Lecture 5 – 05.05.203
Soft system models for change
What is an organization? -> remind
Assumptions: two possible approaches for change
-
HSMC – based on rational models which are appropriate for medium/hard complexity situations.
“people issues” are low. Used by the majority of managers.
SSMC – applied in situation of soft complexities, taking into consideration the involvement of
“people issues” (leadership, culture, and politics).
Soft systems models for change
 Often, the signals arriving on manager’s desks are not as clearly categorized – the only thing
managers perceive are problems or messes.
 Soft Systems Models of Change challenge the rationality to organizational change taken by the Hard
System Models of Change.
 SSMC recognizes that some change situations (problems/opportunities), by nature of their
complexity and particular characteristics (messes), require soft rather than hard systems
approaches to change.
Basic approach: Ackoff (1981) suggests there are 3 kinds of things which can be done about soft complexity:
1. Resolve them – select a solution that yields a “good enough” outcome. Patch and mend (fix it for
the moment), survival-oriented.
2. Solve them (optimizing) – select quantitative approaches based on research and rational-logic
methods of analysis. Focuses on the parts rather than the whole (the idea behind the hard system
models of change).
3. Dissolve them – challenge the nature of the problem context by challenging underlying purposes
and assumptions (or system involved) so as to remove the problem.
a. in double-loop learning, individuals, groups or the organization question the values,
assumptions and policies that led to the actions in the first place; if they are able to view
and modify those, then double.-loop learning has taken place.
b. This is what the soft systems approach tries to do.
Exercise: application to company X below
A large machine tool manufacturing company is confronted with abrupt changes in the demand for its
products.
Current situation: reactions to the fluctuations are both disruptive and costly for the company –> desired
situation: first reduce cost and then also fluctuations.
Company x: resolving the problem
Among other things, the company (by using past experience and using ’good sound judgement’) alternated
continually between hiring and firing personnel, many of whom were highly skilled. This made for low
morale, low productivity, not to mention hostility between labour and management, but lowered the cost.
Solving the problem
The managers brought in researchers who formulated the problem as one of production smoothing, the
solution to which depended critically on the accuracy of forecast demand. Unfortunately, they could not
develop very good forecasts. Therefore, the solutions yielded by optimizing (solving) were only marginally
better than those previously obtained by problem resolving.
Dissolving the problem
Finally, a design attack was made on the problem. It was reformulated into one of reducing fluctuations of
demand rather than one of responding to them. This was done by adding a new product line, the demand
for which was counter-cyclical relative to that for machine tools, but its production required the same
technology, and some of the same parts and subassemblies. The new product line, road building
equipment, also used the same distribution and marketing system as machine tools.
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT – philosophy and underlying assumptions
 French and Bell (1999, pp.25–6) – OD is a long term effort, supported by top management, to
improve visioning, empowerment, learning and problem-solving processes, through an ongoing,
collaborative management and organizational culture – with special emphasis on the culture of
intact work teams and other team configurations – using the consultant/facilitator role and the
theory and technology of applied behavioural science, including action research.
 Cummings and Worley (2005) – OD is a systematic application and transfer of behavioural science
knowledge to the planned development, improvement, and reinforcement of the strategies,
structures and processes that lead to organizational effectiveness.
OD as a process for managing change
-
OD is a process of change which has a framework of recognizable phases that take the organization
from its current state to a more desired future state.
Two important concepts in OD are Action research and Change agent.
An example of OD process is Lewin's three-phase model of change (one of the earlier and most
influential models) Unfreezing, Moving and Refreezing.
Characteristics of the OD approach to change
 It emphasizes goals and processes but with particular emphasis on processes – the notion of
organizational learning as a means of improving an organization’s capacity to change is implicit in
OD approaches
 It deals with change over the medium to long term, that is, change that needs to be sustained over
a significant period of time
 It involves the organization as a whole as well as its parts
 It is participative, drawing on the theory and practices of the behavioural sciences
 It has top management support and involvement
 It involves a facilitator who takes on the role of a change agent
 It concentrates on planned change but as a process that can adapt to a changing situation rather
than as a rigid blueprint of how change should be done.
OD – an action-research-based model of change
 Action research is a collaborative effort between the leaders and facilitators of any change and
those who have to enact it. Context bound (real life problems).
 It involves data gathering, continuous feedback of data to the client group, data discussion, action
planning, and action. Co-generation of knowledge.
 Therefore, action research is, as its name suggests, a combination of research and action lead by an
internal or external change agent/s.
French and Bell (1999) and Cummings and Worley (2005) give detailed descriptions of action research – it is
a collaborative effort between leaders and facilitators of any change and those who enact it. It involves the
following steps:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Management’s perception of problems
Consultation with behavioural science expert
Data gathering and preliminary diagnosis by consultant
Feedback to key client or group
Joint agreement of the problems
Joint action planning
Implementation
Reinforcement and assessment of the change
Doing action research in your own
organization.
Lewin three steps approach
 Unfreezing
 Develop a vision for the need to change (transformational leadership) through the process of
organizational diagnosis and creative thinking.
 Resistant to change is the most problematic issue in management of change.
 To describe the current state, use for instance the PEST analyses. Even temporal (historical) and
internal environment must be assessed (info about total system)! Questionnaires, interviews,
observations and organizational documents, can be used
 Disturb the status quo by strengthening or weakening the resistant to change through an awareness
of what will happen if nothing changes. Use for instance Force Field Analyze (FFA).
 FFA MODEL – visualize the power balance and the strong forces in the form of feelings, values,
power and politics that are restraining change.
 An automatization of the production process, due to uneven quality and long lead times
 The increased competition will otherwise put us out of business
 Changing
 A systematic (brainstorming/research) search for new ideas to take the organization from its current
state to a desired future state, through dialogue with all concerned in order to create an
understanding for the need to change and to use all ideas and creativeness of the people involved.
 Refreezing
 The use of continuous data collection and feedback is essential to keep track of how the change is
progressing and to monitor for further change in the light of environmental changes.
 The use of surveys and interviews is one way of collecting data (data to be collected depends on the
situation).
 Symbolic actions, such as change of logo, forms of dress and ways of grouping people, as well as
leadership could be one way to manifest “the new way to work”.
Why are these steps so important?
If you skip the phase unfreezing, the change will meet resistant (old values will increase and lead to
misunderstandings and a lack of trust) when prevailing forces are increased. Use for instance the FFA model
to visualize!
If you don’t base your decisions on a rigorous and systematic process when making the actual change, and
instead base your decisions on a hunch that yields a ”good enough” outcome (Resolve, Ackoff, 1981) and
don’t involve all that are concerned by the change, the suggestions are often ill founded, when you lack
important knowledge and/or an internal acceptance.
An assessment of the OD model for change






OD does not always face up to harsh realities of change
OD is limited when change situations are ‘constrained’
OD requires ‘out of the ordinary’ leadership
OD fits uneasily with the structures and culture in the public sector
OD does not ‘work’ in all cultures
Conclusions
 Soft systems approach to change emphasizes not just the content and control of change but also
the process by which change comes about. They require consideration of the cultural and political
aspects of organizations as much as the structure and systems.
 Soft systems models of change are, essentially, planned approaches to change. This does not mean,
however, that they cannot account for unexpected and surprising situations.
Hard and soft methods: PROS
Hard approach:
-
Controllable
Applicable also in presence of low educated staff
Autocratic leadership
Companies can implement a soft strategy
Suitable for downsizing and restructuring strategies
Effective in the short-run
commonly adopted around the world
Desirable for evaluating the initial situation
Useful for the intervention on a particular area
Suitable for org. with mechanistic structure
Good for org. with a bureaucratic structure
Soft approach:
-
Emphasis on human factors
Preference for high educated staff
Socially oriented leadership
Preferred for financial objectives
Desirable in soft situations where goals and means can be unclear
Suitable for org. with an organic structure
More likely to be adopted in ethnocentrically operated organizations
Hard and soft methods: CONS
Hard approach:
-
Often does not take into account employee’s education and capabilities
-
Less efficient where goals and means are unclear
High costs of management consulting companies
Only top management acts in the change process
Less good in identifying political and moral issues
Soft approach:
-
Lewin’s model: level of ambiguity
Unclear specifications in relation to the internal and external environment
Not sufficient to implement a planned change
Long-run effectiveness
Not convenient with low educated staff
Limited when time is essence
Does not always face up to hard realities of change
Limited when change situations are constrained by nature
Inappropriate with public companies