What is an organizational change, and when should an agency undergo one?
Organizational change is a management process when new structural and business strategies are offered to promote change. It cannot be taken spontaneously. As a rule, a company has to be ready for change, and leaders should assess employees’ and all systems’ readiness for change (Netting, Kettner, McMurty, & Thomas, 2012). Any organizational change is an attempt by a facility to survive and achieve positive results in a competitive business world. It is suggested to rely on macro-level practices as main interventions that can be taken at different levels to create effective social and organizational policies (Kanel & Horn-Mallers, 2015).
Strategic planning, organizational planning, culture, human resources, and leadership are the five main puzzles in the successful promotion of any change. It is impossible to succeed in a change in case some of these factors are neglected. A good leader has to make sure that there are enough strategic decisions and reasons that can support the importance of change. Organizational planning is the core aspect of change because it is the stage when various transitions occur.
Human resources define the possibility of change and employees’ readiness in regards to current skills and knowledge gained. An agency should change when some challenges or shortages are observed. The facility’s leaders want to improve the results and increase the statistical data. Change is a solution that can gain various forms. However, in some cases, it is not necessary to wait for some problem or threat. Change can be used to motivate people and increase productivity due to some new human resources, knowledge, or exchange of experience. Macro practices can be used to develop a good plan and prepare every employee for work.
Why is a smaller leadership group better than a larger one for decision making?
A small group is an area where some changes and improvements can occur more effectively in comparison to such areas as communities and organizations (Netting et al., 2012). There are also situations when, in large organizations, small leadership groups are created for decision-making processes. In a situation like the one of Lutheran Family and Children’s Services of Missouri, the creation of a small leadership group is an appropriate solution.
First, a small size promotes the possibility to check each member of the group, their knowledge, and experiences. Second, it is easy to learn a small group of people and observe effective results in a short period. Then, small groups can communicate and exchange information quickly regarding the opinion of each member. It is possible to organize brief meetings and discuss the current problems at any time required. As not too many people are involved, an unexpected or unplanned meeting can be organized with several benefits observed at the end. In other words, it is easy for leaders to be gathered, heard, and understood in small groups in comparison to the opportunities of the same leaders in large groups. Finally, changes and improvements are easier to achieve at macro levels in small groups than in large groups.
If facilities do not want to spend their time, efforts, people, and money to develop some steps and introduce a new task including many people at the same time, a small group is the answer that can be given. Several people with good experience and the possibility to develop and prove their positions can cooperate to prove or disprove the importance of change and the strategies that can be used by all employees.
References
Kanel, K., & Horn-Mallers, M. (2015). An overview of the human services. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Netting, F.E., Kettner, P.M., McMurty, S.L., & Thomas, M.L. (2012). Social work macro practice (5th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.