Advantages of change:

1. A potentially better way of doing things;
2. Potential long-term savings
3. It could be the right way of doing things and not just a superficial improvement.

Disadvantages of change:

1. Change can still be wrong. It could merely be a reorganising of things but does not necessarily mean the new way is right, just more efficient perhaps.
2. Change can cost a lot of money and time.
3. Sometimes organisations try to do too much by adding new activities on top of old activities for no real benefit other than looking like people are more busy.

Now assuming it is necessary to change and will bring great benefits, initiating the change is often the most difficult to achieve because all systems prefer to stay in a state of equilibrium. This is especially true of people. So how do we get people to change?

First, let's ask ourselves why we need to change and whether there is change at all before implementing the steps to making change happen.

 
Why do we change?
The changes we see in the world and how customers perceive them may affect those within an organisation to change. We call this the need to follow the herd so to speak so as to look like it is up-to-date and relevant to the current marketplace. In other situations, it can be to get ahead of the competition. At other times, the changes could be a genuine need to improve something in order to achieve something great and, in return, bring tremendous long-term benefits to everyone concerned.

 
Do we need to change?
Only if you believe it will make a significant and positive difference in what people can do and achieve through the change.

If you are following the herd, you may need to ask yourself how important is this change to the organisation? Will it really make a difference? If it is to get ahead of the competition, the change might be important. If the company is struggling to stay afloat, any advantage you can gain could translate into significant profits. But for how long will the change last? Will the benefits be long-term?

 
Is there change?
Yes, but it depends on how you look.

Superficially, there are lots of changes. Its like looking at the surface of the ocean: it can appear to move around and change a lot. And this is where many management experts tend to focus on.

For example, people may look at a technology and think it is changing because there is a new model every year. But if you look deeply enough, you will often see the same technology masquerading under a different package give or take a few features added by the manufacturer (something you could easily do yourself by upgrading certain components on older systems so long as there is a genuine benefit from doing so).

However, you will also find lots of stability if you look deeper and below the superficial details.

Here's another example. Did you know the specific tools you use on a word processor may never change with each version upgrade or update? You type some text, for instance, and you decide it is time to centre the text, give it a bold look, perhaps make the text bigger and choose a standard type of font. These functions never change. However, the placement of those buttons to bold some text, make the text larger and so on may be different. To management experts, this is what they mean by changes. But you and I know, the changes are superficial. The functions to perform what you want in previous versions are still there. It doesn't change.

So why the superficial changes? Perhaps the changes help to improve workflow and productivity for those using the software.

This is the question management experts should be asking: Not that there is change, but rather do the changes actually translate into a sizeable improvement in the way people perform and achieve their work? And will it achieve greater stability in the workplace?

If the answer is no, then the changes are not really changes. The changes are more superficial and should have no relevance to what you and other people do in the core sense.

NOTE: In marketing, superficial changes are considered important to selling a product or service. The idea is that when people see something different on the outside, it is likely they will buy the product or service. But you should bear in mind that given enough time, if you do it too much, people will see through it all. It is better to make superficial changes only if there is a genuine change in the product or service itself. Presenting something through superficial changes is one thing. But truly fundamental changes underneath is what people will remember.

 
What is the aim?
Again the concept of balance is critical to change management.

We all know that there will be times when we have to change. We call this an "opportunity to improve". And when we do change, we have to choose carefully the things that promote greater stability and gives customers and staff everything that they need and want for now and in the far future so as to minimise the amount of changes required in the future.

This is sensible.

People don't change for the sake of change. There must be a desire to change and this can only happen if people can see the benefits and greater stability derived from the improvements when the change is made. Change should result in greater stability and bring positive benefits.

It's a form of balance in reaching a new state of equilibrium better than people had before.

There is a term used by management experts to get this balance into their work. A dynamic equilibrium is the word used to combine change and stability. The word dynamic connotates change, whereas equilibrium brings into our mind the idea of stability.

 
What if we have to change? Why can't we change?
There are barriers people use to resist change. Among the common excuses for not making "necessary" changes include:

1. Uncertainties about not knowing what the future will bring.
2. Not willing to give up current benefits if they can't see the same or improved benefits through the change.
3. Sometimes people haven't thought through the process.

Basically, people fear change because they can't see into the future to see the improvements.

 
Why the fear?
Don't be too surprised. People see on the news examples of change in organisations and not all the changes are good. For example, people's jobs can sometimes be cut. But if an organisation is built on solid socially-responsible principles and a solid base of quality and popular products, no one's job should be sacrificed. It should always be a reorganisation of people to perform things in a way that is better than before and with greater relevant to the marketplace.

For any organisation to lose people through the change means the organisation has focused itself too much on profit and a rigid hierarchical management structure and have not invested enough in its people and its customers to listen and become innovative and creative in finding new avenues to sell new products and services.

Managers must look at themselves and their organisations should the change cause fear in the people working under them.

 
How do we change?
Assuming the change is of a positive nature and will bring great benefits to everyone, you must first get together everyone who is likely to be affected by the change. Next, you should explain where the company is going and what it is doing now, the type of changes needed and how it may affect everyone. And finally, and perhaps most importantly, paint the future of the benefits and greater stability the change will bring to everyone.

Everyone has to see a future in the change. And it must be positive and better than where they were before or currently.

It requires careful planning before any change can be implemented. Because change means moving away from a familiar position for many people. There will be some sacrifice in time, money and effort. Some people may find it stressful, which is more the reason why the implementation of any change must be planned thoroughly.

One cannot stress this enough. We change by learning. This means we have to look at what we've done, what we are doing now, and how much better the improvement will be when we make the change. It is a planning process that requires participation of everyone in the decision-making process (ie. the ones who will need to change).

 
How do we know we need change? The strategies used to create change
The introduction of change should be a planned process. This means setting goals, gathering information, establishing promoting and restraining factors and then develop the plan or set of actions to help reach the goals.

To help see the importance of the change, management experts will often use tools like the Force Field Analysis diagram showing the equilibrium line of where the organisation is at and add to either side of the line all the promoting and restraining factors stopping the organisation reaching the desired position. Thus the diagram is aiming to teach us the importance of reducing the restraining forces and/or maximising the promoting forces so the organisation can move to the desired position.

Then there is the Lewin-Schein Change Process showing that there are ways for the manager to "unfreeze" the way people do things, then make the change, then doing the "refreezing" on the new ways. Training, modelling etc are what is often used to "unfreeze". Praise, rewards etc are the tools for "refreezing".

Other people use similar models for the change process. It is essentially a three part process model.

 
What's the best way to learn?
When we change, we may have to learn new skills. However, it is important for the manager to ensure there is quality in all learning done so that in future the amount of learning required for any further changes is not as great. The aim should be to look at the essence of things and do quality learning of what it takes to deal with them. Then the staff can do minor learning in future for the minor and relatively new things that appear (ie. the superficial changes).

 
How do we really know the change is good?
We don't really know until we try. But always take it in small "reversible" steps in case the change is not a good thing.

But remember, staying where you are can also be a dangerous thing as well.

This is where the problem lies. The problem is that if you make it too easy to change people, people will jump too easily into something they may regret later. Furthermore, being half-committed can also be dangerous if the change is a positive one. It can also be dangerous to stay where you are.

In the end it depends on what type of change is being committed to the people and making sure that change is based on sound research, quality decision-making etc. It must show the clear benefit to people in making the changes. Otherwise, change can be a dangerous concept in itself.

 
Can I get help to make the change?
Yes you can. There are people called outside and internal change agents to help improve the problem-solving and renewal process of an organisation. Internal change agents (eg. a new manager or a permanent new staff). External change agents (a management consultant, or contract short-term staff).