Saturday, February 18, 2017
Blog #2: Challenges to Change
There are many challenges among organizations, one of which is change. Throughout my work experience in social service agencies, the most common barrier to organizational success are the inability or challenge to handle or make external or internal change. Some barriers to change within agencies were: the lack of vision, planning, standards,consensus, resistance to change- employee or leadership resistance, poor communication, improper change management, no succession plan, decision management , implementation, conflict management, and leadership.
Friday, February 17, 2017
Convergence: How Five Trends Will Reshape the Social Sector by Gowdy, Hildebrand, Piana, and Campos (2009) suggest five trends expected to reshape the social sector. In my experience, present opportunities were once past problems. And, since the social sector tends to adjust to change more like molasses than a rushing river, those past problems are still boisterously present in the social sector. In this brief examination, I look to examine those five trends as problem areas and explain why organizations are slow to catch on.
Thursday, February 16, 2017
Change is uncomfortable. Many people like things the way they are and are hesitant to quickly buy into the idea that we need to start doing our jobs differently to accommodate to shifting contexts. However, change is inevitable and, if navigated gracefully, can result in tremendous progress. Organizations are inherently groups, and in groups there are stages of change. Tuckman’s model (Tuckman, B., 1963) proposes the following stages (and these are fluid): forming, storming, norming, and performing. Roll with the punches and remember that often great chaos precedes great change.
Organizations, especially nonprofits, often struggle when it comes to making necessary changes to stay relevant, let alone stay afloat. Such organizations battle with organizational inertia, where they are stuck on the same path doing the same thing they have done for years. Organizations that have been caught in this trap for a long time don’t always see the need to change because it has been “working” for so long.
Posted by Julianna Stohs
The Difficulties of Organizational Change
Change is difficult to bring about. We find comfort in routine and tradition, and so we often fight against it. Just as people resist change so do organizations. But why do so many organizations fail to successfully change? A key reason is that many organizations have dysfunctional cultures that hinder their ability to adapt (Rosenberg & Mosca, 2011). There is often a lack of trust between the employees and the management trying to implement the change. Without this trust there is not likely to be a shared commitment to the change being made. With no shared vision across the organization, change has little chance of succeeding.
The challenge to remain competitive today is forcing businesses and organizations, including those in the nonprofit sector, to reconsider the basic concept of strategy.
Bringing about change in an organization is a challenging undertaking, and there are many obstacles that may prevent necessary change from occurring. Stakeholders may not think that change is needed, and may want to cling to what the organization has always done. There can be disagreement about the appropriate next steps for the organization, and some members of the organization may feel as if their ideas are overlooked and that they are not valued. Once a new direction is decided upon, the next steps may not be adequately planned, or there may not be an organizational structure in place to help with implementation. There may be a lack of communication or training for staff members or volunteer to execute the plan, resulting in frustration. Organizations may diversifies services too greatly or deviates too far away from the organization’s roots, or may be disconnected from how the organization can best serve its intended clients.
Posted by Kendra Nervik
Change, although difficult, is inherent in nature. We see it as summer turns into fall and the leaves change color. We see it when children grow-up into adults. Even scientific breakthroughs, technological advances, the progression of human rights, and culinary masterpieces are products of change. Change is required when the status quo is no longer feasible, and often comes whether we want it to or not. But if change is natural, why is it so difficult? Why do organizations and communities experience stagnation, often at the expense of their members, when life is dynamic? La Piana Consulting suggests that we are afraid of change because it creates a sort of urgency within us, “People don’t know what to do. People are thinking ‘how do I not mess up?’” (Convergence pg. 23-25). It is easy for people to become comfortable and complacent in their routine, and change often carries a negative undertone.
Posted by Atiya Siddiqi
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
As the adage goes, change is hard. Whether it’s changing a bad habit like biting your nails or changing careers, individuals often meet change with resistance, uncertainty, and/or fear. Change becomes even more difficult when it involves many individuals, or in an organization. Change is difficult to bring about in organizations for two general reasons:
Organizations operating in the nonprofit sector face the most complicated set of factors influencing change. Solutions to overcoming the challenges associated with enacting effective, positive changes must incorporate the unique elements of the nonprofit sector and some of the weaknesses therein, such as the challenges associated with nonprofit leadership, a restrictive economic model based on donations, and the difficulties associated with monitoring an organization’s progress towards accomplishing an altruistic ‘mission’.
Posted by matthew.burr1
Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Like all systems worth studying, the factors involved exist on a continuum. The relationship between non-profit, government, and for-profit agencies are no exception, seeming to slide along an interchangeable scale of scope depending on the topic at hand. This comparative summary assigns each agency to three categories to broadly characterize the approach and highlight similarities and differences: micro, mezzo, and macro.