Management of Change in Lufthansa Airlines Essay

Management of Change in Lufthansa Airlines - Essay ExampleSecondly, there must be allocation and mobilisation of resources so that the necessary changes may be executed. According to Beer and Eisenstat (2000, p. 32), it is increasingly becoming in truth critical for the corporate world to excel at strategic change management so that they could shell their competitors. This paper then will discuss corporate restructuring and privatisation in Lufthansa Airlines. The Type of Change and Why It Was Introduced Lufthansa was near going under in 1991 owing to accrued large debts. However, in a span of octonary years, the company turned around its fortunes to become a world leader in the aviation industry. In order to turn around its fortunes, the company had to institute radical changes. After instituting changes, which was the first step in the process, more allied changes had to follow so that the future of the company could be assured. The management of the company resolute to execut e change at four different levels, which were modelled around the concept of renewal sustenance at four levels. However, after eight years of its turnaround, none of the processes that were started were completed. The most challenging bit was sustaining the progress introduced finished change. It has been pointed out by Boxall (1996, p. 66) that most processes of change do non work because of an absence of attitudes geared towards change. It follows then that irrespective of how important or good a change process is, the desired goals are not achieved. Similarly, Beer and Eisenstat (2000, p. 35) are of the opinion that those change programs that do not work are usually based on theories of change that are flawed. In this case, it is important for change management to recognise their limitations in terms of cogency to institute changes from the top. Instead, change managers should be involved in the creation of the climate of change that is in in tandem with the companys developm ent goals without relying on any specific solution (Armenakis and Bedeain, 1999, p. 302 Schuler and Jackson, S. 2001, p. 247). There is usually a difference between execution philosophy of change and process management philosophy. On the one hand, the designer is of the assumption that leading change is the primary task in the process of change while, on the opposite hand, the latter places emphasis on the main task of change as planned implementation (Burnes, 2009, p. 76). The place setting in Which Change Took Place During the change process, it becomes apparent that the basis of principles and values are dictated by underlying cultures (Worren, Ruddle and Moore, 1999, p. 279). The conditions that exist in the American companies are different from those of European continent in relation to criteria that are important for change strategies (Theodorakopoulos and Figueira, 2012, p. 863). This is particularly pertinent to HRM (human resource management) because it is involved with contemporary techniques of management, also primarily dealing with etiquette and values. There has to be a differentiation between strategies HRM and their role during the change process. It has been observe that HRM is deeply entrenched in the American culture, which counter-runs the prevalent In Europe culture of social responsibility, communism and pluralism (Saunders, Mann and Smith, 2008, p. 1110).