Lake County Library District (LCLD)

Present Picture of LCLD The Lake County Library District has always prided itself with the fact that there are more library cards issued per capita in Lake County than any other county in the state. However due to short sightedness in the previous management approach Lake County Library District is in for a major change. Change is generally categorized into the following : 1. Administrative Change 2. Technical Change 3. Procedural Changes with respect to goals and services In this case, LCLD is headed for both administrative change as well as technical change to meet the requirements set down by the countys government. This has been done as the traditional management practices have left the LCLD in dire straits. LCLD currently need to overcome the following problems using effective change management : Implementation of computerization in an environment where until now traditional management was implemented. Traditional Management had underlined participation from employees in decision making about LCLDs working. Time and budgetary constraints brought upon by the county government to restore a level of professionalism within a system of this size. Resistance to change by employees, who are worried about job security if computerization is introduced. Over dependence on traditional working models has led to over staffing which has decreased the overall efficiency of the LCLD. Absence of inexpensive labor that was caused by the friction generated by the old management and the state university with respect to allowing university interns to work there.

1st Phase of implementation of change Now that we know the pressing issues at hand at LCLD we are left with four option to implement change : A. Implement computerization as a top-down change. Prescribing the necessary direction ourselves. B. Implement the change by involving all the employees in decisions about how to put the system in place. C. Implement the change by involving all employees in decisions whether or not LCLD should implement a computer system. D. Implement the change by involving a group of employees in decisions about how to put the system in place. Keeping all the factors in mind we have to choose the correct alternative that would lead to the successful implementation of change in this scenario. In this case , it is evident that we would opt for option A. Why option A We have selected A as the time span to implement the change is short i.e. one year. The top-down approach is ideal in this situation where decisions need to be implemented immediately as after this year we do not expect any increase in systems operations budget for a couple of years. Tangible evidence justifying this option are the state universities actions against LCLD and the state governments intervention by appointing a new head librarian whose expertise is implementation of computerized library systems. Due to this backing by the state, all power at the library is with the new head librarian justifying our selection of the top-down form of management. As the employees are not in the habit of participative management and as we have very little turnaround times, we should prescribe the necessary directions ourselves. Why not option B In case, we select option B, we would decide to implement change through delegation. We would need to call all the employees for a meeting where we would select the most active participants and have them serve on the implementation committee. This would lead to employees splitting into coalitions which are sharply divided about the task on hand. The committee is hence unable to agree on a plan until after important deadlines have passed.

Hence we do not recommend option B for this case because: Expertise about computer system implementations is not dispersed among the current workforce. LCLD employees are not used to participative management and may lead to more friction among the employees. Time is a major constraint in the current scenario to implement option B. LCLD has a fine image in the county and would not like to risk tarnishing it. Why not option C We would not like to involve the employees decisions about whether or not LCLD should implement computer systems. This is advisable as around 60% of the employees are resistant to this change. This resistant is brought about by staff inhibitions about how the computer systems would affect their job stability. As in the current scenario, it is imperative that we go in for the computer system implementation; we do not consider this option as a solution provider to our problems. Why not option D We do not consider option D in which we select a group of employees and involve them in the decision making about the computer systems because : It would create an atmosphere of favourism and would cause negative reactions from the remaining staff. There is little relevant expertise in the workforce. LCLD staff is not used to participative management and any delegation may lead to little or no progress in solving our problems. As time is of the essence, we have no time for delegation.

Course Instructors Response You have correctly decided that the top-down implementation scheme is the best. You now face several decisions about how to do this. Your first need is to decide how to phase the change. Which would you choose? A. Implement the change so that it is operational in the Live Oak branch first and then in the main branch and finally in the Crystal Lake branch. B. Implement the change so that it is operational in all the branches simultaneously. C. Implement the change so that it is operational in the main branch first and then in the Live Oak branch and finally in the Crystal Lake branch 2nd Phase of implementation of change After analyzing the options, we choose option A as the appropriate choice in phasing out the implementation. Why option A We have selected A, to implement the change in Live Oak branch first, then in the main branch and finally at the Crystal Lake branch. As the majority of the staff are in favor of the computerization, there would be less resistance to the implementation. This would ensure the smooth transition brought about by the change. On successful implementation of computerization at the Live Oak branch first, we could justify the changes to the suspicious members at the main branch and subsequently to the Crystal Lake branch where we would face the most the resistance. Also, if the roll out is done branch wise, it would ensure the smooth implementation of the change. Why not option B We wont be going for the implementation of change in a way so that it is operational in all the branches simultaneously because one of the powerful tools to a change is to implement it in phases. Phasing is preferred over this approach as Phasing allows the involvement of those most committed to change early and delays the commitment of those who are initially more reluctant. It allows those initially less committed to observe the effect of the change and reciprocate more favorable responses from them. It also allows those who are unprepared to go about the change to plan the roll out more efficiently when it approaches them.

Why not option C We would not consider option C as we can see that implementation of the change at the main branch first would run into fierce resistance from the staff there that are suspicious and unreceptive to the change. This would lead to a situation of conflict at the branch and would deter the changes from being rolled out at other branches.

Course Instructors Response It is a better idea to phase the implementation rather than attempting it all at once. Phasing facilitates the implementation of change for two main reasons. It allows a demonstration effect that shows the benefits of change on a smaller scale. It galvanizes opinion in favor of the change since observers will have evidence of its application. If we take a different option sequence, that would not be advisable. Starting with the main branch has two problems: The organization chart indicates that the main branch is the largest and its operations the most complex. It is not necessary to confront such a comparatively difficult situation right from the start. It is best to sequence the phases to be certain of early success. You are correct in phasing the implementation. This will enable you to demonstrate a small victory which will be held to the momentum of the change effort. Choosing the Live Oak branch as your test site is also correct for the personnel. They seem to be least resistant from the onset. Now, if you face the decision about how to announce the change. It occurs to you that you could introduce it with different levels of visibility and fanfare, which of the following you would choose: A. High Visibility: Call a meeting of all personnel and announce your plan for the implementation of the computer system. Simultaneously send out a press release to county newspapers that details the plan and promise better services after the system is operational. Solicit invitations to speak at community services about the change. B. Moderate Visibility: Call a meeting of all the personnel and announce your plan for the implementation of the computer system. C. Low Visibility: Tell the professional librarians your plan and ask them to communicate this to their aides and assistants.

3rd Phase of implementation of change After considering the given options and the situation under which the change has to be rolled out, we select option A as the appropriate choice Why option A To introduce and announce the change, it would be advisable to go in for high visibility i.e. call meeting of all personnel and announce the plan for implementation of complete system and reason for doing so. This will lend an opportunity to try to explain what is wrong in the current scenario and how the implementation of the new system would answer these inadequacies. The press release would ensure that library members are kept informed about the changes and that these changes are brought about for providing better services to the patrons. Speaking to community service groups would ensure better communication between the decision makers and those who are directly affected by the changes taking place. Why not option B Calling a meeting of all personnel and announcing the plan for implementation would not be sufficient as this may lead to confusion and resistance. This confusion could fuel more resistance. Also without informing existing patrons, they would find the changes too sudden or would not understand the underlying necessity for such changes. Why not option C Informing only the professional librarians about the changes would not at all yield results as majority of the professional librarians are either suspicious or uncommitted towards the change. The chaos, confusion and questions would be still prevalent. There would also be more detractors in this way.

Course Instructors Response A highly visible campaign of announcing your intensions leaves little doubt as to your resolve for getting the system up and operational in a year. Anything less than this and people may be apt to test your resolve or underestimate it. You choose option A correctly. You now need to decide what to do with the position of Community Service Director. Recall that this position was vacated by Mrs. Bs husband when the both of them retired. One option is to fill the position with a person who will continue to serve as the primary liaison between the LCLD and the community. Thus, the new person would spearhead such efforts as the Toy of Reading program and the Childrens Story Home program. This individual would also be responsible for arranging new co-operative ventures with other libraries in the county being linked by an integrated information resource system. Another way of dealing with the position is to change it to a position to Director of Library Information Systems. This will require a change in civil service classification but you have good reason to believe that this could be done without delay or opposition. The implications of these two options are as follows: 1. Replace Mrs. Bs husband with a new director of Community Relations. You will need to ask Alice Bishop to serve as primary details of the BIBLIOTEK system, so she possesses the necessary technical skills to act in this capacity. However you will have to be very involved with the change to the point of having the delegate almost all responsibility for community service to the new director. This option will enable the LCLD to maintain a high profile in its concern for community service. 2. Change the position to Director of Library Information Systems and fill it with a professional. This will enable you to bring in an expert on library computer systems. He/She will be prepared to handle the details of the change and the linkage to other library systems. This will free you to be more visible in the community and allow you more flexibility in dealing with your responsibilities.

4th Phase of implementation of change After analyzing the options, we choose option 2 as the appropriate choice in phasing out the implementation. Why not option 1 There are a number of issues when pertaining to the vacancy of the Service Directors position. In case, the new librarian is delegated with all the work, it would take a longer time as gaining a technical skill would be time consuming and unfruitful at times. As we have opted for high visibility through media coverage, a professional would be readily accepted as he/she would be identified with the change that he/she would bring in terms of betterment of services. As the professional brought in would be more technically sound, he/she could take on the work of linking the LCLD to other countys. This would not only be a more efficient way of working but would avoid disruption of regular services by diversifying the librarian into task he/she isnt capable for. Why option 2 Since there is a need of arranging new co-operative ventures with other libraries in the county and its evident that computerization is essential for this purpose as it will facilitate such ventures and ultimately the whole county would be linked by an integrated information system. Thus the idea of changing the said position to Director of Library Information Systems and appointing a professional is a good decision. Approving a professional at this time would also relieve me of the work overload. Moreover this will also lead to more visibility in the community for me where most of our patrons exist. As no responsibility is delegated, this decision would eventually enhance cohesiveness in the organization.