Management of Change: Administrative and Organizational Change
We continue our discussion to do with Management of Change (MOC). Previous posts in this series are:
Management of Change: Further Thoughts on 'Replacement-In-Kind'; and
Management of Change: Administrative and Organizational Change.
Types of Change
If change is to be managed properly, it is necessary to understand the types of change that are typically made on a facility — each will require its own response. Changes can be categorized as follows:
Initiated change;
Non-initiated change;
Temporary change;
Emergency change; and
Administrative and organizational change.
In this post we look at Administrative and Organizational change.
Administrative and Organizational Change
When Management of Change systems were first implemented they generally focused on physical items such as equipment and instruments. However, an effective Management of Change program will also consider the impact of changes to topics such as organizational structure, operating procedures, personnel changes and training, even though they are generally more difficult to categorize and define in terms of their impact on system safety.
Managing organizational change is more difficult than managing technical change because it involves human behavior and feelings — issues which are difficult to understand and to predict. For example, a large theoretical gain in efficiency may be achievable if operators and maintenance personnel can share their work activities. Yet such changes can generate concerns about job security and loss of seniority. The upshot may be that that overall efficiency and productivity may actually fall should that change be implemented.
The following are examples of organizational change that could have an impact on a facility’s performance.
A corporate directive calls for a reduction in the number of people employed at a site.
The operations superintendent proposes to change the route that delivery trucks follow when moving within the facility boundaries.
Shift workers vote for a change from eight-hour to twelve-hour shifts.
The engineering manager suggests that a different contract company be used to bench-test the facility’s relief valves.
The Information Technology department installs a new computer system for inventory control.
A purchasing agent decides to use a different vendor to supply a critical spare part.
The company comes under new ownership.
Six of the most senior technicians retire within a three-month period — taking their knowledge and expertise with them.
There is a general reduction in head count because the company is in financial difficulties.
If the change involves putting new people into existing jobs, then it is likely that the new person will have less experience than the person being replaced. The replacement may be given some formal training for the new position, but generally the handover consists of working in tandem for a while with the person who is leaving the job. Whether or not such a change should be processed through the MOC system will probably depend on the criticality of the job in question.
Managing organizational change is challenging because it involves human behavior and feelings — issues which are difficult to understand and to predict. For example, a large theoretical gain in efficiency may be achievable if operators and maintenance personnel can share their work activities. Yet, such changes can generate concerns about job security and loss of seniority. The upshot may be that that overall efficiency and productivity may actually fall were that change to be implemented.
