Given what you read in the required article this week and what you learned from the positions presented by your colleagues in the discussion topic, complete a journal assignment that answers the following questions: (a) For organizational change to be successful, what role should a leader take in vision development? (b) How would you weave proactive and reactive elements into the planning and implementation of an organizational change effort?
Submit assignment as a Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins.
Library Article: A Theoretical Framework of Organizational ChangeLibrary Article: Employee Participation in Organizational Change: Investigating the Effects of Proactive vs. Reactive Implementation of Downsizing in Swedish Hospitals (Optional)
Organizational change involves a change in a company’s culture, technology, policies, strategies or structure. The Human Resource Department is mostly involved in making the changes since its practices creates positive worker-perceptions of changing (Maheshwari & Vohra, 2015). Proactive change occurs when a company tries to make changes to its structure and practices before a threat or opportunity emerges. The company usually incorporates the dynamic change attempts to invest in potential opportunities in the future since it focuses on avoiding future threats. On the other hand, reactive change involves a company making alterations in its operations after opportunities have emerged or a menace had already been experienced. It is better to implement the reactive change technique than the proactive change.
The reactive change saves time, cost and other resources incurred if the threat or opportunity does not emerge; unlike using proactive change. As much as a company will be psychology prepared if it uses the dynamic change system, it is deemed to incur losses if nothing anticipated for happens as planned. In reactive change, the company can instead use the financial resources to invest in other opportunities or ideas. Companies can gain from exploitative ideas when the reactive technique is used (Gershon, 2013). The companies tend to research on current ideas and not focus on future uncertainties. The capability of dealing with uncertainty is essential towards the endurance of a company within every competitive area (Dillon 2005). As much as uncertainty exists in each aspect of a project, adverse effects can be avoided by being keener during the present moment. The Human Resource Department plays a significant role in ensuring every employee is performing their duties well. It represents a vital role in ensuring that disaster does not happen in the future. It can focus more on using its resources to train its employees further and increase the current productivity.
In a nutshell, reactive change is better than proactive change. This change is fundamentally better because it saves on resources. Furthermore, it forces companies to be keener and more focused while doing their work to avoid future threats from happening. Companies discover better investment opportunities after achieving their short-term goals. This approach is more goal-oriented and it has a positive inclination towards the future success of a company. Companies that use this technique become more enthusiastic and optimistic than those that undertake proactive change.
Gershon, M. (2013). Strategic Timing and Proactiveness of Organizations. Sage Publications
Dillon, L. (2005). Reactive project change management. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2005—EMEA, Edinburgh, Scotland. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Retrieved from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/reactive- project-change-management-7530
Maheshwari, S., & Vohra, V. (2015). Identifying critical HR practices impacting employee perception and commitment during organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(5), 872-894.