Introduction
The novel coronavirus has had a tremendous impact on all areas of life. Around the world, many individuals lost their homes, livelihoods and the stability of their daily routines. The process has affected medical organizations, educational institutions, and economies. In the struggle to adapt, both organizations and governments have had to change the way they operate, adopt new rules, policies and guidelines. While the virus cannot be considered truly “addressed”, the mass adoption of countermeasures, combined with the passage of time and worldwide restructuring of the economy, has helped companies survive the period of uncertainty. However, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic also opened many possibilities for change, creating a need for most organizations to adjust how their business is conducted.
For the purposes of discussing existing business change strategies in the context of newly changing global circumstances, it is necessary to consider them against the difficulties presented by the recent pandemic. This essay will focus on overviewing different change strategies, considering their past, present and future value, as well as speculating on whether they can be effective in the pandemic/post-pandemic era. Such theories as OD, and economic and social constructionism will be considered. First, the change strategies that are considered ineffective will be addressed. After discussing the specific inefficiencies they displayed over the course of the pandemic, it will become possible to further discuss the implementation of more suitable, innovative strategies into business change organizations. Research and experiences brought on by the pandemic suggest that approaches capable of combining efficiency, communication and flexibility can better support modern companies’ needs.
Change Strategies of the Past
Economic Strategy
Economic strategy is the first and one of the most well-known methods of change management. According to the course book, economic change strategies were prevalent in the past and recently experienced a resurgence (Hayes, 2021). This method focuses on a top-down introduction of change, introduced by the leadership and implemented under its guidance. Economic goals, such as profit and adherence to shareholder goals are made central in this process, allowing an organization to meet its financial requirements of change. Without the need to consider the opinions or ideas of the entire organization and the support of shareholders that are convinced by good returns, it is possible to implement change quickly. This process is oftentimes supported by additional consultations with knowledgeable professionals, allowing the initiators of change to take the initiative step-by-step, understanding the needs of the market and their organization. Aside from its organized nature, this method also requires less preparation, resources and manpower to facilitate. Without the need to communicate with employees on all levels of the organization or consider the ideas of a wide arrangement of people, the management can initiate change quicker.
A number of problems can be encountered once an organization decides to pursue an economic solution in their change management. Firstly, resistance to change will be higher than that using other solutions. Without consulting the employees and lower management, the leadership’s vision of change can either deviate from the desires of their employees or feel unnecessary (Tamunomiebi & Akpan, 2021). As a result, both managers and workers often put less effort into constructing change or start to directly oppose it. According to research, and the experiences of many companies, when people are faced with changes to the structure of their workplace, they are likely to resist. Another significant issue is the lack of motivation from the major part of an organization. One of the necessary predictors of quick and successful change is employees being motivated to create it. When the power, initiative, decision-making and administrative authority are all localized to the top of the organization, the majority will not have sufficient motivation to support change. Research presented at the IBAB International Conference in 2019 shows that task delegation plays a vital role in helping workers maintain motivation (Nizhegorodtsev & Goridko, 2019). Not being able to participate, administrate tasks, or work on parts of change that bring out their individual talents hampers employee participation in organizational improvement.
OD Strategy
The OD Strategy, or organizational development, takes an approach diametrically opposed to the economic change strategy. Instead of focusing on the profitability of change, it emphasizes the need to keep up with the competition, along with enhancing coordination and employee commitment. Where the economic strategy can be described as a top-down approach, the OD strategy starts from the bottom up. Corporate culture and participation form the heart of the organizational development solution, and communication between various parts of the organization is vital. In order to create change with this approach, consultation and ideas from all levels of influence are gathered, encouraging every individual to contribute to the process of creating change. Similarly, ideas are chosen on the basis of the collective agreement, and the way change is organized negotiated between the workers and managers. This approach has many benefits, many of which come from its ability to foster a better workplace climate. Allowing people to participate directly improves their motivation, expands the potential pool of ideas and reduces resistance to change through awareness (Nizhegorodtsev & Goridko, 2019). However, there are also significant issues with this method.
Following the lengthy process of communicating with the majority of an organization to initiate change, it becomes difficult to facilitate fast improvement. OD change strategies take significantly more time than economic ones, making both the leadership and shareholders wait until any results are seen. In addition, it may be especially difficult to justify this solution for change to shareholders. As individuals that invest their money and time into an organization, shareholders want to see returns on their investments as soon as possible, meaning that a slow, quality-focused, employee-driven approach may not align with their priorities. Without being able to gain the full support of shareholders, initiating change in the first place or enacted it to a sufficient degree may be impossible.
Issues of the Old Approaches
Economic Strategy
One of the biggest takeaways from the COVID-19 pandemic was the importance of engaging organizations on all levels of change. During the pandemic, the majority of the working population experienced a wide variety of negative emotions, and their voices were left unheard. From a combination of cutting costs and discontent with their workplace, many employees resigned from their previous place of employment. The central lesson of the pandemic was that leaders must listen to and value their staff, engage with the feedback and center their needs as a part of the organization. Without such consideration, it is impossible to retain a stable and productive staff. An economic strategy fails to consider this factor and does not produce the desired workplace climate. If forced to engage with a change strategy after the pandemic, it is likely that the employees will either resist the change or feel that the organization’s climate is unfit for them and leave. Emphasizing engagement on as many levels of the company as possible is crucial in creating change in the post-pandemic environment.
OD Strategy
OD strategy, despite its focus on the needs and desires of the workforce, similarly has significant issues that prevent it from being effective in the organizational setting of today. The major flaw of this approach becomes the deciding factor, as the inability to quickly improve and adapt is unacceptable. During the pandemic, it became increasingly clear that quick improvement is necessary. Adopting new workplace rules, employing remote working protocols and using the internet for the majority of human interactions. Even healthcare measures, such as enacting social distancing rules or providing benefits to workers, all of these changes require timely enforcement. Without being able to adapt and overcome difficulties as soon as they emerged, companies would be incapable of surviving in the difficult and highly competitive environment of the pandemic. As a result, most organizations understand the value of quick and efficient structured change and cannot afford to spend long periods of time in creating the best model for moving forward. Despite the gradually stabilizing economy, and the profits most organizations face, it is widely recognized that political instability and uncertainty still persist. The organizational development strategy is too unwieldy to be effectively used in a fast-paced environment of today.
The inability of OD strategy to adapt to modern business realities is further emphasized by the importance of the worldwide web. The news cycle, research and political circumstances move quickly, leaving the people and companies alike to act accordingly. In order to keep up with the competition, organizations must use methods that are flexible, agile, and resource-savvy. Despite the importance of engaging the organization as a whole, gathering ideas from many sources and initiating conversation, it is necessary that organizations are also able to adapt quickly, making this method unsuitable in most cases.
New Change Strategies
Combined OD-Economic
The strategy that combines both organizational development and economic change is able to sufficiently address the negative sides of both approaches. This type of change is designed from the top down, like the economic strategy, while also seeking to involve key participants and stakeholders. Instead of simply directing the workers to enact change and lead the organization by a certain standard, this method sees leadership as proposing a malleable framework that is further adapted and changed to suit the needs of individual participants. By involving management on different levels of influence, it becomes possible to better manage change and keep a line of communication from top to bottom. Lower line managers are able to translate the needs or suggestions of employees to higher management, which can then adapt and overcome emergent issues. This creates a constant stream of ideas, one which enhances the capacity of the organization for informed, evidence-based change. Another benefit of this strategy is that it reduces resistance to change, both by delegating work to individuals and clearly communicating a vision of improvement. The ability of the change managers to direct their subordinates to act within the necessary capacity builds on the individual skills of each employee and increases work satisfaction. As mentioned previously, it is possible to inspire employees in order to increase their engagement with the improvement strategy. In addition, the focus on profitability and a clear line of communication make it easier to involve shareholders and secure their funding for the initiative.
Because of all the reasons mentioned previously, this approach to change management is effective in facilitating organizational improvement even after the pandemic. The voices of the majority are heard and put into good use, addressing the need for increased employee retention, and communication and reducing the threat to a healthy workplace climate. The connection between different levels of management and a focus on the wellbeing of employees is conducive to accountability, reducing the strain on regular workers and controlling potential misuse of power. In addition, this method is significantly faster than the OD strategy, owing to the top-down structure. The need to consult and actively gather ideas from the employees is eliminated, instead being replaced with clear and charismatic communication of an existing vision for change. The existence of tiered management is helpful in reducing the strain for individuals, and improving their wellness and health. Research shows that good management and delegation of tasks is conducive to a better workplace culture, mood and professional interaction.
A post-pandemic consideration that was not brought up in a meaningful way until this moment is remote work. Many businesses and companies have transitioned to semi- or fully remote workplaces, allowing individuals to work from the convenience of their own homes. While there are certain concerns associated with this change, it is generally seen as a move toward employee freedoms and benefits. As a result, business finds themselves needing strategies that can work both in a regular workplace environment and remotely. The micro-management of a combined strategy is perfect for remote work, with quick video call communication enhancing the ability of individual teams to cooperate with each other (“Not enough communication from leaders during a pandemic, say UK professionals,” n.d.). Each part of the organization can keep up with its own set of responsibilities and concerns during a change strategy, all the while being connected through the internet.
Charismatic Transformation
Charismatic transformation, as another strategy for change, appears to be especially well-designed for addressing crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. As implied by its name, this type of change focuses on transforming the organization instead of introducing incremental change. When a company does not fully align with its environment, this type of change can be effectively utilized in order to bring it closer to the market standard. Instead of using the combined knowledge of the employee base and understanding the needs of each participant, it seeks to utilize a charismatic leader figure to communicate a specific vision of organizational change (Sarieddine, 2012). This process compensates for the inability to engage many stakeholders with significant time reduction and saves money. Compared to incremental changes, a transformation seeks to change or radically shift the core vision of the company, giving it the ability to work within a world of changed circumstances. Much like the combined strategy, this approach can be seen as vital in addressing the problems introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Those organizations that have failed to quickly change their entire business models or operational strategies faced immense losses in revenue, budget and clientele. Many companies that refused to innovate, or recognized the value of innovation too late completely shut down, with no potential prospects for recovery in the near future (Palmer, 2021). With the need to align a company with the ever-shifting circumstances of the global economy, a transformational change strategy becomes the central tool of survival. Along with the speed of top-down approach, this method is capable of bringing necessary improvements or adjustments into business.
Looking at the Past, Moving to the Future
As briefly discussed when considering various change strategies, many of the vital aspects of business and organizational change have evolved as a result of the pandemic. Despite persisting as a healthcare disaster and a problematic economic consideration, it has opened up many possibilities and opportunities. The need to quickly adapt to various government regulations, shifts in politics, international trade, and price fluctuations, along with a wide variety of other considerations, became the grounds for many organizations to change, or recognize the need to be flexible. Without an ability to quickly adopt new policies, adjust and continue work, it would be impossible to survive in the emergent climate. Recognizing the immense profitability of many organizations with the downturn of the pandemic shows that the change management ultimately worked to improve their business capacity. Those organizations that have managed to overcome the difficulties presented by the pandemic came out of it better prepared and capable of achieving more. This process allowed organizations to see change as a necessary part of moving forward in the economy, and competing with other entities.
With a shift in the perception of change, it is now possible to adopt more sweeping adjustments to the way companies are run, in order to enhance their efficiency, sustainability, resilience and employee satisfaction. As noted by research throughout the pandemic, many consider remote working to be far more comfortable than regular work environments. This is coupled with an increase in professional efficiency and a decrease in costs for office upkeep (Bick et al., 2022). Despite significant challenges connected to managing and controlling a remote workforce to a sufficient degree, it can be said that remote work is the future of many companies. This includes employee training, meetings, management and many other concerns, all of which can be relegated to the online space. Giving employees freedom of movement and choice has the potential to increase their satisfaction with the workplace, as well as decrease worker turnover.
Theoretically, organizations could explore other options of employee empowerment in the future, focusing on giving their staff a reason to give more of their creativity, skill and knowledge to the workplace. This can be done by expanding the range of employee benefits, giving more people the power necessary to feel valued in the company, or enhancing communication channels. With the lessons of the great resignation in mind, leaders must come to value and respect their workforce, operating as a team of equals instead of a fully hierarchical perspective (Sheather & Slattery, 2021). This would ensure that most companies can create more organic, cooperative, supportive and well-intentioned workplaces, facilitating lesser resistance to improvement and good workplace ethics.
Another avenue for change that was addressed during the pandemic, and continues to be addressed, is sustainability. Sustainability, coupled with organizational resilience, stands at the center of corporate longevity. It is closely tied to the values of each organization, and its importance should not be understated. Without resilient structures and management, a company will be unable to survive shifts in market trends and economic, political and social changes. In addition, concerns about sustainability are also important for corporate brand image and customer retention. Therefore, adopting measures that facilitate better organizational resilience is vital in the post-COVID economy. Companies that build their structures to survive potential risks will be capable of answering the outside pressure and coming on top of potential obstacles.
For the management and organizational change sphere in particular, the post-pandemic landscape appears full of possibilities as well. Varied structures of change management have appeared and proved their effectiveness in enabling companies to persist in a climate of uncertainty. In particular, approaches that recognize the fluidity of interpersonal environments and a need to give individuals an outlet for workplace feedback have thrived. Transformational leadership, hailed by efforts to fully change how companies operate, answer the needs of the population and satisfy the needs of a starved consumer base, created opportunities for profit and success. In addition, leadership and change strategies of the pandemic and post-pandemic world emphasized the need to communicate corporate visions and goals clearly.
In order to encourage the employees to enable organization-wide change, it is necessary to make them understand why change is needed. Instead of approaching improvement management from a forced perspective, leaders and managers increasingly learn to create an understandable and shareable visualization of their ideas. Clarity of communication serves to spread the idea of change, adapting and molding it into one that is capable of supporting the entire organization efficiently. Going into the future of change management, companies and their leaders should be able to recognize the importance of talking to their workers and inspiring a shared vision of tomorrow. Through this process, they will be able to more effectively achieve their goals.
Conclusion
As a result of this work, it was possible to identify the key considerations and needs of companies initiating change strategies. By examining the current and past bodies of research, core change approaches were identified, including various types of innovation or structural improvement. The widespread change strategies of the past largely became redundant, being replaced with the need to adapt quickly and engage the organization on a deep level persisting at the same time. Both the economic and the OD strategies were revealed to be incapable of addressing the needs of today’s companies, either due to their focus on short-term profitability or their time-consuming nature. Instead, new initiatives for change management were discussed and praised.
A combined strategy for enacting change manages to sufficiently address the issues of its predecessor while also aligning with the needs of the post-COVID workplace. Its quick nature, the coordinated basis for change, and focus on both profits and workplace culture work to minimize the existing issues of the previous two strategies. Similarly, the charismatic transformation approach works to directly combat the issues of the modern economic environment. By allowing organizations to be led by an idea of structural change, directed and created through charismatic communication, it is possible to quickly adapt to the needs of a shifting market and improve performance while keeping up with the competition.
References
Bick, A., Blandin, A., & Mertens, K. (2022). Work from home before and after the COVID-19 outbreak.
Hayes, J. (2021). The theory and practice of change management. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Nizhegorodtsev, R., & Goridko, N. (2019). Motivation management: towards a digital paradigm [Paper presentation]. New Skills for Managers in a Changing Digital World, 12th IBAB International Conference.
Not enough communication from leaders during pandemic, say UK professionals. (n.d.). UK jobs and recruitment. Web.
Palmer, M. (2021). 31% of companies failed to innovate during the pandemic. Sifted. Web.
Sarieddine, I. (2012). Charismatic transformations versus developmental transitions in organizations – Case study “Jamie’s food revolution”. The blog of Ihab Sarieddine. Web.
Sheather, J., & Slattery, D. (2021). The great resignation—how do we support and retain staff already stretched to their limit? BMJ, n2533.
Tamunomiebi, M., & Akpan, E. (2021). Organizational change and the imperatives of managing employee resistance: A conceptual review. Journal of Strategic Management, 6(1), 18-32.