Change Management in Public Organizations: A Complete Guide

Introduction and Research Question

Change management involves an organization moving through adjustments to bring it to a different point in its development (Anderson & Anderson, 2001). Organizations are almost always changing and growing, but when change management is involved these changes are calculated and take place in a planned way. The goal is to move the organization forward so that it can continue to grow and develop with the times. Sometimes change comes very rapidly; other times it can take much longer.

What kinds of changes take place are also important to consider, because changes have to be managed carefully or they can get out of control and fail to produce the intended results (Kotter, 2011; Marshak, 2005). That can send an organization down the wrong path very quickly. Change can happen to one department at a time, or to an entire organization all at once. Leaders who initiate the change process are generally the ones who have the most to lose if adjustments do not go well, but the entire organization can suffer as well (Kotter, 2011).

To avoid serious problems, the leaders of any organization must focus not just on effecting change, but on how to carry out that change in the most effective and efficient way for all involved (Kotter, 2011). These leaders also need to consider ways to mitigate resistance to change throughout the organization, so that the changes are not hindered by those who do not want them to occur. In any organization, there will always be people who do not want to see anything change, and getting them on board can take time and effort (Kotter, 2011).

This paper addresses the issues that surround change management in public organizations, including the value of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and how it can help organizations effect change efficiently.

Without change, there can be no growth or development for an organization that needs to move forward in order to keep serving clients and operating effectively. Public and private organizations sometimes handle these issues differently. The research question explored in this paper is as follows:

Public Organizational Behavior Before, During, and After Change

RQ: How will public organizations behave before, during, and after change?

Answering this question requires examining the three phases of change — before, during, and after — as well as how employees handle the changes and whether they influence other members of the organization. How leaders work with followers can have a strong effect on how an organization handles change and whether it makes changes as scheduled and with as little disruption as possible for everyone involved.

Public organizations — those operated by the government — are not always deeply different from private organizations in the way they address change. The goal is to make needed changes as quickly, efficiently, and smoothly as possible, beginning well before the change actually takes place. Proper planning is essential, and employees need time to adjust (Phillips, 1983; Whelehan, 1995). The best way to help them adjust is to provide adequate leadership so that employees can get through the changes they will be expected to accept (Marshak, 2005).

If employees feel supported and thoroughly understand the upcoming change, they are more likely to move through it with less resistance. The more lead time a person has to prepare, the higher the level of comfort that person will likely have with the changes (Kotter, 2011). Before any change takes place, all employees should be notified of what the changes will be and when they will occur. While it is not strictly required to explain why, the more information provided before implementation, the more likely employees are to understand the change (Kotter, 2011). Understanding can lead to acceptance, which goes a long way toward a smooth transition.

The period during the change is the most critical (Anderson & Anderson, 2001). This is when things can — and do — go wrong if there has not been good communication beforehand. Employees may decide they will not comply with the change, attempt to cut corners, or simply make honest mistakes because they are not yet familiar with the new requirements (Kotter, 2011). Leaders and management can also struggle to ensure the change is being implemented correctly and that everyone is handling it properly (Kotter, 2011). Once the change has begun, it must be carried out; there is no going back for either management or employees.

Although changes are typically planned well in advance, this does not mean there cannot be glitches when the change is actually underway. What looked very good on paper may not translate well into real life (Kotter, 2011). If that is found to be the case, adjustments can be made throughout the process to ensure the change is implemented correctly and accomplishes its intended result.

The end goal of the change remains the same regardless of whether adjustments are necessary. The length of time a change takes will also depend on its nature, since some are far longer and more complicated than others. Larger changes should be planned over a longer period of time, in order to give employees time to adjust and ensure the change is carried out successfully (Whelehan, 1995).

Employees, Resistance to Change, and Leadership

Once the change has been completed, employees and leaders must get used to performing activities differently (Kotter, 2011). The change may be minor, affecting only one department or a few employees, or it may be a sweeping policy affecting hundreds or thousands of people. Either way, those affected will have an adjustment period. Even with careful planning and implementation, changes are stressful and take time to absorb (Kotter, 2011). Some people will remain resistant even when they know they have no choice, and even when the change is clearly better for the organization. Some people are simply uncomfortable with any difference in their routine.

Because the organization is public, the change may also affect the people the organization serves. It could be strictly internal, or it could have an impact on the community. Either way, the behavior of leaders and employees will be different after the change simply because the change was required (Kotter, 2011).

Additionally, people who dislike change may feel fearful or uncertain about when the next change may come, or about what changing times signal for their future. This is to be expected, and there are no guaranteed approaches that will work with every individual. Methods of adapting to change that work for one person may not work for another (Anderson & Anderson, 2001; Kotter, 2011).

Employees performing the change are critical to the organization and the community it serves, because they are responsible for getting the change right and ensuring everyone can get through it acceptably (Marshak, 2005). They may have to deal with people who are angry about the change, or even depressed by it. If the change removes perks or benefits for a particular group, there can be very upset people to manage.

Whether those affected are internal — employees and leaders — or people served by the organization such as customers or clients, the employees implementing the change will still have to deal with them, often frequently. This can become stressful and, in some cases, even dangerous to physical or mental health. It is therefore very important that employees working to implement the change have the tools they need to protect themselves and the organization (Anderson & Anderson, 2001; Whelehan, 1995).

With the right tools and support, employees will be able to handle whatever comes their way and still stay on track to implement the required changes on time and correctly. Delays and problems can derail a change effort and prevent employees from completing things in a timely fashion, which can hurt not only the organization and those who work there, but also the people it serves (Kotter, 2011).

This is especially true if a shutdown or partial shutdown of some parts of the organization is required to implement the change. Employees making the change happen must have proper techniques, tools, and knowledge; without them, they could cause serious difficulties for others. Improper training can also produce high levels of stress and a damaging rift between employees and their leaders or colleagues.

In every organization, some people will be resistant to change. These may be leaders or employees, but they can create a great deal of tension and strife. Not only do they want to avoid the changes that are going to take place, they will sometimes actively work against those changes (Kotter, 2011). They may also attempt to influence others against the changes in an effort to prevent them from occurring. That is not always the case — some resistant employees keep their feelings to themselves — but many will speak out against proposed or implemented changes they do not like. This is most common with long-term employees who have grown accustomed to doing things a certain way, though younger, less seasoned employees can also struggle with change (Anderson & Anderson, 2001).

How a person reacts to change and whether he or she resists it is not simply an employment issue; it often reflects that person's broader disposition toward change in daily life as well. Some people are simply not comfortable with changes taking place and want things to stay the same (Kotter, 2011). They may feel safer when nothing changes. There are ways to help employees get past this resistance, but it takes time and effort. Organizations that are committed to proper change must help resistant employees make the transition if those employees are to remain with the organization (Anderson & Anderson, 2001; Phillips, 1983).

A particularly significant concern in change management is how leaders (management) and followers (employees) interact with one another. Without effective leadership, it is not possible for an organization to stay together or move forward in the right way. Leaders in a public organization going through change should consider utilizing transformational leadership. This approach keeps leaders in charge while also making them part of a team where employees can work together and feel included in the process (Kotter, 2011; Marshak, 2005). Every person following this type of leader can see that he or she is part of a team and has something to contribute. The leader also works to ensure followers see the value of their input. Followers should want to follow a leader; if they do not, the leadership is lacking (Kotter, 2011).

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)

When a leader is committed to upholding a high level of ethics, it is more likely that followers will do the same. Leading by example is important in any organization and can go a long way — especially during changes, when employees may feel uncomfortable with adjustments to their roles and responsibilities. Older employees may genuinely fear being pushed out of their jobs, and newer employees who have not been with the organization long may share that concern, since recently hired staff are often among the first affected when restructuring takes place.

Leaders who display strong ethics and who are open to working closely with employees encourage similar behavior in their followers, who will then want to model the same conduct (Anderson & Anderson, 2001; Draper, LaDou, & Tennenhouse, 2011). Being an ethical leader does not guarantee ethical followers, but it certainly helps when appropriate behavior is consistently modeled throughout the organization. When a person works in a public organization where clients are in need of assistance and rely on that organization for help, his or her ethical conduct directly affects the quality of service delivered. The stronger the ethical behavior displayed, the better it is for the entire organization.

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) is one of the most vital tools when it comes to effecting change. It involves the use of software that helps an organization stay organized, determine where and when its resources are needed and being used, and plan for the future. Unfortunately, many organizations simply follow whatever is suggested by the vendor offering the ERP resources (Burns, n.d.). This is problematic because it can lead to acquiring resources that are not truly needed, and can prevent the organization from obtaining what it actually requires to be effective. Selecting the first vendor approached and agreeing to the first resources offered is not the right approach to proper change management (Burns, n.d.).

There are many vendors available for these types of resources, and finding the right one can have a significant impact on how change is implemented and how effective and smooth that change actually is. Since ERP is such an all-encompassing system, it is crucial that an organization find not only the right vendor but also the right software package (Burns, n.d.). Without the right software, critical information needed to advance the organization may be overlooked. When organizations invest in an ERP package, they need it to make a meaningful difference. If it does not, the money is wasted and the organization will not move forward.

Finding the right company and software is a consideration for all organizations — both public and private — regardless of size or specific needs (Donovan, 2011). In many cases, vendors exert too strong an influence over the decisions that organizational leaders make. This is understandable, since vendors know far more about the ERP options than the organizations do. Organizations are often uncertain about the software options available to them and which would best suit their goals (Krigsman, 2011). Relying on the vendor to select the product may seem sensible, since the vendor knows the product well. However, it is important to remember that the organization knows its own business far better than any vendor does.

The two parties should work together in the selection and implementation of ERP software to achieve the best fit for the organization (Krigsman, 2011). Collaborating closely can build a thorough understanding of the organization's real needs and the software options available to meet them most efficiently. Cost should be a factor, but the value delivered for money spent is more significant and should be the primary focus for any public organization (Krigsman, 2011). Taking good care of the organization's clients can only be accomplished through the use of proper resources (Wailgum, 2010).

The best way to obtain a sound ERP system is to ensure the organization clearly understands its own needs. Without clarity on what is required from ERP resources, an organization cannot make a good decision regarding which vendor to use or what software to purchase (Donovan, 2011). Planning for current needs and anticipating how the organization will likely grow in the future can ensure that the right ERP software is purchased and that major upgrades will not be needed for some time.

Organizations can also make mistakes or change their minds about what they wanted and needed. When that occurs, they must go back to the drawing board and work with a vendor to get what they truly need. Working with more than one vendor can also help, because it allows an organization to compare and contrast what it is being offered and identify what would really be the best choice — both currently and over time, as the organization continues to change and evolve (Donovan, 2011). Using ERP is not the only concern for an organization, but it can certainly have a large effect on how things are carried out and whether they are handled efficiently.