write a summary on these This has to do with the changes in the overall formal relationships within an organization. Examples of structural change include reorganizing departments or business units, adding employee positions, or revising job roles and assignments. These changes should be made to support broader objectives such as to centralize or decentralize operations, empower employees, or find greater efficiencies. Dimension of change- When considering how to assess the need for change in an organization, it can be helpful to think of three dimensions: the scope of change, the level of change, and the intentionality of change. The first, the scope of change refers to the degree to which the required change will disrupt current patterns and routines. Incremental change refers to small refinements in current organizational practices or routines that do not challenge, but rather build on or improve, existing aspects and practices within the organization. Common incremental change practices are LEAN and Six Sigma, which are used to find relatively small changes that can generate greater efficiencies in a process. An organization can improve its product-line efficiencies by identifying small discrepancies in process, then fixing them in a systematic way. Incremental change does not typically challenge people to be at the edge of their comfort zone. In contrast, transformational change refers to significant shifts in an organizational system that may cause significant disruption to some underlying aspect of the organization, its processes, or structures. Transformational change can be invigorating for some employees, but also highly disruptive and stressful for others. Examples of transformational change include large systems changes and organizational restructuring. Culture change often requires transformational change to be successful. Finally, a strategic change is a change, either incremental or transformational, that helps align an organization's operations with its strategic mission and objectives. This kind of change is necessary for an organization to achieve the focus it needs to make needed transfer missions and work it does feel to stay competitive in the current or larger organization, larger market environment, or societal environment. The level of change refers to the breadth of the systems that need to be changed within an organization. Individual-level changefocuses on how to help employees to improve some active aspect of their performance or the knowledge they need to continue to contribute to the organization in an effective manner. Individual-level change programs include leadership development, training, and performance management. Group-level change centers on the relationships between people and usually focuses on helping people to work more effectively together. Team development, or teambuilding, is one of the most common forms of a team change process. Organization-level change is a change that affects an entire organizational system or several of its units. Strategic planning and implementation is perhaps the most common type of organization-level change. Higher-level change programs usually require changes at lower levelsan organization-level change may require change at both team and individual levels as well. Intentionality is the final dimension of change and refers to the degree to which the change is intentionally designed or purposefully implemented. Planned change is an intentional activity or set of intentional activities that are designed to create movement toward a specific goal or end. Planned change processes often involve large groups of people and step-by-step or phase-by-phase activities that unfold over a period of time. Usually, effective leaders identify clear objectives for the change, the specific activities that will achieve those objectives, and the indicators of success. Assumption about change (i.e., deficit-based, abundance-based)-

Deficit-based change:- One common motivation for change is the perception that an organization may be in some state of dysfunction with significant and serious problems, somewhat like a patient in a hospital in need of serious medical attention. A dysfunctional organization may require transformational change, in which the fundamental assumptions, beliefs, and organizing ideas of the organization are thoroughly challenged and altered. This set of perceptions often leads to deficit-based change, in which leaders assume that employees will change if they know they will otherwise face negative consequences.

Abundance-based change:- In contrast, leaders may perceive that an organization is highly functional, much like an Olympic athlete or highly accomplished team. A high-performing organization may require incremental change as the organization continues to build on solid fundamentals to refine and add to its capacity for high performance. This set of perceptions often leads to abundance-based change, in which leaders assume that employees will change if they can be inspired to aim for greater degrees of excellence in their work.

Kotter's Change Model- Kotter's change model is one of the most widely used in organizations today. Generally, it aligns with mechanistic view of structure and thus it may be especially useful in organizations where there is a strong, hierarchical structure. This is an eight-step model that relies on a centralized, top-down process for creating planned change.

Establish a sense of urgency:- Managers do this by creating a narrative about why the change is necessary. Top managers often use diagnostic tools to gather data that supports the case for change. They strive to convince key organizational leaders and employees that the change is absolutely necessary. A common metaphor is to "create a burning platform," or to make it clear that the organization cannot survive if it continues doing what it has done.

Form a powerful guiding coalition:- Managers assemble a group of influential people to help shape the planned change. Ideally, the guiding coalition should represent the areas of an organization that will be affected by the change. The guiding coalition should become ambassadors for the change as it unfolds.

Create a vision of change:- The manager and guiding coalition together create a vision of the expected change. They outline the scope of the change, the reason for the change, and what will be better or different as a result of the change.

Communicate the vision:- Reach out to all members of the organization and communicate the vision for change. Ideally, they connect with all the key areas of the organization that will be affected. They clearly explain why the change is needed and how the change should unfold. If needed, they answer questions and clarify problems.

Remove any obstacles:- This step is intended to reduce the resistance to change and/or to provide the necessary resources to make the change successful. The success of this step helps to smooth the way for successful implementation.

Create small wins:- A very powerful way to encourage people to support changes to help them to see the path to success. Short wins signal to the organization that a change is possible and that tangible benefits will come once the change is fully implemented.

Consolidate improvements:- Small changes build up over time and become big changes. As the organization successfully moves toward implementation, it is important to consolidate and solidify successes. Managers should reinforce and celebrate small wins and milestones. The unfolding success of the change helps to convince all members of the organization that the change is real and will produce its intended benefits.

Anchor the changes:- In this step, the new norms and practices that accompany the change are standardized and refined. The mode of change moves from transformational to incremental. Refinements are implemented to fine-tune the change and to capture all the intended benefits.

Kotter's model is especially useful in situations where the desired change is reasonably predictable and where leaders are empowered to drive the change down through an organization. One challenge is that many employees may resist change if they have had no hand in shaping the plans. This is especially true if they do not fully comprehend the urgency of the change or the vision for the change. In this regard, it tends to be used when leaders hold a deficit-based view and are generally inclined to take a top-down approach from a conventional perspective. Still, where leaders need to clearly define and implement a large-scale change, Kotter's model may work very effectively.