Social significance of organizational change management. Features of organizational change management

At the initial stages, changes may be subtle and insignificant, but as the project develops, their volume and number will increase and involve an increasing number of people in the change process. Quality management “preaches” an evolutionary approach to the development of an organization, therefore change management should be based on the principles of kaizen: a large number of small changes in all areas of activity leads to a significant improvement in the organization as a whole.

When implementing the QMS, change management will affect such fundamental elements of the organization as: personnel, processes, technologies, organizational system (structure, responsibility, relationships), corporate knowledge, various management systems, etc. Change management of these elements is based on common principles, but using different methods and approaches.

Change management of elements related to personnel and corporate knowledge must be built on the basis of socio-psychological approaches. Such change management can be called personal change management.

Change management of elements related to the organizational structure, processes, technologies, management systems, etc. should be built on the basis of project management approaches. Such change management can be called organizational change management.

Managing change at the personal level

The quality system is a people-oriented system. Through change management, it is necessary to make people start working in a new way, so that they change their usual ways of working. Here the quality system runs into psychological and social issues of managing changes in people's behavior. If you manage to change the behavior of people, manage to motivate them to do their work in accordance with the new rules, then changes will begin to occur both in individual units and in the organization as a whole. In this case, we can say that the quality system has begun to work and it has been implemented in the organization.

The quality system covers three components of personal change:

• individual;
• collective;
• organizational.

Individual component implies a change in the work of each individual employee. Changes in the individual component occur in several stages, which are associated with the attitude of the employee to the ongoing changes.

At the first stage, the employee realizes the need for change. Further, there is a change in the attitude of the employee to the requirements of the quality system. At the last stage, the employee accepts the changes and begins to implement them in his work.

When people work in a familiar environment, they don't really want to change anything. Therefore, as a rule, the first reaction of employees to the proposed methods of the quality system will be a reaction of resistance. Managing changes associated with the individual component leads to the fact that employees stop perceiving the proposed changes in work as a negative factor and accept the changes. Psychologically, they become ready to work on the processes and procedures of the quality system.

The next part of personality change has to do with change. collective component. In the processes that are defined in the quality system, not one person takes part, but groups of employees. Naturally, not all of them start working in a new way at the same time. For this, time must pass. The collective component implies changes in the relationship between employees.

Organizational component Personal change involves changes in the culture of production. The overall level of production culture is increasing and the employees of the organization need to create and manage corporate knowledge. This component of personal change forms a mentoring system in the organization, the exchange of experience and knowledge between various employees and teams.

As a rule, changes in the individual and collective components occur during the implementation of the quality system, and the organizational component is already affected in the course of the development of the quality system.

Organizational change management involves making changes that are not related to changing the behavior and consciousness of people. These types of changes may include changes in processes, systems, organizational structure, job roles and so on. Thus, organizational change management focuses on the technical side of the changes being made in the organization.

Organizational change management is more formalized and structured than personal change management. This type of change management is built in accordance with the approaches and methods of project management. However, both of these types of changes are always carried out together, because it is impossible to carry out organizational changes without changing the behavior of employees. Conversely, changes in employee behavior will always lead to organizational change.

In the course of building a quality system, organizational change management can affect several levels of a company's activities. These levels are determined by the number of organizational units involved in the changes.

These levels include:

• the level of individual employees;
• the level of individual units;
• level of groups of subdivisions (employees);
• organization level.

At the level of individual employees management of changes in the order of operations in the workplace. These changes affect the functions, tasks, responsibility and subordination of employees. As a rule, changes are documented in work and job descriptions.

At the level of individual departments changes affect the separate activities of units. In this case, the process begins and ends within one unit and is necessary to ensure the operation of this unit. Change management at this level is associated with the distribution of work between the employees of the unit and the change in the interaction between them. Documented changes at the level of individual divisions are reflected in the regulations on divisions and local procedures.

At the group level(employees) change management is associated with the interaction between different departments and employees within the same process. This process is common for several departments and its change can affect all areas of activity (organizational structure, work order, subordination, functions and tasks of employees, management systems). Changes at this level are documented in process maps and procedures.

At the organization level change management covers all processes and all departments. In this case, the changes may affect the principles of governance and the way the organization works. Such changes represent the goals, business plans and concept of the organization's development.

Change Management Principles

Change management is labor intensive and time consuming work. Mistakes in this work can be costly for both the organization itself and its employees. Therefore, when making changes in the minds of the staff, it is necessary to be sure that they will lead to the desired results - improving the quality of work and improving performance. Such confidence can come from adhering to the basic principles of change management.

Change management includes the following basic principles:

• a clear definition of the goals of the change. To manage change, you need to understand what goals you want to achieve. The goals of change at the personal level must be strictly consistent with the goals of organizational change. Otherwise, there is a risk that organizational changes will not receive the necessary support at the personal level.
• clear understanding of the current state of affairs. Change management at the personal level is intertwined with organizational change. In order to make changes in the work of employees, it is necessary to know how this work is carried out at the moment, what factors make the staff do the work in this way.
• change planning. Without a plan, effective change management is impossible. Change planning allows you to determine the impact of personal changes on organizational changes, identify the benefits of changes, possible difficulties and alternatives for implementing planned organizational changes.
• informing staff. Change management cannot take place if the staff is isolated from the information. During the implementation of changes, people try to get as much information as possible about what changes are being made and what they should lead to. Ignorance of the goals of change increases the level of staff anxiety. Therefore, it is necessary to regularly inform employees about the changes being made and the expected results.

The first and indispensable condition for employees to be interested in the implementation of the proposed changes should be their involvement in the study of existing problems of activity. Until employees understand why new rules or procedures are being introduced, they will consider it all nonsense and a waste of time.

Employees should be informed about the planned changes in the distribution of responsibility for quality. Managers must convey to subordinates that the application of quality system charts and procedures is an order, not an occasion for discussion, that it will have positive consequences for all who apply them, and vice versa.

Must be provided effective communication subordinates with leaders. Managers must provide subordinates with information about their tasks to the extent necessary to carry out work under new work patterns.

If new ways of working are not supported and encouraged by management, people tend to revert to old ways of working. Therefore, it is required to encourage any, even the most insignificant achievements of employees. Encouragement should be not only material, but also moral.

After the procedures and schemes of work required by the quality system begin to operate, employees do not need orders and instructions. They are already quite well trained in the new methods of work. All they need is support from management and involvement in the decision-making process. Therefore, after the start of the quality system procedures, employees should have the opportunity to discuss with managers how useful certain quality system activities are.

General Change Management Procedure

The change management process includes a series of sequential steps that can be combined into three steps. Since change management is an ongoing process, the change management order is a cycle of actions to move from the current state to the target state.

The first stage of change management This is the preparation stage for change. This stage includes actions to determine the goals of change, determine the methods for implementing changes, identify possible limitations and reasons for resistance to change.

The second stage of change management is the stage of change implementation. At this stage, a change plan is developed and actions are taken to implement the plan. As a rule, the main tool for implementing changes at the personal level is staff motivation, and organizational changes - project management. During this stage, various methods and types of motivation are used to manage changes at the personal level. Appropriate project management practices are applied to manage organizational change.

The third stage of change management is to consolidate change. During this stage, feedback is collected from employees, the results achieved are analyzed, the discrepancy between the target indicators and the changes actually achieved is determined, and adjustments are made to the procedure for implementing the changes.

An important element in change management is the recognition of the results achieved and the success of employees. Recognition of individual and group achievements in improving performance allows you to consolidate the changes achieved.

Change Management Methodologies

To manage change at the personal level, several well-known theories and methodologies are used. These methodologies are quite effective for managing change in relation to individuals, teams and organizations as a whole.

The most well-known change management methodologies at the personal level include:

• ADCAR model. Information on this model was published in 1998. The methodology was developed by Prosci Inc. ADKAR is an abbreviation for the English words Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability, Reinforcement (awareness, desire, knowledge, skill, consolidation). This model describes well the change management of the individual component of personal change. The essence of this model is that changes in employee motivation and behavior occur in several phases. First, the employee is Aware of the need for change, then he has a desire to participate and support the change. The next step is to gain Knowledge on how to implement change. Further, the employee implements the changes in practice and shows his Skills. At the last stage, the Consolidation of the implemented changes is carried out.
• AIM methodology (Accelerated Implementation Methodology). It is used to manage changes in all components: individual, collective, organizational. The methodology contains ten main steps that allow you to effectively manage the change process. These ten steps fit into the three phases of change - the planning phase, the implementation phase, and the monitoring phase.
• The Beckhard and Harris change management model. In accordance with this model, successful implementation of personality changes is possible if the set of factors pushing a person to change is stronger than the resistance to these changes. Factors that push a person towards personal change include dissatisfaction, desirability (the desire to get something), and practicality (the need to get what one wants).
• Transition model by William Bridge. This model was developed and published by change management consultant William Bridge in 1991. The essence of the model is that in the course of change management, a person must switch to a new way of working, and not change the existing one. The difference lies in the concepts of "change" and "transition". Change is what happens to people, even if they don't agree with it. The transition takes place in the human mind. He internally agrees and accepts the changes.
• John Kotter's Model of Change. This model is a set of eight sequential steps for making changes. It is simple enough to understand and can be applied to change management in organizations of any type and size.
• Kubler-Ross model. This model is quite popular in managing change at the personal level. According to this model, there are four stages of change in people's behavior. At the first stage, employees react negatively to any changes, then people have fears about the consequences of changes. At the third stage, the process of adaptation of employees to changes begins, and the fourth stage is characterized by the acceptance of changes and the active work of employees in the new conditions.
• Model Kurt Lewin. This model, which was developed in the 1940s, is still a highly relevant change management tool. The model is based on three phases of change. The first phase is the so-called “defrosting” phase. In this phase, attempts are made to reduce the resistance to change on the part of the person. The second phase is “making changes”. At this phase, actions are taken to involve a person in the process of change (new models of behavior, values, views are developed). The third phase (the “freeze phase”) supports the changes made so that people do not return to the old methods and ways of working.

Several well-known approaches can be used to manage organizational change:

• anti-crisis approach. This approach is used when it is necessary to make changes in a short period of time and achieve quick results. When implementing a quality system, it is less preferable, because causes the most resistance from the staff. The main method used in this approach is the reengineering method. Reengineering involves a complete restructuring of the activities and processes of the organization.
• continuous improvement approach. This approach is the most appropriate for implementing changes within the framework of quality system activities. Changes occur gradually, affecting "on the rise" more and more elements of the organization. Methods that are applied in this approach include kaizen, 6 sigma, lean manufacturing, just-in time, etc.
• adaptive approach. It is a cross between an anti-crisis approach and a continuous improvement approach. Changes are made in stages. After carrying out one stage of changes, a period of work without changes begins. Then the next phase of change begins. With this approach, the most commonly used methods are: project management method, kairyo method, quality premium methods (EFQM model, Deming premium, Baldridge premium, etc.) and self-assessment methods.

Change management. Reasons for resistance

Any changes in the work of employees are associated with the emergence of some resistance on their part, tk. changes take them out of the comfortable and stable state to which they are accustomed. The success of the implementation of the quality system will depend more on the ability to understand and overcome resistance than on the "pressure" on the staff with new procedures and rules of work.

The main reasons for resistance on the part of employees when implementing a quality system are usually the following:

• Loss of position in the organization. Employees are afraid that as a result of the implementation of the quality system, their working conditions may worsen, wages will decrease, workload will increase, etc.
• Doubts about the need for change. If employees do not understand why the quality system is being introduced, then they will consider these works useless, and the current situation in which they work is normal, requiring no changes.
• Dissatisfaction with interference in their work. Usually, when employees do their jobs, they think they are doing their best. This is especially true for workers with extensive experience. And specialists in the quality system invade the scope of their professional activities. Naturally, this causes resistance.
• Unexpected change. As a rule, there will always be a number of employees in the organization (sometimes a very large number) who do not know anything about the implementation of the quality system, so when they are told that they must now work according to the new rules, they begin to resist such changes.
• Lack of knowledge by employees of the goals of change. When an employee does not understand the purpose of changing specific actions in his work, this causes the rejection of changes.
• Inertia in solving existing problems. This is also one of the common causes of resistance. Employees simply do not want to take on the problem solving in their work.
• Doubt about your competence. Often people resist the implementation of a quality system because they doubt whether they will be able to master new skills and abilities.
• Unwillingness to change existing relationships. The quality system changes relationships in the team. Not all employees want this, especially when the relationship suits them and they are comfortable for them.
• Doubts about the competence of people implementing the quality system. People are suspicious of change proposed by those they don't respect or trust. Therefore, when implementing the QMS, the participation of top management and administrative support for the ongoing changes is very important.

Topic 4 ESSENCE OF THE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT IN THE ENTERPRISE

The study of the problem of "management of organizational changes in industrial enterprises" is a study of fundamentally important patterns of economic reality. The study of industrial enterprises as socio-economic systems requires the development of a list of scientifically or empirically substantiated rules that oblige to take into account the sequence, content, differentiation and methods of rational performance of work on the artificial creation of complex organizations and their management, which are called the principles of organization and management.

A principle as a category is a norm, a rule, a form of combination of actions that require the fulfillment of one or another scientific pattern. The set of principles is the general rules in nature and society, which as a whole create a mechanism for the application of certain laws. Success in solving any problem depends on the validity of the structure and content of the set of principles, incl. problems of management of organizational changes.

Each level of organizational change management has its own models, methods, stages, conditions and components of the process, on which the effectiveness of changes depends. Therefore, for each industrial enterprise, one of the goals of organizational change management is right choice these components in accordance with the current or predicted factors of the external and internal environment of the organization.

Consequently, organizational change is a complex, diverse phenomenon that needs to be explored in different aspects. In practice, certain approaches have been formed and certain patterns have been identified in the preparation and implementation of the process of organizational change in order to increase its effectiveness. It is necessary to formulate the main features of the process of managing organizational changes in enterprises, systematize them and develop theoretical principles for the preparation, planning and implementation of organizational changes in production systems, which will improve the efficiency of the system.

To develop general principles for the effective management of organizational changes in industrial enterprises, it is proposed to formulate the main features of the process of organizational changes occurring in production systems (PS).

The main features of this process, in our opinion, are the following.

Continuity of change

The process of organizational change is a temporal sequence of ongoing changes recorded by comparing and evaluating the highlighted, analyzed and compared previous and subsequent states of the system. Because the processes of organizational change are carried out continuously in a visible or hidden form, purposefully or through self-development, this does not allow them to be correctly identified in dynamics. Therefore, the identification and classification of organizational changes are carried out conditionally by assessing the three states of the system: past, actual and future. The dual nature of organizational change leads to contradictions in the development and implementation of an organizational change program. Organizational changes identified by managers accurately reflect only the trends of the transformation process and one of its latest states. It leads to the need for continuous forecasting, planning a set of organizational actions under conditions of uncertainty, which greatly complicates the solution of practical managerial tasks, and the more dynamic and radical the changes taking place in the system, the more difficult it is to manage this process.

Duality of change

If changes in a production system are continuous, then it is constantly moving from one state to another, and this new state may not necessarily be better than the original one. This phenomenon contains the main criterion for any change management: change is not yet a value, because it can give a negative qualitative effect, although from a quantitative point of view it can be assessed with a positive sign. Therefore, in the process of change, there are always issues of measuring and evaluating the effectiveness of changes. Results measurement and control systems should provide an assessment of the extent to which the organization's strategic objectives have been achieved.

Cyclicity of changes

Organizational change is a cyclical process. It reflects the transition from an inefficient state of the production system to a more efficient one and vice versa. Organizational change simultaneously contains three forms of energy that determine the state of the production system at each moment: a creative-chaotic state in the form of innovation, a dynamic state in the form of progress in the development of the system, a stable - immobile state - in the form of system conservatism. The initial state of the production system is conservative. The transition to another state is carried out under the pressure of external or internal factors that cause the need for changes. That's why change management, in our opinion, means developing the ability of the production system in each cycle to start from scratch, with an analysis of changed conditions and opportunities and be ready for changes, for gaining new knowledge.

Consistency of changes

Every organizational change occurs under the influence of external and (or) internal impulses. But there is always a defining central element of the system that generates these impulses. In a normal production system, this element is the leadership of the organization. It forms a culture of change in the organization, coordinates them, provides the opportunity and coordination of all elements of the production system to "change together" with the greatest systemic efficiency. If the system balance is disturbed by the influence of other elements, then the system may be destroyed, its degenerative or ineffective change. The intensity, directions and forms of organizational change should correspond to the size and growth rate of the organization.

Therefore, in the management of organizational changes, the top management should play the greatest role, which outlines goals, strategies, programs for organizational changes, provides the necessary direction for systemic development with the greatest efficiency, timely eliminating or compensating for emerging deviations in the development of individual elements.

Direction of change

Production systems always have a development vector, regardless of whether the manager is aware of it or not. It can and should change according to the stage life cycle organization and the stage of development towards which it is moving. Changes should be directed towards achieving the goals of the system. Otherwise, they become random and do not bring results. Changes are carried out primarily in those areas that provide a solution to priority problems. This allows you to get the most tangible results and convinces the team of the need for further changes. That's why managers need to purposefully choose the vector of development and manage it effectively, choosing at each moment the necessary factors of influence on the elements of the system, determining their optimal connection with each other, the necessary communications to achieve maximum results at the lowest cost, while observing the laws of maintaining the viability of the production system.

Natural sequence and stages of changes

Organizational changes should be consistent with the stages of the organization's life cycle. When carrying out organizational changes in production systems, it is necessary to observe the natural sequence of stages and stages of change. Attempts to skip or jump over any stage can lead to the choice of the wrong directions of development, to social turbulence, to organizational pathology, to the destruction of the system. That's why one of the most important principles of organizational change management should be the principle of the natural sequence of changes.

Selective focus of management at each stage of organizational change

At each stage of development, it is necessary to identify and selectively motivate the growth points of the organization. Growth points are local associations, groups of employees, subcultures that determine each stage of the organizational development of the production system, its vector in the market space and successively replacing each other in time.

Therefore, the main condition for the effective management of organizational changes in production systems is the selective management of the motivation of the points of growth of the organization that are relevant for a given stage of development, the disclosure of their potential, which can greatly increase the efficiency of the entire process of change.

It is necessary to combine the interests of high-potential employees with the interests of the organization. Failure to fulfill the role of "organizers of change" leads them to an internal crisis, the loss of the ability to work in the organization, to the blocking of organizational changes planned by others.

The "hidden" potential of organizational change

To maintain the chosen trajectory of the development of the production system, it is constantly necessary to maintain a balance in the development of the elements of the system. However, the balance of elements can be maintained up to a certain point. As soon as large qualitative differences appear between the elements, the system gradually goes out of balance, a new wave of changes is born. Thus, in any production system there is a huge potential for development, but it is often in a latent state. New impulses of change in the system can be initiated by any element of the production system. Also, any element can introduce destabilization or inhibition in the process of organizational change. That's why one of the main tasks of organizational change management is to assess the development potential of the elements of the production system and its consistent unlocking at the right time for the effective development of the system as a whole.

Uniqueness of changes for different systems

Organizational changes are subject to system-wide principles of functioning. But for each production system, at any given time, there is a completely individual set of external and internal factors that initiate their own unique set of limitations and opportunities. Therefore, there are no standard or exemplary change programs. Every organization needs the right change at the right time and in the right place.

Adequacy of organizational changes to changes in the external environment

The external environment is one of the most effective catalysts for organizational change in the production system. This process is influenced by a huge number of factors, and they change at such a speed that the final direction of the organization's development vector is often very variable. The external environment turns from laminar to turbulent and acquires new properties: heterogeneity, instability, uneven time flows, unpredictability. Therefore, when managing organizational change in such an environment, it is practically impossible for managers to single out “zones of confident management.” To solve problems in such an environment, new management methods are also required. In a turbulent environment, effective management must have a dynamic character that corresponds to the environment..

4.2 Principles for effective organizational change management

Based on the foregoing, we can formulate the following general principles for effective management of organizational change. .

· Continuity of forecasting, planning and implementation of the process of organizational change.

· Objectivity and consistency in measuring and evaluating the effectiveness of organizational changes.

· Continuous support of cyclicity and readiness of PS for changes.

· Allocation of the top manager as a leading element in the management of organizational changes.

· Purposeful choice and effective management of the PS development vector.

· The natural sequence of steps in the process of organizational change.

· Selective management of motivation points of PS growth at each stage of organizational change.

· Continuous assessment of the potential for the development of the elements of the PS and management of its balance.

· Timely unlocking of the “hidden” development potential of individual elements at the right time to increase the effectiveness of organizational change.

· Uniqueness of the program of organizational changes for various systems: the right changes at the right time, in the right place for each PS - main principle organizational change management.

· Adequacy of organizational changes to changes in the external environment of the PS. The enterprise must have information about the current state and forecasts of the market situation and be guided by it in the decision-making process.

· Correspondence of organizational changes to the size, growth rates and stages of the life cycle of the PS.

· Limited number of cycles of organizational change. The limitation of the number of production and distribution cycles between the restructuring of the organizational structure for the enterprise has been empirically established.

· Accounting for the time factor when making changes. Organizational changes must occur sequentially, more often evolutionarily, at such a speed that it is possible to adapt to changes, employees have time to develop new skills.

· Creation of conditions for collective awareness of the need for changes and informing more employees in the organization about them.

Detailing changes. Planning for an organizational change project must begin with fast-moving change objects. Employees need to be constantly informed about the results. The results achieved on these objects are a guarantee of the future successful completion of the project, and the corresponding potential is being mobilized to address the major challenges of change.

· Formation of a single coalition of leaders and managers who would develop ideas and strategies, as well as perform the work of managing the change process.

· Creation of teams of employees and provision of conditions for their effective activity. Teams serve in the process of organizational change as a source of additional internal energy throughout the organization to fulfill current tasks and accumulate potential for the future. Through them, it is possible to involve more employees in the process of change, use their ideas, take into account needs, more effectively inform and inspire employees with changes, reduce their dissatisfaction with the change process and resistance to it.

· Consolidation in the culture of the enterprise of new approaches, rules and methods of action provided for in the course of changes.

· Creation of feedback loops when developing the project of organizational changes. The process nature of organizational change is expressed by the creation of feedback between the stages of the iterative process. Organizational change means that the enterprise develops consistently, gradually achieving a balance between different circles of interests. But at each stage it is necessary to evaluate and measure the degree of achievement of the set goals, the management to analyze these results, maintain or change the vector of the organization's movement. This requires feedback.

· Responsibility for development results. The enterprise should feel its social and institutional responsibility in relation to all internal, external participants in production and investors, avoid making decisions that violate the rights of employees, consumers, shareholders, as well as contrary to the interests of the state.

Thus, organizational changes affect a large number of interdependent parameters of the production system and occur under conditions of various types of reactions of the external environment and the internal environment of the organization. Therefore, effective management of organizational change is a very difficult task for managers.

In addition to the general principles of effective management of organizational change, we can distinguish, in our opinion, the following principles of organizational change management at various levels of environmental impact.

1. The interaction of the system with the external environment consists in the exchange of a certain amount of resources, needed by the system for life support.

2. When the production system is exposed to adverse external influences, the system incurs losses of two types: an increasing decrease in profit from the main activity; the costs of stopping the decline in profits and ensuring its further increase. The effectiveness of the management of the production system is to minimize the amount of these losses.

3. The external environment has three types of impact on the production system:

1) determines the possibilities and conditions for achieving the goals of the system;

2) determines the possibilities of obtaining the necessary resources;

3) determines the restrictions on the functioning of the system;

A change in the parameters of the external environment leads to responses from the production system, that is, to a response

4. The impact of the external environment on the production system is highly variable, both in terms of individual parameters and in general in terms of composition. Therefore, the production system faces the task of quickly and adequately responding to various changes. environment. Its responses must be coordinated in terms of speed with the external influences that cause them.

5. In order for the response to be effective in order to ensure the normal functioning and integrity of the system, the production system must have appropriate flexibility in the structure and development of the control system with memory and speed sufficient to store and timely select the appropriate type of reaction or develop a new one, if any. impact has not been observed in the past.

6. Possible goals of the response of the production system are to extinguish the perturbation of the external environment and adapt the production system to external conditions.

7. The objectives of the response aimed at improving the comfort of the environment include the following organizational changes: the organization of external institutions loyal to the system, alliances, coalitions that increase the "organization of the environment", the acquisition of monopoly positions, mergers and acquisitions, the creation of damping reserves of resources.

8. The goals of response aimed at adapting the system to external conditions include: reducing the complexity of the environment, its uncertainty, bringing the system's response rate into line with the rate of change in the external environment, adapting the system's goals to it.

9. Reducing the complexity of the external environment is achieved by reducing links with it, reducing the number of controlled features. The complication of the environment also requires decentralization of the structure.

10. Reducing the uncertainty of the external environment is carried out by increasing the proportion of permanent connections and the degree of awareness of the signs. The stability of the external environment leads to the bureaucratization of the organization.

11. Bringing the speed of system response in line with the environment is carried out by creating a more flexible structure of the system and diversifying its reactions.

12. Adaptation of the goals of the system to the external environment is carried out by changing the strategy of the system or transferring activities to a less aggressive environment.

13. The diversity of an organization's markets leads to a division of its structure into market-oriented organizational units.

14. The type of reaction of the system must correspond to the type of influence of the environment. There are the following types of reactions of the production system: production, competitive, innovative, entrepreneurial, administrative. specific kind and the reaction time of various production systems to a threat is different, it is required to choose a type of reaction that would minimize system losses.

15. An organization with a differentiated market environment to reduce the uncertainty of information should segment the external environment into separate markets (if possible) and assign control over each to separate divisions. So it minimizes the need to coordinate decision-making regarding different organizational units.

16. No organization exists in an evenly dynamic, complex, diverse or hostile environment. The organization is forced to respond to the disproportion of the environment by differentiating the structure. Disparities in the environment encourage the organization to selectively decentralize into differentiated work groups.

17. In a catastrophic (extremely hostile) environment, the very survival of the organization is in question. Since responsiveness becomes a critical factor, centralization and decision-making by the manager are required.

18. The choice of the optimal behavior to achieve maximum cost-effectiveness depends on the level of environmental dynamics. The difference between active, reactive and planned behavior lies in the sequence of acceptance management decisions. With today's high level of dynamics of the external environment, the incremental style of behavior of production systems is becoming increasingly important.

19. The process of organizational change should be directed in modern conditions to improve the "open" model of the organization, be customer-oriented, carried out not so much when necessary, but in order to establish highly effective, high-quality work of personnel that brings people satisfaction, and for the development of international markets.

20. The process of organizational development of the production system is closely related to the changes taking place in the external environment. It is continuous, cyclical and is usually associated with the emergence of new technologies and new products or the development of new markets, i.e. driven by various innovations.

21. The goal of managing the organizational development of production systems is to develop such control actions in which the state of organizational development corresponds to the level of environmental impact and is acceptable for decision makers in terms of system performance criteria that are achievable in this environment.

22. The organizational mechanisms of the production system must be tuned to constantly monitor changes in the external environment, to continuous changes within the system and adapted to identify new problems and develop new solutions more than to control those already taken.

23. The type of management structure should be chosen in such a way as to ensure maximum flexibility and adaptability of the system, quick response to changes in the external environment (most often it is necessary to make a transition to greater decentralization of management).

24. For successful implementation the process of organizational change requires the development of a system of organizational support for change.

25. With a high rate of changes in the external environment, it is necessary to take preventive advanced development of production and organizational potential in order to prepare for future changes.

4.3 Theoretical foundations of organizational change management for the formation of an effective internal environment of the enterprise

Before formulating theoretical provisions on organizational change management for the formation of an effective internal environment of an enterprise, it is necessary, in our opinion, to more strictly define our understanding of the effectiveness of the internal environment of an organization.

Under the efficiency of the internal environment of the organization in the work is understood the ability of the elements and the entire structure of the organization to ensure at any moment in time the sustainable preservation of the vector of its development and the achievement of its goals under any environmental influences and at optimal resource and information costs of the system.

Organizations are built on the principle of structured hierarchies. It is shown that the described structurization has a fractal character.

Collective phenomena are the result of the local interaction of many elements of the hierarchy. The elementary structural unit, the divisibility limit, of economic systems, in our opinion, is a person - an economic agent.

A. Smith, studying the basics of the typical behavior of an economic agent, wrote that each individual person tries as far as possible to use his capital in such a way that the resulting product has the greatest value. Ordinarily he does not intend to contribute to the public good, and is unaware of how much it contributes to it. He has in mind only his own interest, only his own benefit. Moreover, in this case, he is directed by an invisible hand to a goal that was not at all part of his intentions. By pursuing his own interests, he often promotes the interests of society more effectively than when he consciously seeks to do so. As a result, a clearly organized economic system of society appears.

In nature, each individual tries to survive by interacting only with the local environment according to a given program, which leads to a harmoniously organized structure of the ecosystem. The economy, like ecology, is an open system constantly exchanging flows of matter and energy with the environment, which maintains existence and ensures their development towards further complication of the structure.

The economy develops by absorbing energy and matter from the environment, while dissipative structures are not only enterprises that process material resources, but also the banking system that exists due to financial flows, etc.

The structure includes at a certain point full squad parts and elements of the organization, forms of interconnections of parts and their mutual correlation in the performance of the functions of the organization. The structure can reflect an instant snapshot of the dynamic state of the organization, show its stability, as well as the organization of the production system. The organization of the production system can change in various ways when the structure, its elements and the links between them change.

However, the structure is a function of the total number of elements, the forms of their relationships and the diversity of the primary elements of the organization. A change in any of the listed components can change the quality of the structure of the production system itself, bringing it to a new structure.

The structure of any organization always expresses its inner essence and integrity, its main physical and logical (ideal) properties. Therefore, in the theory of organization, the category "structure" is considered as a basis that ensures the unity of the form of organization and the level of performance of its functions.

According to the definition of R.A. Korenchenko, the structure of an organization is a set of stable connections of elements within an object that ensure its integrity and identity to itself, the composition of its constituent elements is objectively necessary, the features of the relationship and connections between them are a structural property of an organization that predetermines not only its qualitative characteristic - organization, but also external form, behavior, place in the surrounding world.

The structure through the connections of the elements forms the mechanism for performing the functions of the production system, determines its boundaries, ways of interacting with the external environment, the degree of flexibility of the organization, and reactivity when it is affected. It is the most stable essence of the organization, but also the most effective potential "point of growth" of its qualitative development and complication.

Thus, the structure reflects, on the one hand, the full set of properties of the organization in a certain segment of its life cycle, and on the other hand, its internal environment both as a set of elements and as a functioning whole, therefore, in our opinion, the formation of an effective internal environment of the organization can be identify with the formation of an effective organizational structure of the production system. However, this should be understood in a broad sense, as explained in the work earlier, and not reduce this process only to the formation of an enterprise organigram and writing job descriptions, as is often the case in practice.

The dynamics of development of any economic systems is determined by the microeconomic behavior of economic agents. The behavior of enterprises determines the dynamics of meso- and macroeconomic systems. Therefore, when considering theoretical aspects interaction between the organization and the external environment in this work, the enterprise as a whole was considered as an economic agent (an indivisible element of meso - and macro economic system).

Human behavior determines the dynamics of the development of microeconomic systems, i.e. enterprises. Therefore, when studying the theoretical aspects of the formation of an effective internal environment, it is proposed to consider a person (person) as such an economic agent, performing certain functions, endowed with certain powers, possessing certain knowledge and having certain motives and goals for carrying out his activities within the organization. In this case, a person is the nano-level of consideration of the multidimensional economic environment of the general mega-economic system - the world economy. Such a systemic representation of the economic environment allows, in our opinion, to form a comprehensive solution to the entire set of problems of effective organization of the process of organizational change at various levels of a multidimensional economic environment, to formulate a holistic unified view of the universal concept of organizational change and to develop general theoretical foundations for managing organizational change for economic systems.

All theoretical conclusions presented in this paper are based on the following axioms formulated by us.

Axiom 1. All economic systems, functioning, newly formed and projected, belong or can be attributed to different levels of a single multidimensional economic environment.

Axiom 2. All economic systems belonging to different levels of the multidimensional economic environment function and develop on the basis of uniform laws and principles.

Axiom 3. All economic systems belonging to different levels of the multidimensional economic environment have a hierarchical structure.

Axiom 4. Each higher level of the hierarchy of the multidimensional economic environment is the external environment for the previous level.

Axiom 5. The external environment of any level of the hierarchy has a single evaluation criterion.

Axiom 6. All economic systems belonging to different levels of the multidimensional economic environment have their own rate of development and their own final life cycle, at the end of which they are transformed into other systems.

Axiom 7. The efficiency of an economic system at any level is determined by a single criterion - the achievement of the set goals with an optimal resource and information exchange with the external environment.

Based on the above axioms, we will assume that the internal environment of the organization is the external environment in relation to the individual. Then, as has already been proved in the work, the mechanism of interaction between a person and the internal environment of an enterprise is formalized and described with the help of theoretically - multiple representations. The mechanism of interaction between the individual and the internal environment of the organization is shown in Figure 4.1.

Economic systems different levels have individual properties, types of structures, characteristics of the connection between elements, types of reactions to the influence of the external environment, types of behavior. Therefore, these features for systems of any level should be specially described.

The interaction of an individual with the internal environment of the enterprise consists in the exchange of a certain amount of resources necessary for him to live and meet certain needs. Human participation in the activities of the enterprise is considered in the work as an activity for the production of spiritual and material goods and resources for economic exchange. Conventionally, this human activity in the production system can be represented as follows: he takes a number of resources from it, adds value to them and supplies them back to the internal environment of the enterprise in the form of goods, services, creative technical and managerial solutions.

This human activity is a stream of various resources coordinated in time, balanced by certain reserves (resources, information, etc.) that support it when the conditions of exchange with the internal environment change. These flows form a circuit with positive and negative feedbacks that improve or worsen the performance of the individual.

Human behavior in the production system is determined by the action of various kinds of external perturbations on its part.

The results of their impact on an individual can be the same as for the system itself:

1) favorable (comfortable), if the action of the internal environment of the enterprise increases the efficiency of a person;

2) neutral (constant), if the parameters of the internal environment change slightly and do not change the conditions of the individual's activity;

3) unfavorable (aggressive), if a change in the parameters of the internal environment leads to a decrease in the efficiency of human activity;

4) catastrophic (lethal), if a change in environmental parameters leads to the cessation of human activity in a given production system (dismissal, death).

The effectiveness of a person's activity in work is understood as the probability of achieving system-wide and personal goals.

When a person is exposed to adverse external environmental influences, he incurs the following losses:

1) an increasing decline in income from activities in a given production system;

2) costs that compensate for the deterioration of socio-hygienic working conditions (for restoring health, meeting socio-cultural needs, safety);

3) the cost of training and improving (changing) qualifications;

4) the costs of stopping the decline in income and ensuring its further increase.

The effectiveness of organizational change management to create an effective internal environment of the production system is to minimize the amount of these losses.

When changing the conditions of the internal environment of the enterprise, a person can exhibit three types of behavior.

1. Influence the environment in order to extinguish disturbances (reactive).

2. To carry out internal changes (changes in one's own stereotypes of thinking, one's behavioral patterns, one's image, ways of learning, professionalism, personal goals) to adapt to changes (adaptive).

3. Anticipate and prepare for possible adverse changes (planned).

Adaptation of a person to external conditions occurs by changing the set of connections (communications) and changing one's own personality. The personality characteristics of an individual act as a special mechanism of adaptation to the environment and, therefore, imply the interdependence between the internal environment of the enterprise and the personal properties of the individual.

The internal environment of the production system has three types of impact on a person.

1. Determines the possibilities and conditions for achieving the overall goals of the system and the individual.

2. Determines the possibility of obtaining the necessary resources.

3. Defines restrictions on the activity of the individual.

The result of this impact, respectively, is the set of goals of the system - (C i ), the set of resources - (R i ) and the set of restrictions - (O i ).

However, these sets correspond to a certain state of the internal environment of the enterprise. If the rate of changes occurring in the environment is much less than the rate of changes occurring in a person, then the environment has practically no decisive influence on him and will be called stable in the work, since the development of the individual occurs only because of his internal needs and does not associated with the environment. If the rate of changes in external conditions is comparable to the rate of changes in the individual, then the internal environment of the enterprise can have a noticeable impact on its development, but these changes are caught and perceived in a timely manner by a person. Therefore, the conditions of its activity within the enterprise do not change significantly, and the environment will be considered quasi-stable and an individual can foresee its changes in the future.

If the rate of change in the internal environment is much greater than the rate of change of the individual, then he may not have time to respond to these changes, which leads to the need for frequent personal changes and to an increase in losses that can lead to an unfavorable outcome - a catastrophe (cessation of human activity at this enterprise ). Such an environment will be called unstable. It requires the manifestation of new types of reactions and the development of new methods of human adaptation to rapidly changing conditions.

The interaction of the elements of the production system with each other and the internal environment and the individual is carried out by choosing and establishing various relationships. Communication in the work is understood as any change (action, interaction) in the system, accompanied by the movement of material and information flows. Then the content of management in economic systems of any level, in our opinion, is the choice of actual connections from among the potentially possible ones and their implementation.

The interdependence of changes in the internal environment and human activity in the production system requires establishing the characteristics of changes in the environment in space and time, as well as assessing the level of influence of environmental elements on the development of the individual. Since, according to the axioms 4 and 5 formulated by us, the internal environment of the production system will be an external environment for the individual, both the measurement methods and its assessment will be the same as for the external environment.

In this regard, the main characteristics of the states of the internal environment of the production system will be the following.

1. Complexity - the number of environmental factors that are essential for the functioning of a person in the production system, the variety of their features and properties.

The more heterogeneous are the elements of the internal environment, the more differentiated should be human activity in the production system.

2. Uncertainty - the degree of availability of information regarding the estimates of the significance of various environmental factors and its individual elements, the impossibility of accurately establishing these estimates.

Uncertainty can be generated, firstly, total absence information about some phenomenon or environmental factor, because of their novelty, secondly, limited human capabilities to organize communication channels with the environment, and thirdly, because of the time of receipt and processing of information.

Individuals, especially decision makers in the production system (DM), must have accurate, reliable and certain factors or elements of the environment that are or can, if possible, complete information about the state of the environment, about the degree of importance, be significant in a given or forecast time interval. However, information about changes in the internal environment is often limited. Making decisions with incomplete information leads to errors and additional costs.

3. The rate of change (environmental stability) is the frequency and level of changes in environmental factors and its elements, the degree of certainty and familiarity of changes, a measure of the constancy of assessing the significance of specific environmental factors and its elements.

4. Comfort - the degree of compliance of environmental factors with effective human activity, a measure of the possibility of its effective functioning.

The assessment of the level of environment dynamics should, in our opinion, meet the following requirements.

1. It should be based on a comprehensive, multidimensional approach to measuring such a complex phenomenon as the external (internal) environment of a production system.

3. Indicators should be comparable and, if possible, easily calculated in practice.

4. The indicators should be unidirectional and have a single economic meaning, allowing them to obtain a single assessment from them and use it to calculate the measure of the influence of the environment on the activities of an economic agent of any level.

Figure 4.1 - The mechanism of interaction between the individual and the internal environment of the organization (compiled according to B.M. Genkin)

All the characteristics of the environment that we have chosen earlier determine the conditions for the functioning of a person in the system, the greater the complexity, variability, novelty of the environment parameters, the less likely the individual is to achieve the desired personal and systemic results (goals), the lower the effectiveness of his functioning under the current system of communications (connections). ). Therefore, all the indicators included in our proposed system for assessing the interaction between a person and the environment have the meaning of the risk of its functioning in this environment.

The risk of functioning in work is understood as the probability of occurrence of losses or shortfall in income in comparison with the desired result, that is, the level of a certain financial loss, expressed as:

1) in the possibility of not achieving the goals;

2) uncertainty of the predicted result;

3) the subjectivity of the assessment of the predicted result.

The variety of connections, the number, the uncertainty of their characteristics, the speed of their change over time increase the risk of human functioning. Each connection in a certain way affects its activity in the production system, it is individual in its characteristics, the identification of these differences in the connections, as well as their multiplicity, impose special requirements on the individual. The totality of differences in relationships forms the signs of relationships.

Thus, when assessing and predicting the dynamics of the internal environment, it is necessary to take into account not only the number of established connections between a person and the internal environment, but also the variety of features that characterize each connection. In our opinion, it is necessary to distinguish the following main features of the connections between the internal environment and the individual in the production system. Features can be individual for each production system and are determined by the decision maker.

It is possible to link these two characteristics (the number of connections and the variety of their features) into one - into an assessment of the level of environmental impact (the risk of the system functioning in the environment) - using the entropy function.

The more connections are served by a person, the more they differ from each other, the greater the uncertainty of the functioning of an individual in the system and, accordingly, the uncertainty of managing connections, the more diverse (complex) human activity should be and the more diverse methods of his response.

According to the provisions of axioms 4 and 5, the assessment of the level of impact of the internal environment can be carried out on the basis of the model presented in the work.

Since the characteristics (the number of connections and the variety of their features) can be considered independent, the overall assessment of the level of impact of the internal environment on an individual in the production system is also made according to the formula:

where H(J,I)* fact is the total actual uncertainty of human functioning according to all characteristics of the internal environment, and H(J,I)* max is the total maximum uncertainty of human functioning in the internal environment of the production system that has these characteristics and features.

The indicator of complexity reflects the degree of structuredness, hierarchy of the internal environment, determines the measure of control in the production system.

The uncertainty indicator reflects the degree of familiarity, standardity, routineness of work tasks and human functions in the production system, determines the degree of standardization of human behavior patterns and methods for predicting the state of the environment.

The stability indicator reflects the variability of the environment, its understandability for a person, determines the methods of its response to changes and the range of reactions.

The comfort indicator reflects the degree to which a person can achieve personal and system-wide goals under given conditions of the internal environment, determines the necessary speed of a person's reaction in the production system.

The state of the internal environment in the work is understood as one of the possible combinations of relationships and features that characterize them, established at the time of assessment. A state parameter is a quantitative characteristic of a state.

Since a person is the divisibility limit of an economic system of any level, the level of impact of the internal environment of the production system on a person will be called an assessment of the state of the internal environment of the organization.

It is proposed to assess the state of the internal environment of the production system (Uvns) in three areas:

1) assessment of the state of the environment by working groups (teams) in which employees are united for the implementation of work tasks (goals), to identify the most risky tasks (projects) - goals that are a "bottleneck" in the system, i.e. not feasible with data conditions;

2) assessment of the state of the environment for the linear divisions in which employees and working groups operate in order to identify the most risky (tense) divisions that are a weak link in the structure of the enterprise and require increased attention from general management;

3) assessment of the state of the environment for the main management functions (headquarters) of the production system, providing the necessary set of reactions of the enterprise when interacting with the external environment (supersystem), in order to identify the most risky functions that do not provide the necessary response and, therefore, reduce the efficiency of the production system , and also increase the likelihood of a crisis state or a “lethal” outcome for her. They require increased attention from the management of the company.

The methodological approach proposed in the paper makes it possible to assess the riskiness of individual structural formations of the production system, as well as general state the internal environment of the production system. Graphically, the proposed assessment of the state of the internal environment can be represented as a three-dimensional model shown in Figure 4.2.

In accordance with the real situation, enterprises do not have any other internal goals and motives for behavior, with the exception of the goals of survival and growth, which are formed in the process of searching and “natural (competitive) selection” in interaction with the external environment. Among other motives, income maximization is determined by market organization social production and supported by the institutions that form it. At the same time, this motive does not always play a leading role in the behavior of economic agents - very often, in conditions of incomplete information, they are content with obtaining the minimum acceptable profit for continuing reproduction or are guided by other goals, depending on the economic situation.

Figure 4.2 - Model for assessing the state of the internal environment of the production system

However, it should be noted that in all modern methods the formal design apparatus effective organizations is of an auxiliary nature, only supplementing the purposeful work of qualified experts, managers and members of organizations.

At the same time, the main weakness of these approaches lies in the substitution of the problem of creating a complete organizational system by considering only some of its aspects. It is necessary to form a comprehensive understanding of the composition, content and conditions for the formation of effective organizations.

Thus, generalizing all of the above, it is possible to form a complex theory of the formation of an effective model of an organization (industrial enterprise). In order to form such a model, it is necessary, in our opinion, to combine evolutionary, situational-configuration, ecological-biological and system-integration models. As an elementary unit of the internal environment of the enterprise, one should accept the "organizational routine" as a carrier of the organization's hereditary characteristics and a source of organizational changes when the parameters of the external environment change in order to survive and adequately adapt in it.

The modern paradigm of the life cycle assumes that development is a schematic sequence of states of an organization, separated by moments of transformation, which make it possible to single out different periods in its development. The main focus of research in most works on life cycles is the nature of evolutionary changes, the number of stages, their features and duration.

It is necessary, in our opinion, to agree with the opinion of E. Popov and N. Khmelkova that “the theory of the life cycle of an organization today needs a serious revision from new system-integration positions, which allow us to get not only answers to the questions of how and why an organization evolves, but and what changes in it.

Understanding the organization as a system is an axiom of modern management theory. However, when developing evolutionary approaches, the principle of consistency is not fully implemented. The organization in the theories of life cycles appears as a conditionally primary element of analysis, its dynamics internal structure not systematically studied.

Recognition of the complexity and heterogeneity of the internal environment of the organization requires taking into account the systemic principle of polydynamism. It means that “various elements of the organization’s internal environment are characterized not only by their own “meaningful dimension”, but also by their own evolution, the speed of which is not the same and does not coincide with the period of the organization’s presence in the market” .

The results of the study by J. Collins demonstrated the ambiguity of the processes occurring in the internal environment of the organization. The author argues that "Great companies retain their core values ​​and core message, but their strategies and operating tactics adapt to the world's changes an infinite number of times."

Therefore, it is necessary to study the life cycles of the internal environment of the organization, taking into account the structure and characteristics of its individual elements, the nature of their evolution. This will change the understanding of the process of development of the organization as a change in the stages of the life cycle.

The life cycle of organizational routine according to the system-integration approach includes three stages. The initial stage - routine, involves the formation (birth) of a new organizational routine, clarification of its market prospects, within which the return (income growth, profit, cost reduction) from changes in the established complexes of the organization's activities should increase.

The second stage - routine, represents the actual routine state of intra-company institutions, values, mental characteristics and behavioral patterns, when they take root in the internal environment of the organization. At this stage, there are organizational routines that have justified themselves as a source of competitiveness that have brought sustainable benefits to the organization.

The third stage - post-structurality (rigidity), refers to obsolete institutional, cultural and behavioral patterns, the return on which is gradually decreasing. They, using the term D. Leonard-Burton, are a kind of "ossification" or "rigidity" that must be destroyed. D. Leonard-Barton defines "ossification" as a variety of old norms, values, knowledge, skills and management systems that are difficult to change. She identifies four coordinates of key competencies that, over time, if they lose their adequacy, can become elements of key ossifications: physical systems, management systems, skills with skills and knowledge, and organizational values.

A feature of the approach proposed by E. Popov and N. Khmelkova, in contrast to the evolutionary theory of Nelson-Winter, is that there is no opposition between routine and innovation in the life cycle model. Organizational routines are evolving. Routine and innovativeness are two different states of intraorganizational processes. We are talking about different degrees of routine functioning of the organization. In essence, the organization is a set of established routine models, while innovation is the process of forming a new organizational routine to replace the outdated one. The concept of "routinization" was proposed by the English sociologist E. Giddens, who studied the nature of the functioning of local social communities, which include the organization. Understanding “routinization” as ensuring the stability of certain patterns of behavior over time, their regularity, stability and predictability”, he noted that “socialization of individuals can take place only in a routinized context that gives them a sense of community, security, trust, the ability to track and interpret their own and other people's actions."

The fundamental levels of the pyramid of the internal environment of the organization, formed by its values, mental characteristics and intra-company institutions, live longer. They are connected not with the resources or market behavior of the organization, but with value and cultural aspects. The culture of the organization is characterized by casual uncertainty, which makes it not fully realized and not always understandable even for direct carriers. Such routines are almost impossible to copy, creating a long-term strategic advantage and "corporate identity".

Shane E., who divided organizational culture into levels of artifacts, proclaimed values ​​and basic ideas, noted the human desire for cognitive stability. The author of the concept of transformational learning of the organization wrote: “Corporate culture is based on postulates that seem so obvious to us that we do not even dare to discuss them openly. For example, these could be the goals of the organization or what the company has learned over the years. When we talk about changing the culture of an organization, we mean transformative learning... changes of this magnitude require employees to abandon old tried and tested postulates and embrace new ones... the process of unlearning and then learning again is inevitably slow and painful.”

The presence of an organization's beliefs and dominant values ​​is a defining obstacle to fundamental change. Such organizational routines are characterized by high costs of routinization, especially the costs of overcoming established approaches, outdated beliefs and decision-making logic.

In turn, functional (resource, technological, behavioral) levels have a shortened life cycle associated with the phenomenon of organizational learning. Its goal is to ensure the permanent adaptation of the enterprise to changes in the external environment.

The use of the organizational routine life cycle model allows us to conditionally identify nine possible states of the internal environment of the organization (Figure 4.3), depending on the dynamics of its fundamental and functional components.

Figure 4.3 - The matrix of states of the internal environment of the enterprise and the likely trajectory of its evolution

The diagonal of the matrix shows "balanced" states of the internal environment of the enterprise, when organizational routines of different levels are at the same stage of the life cycle. To the left and right of the "balance" diagonal, various states of "imbalance" are shown, when an enterprise has value-mental and resource-behavioral routines, the life stages of which do not coincide. The arrows show the most probable scenario for the development of evolutionary processes. During one complete cycle of origin, rooting and obsolescence of routines of a fundamental level, several generations of organizational routines of a functional nature change.

Analyzing the system-integration approach to the evolution of an organization proposed by E. Popov and N. Khmelkova, we can, in our opinion, agree with the proposed theoretical hypotheses to explain the mechanism of the organization's functioning. However, these theoretical provisions require significant refinement, because. do not contain explanations of many important, from a practical point of view, aspects of the functioning and change of the organization throughout its life cycle. These include:

Interrelation of the processes of transition of routines of the fundamental level to a new state with the change of generations of routines of the functional level;

· Criteria for evaluating the stages of evolution of organizational routines of all types, tk. the indicator of the return of the routine proposed by the authors (the cost of routinization) is completely unmeasurable. On the one hand, this is due to the fact that the cost accounting methodology at the enterprise does not single out such an accounting object as organizational routine. On the other hand, it is quite difficult to single out such an object, because does not exist quantification the degree of routinization of the organization's processes, and there is also no consensus on the composition of its routines (elements) of the internal environment;

In the considered approach, there is also no connection between the life cycle of routines at different levels and the life cycle of the organization as a whole.

To solve these theoretical problems, the paper proposes a comprehensive theory of the formation of an effective internal environment of the organization. Its main provisions are as follows.

Organizational systems, according to A. Bogdanov, during their lifetime have the ability to improve and select new elements that can change intrastructural relationships, intraorganizational proportions between parts, shift the centers of stability of dynamic balance and functions of the former constituent components, change their nature, i.e. adapt to external conditions. On the other hand, as noted, due to organizational internal capabilities, adaptation processes for a given organization are terminated. A destructive crisis sets in - death, new, more suitable organizations appear that perform the same functions as the previous ones, but they are more in line with external conditions.

It is clear that the stages themselves undergo major changes throughout life. For example, allotropic growth and development (uneven) of parts of the organization, different in time, different in appearance, active manifestation and extinction of their functions are observed.

Due to the influence of the external environment on the internal stages of the life cycle within open systems, the ratio of entropic and negentropic processes of energy assimilation and deassimilation changes in such a way that under certain conditions the duration of the period of active functioning of the organization increases, the time of origin and (or) development and (or ) decay time.

The law of ontogenesis (introduced by E. Haeckel) explains the historical variability of the life cycle under the conditions of the mechanism of competition and uncompromising struggle various kinds organizations in the external environment for their survival, which is the cause of the death of some species and the prosperity of others.

Taking into account the life cycle cost is important in the analysis of any organization, incl. and production system. The manager must know exactly at every moment in what phase of development his organization is in: what is its heyday, maturity or decline, in order to determine what targeted organizational changes need to be carried out in it so that it functions and develops stably. Internal restructuring can be caused by a change in the private goals of individual units or a measure of the activity of individual individuals upon their achievement. This can affect the corporate goal and how it is achieved. As a result, the set, physical and other properties of the elements included in the organization, their groups, divisions, activities, their specific ratio and role in achieving the common goal, i.e. the structure is changing, and with it the quality of the entire production system, its nature.

IN economic organizations, including in production systems, the change of phases of development, their duration occur on other grounds than in biological and other organizations, a different role in the passage of these phases is played by the external environment, the sufficiency of internal resources, the rationality of energy and information consumption in the internal environment of the organization.

The very birth of an organization, depending on its nature, occurs in different ways. The first way of origin production organizations is the pooling of shareholders' capital. The second way of origin can occur, as noted by A. Bogdanov, as a result of a disjunctive crisis or disintegration: the separation of elements or substructures of former organizations to form new independent organizations with different goals and functions than the former ones. The third form of the emergence of a new production system is a complete reorganization as a means of overcoming the crisis of the previous organizational form and its transition to a new one with a change in the final goals, functions and means of achievement.

A. Bogdanov in tektology proposed to use the concept of crises as the initial and final points of the life of any organization (crises of type C and D), as well as the initial and final moments of the stages of the life of an organization, to objectify the results of organizational changes. The former were called organizational form crises, and the latter, process crises. In this case, the boundaries of the separation of processes x and y will be equilibrium points - attractors, between oppositely directed activities x and y within a given organization. They are a condition (signal) for the formation of new structures and new directions for the development of elements in the system.

Let us now consider in more detail the proposed point of view on the content of organizational changes at the stages of ontogenesis of the production system (Figure 4.4).

At the stage of growth t 1 - t 2, the potential of the organization is born through the formation of all its internal parts, a connection with the external environment is established, the process of improving the interaction of the main elements of its structure begins by clarifying their functions and real capabilities.

The mobile equilibrium L 1 is characterized by a quantitative and structural predominance of the elements necessary for growth and development entering the PS over those that are realized in the external environment.

Figure 4.4 - Stages of ontogenesis of the production system (PS) (the figure was created on the basis of):

point t 1 - the birth of PS; period t 1 - t 2 - birth and growth process; t 2 - t 3 - period of development; t 3 - t 4 - flourishing; t 4 - t 5 - maturity of the PS; t 5 -t 6 - the process of some decline; t 6 - t 7 - destruction process; t 7 - death of PS. The connection in the figure of the segments of the curves through the points t 1 - t 7 is drawn along the x time axis, the corresponding points L 1 , L 2 , L 3 , L 4 of the mobile balance of the performance of functions at each stage are indicated by attractors L along the y axis on the ontogenesis curve with points: a 1, a 2, a 3, a 4, a 5, a 6

There is an initial (simple) form of organization. The PS is action-oriented, single-handedly managed by the founding leader, very vulnerable, there is no organizational culture at all. Ends with a sales crisis.

At the stage of development t 2 - t 3 growth continues, however, the substructures of PS allotropically, but in concert, change, their role and significance change, i.e. the main thing at this stage is that the structure is being improved and developed, which approaches the most developed form.

Organizational Change Methods

Changes may not have the same impact as planned. In this case, attempts to improve organizational adaptability and change individual behavior must be accompanied by managers of the essence of the required changes and certain methods for their implementation.

These methods focus on six main components that affect the implementation of organizational change:

• people (workers of the organization), their personal qualities, perceptions, problem-solving style, needs and motives;
• culture - reflects shared values ​​and beliefs, expectations and organizational norms;
• tasks or the essence of the work itself, its level of complexity, etc.;
• technologies, including methods for solving problems and making decisions, knowledge management, information technologies used;
• organizational structure - as a system of communication and control;
• strategy - related to the planning process in an organization, from setting goals, developing strategic plans to locating and using the resources available in the organization.

There are several basic methods for implementing restructuring in organizations:

1. Unplanned changes. There are a lot of evolutionary, natural changes going on in every organization. These changes occur regardless of the will of the leadership. They cannot be planned, but they can and should be taken into account when determining the future of the organization. It is possible to plan measures to prevent and eliminate the negative consequences of evolutionary changes.

2. Planned restructuring. If the organization is subject to only unplanned changes, this is a sign of poor leadership, a manifestation of an unwillingness or inability to look ahead and prepare to respond at the right time to future opportunities and difficulties.

Planning cannot completely eliminate the need for unplanned change. However, it helps the organization to prepare appropriately for expected changes and minimizes the number of situations where hasty decisions have to be made in an atmosphere of panic. Moreover, planning for change allows you to “create the future” (for example, through technological development or the launch of new products and services), set and achieve complex development goals. Thus, the planned changes can be active.

3. Imposed changes. In organizations, a significant proportion of change is imposed by management. This often causes resentment and resentment, especially if the people affected feel they should have been consulted or at least informed in advance. If changes come from a person in power and are imposed, they can be inherently unstable and disappear when the source of power is removed or in the absence of appropriate penalties and sanctions.

However, it cannot be argued that any imposed restructuring is bad. There are urgent situations when discussions are not possible, and delaying decisions is tantamount to suicide. Some administrative and regular measures affect many people, but are of little importance and do not require lengthy discussions and consultations. And if you work not with independent, but with dependent people, the imposed changes are considered more effective. In general, the level of culture, education, access to information, the availability of alternatives, and other factors greatly influence the attitude towards the imposed changes.

The leader should think twice before deciding to impose any action. He should only do this if he is firmly convinced that there is no other choice - for example, he did not succeed in obtaining the support of the group, but he feels that change is inevitable. However, he must always take the trouble to explain to employees the reasons for his decision.

4. Change with participation. In different national and social environments, people have different attitudes towards changes that are brought to them as a fait accompli and imposed without prior discussion or consultation. However, in a growing number of countries, “participatory change” is preferred, i.e. involving in the process of preparation and implementation of changes those people who are affected by these changes. People want to know what's coming up and be able to influence what affects them. This applies to both global decisions at the state level and strategic changes at the company level. Managers and administrators are becoming increasingly aware of this fundamental requirement and are responding to it by involving others in the development of change.

Participatory change is slower and more costly than forced change, but is considered to be more durable. In addition, this approach allows management to use the experience and creativity of people, which is difficult to achieve in the first case. There are various levels and forms of participation in change, depending on the nature and complexity of the change, on the maturity, cohesion and motivation of the group, and on the relationship between management and employees. There are three levels:

The first level is the information level. At the first level, the manager or consultant informs the employees about the need for changes and about the specific measures that are being prepared.

The second level is the consulting level. At the second level, during restructuring, consultations are held on related issues, for example, when identifying the need for changes and checking how people can react to the proposed measures. Suggestions and advice are welcome, and management can revise its action plan based on them.

The third level is the level of active actions. At the third level, management seeks the active participation of employees in the planning and implementation of change, invites them to participate in determining what and how to change, as well as putting approved actions into practice. This is usually done through working or task forces, ad hoc committees, staff meetings, and other methods.

5. Change through negotiation. In many cases, restructuring requires negotiation between management and unions representing employees. Such changes may be determined by law, collective agreement or other agreement, formal or informal.

Managers and consultants should always be ready for dialogue with workers and other representatives of employees, not only in cases expressly provided for by law or formal agreements, but also if changes may affect the interests of people in the organization.

People and culture oriented methods

These methods of carrying out changes are focused on the participation of the majority of employees in them. If successful, these methods improve individual and group processes in problem solving and decision making, communication, attitudes towards work, and so on. Changing organizational culture affects the level of acceptance of values, expectations, location and behavior of employees. The main methods focused on organizational culture include the following five methods:

1. Discussion of the results of the organizational diagnosis. This method includes the following steps:

• collecting information from members of the organization or working groups;
• organization of the received data in an understandable format;
• communication of data to those from whom it was received.

In the future, employees use this information to plan their actions to solve problems that arise. main goal This method is to improve relations between members of working groups and departments by discussing common problems, instead of carrying out specific innovations.

2. Group work. The use of this method consists in the fact that the members of the working group carry out a diagnosis of joint work and plan for changes to improve the effectiveness of group work. This approach focuses on the following aspects:

• setting group goals and priorities;
• analysis of performed group work;
• learning how group work is done;
• the study of relations between members of the group in the process of work.

3. Consulting on the process. The application of this method includes the assistance of consultants to managers and employees in the perception, understanding and action on the processes that occur in the work environment. Basically, these processes are how people do work, including their behavior in meetings, formal and informal work interactions, and other task-related behaviors.

4. Quality of life at work. Quality of life programs are activities carried out by an organization to improve conditions that affect performance. These programs are related to safety, health, participation in decision-making, opportunities to develop talent and creativity, etc.

5. System of work - high commitments - high results. This system associated with changing the culture of the organization, increasing the involvement of employees in the work. The purpose of the system is to give employees the feeling that only they can do the job at such a high level that no one else could do it. These systems have the following characteristics:

• delegation of authority through the timely transfer of information and giving responsibility for decision-making and actions at their level;
• group work within the framework of business processes aimed at customer satisfaction;
• giving employees power through increasing their responsibility for the work performed;
• integration of people and technology;
• understanding by employees of the meaning and content of organizational goals at the level of participation in the vision of the future of the organization.

Task and Technology Oriented Methods

The considered methods concentrate on making changes directly in the work of employees and their groups. In this regard, the main attention is paid to the technological processes and tools used to perform certain tasks.

The methods in this group are:

1. Work design- a deliberately planned restructuring of how a particular job is done in order to increase employee motivation, engagement and productivity and improve overall job performance.

2. Sociotechnical system. This method of change is task and technology oriented, focusing on the technological and social aspects of the organization, optimizing the relationship between the two. This method usually involves a radical redesign of the work, taking into account the interests of both technology and workers. Many modern industries initially use this method both independently and as part of other previously described methods for making changes.

3. Quality mugs are working groups of volunteers from one area of ​​activity that meet regularly to monitor and resolve problems related to the quality of work and its results. The effectiveness of the quality circles is manifested in the fact that its members receive training in problem solving, statistical quality control and group work. Their work results in quality and performance improvement recommendations for possible implementation. The disadvantage of quality circles is the limited scope of problem solving.

4. Reengineering of business processes. This method is aimed at redesigning, streamlining work, reducing costs, improving quality and efficiency in its implementation. Reengineering is accompanied by the following typical changes in the organization:

• functional units are replaced by process ones;
• replacement of narrow specialization with a broad one;
• empowerment of employees;
• replacement of performance appraisal by actions by results appraisal;
• managers become "coaches";
• structure from vertical to horizontal.

Reengineering is a complex method, but it is accompanied by fundamental changes in the organization.

5. Total Quality Management (TQM). This method aims to anticipate customer needs and meet quality expectations.

The main components of this method:

• plan for continuous improvement of all processes;
• a system for accurately measuring these improvements;
• a strategic plan based on comparing the quality of the organization's work with the best world achievements;
• close partnerships with suppliers and customers that provide feedback;
• understanding consumers, allowing them to immediately transform their needs into products and services;
• long-term relationships with consumers;
• error prevention;
• Commitment to quality improvement in everything for employees at all levels.

Structure and Strategy Oriented Methods

Changes in the structure are associated with a reshuffle in positions, relocations between working groups and structural divisions. Changes in strategy include a review of the organization's mission and goals, and the strategy to achieve those goals.
Adaptive organizational structures. As organizations grow, they become more complex and face the need for constant change in order to adapt to new ways of working. To do this, the organization and its structure must be flexible and adaptable. The main types of organizational structures that meet these requirements:

1. Parallel organizations. In this case, the organization consists of the main and additional structures. At the same time, the parallel structure deals with complex problems that the main or formal structure is either unwilling or unable to solve. People in a parallel structure use other channels of communication and power. They adhere to other norms in group work, solving problems, making decisions that are different from the main structure. The parallel structure does not require the involvement of new personnel, it is formed from existing employees. Such an organization is characterized as follows:

• all channels of communication are open and connected; managers and employees freely exchange information without restrictions from the formal organizational hierarchy;
• there is a rapid and complete exchange of relevant information on the problems and issues being addressed;
• the norms used contribute to the emergence of fair questions among employees and an analysis of the goals, assumptions, methods, alternatives and criteria for innovation;
• there is a development of mechanisms that contribute to the unification in the future of formal and parallel structures.

Parallel organizations contribute to the development of managerial skills, the ability to cope with crisis situations that require decentralization in decision-making, and acceleration in the implementation of innovations.

2. Matrix organizational structure. Organizations experiencing mechanistic and bureaucratic constraints sometimes move to matrix structures, representing a kind of balance between the use of resources along the lines of products or objects and along the lines of functions. The matrix structure of the organization quickly adapts to changes.

3. Network organizations. Network structures have features of matrix and parallel structures. The main emphasis in them is on complex information technologies, with the help of which the activities of network participants are coordinated. Managers of this network can quickly gather a group of workers and send it to the project to solve urgent problems. Employees are required to show a spirit of cooperation and a positive attitude towards group work. Network structures are common in transnational corporations, global organizations.

Strategic changes. An example of a method under consideration is an open planning system that helps an organization to systematically assess its environment and develop a strategy that can cope with the external environment.

Stages of this system:

• assessing the influence of the external environment on organizational behavior;
• assessing the organization's response to the requirements of the external environment;
• formulating the mission of the organization;
• scenario method, that is, the development of a realistic scenario regarding the future requirements of the external environment, as well as the development of an ideal scenario of the future requirements of the external environment and the response to them from the organization;
• comparing the current situation with the future ideal and preparing an action plan to reduce the gap between the present and the future.

The key point in the system under consideration is the concept of vision, which consists in choosing the desired future state of the organization.

Project methods of change management

In a rapidly changing, turbulent environment, modern organizations are forced to continuously transform. Most often, these changes are carried out reactively, which often leads to loss of competitive advantage and sometimes to the death of organizations. Proactive (proactive) implementation of change requires knowledge of the basic patterns of this process, sources of resistance to organizational change and methods to overcome them.

Project management is a carefully planned and organized system of measures aimed at solving a specific problem (for example, building a house or creating a new computer system). The management of any project involves the development of a project plan with the obligatory definition of goals and a description of how to achieve these goals. In other words, the project developer must decide in advance how, in what time frame and with the involvement of what financial, human and other resources to achieve the goals of the project. This means that along with the plan, he needs to create a system of measures to ensure control over its implementation. During the implementation of the project, it is important not to “get out” of the schedule in the areas of work that lie on the “critical path” and link the most problematic parts of the plan, on which the timely execution of the project as a whole depends. In other words, the plan must be carried out according to the plan.

The main stages of the project implementation include: development of the principle feasibility of the project, planning, implementation, evaluation and provision of resources.

Most enterprises, unfortunately, do not have sufficient resources and qualified personnel to ensure effective project management in the field of reengineering. In addition, reengineering is a truly project-based, "hard" method of making changes, aimed at changing the organization's business processes, breaking down functional boundaries. Like any rigid method, it is associated with strong resistance to change. And not every company can go for it. In addition, all modern Western research suggests that pure project management methods are not suitable for change management, because. do not take into account changing goals as projects are implemented and overcoming resistance - the consequence of this is failure to meet deadlines, exceeding budgets, demotivating project teams).

Another difficulty, oddly enough, lies in the growing popularity of the very concept of reengineering. The systematic approach to reengineering is often replaced by frank attempts to “paint the facade” of a hopelessly outdated building. As a result, managers actively use fashionable terminology snatched from the context of the concept, but decisions are made on the basis of the “wastebasket” principle. Briefly, the essence of this approach is as follows. Faced with the need to improve performance, the manager looks for a set of “homemade” recipes and remedies from among those that worked well in the recent past, but were, in his opinion, undeservedly forgotten or sent to the wastebasket (by one of the higher officials). Next, the manager selects the most attractive of these time-tested drugs, effectively presents them to his superiors and opens a new improvement project ... Needless to say, such “permanent improvements” sooner or later end up in the same place where they came from.

The most effective way to improve an organization's performance is to harmonize all existing resources, strategies, work processes, technologies, organizational structures, training systems, etc., so that it is able to create products or services that meet customer expectations.

In the language of organizational process management, this purposefulness is denoted by the well-known term - "focus on the consumer." The work processes of the organization, according to the same terminology, are interconnected sets of functions and procedures performed over a certain time, leading to the achievement of certain results.

Projects, from the point of view of the process approach to managing activities, are the same full-fledged processes as other processes. This most often explains the "natural rejection" of the project when trying to implement it within a functionally oriented organization. In most cases, small businesses are forced to bring in external experts to the project management team, and the limited resources of such enterprises allow them to manage no more than three to five projects at a time.

Project change management can be done in a variety of ways. Consider the differences in the policy of applying design methods in more detail.

directive policy. Its essence boils down to the fact that innovations are carried out by the manager without the involvement of team members. The goal of such a policy is rapid change in a crisis situation, and team members will have to put up with changes because of their inevitability. A necessary condition is the strong personality of the manager, the presence necessary information and the ability to suppress the resistance of the collective. At the same time, the manager must have significant authority, full power and the necessary stamina to bring the initiated changes to the end. It is clear that a policy of directive change is effective when other policy options cannot be applied.

Negotiation policy. The manager is the initiator of innovation; he negotiates with the team, in which partial concessions and mutual agreements are possible. Team members can express their opinion and understanding of the essence of innovations.

Policy for achieving common goals. Its essence lies in the fact that managers, involving consultants - specialists in the field of management, not only receive the consent of the team to introduce innovations, but also set goals for the introduction of innovations for each member of the organization, determining their responsibility for achieving goals, both personal and overall. organizations.

Analytical policy. The manager attracts specialists - experts who study the problem, collect information, analyze it and develop optimal solutions without involving a team of workers and without taking into account their personal problems.

Trial and error policy. The manager cannot define the problem clearly enough. Groups of workers are involved in the implementation of innovations, who try approaches to solving the problem and learn from their mistakes.

Methods of business process reengineering

In 1993, American management specialists M. Hammer and J. Champi formulated the concept of business reengineering in general terms. In their opinion, economic reengineering is a fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of the enterprise and its most important processes. The result is a dramatic (order of magnitude) improvement in key quantifiable cost, quality, service, and time metrics. According to this concept, we should talk about a deep reorganization of the enterprise along the entire value chain. The process of meeting the needs of the client is also subject to a radical reorganization.

An important prerequisite for achieving such ambitious goals is the orientation towards the production process and the customer, as well as the creative use of the latest information technology in the workplace of competent employees. New solutions must be consciously implemented in a non-democratic way. Leadership is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals who are endowed with all the necessary legitimate power to carry out the planned changes energetically and in a short time.

Business process reengineering is defined as: “The fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve significant improvements in such key performance indicators for modern business as cost, quality, service level and responsiveness” .

Business processes are interrelated types of work performed over a certain period of time and leading to the achievement of certain results. As a rule, these processes begin with the identification of requirements and end with the establishment of relationships with suppliers.

At the center of any revision of the business process is meeting the needs of internal and external customers. It depends on the strategy of the enterprise what needs to be accepted as key processes. But the focus should be on only a few of them (for example, the development of new products, the integration of logistics, etc.).

Auxiliary processes should not be optimized by themselves, but solely taking into account the needs of key processes.

It is also necessary to approach the problems of the so-called points of intersection of interests in a new way.

Particular attention is paid to information technology. The purpose of its implementation is the complete processing of information about customers and production. Wherein we are talking about completely new areas of application, and not just about process automation.

Thanks to the targeted use of data banks, expert systems, telecommunication networks, it is possible to significantly expand the scope of employees' tasks.

More perfect information base will not bring the desired result if the competence of the personnel is not changed, meaning not only organizational (duties, powers), but also purely qualification (capabilities, abilities, skills) parameters. In this regard, the authors of the concept of economic reengineering speak of "authorized" employees who should become "process professionals" (masters).

Collaboration among staff (eg in working groups) should be radically improved. As needed, an employee should have means of communication with any colleague.

Other changes are needed in the area personnel management. Thus, the new base of compensations (wages) is especially important. The incentive system should focus primarily on the actual abilities of employees, and not on their previous merits.

Each company implements business process reengineering in its own way. A "own" approach to business process reengineering often allows a company to significantly increase its "index of success". This approach makes it possible to make the best use of organizational, economic and political factors to assist the company in its desire to take a unique, unique position in the market, in other words, to position itself and become recognizable to an increasing number of real and potential consumers. But this requires a deep understanding of the company's inherent strengths, opportunities, weaknesses and threats. Only then will it be able to meaningfully extract the essence of the results of business process reengineering in its own and other industries and successfully apply the solutions that are most suitable for it. This subtlety is often overlooked in the methodologies offered by some management consultants. When borrowing the results of previous successful and unsuccessful attempts at business process reengineering, it is very important to get the most complete (as far as possible) understanding of the specifics of the company for which this borrowing is carried out.

According to experts, the probability of success of a future business process reengineering program ranges from 25 to 75%. Filling the gap between theory and practice of business process reengineering is very important.

Change management must be based less and less on exaggerated hopes of success and more on facts and evidence. This implies the expediency of terminating some business process reengineering programs before they can be implemented. Recently, there has been a growing awareness of the importance of managing business process reengineering programs. It is worth emphasizing that the synchronization of redesign and implementation (implementation) of business processes is a rather difficult task. For example, intervening in the company's traditional supply chains (in the field of logistics) or in the development of the organization's strategy requires high managerial skill.

Companies with: 1) well thought out, 2) adequately resourced, and 3) properly implemented business process reengineering programs can achieve significant results. If at least one of these three components of success is missing, then the results may differ significantly for the worse from the expected ones.

So, business process reengineering is systems approach to improve the organization's performance, designed to optimize the organization's value system over a certain period of time. Improving the effectiveness of the organization in the long term should be the same daily concern of managers as the operational indicators of its current work.

The most critical resource of any organization is its people. Without their support and commitment to the interests of the organization, no company, even the most prosperous one, can survive. Therefore, the education and training of personnel should be as important to the organization as the reengineering of its processes.

However, reengineering, like the introduction of any other changes, must be carried out very carefully, taking into account the interests of people and with the full support of management. Reengineering teams should be small but include all levels of employees. In a small enterprise, each employee has his own daily duties, so the number of priority projects is strictly limited, not only during reengineering, but also during the daily work of a process-oriented organization.

The best results are achieved when all employees of the company are involved in the reengineering project as quickly as possible and the results of the implementation of each significant stage are summed up.

Of particular importance is the thorough preparation of employees for the transition from their functional tasks to process-oriented ones. Each of them needs some of the old duties to be preserved in his new status. This maintains a welcoming climate in the company, as well as a sense of confidence and readiness for change.

The concept of business process reengineering has a lot of different interpretations.

The areas of its application are so diverse and unlike each other that even among specialists in this field of management there is still no common point of view. From a corporate point of view, reengineering certainly represents a massive overhaul of activities based on the modernization of all work processes and the use of the latest information technologies. The media most often sees such a restructuring as a veiled way to carry out massive job cuts - "a forced measure taken by the administration to save business."

While differences in terms of terminology and scope of the concept of business process reengineering can usually be overcome, the situation is different with companies offering services in this market. Almost every consultant promotes his own know-how to the market, which, in his opinion, compares favorably with the proposals of competitors. As a result, the methodology and tools vary from project to project and from one consulting firm to another. The lack of uniformity and approved standards is still a serious problem in building a reliable and mutually consistent theory of business process reengineering.

In addition, the reengineering and transformation of the business, which were carried out by companies like GE, IBM, ended in success only thanks to the leaders of the organizations (not one, but tens and hundreds in each) and the great work they did with the staff.

Organizational Development Methods

Organizational development refers to the concept of planning, initiating and implementing processes for changing social systems with the involvement of a wide range of participants. Supporters of the evolutionary concept proceed from the fact that, first of all, the views, value ideas and behaviors of members of the sociotechnical system should change, and then the system itself (“organization” in the institutional sense).

Organizational development is defined as a long-term, rigorous, comprehensive process of changing and developing an organization and its people. The process is based on the training of all employees through direct interaction and the transfer of practical experience. The purpose of the changes is to simultaneously improve the productivity of the organization and the quality of work.

This definition already outlines the main normative provisions of organizational development. Changes must be made by the members of the organization. Internal and external consultants (so-called change agents) can act as an auxiliary force, but not as the main agents of change. This is expressed in the postulate "self-reliance" (without dependence on experts), as well as "people affected by change become their participants." In this way, organizational development can contribute to the democratization of labor. Unnecessary hierarchical levels should be eliminated, and power relations should be reduced to the level of partnership with an emphasis on mutual trust.

The expanded concept of organizational development includes both structural and personnel aspects. Within the framework of the structural approach, an attempt is made, with the help of changes in organizational regulation (for example, organizational plans, descriptions of individual role functions), to create favorable framework conditions for achieving the goals of organizational development.

The personnel approach consists in carrying out activities to improve the skills of employees (personnel development) and stimulate their readiness to accept and implement changes. Undoubtedly, the goal setting of organizational development (economic and social efficiency) should be based on a combination of both approaches.

Organizational development is carried out in several stages.

First, there is a “defrosting” of the social system. The views, values ​​and behaviors of the members of the system are called into question and an examination of their suitability for achieving system goals (productivity, innovative activity, humanization of labor) is carried out. At the second stage, the movement towards change begins. New models of behavior and organizational regulation are tested and strengthened in the course of staff training.

Processes of change require a logical conclusion, since it is known that they can last indefinitely. Therefore, it is necessary to stabilize and consolidate new, officially legalized models of behavior and organizational rules. This occurs at the stage of the so-called freezing of the process of change.

Within the framework of the concept of organizational development, it is important to establish where in the organizational hierarchy is the starting point for the process of change, which will subsequently become all-encompassing for the social system. The considered concept in this respect is very different from the previously considered concept of economic reengineering. If the latter is characterized by a top-down movement, then the concept of organizational development is much richer in options. It allows not only the reverse course of the process (“bottom-up”), but also its initiation in the lower and upper parts of the hierarchy simultaneously (the so-called bipolar strategy).

The process of change can also begin in several hierarchical links, different special areas and at different hierarchical levels (the “many points” strategy) or like a wedge in the center of the hierarchical structure, gradually spreading to adjacent layers of the social system (the “wedge” strategy).

It should be noted that the method of organizational development (at least its most significant components) is widely used in the organizational practice of modern enterprises.

Change management methods: socio-psychological aspect

The importance of human resources for the success of the implementation of changes and the role of the personnel management service in innovation management
Reforms in an organization related to a change in the management system are almost always, if not initiated, then carried out with the direct participation of business owners (whether these are reforms carried out with the help of external consultants, or changes carried out independently). It is very important that the personnel management service, represented by its director, has an appropriate status that allows it to stand at the origins of organizational change, and not just serve this process.

It is obvious that most problems can be avoided by advising change initiators in advance on the choice of certain approaches.

Thus, the personnel management service acts, on the one hand, as a consultant to the owner and a team of top managers, and on the other hand, helps to implement the existing plans in the most optimal way, that is, it performs a service role. Along with these functions, the personnel management service, when carrying out organizational changes, plays the role of a facilitator and catalyst.

Organizational changes most often cause resistance from ordinary employees, so top managers, together with the personnel management service, have to overcome this resistance.

In order to achieve effective implementation of the planned changes, it is important to take the following steps.

Recognition of the main threats. Among the main threats to the successful implementation of organizational change are the following:

• unclear idea of ​​the desired future state, lack of clear criteria for achieving goals and strategic guidelines;
• poor planning of the transition process, inadequate assessment of available resources, including human, financial and time;
• opposition to organizational changes on the part of the company's personnel;
• insufficient readiness of personnel, including top management, to work effectively in a rapidly changing environment, that is, the lack of necessary competencies.

Shaping a common vision for the future. Although the transition process is most often carefully planned, any change almost always brings with it a state of uncertainty in the organization. In this regard, the success of the ongoing activities largely depends on how much the company's personnel are involved in the process itself, how clear and transparent the goals of organizational changes are.

A common vision of the future allows you to rally the staff of the organization in order to achieve a common goal. Changes will not be successful if the goals, criteria for achieving them, as well as the obvious benefits of a new, desired state of the organization, are not initially clear. Before we go somewhere, we must explain why we are doing this and what we will get as a result. After that, you can draw up an action plan that answers the question of how we are going to move to the desired future. At the same time, it is important that not only managers, but also employees participate in the planning of events.

The formation of a shared vision for the future can begin in strategic planning sessions for top managers of the company, where common goals are considered in context. strategic development business. Further, the ideas of top management are transmitted to the level of middle management, while using the principle of cascading, when the goals are not just descended from top to bottom, but are discussed, supplemented and corrected.

Development of a system of motivation for change. As a rule, the work on the implementation of organizational changes is divided into a number of projects, which should be described in appropriate detail.

In our opinion, the bonus fund of projects included in the plan for organizational changes should be included in the budget in advance. Project participants thus have the opportunity to receive additional rewards for achieving project goals.

It is advisable to pay remuneration not only for the achievement of final, but also intermediate results, especially when it comes to long-term projects.

Opportunities that are provided to staff for development should be attributed to non-material incentives. In particular, during the period of organizational changes, there is an opportunity to acquire new skills and knowledge, the number of trainings increases several times, participation in project groups allows you to expand the scope of your activities, etc.

Selection of agents of change in the organization (change agents). When carrying out organizational changes, it is important to participate not only formal, but also informal leaders of the organization who are able to carry out reforms. These are the so-called agents of change, and the role of informal leaders often turns out to be much more important than the role of department heads, since the success of reforms may largely depend on the position of informal leaders. The personnel management service should pay special attention to working with this category of personnel, involving people in the change process not only as participants, but also as active agents of change.

Assessment of the level of development necessary knowledge and skills of the management personnel of the organization. The ongoing changes require certain knowledge and skills of the organization's personnel. In this regard, it becomes especially relevant to conduct an appropriate assessment of employees.

For these purposes, the most effective is the use of the assessment center (assessment center). It should be noted that this method is quite expensive, requires a significant amount of time for preliminary preparation and, as a rule, requires the involvement of external consultants. In any case, especially at the planning stage, it is important to use standardized interviews, in some cases, psychological diagnostics.

In addition, the implementation of organizational change involves project and team work, which is why it is so important to prepare the organization's staff for such work in advance with the help of specially designed training programs.

Preparation and implementation of the training plan. A learning plan for organizational change is prepared not only on the basis of an analysis of the results of an assessment; it is also necessary to take into account the current activities of the organization. That is, when placing emphasis and priorities in the work related to organizational changes, we should not forget, for example, the planned trainings for sales managers.

The most optimal form of training in the implementation of the plan is to conduct trainings focused on the development of certain managerial skills. In some cases, the organization of development centers or assessment and development centers (assessment and development center) can be effective.

Involvement of external consultants and training companies. When implementing organizational changes, it is advisable to use the services of external consultants. Not all consulting companies are able to provide effective assistance in training the personnel of a company implementing organizational change. In this regard, the personnel management service should, based on an assessment of the need for training, make a choice of one or more training companies. In order to maintain a unified approach to reform, it is preferable that consulting company accompanying the project, was involved to the fullest extent in personnel training. When choosing a training company, one should pay attention to the experience of trainers in organizations that have carried out such changes.

In addition, special attention should be paid to evaluating the effectiveness of training based on an analysis of the acquired knowledge, skills, developed behavioral attitudes and achieved performance.

Clearly, organizational change requires significant investment in employee training. How effective the investment in staff development will be will only be known when the project is completed. The important role of the personnel management service in this case lies precisely in assisting in achieving organizational goals in the most efficient way, that is, at minimal cost, but with proper quality and in accordance with the deadlines.

Methods for overcoming resistance to change and involving staff in change
Conflict-free implementation of changes in the conditions of cooperation of the whole team is the exception rather than the rule.

Changes are assessed too differently by the top management of the enterprise (for them, these are new chances) and by its employees (for them, changes are fraught with danger).

Resistance to change refers to any actions of employees aimed at opposing the implementation of changes in the organization, discrediting them.

The bearers of resistance are employees who are not afraid of change, they are afraid of being changed. Therefore, they seek to prevent changes in order not to fall into a new structure that is not entirely clear to them, in which they will have to do a lot differently than they are used to, and do things that are not what they were doing before.

When introducing any innovations in the work of the enterprise, managers must be prepared for the fact that they will not be accepted by a greater or lesser part of the employees. Changes always cause resistance among the members of the organization, as a result of which there are delays in the start of this process, and, consequently, there is a lag in comparison with the planned deadlines for achieving the goals, or even their complete failure.

In most cases, resistance is not easy to recognize, since it is built in such a way that allows its bearers, on the one hand, to have reliable protection against innovations, and, on the other hand, to ensure the invulnerability of their position.

Forms of resistance can be different: from a direct refusal (under various pretexts) to participate in innovation, to imitation of activity while simultaneously demonstrating that the innovation does not give positive results. At the stage of innovation, resistance takes on other forms:

• "Piece Implementation". In this case, under the guise of stages, only some elements are mastered.
• "Eternal Experiment". If a stage of experimental testing of an innovation is carried out before widespread introduction, this stage can continue even after the feasibility of the innovation has been proven.
• "Reporting Implementation". It consists in the discrepancy between the actual level of development of innovation and the one presented for the report. The degree of distortion in this case can be difficult to detect.
• "Parallel Implementation". It takes place when the new coexists with the old, although it should displace the "predecessor".

Since most organizations have several "power centers", located at different levels of the management hierarchy and with different interests, the degree, direction and activity of resistance in different parts of the organization will vary.

Usually the strength of the resistance of the members of the organization depends on three main circumstances:

• degree of destruction of established life principles, principles and norms
• the speed and intensity of the process of change
• the nature and extent of the threat to power.

Let us now consider the main causes of resistance to change.

The main reasons for resistance to innovation are: uncertainty, a sense of loss, the belief that change will not bring anything good, misunderstanding and lack of trust, inadequate reward systems.

Uncertainty can be the result of poor information or an objective difficulty in foreseeing possible consequences. The motive of safety, security is important when people choose the way of their behavior. People tend to avoid possible failures, and to varying degrees are prone to risk.

While the change may be beneficial to the enterprise, its employees may feel that it is detrimental to their interests. Regardless of whether this is true or if such an opinion is erroneous, the change will not be supported.

Resistance to innovation often arises from people's belief that innovation is not necessary for the enterprise or even contrary to its interests. They may think that it will not solve the problems, but will only increase them.
Conventionally, the causes of resistance to change can be divided into several groups.

Economic reasons related to the potential loss of income or its sources. This includes fear of the prospect of unemployment, reduction of the working day, intensification of labor, deprivation of benefits and privileges. Economic losses may also be due to the high costs of time and money associated with the implementation of the transformations themselves.

organizational reasons. Here we can mention the unwillingness to change the existing system of relations, disrupt the existing alignment of forces, fear for future career, the fate of the informal organization.

Personal reasons associated mainly with psychological features of people. Here we can talk about the power of habit, inertia, fear of the new, the unknown. Most people do not like it when the usual course of events is disturbed. In the process of change, there is inevitably a threat to position, personal power, status, position in the organization, respect in the eyes of management and colleagues. Finally, personal resistance may be based on the realization of one's incompetence, disbelief in one's own strengths, the ability to master new activities, unwillingness to overcome difficulties, take on additional responsibilities, independently think and work.

Socio-political reasons are characteristic not only for individual members of the organization and their groups, but also for the entire team as a whole. Here we can name such factors as the lack of conviction among people in their need, largely due to insufficient awareness of their goals, methods, expected benefits and possible losses.

If managers encounter resistance to innovation, they must first of all understand what is the reason for it and what necessary conditions they did not create.

The extent to which management succeeds in eliminating resistance to change is greatly influenced by the methods used to overcome resistance. The set of these methods is different - from soft (indirect impact on employees) to hard (coercion). They should be used after analyzing the current situation in a given organization, taking into account the goals, objectives, deadlines, nature of changes, and the existing balance of power.

Resistance to change can have different strength and intensity. It manifests itself both in the form of passive, more or less covert rejection of change, expressed in the form of absenteeism, reduced productivity or a desire to move to another job, and in the form of active, open opposition to perestroika (for example, in the form of a strike, a clear avoidance of innovation). ). The reason for resistance may lie in personal and structural barriers.

Personal barriers include, for example:

• fear of the unknown, when the familiar is preferred;
• the need for guarantees, especially when one's own workplace;
• denial of the need for change and fear of obvious losses (for example, maintaining the same wages with an increase in labor costs);
• a threat to the old workplace social relations;
• non-involvement in transformations of persons affected by the changes;
• lack of resources and time due to operational work, which slows down changes that cannot be implemented “in passing”.

Organizational barriers are:

• the inertia of complex organizational structures, the difficulty of reorienting thinking due to established social norms;
• the interdependence of subsystems, leading to the fact that one "out of sync" change slows down the implementation of the entire project;
• resistance to the transfer of privileges to certain groups and possible changes in the existing "balance of power";
• past negative experiences associated with change projects;
• resistance to transformational processes imposed by consultants from outside.

This list shows that already at the stage of conceptual development, the reaction of personnel to changes can be taken into account in a planned manner. At the same time, approaches to reorganization with the expectation of the participation of the collective, despite the preference, are fraught with too much loss of time before the measures taken will give a result. Therefore, in case of need for rapid and radical changes, tough measures must also be provided.

I. Ansoff offers four special methods to anticipate, weaken and control resistance to change (table):

1 forced (requires high costs and is undesirable in social aspect- conflicts), is used in conditions of acute shortage of time, when an immediate reaction is required. Forced change will be more effective if, before the start of changes, an analysis of the mood and behavior of the staff is carried out, and an atmosphere of support is created;

2 method of adaptive changes (his slogan: "Moscow was not built immediately");

3 crisis management (emergency unpopular measures);

4 resistance management (method of "accordion") - an intermediate position between forced and adaptive, when there is time and resources.

Their general idea is in purposeful phased creation"launching pad" for innovations, i.e. the process of studying the forces (factors) acting in the course of transformations and the formation of a positive potential among the supporters of reform who are able to bring it to the end.

The choice of a specific method for implementing changes depends on many factors, for example, on the accepted management style in the enterprise, organizational culture, the level of competence of the manager, staff training, etc. For example, authoritarian leaders will choose to act decisively and assertively in order to shorten the duration of the change process; Democratic leaders will extend it as long as possible in order to reduce resistance.

Table. Comparison of change implementation methods

Method	Application conditions	Advantages	Flaws
Forced	Time limit for reforming	The speed of change	strong resistance
Adaptive	Lack of urgency	Weak resistance	Slow and disorderly reform
Crisis	Threat to the existence of the enterprise	Weak resistance, and in the initial stages - support	Hard time pressure and risk of failure
Resistance management	Medium term or cyclical reform	Adjustable resistance and adjustment to the right moment	Complexity of planning and implementation

1. Education and counseling. This method involves an open discussion of ideas and activities, enabling team members to be convinced of the need for changes before they are carried out, conducting special training. Here individual conversations, presentations in front of a group, discussions can be used. This method is recommended if the reasons for resistance are lack of information, inaccurate information, or inadequate analysis. Disadvantages of the method - it can take a long time if many people are involved in this process.

2. Participation and involvement. This method assumes that potential adversaries should be involved in the planning and implementation of changes. This will give them the opportunity to freely express their attitude towards the proposed changes, better imagine the consequences of the changes. The method is recommended where there are significant opportunities for resistance. Disadvantages of the method - it can take a lot of time and lead to errors in making changes.

3. Help and support. It is not uncommon for employees to seek advice to help them overcome the fear and anxiety caused by change. A manager can provide emotional support by listening carefully to employees who are experiencing stress, giving them some time to relax. There may also be a need for additional training to upgrade the skills of staff to meet new demands. Recommended for cases where resistance is only out of fear of personal problems. The disadvantages of the method - it can take a lot of time, cost a lot and still not help.

4. Negotiations and agreements. To ensure the approval of the innovation, an exchange of opinions is organized and a compromise is reached. Material or other incentives can be used to compensate for the possible losses of employees whose interests are affected by the innovation. It is applied in situations where one or a group clearly loses when introducing an innovation, and where they have great opportunities to resist. Disadvantages of the method - can be too expensive, and set others to seek compliance in the same way.

5. Co-optation. Involves giving the person who may be resistant to change a leading role in making decisions about the introduction of innovations and their implementation. It is recommended in specific situations where other methods are expensive or not feasible at all. Disadvantages of the method - can create problems if those who are co-opted are aware of why it is being done.

A coercive-oriented strategy can only in exceptional cases lead to sustained success. On the basis of the formally legitimate power of the leader, changes are introduced in the order of an order, accompanied by incentives or threats of sanctions. The desired behavior is determined by the fear of punishment, not the conviction of the subordinate. Thus, changes that guarantee the organization stable and lasting success cannot be achieved, only short-term achievements are possible in times of crisis, when, for example, there is a threat of a significant number of jobs being cut.

The so-called biographical approach, which is based on the history of the organizations being reformed, promises greater success. In this case, they proceed from the factors that determine individual value ideas, group norms and common goals.

Affected persons should themselves be interested in changing their normative orientation in relation to the old models and developing new system responsibilities. For this, programs of organizational and cultural change are created, in which rational elements such as knowledge, planning, information, and institutionalization find a place. The content of these elements is defined by the American specialist J. Kotter as follows:

• argumentation of the need for urgent changes - assessment of market conditions and competition, identification and analysis of crisis phenomena, potential crises and possible chances for the enterprise;
• coalition building - identifying a team of influential leaders who can successfully lead the process of change;
• development of a perspective that, during organizational changes, performs a leading and guiding function and is implemented with the help of an appropriate strategy;
• Facilitate the implementation of the vision - clarifying the content of the vision and strategy through the implementation of an inclusive information and communication policy;
• delegating authority to achieve perspective to lower levels - eliminating barriers to change, changing outdated structures and systems, stimulating extraordinary ideas, creating favorable conditions for experimentation, creativity and innovation;
• planning and achieving success in the short term - quick success, in which all staff are involved, to the extent possible, serves as the basis for long-term motivation;
• consolidation of first achievements and adoption of new change projects - the growing approval of changes by the team is consistently used to consolidate adequate methods, structures, etc. and concentration of efforts on the introduction of new processes;
• institutionalizing a new way of doing things - linking the relationship between new behaviors and organizational success, creating pay and incentive systems that promote the establishment of new behaviors.

American researchers R. Kanter, B. Stein and T. Djik offer another version of the organizational change program, which includes the following elements:

• building support for proposed changes – engaging key and stakeholder groups, and individuals in search of optimal solutions. The process includes senior management, informal leaders, experts (with special knowledge in the field information support), representatives of trade unions, creditors, supervisory boards, etc.;
• determining the overall perspective - displaying the desired direction of change without a detailed analysis of the details. The perspective here serves as a guide for setting specific goals, developing a strategy and choosing activities and should be of a motivational nature, i.e. convincingly show the need for change and stimulate positive expectations of the team;
• establishing areas of individual responsibility in the process of change - assigning to each member of the organization its role and tasks arising from the transformation process, in order to avoid uncertainty and conflicts;
• provision of information and training of personnel - timely familiarization of the members of the organization with new responsibilities, procedures, techniques and behaviors according to a carefully designed program;
• constant review of the key parameters of the organization - successful enterprises strive to achieve maximum consistency in strategy, resource allocation, organizational structure, operations, management systems, personnel management methods, working conditions and organizational culture. All these parameters need to be regularly evaluated, as it is necessary to insure against the occurrence of any discrepancy between them as a result of changes in individual interdependent elements.

Methods for changing organizational culture
Organizational culture is one of the areas of organizational change as part of the implementation of the enterprise strategy. In general, the implementation of the strategy should take place in the following areas:

1. changes in the structure of the enterprise;
2. changes in technology;
3. changes in manufactured goods;
4. changes in culture.

Organizational culture is not an obligatory object of organizational change in the sense that changing organizational culture is a very difficult and sometimes impossible task. Therefore, at the stage of determining the strategy, it is necessary to take into account as much as possible what difficulties with changing the organizational culture may arise when implementing the strategy, and try to choose a strategy that does not require the implementation of obviously impossible actions to change the organizational culture. Organizational culture changes are required when the existing culture in the organization is not conducive to changing behavior to the point necessary to achieve the desired level of organizational performance.

Changes that require correction of the existing organizational culture:

• improving organizational efficiency
• fundamental change in the mission of the organization
• increased international competition
• significant technological changes
• important changes in the market
• acquisitions, mergers, joint ventures
• fast growth organizations
• transition from a "family" business to professional management
• entry into foreign economic activity.

The constant desire to improve the efficiency of the organization is due to severe pressure from the external environment. The inability of individuals and entire groups in an organization to behave effectively threatens even the very survival of the organization. The purpose of an organization is vital to its survival and longevity. The organization receives support from groups that endorse its purpose, which is clear to them: the organization is attacked by those who reject that purpose.

Organizational values ​​are directly related to the achievement of the goals of the organization. The survival and success of any organization depends on the ability to get employees to behave in a manner consistent with its values.

Individual values ​​can interfere with an organization's performance when they generate behavior that conflicts with the demands that flow from the organization's values.

Changing organizational culture is a serious painstaking work that requires a well-thought-out system of actions. The leadership of any organization that is seriously trying to change a culture must start by creating a model of what the new culture should be, i.e. clearly understand what needs to be managed and what result is desirable to obtain. The specific strategies and degree of success depend on the strength of the existing culture and the scale of change desired.

Change Agents

A change agent is a specialist who analyzes the company's activities and makes proposals for specific actions, determines the success of the changes.

The change agent is used to get people in the organization to pay attention to issues such as attitudes towards different aspects of the organization and management; determining what is preventing you from doing the job; how to do the job more efficiently, etc. The change agent can be an external consultant or a representative of organizational development or human resources.

Organizational change efforts require a successful start. It is not enough to make the right decision about what to change and allocate responsibility for implementing the change. The organization must identify people who have a critical and innovative mindset, who like to experiment, can imagine the future, believe that change is possible, influence others not just by talking about change, but by showing what can be achieved. Change agents may be managers, but they are also often engineers, marketers, project coordinators, experienced workers and craftsmen, or other staff members.

Organizations that are committed to change must encourage innovation, experimentation, and entrepreneurship. Managing change means not only tolerating a departure from routine and tradition and recognizing that it cannot be done without some risk, but deliberately involving innovators in the change process, giving them chances, observing their work, exemplifying them in demonstrating that what the organization can achieve.

Innovators and entrepreneurs play a big role in developing a successful organizational change strategy. They are the main agents of change for the organization. Often, it is in their unit that changes must begin. Some of them will become managers of new units responsible for new product lines and services, coordinators of change projects, or trainers and internal consultants helping other people and groups make the necessary changes.

Various types Change agents can play different roles in an organization. Change agents can be:

• employees whose interest is and remains predominantly technical;
• employees who can come up with great technical ideas but fail to turn them into business opportunities;
• employees who are predominantly entrepreneurs and leaders and can help managers create and implement change that requires the involvement of many people, individuals and groups.

An organizational change strategy can be based on the internal capabilities of the organization, i.e. on the abilities of managers and professionals who can play the role of agents of change. An alternative is to involve an outside change agent as a consultant. This is an important management decision that affects the entire course of the change process. The consultant can not only bring some technical competence and alternative views, but can influence the behavior of those involved in the changes by their presence and actions taken. The consultant can also influence the behavior and decision-making of those leaders who have invited him.

The main factors to be considered when engaging a consultant in an organizational change process are:

• consultant's reputation (knowledge, experience, personality). Employees should listen to his opinion, they should recognize him as a specialist in organizational change;
• style of counseling to help with change (there are different styles of counseling - the question is which one will best achieve the desired results).

Skills a Change Agent Should Possess

Change agents must possess certain skills that can be grouped into four categories:

1. Interpersonal skills. The ability to establish clear communication between people in situations that are often tense and emotionally overburdened is the most important quality change agent. The situation can turn out in such a way that people will clearly monitor what they say and how, so the agent of change must be able to recognize and understand non-verbal information. Nonverbal information can be contained in facial expressions, movements, speed of reaction to questions, etc. Change agents must also be able to create a feedback mechanism. Some employees need to be introduced to the views of other employees. It is important not to allow personalization of opinions. And in order for people to be able to analyze different opinions and jointly look for ways to solve the problem, a common language must be developed.

2. Problem solving skills. It is very important for a change agent to be able to effectively resolve all problems that arise during the implementation of changes.

First, he must be able to categorize the information he is dealing with and select which information is relevant to the problem.

Secondly, he must adhere to the goals that have been set by the change program from the very beginning of its operation. For many people, it is difficult in an emotional and dynamically developing environment to maintain the goals of their activities, not to subject them to some adjustment.

Thirdly, he must be able to express the views and concerns of working group members in a way that is understandable to others.

The agent of change must control himself even in the most unpleasant situations. All these skills are acquired through constant learning, solving practical problems.

3. Group work skills. Most of the employees of organizations are part of small decision-making teams almost all of their working hours. However, this does not mean that they are able to work in such groups. Often, group members simply repeat their words to support their position day in and day out. The agent of change must be able to lead the discussions in small groups in order to direct the efforts of their members in a constructive direction. It is also important for him to be able to oppose the opinions of employees to each other during the discussion.

4. Political skills. A change agent should not put people at risk because they have been open with him. If people see that he is politically naive, they won't want to risk giving him any valuable information. The change agent must inspire confidence in them, in which case they themselves will initiate discussion of the problems and how they see them.

In order to be trusted by people, a change agent must learn what to say, what not to say, how to present and interpret different situations.

Organizational development tools

In the process of implementing an organizational development program, change agents usually use various tools.

1. Diagnostic technique. In diagnostic testing, agents of change often use research or interview techniques. Surveys provide information about problems that are occurring, and often employees answer questionnaires anonymously. This method allows you to quickly get information from large groups of people. Surveys are used to find out what problems exist and what changes can be made. Survey results are usually summarized and discussed in working groups.

2. Nominal group method. This is a method of group discussion of problems, which involves a clear control of the communications of group members by the change agent. Some group members usually do not have much desire to speak out in group discussions of problems. Therefore, change agents often ask group members to give their opinion in writing before the discussion begins. Usually employees are asked to list the problems that prevent them from working. Then these anonymous statements are brought together and in hard copy posted for public viewing. Then, after some time has passed, the group members are asked to rank the problems and single out the most important ones. The leader of the group again brings together this information, observing the principle of anonymity, and hangs it up for review. At this stage, problems are usually already well defined. Then the members of the group should again submit their solutions to the problems in writing. This information, also anonymous, is again posted for review. And only after that the leader of the group allows a joint discussion of problems and ways to solve them.

3. Force field analysis. Force field analysis is a technique for graphically depicting the main forces in a conflict or planned change situation. When any conflict arises in an organization, there are forces acting in different directions. When analyzing the alignment of forces, the first step is to identify the main forces that contribute to the transition to a new, most desirable situation (leading forces), and those forces that oppose this (opposing forces).

The second step is to assess the degree of influence and significance of these forces and depict them on a diagram. Obviously, a change of position is possible only when the leading forces prevail over the opposing forces.

Thus, the third step is the development of special measures aimed at supporting the leading forces, suppressing the resistance forces and / or turning the resistance forces into supporting forces.

4. Training to develop teamwork skills. Teamwork skills development training is aimed at building trust, openness and coordination of actions of members of working groups or groups of managers. When developing teamwork, the change agent encourages team members to share more information than their daily practice. This creates an atmosphere of greater trust between team members. As trust grows, so does the effectiveness of the group.

Thus, the main goals of teamwork are to increase the amount of information by intensifying the exchange of information between group members and the formation of joint decision-making skills.

5. Lattice of organizational development. This method includes an assessment of management styles in the company based on an assessment of the attitude of managers to personnel and to production processes, as well as the use of special training programs to change management styles. The Control Grid Method was developed by American psychologists Robert Blake and Jane Mouton.

The first step is to assess the management style of either one manager or whole group managers in order to more accurately determine the style of leadership in the company. The method is based on the assumption that a great concern for people combined with a great concern for production processes is the ideal leadership style. After assessing the leadership style, the change agent conducts a training for managers, during which managers learn to independently evaluate their management style and develop measures to improve it.

Resistance to change

Organizational change is the process of moving the system to a qualitatively different state in accordance with our idea of ​​the desired future. They are usually associated with the transformation of business strategy, for example, with the entry into new markets, with mergers and acquisitions of other companies, which is very typical for Russian business at the present stage of its development.

The people in the organization (at least some of them) resist change. There is nothing surprising, let alone pathological, in such resistance: most people strive for stability and predictability of their existence and fear revolutionary breaks in their usual way of life, and also have their own idea of ​​​​how to implement the strategy. Strategic change promises a lot to some people in the organization in terms of career and professional growth prospects and threatens others who may fear losing their position in the organizational hierarchy or even lose their position. Therefore, people in the organization react to the prospects of strategic changes in different ways: some of them become active supporters and guides to the strategy, others become active opponents, opposition, and others become passive observers of the development of events. But they all have an impact on the implementation of the strategy, and their impact must be taken into account by the planners and leaders of strategic change.

Groups confronted with the need for change face the prospect of changing informal networks, channels of communication, behavioral stereotypes and norms. Consequently, they readily respond to calls for resistance to change. Resistance to change on the part of individuals and groups can often be the only but powerful force holding back the development of an organization. The threat from this force depends on various reasons.

Technical reasons resistance of employees to change is associated with the operation of the so-called technical conditions of the organization, which are ways of connecting human and technical resources in the organization. The types of such reasons are presented in the table.

Table. Technical reasons for employee resistance to change

Cause type	Characteristic
Lack of resources and communications to innovate	Most often, it occurs when the management of the organization, planning the implementation of innovations, overestimates its capabilities. Leaders of lower levels of management, knowing the real picture, resist change.
Internal disunity of the organization	The reasons for internal disunity are very numerous: social conflicts between individual groups in the organization; cultural differences (different values, accepted norms etc.); wrong position of leaders; lack of identification with the teams of the organization, etc. All this can cause resistance to innovation among certain groups in the organization.
Unknown outcome or fear of the unknown	Often the members of the organization simply do not see the prospect of innovation and therefore they have a feeling of possible failure or negative consequences, in connection with which they try to idealize the current state of the organization and resist innovation.
Lack of plans, unclear goals	This group of reasons can be considered as a special case of fear of an unknown result. The uncertainty of future actions, the lack of division of activities into stages in accordance with the goals of the organization gives employees the illusion that plans are unrealizable and the changes being made are inappropriate.
Lack of leaders	Creating a holistic vision of the organization depends on the activity of instrumental leaders. It is they who are able to prompt, direct the actions of people and organize the ongoing changes. It is obvious that the activities of leaders should be aimed at implementing changes, otherwise the leader can only slow down innovative activity.
Falling costs	Resistance to change can increase if the organization is on the cutting edge of success and its costs are reduced. In this situation, the members of the organization have a reasonable question: why change something when the organization is working so well? This is one of the biggest reasons for resistance to change. In the case of long-term successful activities of the organization, employees develop a habit and it is psychologically difficult for them to step over it and face uncertainty.
Lack of training and counseling system	For the implementation of innovations, training and counseling are necessary, since without this complete socialization of individuals in relation to innovations is impossible. In the absence of a system of training and counseling, resistance to change is almost inevitable.

Political reasons resistance to change is associated with the redistribution of power in the structural and cultural changes in the organization. In the event of significant structural changes, managers at various levels always face the question: who and to what extent will be involved in making managerial decisions in new situation. The attitude of managers to innovations depends on the answer to this question. All this determines the main political reasons for the resistance presented in the table.

Table. Political reasons for employee resistance to change

Cause type	Characteristic
Threat to powerful statuses	Possible loss of influence and authority, tk. very often innovation is associated with structural changes, and as a result of the restructuring of the organization, the head can take a lower level in the management structure. In addition, implemented innovations can lead to a change in the nature of the relationship between managers and subordinates, which can also be perceived as painful and cause resistance to change.
Opportunity to criticize leaders	In the course of change, the old ways of organizing are often criticized. production process, management and control methods. Given the possibility of such criticism and fearing its consequences, many leaders in the organization tend to avoid innovation, proving the advantages of their old way of doing things.
	In the course of accepting changes, a serious barrier for the leader can be the adoption of a different method of management. The fact is that every leader seeks to standardize the decision-making process as much as possible, to simplify it. When introducing innovations, the manager has to deal with new ways of making managerial decisions, which can be very complex. In this regard, until the leader fully adapts to new conditions, he may resist innovation.
Changing forms of power influence	When the situation in the organization or its divisions changes, managers may need to change the forms of power influence. For example, before the changes were made, the leader was guided by the power of coercion, but when the situation changes, he is forced to use informational power, referential power, or the power of an expert. Most often, the leadership of the organization is not ready to immediately change the forms of power influence, and a certain time must pass to adapt to new forms of power. Usually at this point there is resistance to change in the organization, which can continue as long as the leaders do not adapt to the new conditions for the exercise of power.

Cultural reasons resistance to change is associated with a change in value orientations and social norms operating in the organization. These reasons include the following (table).

Table. Cultural reasons for employee resistance to change

Cause type	Characteristic
Influence of former values	Since each member of the organization is focused on his own personal matrix of values, any interference from outside can lead to an explicit or implicit rejection of new values, and the inertia of commitment is very strong. So, if in organizations where employees were focused in their actions only on the opinion of the leader, and in the new conditions they have to rely on their own opinion or the opinion of colleagues, then this significantly changes their value orientations. However, members of the organization cannot immediately change their orientations and become helpless in the face of technical uncertainty, resulting in resistance to change.
Return to tradition	In any social community, one can hear the opinion that in the old days life was much better. This is a common phenomenon based on habits and stereotypes that make it easier for people to navigate their social environment. However, habits and customs that are very useful to people may turn out to be unnecessary and harmful when mastering new situations. Thus, the power of habits and customs in organizational culture has a significant impact on the acceptance and implementation of social change. Let us illustrate this statement with a rather simple but illustrative example. Team members are used to drinking tea at a certain time, but after the reorganization, they can not do this. Even on such a small occasion, resistance to change can arise, fueled by pleasant memories of free tea parties.
Action of Regulatory Control	As you know, the norms of the life of the organization are accepted by employees and internalized in such a way that they become the most convenient, familiar. Compliance with norms is controlled through informal control, and it is psychologically difficult for members of the organization not to comply with existing norms of activity. In accordance with the rules of informal control, any new norms in this field of activity are considered deviations, against which sanctions are directed. social control. At this point, there is resistance to innovation.

In the process of implementing changes in the organization, it is necessary to consider what people see the meaning of the changes in. By making changes, the manager hopes that the organization will develop, and employees will work even more efficiently. Overcoming resistance, it is necessary to set new guidelines that a person can perceive as motivating for new actions. It should be borne in mind that working on changes in the organization is work with the motivation of employees.

Human motivation is determined by three components - the instinctive nature of needs, the conditioned reflex organization of higher nervous activity man and man's desire for meaning. The latter distinguishes man from animals and creates a huge potential for change. It is possible, relying on the instinct of self-preservation, to intimidate and achieve submission. It is possible to pre-budget a bonus fund for projects included in the organizational change plan and generate a positive reaction. But if people misinterpret the meaning of the changes, the expected result will not happen.

When it comes to the motives underlying the behavior of the participants in the changes, they often come down only to pragmatic interests of a material nature and, in particular, to maximizing profit, which is considered as the main goal of this activity. Coming to the fore, materialism nullifies the significance and influence of non-material factors on the motivation of activity, such as the need for self-realization, self-affirmation, love for one's "work", the desire for social recognition and others, which can and should be a powerful motivator for anyone, especially innovation activities.

The manager needs to clearly understand and be able to convey to the staff information about the state that should come after the changes and how much it will be better for everyone if they change. To achieve the goal, the first concrete steps are very important, which show that progress is possible and occurs favorably if positive results are achieved in the early stages of the change process.

In order for the manager not to create a problem for himself, which can become an insurmountable obstacle to ongoing changes, it is necessary to constantly motivate staff to achieve their goals, using both material and non-material incentives.

The reaction of the leader to resistance can be different. In order to understand how to respond to employee resistance, it is helpful to identify forms of resistance at the following levels:

• organizational level
• group level
• individual level

Understanding the level at which resistance occurs and how it is characterized allows the leader to direct efforts in the right direction. Each of these levels has its own characteristics of resistance and its own methods of influence in order to reduce resistance.

organizational level. At this level, structural and cultural factors can contribute to widespread resistance: either outdated systems are unable to cope with rapid and radical strategic changes, or, for example, aggressive marketing strategies seem unacceptable to public opinion. Most effective reception overcoming resistance at this level - a systematic approach to change, considering the organization as a whole, revealing the relationship between the various parts of the organizational system. However, the difficulty lies in the fact that in order to understand the behavior of an organization as a system, it is necessary to take into account the behavior of all interrelated subsystems, such as finance, production, marketing and supply, human resources, and much more.

Group level. When designing the implementation of the strategy, it must be borne in mind that the organization as a system includes not only formal groups (departments, departments, sectors, etc.), but also informal ones. Communicating the strategic intent in a timely manner and consulting at the planning level before implementing the strategy can help reduce group resistance and reveal what really worries people about the proposed strategy. Attracting members of influential and authoritative informal groups to your side in the organization also has a positive impact on the level of individual resistance to change.

Individual level. Considering that the formal and informal groups to which employees who adhere to certain views regarding the strategy belong, decisively influence the position of the individual - a member of the group, which he will take and defend in the design and implementation of strategic changes. However, if the reference group supports the prospect of change, some employees may harbor their own personal concerns about the impact of the change on their future position in the organization, career opportunities. Helping an employee gain a new understanding of what is happening and reconsider their attitude to change, most often requires individual work with him to explain the benefits and benefits that he will personally receive as a result of implementing the strategy. Such work should lead to a change in the behavior of the employee.

It must be borne in mind that recognizable resistance to the implementation of a strategy is not very common. In practice, there is more often a need to deal with potential conflicts and deadlocks at all levels. They arise from the fact that different groups try to defend their own interests, using the process of change itself for this purpose. This may take the form of opposition to a particular change. Therefore, change is a prerequisite for constant and inevitable tensions between individuals, organizations, groups and departments. The problems that the manager has to deal with, the underlying conflicts that have to be resolved, may have little to do with the specific change being proposed.

Organizational change can be effective if it has the support of the people it affects. Due to leadership errors, even existing support can turn into its complete opposite and be replaced by resistance; in such a situation, it is difficult to correct the situation. To prevent such a situation, it is necessary to invite people to actively participate in all stages of change. This helps to create an atmosphere in which people feel like they are the “owners” of the proposed changes: the idea does not come from above or from an external person, but from within the group. If things go wrong, the group does not look for the culprit on the side, but examines the reasons and willingly helps to revise the proposals.

In order to enlist the support of employees, managers need to pay attention to the following aspects: drawing attention to the need for change; obtaining support for specific proposals; formation of the personal composition of participants in the process of change; support and creation of informal information network; consideration of objections to changes.

There are a limitless number of methods to draw the attention of individuals and groups to the need for change. However, there are two particularly interesting and proven methods:

1) creating an atmosphere of anxiety - a minimal degree of anxiety is effective as a way to make people more attentive, which can last a long time. A particularly successful combination is to use the state of anxiety to draw attention to specific needs, and then continue to develop solutions that meet these needs;

2) two-stage information process - changes are accepted and effectively implemented as a result of the effect of stimulating the flow of information.

When the attention of the audience is aroused, and there is an interest in changes in general, there should be a desire to develop specific proposals. When presenting information in support of choosing a given proposal in preference to alternative schemes, it is often necessary to mention some negative aspects in addition to the positive ones.

When dealing with individuals or small groups, it is sometimes possible to use group members to support the change process. Balanced, self-confident people with a certain amount of self-respect, apparently, can influence those who lack these characteristics. It is also necessary to remember that people with a relatively high self-esteem are more affected by information of an optimistic positive nature. The manager can get support for the change process from such people by drawing their attention to the expected positive results.

Information about very important and topical issues changes attitudes among people more and faster when "accidentally heard" or leaked through unofficial channels, rather than officially reported. Rumors that thrive in the absence of official reports are usually limited to unofficial channels and can often be countered through those same channels. Even fundamental information has a stronger effect on people's relationships if it is distributed informally.

As changes are introduced, the manager's attitude to management tasks changes. There is an awareness of the insufficiency of the existing arsenal of means management activities understanding the need for change. All managerial tasks are differentiated according to the degree of difficulty for managers into the following groups:

1. Strategic planning of the organization's activities, while among the heads of enterprises whose main goal for the next year is survival, the number of those experiencing such difficulties is greater than among the heads of organizations focused on stabilization and development.

2. Analysis and identification of hidden problems in the activities of the organization, analysis and assessment of the external environment of the organization, planning the current activities of the organization.

3. Creation of an effective system for monitoring the fulfillment of tasks, creation of a system for introducing innovations, stimulating the productive work of subordinates, organizing effective accounting at the enterprise.

4. Formation of the functional structure of management, analysis of the results of the enterprise.

With regard to any social change there are always large individual differences both between people and between different groups. As a change leader, it is important to know the types of people who resist change.

Research data show that people who are most willing to experiment and innovate have certain characteristics. These individuals, referred to as "isolates," often have a strong technical focus, read extensively on their particular subject, frequently attend meetings and conferences, and travel to learn new circuits. Their activities are constantly monitored by a second type of person who has characteristics similar to "isolates", but usually due to broad interests in other areas, who do not have enough free time to experiment and test new methods in depth. This type, called the "evaluative leader", has significant influence in the group and even outside it. In addition to being highly technically skilled, he usually occupies a significant social status in society. Changes must usually emphasize the highly technical aspects of the new approach in order to attract and convince "isolates" and "evaluation leaders" who, when normal conditions should help and influence the other members of the group.

Opponents of change can be divided into "aggravating" and "equalizing". Sharpeners are people who ask specific, detailed questions about the change process. These are usually sincere opponents who want to be convinced that the proposal is reasonable and accept logical arguments. "Equalizers" generalize and expand the problem under consideration. They are usually quite difficult to convince, as they are often more interested in the form of their own objections than in the content. Objections to and resistance to change can come in a variety of forms. Gestures, facial expressions, or persistent attempts to avoid discussions on a given issue with a leader or manager can play a very important role and say more than words.

Also, different socio-economic types of people are distinguished according to their attitude to changes, depending on the intensity of the manifestation of three psychological components: psychological readiness for innovation (motivational component); preparedness for life in new conditions (knowledge, skills, experience, etc.); real activity (actions, deeds, activities). Different combinations of desires, knowledge and actions allow us to conditionally divide people into the following socio-psychological types:

• “active reformers” (wish economic changes, know how to work in new conditions and are actively working on reforms);
• "passive reformers" (wish, know how, but do not act);
• “passively positively related to innovations” (mostly they want changes, but they don’t know how and don’t act);
• “overcoming themselves” (they know how and act, but do not want changes);
• "inefficient" (wish and act, but do not know how);
• “expectant” (they know how, but do not want and do not act);
• “blind performers” (there is no expressed desire, they do not know how, but they act in the direction of changes with the help of others);
• "passive opponents" (do not want, do not know how and do not act);
• “active opponents” (unwilling, unable and actively resisting change).

Psychologists distinguish several levels of reality testing - the ability to distinguish between mental images and external objects, fantasy and external reality; the ability to correct subjective impressions by comparing them with external facts. According to these levels, the following psychotypes of employees in the process of resistance to change are distinguished: psychotic, borderline, neurotic and mature.

The psychotic level for an adult is not considered the norm and most often allows one to suspect one or another mental disorder. When it comes to change, it is people with reality testing disabilities who may be among the first to respond to the appearance of a product, especially if it “represents” their area of ​​​​interest.

For the "border guard" it is not so much the reality itself that is important, but the emerging emotions, interpretation from the standpoint of a non-existent, often mystical connection between various facts or events. One of the differences of this level is the unwillingness to take responsibility for a significant part of the events that happen to a person. This is manifested in a passive, consumerist approach to life. The “border guard”, as an employee, is poorly aware of his true needs, chooses the simplest and most affordable ways to satisfy them, more often follows the opinion of the majority and “parental” significant figures, authorities. One of the important needs of such a person is the need for belonging, to correspond to the characteristics of the group, microsocial environment, context. It can be assumed that the "border guards" largely form the "late majority, moderate" group.

The neurotic level of functioning of the human psyche is characterized by a high degree of awareness, including the ability to recognize one's needs, internal conflicts and consciously resolve them. Neurotics are able to adequately perceive new information (including information about changes) and correlate it with their needs. The neurotic level allows not only to adapt to environmental conditions, but also (to a certain extent) to form these conditions. The ability to make a conscious decision to consume an innovative product makes "neurotics" an interesting target audience for promoting change, including because, having satisfied their needs in a new way, they are able to reasonably explain to their environment the benefits of innovation.

A mature (in the psychological sense) person perceives reality (both external and internal) adequately, he is able to manage his condition, actions, well-being. He is capable and disposed to actively seek and create opportunities to meet his needs and the needs of his significant environment. Participation in the process of change is natural for a mature person, but he largely manages the interaction with innovation. Communication with mature people in order to promote change is successfully built on the principles of partnerships.

So, in order to cope with the negative attitude of employees towards changes and resistance to them, you can use the following methods.

Management must communicate directly with employees and provide them with information about what needs to be done, why and how changes should be made. It is necessary to be truthful and sincere in relation to the existing situation. The provision of information must be timely - the lack of information creates doubts, causes a state of uncertainty, contributes to the spread of rumors and speculation, which undermines the trust of employees in the management of the organization. Another mistake is to provide too much information at once.

Clear arguments and reasoning should be used in explaining and supporting proposed projects. Communicate to employees about the benefits and rewards of the change and how the gap between reality and the desired state should be bridged. Involve in the implementation of the project all employees related to this activity, as well as opinion leaders, leading specialists, existing trade unions and other groups in the decision-making process. If, as a result, the initiators of changes, and shareholders, and opinion leaders are involved in this process, then thanks to this there will be great opportunities for a favorable, efficient and effective implementation of the proposed changes in the practical activities of the organization.

It is necessary to create a comfortable environment and an atmosphere of inclusion in the process of change, to develop employees' self-confidence and commitment to change, to enable them to understand their own interests and to implement them in their work in a way that contributes to the achievement of the overall goals of the organization.

With people who resist change, it is necessary to organize meetings and give detailed answers to their objections. At the same time, the implementation of the project should be temporarily postponed if the resistance is too great and the management cannot count on the support of the majority yet.

Norbert Tom Director of the Institute for Organization and Personnel, University of Bern (Switzerland)
From the archives of the journal "Problems of Theory and Practice of Management"

The type of crisis of the sociotechnical system determines the urgency of changes and the degree of their radicalness

Economic reengineering (revolutionary model of change) - fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of the enterprise

Organizational development (evolutionary model) is a long-term and comprehensive process of change and development of an organization and its employees

Today it is obvious that in order to survive in the market and remain competitive, enterprises must from time to time make changes to their economic activity. Moreover, the need for changes has become so frequent that their impact on the life cycle of an enterprise is no longer considered an exceptional phenomenon. In practice and research, more and more attention is paid to the analysis of methods and organizational capabilities of change management ("change management").

The concept of change management covers all planned, organized and controlled changes in the strategy, production processes, structure and culture of any socio-economic system, including private and public enterprises. "Change Management" deals with specific issues of enterprise management, including organizational, personnel, communication and information aspects.

Prerequisites for change

The fundamentally important question is the following: how can an enterprise withstand changes in the external environment (occurring often, but irregularly and almost unpredictably), as well as, with the help of preliminary measures or a response, maintain its viability and achieve its goals. The enterprise must constantly monitor the main components of the environment and draw conclusions about its needs for change. Typically, these components are economic(for example, globalization of the market or its regional differentiation), technological(rapid spread of new technologies), political and legal(changes in legislation), socio-cultural(demographic shifts, changes in the value system) and physical and environmental(climatic conditions, load on the ecosystem).

An enterprise facing the need for change is greatly influenced by production And personnel options. The first category includes strategic economic areas, the organization and course of the production process, corporate culture, the technology used, and property relations. Among the personnel parameters, the most important are such as the psychological ability of the members of the organization to perceive changes, personal ambitions, opportunities for professional development, readiness for cooperation.

As a rule, crisis situations are the impetus for change. From an economic point of view, crises should be distinguished by the areas in which they pose a threat to the achievement of corporate goals. So, liquidity crisis means a real loss of solvency. Therefore, urgent action is needed, otherwise the enterprise will be forced to leave the market (for example, as a result of its sale at an auction or other liquidation procedures).

Crisis of success characterized by a clear negative deviation of the actual state from the planned one (for example, in terms of sales, cash receipts, profits, profitability, costs, etc.). The causes of such a crisis may be errors in market research, production, investment, personnel policy.

Less visible and less immediate is strategic crisis. Although the position of the company at the moment (the situation of success) may seem quite satisfactory, its onset must be diagnosed if there are failures in the development of the enterprise, the potential for success decreases, the protective capabilities in competition. The emerging gap between likely and desired outcomes can only be bridged by changing the previous or adopting a new orientation (for example, entering new markets, product or technological innovations). As a rule, such changes are calculated for many years.

Two extreme approaches to change management

Changes in strategy, processes, structure, and culture can be gradual, in small steps, or radically, in large leaps. In this regard, one speaks of evolutionary And revolutionary change models. In the spirit of such an "extreme" classification, it is expedient to present the concepts of changes in sociotechnical systems.

Revolutionary changes in the framework of "reengineering of economic activity"

In 1993, American management specialists M. Hammer and J. Champi formulated the concept of business reengineering in general terms. In their opinion, economic reengineering is a fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of the enterprise and its most important processes. The result is a dramatic (order of magnitude) improvement in key quantifiable cost, quality, service, and time metrics. According to this concept, we should talk about a deep reorganization of the enterprise along the entire value chain. The process of meeting the needs of the client is also subject to a radical reorganization.

An important prerequisite for achieving such ambitious goals is the orientation towards the production process and the customer, as well as the creative use of the latest information technology in the workplace of competent employees. New solutions must be consciously implemented in a non-democratic way. Leadership is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals who are endowed with all the necessary legitimate power to carry out the planned changes energetically and in a short time.

At the center of any revision of the business process is meeting the needs of internal and external customers. It depends on the strategy of the enterprise what needs to be accepted as key processes. But the focus should be on only a few of them (for example, the development of new products, the integration of logistics, etc.).

Auxiliary processes should not be optimized by themselves, but solely taking into account the needs of key processes. It is also necessary to approach the problems of the so-called points of intersection of interests in a new way.

Particular attention is given information technology. The purpose of its implementation is the complete processing of information about customers and production. This is about completely new areas of application, and not just about automating processes. Thanks to the targeted use of data banks, expert systems, telecommunication networks, it is possible to significantly expand the scope of employees' tasks.

A more advanced information base will not bring the desired result if the competence of the personnel is not changed, meaning not only organizational (duties, powers), but also purely qualification (capabilities, abilities, skills) parameters. In this regard, the authors of the concept of economic reengineering speak of "authorized" employees who must become "professionals of the process."

Collaboration among staff (eg in working groups) should be radically improved. As needed, an employee should have means of communication with any colleague. Other changes in the field of personnel management are also needed. Thus, the new base of compensations (wages) is especially important. The incentive system should focus primarily on the actual abilities of employees, and not on their previous merits.

Evolutionary change within organizational development

Organizational development refers to the concept of planning, initiating and implementing processes for changing social systems with the involvement of a wide range of participants. Proponents of the evolutionary concept proceed from the fact that, first of all, the views, value ideas and behaviors of the members of the sociotechnical system should change, and then the system itself ("organization" in the institutional sense).

Organizational development is defined as a long-term, rigorous, comprehensive process of changing and developing an organization and its people. The process is based on the training of all employees through direct interaction and the transfer of practical experience. The purpose of the changes is to simultaneously improve the productivity of the organization and the quality of work.

This definition already outlines the main normative provisions of organizational development. Changes must be made by the members of the organization. Internal and external consultants (so-called change agents) can act as an auxiliary force, but not as the main agents of change. This is expressed in the postulate "self-reliance" (without dependence on experts), as well as "people affected by change become their participants." In this way, organizational development can contribute to the democratization of labor. Unnecessary hierarchical levels should be eliminated, and power relations should be reduced to the level of partnership with an emphasis on mutual trust.

The expanded concept of organizational development includes both structural and personnel aspects. As part of structural approach an attempt is made through changes in organizational regulation (for example, organizational plans, descriptions of individual role functions) to create favorable framework conditions for achieving organizational development goals. Personnel approach consists in carrying out activities to improve the skills of employees (personnel development) and stimulate their readiness to accept and implement changes. Undoubtedly, the goal setting of organizational development (economic and social efficiency) should be based on a combination of both approaches.

Organizational development is carried out in several stages. First, there is a "defrosting" of the social system. The views, values ​​and behaviors of the members of the system are called into question and an examination of their suitability for achieving system goals (productivity, innovative activity, humanization of labor) is carried out. At the second stage, the movement towards change begins. New models of behavior and organizational regulation are tested and strengthened in the course of staff training.

Comparison of the main methods of change management

Origin of the method	Engineering Sciences, Management Consulting Practice	Social psychology, consulting practice in sociology
main idea	Radical rethinking and redesign of enterprises or production processes	Long-term, comprehensive change and development of the organization and its members
Criterion	Economic reengineering	organizational development
Principled position of managers		Keeping members of the organization in place Self-reliance Involvement of employees affected by change Democratization, elimination of hierarchy
Attitude towards staff	Granting Additional Permissions Formation of professionals	Reliance on employees who are capable of learning and ready to take responsibility
The nature of the changes	Profound and pervasive change Discontinuity of the process Changes in big leaps	Long learning and development process Process continuity Changes in small steps
Project implementation timeline	Several years focusing on quick success measurable in quantitative terms	For a long time with the expectation of patience and openness
Object of change	Enterprise as a whole or key processes	The company as a whole or part of it
	Significant and stable increase in profitability (economic efficiency)	Increasing profitability (economic efficiency), humanization of labor (social efficiency)
Type of crisis	Liquidity crisis Crisis of success	Crisis of success strategic crisis
Change strategy	Top down strategy	Top down strategy Bottom up strategy Bipolar strategy Wedge strategy "Many points" strategy
Methodological aspects	Reorganization of key processes in accordance with the adopted market strategy Adaptation of organizational structures and job descriptions Change in value perceptions (for example, orientation to the value creation process or customer base) Introduction of modern information technology Staff development and new methods of remuneration	Structural and personnel approach (new forms of organizational structures, changing attitudes and behavior patterns of employees, qualification events for individuals and groups)
Key Roles	Leader ("imperious patron") "Process owner" (in the role of its curator) Reengineering Group Management Commission (consisting of the "imperious patron" and specialists) "Chief of Reengineering" (specialist)	"Agents of change" (composed of specialists and "process owner" in the role of a consultant) "Customer System" (reorganized area) "Catalyst for change" ("powerful patron")
Strengths	Possibility of radical renewal Chances for a clear increase in profitability The speed of change Conceptual unity of events Significant expansion of the competence of specialists	Social acceptability in relation to the natural course of change Accounting for the ability to develop members of the system Stimulation of self-management and self-organization Long-term perspective Lack (decrease) of resistance to change
Weak sides	Instability in the phase of change Restrictions in time and actions due to the desire to quickly improve results Exclusion of alternatives to the strategy of change (top-down only) Low social acceptability	Insufficient reaction rate Exaggerated requirements for the social competence of participants in the process of organizational development The need to find compromises Insufficient ability to implement unpopular but necessary solutions

Processes of change require a logical conclusion, since it is known that they can last indefinitely. Therefore, it is necessary to stabilize and consolidate new, officially legalized models of behavior and organizational rules. This occurs at the stage of the so-called freezing of the process of change.

Within the framework of the concept of organizational development, it is important to establish where in the organizational hierarchy is the starting point for the process of change, which will subsequently become all-encompassing for the social system. The concept under consideration in this respect is very different from the concept of economic reengineering. If the latter is characterized by a top-down movement, then the concept of organizational development is much richer in options. It allows not only the reverse course of the process ("bottom up"), but also its initiation in the lower and upper parts of the hierarchy simultaneously (the so-called bipolar strategy).

The process of change can also begin in several hierarchical links, different special areas and at different hierarchical levels (the "many points" strategy) or like a wedge in the center of the hierarchical structure, gradually spreading to adjacent layers of the social system (the "wedge" strategy).

It should be noted that the method of organizational development (at least its most significant components) is widely used in the organizational practice of modern enterprises.

Comparison of approaches

The assessment of the feasibility of using a particular method depends on many factors. Staff attitudes towards change and understanding of authority by both management and employees are critical. Situational readiness for change, in accordance with one of the extreme concepts, should be assessed depending on the type of crisis in which the social system finds itself.

Under the conditions of a liquidity crisis, organizational development cannot be considered as a serious alternative to economic reengineering, while the principles and techniques of the former provide sufficient opportunities for solving problems during a strategic crisis. It is especially important to make the right decision regarding the choice of approach in the event of a crisis of success. In this case, first of all, one should take into account the personnel factor, as well as economic parameters.

In the table, the considered methods are compared according to a number of the most important criteria.

The underlying idea behind each change method determines role functions process participants. government representative ( in economic reengineering - a leader, in organizational development - a "catalyst of change"), by virtue of a high position in the organizational hierarchy, legitimizes the process of change, provides the necessary resources, and removes systemic barriers. In business reengineering, top management assumes the role of a powerful agent of change. In organizational development, a "catalyst of change" can speed up or slow down (which happens more often) the process of change.

Function responsible for the execution of the process(in business reengineering - "master of the process", in organizational development - "change agent") is to form a project team, prevent bureaucratic interference, and directly inspire and motivate participants. They also have the function of the main coordinators. They provide information about the progress of change.

Finally, the role specialists(respectively "chief of reengineering" and "change agent" in combination with "client system") is to provide tools for change. This may include teaching change techniques (process analysis, creativity techniques, group exercises, etc.), as well as applying specific knowledge to problem solutions. Within the framework of organizational development, special knowledge is not monopolized by the “change agent”, the forces of the “client system” are consciously involved in cooperation, i.e. employees of the reorganized area. All participants in the process, of course, must cooperate effectively and work in an atmosphere of freedom.

The idea of ​​differentiated and integrated change management

The analysis shows that change management can be applied in a wide variety of situations and take on a variety of forms of implementation. An important area for further research is the relationship that can arise between intra- and extra-firm conditions, the personnel parameters of an organization, various types of crises, and the main tools for managing change. First of all, it is necessary to clearly identify these links, and then make empirically substantiated assessments of the adequacy of the state of the enterprise and the tools for implementing changes (see diagram).

Between the extreme forms of change - economic reengineering and organizational development - lies a number of intermediate options. They may differ in the degree of participation of the members of the organization and the freedom of action of top management in the implementation of change. Depending on this, emphasis is placed on economic and / or social efficiency. The type of crisis determines the urgency of the changes and thus the degree of their radicalness.

The successful application of this or that method essentially depends on the activities in the field of personnel management. Along with measures to preserve employment, differentiated concepts of staff cuts cannot be ignored. Leaders of the change agenda must address employment issues in a non-destructive way for those who are laid off and seek to secure their use in the labor market. The goal of change management is not to reduce staff, but to unlock and realize its potential to increase the competitiveness of the enterprise.

Starting Framework for Differentiated and Integrated Change Management

The process of renewal (transformation) of an organization is understood, based on the introduction of innovations in organizational processes. The relevance of changes and innovations is due to the need to adapt the organization to the requirements of the external and internal environment, to master new knowledge and technologies, which is especially important in a market economy. The amount of knowledge possessed by humanity doubles approximately every five to seven years, and accordingly, the number of new situations that require an adequate solution doubles. This leads to an increase in the importance of change management tasks. Minor adjustments of the main parameters of the organizational environment (structure, tasks, processes, personnel, etc.) are recommended to be carried out in the organization regularly, large ones - once every four to five years. The goal of change is to bring about progressive change to move the organization into a high-performing state.

The reasons for organizational changes and innovations can be economic, ideological, organizational, informational, personnel, etc. The most common are changes in external working conditions (actions of competitors), the emergence of progressive technologies for solving management problems (automation and computerization), bureaucratization of the management apparatus (increase in management costs). ).

Diagnostic signs that determine the need for changes can be direct and indirect: deterioration or stabilization of the organization's performance indicators, losses in competition, staff passivity, unreasoned protest against any innovations, lack of a procedure for reversing inefficient management decisions, a gap between the formal duties of the staff and its specific work, high frequency of punishments in the absence of rewards, etc.

Innovations can be divided into 3 groups:

• technical and technological (new equipment, devices, technological schemes etc.);
• product (transition to the production of new products, materials);
• social, which includes:
  • economic (new material incentives, indicators of the wage system)
  • organizational and managerial (new organizational structures, forms of labor organization, decision-making, control over their implementation, etc.)
  • actually social, that is, purposeful changes in intra-collective relations (election of foremen, foremen, new forms of publicity, educational work, such as mentorship, the creation of new public bodies, etc.)
  • legal, mainly acting as changes in labor and economic legislation.

Sometimes economic, organizational, legal innovations are united by the concept of "management".

Classification of changes and innovations:

organization of the event:

• planned
• unplanned;

by deadline:

• short-term
• long-term;

in relation to staff:

• increasing the efficiency of the work of the staff;
• improving the skills of employees;
• aimed at improving the climate, increasing job satisfaction, etc.

According to the method of implementation, innovations should be distinguished:

• experimental, that is, passing the stage of approbation, verification;
• direct, realizable without experiments.

By volume:

• point (rules);
• systemic (technological and organizational systems);
• strategic (principles of production and management).

By appointment:

• aimed at: production efficiency;
• improvement of working conditions;
• enrichment of the content of labor;
• increasing the manageability of the organization;
• improving product quality.

Possible positive impacts of innovations:

• cost reduction;
• reduction of harmfulness of work;
• advanced training, etc.

Possible negative impacts of innovations:

• financial costs for their implementation;
• decrease in work efficiency at the initial stage;
• social tension, etc.

For the successful implementation of the transformation, it is necessary to analyze their causes, objects, positive and negative sides, clearly formulate goals and only then make changes.

Any innovations as certain changes in the labor process are inevitable, since they are mainly due to objective factors. At the same time, it must be emphasized that reorganization is not an end in itself, but a means of realizing new tasks and areas of activity.

The reorganization of an enterprise can be carried out in various forms: merger, accession, division, separation, transformation, reduction, reprofiling. With each of these types, a corresponding restructuring of the management system takes place, which entails changes in the structure, technologies, personnel, organizational culture and other essential parameters of the organization's functioning.

The priority goal of changes and innovations should be considered to be the achievement of better results, the development of advanced tools and methods of labor, the elimination of routine operations, and the implementation of progressive changes in the management system.

Change policy of the organization

Change management should be considered in two aspects: tactical and strategic. From a tactical point of view, change management means the ability to carry them out in adequate time, achieve the goals set, reduce resistance to change, and increase the adaptation of employees to them. In a strategic context, change management means incorporating permanent changes into management practices so that they become habitual and expected by all personnel in the organization, and their temporary absence would cause alarm and anxiety. It is the provision of strategic change management that can lead to a significant increase in the competitiveness of the organization.

Change management can be implemented based on two principal approaches:

Reactive approach- allows you to respond to ongoing events, adapt to changes, mitigate their consequences. At the same time, there is a time interval for lagging internal changes in response to external influences, which can lead to a loss of the organization's competitive position.

Proactive (preventive) approach- makes it possible to anticipate events in the external environment, get ahead of them and initiate changes ourselves. In this case, the manager's role is to bring about constant organizational change to control the very "destiny" of the organization. This approach allows you to radically manage change.

Changes in frequency are divided into one-time and multi-stage; in relation to the staff - positively perceived by the majority of staff and negatively perceived.

The main objects of organizational changes and innovations are:

• the goals of the activities of the personnel and the organization as a whole;
• organization management structure;
• technology and tasks labor activity personnel;
• composition of the staff.

One of the components of the introduction of innovations is the development of a new idea by the organization. The author of the idea must:

• identify the interest of the group in this idea, including the consequences of the innovation for the group, the size of the group, the spread of opinions within the group, etc.;
• develop a strategy for achieving the goal;
• identify alternative strategies;
• finally choose a strategy of action;
• draw up a detailed action plan.

People tend to have a wary-negative attitude towards all changes, since an innovation usually poses a potential threat to habits, ways of thinking, status, etc. There are three types of potential threats in the implementation of innovations:

• economic (decrease in the level of income or its decrease in the future);
• psychological (feeling of uncertainty when changing requirements, duties, methods of work);
• socio-psychological (loss of prestige, loss of status, etc.).

With the innovation, the organization of work with people is carried out in accordance with the principles:

• informing about the essence of the problem;
• preliminary assessment (informing at the preparatory stage about the necessary efforts, predicted difficulties, problems);
• initiatives from below (it is necessary to distribute responsibility for the success of implementation at all levels);
• individual compensation (retraining, psychological training etc.).

The following types of people are distinguished according to their attitude to innovation:

Innovators are people who are constantly looking for opportunities to improve something. Enthusiasts are people who accept the new, regardless of the degree of its development and validity. Rationalists - accept new ideas only after a thorough analysis of their usefulness, an assessment of the difficulty and possibility of using innovations.

Neutrals are people who are not inclined to take the word of a useful proposal.

Skeptics are people who can become good controllers of projects and proposals, but slow down innovation.

Conservatives are people who are critical of everything that is not tested by experience.

Retrogrades are people who automatically reject everything new.

Options for the policy of introducing innovations in the team

directive policy. Its essence boils down to the fact that innovations are carried out by the manager without the involvement of team members. The goal of such a policy is rapid change in a crisis situation, and team members will have to put up with changes because of their inevitability.

Negotiation policy. The manager is the initiator of innovation; he negotiates with the team, in which partial concessions and mutual agreements are possible. Team members can express their opinion and understanding of the essence of innovations.

Policy for achieving common goals. Its essence lies in the fact that managers, involving consultants - specialists in the field of management, not only receive the consent of the team to introduce innovations, but also set goals for the introduction of innovations for each member of the organization, determining their responsibility for achieving goals, both personal and all organizations.

Analytical policy. The manager attracts specialist experts who study the problem, collect information, analyze it and develop optimal solutions without involving a team of workers and without taking into account their personal problems.

Trial and error policy. The manager cannot define the problem clearly enough. Groups of workers are involved in the implementation of innovations, who try approaches to solving the problem and learn from their mistakes.