ADKAR Model of Change Management

An appropriate and popular method to follow the three steps of change considering the change management principles is given by the ADKAR Model

A– Awareness of the need for change

Make all level of staff aware why the upcoming change is needed. Change implemented to improve business operations, stay ahead of your competition, and/or increase the bottom line, is not only wise, but also necessary for success.

D – Desire to support and participate in the change

It is imperative that management encourage the desire of their employees to support and actively participate in the forthcoming change, regardless of the immediate appeal or flash of the new procedures or processes.

K – Knowledge of how to manage

Management must provide the training and education to its staff of the methods of changing to the new procedures, software, or organization. High levels of awareness and desire will often be useless without the necessary knowledge of how to change to accomplish the goals desired.

A – Ability to implement the change

Along with the knowledge of how to affect successful change, everyone involved needs to be given the specific training and information to achieve success in implementing the details of the change to be made.

 

R – Reinforcement to sustain a change  

 

Reinforce the new “habits” of the staff typically improves the success of the changes made

CHANGE MANAGEMENT

 

A simple definition of change management stands for a structure approach to change individuals, teams and organizations from a current stage to a desire future stage.


This subject has been studied for several years (example: 1951, Lewin) to help to increase  organizational effectiveness having as a result several management literature. Nowadays is extensively recognized that an essential and crucial challenging responsibility of an organizational leadership exists: to identify the need of change (Hayes, 2007)

 

“An early model of change developed by Kurt Lewin (1951) described change as a threestage process. The first stage he called "unfreezing". It involved overcoming inertia and dismantling the existing "mindset". Defence mechanisms have to be bypassed. In the second stage the change occurs. This is typically a period of confusion and transition. We are aware that the old ways are being challenged but we do not have a clear picture to replace them with yet. The third and final stage he called "freezing" (often called "refreezing" by others). The new mindset is crystallizing and one's comfort level is returning to previous levels.” (Hayes, 2007)

 

Hayes (2007) differs between two dimensions and four quadrants of change:

 

“In the first dimension incremental change is associated with those periods when the industry is in equilibrium and the focus for change is ‘doing things better’ through a process of continuous tinkering, adaption and modification. Transformational change occurs during periods of disequilibrium. It involves a break with the past, a step function change rather than an extrapolation of past patterns of change and development. It is based on new relationships and dynamics within the industry that may undermine core competencies, things differently rather than doing things better. It might even mean doing different things.

 

In the second dimension it is sometimes relatively easy to anticipate the need for change. For example, companies competing in markets where margins are being squeezed can anticipate the need to secure greater efficiencies or generate new income streams. There are, however, occasions when organisations are confronted with changes that are very difficult to anticipate – for example, the effects of the 9/11 events in New York City. Some organisations are much better in anticipating the need for change than others. They are proactive. They search out potential threats and opportunities and anticipat changes that they could initiate to gain competitive advantage. Other organisations are much more Reactive and act only when there is a clear and pressing need to respond.”

Whether the need is for incremental or transformational change, the earlier the need is recognised, the bigger the opportunity is for managers to decide how to manage it, having more reachable options. Combining the two dimensions of change discussed so far, Nadler et al. provides a useful typology of organisational change.