, 2013). Improving communication processes can help the organization become more responsive and adaptable. Sophisticated communication channels enable faster and more accurate decision-making, ultimately enhancing results in pivotal circumstances.
External factors like technological advancements in communication tools and geopolitical changes require quicker decision-making processes to be implemented (Burke & Litwin, 1992). Review the comany’s core mission and strategic objectives to verify their alignment with new communication goals aimed at enhancing speed and precision (Martins & Coetzee, 2019). Evaluate leadership styles and behaviors to guarantee they endorse open communication channels and prompt decision-making (Musaigwa, 2023).
Promote a culture that values transparency, rapid dissemination of information, and cooperative resolution of issues (French et al., 2021). Revise hierarchical frameworks as needed to enhance the speed of information dissemination among various levels of authority (Filej et al., 2009). Encourage proactive communication and empower personnel at all levels to make informed decisions promptly by implementing effective management practices (Spangenberg & Theron, 2013).
Selection of the Burke-Litwin Model
The Burke-Litwin Model was chosen for this organizational change effort due to its inclusive framework that considers internal and external factors impacting change (Burke & Litwin, 1992). The model outlines 12 essential elements that impact organizational performance, which include leadership, culture, structure, management practices, systems, work unit climate, task requirements, individual skills/abilities, individual needs and values, motivation level, and performance outcomes (Burke & Litwin, 1992; French et al., 2021).
One of the key attributes of this model is its causal characteristic. This attribute renders it especially fitting for intricate institutions such as company X, where various components are interlinked. For example, alterations in communication processes, as a structural element, could impact leadership styles or management practices, which could subsequently influence individual motivation or performance results (Martins & Coetzee, 2019).
The model can be a valuable guide when restructuring communications within the hierarchical framework of the cmpany during the implementation of initiatives. The leaders are going to forecast the possible effects and guarantee coordination among different elements that are part of the efforts to enhance efficiency and decrease redundancies in the overall existing structures (Filej et al., 2009).
Approach to Managing Change for Employees of Company X
In the context of implementing the Burke-Litwin Model for organizational change, it is imperative to recognize the implications of both first order and second-order changes (Burke & Litwin, 1992).?First-Order Change Impacts entail small modifications that do not fundamentally change the organization's core structure or strategy. Introducing new technology for logistics management within a specific unit, for example, would be considered a first-order change. The primary goal is to enhance efficiency and effectiveness through operational modifications (Martins & Coetzee, 2019).
The effects of Second-Order Change involve transformative modifications that fundamentally alter the organization's structure, culture, or strategy. To illustrate, alterations in company policies could mandate a complete restructuring of training schemes and leadership tactics within every division. The implementation of this change type requires an examination of strategic objectives and could require significant cultural adjustments within the organization (French et al., 2021).
Envision a situation where the organization incorporates artificial intelligence (AI) to improve its decision-making processes. The development of AI technology in the external context serves as an external factor influencing this shift (Burke & Litwin, 1992). The organization must adapt to keep up with the technological advancements being employed by other global companies to maintain its competitive edge.
Strategic considerations entail integrating AI with strategic objectives, such as enhancing operational readiness and improving decision-making efficiency and accuracy (French et al., 2021). The integration of AI requires changes in procedures, structures, and operations across various levels within an organization, encompassing operational elements. It is crucial to revise training programs to equip staff with the necessary skills. Workers may experience anxiety or opposition due to perceiving AI as a challenge to their positions. To effectively handle these concerns, it is essential to use communication, training, and support to ensure successful implementation (Musaigwa, 2023).
Systems-Thinking Approach to Change Models
Understanding and implementing organizational changes, especially within complex entities like Company X, require a systemic approach. The Burke-Litwin Model illustrates this concept by viewing an organization as a network of interconnected elements (Burke & Litwin, 1992). The different components in the model, like leadership, culture, structure, and management practices, interact with each other, establishing a network of dependencies and influences.
?This comprehensive perspective enables leaders to predict how alterations in one aspect may impact the organization. As an illustration, modifying communication processes could affect leadership styles or decision-making methods (French et al., 2021). Through the utilization of a system-thinking approach, leaders can predict these interactions more effectively and plan accordingly to reduce negative consequences while improving positive outcomes.
Design-Thinking Approach to Change Models
The dimensions of the Burke-Litwin Model are indicative of a design-thinking approach as they highlight the importance of empathy, ideation, prototyping, and testing (Burke & Litwin, 1992). The main emphasis of design thinking is to comprehensively grasp the needs of users, specifically company’s X personnel in this context, and to create inventive solutions that effectively cater to those needs (French et al., 2021).
The strength of the model is derived from its causal nature. It not only enumerates the components that must be aligned for change to be effective but also elucidates the cause-and-effect relationships between them (Burke & Litwin, 1992). This functionality enables leaders to forecast the effects of modifications in one domain on others. The model is notably efficient in addressing intricate organizational changes with various components, such as in extensive transformations or corporate mergers (Martins & Coetzee, 2019).
For instance, envision an organization like Company X introducing a new technology system across different units. Leaders are advised by the Burke-Litwin Model to initially evaluate external factors like technological advancements or regulatory requirements (Filej et al., 2009). Subsequently, they would adjust their mission and strategy to integrate this new system efficiently. Effective leadership is essential for driving this change through the cultivation of an organizational culture that encourages innovation and the implementation of supportive management practices (Musaigwa, 2023). Understanding individual needs and values along with motivation factors enables leaders to facilitate training programs that enhance task skills required for operating the new system (Spangenberg & Theron, 2013).
Applying Design Thinking to Organizational Change
Leaders should possess empathy to grasp the significance of communication delays on the daily tasks and morale of soldiers (Musaigwa, 2023). The process of ideation, through brainstorming sessions, has the potential to produce innovative concepts for developing new communication channels or technologies aimed at enhancing the efficiency of information dissemination (French et al., 2021). To test new communication strategies before full-scale deployment, it is advisable to implement pilot programs within selected units, a process commonly known as prototyping (Martins & Coetzee, 2019). The testing phase involves collecting feedback from participants to improve processes until the most optimal solutions are reached. The iterative nature of this process guarantees that any modifications made are centered around the user and are practical for implementation in real-world military scenarios (Burke & Litwin, 1992).
Significance of Element Placement in the Model
The positioning of every component in the Burke-Litwin Model denotes its significance and impact on organizational effectiveness (Burke & Litwin, 1992). The external environment is situated at the top as it dictates limitations and prospects for internal alterations (Burke & Litwin, 1992). The transformational elements of Mission, Strategy, Leadership, and Culture can lead to significant changes at various levels when modified (Martins & Coetzee, 2019).
Transactional factors that directly impact daily operations, such as structure, management practices, and systems, may not lead to significant transformation on their own (French et al., 2021). Reflect on the impacts at the individual level stemming from organizational changes in motivation, individual needs, values, and performance outcomes (Spangenberg & Theron, 2013). Comprehending this hierarchy is essential for determining the appropriate interventions according to desired outcomes, be it focusing on strategic changes or operational enhancements (Musaigwa, 2023).
The placement of every element in the Burke-Litwin Model indicates its significance and influence on organizational efficiency. Positioned at the top of the model is the external environment, comprising factors beyond organization that influence the constraints and possibilities for internal modifications. In the setting of company X, this could encompass geopolitical shifts, technological advancements, or modifications in defense policy.
The mission and strategy outline the organization’s purpose and strategic approach (Burke & Litwin, 1992). For instance, a change in company X approach from conventional warfare to cyber operations would demand a broad organizational transformation. The actions and approach of leaders have the potential to either propel or impede initiatives for change.
Organizational culture embodies collective values and standards that impact the perception and execution of change (French et al., 2021). The impact of transactional factors on daily operations is direct, yet they may not bring about significant transformation by themselves. Structure, management practices, and systems elements are crucial in ensuring alignment of daily operations with strategic objectives, although transformational factors are usually needed to drive significant changes.
Diagnosing Organizational Performance Using Model Dimensions
The identification of performance issues using these dimensions calls for in-depth research customized for each component involved. Perform an analysis of the external environment by conducting market research or geopolitical assessments to identify external factors influencing military operations, such as technological advancements (Martins & Coetzee, 2019). Evaluate the mission and strategy by reviewing strategic documents to confirm alignment with current objectives. Assess leadership effectiveness through the implementation of surveys and interviews. Evaluate the cultural landscape by performing assessments to understand the common values and beliefs among employees.
Specific methodologies are needed for various areas such as Structural Review, Management Practices Examination, System Analysis, Motivation Study, Individual Needs Assessment, and Performance Outcome Measurement. These methodologies should be customized to suit each area in a contextually relevant manner, and should be implemented accordingly, after, following suit, and thereof. Through a systematic approach, each dimension will be addressed with targeted research efforts that are strategically aligned to achieve specific objectives aimed at improving efficiency and reducing redundancies within the existing structures (Spangenberg & Theron, 2013).
Conclusion
Through the systematic implementation of the Burke-Litwin Model's specified procedures, company X could potentially transform its communication system, leading to heightened operational efficacy and decreased overlap within its units. The Burke-Litwin Model is deemed highly advantageous for company X because it provides a comprehensive framework for understanding and managing organizational change by analyzing 12 interdependent factors that affect performance (Martins & Coetzee, 2019). The model emphasizes the importance of both external and internal factors, which is pivotal for a company such as Company X operating in a dynamic environment with rapidly changing external threats and internal needs (French et al., 2021).
Through the application of this model, company X can systematically analyze the possible effects of modifications in one domain, such as leadership or strategy, on other areas like culture or individual motivation (Burke & Litwin, 1992). The comprehensive strategy outlined here ensures that alterations are carried out efficiently and with lasting effects, consistent with company X's aim of maintaining readiness and flexibility.
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
References
?
Applying the Burke-Litwin model as a diagnostic framework for assessing organizational
?effectiveness: Original research. (2024).?SA Journal of Human Resource
Management.?https://doi.org/10.10520/EJC95887
Burke, W. W., & Litwin, G. H. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and
change.?Journal of Management,?18(3), 523-
Filej, B., Skela-Savic, B., Vicic, V. H., & Hudorovic, N. (2009). Necessary organizational
changes according to Burke-Litwin model in the head nurse’s system of management in
healthcare and social welfare institutions - the Slovenia experience.?Health policy
(Amsterdam, Netherlands),?90(2-3), 166–174.
French, R., Mahat, M., Kvan, T., & Imms, W. (2021). Viewing the transition to innovative
learning environments through the lens of the burke-litwin model for organizational
performance and change.?Journal of Educational Change,?23.
Martins, N., & Coetzee, M. (2019). Applying the Burke–Litwin model as a diagnostic framework
for assessing organisational effectiveness.?SA Journal of Human Resource Management,
Musaigwa, M. (2023). The role of leadership in managing change.?International Review of
Management and Marketing, 13(6), 1–9.?https://doi.org/10.32479/irmm.13526
Spangenberg Hermann, & Theron Callie. (2013). A critical review of the Burke-Litwin model
leadership, change and performance.?Management Dynamics: Journal of the Southern
African Institute for Management Scientists,?22(2), 29–48.