Organizational Change

at
Categories
Tags

 

 

 

Description

Two principle impediments to effective and lasting organizational change are structures and systems within the organization. In other words, for change to become a part of an organization, managers often have to change the formal and informal structures of an organization to better support the change initiative.

For this Discussion Question, find an organization in KSA that completed a change in their organization within the last three years. Discuss how they changed or modified their formal and informal structures and systems to ensure the intended change became a part of the organization’s culture. Then discuss how the organization used structures and systems to deal with the uncertainty and complexity in the environment? Was this an appropriate response?

How could the existing structures and systems have been approached and used differently to advance the desired change? How did existing structures and systems affect the ability of the change leader to bring about the desired change?

Embed course material concepts, principles, and theories, which require supporting citations along with two scholarly peer-reviewed references in supporting your answer. Keep in mind that these scholarly references can be found in the Saudi Digital Library by conducting an advanced search specific to scholarly references

 

Sample Solution

Thirdly, Vittola argues that war should be avoided (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332) and that we should proceed circumstances diplomatically. This is supported by the “last resort” stance in Frowe, where war should not be permitted unless all measures to seek diplomacy fails (Frowe (2011), Page 62). This means war shouldn’t be declared until one party has no choice but to declare war, in order to protect its territory and rights, the aim of war. However, we can also argue that the war can never be the last resort, given there is always a way to try to avoid it, like sanctions or appeasement, showing Vittola’s theory is flawed. Fourthly, Vittola questions upon whose authority can demand a declaration of war, where he implies any commonwealth can go to war, but more importantly, “the prince” where he has “the natural order” according to Augustine, and all authority is given to him. This is further supported by Aristotle’s Politics ((1996), Page 28): ‘a king is the natural superior of his subjects.’ However, he does later emphasise to put all faith in the prince is wrong and has consequences; a thorough examination of the cause of war is required along with the willingness to negotiate rival party (Begby et al (2006b), Page 312& 318). This is supported by the actions of Hitler are deemed unjustly. Also, in today’s world, wars are no longer fought only by states but also non-state actors like Al-Queda and ISIS, showing Vittola’s normative claim on authority is outdated. This is further supported by Frowe’s claim that the leader needs to represent the people’s interests, under legitimate authority, which links on to the fourth condition: Public declaration of war. Agreed with many, there must be an official announcement on a declaration of war (Frowe (2011), Page 59-60&63). Finally, the most controversial condition is that wars should have a reasonable chance of success. As Vittola reiterated, the aim of war is to establish peace and security; securing the public good. If this can’t be achieved, Frowe argues it would be better to surrender to the enemy. This can be justified because the costs of war would have been bigger (Frowe (2011), Page 56-7).

This question has been answered.

Get Answer