Industrial Relations Workplace Change (subject) Essay

Industrial Relations Workplace Change (subject) Essay Industrial Relations Workplace Change (subject) â€" Essay Example > Change modelsIntroductionEvery organization will occasionally experience the need for change in the management or organizational structures of the company. Proven application procedures need to be applied in the management of the changes that are likely to be implemented as such. Using a relevant approach to management of the same will ensure its successful management. According to Anderson (2009), change management entails a clear thought plan of methodologies and approaches, which are implemented sensitively. It further emphasizes the need for a clear approach and consultation with all the stakeholders involved in change or those who are affected by change. Palmer et al (2006) points out the fact that clear goal setting need to be exercised in any change management process. Each organizational management need to clearly identify changes that need to be done and define the limits of the change. In this paper, a discussion has been given focusing on the change management models th at are in existence today. The paper puts its focus in one model based on top/down approach, which has been identified as the key model that is best for analysis. SWOT (strengths weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis of this mode is also done in the paper. It aims at giving clearer understanding of this select model. As one reads along a case study of a selected company that has employed this change model in the past is also analyses in depth. The last section of this paper tries to justify the selected model as the appropriate models. Discussion is also given in this part focusing on the presented arguments as well providing a summary of potential limitations that this model might present in practice. Top-Down/Systematic ModelJohn Storey was the founder of the top down systematic model (Burke 2007). He identified this model as type one under which changes can happen in an environment or organizational scenario. The other models developed and advanced together with this model are the piecemeal, bargaining for change, systematic jointism and mixed models (Burke 2007). The Top-Down approach describes a well-organized model that is based on systematic approach to change. The model focuses on identification of procedures and application of the same procedures in a systematic manner using appropriate tools that would see to it that a desired change is realized. Systematic change model begins with the setting of goals or vision identification for the process of change. The need for change should be clearly described and defined. The model is a proponent of a well defined target of change that emanates from an organized group of management. It has few people involved in the decision making of change process and as such, this can be a cause for conflict. It, however, counteracts this setback by allowing constant reviewing and monitoring of the activities involved in the change process. A next stage is systematically entered after the achievement of the d esired results in the current stage of change execution (Hellriegel, Slocum, 2010). The other forms of change model also describe change procedures but put their focus in different perceptions. Type two models also referred to as the piecemeal describe a change in an organization in which different forms of communication practices are applied. Some of these communications forms include team briefings and open communication. Piecemeal approach describes the need in which the implementations and applications that are coordinated in a transparent manner. Bargaining for change or type three models is a proponent of accessions that describe working practices and conditions that are secured from different groups, which in turn are compensated well. As the name describe, it involves a lot of bargaining and use of negotiation techniques with opposing numbers. The aim is to arrive at an offer that is agreeable to both parties. There is no much difference between bargaining model and system atic jointism. In systematic jointism, bargaining is also done but differs in the form that a total package is put together after negotiations. The last model which is described as type-five describe a model in which no discrete initiatives or total packages are negotiated upon as in the case of type three and four models. This model proposes the continuous incremental and change of organizations structures and cultural elements until the desired change is arrived at (Hellriegel, Slocum, 2010).