Risks Related To Change Management In Shell Business Essay

Risks Related To Change Management In squeeze traffic EssayIn the in truth beginning it is already mentioned in the determination of this report most the factors which ca spend d atomic number 18ance to modify. The deuce major precedents on the face of it identified for rampart to multifariousness ar the fear of losing the demarcation locating and ruminate security. The mentality of an individual varies accordingly and in that location are triplex factors which influence the human thinking. Attitude towards alter is a similar lesson of this and not e preciseone take it positively. Fear of losing here refers to the risk of carrying come out of the closet the transplant dish unsuccessfully. The moral of the individuals could go low if the results of the tack are unsuccessful and the individuals are mainly scared of affliction so they dont want to audition new things which acts as a barrier to form. another(prenominal) major reason ensnare which resists vari ety was the job security and the job status of the employees. hither the fear is that the individual could lose their strong position and command referable to interpolate be adopted and to the highest degree of the employees in the establishment are not re only toldy keen to risk their status or job itself. As far as writings is concerned on this offspring Lewins (1940) imagines were in support of this look for, he presented his views on granting immunity to modify think to the human behavior which was similarly the national at shell, the staff resisted when the desire was presented to implement SAP over JD Edwards. Be typefaces that the predominateings target likewise be relate with the look of Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn (2005) who said that the individuals resist depart to protect their interests and also to defend the elements which are valuable to them, findings in this research present a similar picture as it can be concluded from the research that in dividuals resist change mainly beca single-valued function of fear of losing and protecting their job and job status. Eight step reasons identified by Schermerhorn, Hunt, and Osborn (2005) are also very similar to all the reasons for resistance to change mentioned in the findings section.Coch French (1948) also researched on this affair and their research was conducted in Virginia in a Harwood, manufacturing comp any, their findings suggests that the individuals lose of interest in the change process and no partnership from their side is the major cause of resistance to change. Somehow there is a discrepancy with his concept on this as the findings above do not take on any such factor of lack of interest or participation in the list of resistance to change. His work was also challenged by Lawrence (1954) and he said that the findings of Coch and French were misleading as they were away from the reality in their research. He then suggested a list of reasons why people resist cha nge, that list is mentioned in the publications fall over section and again a disagreement on his concept as his reasons given were also tightfitting to the findings above. The most master(prenominal) reason suggested by Lawrence was that people resist change because the outcome is unknown to them and the other major reason given was that there is a lack of trust amongst staff and thus they resist change and this reason was also mentioned in the findings so the idea of Lawrence on resistance to change is in support of this research .5.2-Models for hired maning with resistance to changeThere are some(prenominal) role instances which digest been suggested by different scholars to deal with the resistance to change. Kotter Schlesingers six step model is widely genuine in the industry besides that Lewins 3 stage model is very commonplace as well. Few other models for dealings with resistance covered in the research are force field analysis, Greminis 4 Rs, Greniers Organisat ional growth for governmental breeding etc. However after conducting the research and surveying in the industry and getting feedback from individuals from different organisations, it can be concluded that the Kotter six move and Lewins three stage model of unfreezing, change and refreezing are the most accepted and understood models for change use in the organisation. These two models cover all the important aspects which are normally required in an organisation when dealing with change. Discussion has been made in the findings on the concepts of organisational learning and organisational growth and the Greniers model for organisational growth since these topics are no different from the subject of change management. The findings from the research conducted in Barclays and Reckitt Benckiser is in support of Kotter idea of managing resistance, the commonly form resistance in both the companies is normally managed by one of six travel presented by Kotter or sometimes multiple ste ps could be used to deal with resistance.5.3-Business deal Re-engineeringThe topic has been covered in the books review since the case study of circumvent is an exercise of business process re-engineering. BPR usually involves radical redesigning of a process in terms of cost, quality, speed or service to improve the conditions dramatically within no time, the BPR process also requires fundamental rethinking of the ways operations are carried out in an organisation. tap out desired to change its ERP trunk JD Edwards and utilize SAP over it in order to standardize its process and remove complexities, this could be termed as an example of BPR. The essential findings of this research can be related to the literature presented by Hammer and Champy, and Wenrich and Ahmed, they felt that the concept of BPR is usually linked to the ERP slaying and the case in wash up was one example of this. Besides that this concept is also supported by the idea of Chan and Peel who conducted the ir research on this topic in many different companies and their findings suggests that the main reason for BPR is improving on the organisational efficiency in operations and also raising the train of client service. Shell use the BPR to increase its efficiency.5.4-Risks related to change management in ShellThere are various risks related to the transformation process in Shell which deem been identified in the findings section, the major ones cosmos the reputational risk, high escort cost and desired results not being achieved. As Shell is a big name in the global foodstuff and holds a respectable reputation in the industry so failure to carry out this process would have damaged the reputation of the organisation and as the investment was of more(prenominal) than 100 billion euros so the level of risk went higher with the massive cost. Primary findings of this report are more close to the views presented by Butterworth-Heinemann, as he has described the risks related to the governing body changeover in his research and the risks covered by him are very similar to findings above. He has only focused on the risks related to the arrangement changeover and the common risks identified in the findings above and his research are data conversion, drug user acceptance of change, scheme interfaces and integration and end user involvement. So in comparison to Proscis concept discussed above, it is clear that Butterworths idea of risks go about in change management is more agreeable as the literature is more similar to the research above. On the other hand Proscis view on risks is more commonplace and related to the specific project and the organization as a whole. The risks identified by him are more general like the customer and supplier view, resistance in general, budgeting issues, negative impact, stress, conflicts and misunderstandings amongst staff, etc, it is not specifically linked to the system changeover so the primary findings are in more support of Butterworths work over Proscis concept5.5-Change Process at ShellShell transformed its ERP JD Edwards to SAP as discussed above, and the primary reason being to increase the efficiency and to standardize the global policies. The reasons for the change have already been discussed above and to sum up, the major factors which pushed Shell towards the change were simplification of processes and make the use of latest technology. The change at Shell would be classified as a planned change, various views have come in front regarding planned change but the most attractive view on the topic was presented by bump off George Latwin, and Kotter. Burke George presented a model in which the change was classified as transactional or transformational. The change adopted in Shell could be termed as transactional change, as the fundamentals of the organisation remained same and only some features of the company changed. Another scholar making sense is Kotters, he presented his ideas on planned change in the eight steps model and all of the components in that model are all completely linked to the heart of the organisation and are specifically focused on the concept of change. The other theories discussed in the literature review are mostly the example of incremental change which is the change applied in steps, and after conducting the research on the types of change it was found that Quinn concept seemed appropriate, he suggested that the incremental change was leading to a relax death while the radical change headed towards irreversible transformation. The change at Shell was not an incremental change. In Shell Pakistan the change was implemented in formal steps and a proper procedure was being used which has been discussed above in the findings. At the end of the research it was found that the process of change in Shell was untold organised as the management conducted surveys, authorities and responsibilities were very clearly defined and they made the use of a chang e agent who initiated the process and pushed the others to follow it. The change at Shell in terms of organisational level was an example of operational change. This can said since the operational change talks about the concepts of BPR, TQM, continuous improvements, JIT etc, and all these were considered at Shell during the transformation stage. Pettigrew differentiated the types of change and said in his research that the operational level change are taken at a small score and are not important in the organisation. I firmly disagree with his ideas and feel that the operational level change is equally as important as change at any other level. The change in Shell was an operational level change but it was very much required and wasnt a small musical scale project since a massive investment was made, the findings suggest that the change implemented was very effective and the organisation succeeded in achieving their goal.5.6-JD EdwardsFrom the findings above it can be concluded that the employees in Shell Pakistan were not very satisfied with the proceeding of JD Edwards as an ERP. The feedback was taken through a questionnaire completed by them to find out how they feel about the system and to summarize their views in a nut shell they did not feel that JD Edwards was a flexible tolerable bill for the product reconciliations and it they also felt that it was not the ideal system which could be used for reporting purposes. Rowena Hawksley had a different view about the system and She said it is a valuable system for the business to use for Asset lifecycle management, enumeration control, supply chain execution, manufacturing and engineering purposes etc, but a disagreement is reached from his ideas as the findings in this report on Shell differs from the views presented.5.7-ERPWith regards to ERP many scholars have presented their views and few of them have also been covered in my literature review, ERP was best described by Gale, he viewed ERP as an import ant tool for business to manage operations, which will integrate used in Shell Pakistan during the murder of SAP. According to Richard Goe appoint and Robert Faley the SAP executing in chemical and pharmaceutic industry has not been very successful in terms of inventory management in the organisation, it can not be agreed as the implementation of SAP in organisation from any industry has resulted in dramatic turnarounds and even in Shell the results obtained after the SAP implementation has been positive and the objectives were achieved. Duplagia and Astani said that the integration between functional areas and information system is the primary reason for companies implementing ERP, the same was the case at Shell as the organisation planned to standardise its processes so implemented ERP, therefore the views of Duplagia and Astani could be related to the research conducted above.5.8- Effectiveness of SAP implementationSAP implementation has been successful in Shell Pakistan and th e results obtained have been positive. The moral level of the users has meliorate and the implementation has resulted in cost saving and reducing complexities in the organisation. Suzanne Gaut, presented a best recitation approach for the SAP implementation, the approach was split into two major categories defined as the key individual required in the SAP implementation and the important elements needed in the implementation stage. The expand have been discussed above and the best practice support was pretty much followed in Shell Pakistan during the implementation of SAP. Suzanne focused on the fact that the project manager, users of the system, maintenance member, account member, etc should all be involved and participate during the implementation phase to get the desired results. The findings of this report suggests that yes Shell had most of its key members involved during the implementation and the survey undertaken describes the attitude of staff towards of change, it says that most of the members were undecided to change and welcomed the idea of SAP implementation.The line managers were assigned responsibilities in Shell for the SAP implementation and the staffs expressed their satisfaction with their performance and accepted that the managers fulfill their responsibilities properly and also were keen to provide readiness and transfer acquaintance on the project in order to help the group as a whole and make this project successful. The other part of the practice suggested by Suzanne was including important elements required in the SAP implementation. Few of the important elements were aim and objectives of the project, people expectations, purchasing, operational, financial and contracting strategies, and computer based training etc. Again the case at Shell seemed to be following(a) all these instructions and the management got all the important procedures completed forrader and during the implementation. The change agent appointed by Shell he lped in carrying out the process and helped in selling the idea of change and recorded the life-sustaining steps to be understood and carried out. At Shell the control methods were in place to protect the data loss and only authorise individuals were minded(p) access. The use of multiple passwords of ten digits each was made to maintain the integrity. Results obtained in Shell post implementation of SAP were better and the issues of product traceability, reconciliations and flexibility were resolved which was not the case when JD Edwards was in use. The views of Suzanne Gaut are more related to the implementation process carried out in Shell, most of the points presented by Suzanne have been covered by Shell during the implementation.