Essay on my bank bottom up approach PDF

Preview

Summary

Essay on my bank bottom up approach...

Description

Essay on the bottom-up change model followed by “My Bank” This essay will critically review ‘My banks’ organizational changes in relation to the bottom up approach. Applying communication & leadership theories and literatures to analyses the reason for resistance in this change approach & how the change approach could have been improved. According to the systems theory a change is often driven by the surrounding environment, technology & competition which triggers by needs within the organization ( Catrin & Mats, 2008 ). Therefore the main aim of ‘My banks’ change strategy was reducing in-house cost by using current employees to find the most cost effective and quality ways of improving & implementation of working standards by forming interdepartmental teams. The implementation strategy and the scope of tasks in the bottom-up was based on generating innovative ideas & recommendations from operational staffs, it promotes operational staffs to think differently which relates to thought leadership style followed by the staffs ( Bigley, 2019 ). The bottom-up model encouraged the operational staff with the support of management to form teams in order to lead, identify inefficiencies & come up with recommendations. However the team were expected to complete all their tasks despite working on the change model. Balogun & Johnson emphasized that it is about making sense in the perception of change rather than management executing decisions & administering them. Hense, Kotter (1996) emphasized that misunderstanding & inconsistent with communication can cause unfavorable behavior in the change process. Furthermore the effective lateral communication & formation of quality improvement & interdepartmental teams enabled extensive communication & accomplishment of planned tasks among employees that allowed them to generate new productive ideas. Furthermore the understandings & recommendations from operational staffs are also crucial for shaping the change. However, the middle and upper management’s leadership style in the model resisted the recommendations. Through analyzing the kaleidoscope theory with the bottom-up model, it is evident that the readiness stage for change in this model was very low and failed due to the reason that managers did not poses a participative style to implement the model. Secondly managers does not fit into the model as supportive managers since they resisted to implement some recommendations from staffs. Drawing from the case study, the speed (time stage) of the model was highly effected due to squad meeting resulting in qualitative work overload and managers became reluctant to support the change has resulted in wasting productive time. Moreover the managers rarely accepted the recommendations and shows less commitment causing disillusionment by staff, the management viewed the scope of work & recommendations of staffs as unworkable which resulted in frustrations of operational staffs. As a result the whole change model failed and the bank decided on working in another change initiative strategy. In addition the bottom up approach could have been improved by implementing a supportive & participative approach from the managers towards this change model ( Reiss, 2012 ).

Reference Catrin, and Mats, (2008) Speaking of Change. Three Communication Approaches in Studies of Organizational Change [online]. 13 (3), p. 17. [Accessed 02 March 2020]. Balogun, (2008) Exploring Strategic Change, The exploring corporate strategy series. Illustrated ed. Us: Ft Prentice Hall Financial Times. Joel Bigley, (2019) Executing Transformation, A Holistic Approach to Change Management [online]. 1st ed. Usa: Archway Publishing. [Accessed 27 February 2020]. Michael Reiss, (2012) Change Management: A Balanced and Blended Approach. 1st ed. Germany: BoD – Books on Demand....