McKinsey 7S Framework.
The Four Frame Model
Elaboration of and Critique to 7S Framework.
Impact of these change models on modern business productivity.
It is noteworthy that change is an important element of any corporate practice. Moreover, a business can survive only when it evolves constantly. The changes within an establishment can be of any form like novel technologies, operational costs, progressions in science, and so on. Change initiatives should always be incorporated for a decent reason within the setting of progressing the company's objectives, and goalmouth (Stouten, Rousseau & De Cremer, 2018). This report is going to critique on two change models named as 7S framework, and the four-frame model. Furthermore, it focuses on both the strengths and limitations of one change theory. Additionally, it discusses how such models or theories of change can lead to organizational productivity in the contemporary environment.
McKinsey 7S Framework refers to a tool that evaluates the business's organizational design by focusing on the seven chief internal components named as strategy, structure, style, shared values, systems, skills, and staff. Moreover, it identifies if these seven elements are successfully aligned and enable the company to attain its goals. It is a useful technique to identify and solve corporate problems. It can be said that by considering how each component influence on others, it is probable to take an all-inclusive method to corporate change. Within an organization, if a change leader feels that their company could be more fruitful, they can utilize this framework to assist recognize the elements that need to change (Demir & Kocaoglu, 2019).
This model of change management refers to a concept that splits any particular company into four frames named as structural, human resource, political, and symbolic. These four lenses are considered as guides that can be utilized to assess a complex situation and define solutions. Further, it provides the viewpoints about the main causes behind an issue, prospective ways to progress, and approaches to attain the defined goals. Moreover, this theory, given by Boleman and Deal, enables a business to gain simplicity of the tasks at hand and establish a roadmap for the most effective and suitable policies for attaining success (Bajis et al., 2018). The structural frame emphasizes on the ‘how’ of change. Further, it mainly focuses on approach; descriptive tasks & responsibilities; setting assessable goals; and generating systems & procedures. It is compatible with companies and managers that deal with evaluation and logic. The human resource is concentrated on the people, their needs, and their worth within the company. Furthermore, it focuses on giving team members the influence and opportunity to accomplish their professions well. Another lens is political that focuses on the significance of addressing encounters between people. It is noteworthy that leaders need sponsorship, networking, and arbitration skills. Moreover, the symbolic frame is based on the theme that the way human determines and establishes meaning in an unclear and disordered world (Reinholz & Apkarian, 2018).
The 7S Model was developed in the year 1980s by Tom Peters, Julien Philips, and Robert Waterman who were consultants of Mckinsey. This model has been extensively utilized by the consultants and professors as the most renowned strategic planning tools since its introduction (Libenth, 2017). The main focus of this framework is on the Soft Ss (Human Resources) instead of focusing on customary mass production tangibles of substructure, capital, and apparatus to be means of greater corporate performance. It is noteworthy that the 7-S model can be useful in numerous situations. It is mainly useful to enable organizational change and to aid incorporate novel strategy (Alam, 2017). Moreover, it helps to recognize how each area might alter in the forthcoming. It is also useful to simplify the merger of companies. This model comprises of seven areas of the company that is segmented into hard and soft areas. From all seven components, strategy, systems, and structure are the hard one that is much simpler to recognize and handle as compared with the soft one. Contrarily, the soft elements are style, skills, and staff that are harder to handle, and are the basis of the company and are more probable to establish the constant competitive edge (Ravanfar, 2015).
The elements of the 7-S framework are explained below:
The diagram of the 7S model is illustrated below:
In this figure, the shared values come in the centre that impacts all the other elements of the model connected and unified with each other. Moreover, this model recognizes the irregularities between numerous components and offers a strategic action plan to reach the anticipated state of the company. This can further be reviewed by focusing on the below steps:
Indeed, every model or technique does not exist without certain limitations. Likewise, the 7-S model also has specific restrictions stated consequently. This model disregards the significance of the external environment and shows just the most vital components in this model for elucidating the interdependence of the important procedures and causes within the company. Moreover, it does not elucidate the concept of corporate performance obviously, and efficiency. It has been critiqued for deficient sufficient realistic indications to assist their explanation. Further, it is also hard to evaluate the degree of fit with correctness positively. Besides that, it is being critiqued for missing out the complicated areas wherein the real gaps in conceptualization and implementation of strategy may occur (Galli, 2018).
Both of the above-stated models named as a 7-S framework and four-frame model lead to enhance productivity within modern organizations. It is because such models determine how the business will attain the targets and goals. In contemporary times, organizations are becoming more and more complex with the evolution of technology and new processes Aithal, 2017). Furthermore, it can be said the training and development of human resources as per the corporate change and environment forces individuals to effectively work to endure and enhance their efficiency (Salvarli & Kayiskan, 2018). These objectives can be simply suitable fulfilled using the change models stated above. Moreover, it is also true that with more competition in the contemporary competitive setting, companies are looking for means by which they can market their goods and services internationally. This has given way to globally consistent products rather than locally adapted ones. It necessitates adjusting a company’s strategy, structure, and other things to remain competitive. When a company knows what structure it must adopt, what systems it must use, what leadership style it must express, what skills will be required in the global setting, and today's business, it will be able to better manage the things and can attain higher performance. This can only be done using the change theories and models like the 7S model and four frame models (Khattak, Ramzan & Rehman, 2015)
From the above report, it can be concluded that the 7S model and the four frame models are both effective in managing and determine the changes in the organization. It can be said that by considering how each component of the 7S model impacts others, it is probable to take an all-inclusive method to corporate change. The four-frame model of change management refers to a concept that splits any particular company into four frames named as structural, human resource, political, and symbolic. Furthermore, it can be inferred that the 7-S model disregards the significance of the external environment and shows just the most vital components in this model for elucidating the interdependence of the important procedures and causes within the company.
Aithal, P. S. (2017). A critical study on Various Frameworks used to analyze International Business and its Environment. International Journal of Applied Engineering and Management Letters (IJAEML), 1(2), 78-97.
Alam, P. A. (2017). Measuring Organizational Effectiveness through the Performance Management System and Mckinsey's 7 S Model. Asian Journal of Management, 8(4), 1280-1286.
Baishya, B. (2015). McKinsey 7S framework in corporate planning and policy. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Science Society and Culture (IJIRSSC), 1(1), 165-168.
Bajis, D., Chaar, B., Basheti, I. A., & Moles, R. (2018). Identifying perceptions of academic reform in pharmacy using a four-frame organizational change model. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 14(10), 921-930.
Demir, E., & Kocaoglu, B. (2019). The use of McKinsey's 7s framework as a strategic planning and economic assessment tool in the process of digital transformation. PressAcademia Procedia, 9(1), 114-119.
Galli, B. J. (2018). Change management models: A comparative analysis and concerns. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 46(3), 124-132.
Khattak, A. N., Ramzan, S., & Rehman, C. A. (2015). Organization Development through effective Hiring System: A phenomenological study of business organizations. Journal of Commerce (22206043), 7(4).
Libenth, R. (2017). Application of Mckinsey 7s Models Approach in Effective Monitoring of Revenue Collection in TRA: Case of Kinondoni municipality (Doctoral dissertation, The Open University of Tanzania).
Mitchell, B. C., Fredendall, L. D., & Cantrell, R. S. (2015). Using McKinsey’s 7 S Model to empirically examine organizational effectiveness among the NBA teams. International Journal of Management & Human Resources, 3(1), 69-85.
Ravanfar, M. M. (2015). Analyzing Organizational Structure based on the 7s model of McKinsey. Global Journal of Management and Business Research,5(5), 43-55.
Reinholz, D. L., & Apkarian, N. (2018). Four frames for systemic change in STEM departments. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1-10.
Salvarli, M. S., & Kayiskan, D. (2018). An Analysis of the McKinsey 7-S Model and Its Application on Organizational Efficiency. International Journal of Scientific and Technological Research, 2422-8702.
Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating management practice and scholarly literature. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752-788.
Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Management Assignment Help
Proofreading and Editing$9.00Per Page
Consultation with Expert$35.00Per Hour
Live Session 1-on-1$40.00Per 30 min.
Doing your Assignment with our resources is simple, take Expert assistance to ensure HD Grades. Here you Go....
My Assignment Services acknowledges the academic integrity guidelines prescribed as per Australian Universities to ensure that the services, sample material, and study resources available on our website, in no way are utilised to commit academic misconduct of any type. All users of our services must adhere to and affirm acceptance of all conditions elucidated in our policy document on academic integrity.