Lewin Change Management Developing Corporate

Lewin Change Management

Developing Corporate Social Responsibility through Managerial Strategy: An application of Change Management

Corporate social responsibility (and the lack thereof -- whether merely perceived or an all-too-evident actuality) has been an increasingly prevalent and impassioned topic over the past decade. Calls for greater responsibility have come from many angles; environmental concerns demand greater corporate attention, the physical as well as the financial welfare of employees has been reexamined and publicly scrutinized in many industries and organizations, and the recent economic crisis even underlined the need for social responsibility in the financial sector to handle money in a manner that sustains business as best as possible. The entire global financial system, as well as the human and natural resources on which these companies all ultimately depend, depend on corporate social responsibility.

These broad understandings and assessments of the need for corporate social responsibility -- which is arguably greater today more than ever before due to the size and scope of the impact that a lack of responsibility can demonstrably have -- do not, however, suggest anything that is of immediate practical value. Developing corporate social responsibility is far easier said than done, even within corporations that are generally willing to do so. True social responsibility means going beyond simple ethical imperatives, or perhaps requires a new understanding of more expansive ethical imperatives that demand a level of reasonable foresight and proactive behaviors. Regardless, corporate social responsibility is a complex standard that requires true organizational transformation.

In order to be truly socially responsible, a corporation needs to develop both the knowledge base and essential principles and objectives that will allow the corporation to carry out its primary objective -- that of providing their investors/owners a return on their investment -- in a manner that also improves the myriad social issues that the business can expect to encounter, or at the very least do no harm in these regards. This means analyzing and acknowledging the true social impact of each of the corporation's actions, and either altering behaviors to modify or eliminate any negative social impact or simply eliminating the action. Obviously, it would be advantageous to most organizations to continue the majority of their current actions, if in modified form, and thus a method for implementing behavioral change in a fundamental and organization-wide manner is needed.

Lewin's Model of Change Management

In the 1950s, psychologist Kurt Lewin examined the problem of organizational change, noting that it was far more difficult than might be expected and observing a strong resistance in most individuals to any changes in the work process, especially after comfort in a position and/or within an organization had set in (Blokdijk 2008). What Lewin suggested, in essence, was that people had a natural tendency to "freeze," causing fundamental organizational behaviors and attitudes to also "freeze" due to the desired perpetuation for the status quo of the individuals that comprise any given organization (Nilakant & Ramnarayan 2006). Obviously, this makes most organizations very resistant to change, and this resistance can become stronger as the number of individuals within the organization grows (Zou & Lee 2009).

Lewin did not merely stop after noting this problem with the successful implementation of meaningful organizational change, however, but went on to develop a conceptual model for organizational change that is still in wide use today. In order to be effective and truly implemented, change has to be managed, with the desired modifications in practices, behaviors, and attitudes being specifically and explicitly developed and communicated to the individuals that make up the organization. There is, quite simply, a need to overcome the natural "freezing" tendency that exists for most individuals and organizations, and it is through the explicit and direct attention of managerial practices and principles towards the development and implementation of desired changes that this can be accomplished (Felkins, Chakiris, & Chakiris 2001). Lewin analyzed and discussed this far more extensively in developing his change management model, of course, but his understanding of the change management process is remarkably straightforward and simplistic -- overly simplistic, according to some (Carter 2008).

Lewin theorized, based on his observations, that change was most effectively brought about in organization through a three-step process. The process he identified and outlined is often confused with the "plan, implement, review" mechanistic approach to implementing program or organizational change, but Lewin's model for change management is far more rooted in psychology than in any purely mechanistic approach to business (Cameron & Green 2004). Lewin saw change and the organizational resistance to it as primarily a human difficulty, and his method for addressing this difficulty is equally humanistic.

The first step in implementing meaningful and lasting change is "unfreezing," which consists of making the individuals affected by the change able to see the reasons that the suggested change is needed, motivating them to the potential of the change (Griffin 2008). Only after the proper motivation has been reached can the change itself be implanted in a way that will prove lasting and truly transformational, allowing for and/or leading to fundamental behavioral shifts by the individuals and thus the organization involved. This is the second step in Lewin's model, and it is followed by the third and final step of "refreezing" -- using the very same human tendency that the "unfreezing" process had to fight against to reinforce the concepts and behaviors introduced by the changes carried out and restoring individuals to a certain level of comfort with their roles in the organization (Griffin 2008). In this way, the changes become a new yet familiar and fundamental part of the organization's behaviors and attitudes.

Again, it is essential that Lewin's change management model be seen as the human resource tool that it is; the perspective of the model necessarily views the human resources of an organization as the only means by which real change can truly be effected. Lewin's model is not really as straightforward a blueprint for change as it seems -- although the steps are neatly outlined, the accomplishment of these steps can be a more daunting task than the outlines suggest. This is perhaps even more true of the first and last steps in Lewin's change management model than it is of the middle step -- the actual implementation of the change itself -- as it is in these stages that the individuals' minds must be prepped and satisfied.

Entering a change-requiring scenario equipped with this model and a knowledge of its actual implications and applications, however, makes the process of planning for and implementing change far easier than it could otherwise be. The apparent simplicity of Lewin's model for change management belies its effectiveness, as evidenced by the tool's staying power in both academic literature and practical business applications (Nilakant & Ramnarayan 2006). Business has changed radically since the middle of the twentieth century, when this model was first put forward, but it has managed to remain just as relevant and applicable to today's organizations and the current era's specific needs for organizational change. An application of Lewin's model for change management would allow any organizations an opportunity to redefine its core strategies and values in order and any actions, behaviors, and attitudes necessary to carry them out (Cameron & Green 2004).

Implementing Change Management for Social Responsibility

Taking Lewin's change management model and applying it to a modern organization for the purpose of making that organization more socially responsible at all levels of business might seem like a tall order, and indeed it is no small task. There is a great deal of evidence, however, that suggests that it is entirely possible, and not even incredibly difficult given adequate time and a proper commitment on the part of management to the changes being implemented (Silvey & Warrick 2007). This commitment, coupled with an accurate and comprehensive understanding of the changes required and the objectives desired, is all that is necessary to begin phase one of the change management model.

As noted above, the first phase in the model -- "unfreezing" -- consists of convincing individuals within the organization of the necessity for the desired change(s) (Griffin 2008). Often, this consists of calling individuals' attention to the changes in external circumstances that warrant and/or necessitate internal organizational changes in response (Lee, Pena-Mora & Park 2005). In the case of corporate social responsibility, there are a multitude of external situation and effects currently prevalent in the world and the media that can be used to underline and emphasize the needs for organizational change. Enhancing the awareness of everyone within the organization to such situations as environmental degradation and broad public and/or industry dependence on the company's performance will help to establish the need for change in individual's minds, allowing change to be implemented.

The exact changes that will need to implemented will vary from organization to organization, but there are a few generalities that can be made about these changes when they are for the express and direct purpose of enhancing a given organization's corporate social responsibility. No change of this scope and magnitude will be implemented without direct operational guidelines being established for the organization's interactions with resources and clients, for instance, so the changes in this instance must be made concrete before they are brought to the organization as a whole (Silvey & Warrick 2008). Social responsibility also necessitates an awareness of social concerns and impacts; a deeper-developed part of every department/office's leadership must be devoted to the analysis and awareness of the social interactions and effects of the organization's actions and behaviors.

In the refreezing process, the goals and objectives behind the implemented changes, as well as the concrete and operational aspects of the changes themselves, must be repeatedly reinforced in order to remain effective (Felkins et al. 2001). Examinations of how current actions might have affected both the organization's position and society as a whole in past and/or ongoing scenarios of social concern could be one method of reinforcement, creating an engagement between the individuals of the organization and both the abstract and the concrete aspects of the changes they are a part of implementing. The clear expectations regarding the changes and the clarity of the results of these changes can both go a long way towards restoring the level of comfort most individuals evince -- whether or not they consciously express it -- and thus "refreezing" the organization into is new and changed actions, behaviors, and attitudes of more socially responsible practice (Blokdijk 2008). With this, the change management process is essentially completed, until the next round of needed changes is perceived and unfreezing is needed.