Research model for Change management and innovation
The purpose of the research is to evaluate the impact of change and innovation in the public sector using the most appropriate models. There is need for employees in the public sector to accept the innovative changes that may be necessary to improve the service delivery and cut wastage of time and resources.
Most of the government agencies are accused of redundancy but this can end through embracing change and innovation in the public sector. The paper will focus on the attitude of the employees and their leaders towards innovative ways that may force the entities to change its operations. It is necessary for the employees in the public sector to be trained on how to cope and accept changes in the company structures that may lead to efficiency in their work. The public policies on change management need to be implemented in the sector to enable the employees cope with innovation at the workplace.
The research depends on the behavior that the employees and the managers in the public sector are likely to show upon adoption of innovation in the sector. The best methodology is the exploratory research model that is helpful in understanding the behavior of the two groups of respondents. The research will use both primary and secondary sources through questionnaires and literature from academic sources respectively.
|Kurt Lewin’s Model
|John Kotter’s Model
|1. Establish a sense of urgency
2. Create an influential coalition
3. Develop a vision and strategy
4. Communicate the change vision
|5. Address the obstacles to change
6. Generate short-term goals
7. Build towards change
|8. Integrate the changes into the corporate culture
Figure 1: Lewin’s Model adopted with Kotter’s Model
Although the public sector does not aim at achieving a high profit margin, it is important for the government entities to embrace innovation to enhance efficiency in service delivery. Various models can be used to explain the behavior of the employees and the managers in relation to change and innovation. A combination of Kotter’s and Lewin’s model is important in explaining the change and innovation in the public sector. Lewin suggests that companies need to understand that change is a process thus they should not expect to implement the change strategies and have positive results immediately (Burnes, 2004). The firms have to undergo three phases namely the unfreezing, change and refreezing. The model can be merged with Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model that holds similar view on change management. Kotter holds that change cannot occur overnight but the companies must go through a process of eight phases to achieve the best out of changes in the organization (Kritsonis, 2005).
The first step in the model is to create urgency of the change so as to remain ahead of competitors in the market. Showing the employees that there is an urgent need to change the operations and structure of the company helps in initiating change. This can be likened to the unfreezing process in Lewin’s model. There is need to carry out adequate research on the available innovative ways that the government entities can adopt to improve the efficiency (Appelbaum et al, 2012). This implies a thorough research in both internal and external environment of the company to identify the threats and opportunities facing the government entities. There is a need to form an influential coalition by gaining the support of the necessary parties to be in a position to implement change effectively. To enhance success in change management the company needs to have an influential team that supports the implementation of changes. Identifying strong leadership among the employees is essential in this stage. It is necessary to carry out an accurate assessment on the internal environment of the company to indentify the weaknesses and strengths of the teams that can be effective in implementing change. The third phase involves motivating the parties involved towards change through creation of a vision for change. This phase involves determining the values that relate to the need for a change. The government entities must create a strategy to execute the vision in collaboration with the change management team.
The other phase involves communicating the vision created in the third phase to the parties involved such as the employees. This step is similar to the change phase suggested in Lewin’s approach. It is a crucial step because it determines the extent to which the vision created by the company will be successful. There should be no special meetings to communicate the vision to the people but it should be done frequently to enhance its familiarity (Fernandez & Rainey, 2006). Applying the vision in all aspects of the company’s operations helps enhance the success in change management.
The fifth step towards managing change in companies involves addressing the obstacles that may lead to resistance to change. It involves recognizing and rewarding efforts of the people who implement change process effectively (Gill, 2002). The other phase involves determining the short-term objectives that the company aims to achieve. The short-term objectives guide the coalition team and the other employees towards embracing change. It is also a way of motivating the people towards change through rewarding the little successful efforts by the parties. It is through working to meet the short-term objectives that the company is able to move to the next step of building towards the change. This is the seventh phase of the process and it is similar to the unfreezing step in Lewin’s approach. It involves identifying the barriers that hinder change and setting the most suitable strategies to address them. These phases are similar to the change step in Lewin’s model that involves addressing the various factors that may result to resistant to change.
The last phase involves integrating the changes into the corporate culture to ensure that change is included in every aspect of the organization. This can be done through communicating the change values in every aspect of the company. It is similar to the unfreezing phase in Lewin’s model.
Appelbaum, S. H., Habashy, S., Malo, J. L., & Shafiq, H. (2012). Back to the future: revisiting Kotter’s 1996 change model. Journal of Management Development, 31(8), 764-782.
Burnes, B. (2004). Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: a re‐appraisal. Journal of Management studies, 41(6), 977-1002.
Fernandez, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2006). Managing successful organizational change in the public sector. Public administration review, 66(2), 168-176.
Gill, R. (2002). Change management–or change leadership?. Journal of change management, 3(4), 307-318.
Kritsonis, A. (2005). Comparison of change theories. International journal of scholarly academic intellectual diversity, 8(1), 1-7.