Dimensions of Organizational Capacity for Change

Name

Institution Affiliation

According to Barnett & Carroll (1995), organization capacity for change is a crucial element towards the success and development of an organization. They view the dimension of communication systems as significance in ensuring conveyance of crucial information and transforming knowledge into actions.  I believe communication systems are important in information sharing and quick decision making. Example, proper interaction between the purchasing department and the finance section result to cost effectiveness during procurement.

Barnett & Carroll (1995) point trustworthy leadership as the second dimension.  Other than being competent, leaders must promote honesty and prioritize organizational interests.  On the other hand, for employees to maintain a positive change, trust must also be maintained to their leaders. I view this important because it results in maximum utilization of time as a result of minimal supervision. Example, reduced time in preparation of payrolls and record updates.

Capable champion is the third dimension. Barnett & Carroll (1995) argue that, for a positive change to be observed within an organization, a certain group of experienced group of employees must be involved. To spearhead organizational change, it requires an extra effort. Therefore, it is significant because the experienced group of employees takes part in bringing the positive and quality change within the organization, I view it important because change takes place with minimal difficulties. Example, deployment of the best technical experts to effect change in data protection and control.

Fourthly, the dimension of involving the middle management. The author views...