Peter Senge is a change theorist that I have explored in a little detail. He has written much and I have just scratched the surface of his change theory. Some of his ideas have been helpful to me in discerning how to bring about change in an organization, as well as understanding my personal decisions in embracing change suggested by others.
Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, and Smith (1999) zero in on a key concept: profound change requires a fundamental shift in a person’s thinking. They advocate that we need to understand the nature of the growth process and how to stimulate it, but we also need to be aware of the forces and challenges that impede progress. They urge us to appreciate the inescapable interaction between growth and resistance, what they call the “dance of change.”
Senge et al. (1999) suggest 10 challenges facing the change process. The first four fly in the face the change agent during the process of initiating change (1. we don’t have time; 2. we have no help; 3. this stuff isn’t relevant; and 4. they’re not walking the talk); the next three challenges face the organization during times of trying to sustain momentum (5. the challenges of fear, 6. negative assessment, and 7. arrogance); the last three involve the barriers to redesigning and rethinking the change process (8. the challenges of autonomy, 9. diffusion and 10. purpose).
I so agree with Senge et al. (1999) when they note that people involved in the initial aspects of the change process need enough flexibility to devote time to reflection. In looking at educational institutions, Collinson and Cook (2001) agree that teachers need discretionary time to share with colleagues as well as some designated time for formal sharing. When an organization begins to communicate the idea of change with stakeholders, it is imperative for the company to plan some informal and some formal times for sharing and listening among the various layers of employees.
Senge (1990) underscores that shared vision is vitally important because it provides focus and energy to an organization. He warns however that most visions are one person’s vision imposed on an organization. “Such visions”, says Senge (1990), “at best, command compliance – not commitment” (p. 206). Senge continues to look at vision and the responses of others when a vision is presented. He suggests five responses:
1) Commitment - the individual truly wants it and will do whatever it takes to make it happen.
2) Enrollment – the individual wants it and will do whatever can be done within reason.
3) Genuine compliance – the individual sees the benefits of the vision and will do everything expected and more.
4) Formal compliance – the individual, on the whole, sees the benefits of the vision and will do what’s expected and no more.
5) Grudging compliance – the individual does not see the benefits of the vision but does not want to lose job, so he does enough of what’s expected because he has to, but also lets it be known that he is not really on board.
How important it is to discern the kind of response others are having toward a particular idea for change.
Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, and Smith (1994) point to organizational change as an activity that must be accomplished through getting the entire organization engaged and committed to the vision and to truth. They conclude that any coercive process, no matter how well intended, simply cannot ultimately result in commitment. Senge (1990) insightfully shares,
“There are two fundamental sources of energy that can motivate organizations: fear and aspiration. The power of fear underlies negative visions. The power of aspiration drives positive visions. Fear can produce extraordinary changes in short periods, but aspiration endures as a continuing source of learning and growth” (p. 225).
Cramming a vision down the throats of others or mandating that the organization buys-in to the leaders' vision results only in resistance and lip-service. If I desire to take up the task of implementing a change within an organization, I must attempt to transform it into a shared vision that energizes people through inspiration, enthusiasm, and passion.
Collinson, V., & Cook, T. F. (2001). "I don't have enough time": Teachers' interpretations of time as a key to learning and school change [Electronic version]. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(3), 266-281.
Senge, P. , Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., & Smith, B. (1999).The dance of change: The challenges to sustaining momentum in learning organizations. New York: Doubleday.
Senge, P. M. (1990). Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday/Currency.
Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., & Smith, B. J. (1994). Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. New York: Doubleday.
Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, and Smith (1999) zero in on a key concept: profound change requires a fundamental shift in a person’s thinking. They advocate that we need to understand the nature of the growth process and how to stimulate it, but we also need to be aware of the forces and challenges that impede progress. They urge us to appreciate the inescapable interaction between growth and resistance, what they call the “dance of change.”
Senge et al. (1999) suggest 10 challenges facing the change process. The first four fly in the face the change agent during the process of initiating change (1. we don’t have time; 2. we have no help; 3. this stuff isn’t relevant; and 4. they’re not walking the talk); the next three challenges face the organization during times of trying to sustain momentum (5. the challenges of fear, 6. negative assessment, and 7. arrogance); the last three involve the barriers to redesigning and rethinking the change process (8. the challenges of autonomy, 9. diffusion and 10. purpose).
I so agree with Senge et al. (1999) when they note that people involved in the initial aspects of the change process need enough flexibility to devote time to reflection. In looking at educational institutions, Collinson and Cook (2001) agree that teachers need discretionary time to share with colleagues as well as some designated time for formal sharing. When an organization begins to communicate the idea of change with stakeholders, it is imperative for the company to plan some informal and some formal times for sharing and listening among the various layers of employees.
Senge (1990) underscores that shared vision is vitally important because it provides focus and energy to an organization. He warns however that most visions are one person’s vision imposed on an organization. “Such visions”, says Senge (1990), “at best, command compliance – not commitment” (p. 206). Senge continues to look at vision and the responses of others when a vision is presented. He suggests five responses:
1) Commitment - the individual truly wants it and will do whatever it takes to make it happen.
2) Enrollment – the individual wants it and will do whatever can be done within reason.
3) Genuine compliance – the individual sees the benefits of the vision and will do everything expected and more.
4) Formal compliance – the individual, on the whole, sees the benefits of the vision and will do what’s expected and no more.
5) Grudging compliance – the individual does not see the benefits of the vision but does not want to lose job, so he does enough of what’s expected because he has to, but also lets it be known that he is not really on board.
How important it is to discern the kind of response others are having toward a particular idea for change.
Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, and Smith (1994) point to organizational change as an activity that must be accomplished through getting the entire organization engaged and committed to the vision and to truth. They conclude that any coercive process, no matter how well intended, simply cannot ultimately result in commitment. Senge (1990) insightfully shares,
“There are two fundamental sources of energy that can motivate organizations: fear and aspiration. The power of fear underlies negative visions. The power of aspiration drives positive visions. Fear can produce extraordinary changes in short periods, but aspiration endures as a continuing source of learning and growth” (p. 225).
Cramming a vision down the throats of others or mandating that the organization buys-in to the leaders' vision results only in resistance and lip-service. If I desire to take up the task of implementing a change within an organization, I must attempt to transform it into a shared vision that energizes people through inspiration, enthusiasm, and passion.
Collinson, V., & Cook, T. F. (2001). "I don't have enough time": Teachers' interpretations of time as a key to learning and school change [Electronic version]. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(3), 266-281.
Senge, P. , Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., & Smith, B. (1999).The dance of change: The challenges to sustaining momentum in learning organizations. New York: Doubleday.
Senge, P. M. (1990). Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday/Currency.
Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., & Smith, B. J. (1994). Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. New York: Doubleday.
No comments:
Post a Comment