Organizational Change Research Proposal

Since the early ages, the society was divided into different social classes. As the time passed and people started acquiring professions this division has also spread in that field. It became so that people from lower classes with lower income would not choose to acquire higher or even secondary education, but would prefer to work on the crafts that often ran in their families for generations. At the same time people from wealthier families and higher social classes would tend to enter universities, get a degree or even a couple and then start working good jobs with high salaries.

Globalization and modernization have switched the perception of classes a nudge. Today the belief that only people from wealthy families may work as lawyers, doctors, and engineers does not apply. This made it possible for people of all classes to pursue the profession of their dream. Furthermore, more and more often we see that blue-collar, manufacturing and other low-end jobs decline.

As the high-end jobs became popular recruiters started seeking different skills and levels of education.

This is one of the changes that emergence of high-end jobs brought along. Such jobs are mostly concentrated in the cities’ downtowns and are critical to the information economy, such as financial management, computer services, and marketing. Thus, high-end jobs has caused the change in the way cities were populated, because occupying the downtown, they have moved middle-end and low-end jobs either to suburban locations or to other areas or countries with lower labor costs.

We are currently experiencing one of the strongest and most overwhelming finical crises ever.

Get quality help now

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified

Proficient in: Goals In Life

4.7 (235)

“ Amazing writer! I am really satisfied with her work. An excellent price as well. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

I assume that the crisis will bring significant changes to the high-end jobs. We already see that many people holding such jobs are getting fired, due to the insolvency of big companies. As the consumer confidence keeps falling, I can predict that this will hurt the sector even more, thus more people will be affected. I also believe that those left without jobs would have a hard time finding new occupations, because they do not usually possess any practical low-end work experience that is needed right now. Thus, the forecasts for the high-end workers and the industry in general are not bright.

It is remarkable that over the last three decades the world population figures have grown outstandingly. In fact, the world population has increased to around six billion people, and it is projected to reach 9 billion by the middle of the twenty-first century. Though, of course, the projected additions to world population have been, and will stay to be extremely uneven around the world. The latter creates great difficulties.

As the population size has changed so radically, many changes are taking place today in the formal structure of an organization. One of the main changes is that nowadays considerable emphasis is placed on the environment, in which the organization exists. Thus, organizations become isomorphic with their environment.

Organizations are influenced by normative pressures which are placed on them, consequently they have to establish equivalence between the environment and their structural arrangements. For this purpose the theorists came up with isomorphic change mechanisms. It is very challenging for an organization to maintain the competitive advantage and to match increased environmental differentiation by patterns of differentiation within the organization.

In my opinion organization should choose to apply normative method of change. I believe that this method is more useful than the other two because it relies less upon the ideas of competitors or other big corporations. Of course, when employing this method the organization will be strongly influenced by the government and other regulatory bodies. Though, as this method leads to the professionalization I consider it worth choosing.

It is possible to identify four objects of change. These objects are: opponents, promoters, hidden opponents and potential promoters. The opponents have strong attitude toward change in general and the particular change. Promoters, on the other hand have a positive attitude to change and support the particular change. Hidden opponents to change have a negative attitude to change in general, though they make it seem as though they support the change suggested. Finally, potential promoters have genially good attitude to change, though for some reason they are not convinced to support the change introduced.

In considering these four objects of change, it is possible to identify four methods of change that are commonly seen. These methods are accidental method, backstage method, controlled method, and debate method. Accidental method is a high-risk strategy that relies upon the trust of the organization to adopt any changes that are promoted by the managers. This method tries to see why problems happen and seeks to implement change in a gentle way. In my opinion, this method should be used when dealing with opponents in order to make the process of change as smooth as possible.

Backstage method relies fully on preparation. When this method is used people do not even notice that the change has occurred. I consider that this method should be used with opponents and hidden opponents, because it is not as visible as the accidental and debate methods. The controlled method is based upon a deterministic framework, meaning that managers make the assumption and control the future according to a set of rules. This method is best to be used with promoters who are willing to support any change. The debate method is used very widely, for its sake workshops are created and decisions to implement change are taken openly. This method should be used when dealing with promoters or potential promoters because it allows to clearly see the picture of change.

If I was about to implement change, I would use the debate method because I consider that good ideas can be generated only with help of discussion. Thus, I would be willing to hear all what the objects of change have to say.