"There is a serious danger that fire policy will be developed on the basis of work carried out in the context of the market place rather than being underpinned by research which has been subjected to full process of academic rigour and peer review" Professor D Drysdale (European Vice-Chair, International Association of Fire Safety Sciences) and D T Davis (Chair of the Executive Committee, Institution of Fire Engineers). Fire Engineers Journal 61, 10, 6-7

Contact us Homepage Useful links Research Advice Contributors About us	Want help with your bibliography? Go to Research Advice Day, G. (2000) Change Management: a case study of a change programme undertaken by West Sussex Fire Brigade, unpublished dissertation for MBA, University of Brighton, fitting-in.com
	Want help with your bibliography? Go to Research Advice

MBA DISSERTATION

UNIVERSITY OF BRIGHTON

CHANGE MANAGEMENT

A CASE STUDY OF A CHANGE

PROGRAMME UNDERTAKEN BY

WEST SUSSEX FIRE BRIGADE

GRAEME DAY

October 2000

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the management of a major change to the structure of West Sussex Fire Brigade that took place in 1998 and to reflect on the success of the project to date. It sets out to explore what drove the restructure to take place in the first place, how the change agents were nominated, the role of management throughout the change process, and how the change was communicated to the personnel of West Sussex Fire Brigade.

The report goes on to look at the use of change models in the process. Were they seen as management fads; could they have been of use to the Brigade's Management Team and change agents? It explores the level of consistency at different levels in such areas as perceptions regarding the drivers of change and the benefits of the restructure for the organisation and the individual.

The influence of culture is also evaluated. Was the organisational culture of West Sussex Fire Brigade seen as a barrier to change? Was it even acknowledged and if so, could it be managed in order to effect a more efficient change programme?

Although there is considerable change in both private and public sector organisations, there is still a reluctance to accept change. The question most often asked of this report's author was "why are we doing this?" This fundamental enquiry, although put forward by all levels of personnel, disguises the fact that there are two main schools of thought within West Sussex Fire Brigade regarding the management and implementation of change:

· Those who perceive change as a necessary feature of their working lives and as a method for achieving organisational effectiveness and progress coupled with personal achievement.

· Those who see change as a management fad designed to do no more than put an individual's (or group of individuals in the case of the West Sussex Fire Brigade's Management Team) "stamp" on the organisation.

STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT:

This study reviews the rationale and process of the organisational restructure that took place in West Sussex Fire Brigade two years ago. The conception and management of the change process are also evaluated along with the possible role played in the process by the culture of the organisation. The research is conducted within the organisation and involves the Brigade Management Team, the Officer Corps and the non-uniformed section of the Brigade. The purpose of the research is to evaluate the approach to the management change and to determine whether or not the rationale for change is viewed in a consistent manner by those affected by it.

Due to the pressures currently being placed on the Brigade e.g. Best Value; application for a Charter Mark award renewal; Health and Safety Executive requirements, the research undertaken is limited to involving the three groups mentioned in the previous paragraph. However, it is believed that the sample taken is large enough to be valid for this study. This view is re-inforced by the fact that those approached for the purpose of researching this topic are key players in the change process at the heart of this report e.g. Brigade Management Team members and the change agents amongst others.

LIMITATIONS:

Whilst there is a great deal of literature about change and the management of change, the subject is open to much interpretation by academics and practitioners alike. Whilst change appears to a core characteristic of all social systems, definitions of change are problematic as they assume that we can differentiate between change and stability. The change process is more complex though, as organisations are always changing, the change often being subtle in its manifestation. Therefore, Schein's (1970) definition of organisational change,

"…. induction of new patterns of action, belief and attitudes among substantial segments of a population,"

does not take into account, Thomas' (1993) assertion that whilst society is undergoing an unprecedented level of change, the pace of change varies from organisation to organisation. Thus, whilst some experience extreme turbulence, others may be relatively stable.

The debate about the nature of change is replicated in that centred around the role of management when facilitating the change process. Drucker's (1985) definition of the manager's role:

"…. Creating a true whole that is larger than the sum of its parts, a productive entity that turns out more than the sum of the resources put into it"

likens managers to conductors of an orchestra whilst Handy (1986) used the analogy of a doctor who diagnoses a particular problem and develops a strategy to be able to deal with that problem. Thus, practitioners of change are left with deciding whether or not managing change is an art form or a science.

As a result, for the purpose of this report, change is dealt with as meaning organisational change which can be managed, as opposed to change which is "evolutionary" (Tichy 1983) and therefore out of the control of any managerial action.

Similarly, because of the complex nature of organisational culture and the sub-cultures which exist within each organisation, the issue of its influence on the management of change is dealt with from the perspective of whether or not culture was or could have been viewed as a barrier to the change management programme drawn up by the management team of West Sussex Fire Brigade. This approach will also eliminate an element of possible bias on the author's behalf because of the fact that he is a member of the organisation that is the subject of this report. Also, by viewing organisational culture in this controlled way, confusion about the culture of West Sussex Fire Brigade and misconstrued perceptions about its nature and influence on the part of the reader who may not be associated with the organisation, can be avoided.

The major limitation of this report however, remains the fact that it is a case study of the management of change in a single organisation. Comparisons with other organisations having been rejected for the reasons given in the methodology section of this report.

A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

INTRODUCTION:

The objective of this review is to consider the influences and issues raised by the literature that surrounds the topic of change management. The review will also serve to support the discussion raised by the report.

Whilst the practice of management is an old one, for example the Sumerians in 3000 BC, developed a written language which became a method of record keeping for business transactions, as an academic subject it is a recent one. "Change Management" is an even more recent development dating back to the 1940s Carr et al (1996) believes. The last sixty years have seen a drastically changing social, economic and political global environment in which organisations have also had to adapt to the changes around them in order to survive, for example the change in working methods and processes brought about by the use of technology.

As a result, change in organisations and subsequently change management principles have become recognised. The magnitude of change and the variables involved have proved fascinating to many people. It is this spread of interest that this review will address along with the following topics:

· Influences for change

· Change models

· Change management

· The role of managers in the change process

· Change: success and failure

· The role of the change agent

· Communicating change

· Relationship between change and culture

· Definitions of culture

· Culture as a barrier/enhancer to change

· Is culture important?

INFLUENCES FOR CHANGE:

Tichy (1983) believes that the change process is influenced by the dominant coalition of an organisation, the members of which make decisions to cope with uncertainty by managing a change. He goes on to argue that the information that creates uncertainty in organisations falls into four areas:

1. Historical comparisons between current and past performance.

2. Planning comparisons between current performance and future projections.

3. Comparisons with firms in the same industry.

4. Other people's expectations e.g. where managers attempt to make an impact in order to enhance their careers,

This information leads to five drivers for change:

1. Environmental changes.

2. Technological changes.

3. Shifts in agreement among organisational members over the goals of the organisation.

4. Shifts to agreement among organisation members over the means of getting work done.

5. Changes in people.

Kirt Lewin (1951) argued that organisations exist in a state of equilibrium, which is not itself, conducive to change. This equilibrium is the result of opposing forces, which constantly act upon the organisation and its individuals. These Lewin believed, were the forces or influences for change and he called them Driving Forces (changing markets, new technology, new personnel) and Restraining Forces (fear of failure, strength of culture, lack of resources). Building on this work, Wilson (1995) states that in order to promote the right conditions for change, organisations and individuals have to identify restraining and driving forces. An imbalance must then be created between the driving and restraining forces that will enable the driving forces to automatically drive the change forward.

The need for individuals to recognise driving and restraining drivers is highlighted by Plant's (1987) work. He argues that force recognition requires training in order that action can be taken to manage the balance in the desired direction.

"Managers should examine what power they have in order to exert influence over various forces or should adopt particular interpersonal tactics, depending upon situational contingencies" (Plant 1987 : 40).

Being able to identify change drivers is useful as it contributes to the ability of an organisation to focus not on what the organisation has achieved but on its fitness for future action. (Thompson 1967). By understanding the drivers of change Thompson (1967) believes that managers can create a strategy for change. For example, once change drivers have been identified, an appraisal of their perception within and impact on the organisation can be made and scenarios built to determine the effectiveness of the proposed changes.

CHANGE MODELS:

Change is a complex process, which is unique in each case; thus it is difficult to draw up a predetermined set of answers to managing change. One approach is to integrate widely recognised theoretical principles from business, management, sociology and behavioural psychology with field experience acquired from industry based case studies. Conceptual models for change bring these themes together and share common ideas for example that "change must derive from an organisation's natural and established capabilities" (Hammer and Champny 1993).

Carr et al (1996) believe that successful models have the following elements in common:

· They address change in a comprehensive manner.

· They follow a process for introducing change e.g.

- Assess

- Plan

- Implement

- Review

· They address a set of critical success factors.

The idea of combining themes because the change process is messy is supported by Clarke (1994). Clarke argues that while a step-by-step approach is sensible, it pays to remember that the change will actually change as it progresses. In an attempt to address this, Clarke advocates the use of the "change star" model. The model was developed to help create a vocabulary which managers could use in thinking through a change. A criticism of the model however is that it is unclear where an individual should start. Clarke believes however that the model has proved to be a good guide for managers.

WHY

CHANGE?

OUR

BUSINESS IS

CHANGE

REINFORCE MAKE IT

TEAMS MANAGEABLE AND INDIVIDUALS

SHARED

APPROACH

FIG 1: CHANGE STAR

A model, which helps to measure change capability, has been developed by Lynda Gratton. The model is known as the People Process Model (Gratton et al 1999) and assesses the strength of strategic linkage between human resource management processes and business strategy. The model argues that by attending to short-term and long-term people management requirements an organisation can:

· Assess what its human resource needs are for the future.

· Assess these needs against its current short-term liabilities.

· Implement a series of transformational interventions to narrow the gap between future requirements and present capabilities (Balogun and Hope-Hailey 1999).

TRANSFORMING

· TRANSFORMING LEADERS

· TRANSFORMING THE WORKFORCE

· TRANSFORMING THE ORGANISATION

DELIVERING SHORT-TERM GOALS

· OBJECTIVES

· PERFORMANCE METRICS

· REWARD

· TRAINING

PREPARING FOR LONG-TERM SUCCESS

· CREATE A VISION

· PEOPLE STRATEGY

· LONG-TERM PEOPLE SCANNING

GAP

ANALYSIS

FIG 2: PEOPLE PROCESS MODEL

Wilson (1995) argues that models allow practitioners to develop some frameworks in which the various themes of change can be placed and examined in relation to each other. The model Wilson proposes is a four-cell box. Whilst acknowledging that the characterisation offered by the model is a useful guide for organising thinking about approaches to change, Wilson points out that "the whole world of organisational change cannot easily find a home in one of the cells".

	THE PROCESS OF CHANGE	THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CHANGE
PLANNED CHANGE	1 LOCAL INCREMENTALISM AND VARIOUS NEED, COMMITMENT AND SHARED VISION MODELS	2 REDUCING RESISTANCE TO CHANGE (FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS
EMERGENT CHANGE	3 CHARACTERISTICS OF STRATEGIC DECISIONS: POLITICAL PROCESS MODELS	4 CONTEXTUALISM: IMPLEMENTATION IS A FUNCTION OF ANTECEDENT FACTORS AND PROCESSES

FIG 3: CHARACTERISATION OF APPROACHES TO ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE (WILSON 1995)

One of the most useful change models is that quoted in Balogun and Hope Hailey's (1999) work. The model combines work carried out by Lewin (1958) regarding "unfreezing, moving and refreezing" (the terms relate to making people ready for change, implementing change and embedding changes respectively) with work completed by Adams, Hayes and Hopson (1976). Known as the transition curve, Adams et al believe that individuals go through seven stages as they undergo change. Balogun and Hope Hailey (1999) believe that these two concepts can be combined in order to show designers of change what interventions in the overall process can achieve for individuals experiencing change.

UNFREEZE DENIAL SHOCK	MOVE SEA AWARENESS TESTING ACCEPTANCE	SUSTAIN INTEGRATION RCH
· MINIMISE SHOCK · COMMUNICATE EARLY · EXPECT RESISTANCE	· HELP INDIVIDUALS TO CHANGE - GIVE SUPPORT · EDUCATE & TRAIN	· ENCOURAGE REFLECTION · SUPPORT INDIVIDUALS IN NEW ROLES · CELEBRATE SUCCESS

FIG 4: THREE LEVELS OF INTERACTION (BALOGUN & HOPE-HAILEY 1999)

CHANGE MANAGEMENT:

Kanter (1983) argues that change management has become a managerial prerogative in which the individual manager should be multi-skilled, interpersonally expert, psychologically fluent and constantly able to plan for change. A belief has emerged that planned change is possible; that managers can be trained to manage change and that a good manager combines entrepreneurial flair, general management skills and an understanding of technology. (Piore and Sabel 1984; Scarborough and Corbett 1992)

However, Barlow (1989) argues that with regard to management training in such areas as planning and handling change there is only limited value in setting up training in these disciplines. This is because individual career advancement and "the tenets of planned management are in direct conflict" because "successful types are spotted early on" and that advancement is individually based.

Burnes (1996) argues that in order for change management to be effective, managers must understand what Burnes believes are the central themes to change management:

· Individual Perspective School

· Group Dynamic School

· Open Systems School

This will enable organisational managers to identify the circumstances surrounding changes relating to them and review the approach which is most relevant to their situation. Thus management will be able to recognise whether or not the objective of the change lies at the level of the individual, the group or the organisation.

Mabey and Mayon-White (1993) state that managers must identify whether or not their change management process will cover a planned or an emergent change. They argue that change management of planned change requires managers to direct and control staff, resources and information, whilst emergent change requires managers to operate as facilitators and coaches who can bring together and motivate teams and groups to identify the need for and achieve change.

Carnall (1995) agrees. He argues that to manage change effectively involves the ability to create a new syntheses of people, resources, ideas, opportunities and demands. He believes that change management involves three key areas:

· Managing Transitions

· Dealing with organisational cultures

· The politics of organisational change

By synthesising these elements Carnall believes that an environment can be created in which creativity, risk taking, learning, the rebuilding of self-esteem and performance can be achieved. By sustaining this synthesis, change will follow.

The philosophies outlined in this section of the literature review do, however, give managers problems, especially it seems, where synthesising the elements of change management is concerned. For example in Warner Burke's (1991) study, it was shown that out of a sample of 700 executives involved in change management, scores of between 70% - 79% were achieved for areas such as evaluating change and planning change. However, in areas involving managing the people side of change and understanding change, scores fell to between 60 -69%. Warner Burke believes that this suggests that managers require more skills and knowledge to help their organisations and people make the transition to new ways of operating.

THE ROLE OF MANAGERS IN THE CHANGE PROCESS:

In his studies, Obeng (1998) argues that the role of management in the change process is to ensure that the change delivers benefit to the organisation and its people. Obeng states that managers' skills are crucial to a change projects success and that there is no point in embarking on a change project until the organisational management are certain that they can deliver all the aspects of strategic change. Underpinning this concept are Obeng's three key managerial change skills:

· Understanding the business environment and context of the change

· Capable of handling the politics of major change without becoming embroiled in them

· Be able to create "flocks" of projects and effectively select and coach project leaders to delivery.

Hooper and Potter (1999) believe that it is the management's role to shift people's perceptions from seeing change as a threat to seeing it as an exciting challenge. Their work has highlighted what they see as the four key elements of management's role in a change process. These are:

· Communicating the reasons for change.

· Releasing people's potential.

· Setting a personal example.

· Self-pacing to avoid unnecessary stress.

A more radical appraisal of the role of managers in the change process is offered by Butcher and Atkinson (1999). Instead of accepting the idea that senior managers need to create change initiatives, they argue that destructive politics, negative emotions and cynicism usually triumph over logic. As an alternative, they believe that management should encourage a "bottom-up" approach which comprises three key elements:

· The creation of isolated pockets of good practice.

· An emphasis on the power of individuals

· The need for such individuals to have development experiences outside their own business.

Once a "pocket" has been formed, Butcher and Atkinson state that the role of the manager is to allow corporate habits, goals and assumptions to be challenged in the context of organisational performance. The drawback for management with this approach is that the political nature of their model requires a delicate balancing act between creating the "pocket" and fending off attacks on it from the wider organisation. The manager must, therefore be seen as organisationally credible as well as subversive. Whilst Butcher and Atkinson acknowledge that this approach gives managers a dilemma e.g. the principles of "top-down" management are hard to relinquish; it places huge demands on those who create pockets of good practice, they do believe though, that their model emphasises leadership; draws on the recognisable realities of any business and that a successful "pocket" is hard to ignore.

Identifying the role of management early is emphasised by Tim Burton (2000). In his case study involving the Hinckley and Rugby Building Society Burton showed the importance of senior management quickly agreeing their primary role. In this instance the role was to co-ordinate, prioritise and oversee the change process, whilst allowing the formation of working groups. The groups were then tasked with addressing the effect of the change programme on the main activities of the organisation. The benefit of this approach meant that the Society's branches were able to remain open throughout the change process and that staff dealt with the change easily.

The creation of an organisational structure which encourages and sustains experimentation and the development of a workforce that is responsible for identifying the need for change is McCalman and Paton's (1992) view of the management role at a time of change. They go on to argue that managers should facilitate rather than implement in order to be able to judge how appropriate a proposed change may be.

Burnes (1996) sums up the role of management in the following way:

"It is the role of managers to ensure that all available options and choices are identified and that the choices made take account of both the short and long-term interests of all their stakeholders - whether these be shareholders, employees, the managers themselves or the community at large. The worst managers may not be those who make poor choices; it may be those who fail to recognise that any choice exists at all".

[Burnes (1996) p362].

CHANGE: SUCCESS & FAILURE:

Tichy et al (1976) believe that a successful change process has three key elements:

· Diagnostic ability to probe potential future courses of action.

· A capacity for developing change strategies.

· A cluster of skills and competencies required to implement and carry through the change.

Beer et al (1990) made a study of six companies in order to ascertain what differentiates the change initiatives that succeed from those that fail. Key elements for success were identified as follows:

· Maintaining a focus on change

· Ensuring consistent, intensive communication

· Developing process ownership

· Change management linked to results.

The common elements of failure were identified as follows:

· Better leadership training required

· Changes deployed unevenly throughout the organisation

· Internal politics

· An inability to move initiatives from the senior management to the lower levels.

When management create an environment that promotes the understanding and the implementation of change it enables all the personnel involved to understand their part in the process and leads to a successful change programme (Carr et al 1996). They offer the following formula for successful change:

SC = V + N + M + R + F

Successful change = Vision + Needs + Means + Reward + Feedback

· VISION - must be shared with staff and articulated and communicated by change leaders.

· NEED - need for change is developed and is shared by all employees

· MEANS - practical means to achieve change has been planned

· REWARDS - reward systems have been aligned to identify appropriate

· FEEDBACK - must be given at each stage of the process to monitor progress

Whilst Carr et al's (1996) formula addresses the mechanics of successful change, it is the "fear issue" that may cause failure and is completely ignored (Cramp 1998). Cramp believes that there is fear of the unknown, fear of the personal consequences of change and fear of change itself. Managerial fear manifests itself in fear of failure to carry out the change to fear of being unable to operate within the new organisation. Cramp believes that fear of change can be dealt with in a similar manner to that used to deal with bereavement. By acknowledging that people will experience denial, anger, depression and acceptance where bereavement and change are concerned, Cramp argues that the change process can be managed successfully and individuals can be helped through the stages of a change programme.

Adams (1987) view disagrees with Cramp's (1998) view. Adams (1987) believes that although fear of failure, and the fear of making a mistake can be a block to the problem solving that needs to take place during a change programme, the punishments handed out by management as a result of these mistakes are minimal. Adams (1987) argues that "excessive importance is attached to the risk of failure". Change creates new forms of structure within organisations. A study carried out by Chandler (1962) identified the following five key factors which he believed would influence the degree of success of an organisational change programme:

· Degree of uncertainty in the environment within which the organisation operates

· Diversity of products and markets and divisional structures

· Size of organisation

· Influence of technology

· Culture within the organisation

THE ROLE OF THE CHANGE AGENT:

In order to determine an appropriate change process, change agents need to be able to examine the internal and external context of an organisation. Thus a change agent needs to analyse such things as how ready an organisation is to accept change and how great is its capacity for change (Balogun & Hope Hailey 1999). The argument continues that change agents need certain skills in order to carry out their role effectively:

· An ability to analyse the change context.

· An ability to be able to judge the key contextual features of the change and design an appropriate approach.

· To be able to take action to achieve implementation.

· To be able to handle complexity and be sensitive about the impact of change.

· Have good influencing skills.

· Have an awareness of the potential impact of their own preferences on the design choices made.

In his work, Duck (1993) states that change agents will be most effective if their sole responsibility is the management of a transition. The agents must be accepted by the organisation or given backing by senior management for their work. Duck's (1993) work supports that carried out by Balogun and Hope Hailey (1999) as it identified key areas of change agent work which must be underpinned by an appropriate training programme. These areas are:

· An understanding of the business

· An understanding of and a buy-in to the change vision and goals.

· An understanding of the mechanism, tools and techniques of change management.

· The possession of good people skills, an ability to be sensitive to people issues and have the respect of the organisation.

Beckhard and Harris (1977) believe that it is difficult for change agents to predict the impact of their actions on the organisation. This is because organisational systems - technical, political, cultural - are loosely coupled and thus the change agent must proceed with a process that can be continually adjusted. They offer the following guidelines for change agents:

· Review the current state diagnosis and the desired state change strategy to determine the technical, political and cultural adjustments required by the change.

· Determine when the political, cultural and technical cycles will peak.

· Plan to separate the three systems in order to manage the transition in each.

· Plan to recouple the three systems and be aware of how they will mesh in the desired state of the organisation.

Carr et al (1996) believe that the role of the change agent is instrumental in making the major decision of working through existing structures or creating new ones. Even if other risk factors indicate a low likelihood of success, a skilled change agent can increase the possibility that a project will succeed by devising strategies that will positively influence sponsor commitment, target resistance and measure the readiness of the organisation's culture for the change.

COMMUNICATING CHANGE:

Communication is essential where major change is concerned (Clarke 1994) and its breakdown is a major reason for the failure of change programmes. Clarke goes on to state that open communications means that doubts about the change can be expressed and that the change can be understood by those affected by it. A policy of open communication does however, mean taking more time in the early stages of the change process to explore issues with those affected and may result in change to the overall plan. The benefits Clarke (1994) argues are that by the time the change is actually announced, it is actually fairly well developed.

Burnes (1996) believes that communication is one way of avoiding the uncertainty of change. He argues that the communication process should inform all those who will be affected by the change process. The process should take place in the early stages of the change and should give both the context for proposed changes as well as the details and consequences.

The involvement of people in the communication process is also advocated by Andrew Leigh (1998). As a result of this involvement Leigh (1998) argues that the best way to communicate a major change to those most affected is by using a fact-to-face method. He advises against using large meetings, recommending that change is best communicated through those who deal closely with those in the "front line".

Communication is seen as being particularly important during all phases of a change programme by Balogun and Hope Hailey (1999). They argue that during the unfreeze phase, "communication needs to be designed to create readiness"; during the move phase "communication needs to provide explanation" and finally "communication also needs to provide update information for all staff". The important thing for Balogun and Hope Hailey (1999) is that the content of any communication should focus on the needs of the audience. They offer the model shown below as an initial framework, stressing however that planned communication will never be enough.

CHANGE PHASE	COMMUNICATION PURPOSE
UNFREEZE	CREATING AIMS: UNFREEZE STAFF READINESS CHALLENGE THE STATUS QUO SPREAD UNDERSTANDING OF NEED FOR CHANGE REQUIRES RICH COMMUNICATION
MOVE	PROVIDING AIMS: REDUCE UNCERTAINTY AMBIGUITY EXPLANATION PROVIDE STAFF WITH INFORMATION TO FULFIL THEIR ROLE DURING CHANGE ENABLE STAFF TO UNDERTAKE NEEDED CHANGE PREDOMINATELY REQUIRES RICH COMMUNICATION
SUSTAIN	PROVIDING AIMS: KEEP STAFF INFORMED OF PROGRESS UPDATES PREVENT UNCERTAINTY/ANXIETY MORE LIKELY TO BE ROUTINE COMMUNICATION

FIG 5: COMMUNICATION DURING CHANGE (BALOGUN & HOPE HAILEY 1999)

CULTURE AND CHANGE:

Many theoretical approaches to change recognise the link between the culture of an organisation and a willingness to accept change. Clarke (1994) argues that the essence of sustainable change is to understand the culture of the organisation being affected by change. Clarke (1994) acknowledges however that positive attitudes towards change cannot be created overnight. She goes on to develop the link between change, culture and communication by stating that the best way "of sensitising people for change is saturation levels of training and education which start to spell out the different attitudes and behaviours which the future will demand".

Effecting change by simply attempting to change the culture of an organisation is disputed by Wilson (1995). His argument is that such a change assumes an "unwarranted linear connection between something called organisational culture and performance". His argument draws on work carried out by Tayeb (1989) in which culture is shown to be a multi-faceted phenomenon which is also influenced by the ability of the differences found in organisational hierarchies to effect change. Hofstede's (1990) examination of this topic would seem to support Wilson's view. Hofstede argued that as well as cultural issues, change is influenced by the fact that interpretations of individuals are located in a wider context, whether that context be from individual organisation to business sector or from questions stemming from differing national cultures.

The link between a successful change programme is however, illustrated by Warner (1998). He believes that culture can be changed by changing the people within an organisation, changing their position within an organisation or changing their hearts and minds. Whilst changing people may remove those who stand in the way of change it is also too easy to lose the wrong people. Warner argues that successful change can be achieved by attempting to understand the underlying motives of key individuals. Once this understanding has been achieved, those previously against change can be shown that commitment to a change initiative will result in benefits for the individual and the organisation. The crucial factor in Warner's approach to changing culture is that a strategy must be developed for the change to take place because it is so complex.

Charles Handy (1984) offers an insight into how the culture of an organisation may affect its ability to accept change. He uses the term "role culture" to emphasise high levels of commitment by individuals to either a department or a profession. An organisation typified by the "role culture" is characterised by stability, rules, prescription and standards with clearly specified functional departments. Handy believes that culture is very efficient in stable environments. In contrast is Handy's "task culture". This culture is an adaptable one in which the needs of the tasks, rather than the systems and procedures predominate. Therefore, if management can assess the cultural type of their organisation, they can formulate an appropriate strategy for change.

For Davis and Lawrence (1977) culture is particularly important when organisations make a major switch form one type of structure to another. They argue that in order for the new structure to work a realignment of culture is necessary. The difficulty with this approach though is that it involves a further series of changes itself:

"New behaviours, new attitudes, new interpersonal skills and new knowledge are demanded of people. Greater emotional energy is required because people must be more open, take more risks, work at developing trust and trusting others" (Davis & Lawrence, 1977 p.108).

DEFINITIONS OF CULTURE:

In order to consolidate the fact that it is difficult to discuss the concept of culture, this literature review highlights some of the definitions that have been offered on this topic.

Watson (1987) defines culture as:

"the system of meanings which are shared by members of a human grouping and which define what is good and bad, right and wrong and what are the appropriate ways for members of that group to think and behave".

Deal and Kennedy (1982) pick up on the "systems" element of culture:

"….culture encompasses how people in an organisation are likely to act in given situations both inside and outside the organisation. It includes a set of beliefs, a code of behaviour and minimum standards of performance and ethics. It will influence service quality and the way in which people are treated, whether customers or clients".

Deal and Kennedy's argument develops with the identification of five key elements:

· Characteristic and clear approach to the corporate environment

· Values

· Role models

· Systems and procedures

· Informal means of communications

Eldridge and Crombie (1974) offer the following definition:

"the unique configuration of norms, values, beliefs, ways of behaving and so on, that characterise the manner in which groups and individuals combine to get things done".

Balogun and Hope Hailey (1999) allude to Scott-Morgan's (1999) iceberg metaphor with their favoured definition:

"the deeper level of basic assumptions and beliefs that are shared by members of an organisation, that operate unconsciously and define in a basic 'taken for granted' fashion an organisation's view of itself and its environment". (Schien 1985).

The themes that have emerged from the variety of definitions offered by academics and practitioners have been drawn together by Schein (1993). He has identified what he refers to as the core elements of an organisation's culture:

· Observed behavioural regularities when people interact

· Group norms

· Espoused values

· Formal philosophy

· Rules of the game

· Climate

· Embedded skills

· Habits of thinking

· Shared meaning

· Root metaphors

CULTURE:

"The attitudes and values which inform a society"

THE CHAMBERS DICTIONARY

IS CULTURE A BARRIER TO CHANGE?

Effecting change creates challenges for all organisations. Unfortunately some of the challenges are about overcoming the blocks that stifle the creative problem solving that is required in order to be able to deal with these challenges. Adams (1987) sees cultural issues as such a block. He believes that these issues are hard to overcome because people do not reflect on such areas as tradition and their current problems at the same time.

Willingness for change cannot be created in a short space of time. It takes many positive experiences of change before people learn to over come fear and trust that change will take their organisation some where better. In Schein's (1985) work he studied how organisational leaders developed and transmitted corporate culture. He goes on to argue that before a plan for change is formulated, the organisational culture must be addressed in order that the change process can be understood by all those affected by it. Change has to become part of the culture.

Organisation culture is seen as being one of the strongest barriers to achieving effective change. (Johnson 1998). Johnson's "cultural web" is a model that can be used to aid the understanding of organisational culture and therefore, the barriers it creates. Without this understanding, Johnson (1998) believes that organisations and their personnel will continue to be driven by the existing culture instead of by the desired new ways of operating.

STORIES

SYMBOLS

ROUTINES

&

RITUALS

THE

PARADIGM

POWER

STRUCTURES

CONTROL

SYSTEM

ORGANISATIONAL

STRUCTURE

FIG 6: THE CULTURAL WEB OF AN ORGANISATION (G. JOHNSON 1998)

The importance of Johnson's cultural web is that enables those managing change to be able to ask the following questions:

· To what extent does the existing culture support or hinder the desired changes that need to be made?

· To what extent does the existing culture need to be changed if the desired changes are to be implemented?

· To what extent does the existing culture underpin existing organisational competencies that need to be retained?

As well as the main organisational culture being a potential barrier to change, Salaman (1979) argues that "sub-cultures" must also be acknowledged. Salaman's work shows that sub-cultures can exist in a complex and potentially conflicting relationship with the dominant culture. The problem for managers is then the possibility that their authority could be undermined leading to an inefficient organisation.

The assumption that culture can be managed in order to assist in change facilitation is not supported by Meek (1982)

"Culture as a whole cannot be manipulated, turned on or off, although it needs to be recognised that some organisations are in a better position than others to intentionally influence aspects of it…. Culture should be regarded as something an organisation "is", not something it "has" : it is not an independent variable nor can it be created, discovered or destroyed by the whims of management". (Meek (1992) pp. 469 - 470).

IS CULTURE IMPORTANT?

The importance of organisational culture is demonstrated by Scott-Morgan (1999). His work allies the culture of an organisation to the characteristics of an iceberg. Like the majority of an iceberg, organisational culture remains unseen he argues. It is the unwritten rules of an organisation which shape its culture and are the key to achieving successful change if they are acknowledged and understood. Scott-Morgan states that once this understanding has been achieved and is combined with a study of how actions influence each other over time, organisational culture will be able to assist the formulation of a change strategy.

Culture is seen by Itami (1987) as an important "invisible asset". Itami (1987) goes on to argue that an invisible asset is a key to adaptability and competitive advantage for three reasons:

· It is hard to accumulate

· It is capable of being used in different ways

· As it is used it develops

As a result, organisational culture can be used to differentiate a firm from its competitors, as long as it is developed. This can however, only be achieved through sustained effort and hard work.

Carr et al (1996) agree with Scott-Morgan's (1999) view that culture needs to be acknowledged and understood. Culture they argue is one of the key drivers of individual and group behaviour. Therefore, once organisational culture has been understood, an appreciation can be made regarding whether or not it will support or hinder change.

Mayer and Zucker (1989) express concern about relying on the importance of organisational culture to assist with the change programme. As well as taking several years to achieve, managing cultural change may result in short-term economic benefits which are negated by the long-term stagnation that can manifest itself.

This message was also debated by Bennis (1969). He felt that culture was overemphasised as a method of managing change which avoided the problems of power and the politics of change.

"…… unless models can be developed that include the dimensions of power conflict in addition to truth-love, organisation development will find fewer and narrow institutional avenues to its influence. In doing so, it will slowly and successively decay" (Bennis (1969) pp 78 - 79).

It is however, senior management's unenviable task to decide the content of the organisations culture and to determine how much of it should be shared and thus what objectives are worth striving for (Tichy 1976). Tichy then argues that organisational culture can then be used to communicate change in a believable manner which will not be viewed as corporate propaganda.

Whilst Watson (1994) sees corporate culture as a resource, Weick (1979) argues that it is so ambiguous we can only act upon our own interpretation of it. Weick (1979) does acknowledge that culture can provide guidelines for action as well as resources to help shape and justify actions which promote organisational interests.

CONCLUSION:

From this review of the literature surrounding change, its management and its relationship with organisational culture, it can be seen that the topic is a complex one. Change requires an understanding of what seems likely to happen and of how people react to change. This obviously puts pressure on managers and staff alike with some organisations being exposed as having managers "who are not sufficiently skilful at handling change". (Kotter 1988)

The review has highlighted some of the models that exist to assist those engaged with managing change and has discussed the importance of the role of management in the change process.

Communicating change ideology was reviewed because of the need for organisations to create a willingness to accept change among their members. Regular communication which involves all levels is seen to be the most effective method of ensuring that the momentum for change is maintained.

The role of the change agent as a facilitator of the change process was explored with consensus showing that those individuals selected for this task need particular managerial and personal skills. They need to be able to appreciate the impact of change on the individual as well as the organisation. To be most effective, the role needs to be a dedicated one.

The concept of culture was seen to be complex and difficult to manage. Not only is culture a multi-faceted phenomenon, many organisations possess sub-cultures which can influence the organisation as much as the dominant one. Although cultural elements can be identified, they can also manifest themselves in different ways to different people in and outside the organisation.

There is a lack of consensus amongst writers on the subject of culture & change. Whilst Cummings and Huse (1989) identify five steps to managing cultural change, Filby and Willmott (1988) question the idea that managers can influence organisational culture.

Therefore, as a result of this debate, managers must make their own choices based on their own circumstances and perceived options as to whether to change their organisations culture.

ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT:

West Sussex Fire Brigade is a local authority fire service covering the county of West Sussex. The Brigade is managed via a system of five commands;

· Operations

· Personnel & Training

· Fire Safety

· Technical

· Corporate

The commanders of each function along with the County Fire Officer, make up the Brigade Management Team which is responsible for formulating brigade policy. In turn, each functional commander is responsible for ensuring that the policy matters relevant to his own command are implemented on a countywide basis.

The Brigade responded to 14000 incidents during the year ended 31^st March 1999. The Brigade attended more fires involving road transport than domestic or commercial properties and released more trapped people from vehicles than it rescued from fires. An analysis of statistics from this period showed a 22% increase in fires involving road transport and a 13% increase in calls to road traffic accidents.

The workforce is a diverse one in terms of how many groups exist within the organisation and in terms of the physical location of the command and brigade headquarters. The subject of this report concentrates on the officer corps and non-uniformed staff as they were affected most by the organisational restructure that took place in 1998. The groups of personnel dealt with in this study are as follows:

· Flexi-duty officers - officers conditioned to a shift system made up of 8, 12 and 24 hour shifts. These officers give operational cover and respond to incidents of all kinds in addition to carrying out their day-to-day roles. They are spread across the operations, fire safety, personnel and training and technical commands in order that the county has officer cover throughout.

· 42 hour officers - officers conditioned to a 42 hour week spread over a "nine- day fortnight." They are rarely used operationally, although there is a facility for this. These officers are spread over the fire safety and operations commands.

· Non-uniformed staff - This group is made up of a large variety of individuals. Roles, responsibilities and locations vary enormously. For example, the Corporate Commander is a non-uniformed employee as are the station clerks. This is a fairly stable group in terms of employee turnover and is a group with a large amount of experience of how West Sussex Fire Brigade works. Their pay and conditions of service are administered in a different way to the Flexi-duty and 42 hour officers.

The locations of Brigade headquarters, the functional command headquarters and other key activities are listed below:

· Brigade Headquarters - Chichester

· Operations Command HQ - Horsham

· Personnel and Training Command HQ - Worthing

· Fire Safety Command HQ - Chichester

· Technical Command HQ - Chichester

· Corporate Command HQ - Chichester

· Fire Control - Chichester

· Workshops and Stores - Tangmere

· Brigade Training Centre - Worthing

The diversity of the workforce is further amplified because of the existence of separate sections within each command, for example, emergency planning and service delivery in Operations Command. The organisational structure of the brigade is shown in Figure 7 with Operations Command's sections being illustrated as an example of the diversity that exists within the Commands.

The reason that this research is important for West Sussex Fire Brigade is that the structure shown in Figure 7 is just two years old and is the result of a change programme that altered the managerial layout of the brigade. Until January 1998, West Sussex Fire Brigade had been organised around a divisional layout, which divided the brigade into two divisions. Each division was responsible for managing the references already described in this section and was overseen by a Divisional Commander. At the time of writing this report, the brigade is about to embark on another period of change which could have further implications for the make-up of the managerial structure and the location and roles and responsibilities of certain posts within the functional commands.

The main driver for the current proposals for change is the government's "Democratic Renewal" initiative. This policy aims to improve the manner in which county councils are managed with a view to creating united organisations with clear corporate aims and objectives.

From West Sussex County Council's point of view this means becoming more customer focused, managing performance to deliver quality services and, crucially as far as this report is concerned, creating "a positive attitude to change (dispelling the fear of change, responsive to change, adapting to and enjoying change)."

From West Sussex Fire Brigade's point of view the implications of this initiative have already been felt. The County Fire Officer has been appointed as one of the county council's seven strategic directors and is due to be succeeded by a new County Fire Officer in late 2000. In addition to this the Deputy County Fire Officer has announced his retirement. This has prompted the remaining members of the Brigade Management Team, in conjunction with officers from Her Majesty's Fire Service Inspectorate to consider a number of structural models that will provide an efficient management system for the future development of West Sussex Fire Brigade.

The timing and aims of this report are, the author believes, relevant as lessons learnt from reviewing the inception, planning, rationale, communication and implementation of the restructure two years previous can be applied to the current suggestions for change within West Sussex Fire Brigade. This will assist those tasked with managing that transformation to carry it out as efficiently and painlessly as possible.

As a final illustration of the organisational context for West Sussex Fire Brigade, a strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis has been prepared.

A SWOT analysis is particularly useful at times of change. Garrett (1995) believes that a SWOT analysis is important because it forms the dynamic background against which all the internal and external changes are viewed. He argues that the analysis should be revisited by senior managers every six months for debate and dissent.

The "strengths and weaknesses" part of the analysis shows up inherent potential. As a result, those areas of the organisation that have strengths that should be exploited by suitable strategies can be identified. Weaknesses can also be highlighted and strategies subsequently drawn up which can improve them.

This internal appraisal can then be balanced by an external appraisal, which identifies opportunities, which can be exploited by organisational strengths. The organisation will then be able to anticipate environmental threats against which the organisation must defend itself.

In order to prepare such an analysis for this report, a questionnaire was circulated to the five members of the Operations Command management team. Although this was a small sample, it threw up numerous strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. (Bangs 1995)

From this data, the main issues have been identified and brought together in the chart shown overleaf.

STRENGTHS · Quality of Service · Trained Personnel · Commitment of Personnel · Availability of Service · Local Identity · Hierarchy / Structure · Value For Money (Audit Commission)	WEAKNESSES · Lack of Long Term Strategy · Lack of Short Term Strategy · Monopolistic Complacency · Lack of Resources at Service Outlet Level · Poor Communications Facilities · Effect of External Publics
THREATS · Lack of Long / Short Term Strategies · Low Morale at Officer Levels · Government Initiatives E.G. Best Value · Perverse Funding Incentives · Privatisation	OPPORTUNITIES · Increased Involvement in Community Services / Safety Issues · Sale of Training Courses to the Private Sector · Regionalisation of Service · Charge for Non-Core Activities · Improve Level of Service in Identified Areas (E.G. RTAs)

FIG 8: SWOT ANALYSIS FOR WEST SUSSEX FIRE BRIGADE

Although the chart above provides a useful list of issues, relating strengths and weaknesses to opportunities and threats can be a useful way of summarising the relationship between these areas. This will highlight key areas of focus and yield findings, which can contribute to the formulation of organisational strategy.

A matrix used by West Sussex County Council is replicated in Figure 9 and uses information drawn from Figure 8. The key environmental issues are shown across the top of the matrix, whilst the strengths and weaknesses are listed at the side. Scores are applied to each area in the following way:

++ : major opportunity

+ : good opportunity

0 : neutral

- : some threat

- - : significant threat

The information provided by the SWOT analysis matrix highlights key areas of concern and should be considered carefully especially in times of change. For example, monopolistic complacency may prevent reaction to central government change initiatives such as proposals for regionalising fire services and suggestions surrounding competition between brigades to provide such things as training for industrial sectors.

On a more positive note, the data highlights that the brigade is well placed to deal with issues surrounding questions about its value for money and quality of service.

Above all however, the matrix indicates the need to formulate an overall strategy for the organisation. This would enable future change managers to establish any necessary change strategy and ensure that there was strategic fit between the two.

CONCLUSION:

Having undergone a major change to its organisational structure two years ago, West Sussex Fire Brigade is again on the threshold of another period of transition. The lessons learnt from studying the earlier restructure coupled with an appreciation of a SWOT analysis for the Brigade, will enable managers to supervise a change schedule that will address the needs of the Brigade and will satisfy the external environmental pressures that will impinge on the organisation in the future.

METHODOLOGY

INTRODUCTION:

Mastering change is increasingly part of every manager's job. Clarke (1994) believes that because change is continuous and that there is no arrival point, managers need to study the phenomenon in order that they are able to anticipate the challenges of each phase. Where major structural change is contemplated, as is the case with the subject of this report, a thorough understanding of the change process is very important. As Henderson (1979) warns, failure to grasp the importance of appreciating the change process as a whole can be problematical:

"Experience was an adequate guide when changes could be made in small increments. But intuitive and experience - based management philosophies are grossly inadequate when decisions are strategic and have major irreversible consequences".

Likewise the study of organisational culture and its possible affect on change is relevant for management. Clarke (1994) suggests that if managers propose changes that contradict the cultural biases and traditions of an organisation, it will be difficult to embed those changes in the organisation. Where organisations effect changes that are culturally sensitive, management must be aware that the proposed change will be a lengthy one. Considerable re-inforcement is required, suggests Dawson (1994), if change is to be sustained against the inevitable tendency to regress to old patterns of behaviour.

This report attempts to evaluate the change management process used by the management team of West Sussex Fire Brigade. It also attempts to explore whether or not barriers to change, especially those involving cultural issues, were identified by those managing the change process within the organisation.

METHODS OF COLLECTION:

Before beginning the data collection for this study, the author briefed the County Fire Officer of West Sussex Fire Brigade regarding the area of study being contemplated. As a consequence, the report has the full support of the County Fire Officer because of its relevance to the external environment of change in West Sussex County Council as a whole today, in which the Fire Brigade is also involved.

The research was carried out in the spirit of Drew's (1980) definition of the term:

"Research is conducted to solve problems and expand knowledge".

Consideration was given to making a comparison with another local authority fire brigade and with a private sector organisation. This concept was rejected for the following reasons:

· The change process undertaken by West Sussex Fire Brigade had not been replicated by a Brigade of a similar size for some time.

· The external environment for West Sussex Fire Brigade at the time of the change programme was unique.

· The resource requirements for implementing change were different for different Brigades.

· The nearest private sector company implementing a similar change to its organisational structure had a budget of £60 million and a full time change management team. Whilst, therefore, comparison between West Sussex Fire Brigade and the private sector would have proved enlightening, the relevance of the comparison would have provoked question as the resources, environmental issues and cultural identities would have been too different.

· Time constraints for completing this report precluded an in depth study of other organisations.

METHODS INCLUDED:

The following research methods were used to undertake this study:

· Interviews with members of the West Sussex Fire Brigade management team.

· An analysis of documentary evidence.

· Closed questionnaire to the Officer Corps and non-uniformed sections of the Brigade.

INTERVIEWS WITH BRIGADE MANAGEMENT TEAM MEMBERS:

One-to-one interviews were held with the six members of the Brigade Management Team that were involved with the change process being evaluated by this study. Each member of the Brigade Management Team has his own style and the research method of interviewing each individual was felt to be the best method of capturing their perceptions of the study topic. With perception however, comes bias. This may have manifested itself in the way answers were given depending on how each individual viewed the change process and its outcomes. Information provided by interviewees is also open to interpretation and relies on the honesty of the interviewee.

In order to counter some of the negative aspects of the interview method, each interviewee was given the same ten questions, which they were encouraged to answer as frankly as possible. The interviewees were also told that they did not have to answer all of the questions if they did not want to. The interviewer played little part in the process other than to give elaboration or clarification prompts in order to obtain as much qualitative data as possible.

This approach afforded the author access to the group of key decision-makers and facilitated the gathering of primary data regarding their perceptions and points of focus during the change management process being explored by this report. This research method also made it possible to compare perceptions of the key issues surrounding the process.

All six interviews were taped and transcribed. The interviews lasted between 45 - 60 minutes.

ANALYSIS OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE:

As part of the management of the change process in West Sussex Fire Brigade, the County Fire Officer invited comments, in writing, from those most affected by the proposals for change i.e. the Officer Corps and non-uniformed staff. The written replies to his invitation are kept on confidential file at Brigade Headquarters. The author was allowed access to this confidential file and the 43 memorandums within it.

This method of research was used to supplement the evidence drawn from the management team interviews. It also enabled the author to compare the perceptions of change held by the Brigade Management Team with those held by the personnel directly affected by it. The use of such primary sources of data is seen as "an extremely valuable alternative source of data" (Johnson 1984:23).

Because of their confidential nature, the documents are not reproduced in this report but the trends identified from reviewing them are summarised in matrix form with quotes shown as a means of elaborating the trends.

The author, having read the memorandums submitted and knowing the authors and the context under which they were written, believes all of the documents to be "genuine and authentic" (Barzun and Graff 1977:85). The language used in all the memorandums reviewed for this report comprises terminology that is consistent with their author's approach to work and appropriate for the topic that they address. All of the documents were complete and none had been altered.

Personal bias in the documents can be detected but rather than being a negative aspect of this method of research, the author believes that it can be used to reflect "accurately the true views of an individual or group" (Bell 1999). Some documents for example have been submitted purely because the author has a desire to "be seen to have contributed to the debate", others meanwhile have been submitted in order to protect what they see as an attack on their personal and/or departmental security.

Analysis of the documents has provided some rich qualitative data, which can be compared to that provided by the interviews.

CLOSED QUESTIONNAIRE TO OFFICER CORPS & NON-UNIFORMED STAFF:

A closed questionnaire with two open questions was sent to the Officer Corps and non-uniformed staff of the organisation. The format was chosen as the sample was much larger than the interview sample and because of the need to quantify the qualitative data already collected.

The questions in the questionnaire matched the questions posed during the interview stage and drew on themes that emerged from the document analysis. The intention being to verify the data collected by interview and document analysis.

The questionnaire was piloted by two officers before being circulated to the whole sample. The following questions as recommended by Bell (1999) were attached to the pilot questionnaire:

· How long did it take you to complete?

· Were the instructions clear?

· Were any questions unclear?

· Did you object to answering any of the questions?

· Has a major topic been omitted?

· Was the layout clear?

· Any other comments?

Some amendments to the original questionnaire were made before the final version (Appendix B ) was distributed. The sample chosen comprised those personnel that were in post before, during and after the change initiative. The internal mail system was used and the positive response meant that it was felt to be unnecessary to carry out a follow-up request for returns.

TOTAL SENT	63
TOTAL RECEIVED	48
NOT RETURNED	15
PERCENTAGE RESPONSE RATE	76%

Jargon and specialist language often cause problems for respondents and Hussey & Hussey (1997) advise researchers against their use. In the circumstances of this research however, as all the respondents, irrespective of their rank or position, were members of West Sussex Fire Brigade, this questionnaire design problem was not an issue.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF INTERNAL RESEARCH

INTRODUCTION:

The aim of this section is to examine the findings of the research and to evaluate the overall

management of the change process that took place in West Sussex Fire Brigade in 1998. Thus an insight into the success of the whole process, or otherwise, will be gained. This will highlight areas of concern that can be assessed and reviewed when future changes to the Brigade are planned.

Whilst it is acknowledged that it is difficult to tell exactly what an organisation's culture is (Connor and Lack 1988) and that there are many ways of managing change (Beer 1980), the data provided by this research has a practical worth from a change manager's perspective.

The data has therefore been recognised for its practical use to an organisation about to embark on another period of change and is used as such in this report.

RESEARCH WITHIN WEST SUSSEX FIRE BRIGADE:

· Key themes drawn from interviews with the six members of the West Sussex Fire Brigade Management Team.

· Identified trends, represented in matrix form, from the documentary analysis.

· Results in graphical form, accompanied by a summary of the closed questionnaire completed by 48 personnel from West Sussex Fire Brigade.

· Conclusions drawn from comparing the results from these research methods.

INTERVIEWS WITH BRIGADE MANAGEMENT TEAM MEMBERS:

The initial part of the research was at the Brigade Management Team level. The team consists of six individuals who are responsible for developing policy and strategy for West Sussex Fire Brigade, all of whom were involved in the instigation, formulation and implementation of the restructuring programme.

The interviews were held in an attempt to determine the level of understanding about change management within the Brigade Management Team and whether or not issues such as the organisation's culture were considered as being either a barrier or an enhancer of the change process.

The interview transcripts can be seen in Appendix 'A' with the main trends shown in matrix form below (Figure 10). The themes drawn from each question are discussed as follows:

	Change driven by BMT	Change driven by Officer Corps	Academic change models used?	Defined change management style?	Change agents skills identified?	Targets identified?	Barriers to change identified?	Change communicated well?	Did change fit with organisational strategy?	Workforce diversity acknowledged?	Do anything differently next time?
1	3					3	3				3
2		3				3					3
3		3		3						3	3
4	3			3		3	3			3	3
5		3				3					3
6	3						3				3
7
	3	3	0	2	0	4	3	0	0	2	6

FIGURE 10:

TRENDS FROM INTERVIEWS WITH BRIGADE MANAGEMENT TEAM MEMBERS

CHANGE DRIVERS:

Three of the six members of the Brigade Management Team felt that the change programme was clearly driven by their group as a whole. The three agreed that there was a perception by the management team that the existing structure was not functioning effectively. They highlighted the duplication of work, the parochial nature of the existing system, the need for a change of management style and the fact that policy decisions were not being carried out quickly as the instigators of their wish to effect change. Interestingly, one member of this group of three casts doubt on the perception that there was anything wrong with the structure that existed at the time. His view was that improvements needed to be made in the areas of strategic planning, communication and organisational culture.

The other half of the Brigade Management Team felt that the need for change was clearly driven by the officer corps of the Brigade. This group felt that the officer corps wanted change but that the corps did not know what that change should be. The feeling that it was officers that were driving change came from a series of seminars that were organised by the Brigade Management Team. There was a feeling that people wanted a new solution to the way they were organised and working.

"People got swept up in the process, but did not use the tools that were available."

STRATEGIC FIT:

Only one interviewee declined to answer this question. The remaining five agreed that the proposals for change did not fit in with an existing organisational strategy. Some answers were quite categorical e.g. "No!"; "….did not fit in with an organisational strategy."

Others qualified their response by stating that the change was being driven by those affected by it most. There was also a feeling that there was a lack of vision among those who wanted change and those who were asked to deliver it. The organisation was seen as lacking clarity in regard to the future and therefore unable to say that a particular formula for change was going to be successful.

One external environmental barrier was identified at this stage. West Sussex Fire Brigade, like other brigades, needs a certain amount of ranks to fulfil the operational commitments of a command structure. If there was a form of strategic fit to the proposed change it was that a number of ranks had to be in place, not because they were needed managerially, but because the operational requirements of the Brigade necessitated their existence.

The only other strategic intent of the Brigade Management Team was the one involving keeping "the Brigade content and happy".

USE OF CHANGE MODELS:

The unanimous verdict of the group was that the use of academic change models was not considered when planning, facilitating or implementing the proposed change programme. A lot of discussion centred on the fact that the team had spent a considerable amount of time debating models that illustrated new hierarchical structures for the organisation.

The lack of enthusiasm for engaging with academic change models varied from a feeling that they would be seen as managerial fad to the acknowledgement that "very few of us would have known what we were talking about when it came to academic change models".

An interesting model that may have been of use to the Brigade's Management Team and change agents is Grundy's (1998) Stakeholder Analysis model.

NEUTRAL

COALITION

BUILDING

WIN

OVER

COALITION

BUILDING

LEAVE ALONE

TAKE OUT OF PLAY

WINNING

ON

BOARD

FOR

DISTRACT OR FRAGMENT

AGAINST

LOW MEDIUM HIGH

INFLUENCE

FIG 11: STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS, TONY GRUNDY (1998)

This model would have made it possible for the management team and change agents to have identified key groups within the organisation who have an interest in the organisation's performance and may be able to influence it in some way, e.g. the officer corps and its sub-groups, the non-uniformed staff and the union representatives.

CHANGE AGENTS:

The consensus was that the two change agents were not nominated for their managerial or personal skills. Feelings ranged from the fact that the individuals were nominated because of their position in the structure, to the fact that the individuals tasked with the reference had expressed an interest in seeing the change programme through.

There was an assumption that because the change agents were being drawn from the Brigade Management Team, they would have the necessary skills to manage the change programme successfully. It was felt that

"by the time a person's reached principle management within a brigade, they've got certain managerial attributes that they can develop and promote".

A perception was also expressed that perhaps the term "change agent" itself was not fully understood by the Brigade Management Team.

One interviewee highlighted what he felt should have been the pre-requisite skills for the change agents tasked with seeing the programme through:

"….to nominate individuals with the inter personal skills to educate and change the culture of the service through small group meetings."

In the end however,

"the willing horses were harnessed…."

BRIGADE'S CHANGE MANAGEMENT STYLE:

Only two interviewees felt that the change management style of the organisation could be identified when the change programme was being developed and implemented. There was however a different perception about the style identified, with one interviewee believing the style to be coercive whilst the other felt that it was directive.

The remainder of the group were unable to define a particular management style for the team at that time. It was felt by some that this was due to a lack of experience in dealing with change. Others felt that the "home grown" style was effective in itself. They felt it enabled managers to "quickly pick up the impact and consequences…." , of actions taken by senior management from what was being said by sub-ordinates. Thus, it was hoped that by reacting to the feelings of staff members, the management would not be seen to be imposing change but rather "delivering a platform which everyone wanted".

Identifying a change style to enable management to deal with the process of change is advocated by Balogun and Hope Hailey (1999). Their five suggested styles which may have been useful to the Brigade Management Team are shown below:

STYLE	DESCRIPTION	ADVANTAGES	DISADVANTAGES
EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION	SMALL GROUP BRIEFINGS DISCUSSION AND EXPLANATION. GAIN SUPPORT FOR CHANGE BY GENERATING UNDERSTANDING & COMMITMENT	SPREADS SUPPORT FOR CHANGE. ENSURES A WIDE BASE OF UNDERSTANDING	TIME CONSUMING. EASY TO VOICE SUPPORT THEN DO NOTHING. DEBATE MAY NOT BE ENOUGH TO CONVINCE PEOPLE OF THE NEED FOR CHANGE
COLLABORATION	WIDESPREAD INVOLVEMENT OF EMPLOYEES	SPREADS SUPPORT AND OWNERSHIP	TIME CONSUMING. LITTLE CONTROL OVER DECISIONS MAD
PARTICIPATION/ INTERVENTION	CONSULTATION OF EMPLOYEES ABOUT HOW TO DELIVER THE DESIRED CHANGES	SPREADS OWNERSHIP & SUPPORT. MORE CONTROL & EASIER TO SHAPE GROUP DECISIONS	CAN BE MANIPULATIVE
DIRECTION	CHANGE LEADERS MAKE THE MAJORITY OF DECISIONS. USE OF AUTHORITY TO DIRECT CHANGE	PROVIDES A CLEAR CHANGE OF FOCUS AND DIRECTION. LESS TIME CONSUMING	POTENTIALLY LESS SUPPORT AND COMMITMENT. MAY CAUSE SOME RESISTANCE TO CHANGE
COERCION	USE OF POWER TO IMPOSE CHANGE	ALLOWS FOR PROMPT ACTION	UNLIKELY TO ACHIEVE SUPPORT WITHOUT A CRISIS

FIG 12: MANAGEMENT STYLES

TARGETS:

Four of the six team members identified targets for the change programme. They ranged from the specific:

"It was outcome and behaviour based" and "to improve levels of communication and responsibility with a performance management system"

to the more vague;

"to make the brigade better".

The remaining two interviewees agreed that no specific targets had, in their opinion, been identified. The perception here being that everyone on the Brigade Management Team had too many individual targets that were narrowly focused.

Another management team member felt that the "mini-targets" were essential in order that a series of issues relating to the roles and responsibilities of middle managers could be addressed. The elected members of the County Council had to be convinced that the change programme was necessary and worthwhile and that the "mini-targets" assisted in the process.

DIVERSITY OF THE WORKFORCE:

Two of the Brigade Management Team members acknowledged the diversity of the workforce. One member making the following comment:

"Diversity was interesting in the way it was followed through in all honesty, and the tensions of the diversity and the comments they came back with did influence significantly the shape of what was to come out".

However, the influence of the workforce diversity was not felt so keenly by the other team member:

"….the impact was marginal, bearing in mind the diversity was not significantly changed".

Three other interviewees agreed that the diversity of the workforce was not given consideration. They were also in agreement that the non-uniformed personnel had not been consulted adequately during the change process.

"It was taken for granted that non-uniformed personnel would slot into positions made available by the restructure".

"In my view there was a lack of consultation with the non-uniformed staff, they were left out in the cold".

The final interviewee felt that for the non-uniformed section of the Brigade,

"….it was less of an issue to them and it really became a more uniformed focus".

He did agree though that assumptions were made regarding the ability of certain sections of staff to accept change and move forward:

"….broad managerial information assumed a base of knowledge that didn't exist. It was all gobbledegook to them, so there were a lot of people who had a right to say that they didn't know what was going on and had been left out…."

IDENTIFICATION OF CHANGE BARRIERS:

There was a 50 : 50 split in the answers to this question. However, it appears that time constraints in achieving the completion of the change programme negated the benefits of identifying those barriers.

Of the three that acknowledged the presence of barriers to change, one felt that communications was the largest barrier, another identified cultural problems as a barrier and the third stated,

"Barriers were identified and were discussed but the pressure of having to achieve the restructure by the 1^st January, meant that no strategy was drawn up to combat the barriers".

The other three management team members had not identified specific barriers to change although the concept that the change process could falter was accepted. One member of this group felt that there were no cultural or managerial barriers as he believed that the need for change came from within. It was felt that as barriers manifested themselves they would be addressed and thus dealt with. This approach was criticised by one of the team members that had identified change barriers though;

"….barriers became barricades"

Two barriers that did present themselves as the change process progressed were acknowledged as being the involvement of staff unions and the fact that there are three administrative centres within the organisation.

"There wasn't a separate process of identifying where it could fall down or what would be the big hurdles".

One of the most effective ways to identify potential barriers to change is to use the "force - field analysis" model. Developed by Kurt Lewin, the model enables managers to draw up a pictorial overview of the main problems that need to be tackled. Therefore managers will be able to determine the most appropriate strategies for dealing with the barriers and then moving the change programme.

Figure 13 below shows a force - field analysis of West Sussex Fire Brigade prior to the proposals for the restructure.

DUPLICATION OF

WORKLOADS LACK OF UNDERSTANDING ABOUT

IMPLICATIONS OF CHANGE

ADVERSE AFFECT ON CAREERS

IMPROVE

COMMUMICATION ADVERSE AFFECT ON STATUS

CHANNELS

POOR COMMUNICATIONS

INFRASTRUCTURE

STREAMLINE DIVERSITY OF WORKFORCE

MANAGEMENT

FIG 13: A FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS OF WEST SUSSEX FIRE BRIGADE.

COMMUNICATING THE CHANGE PROCESS WITHIN THE ORGANISATION:

All the interviewees agreed that the change process could have been communicated more effectively. Whilst there was a perception from two of the management team members that the communication process was reasonably effective, they did acknowledge that the messages being put out had not "penetrated well at all."

Interestingly, the two officers perceiving the communication to have been fairly effective also felt that there was a communications strategy. The remaining members of the management team did not mention this with one member saying,

"As there was no change management programme, no communication strategy was formulated."

When answering this question, four of the six interviewees expressed the view that there was a lack of understanding among those to be directly affected, about the nature of the change. Assumptions were also made about the effectiveness and penetration of the messages being sent out to the personnel of the organisation.

"I am not sure in my mind that the aims, objectives and execution of the change were understood."

"We didn't check to see how well it (the change message) was embedded".

"We assumed the communication was working but people didn't know who was doing what and where. We should've done more face-to-face stuff".

Problems with communicating change have been identified by many practitioners and as an aid to communicators of change the Academy of Management in New York produced the following model to assist with the design of a communications strategy:

CHANGE

OVERLEY RICH

COMMUNICATION

CAUSES CONFUSION

RICH

COMMUNICATION

FOR COMPLEX CHANGES EFFECTIVE

COMMUNICATION

ROUTINE COMMUNICATION

FOR ROUTINE CHANGE

TOO LITTLE

INFORMATION AND SENSITIVITY LEADS TO MISTRUST AND LACK OF COMMITTMENT

ROUTINE COMPLEX

FACE -TO-FACE

INTERACTIVE

TYPE OF

MEDIA

PERSONAL MEMOS

GENERAL BULLETINS

FIG 14: EFFECTIVE & NON-EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION OF CHANGE. (LENGL & DAFT 1998)

REPRINTED IN "EXPLORING STRATEGIC CHANGE", BALOGUN & HOPE HAILEY 1999

WOULD YOU DO ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY NEXT TIME:

All the interviewees agreed that they would do things differently if they were involved in managing another change programme. There were a variety of suggestions regarding the way forward, the main themes being listed below:

· Formulate a communications strategy and ensure that communication is effective and is understood.

· Formulate a change strategy allied to that structured for the organisation as a whole.

· A need to identify those directly affected by the change programme.

· Review the location of key personnel and administrative centres.

· Acknowledge the cultural issues within the organisation.

· Ensure that all groups of employees are included in the management of the change process.

· Ensure that there is unified senior management support for the change programme.

· Be more autonomous in deciding the final format of any future change programme.

The focus of this study was reinforced by the following quote from one member of the management team:

"Things are not right now and we're about to experience change again. This is bound to be influenced by the location of the buildings and personnel. Any future change needs to be properly resourced in order to make effective and efficient change across the organisation. People need to be empowered enough to be able to think freely and therefore create meaningful options for change. This would require a change of culture for many people that are used to working within strict parameters".

SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED FROM BRIGADE MANAGEMENT TEAM

COMMONALITIES:

There were five areas that saw the six members of the Brigade Management Team reaching agreement regarding the management of the Brigade's change programme:

· That the proposed change did not fit in with an existing organisational strategy.

· That change models were not considered.

· That change agents were not chosen for their personal or managerial skills.

· That the change programme was not communicated to the workforce effectively.

· That a different approach would be adopted by the management team should they oversee a similar process in the future.

There are a plethora of change models available to managers; Lewin's "Force Field" model (1958); Johnson & Scholes (1998) cultural web are just two examples. The models have one thing in common; that they provide managers and change agents with a pictorial overview of the main problems that need to be tackled. They can also be useful for focusing debate about how to overcome barriers to change.

The same can be argued for giving organisational strategy consideration when embarking on a change programme. Reviewing organisational strategy in the context of impending change is seen to be important to Kay (1993). The argument being that overall organisational strategy affects the choices available to managers when designing a strategy for change and its eventual implementation.

Clarke (1994) agrees, especially when strategy is regarded as the matching of organisation resources to environmental opportunity. Thus change becomes strongly linked to organisational strategy because "every time there is an environmental/strategic shift in emphasis, different parts of the organisation will need to change".

Clarke's (1994) illustration indicates the usefulness of models of change for managers and draws that concept together with issues surrounding strategy in an effective yet simple manner.

ENVIRONMENT

STRATEGY

PEOPLE

STRUCTURE

SYSTEMS

FIG 15: ORGANISING FOR CHANGE (L. CLARKE 1994)

Clarke's (1994) model prompts managers to consider their own ability to manage change; to review existing corporate strategy in the light of environmental influences; to review the efficiency of the existing organisational structure.

Another approach offered by Hamel and Prahalad (1989) encourages managers to create a mis-match between existing resources and emerging objectives. This, they argue, will enable managers to design a change process that will identify the gaps to be filled in order to achieve those objectives.

Whilst there are many models relating to change and its relationship with strategy, there is overwhelming agreement among writers on change that the two concepts are linked and affect effective change management.

Communicating change is essential if change programmes are to be successful (Warner Burke 1987). Communication erases tension, resentment, rumours and lack of trust. Warner - Burke's work has shown that employees who are well informed about how the planned changes will affect them and the organisation, will accept the changes more readily. Dawson (1994) also believes that communication is a significant part of the change process. He argues that without it and the resultant lack of direction it becomes difficult to establish a bond of trust between managers and staff.

Communication is the antidote to the uncertainty of change (Clarke 1994). It is an essential part of the change agent's skills.

Whilst identifying that communications skills are a characteristic of an effective change agent is essential, selecting people to fill the role is not an easy task. Many writers have discussed the characteristics of a good change agent. Tichy (1983) offers the following group of skills and talents:

· Interest in change

· Vision of the future

· Persistence

· Anticipation of problems

· Sense of timing

· Big picture and detail orientation

· Able to secure co-operation

Thus change agent nomination should take personal and organisational characteristics into account. They should not "….automatically be given to people holding certain organisational positions" (Connor and Lake 1988).

DIFFERENCES:

Arguably more important, are the areas where members of the management team of West Sussex Fire Brigade were not in agreement about the change programme they were responsible for. These differences are highlighted in Figure 10 and are listed below:

· Change Drivers

· Management Style

· Targets

· Identifying Barriers to Change

· Diversity of Workforce

Gratton, Hope-Hailey et al (1999) conducted research among eight organisations over a nine year period. Their work found that successful change was achieved by managers that:

· Have a consistent approach to the problems posed to them by the change programme.

· Have a unified clarity about the change.

· Have experience in managing complex change initiatives.

· Possess stable yet implicit cultural values that endure over time.

· Have an ability to design workshops to communicate objectives to the entire workforce.

Part of these differences stem from assumptions made by the Brigade Management Team. Assumptions in this field of management are responsible for many organisational change failures. (Steiner 1972)

ANALYSIS OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE:

For this part of the research, 43 memorandums were evaluated which had been submitted by officers and key non-uniformed personnel. The response was prompted by a request from the County Fire Officer for comments about the proposals for change facing the organisation at that time.

Ten main themes were highlighted by this research. They are shown in the matrix overleaf.

Whilst it has not been possible to reproduce the documents in this report because of their confidential nature, the themes identified in the matrix shown above are supported by relevant quotes where possible.

The two most striking themes are that whilst 58% of the respondents were in support of the proposals for change, almost exactly the same number, 55%, recognised that the proposals would result in adverse affects for those respondents. When considered along with the fact that only 28% of the respondents saw any benefits for the organisation from the proposals for a restructure, a gloomy picture appears to be emerging.

Alternative solutions to the model of change were proposed by 39.5% of the respondents. These alternatives varied from very complex models involving restructuring the hierarchy of the brigade with disadvantages and advantages of the proposals being discussed, to very simple documents which agree with the proposals put forward by the Brigade Management Team.

The perception that the planned restructure would affect personnel in a very personal way is illustrated by the following quotations:

"….a backward step for my position."

"….opportunities reduced."

"….proposal effectively reduces by 50% the avenues for advancement."

From the analysis of the documentary evidence available, it was possible to detect real concern among the respondents about the changes and their implications:

"….anxiety exists amongst many members of the brigade; uniformed and non-uniformed."

"I feel demoralised and worthless with a pending 'demotion'."

All of the replies showed that the proposals for change were seen as having come entirely from the Brigade Management Team:

"….in response to your proposals."

" I have studied your proposals…"

"….your outline proposals for a restructure."

Only 12% of the respondents mentioned the drivers of change and took an objective approach to reviewing the proposals for restructure:

"We must have a plan for change….everything must be targeted to service provision at the highest standard."

"Some of the changes involve cost in monetary terms. If budget cuts are to be made with no job losses, where will the extra funding come from?"

SUMMARY OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE:

Organisational change takes many forms. Burnes (1996) believes that increasingly, change requires individuals and groups to reconsider radically their attitudes to how work is performed and how they behave towards their colleagues. Thus, for many people change involves moving from the known to the unknown.

Whilst the documentary analysis shows that 58% of respondents indicated an overall support for the proposals for a restructure, it cannot be argued that there was a demonstrable willingness to change. With almost the same amount of respondents clearly indicating that the proposals would mean a loss in terms of status for them, members of the Brigade Management Team were given a clear picture of the real and legitimate fears of those about to be affected by the restructure. This is mirrored by the fact that only 16% of the responses made a specific mention of benefits for the individual.

The fact that 39.5% of responses suggested alternative models for the final structure of the Brigade indicates a willingness to take some ownership of the issue. Whilst it is impractical to involve everyone in the planning and execution of a change programme, the Brigade Management Team would have been able to see whether or not certain individuals held the necessary skills to be able to assist the change agents with the implementation of the programme.

The organisational management would have clearly seen that there was a need to communicate the rationale for change from the fact that there was such a small interest in the drivers for change and external environmental pressures. It was evident from the analysis that the context of the proposed change was not fully appreciated. Although detail; e.g. location and responsibilities of certain personnel in the new structure, was understood, the implications for the organisation in the long term were not.

Underpinning this analysis is the notion that "the way things are done in this brigade" was being fundamentally challenged by the proposals for change. Personnel used to working in a particular way, feel insecure when asked to operate in a different manner. The documentary evidence shows this:

"….many officers are disillusioned at present."

"….uncertainty in both uniformed and non-uniformed positions."

A clear indication of a major barrier to the success of the change programme would have been highlighted by these documents.

The themes from the documentary evidence analysis would have provided the Brigade Management Team with clear guidance with regard to the fears and feelings of the personnel most affected by the proposals for change. This would have enabled the team and the change agents to formulate a strategy for communicating and implementing the programme which would have addressed those points. When change affects personal situations it becomes difficult for people to accept it:

"the fear and ambiguity and loss of control during change is so powerful that it immobilises many people and prevents their movement to even highly desired new circumstances."

Connor (1993)

RESULTS OF CLOSED QUESTIONNAIRE:

A closed questionnaire was chosen in an attempt to quantify the qualitative data provided by the senior officer interviews and documentary analysis. The questions draw on themes highlighted by the senior officer interviews and documentary analysis. Two open questions were included at the end of the questionnaire. The purpose of the open questions was to encourage respondents to comment about the overall management of the change programme and the fundamental issue of communicating change.

The figures used in the graphs (Appendix 'B') represent the number of replies received and not percentages. The sample size (48) represents a 76% return. Individual graphs for each question are shown in Appendix B with key points summarised in the following text.

The sample was restricted to the officer corps and key non-uniformed staff of West Sussex Fire Brigade.

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS FROM CLOSED QUESTIONNAIRE:

· 58% of respondents believed that the restructure was driven by the Brigade Management Team.

· 37.5% of respondents felt that the officer corps was responsible for driving the restructure.

· 62.5% of respondents supported the need for a restructure.

· 56.25% of respondents indicated that they understood the rationale behind the restructure.

· 58.33% of respondents felt that the restructure was not communicated effectively.

· 62.5% of respondents expressed the view that they did not understand the implications of the restructure for the organisation.

· 66.6% of respondents felt that they did not understand the implications of the restructure for the individual.

· 77% of the respondents felt that the needs and concerns of the non-uniformed staff were not properly addressed.

· 62.5% of respondents felt that the restructure worsened their career prospects.

· 44% of respondents felt that the restructure was bad for the organisation.

· 33% of respondents felt that the restructure was good for the brigade.

· Almost a quarter (23%) of respondents were undecided as to whether or not the restructure was beneficial for the brigade.

· 52% of respondents indicated that they made their feelings about the restructure known to the Brigade Management Team.

· Of the 52% of respondents that contacted the Brigade Management Team, 24% felt that their comments were listened to. 52% felt that they were not listened to, whilst 24% remained undecided.

ANALYSIS OF OPEN QUESTIONS:

Two open questions were added to the end of the questionnaire:

· Do you wish to make any other comments regarding the management of the restructure?

· Do you have any further comments to make about how the restructure was communicated?

12.5% of the respondents left these questions blank and 8% of the respondents indicated that they did not want to make comment. The main themes from the remaining respondents are shown below.

MANAGEMENT

· The restructure was seen as being ill conceived as it was implemented without carrying out an audit of workloads. As a result there was a feeling that the management of the change programme was "….rushed and unplanned."

"….audit of roles and responsibilities should have been carried out before the restructure took place. Long term issues could then have been identified."

· There was a feeling that new post holders were put in place without fully understanding their new roles. Respondents felt that there were no tangible managerial goals.

"….new postholders didn't appear to know what they were supposed to be doing."

· There was a clear feeling that the management approach to the restructure had "split the Brigade". Officers were not given enough encouragement to support the proposals for change regardless of whether of not they would benefit from them personally. The perception of the managerial methodology was that it focussed on the uniformed officers at the expense of other groups within the organisation.

"….it divided the Brigade."

"It divided the Brigade because there were winners and losers."

· The fact that the restructure was implemented too quickly without a review process was strongly expressed. It was felt that a total restructure was not needed whereas a refining of existing procedures and work practices would have been more effective.

"We ended up with a total restructure when all that was needed was a restructure of certain areas."

"The BMT misunderstood the Officer Corps, a full restructure was not needed."

"At no time has the present restructure been reviewed or the problems dealt with."

"We got exactly what BMT wanted, it was not built around the Brigade's needs."

"What management?"

COMMUNICATION:

The communication process was seen as generally poor and ineffective. Although one respondent felt that the communication process was carried out well, the rest thought that it could have been greatly improved. Many felt that the reasons for the change were not explained and there was disappointment about the lack of explanation surrounding the decision making process.

Many respondents to this question felt that the Brigade Management Team were neither enthusiastic nor committed to the way in which the change was communicated. This left respondents with the feeling that the change was imposed on them and that there "wasn't real confidence in the success of the restructure."

The feeling that the communication process was not as good as it could have been left people with the perception that they had been left out of the entire process. As a result, personnel that were to be directly affected by the change programme were unclear about the need for change and the parameters within which the change had to take place. Levels of ownership of the process were reduced accordingly.

"….we've not been involved in developing the restructure."

Several respondents expressed the sentiment that their views were not listened to by the Brigade Management Team and that the non-uniformed section of the staff were not consulted properly. The officers' seminars that were organised to publicise the change programme were largely seen as "window dressing."

Officers perceived that

"Officers' opinions were not genuinely valued" and that there "….wasn't enough feedback and support."

One respondent answered this open question in the following way:

"Not enough info was forthcoming about what changes were going to be made, how, when, who would be involved etc. There appeared to be a general assumption that everyone knew what was going on and that everyone had access to the same information."

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:

From the analysis of the data provided by the interviews with members of the Brigade Management Team, the documentary evidence and the closed questionnaire, certain themes were identified.

· Driver of Change:

There was confusion amongst the Brigade Management Team and officer corps alike regarding the driver of the Brigade's restructure. Both parties claiming that they were responsible for driving the change programme. In the case of the Brigade Management Team there was a 50:50 split on this matter. This split was not as clear in the officer corps. There was however distinct confusion within the group about this issue.

Very little mention was made about external drivers, for example, finance. There was an indication from officers that the management structure needed to be streamlined. There were however, no other specific drivers for change identified by either group.

· Strategic Fit:

There was agreement that the change programme did not fit in with an existing organisational strategy.

· Need for Change:

Confusion in this area relates to the differences in opinion regarding the drivers of change. Whilst some members of the Brigade Management Team believed that they were simply reacting to demands from the officer corps, others believed that they were driving a change that would rid the Brigade of some of its bureaucratic systems, duplication of work and ultimately streamline the managerial structure.

Some members of the officer corps expressed the opinion though that a change programme that affected the whole organisation was not necessary. They argued that change to certain systems and practices was all that was needed.

"Why are we changing?" was a regular question.

· Communications:

There was overall agreement that the communications process was ineffective. This view was shared by Brigade Management Team members, the officer corps and the non-uniformed staff. The proposals for change were communicated by the County Fire Officer at seminars attended by all officers and non-uniformed staff section heads. This process was backed up by the issue of four documents entitled "Countdown to restructure".

Assumptions were made though, that this would be sufficient to effectively impart the full complexities of the proposed change. The outcome was a group of personnel that, although about to be directly affected by a major change programme, had little understanding of the process. This is also confirmed by the lack of appreciation expressed regarding the implications of the restructure for the individual and the organisation.

· Barriers to Change:

Barriers to change were accepted as a concept by some members of the Brigade Management Team but only two members of the team identified specific barriers; culture and communications. Although not identified by the officers or non-uniformed staff, barriers to change were evident from the analysis of documentary evidence and from the results of the questionnaire.

From this research there is a clear indication that there was a high level of support for the restructure. This facilitating influence was rather diluted by the fact that several barriers were clearly formed from concerns held by those most affected by the change:

· The perceived adverse affects of the restructure for the individual, especially in terms of individual status.

· The limitations that the change programme would place on individual's career prospects.

· Confusion regarding the level of benefit the restructure would give the organisation.

· The fact that the need for change was not fully understood by all personnel.

· The feelings of disillusionment among personnel.

· The idea that non-uniformed staff had not been consulted properly.

· The notion that opinions were not valued by the management of the Brigade.

· Change Agents:

The change agents for West Sussex Fire Brigade's change programme were not picked for their managerial or personal skills in this area. Rather than determining the change agents by considering a combination of personal and organisational characteristics, these "designated change agents" (Hussaker 1982) were picked by virtue of their positions within the organisation and the fact that they had expressed an interest in seeing the change process through.

· Change Models:

None of the accepted models for change were considered by the Brigade Management Team. Great emphasis was placed on designing hierarchical models for the new structure of the Brigade. The academic models, e.g. Lewin's (1951) "force field" model; Connor and Lake's (1988) "Natural Change Process" were seen as being unsustainable from an organisational view by the management. The same applied to the application of strategic models for change e.g. Dunphy and Stace Framework (1988). The approach was qualified by the County Fire Officer in the following way:

"….what the Brigade can't cope with is following what it thinks is a gimmicky or managerial concept."

· Management Style:

Two thirds of the Brigade Management Team were unable to identify a specific change management style. The remaining third disagreed in their perception of the team's change management style. The existing managerial style was seen as being sufficient to guide the organisation through the restructure.

Those affected by the change were openly critical of the way in which the process had been managed. Many felt that the management of the procedure had split the organisation and that the feelings of the personnel and needs of the organisation had been misunderstood.

Apart from two members of the Brigade Management Team, no one identified a specific managerial style e.g. directive, coercive, participative, collaborative.

· Targets:

Whilst targets were identified by four of the six management team, opinion differed regarding the target established and two members were unable to identify a target for the restructure. Although targets such as outputs and behaviour were identified, no interventions such as training to enable staff to be able to deal with the implications of change were put in place. The same can be said of the target of improving communications.

From the data received from the officer corps, the idea of a change target does not appear to have been considered. Indeed, for some members of this group, the whole concept of the programme needed to be questioned which may have influenced their thoughts about the long term implications of the restructure.

· Diversity of the workforce:

This issue was not given much consideration by those responsible for managing the change process, whilst the non-uniformed staff were seen as being a separate work group, little was done to appreciate how the restructure would affect them. There is no data to suggest that the sub-groups within the officer corps were allowed for, although they were referred to during the interviews with Brigade Management Team members.

As a result, the way in which the proposals for change would affect the different groups within the organisation does not appear to have been discussed.

· Different approach in future:

All members of the Brigade Management Team agreed that they would approach a similar change programme differently in the future. Communicating the change process more effectively, formulating a change strategy, acknowledging the cultural issues and including all groups of employees in the change programmes were the main themes extracted from the data.

There are comparisons to be made here with the data from the officer corps and non-uniformed staff. Their perception of the communication was that it could have been improved; that the management of the restructure could have been more effective and seen to be addressing organisational goals and that the non-uniformed section of staff should have been more skilfully dealt with.

Two other issues raised by the officer corps that were not part of the change programme are as follows:

· Audit of workloads in order to ascertain the exact need for and extent of any change.

· Review of the restructure after an agreed period in order to check the effectiveness of the change and to make adjustments as necessary.

CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION:

Before considering the conclusions of this report, it is appropriate to review the aim of the study and whether or not the research has fulfilled the expectations of the aims and objectives.

The overall aim of the study was to evaluate the restructuring of West Sussex Fire Brigade's managerial make up. This was undertaken by interviewing the six members of the Brigade's Management Team, by analysing documentary evidence submitted by officers and key non-uniformed personnel and by analysing the results of a closed questionnaire circulated to the officer corps and non-uniformed staff of West Sussex Fire Brigade. The specific objectives of the report were:

· To explore what drove the change to be conceived.

· To review the role of management during the change process.

· To examine the role, relevance and use by management of change models in the restructure process.

· To analyse the process behind nominating the change agents.

· To assess the efficiency of the communication process as the change programme developed.

· To evaluate the level of understanding among officers and non-uniformed staff regarding the implications of the change proposals.

· To assess the importance of organisational culture in this case study.

It is also appropriate to reflect on the limitations of this report. The research was conducted exclusively within West Sussex Fire Brigade. It only looked at the management of a restructure that affected the composition of the officer corps and some key non-uniformed posts. No comparisons were made between West Sussex Fire Brigade and other shire brigades that may have undertaken similar change programmes.

For the purpose of this report, change is approached from the standpoint that it is something that can be managed rather than being something that evolves. Cultural issues have been viewed in a similar manner i.e. that they are subjects that can be identified as either barriers or facilitators of change.

As this report takes the overall form of a case study of one particular organisation, it must be borne in mind that the findings should only be interpreted in a manner relevant to the management of a change programme overseen by the senior management of West Sussex Fire Brigade.

ACHIEVEMENT OF AIM AND OBJECTIVES

DRIVERS FOR CHANGE:

It has been possible to identify that there was confusion over this issue. The results of the interviews highlighted the fact that there was a difference of opinion between members of the Brigade Management Team regarding who was responsible for driving the restructure. This was backed up by the results from the questionnaires. The confusion shown by Brigade Management Team members was shared by the officer corps and non-uniformed staff.

ROLE OF MANAGEMENT:

The research methods allowed the author to explore whether or not the management had considered their style and thus their role in the change process. The view of those directly affected by the restructure was also examined by the methodology. The research showed that there was no clear managerial style and that there was disillusionment about the role of management throughout the restructure.

CHANGE MODELS:

From the data supplied it was possible to conclude that the use of change models in assisting the conception and implementation of the restructure was not considered to be relevant by the Brigade's management. No one from the officer corps or non-uniformed section mentioned change models in their responses. It was not therefore possible to ascertain whether or not these groups considered the viability of models for change or to gauge their awareness of such concepts.

CHANGE AGENTS:

The report has been able to examine how the change agents were nominated. They were not nominated for their specific managerial or personal qualities, nor do they appear to have been resourced sufficiently.

COMMUNICATING THE CHANGE:

It has been possible to show that the restructure in West Sussex Fire Brigade could have been communicated more effectively. This feeling was shared by managers and staff alike. This led to the formulation of misunderstandings which became barriers to the success of the change programme.

IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESTRUCTURE:

The research has shown that there was a lack of understanding among those directly affected by the change about its overall implications. This covered the implications for both the individual and the organisation. It was also shown that newly created roles were not fully understood by those that were tasked with holding that particular reference.

CULTURE:

The data has shown that specific cultural issues were not, on the whole, identified as being barriers to the success of the change initiative at the centre of this study. It has also been possible to identify that the organisational culture is complex with a number of sub-groups, each having different needs. Whilst identifying the culture of West Sussex Fire Brigade to be strong, the report has been unable to specifically establish its influence on the outcome of the restructure.

CONCLUSIONS

CHANGE AND ITS DRIVING FORCES:

The report has shown that there was a difference of opinion amongst those leading the change initiative and amongst those who would be affected by it, as to who was driving the change. This disparity meant that some members of the Brigade Management Team were actively pursuing alternative hierarchical structures, whilst others felt that they were reacting to the wishes of the officer corps. This was amplified when the Brigade management commissioned an internal report the remit of which was to investigate the restructure proposals. The internal review was seen by many as presenting the Brigade with a fait accompli.

Confusion also manifested itself in the officer corps in the form of alternative proposals for the restructure being submitted by some to Brigade management. At the same time, management team members were being asked by others "Tell us what you want."

This led to frustration in both parties. For example, some members of the management felt that the debate was becoming too involved and wanted change in any form to occur:

"We've talked for ages, for God's sake lets have some change, so that we can at least see that some change has taken place."

Whilst some members of the officer corps felt that the restructure was being imposed on them;

"….the whole issue was carefully stage-managed to achieve a pre-planned result."

MANAGEMENT ROLE:

In carrying out this research it was evident that the Brigade Management Team did not consider a specific style of change management when conceiving and implementing the organisational restructure. Deming (1986) believed that a coherent managerial style enables managers overseeing change to "drive out fear from individuals and create an atmosphere of mutual trust." This approach would help to counter resistance to new knowledge and practices and speed up an otherwise sluggish response to change.

Whilst some of the management styles identified by Balogun & Hope Hailey (1999) can be time consuming and therefore costly, especially where large numbers of employees are involved e.g. the education and communication style, some of the issues raised by this report could have been dealt with if a consistent management style had been discussed. For example, the perception by officers that the Brigade restructure has been imposed and the comments relating to the lack of appreciation of its overall implications may have been successfully addressed by adopting a specific change management style.

Change style can change as the process progresses and it would be wrong to assume that an individual change initiative will be best served by a single style. Workforce diversity also plays a part in determining change management style. Coercion may work with uniformed personnel where a swift result is required but a more participative approach would be more beneficial where non-uniformed staff are concerned.

It is clear however, that thought should be given to adopting a change management style as part of the conception process. This will also avoid inconsistency which can become a barrier to change. The most appropriate style being determined when the change programme is reviewed in context with such issues as change targets and drivers.

MODELS FOR CHANGE:

Change models were not considered by the Brigade Management team nor were they mentioned in the documents analysed by this research. Whilst they were viewed as "gimmicky" by one management team member, another cast doubt on the team's ability to use and interpret such models in the first place.

Tichy (1983) argues however, that models are needed for a systematic management of change. By using them, management can avoid making assumptions and can be guided in their work to diagnose organisational problems. Aldag and Stearns (1991) agree. Their work has highlighted that models can assist managers by enabling them to assess six key areas:

· Identifying the need for change.

· Selecting an intervention technique.

· Gaining support.

· Planning the change process.

· Overcoming resistance to change.

· Evaluating the change process.

Thus as the research has shown that there was support for the restructure, the group or groups giving that support could have been identified and encouraged to back the changes more tangibly. Similarly, where this report has shown that individuals and groups were expressing concerns about how the change process would, for example, adversely affect their career prospects, use of models could have highlighted this and strategies could then have been developed to tackle this negative influence. The model shown in Figure 5 also highlights how groups are inter-related and positioned in relation to their perception of the outcomes of the restructure. Whilst viewing change in context is important when designing an appropriate change approach, organisations can benefit from the use of change models when building a change initiative as they enable change managers to identify, among other things, barriers to change.

CHANGE AGENTS:

Various authors of change literature have discussed the need to identify certain characteristics in potential change agents. (Balogun and Hope Hailey (1999); Connor and Lake (1988); Amabile (1983)). The research for this report has shown that this was not the case for the restructure in West Sussex Fire Brigade.

The change agents in this study were picked not because of their particular managerial or personal skills but because they had expressed an interest in seeing the process through and would, as a result of the restructure, be in key positions when the process had been completed.

The appropriate managerial and personal skills enable change agents to examine the internal and external context of the organisation. This in turn leads to the appropriate change process being chosen.

This is essential because change involves the ability to create a new synthesis of people, resources, ideas, opportunities and demands. Change agents therefore must be able to ensure that new ideas are accepted, new ways of working are embraced and new standards of quality and performance are achieved. Support must be mobilised, coalitions built and supported and opposition identified and considered.

The advantage of choosing change agents that have positions of authority within the organisation is that they are already vested with adequate formal authority to stimulate change. (Hellreigel and Slocum 1976). The main disadvantage with this approach however is that they have to add the role of change agent to their existing duties.

This was certainly the situation with this case study. The two change agents not only had to oversee and communicate the restructure to the organisation but had to set up the infrastructure of the functional commands that they would be responsible for. As a result and without realising it, this can mean that change agents allow their personal philosophies and styles to influence the change interventions they choose. A conflict between an appreciation of the organisational context and personal preferences is often the result.

A method of dealing with this is to outsource change agency. External agents bring with them a degree of objectivity but they can be viewed negatively because they have little stake in the long-term outcomes of their recommendations. However, because of the time constraints placed on the change agents examined in this report, their workloads and the manner in which they were chosen, external change agents may have been an option worth considering.

COMMUNICATION:

The research convincingly shows that the communication process behind the Brigade's restructure could have been more effective. The change was communicated through a series of seminars attended by 40 - 50 officers at a time and through the issues of four "Countdown" sheets (Appendix 'C'). Officers and non-uniformed personnel were also invited to comment in writing to the County Fire Officer about their feelings on the proposals for the restructure.

Whilst writers agree that communicating change is vitally important as it is the most effective way of achieving lasting and irreversible change, Clarke (1994) believes that most people are only really interested in "how" change will affect them. The research for this report would appear to support this view. Many respondents to the questionnaire expressed concern about the future of their career prospects for example.

Communication can affect perceptions about a particular change. Respondents to the closed questionnaire for this report felt that the change had been imposed on them and that their views had not really been listened to. The early involvement of people in the communication process means that a sense of ownership and commitment to the change will increase dramatically. The disadvantage being however that the change agents will have to give up their time to achieve this aim. Communicating the change in this fashion means telling people small chunks of information which need to be constantly checked to ensure that it has been understood. Therefore a communication strategy is essential and must be resourced properly.

This view is endorsed by Burnes (1996) who argues that communication helps to avoid the uncertainty of change, but must be regular and effective. Again, the emphasis must be on informing those to be affected by the change, exactly how they stand to be affected. A good communications strategy must therefore be planned early on in the change process in order to avoid rumours and a lack of trust amongst staff.

Another of the findings of this research was that some personnel wondered why the change was happening at all. When the need for change is fully appreciated, it can be readily accepted. Therefore, communication must focus on the urgency of working differently. It is also essential that senior managers explain and promote the change as silence on their part can communicate the wrong message to the organisation. In other words, communication must match the needs of the audience.

In order to be effective overall, communication must cover a multitude of channels, both group and individual, formal and informal, there cannot be enough communication.

"Lack of communication is the most frequently cited reason for the failure of change programmes".

(Clarke 1994)

BARRIERS:

Whilst barriers to change were acknowledged as a concept, the report has shown that specific barriers to the successful implementation of the restructure were not identified. As one member of the principle management said in his interview:

"I don't believe that there were any barriers that said no, we ain't going to change."

Barriers did however manifest themselves in a number of ways as the change programme progressed. Respondents to the questionnaire indicated that they did not fully understand the implications of the change either for themselves or the organisation; that they felt that the restructure would adversely affect their career prospects and that the change process was not being communicated effectively. The documentary evidence showed that, among other things, personnel were feeling disillusioned, demoralised and perceived, in many cases, that their status was about to be diluted.

Clarke's (1994) work identified similar factors that were tangible barriers to successful change. They included:

· Lack of information

· Threat to status

· Lack of perceived benefits

· Threat to self-esteem

· Loss of control of one's own destiny

The research for this report also highlighted a degree of managerial inconsistency with regard to the driver of the change. Zalman and Duncan (1977) highlight managerial inconsistency as another significant barrier to implementing a successful change. This results in confusion amongst those to be involved in the change process and a lack of understanding about what is expected of them. The County Fire Officer was asked by many officers:

"Tell us what you want"

This plea for assistance shows that the messages behind the proposals for a restructure were not getting through to those that needed them most. This therefore threatened the successful implementation of the change programme.

Beckland and Pritchard (1992) identify several options for dealing with the potential barriers to successful change. Some of these include:

· Helping people to understand the reasons for change.

· Improving communications strategies.

· Ensuring that management demonstrates its own commitment to change.

· Assessing employee readiness for change.

· Involving employees in the planned changes as much as possible.

Whilst the results of the closed questionnaire in this report were obviously not available to the Brigade Management Team, the documentary evidence was. From the documents, key themes could have been identified and strategies drawn up that could have addressed those themes. The crucial issue is to identify and anticipate sources of resistance at the beginning of the change process. The force - field analysis shown in Figure 13 helps to identify and weigh up sources of resistance against the arguments for making change. This allows managers to either rethink as to whether the proposals for change are the right ones or to take action to reduce resistance and/or accentuate the driving forces.

DIVERSITY:

The report has shown that whilst it was acknowledged by Brigade Management Team that there was diversity in the workforce, the impact on the restructure of diversity was seen as being minimal. Some members of the team however felt that this issue was not addressed and admitted that assumptions had been made about the ability of people within certain groups to fit in with the restructure.

Balogun and Hope Hailey's (1999) work has shown that different groups of staff differ in the way in which they identify with the organisation through their department or team. In West Sussex Fire Brigade's case there were four separate groups of employees that were directly affected by the change programme; officers employed on a shift system, officers employed on a 42 hour week system, non-uniformed staff and retained officers. Each group was aware that the restructure could affect their personal situation in some way (although the research has shown that the implications were not fully understood) and each group identified with the Brigade in a different way because of the way in which their particular group interacted with the organisation. The officers employed on the shift system and the non-uniformed staff could also be broken down into further groups each with their own even more focused perspective of the organisation, e.g. fire safety officers, training officers, secretarial staff, finance staff.

Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) argue that an organisation's ability to change is clearly related to complexity. Complexity they found, is reflected in the number of departments and groups within an organisation and does, in general, affect how flexible and adaptive an organisation can be.

Complexity can therefore, affect the choice of a change approach and needs to be considered in the light of:

· The extent to which there is uniformity or diversity within an organisation.

· The impact of these sources of diversity on staff loyalty and commitment to the overall organisation.

· The extent to which the change agent wishes to reduce or increase levels of diversity as part of the intended outcomes of the change process.

(Balogun & Hope Hailey 1999 pp 74 -75)

Organisational diversity can also influence the following parts of the change process:

· Staff who identify with a particular department may show more loyalty to their departmental head than the overall organisational leader. In this case, it may make sense to devolve responsibility for leading change to departmental heads.

· How a change process is announced can be affected by organisational diversity. If diversity exists between different groups, it may be unwise to advertise a change programme to the whole organisation at once.

· Diversity can also affect how a proposed change may progress. Sub-cultures need to be identified and then unified in order that diversity can be reduced in order to allow the planned change to be effective. (Balogun & Hope Hailey 1999)

STRATEGIC FIT:

The report has shown that the restructure did not fit with any existing organisational strategy. This approach may have been influenced by the confusion that existed over what was driving the change. Thus, it was perceived by the management team that the organisation was generally moving in the direction of wanting change. Whilst change can be implemented in this broad manner, it is extremely difficult to manage (Thompson 1967). The reason being that in changing an organisation's structure (as happened in this case study), its complex self-identity changes too. This is important as an organisation's identity is central to its functioning. As a result, changes relating to identity require careful diagnostics to determine not only when they are needed, but how they will affect the organisation as a whole.

Carr et al (1996) believe that any change an organisation undertakes should be based on its overall strategy. Sometimes organisational strategy is the change driver, in other cases strategy shows what needs to be changed. It is therefore essential that change should be reviewed against strategy as the process progresses. Three questions then become essential for change agents and management:

· What elements of organisational strategy will support change?

· How do the elements of organisational strategy fit with the change?

· How will new ways of working affect current business plans?

The approach made by the management team at the heart of this study could be allied, however to the arguments put forward by Mintzberg (1987) and Quinn (1980). Quinn's point of view is that management make strategic decisions that are not highly formalised but, rather, take the form of what he terms "logical incrementalism." This involves combining behavioural techniques, power politics and formal analysis in a logical incremental movement towards ends which are broadly conceived and revised in the light of new information during the process of strategic change.

Mintzberg's (1987) view supports this opinion. He sees an organisation's strategy as "the pattern to be seen emerging over time as actions are taken to enable the organisation to continue into the future." Therefore Mintzberg's argument is that it is entirely acceptable for management to view the strategic management of a change process through the interpretations of the circumstances in which the organisation finds itself.

Given the opposing views that are present on this subject, managers are presented with a dilemma regarding change and organisational strategy. That is, changes are brought on by multiple factors, making it hard to identify causes. A strategy of sorts then tends to develop regardless of the real cause for change.

TARGETS:

The report has shown that whilst two thirds of the Brigade Management Team had identified some targets for the restructure programme, there was not however, agreement regarding the targets. Whilst disagreement might not in itself have proved to be a problem (specific departments need different objectives), there is no evidence to suggest that the individual targets had a common theme to them, for example "….to make the brigade better."

Argyris (1982) believes that achieving targets is one of the key elements of an effective organisation. Highlighting specific targets leads people to taking action which is relevant and specific which in turn seems to motivate people.

Mixed signals can be given out to staff when managers are unclear about how a change process is conceived and what the goals of that process are. Once a consensus regarding the key objectives of a proposal is achieved, the change programme can be moved forward in a purposeful manner that can be seen by staff as being worthwhile. This research has shown that the conflicting messages being put out by different members of the Brigade Management Team meant that there was no real conformity of purpose behind the conception of the restructure and that officers and non-uniformed staff were becoming divided and disheartened as a result.

Whilst the goal of making "the brigade better" was identified, the report has no evidence to show that this would mean that things would have to be carried out in a different manner. In fact the research has shown that many assumptions were made by the management team about how people would adapt to the changes that were planned. Specific organisational targets, especially those related to change need to be understood by all employees. Once the rationale for change and its implications are recognised and understood, it is easier for the change agents to harness this understanding and turn it into commitment to the change process.

Two members of the Brigade Management Team identified that they thought the targets were behaviour and output based. The report however found no evidence about how these targets would be achieved.

Beer et al (1990) argue that behavioural goals should be focused on but warn that behavioural targets can only be achieved if the organisational structure itself changes. This is because working methods and responsibilities force particular behaviour on to staff. Thus, if managers focus on work-based behaviour a smoother transition can result. This approach could have been successful in this study if the Brigade Management Team had fully explained their expectations of the new post holders that were to be put in post by the restructure. By fully explaining the different responsibilities of the new positions, the Brigade Management Team may have been able to encourage the post holders to behave and think differently. This is because the new post holders would have realised that their previous responsibilities and relationships with peers, subordinates and superiors had changed prompting them to act differently as a result.

For the organisation to have achieved the output-based goal for the restructure, there would have had to have been a redesign of performance measures and control systems. This type of output is useful where functional units require a degree of autonomy from the parent organisation in order to manage a change programme in a manner which is relevant to their circumstances.

Again, this method could have been useful for West Sussex Fire Brigade. The output targets would be different for each functional command, for example operations and fire safety as the environments in which they operate are separate.

It would of course, have been acceptable to have combined the behavioural and output targets to have achieved a result that would have been relevant to West Sussex Fire Brigade's organisational context. The requirements, organisationally, would have been sufficient resources to explore the best target and then assessing the most effective method of achieving that goal for the Brigade. Management would also have had to ensure that enough time was made available for change agents to have carried out the necessary research in order to achieve this insight. Finally, a consensus from Brigade Management would need to have been realised before the final message could have been put out to the rest of the organisation.

Unfortunately, both resources and time were in short supply for both the Brigade Management and the change agents. This only served to compound the mixed messages that were perceived to come from the management team and resulted in the feelings of frustration about the restructure among the officer corps and non-uniformed staff. As one respondent to the open questions attached to the questionnaire stated:

"What are the Chief's goals?"

FEEDBACK:

The report has shown that there was considerable frustration at the lack of feedback about the restructure programme and that there was no follow up review of the process. This was probably a result of the poor communications system, a lack of resources, the fact that the change agents stopped their work to concentrate on their post - restructure role as soon as the date for the restructure was reached and a lack of awareness from management of the importance of feedback. This latter point could be linked to the fact that the management team made assumptions about the ability of the workforce to cope with change.

Feedback and review are also linked to a defined management style, something that the report has already established was missing from the approach to the restructure. A facilitative management style that encouraged feedback and review may have helped to build self-esteem and reduce ambiguity amongst those involved in and affected by the restructure.

A review process would not only have monitored levels of readiness for change among the workforce, but may also have highlighted the fact that assumptions were being made at management team level. Feedback would also have allowed the organisation to draw attention to any discrepancy between actual performance and desired present and future performance (Burnes 1996).

Feedback can also be used to create a sense of ownership and responsibility as it results in a workforce that is more knowledgeable about the outcomes of a change programme. In the example covered by this report the feelings of uncertainty experienced by some officers could have been allayed by regular feedback meetings before the restructure. The same could be said for similar meetings after the restructure as an attempt to confirm understanding in respect of the outcomes of the process and of the roles and responsibilities of newly created posts.

Warner Burke's (1991) work backs this last point up. His work indicates that an atmosphere of uncertainty and disillusionment can be eradicated by instigating regular feedback sessions before and after the change programme. Without feedback, performance management systems cannot guide decisions or reinforce positive behaviour. If feedback and review sessions are programmed into the change process, change agents can use the information from those sessions to alter the change process as necessary.

The report has already shown that officers and non-uniformed staff were unsure about the implications of the change programme, feedback may therefore, have eased the situation and encouraged new beliefs and behaviour to have developed.

A lack of resources and the time constraints placed on the change agents undoubtedly affected management's ability to monitor progress and understanding before and after the brigade's restructure. Whilst the techniques listed below require great effort from those overseeing a change programme, the benefits, which include ensuring a change programme, the benefits, which include ensuring that the change is understood; that people are dealing with the change well and that the change is progressing as planned are worth the hard work:

· Focus groups and workshops : encourage debate and problem solving

· Management by walking about : senior management are available for staff to talk to.

· Team briefings : regular meetings with supervisory staff.

· Question and answer sessions : senior managers' host informal question & answer sessions for staff.

· Staff representatives collate feedback.

· Attitude surveys.

· External consultants monitor progress : External consultants host workshops and issue questionnaires. Some staff may be more open with outsiders.

ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE:

The report has shown that organisational culture was not identified as a barrier to successfully implementing the Brigade's restructure. The report has not been able to define the culture of West Sussex Fire Brigade but has, especially from reviewing the documentary evidence made available to the author, been able to identify various sub-cultures within the organisation.

The documentary evidence showed that the respondents were in favour of a restructure. Equally as important though were the indications regarding individual commitment to departments, beliefs about the role of the officer corps, perceptions about individual status and the specific individual agendas held by some respondents for the future of their careers and departments.

These points all became culturally based barriers that almost completely negated the impetus that had been created by the support for the change programme. Whilst there was an element of objectivity, what was evident from the documentary evidence was an interesting trend relating to personal interest and the defence of existing work practices:

· "I have restricted myself to comment only where I have concern."

· " I would like to express my concern about the restructure in relation to my position."

· "I am concerned about the additional work that will come my way after the restructure."

· "I have concentrated my comments upon the structure of my department and my role within it."

Clearly, the restructure challenged not only existing ways of working but also fundamental issues relating to office and personnel location. West Sussex Fire Brigade's overall culture can be described as being strong, i.e. it possesses;

· Characteristic approach to the corporate environment.

· Shared values.

· Role models.

· Rites and rituals.

· Networks - the "grapevine."

(Deal and Kennedy 1972)

Deal and Kennedy (1982) believe that strong cultures lead to effective organisations. The example considered by this research indicates that it was also a barrier to effectively implementing the proposals for change. Whilst the shared values and approach to the environment remained constant, rites and rituals ("the way we do things here") and role models were severely challenged. Without clear direction from the management team and a lack of a defined communication process, the organisational grapevine became the manner in which information was circulated throughout the brigade. Misunderstanding, uncertainty and ambiguity underpinned the general perception of the restructure proposals. Cultural strength had become a tangible force for resisting change.

Organisational culture is a multi-levelled concept. This is particularly true in this case study. At the surface are the observable behaviours, for example, how staff act around senior managers; group consensus regarding high levels of performance is viewed as the next level; finally is the level where beliefs, values and assumptions that cannot be described but affect the efficiency of the organisation exists (Schein (1985). These levels, coupled with the departmental groups within the organisation lead the report to conclude that the culture of West Sussex Fire Brigade is a complex notion. Whether or not it could have been managed in order to assist the Brigade Management Team drive the restructure through more easily is unclear from this report. What is clear however, is that it does not seem to have been considered as something which could either help or hinder the change process.

More research is needed in order for the management of the Brigade to ascertain the nature of the organisation's culture. The time constraints imposed on the change agents reviewed by this study meant that such research was just not possible. Such research would however, highlight how clear the link between culture and effective change might be for West Sussex Fire Brigade.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

The restructure considered by this report is now two years old. West Sussex Fire Brigade is about to embark on another programme of change which will mean alterations to its senior management structure and the review of other parts of the functional management system. This is also reflected by changes at County Council level of which the Brigade is part. These changes will mean alterations to work practices and to the location of certain post holders.

This is, therefore, an ideal time to review the management of change in the hope that it will create an organisation ready to face the internal and external environmental challenges of the next five years.

· When assessing what is driving change, it is important that those managing the process identify and are in agreement about the driving forces. A clear consensus about why the change is occurring needs to be arrived at before the idea is communicated to a wider audience.

· A management style that best meets the needs of the organisation and is adaptable enough to cater for the development of the change as it progresses needs to be agreed at the conception of the change programme. Consideration should be given to the environment in which the organisation exists when determining a relevant management style.

· The use of change models needs to be studied when embarking on change programmes in the future. Models provide managers with guidance on such issues as planning change and overcoming resistance to change. Transition curves assist with the assessment of how individuals will cope with change, whilst a force-field analysis will identify potential barriers to change. Thus the use of models is recommended to managers of change as key issues of the process can be examined and planned for.

· When nominating change agents, managers need to identify certain managerial and personal characteristics among the potential candidates. Nominations should not be made because of rank or position and the change facilitators should be adequately resourced. Where planned change is the approach adopted; consideration should be given to those chosen for this role to receive training in this area of change management. Ideally, the change agent's role should be a dedicated one, where this is not possible, the use of external change agents should be debated.

· A strategy for communicating change must be drawn up. The approach to communicating change must fulfil the requirements of the organisation. Whilst time consuming, face-to-face communication with small groups of staff should be considered in future change programmes. In order to avoid the feelings of ambiguity and disillusionment that were felt by the employees focused on by this report, a communications strategy must consider a variety of communications methods designed to reach the entire workforce. The strategy must concentrate on communicating new methods of working and why the change is occurring.

· Barriers to the successful implementation of a change proposal must be identified as soon as possible. Failure to do so will result in either a change programme, which at best is difficult to implement or at worst, fails completely. A consistent approach from managers of change will enable barriers to be established and agreed early in the process. In addition to a consistent approach, managers must also demonstrate their own commitment to the proposal. This concept will serve to identify potential barriers and strategies can then be drawn up to deal with them.

· The needs and concerns of the diverse groups that make up an organisation must be considered. Each group will be affected by a change programme in a different way and this must be addressed by those managing change. Assumptions must not be made that all groups will cope with change and move the organisation forward in a cohesive way.

· Managers need to consider the environmental issues affecting their organisation when devising a strategy for change and how that change fits with the overall strategy of the organisation. If no organisational strategy exists managers must consider the circumstances in which the body exists. Factors which will then support the proposal for change can be identified and utilised to progress the process.

· Managers must agree the goals of a change programme before it starts and review those goals as the change moves on. The goals must be seen as being worthwhile by those affected by the changes. The aims and objectives must be understood by all concerned. When agreeing goals, consideration must be given to reviewing and amending if necessary existing performance measures.

· A procedure for reviewing the change proposal as it progresses and after it has been implemented should be provided. The job of the change agent should not stop on the day that the change is implemented. Feedback procedures should be set up so that staff and managers can comment on the success or otherwise, of the change and highlight modifications that could be made to the initiative. Consideration should be given to using some of the techniques for ensuring meaningful feedback that were discussed in the conclusions of this report.

· Research should be carried out into the possibility of defining the cultural identity of West Sussex Fire Brigade before any further restructure is considered. Research of this nature will provide a valuable insight into the organisation and will highlight areas that may resist change and areas that can be used to support change. The use of the Cultural Web is suggested as a method of achieving this recommendation. Although time consuming, such research will prove to be invaluable to managers of future change proposals within the Brigade.

· The constraints of time and resources and how this affected the successful completion of the Brigade restructure are borne out by this research. This was further exacerbated by a degree of naivety regarding the implications of embarking upon a change management programme of this size.

It is recommended that before embarking on any similar projects, the Brigade Management Team would be well advised to consider exploring the use of an outside organisation with professional expertise in this field of management. Any cost implications could be justified by achieving a smoother, more effective transition.