System analysis

Other models such Checkland’s model is based on purposeful activity. The weakness of this model was that it relies on perspectives or views to explain change management. Nadler’s change system analysis. Peter Checkland’s Soft Systems Management (SSM) model focuses on the client’s ability to learn quickly and adapts to change. The model is useful when teaching the management on the organization purpose and the purpose for change. The SSM model is simply a systematic methodology of learning and solving problems that are systematic in nature (Soft System Model 2007).
Senge’s Dance model is based on the principle that, “we learn best from our experience, but we never directly experience the consequences of many of our most important decisions,” (Peter Senge 1990, p. 23). The model reinforces feedback and stabilizing (similar to Lewin’s view on feedback). Senge advocates the use of diagrams called ‘systems maps’ to show key elements of a system and their interactions. The Holonic Change model is based on organizational evolution to levels developing high capacity to make intentional change decisions (Evans, J & Thach. , L, 2000).
Conclusion and recommendations Organizations need to implement models that are able to capture most of the highly probabilistic occurrences that touch on their future continuity and profitability. Through the use of models such as the Lewin’s force field analysis model and the Weisbord’s model, change management can be effective and positive. Utilizing these models in the creation of a predictive environmental system can be a great success in harnessing the energy of change and the strengthening of the organization and its employees. In reviewing literature on change management, it is apparent that change management is poised for change in itself.

In order to keep up with the dynamic business environment, the systems of analyzing and predicting change must also be dynamic. Organization theorists must engage a meta-analysis to design and embrace future models that are relevant to specific organizational context. References Argenti, P. (2002). Crisis communication. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 20-28. Evans, J & Thach, L (2000). “Towards the Next Generation Change Model: An Exploration of Change Models as They Relate to Organizational Complexity and Dynamics. ”
Viewed from:http://www. gaian. com/articles/Towards%20the%20Next%20Generation%20Change%20Model.pdf McShane, S. L. , & Von Glinow, M. A. (2008). Organizational behavior (4th ed. ). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Rob, R. , & Yang, H. (2010). Long-term relationships as safeguards. Economic Theory, 43(2), 143-166. Viewed from: ABI/INFORM Global. Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization, London: Random House Soft System Model (2007) “Systemic methods. ” viewed from: http://www. systemicmethods. com/methods/index. htm Westbord’s Six-Box Model. (2005). Viewed from: Http://chapters. astd. org/SiteDirectory/HPI/… /Weisbord%20handout_F. doc