Connecticut Yankee in King Arthurs Court as a Dystopian...

Connecticut Yankee in King Arthurs Court as a Dystopian Work For years, Mark Twains A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthurs Court has been primarily viewed as a work of simple satire. Twain, desiring to poke fun at a group of Americas cultural critics, chief among them Matthew Arnold, who claimed that cultural life in the U.S. treaded on shallow soil, takes aim at the venerated institutions of Britain. The author attempts to show that his countrys lack of romanticized social structures, meaning an absence of royalty, the Catholic church, and long-dead knights and princesses, was far from a cultural weakness. Twain explodes the myth around idealized chivalric society and proves it to be no match for the Nineteenth†¦show more content†¦Here, as in much of Tom Sawyer and most of Huckleberry Finn, he is a great novelist (DeVoto, 274). The work devolves from its first chapters, however, and becomes something very different by the end of the novel. A Connecticut Yankees climactic, blood-letting ending, in particular, stands out as amateurish bungling by the author. Twain, in a burst of what seems, upon initial investigation, a beginning writers attempt to resolve a novel that has spiraled out of his control, kills off his antagonists and finally his protagonist as well. It seems that Twain throws his hands up in frustration and ends the action in an orgy of electrocutions and Gatling gun fire. . . . the book is chaos. Twains mind was not able to stay within[satires] limits. His imaginative ferment demanded gigantic expression, (DeVoto, 278). An alternate reading of the conclusion, however, allows the reader to take a vastly different critical angle on the book. When viewed through the lens of anti-utopian or dystopian analogy, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthurs Courts finale becomes a grave prediction of mans industrialized future. Where Aldous Huxley augured mans enslavement to technology, its intellectual and critical emasculation in Brave New World, Twains work can be construed to encapsulate the pending destruction of societys innocence and idealism by

Lunenburg, Fred C. Organizational Structure Mintzberg Framework Free Essays

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY VOLUME 14, NUMBER 1, 2011 Organizational Structure: Mintzberg’s Framework Fred C. Lunenburg Sam Houston State University ABSTRACT Henry Mintzberg suggests that organizations can be differentiated along three basic dimensions: (1) the key part of the organization, that is, the part of the organization that plays the major role in determining its success or failure; (2) the prime coordinating mechanism, that is, the major method the organization uses to coordinate its activities; and (3) the type of decentralization used, that is, the extent to which the organization involves subordinates in the decision-making process. Using the three basic dimensions —key part of the organization, prime coordinating mechanism, and type of decentralization—Mintzberg suggests that the strategy an organization adopts and the extent to which it practices that strategy result in five structural configurations: simple structure, machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, divisionalized form, and adhocracy. We will write a custom essay sample on Lunenburg, Fred C. Organizational Structure Mintzberg Framework or any similar topic only for you Order Now Organizations exist to achieve goals. These goals are broken down into tasks as the basis for jobs. Jobs are grouped into departments. Departments in organizations may be characterized by marketing, sales, advertising, manufacturing, and so on. Within each department, even more distinctions can be found between the jobs people perform. Departments are linked to form the organizational structure. The organization’s structure gives it the form to fulfill its function in the environment (Nelson Quick, 2011). The term organizational structure refers to the formal configuration between individuals and groups regarding the allocation of tasks, responsibilities, and authority within the organization (Galbraith, 1987; Greenberg, 2011) Very early organizational structures were often based either on product or function (Oliveira Takahashi, 2012). The matrix organization structure crossed these two ways of organizing (Galbraith, 2009; Kuprenas, 2003). Others moved beyond these early approaches and examined the relationship between organizational strategy and structure (Brickley, Smith, Zimmerman, Willett, 2002). This approach began with the landmark work of Alfred Chandler (1962, 2003), who traced the historical development of such large American corporations as DuPont, Sears, and General Motors. He concluded from his study that an organization’s strategy tends to influence its structure. He suggests that strategy indirectly determines such variables as the organization’s tasks, technology, and environments, and each of these influences the structure of the organization. More recently, social scientists have augmented Chandler’s thesis by contending that an organization’s strategy determines its environment, technology, and tasks. These variables, coupled with growth rates and power distribution, affect organizational 1 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY 2_____________________________________________________________________________________ tructure (Hall Tolbert, 2009; Miles, Snow, Meyer, Coleman, 2011). Henry Mintzberg (1992, 2009) suggests that organizations can be differentiated along three basic dimensions: (1) the key part of the organization, that is, the part of the organization that plays the major role in determining its success or failure; (2) the prime coordinating mechanism, that is, the major method the organization uses to coordinate its activities; and (3) the type of decentralization used, that is, the extent to which the organization involves subordinates in the decision-making process. The key parts of an organization are shown in Figure 1 and include the following. Strategic Apex Technostructure Middle Line Support Staff Operative Core Figure 1. The key parts of an organization. ? ? ? ? The strategic apex is top management and its support staff. In school districts, this is the superintendent of schools and the administrative cabinet. The operative core are the workers who actually carry out the organization’s tasks. Teachers constitute the operative core in school districts. The middle line is middle- and lower-level management. Principals are the middlelevel managers in school districts. The technostructure are analysts such as engineers, accountants, planners, researchers, and personnel managers. In school districts, divisions such as instruction, business, personnel, public relations, research and development, and the like constitute the technostructure. The support staff are the people who provide indirect services. In school districts, similar services include maintenance, clerical, food service, busing, legal counsel, and consulting to provide support. ? The second basic dimension of an organization is its prime coordinating mechanism. This includes the following: FRED C. LUNENBURG _____________________________________________________________________________________3 ? ? ? ? ? Direct supervision means that one individual is responsible of the work of others. This concept refers to the unity of command and scalar principles. Standardization of work process exists when the content of work is specified or programmed. In school districts, this refers to job descriptions that govern the work performance of educators. Standardization of skills exists when the kind of training necessary to do the work is specified. In school systems, this refers to state certificates required for the various ccupants of a school district’s hierarchy. Standardization of output exists when the results of the work are specified. Because the â€Å"raw material† that is processed by the operative core (teachers) consists of people (students), not things, standardization of output is more difficult to measure in schools than in other nonservice organizations. Neverth eless, a movement toward the standardization of output in schools in recent years has occurred. Examples include competency testing of teachers, state-mandated testing of students, state-mandated curricula, prescriptive learning objectives, and other efforts toward legislated learning. Mutual adjustment exists when work is coordinated through informal communication. Mutual adjustment or coordination is the major thrust of Likert’s (1987) â€Å"linking-pin† concept. The third basic dimension of an organization is the type of decentralization it employs. The three types of decentralization are the following: ? ? ? Vertical decentralization is the distribution of power down the chain of command, or shared authority between superordinates and subordinates in any organization. Horizontal decentralization is the extent to which non administrators (including staff) make decisions, or shared authority between line and staff. Selective decentralization is the extent to which decision-making power is delegated to different units within the organization. In school districts, these units might include instruction, business, personnel, public relations, and research and development divisions. Using the three basic dimensions—key part of the organization, prime coordinating mechanism, and type of decentralization—Mintzberg suggests that the strategy an organization adopts and the extent to which it practices that strategy result in five structural configurations: simple structure, machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, divisionalized form, and adhocracy. Table 1 summarizes the three basic dimensions associated with each of the five structural configurations. Each organizational form is discussed in turn. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY 4_____________________________________________________________________________________ Table 1. Mintzberg’s Five Organizational Structures Structural Configuration Simple structure Machine bureaucracy Professional bureaucracy Divisionalized form Adhocracy Prime Coordinating Mechanism Direct supervision Standardization of work processes Standardization of skills Standardization of outputs Mutual adjustment Key Part of Organization Strategic apex Technostructure Operating core Middle line Support staff Type of Decentralization Vertical and horizontal centralization Limited horizontal decentralization Vertical and horizontal decentralization Limited vertical decentralization Selective decentralization Simple Structure The simple structure has as its key part the strategic apex, uses direct supervision, and employs vertical and horizontal centralization. Examples of simple structures are relatively small corporations, new government departments, medium-sized retail stores, and small elementary school districts. The organization consists of the top manager and a few workers in the operative core. There is no technostructure, and the support staff is small; workers perform overlapping tasks. For example, teachers and administrators in small elementary school districts must assume many of the duties that the technostructure and support staff perform in larger districts. Frequently, however, small elementary school districts are members of cooperatives that provide many services (i. e. , counselors, social workers) to a number of small school districts in one region of the county or state. In small school districts, the superintendent may function as both superintendent of the district and principal of a single school. Superintendents in such school districts must be entrepreneurs. Because the organization is small, coordination is informal and maintained through direct supervision. Moreover, this organization can adapt to environmental changes rapidly. Goals stress innovation and long-term survival, although innovation may be difficult for very small rural school districts because of the lack of resources. Machine Bureaucracy Machine bureaucracy has the technostructure as its key part, uses standardization of work processes as its prime coordinating mechanism, and employs limited horizontal decentralization. Machine bureaucracy has many of the characteristics of Weber’s (1947) ideal bureaucracy and resembles Hage’s (1965) mechanistic organization. It has a high degree of formalization and work specialization. Decisions are centralized. The span of management is narrow, and the organization is tall—that is, many levels exist in the chain of command from top management to the bottom of the organization. Little horizontal or lateral coordination is needed. Furthermore, machine bureaucracy has a large technostruture and support staff. FRED C. LUNENBURG _____________________________________________________________________________________5 Examples of machine bureaucracy are automobile manufacturers, steel companies, and large government organizations. The environment for a machine bureaucracy is typically stable, and the goal is to achieve internal efficiency. Public schools possess many characteristics of machine bureaucracy, but most schools are not machine bureaucracies in the pure sense. However, large urban school districts (New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago) are closer to machine bureaucracies than other medium-size or small school districts. Professional Bureaucracy Professional bureaucracy has the operating core as its key part, uses standardization of skills as its prime coordinating mechanism, and employs vertical and horizontal decentralization. The organization is relatively formalized but decentralized to provide autonomy to professionals. Highly trained professionals provide nonroutine services to clients. Top management is small; there are few middle managers; and the technostructure is generally small. However, the support staff is typically large to provide clerical and maintenance support for the professional operating core. The goals of professional bureaucracies are to innovate and provide high-quality services. Existing in complex but stable environments, they are generally moderate to large in size. Coordination problems are common. Examples of this form of organization include universities, hospitals, and large law firms. Some public school districts have many characteristics of the professional bureaucracy, particularly its aspects of professionalism, teacher autonomy, and structural looseness. For example, schools are formal organizations, which provide complex services through highly trained professionals in an atmosphere of structural looseness. These characteristics tend to broaden the limits of individual discretion and performance. Like attorneys, physicians, and university professors, teachers perform in classroom settings in relative isolation from colleagues and superiors, while remaining in close contact with their students. Furthermore, teachers are highly trained professionals who provide information to their students in accordance with their own style, and they are usually flexible in the delivery of content even within the constraints of the state- and district-mandated curriculum. Moreover, like some staff administrators, teachers, tend to identify more with their professions than with the organization. Divisionalized Form The divisionalized form has the middle line as its key part, uses standardization of output as it prime coordinating mechanism, and employs limited vertical decentralization. Decision making is decentralized at the divisional level. There is little coordination among the separate divisions. Corporate-level personnel provide some coordination. Thus, each division itself is relatively centralized and tends to resemble a machine bureaucracy. The technostructure is located at corporate headquarters to provide services INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY 6_____________________________________________________________________________________ to all divisions; support staff is located within each division. Large corporations are likely to adopt the divisionalized form. Most school districts typically do not fit the divisionalized form. The exceptions are those very large school districts that have diversified service divisions distinctly separated into individual units or schools. For example, a school istrict may resemble the divisionalized form when it has separate schools for the physically handicapped, emotionally disturbed, and learning disabled; a skills center for the potential dropout; a special school for art and music students; and so on. The identifying feature of these school districts is that they have separate schools within a single school district, which have separate administr ative staffs, budgets, and so on. Elementary and secondary school districts that have consolidated but retained separate administrative structures with one school board are also examples of the divisionalized form. As might be expected, the primary reason for a school district to adopt this form of structure is service diversity while retaining separate administrative structures. Adhocracy The adhocracy has the support staff as its key part, uses mutual adjustment as a means of coordination, and maintains selective patterns of decentralization. The structure tends to be low in formalization and decentralization. The technostucture is small because technical specialists are involved in the organization’s operative core. The support staff is large to support the complex structure. Adhocracies engage in nonroutine tasks and use sophisticated technology. The primary goal is innovation and rapid adaptation to changing environments. Adhocracies typically are medium sized, must be adaptable, and use resources efficiently. Examples of adhocracies include aerospace and electronics industries, research and development firms, and very innovative school districts. No school districts are pure adhocracies, but medium-sized school districts in very wealthy communities may have some of the characteristics of an adhocracy. The adhocracy is somewhat similar to Hage’s (1965) organic organization. Strategy and Structure The work begun by Chandler and extended by Mintzberg has laid the groundwork for an understanding of the relationship between an organization’s strategy and its structure. The link between strategy and structure is still in its infancy stage. Further research in this area, particularly in service organizations like schools, will enhance school administrators’ understanding of school organizations (Lunenburg Ornstein, 2012). In the meantime, school leaders must recognize that organization strategy and structure are related. FRED C. LUNENBURG _____________________________________________________________________________________7 Conclusion Henry Mintzberg (1992, 2009) suggests that organizations can be differentiated along three basic dimensions: (1) the key part of the organization, that is, the part of the organization that plays the major role in determining its success or failure; (2) the prime coordinating mechanism, that is, the major method the organization uses to coordinate its activities; and (3) the type of decentralization used, that is, the extent to which the organization involves subordinates in the decision-making process. Using the three basic dimensions—key part of the organization, prime coordinating mechanism, and type of decentralization—Mintzberg suggests that the strategy an organization adopts and the extent to which it practices that strategy result in five structural configurations: simple structure, machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, divisionalized form, and adhocracy. References Brickley, J. , Smith, C. , Zimmerman, J. L. , Willett, J. (2002). Designing organizations to create value: From strategy to structure. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chandler, A. D. (2003). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the American industrial enterprise. Frederick, MD: Beard Books. Galbraith, J. R. (1987). Organization design. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed. ). Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 343-357). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Galbraith, J. R. (2009). Designing matrix organizations that actually work: How IBM, Procter Gamble, and others design for success. New York, NY: Wiley. Greenberg, J. 2011). Behavior in organizations (10th ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hage, J. (1965). An axiomatic theory of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10, 289-320. Hall, R. H. , Tolbert, P. S. (2009). Organizations: structures, processes, and outcomes (9th ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kuprenas, J. A. (2003). Implementation and performance of a matrix organization structure. International Journal of Project Manageme nt, 21, 51-62. Likert, R. (1987). New Ppatterns of management. New York, NY: Garland. Lunenburg, F. C. , Ornstein, A. O. (2012). Educational administration: Concepts and practices. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Miles, R. E. , Snow, C. C. , Meyer, A. D. , Coleman, H. J. (2011). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Mintzberg, H. (1992). Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Mintzberg, H. (2009). Tracking strategies: Toward a general theory of strategy formation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Nelson, D. B. , Quick, J. C. (2011). Understanding organizational behavior. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY 8_____________________________________________________________________________________ Oliveira, N. , Takahashi, N. (2012). Automated organizations: Development and structure of the modern business firm. New York, NY: Springer. Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. (trans. T. Parsons). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. How to cite Lunenburg, Fred C. Organizational Structure Mintzberg Framework, Essay examples

Organizational Change Management Corporate Environment

Question: Discuss about theOrganizational Change Management for Corporate Environment. Answer: Introduction: John Kahui is an individual dealing in management with an experience of over 10 years in the field of corporate environment. He has started an organization Ecology matters which will protect the natural environment of New Zealand. The main function of the organization is to look after the cleanliness of the beaches, lakes, rivers and forests in New Zealand. The organization is a non profitable organization and operates mainly through the funding from different companies and individuals. The organization does not pay any income tax as it is a non profitable organization and the paid employees of the organization are General Manager, accountant and office administrator. The organization is going through some changes because the organization is not getting enough donations from the individuals. The donors cannot claim any tax benefit because the organization is not registered under Charities commission. The organization has to prepare necessary documentation, rules and guidelines. McKinsey 7S model is used by the organization to implement the changes. McKinsey 7S model is composed of 7 elements. Values are shared among the employees of the organization with the help of Shared values (Boverie et al., 2013). Shared values include the belief and attitudes of the organization. The model defines the requirement of change and better performance of the organization. Goals and vision of the organization is redefined with the help of this model. Strategy: Strategy helps Ecology matters to use the resources optimally. The organization has limited resource (Boverie et al., 2013). Strategy will help the organization to implement the changes properly. Structure: The organization follows a centralized structure. The top management takes the decision and the other members carry out the orders (Brown May, 2012). This creates confusion among the lower level employees, as they cannot take any decisions. This creates dissatisfaction among the employees. System: The system within the organization is not clear among the employees in the organization. Recruitment procedure, pay packages and promotion of the employees in the organization is not structured (By et al., 2014). All these results in changes within the organization Staff: Goals and objectives of the organization are not properly defined. A proper goal and objective of the organization motivates the employees and this enhances the productivity of the organization. Skills: Skills are important for any organization or employee. Skills help an organization to remain a step ahead of its competitors and service (Cummings Worley, 2012). Training is essential to uplift the skills and performance of the employees in the organization. Styles: Leadership styles are important for the proper functioning of any organization. In the organization autocratic leadership style is followed. The boss takes the decision and the others execute the instructions (Boverie et al., 2013). This is not accepted by many of the employees. Instead the organization should follow a democratic leadership style where the organization takes the opinion of the employees before taking any decision. This will reduce conflicts between the employees and management. Figure 1: McKinsey 7S Model (Source: Waddell et al. 2014) Kotters 8 step change process is also used by Ecology Matters. The Eight steps are as follows Establish sense of urgency: In this process the organization determines the present situation of the market and take steps accordingly. Crisis and potential of the organization is discussed by the top management (Daniela, 2013). Powerful Coalition: Coalition is the process in which a group of people come together to address a common cause. In Ecology matters, a coalition is formed among the employees to solve the administration and remuneration structure of the organization Create a Vision: A new vision has been established by the organization. The vision of the organization is to protect the natural resources of New Zealand (Fragouli Ibidapo, 2015). Different strategies have been used by the organization to form the new vision. Communication of the Vision: vision: The top management of the organization, Ecology matters has taken steps to communicate the vision to the employees of the organization. Vision is communicated to employees through meetings and circulation of notices. Empower others to Act on Vision: Ecology matters have changed the structure and procedure within the organization to empower the vision (Giraud Autissier, 2013). All the employees are treated equally and there is no miscommunication among the employees. Plans and Short term Wins: The organization has divided the goals into short term objectives. This has helped the organization in achieving goals quickly. Consolidate Improvement: The organization has planned to recruit employees who are knowledgeable and experienced in the field of social work. Proper training will also help the employees to improve their working capability (Kumar, 2013). Innovative ideas like campaigning through social media will also enhance the functioning of the organization. Institutional Change: Institutional change is done by communicating behaviors with corporate success. This will change the thinking procedure of the organization. Change is an important part of any organization or business. Changes help an organization to remain competitive in the competitive market. Lewins Change management model was introduced by psychologist Kurt Lewin in the year 1950 (Cummings Worley, 2012). Kurt Lewins change management model consists of three stages. They are Unfreeze, Transition and Refreeze. Unfreeze: Unfreeze is the first step of this model. This step helps the employees in the organization to understand the requirement of change. In this step the existing procedures and rules are broken down to produce new ways of operation. Initial stages of these steps are very difficult. In order to make changes, the beliefs value and attitude of the persons in the organization should be changed (Larsen Olaisen, 2013). However, the process becomes easy when poor financial result exists or customer satisfaction is low. The organization, Ecology matters suffers from poor financial condition and the employees are not properly recruited. Even the payments of the employees are also hampered. Skills of the employees in the organization should also be changed. Behavior and thoughts of the employees should be changed to meet the requirement of the organization. All these have helped the organization to go through the unfreeze steps. Transitional stage: Transitional stage is the process in which the employees resolve the uncertainty among themselves. In this new process the employees learn the new behavior, process and thinking. Education, communication ad time is therefore important for the employees in Ecology matters (Cummings Worley, 2012). The employees in the organization take time to cope with these changes. Once the employees cope up with this stage they move to the last step which is known as Refreeze stage. Figure 3: Lewins Change Management Model (Source: Created by the author) Advantages: Through Lewins Change management model employees in the organization are able to come across new strategies and theories. This will help to increase the productivity of the employees in the organization (Maes, 2014). The employees in the organization will properly communicate. Disadvantages: In the initial stages the employees in the organization will not easily accept the changes. Changing the thinking procedure of the employees in the organization will be a challenge for the top management in the organization (O'Donnell, 2016). Change helps an organization to remain active in this competitive market. In the organization, Ecology matters, the top management always accept changes. The top management of the organization has understood that, with change, new policies and rules can be implemented. Moreover new methods and technologies can be implemented in the organization with such change (Cummings Worley, 2012). New technology will uplift the performance of the employees in the organization. Internet will help the management to communicate with the employees in the organization effectively. Social media will also play an important part in creating awareness among the people about the activity of the organization. The accountant in the organization will also accept the changes in the organization. New technologies used in the field of accounts background in the organization will reduce the workload of the accountants (Robertson, 2015). Positive changes in the organization will also improve the financial condition of the organization. Additionally, a stronger economy will also help the organization to expand its growth beyond boundaries. Goals and objectives of the organization can also be met quickly with the help of change in processes. The volunteers in the organization face a lot of problem in the organization. It has been found that in a project the volunteers were responsible to clean up the beaches of Auckland. The supervisor of the project had not properly communicated with the volunteers and a miscommunication was created between the volunteer and the coordinator (Shani et al., 2013). Contacting with the volunteer has also become tough for the local people. Therefore it can be said that the volunteers will accept the changes in the organization. Administration in the organization may not accept the changes in the organization. Administration in the organization is already acquainted with the processes which are being followed in the organization. They are not happy with the changes in the organization. One of the main reasons is that the total working procedure in the organization will change because of the introduction of new rules and regulation (Cummings Worley, 2012). The employees in the administrative department are older generation and they do not accept changes. The administrative people in the organization are not eager to go through the training procedures. Employees in the organization will also not easily accept the changes because they fear of something unknown will occur due to change. The normal routines of the employees will also be affected because of the change in the organization (Cummings Worley, 2012). Often changes in the organization are not accepted by the employees in the organization proving that decisions taken by top management are wrong. 1-60 days 61-150 days 151-240 days 241-300 days Need for change New Interventions Evaluation of result Stabilize change Table 1: Gantt Chart Source: Created by the author In this section of the assignment the researcher has given an action research plan for the organization. In the first sixty days the researcher will identify the need for change. Need for change is an essential part of the organization. Need for change is important because it will help ecology matters to thrive in ever changing world. Change management will help the organization to deliver effective results. It will also help the organization to reduce the gap between the requirement and results. Experienced employees and effective training will help the organization to better serve the environment (Stirpe et al., 2015). Latest equipment and technology will help the organization. Better application of change management will also help the organization to increase the rate of success. Better rate of success will also improve the efficiency of the employees in the organization. The employees will be motivated and this will improve the reputation of the organization. New interventions are important to improve the working culture of Ecology matters. New equipments and technology will help the employees to communicate with each other properly and complete any job quickly. The organization is planning to launch a new app through which the employees can contact with each other and can share information quickly (Cummings Worley, 2012). This will help the organization to perform rescue work effectively. Evaluation of results will be done after implementation of new innovation. Evaluation will be done for a period of 60 days. On successful evaluation the changes will be permanently implemented in the organization. Once the changes are successful it will be permanently be implemented in the organization. Every employee in the organization has to follow the changes in the organization strictly. References Boverie, P., Grassberger, R., Law, V. (2013). Leading individual development and organizational change around learning, meaning, and nurturing environment.Advances in Developing Human Resources,15(4), 382-400. Brown, W., May, D. (2012). Organizational change and development.Journal of Management Development,31(6), 520-536. By, R. T., Oswick, C., Burnes, B. (2014). Looking back and looking forward: Some reflections on journal developments and trends in organizational change discourse.Journal of Change Management,14(1), 1-7. Cummings, T. G., Worley, C. G. (2012).Organization development change(9th ed.). Mason, OH;Australia;: South-Western/Cengage Learning. Daniela, P. M. (2013). the interdependence between management, communication, organizational behavior and performance.Annals of the University of Oradea : Economic Science,22(1), 1554-1562. Fragouli, E., Ibidapo, B. (2015). leading in crisis: Leading organizational change business development.International Journal of Information, Business and Management,7(3), 71. Giraud, L., Autissier, D. (2013). Uncovering the intellectual development of the journal of organizational change management.Journal of Organizational Change Management,26(2), 229-264. Kumar, N. (2013). Organization development--the process of leading organizational change.Abhigyan,31(3), 78. Larsen, T. J., Olaisen, J. (2013). Innovating strategically in information and knowledge management: Applications of organizational behavior theory.International Journal of Information Management,33(5), 764. Leonard, H. S. (2013).The wiley-blackwell handbook of the psychology of leadership, change and organizational development(1. Aufl.;1; ed.). GB: Wiley-Blackwell. Maes, J. (2014). The international society for organizational development and change announces our second international conference in amsterdam from july 7 to 12, 2014.Organization Development Journal,32(2), 148. O'Donnell, V. L. (2016). Organisational change and development towards inclusive higher education.Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education,8(1), 101-118. Robertson, R. (2015). The coaching solution: How to drive talent development, organizational change, and business results.TD Magazine,69(7), 75. Shani, A. B., Noumair, D. A., Pasmore, W. A., Woodman, R. (2013).Research in organizational change and development. Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Stirpe, L., Bonache, J., Trullen, J. (2015). The acceptance of newly introduced HR practices: Some evidence from spain on the role of management behavior and organizational climate.International Journal of Manpower,36(3), 334. Waddell, D., Creed, A., Cummings, T. G., Worley, C. G. (2014).Organisational change: Development and transformation(5th ed.). South Melbourne, Vic: Cengage Learning.