Mohammed Bin Rashid Housing Establishment’s Change


Based in Dubai, the government-owned Mohammed Bin Rashid Housing Establishment (MBRHE) is a primary industry player in housing development and general financial services. Despite having been in operation for more than a decade and is very successful in the market, the company had not qualified for ISO Certification due to various reasons. MBRHE was facing serious challenges in balancing transaction documentation and general accounting.

The reason behind this situation was probably the lack of evidence-based and properly established transaction plan, which determines cost balancing and prioritisation of transactions for its services. Reflectively, the company was losing almost 6% of its total revenues on fraud.

The challenge at this point was how to develop timely and proper transaction documentation, and forensic financial auditing strategy since the quality of financial reporting depended on the availability of better financial monitoring measures. In addition, the stakeholders did not comprehensively understand the factors affecting their business relationship with the company since the reporting model was weak. The company introduced stronger internal control as the primary change to reverse the above trend. The change process was a success due to a strategic change management model adopted by the company, as will be discussed in the next sections. The paper attempts to establish the positive side of change in the MBRHE.

Research Methodology

In order to understand the change projects at the MBRHE, the researcher adopted a quantitative approach through a research case study. Using a case study method will allow the researcher to focus in greater detail on one organization. A questionnaire-based survey (see appendix 1) was conducted to determine the issues stated in the research objective. The questions were mostly closed-end question that requires the respondent to select from a given set of choice.

The target sample was 59 respondents from top management in MBRHE. The actual respondents of the study were 20 top managers in Mohammed Bin Rashid Housing Establishment, 19 top managers from Emaar, 10 top managers of Dubai properties, and 10 top managers in Nakheel. The researcher used primary data collected through surveys and secondary data collected from the company website, articles, books, case study, and site visit. The research questions touched on the model that can be used when implementing change, strategies that can reduce resistance to a minimum, and positive and negative side of implementing change.

Company Reasons for Implementing the Change

According to Burnes (2003), the success puzzle for quality improvement and organizational change implementation management strategy delivery operates on the periphery of the soft skills involving the timeless vision of organizational principles. Besides, defining the value of the business, determining requirements, clarifying the vision, building teams, mitigating task, resolving issues, and providing direction complete with the response projections which shall be addressed in the proposed quality service delivery system (Abrell-Vogel & Rowold 2014).

Quality planning is an important policy that aims to promote long term success in business objectives. Furthermore, quality planning is focused on benchmarking of efficiency of the operations and service delivery initiative, accreditation initiative, and staff performance and skills assessment initiative. In the appreciative inquiry4-D cycle analysis, the strategic planning process may integrate the 360-degree feedback against performance benchmarks to ensure that organizational performance and employee performance are congruent to the change goals of an organization (Armstrong-Stassen 2005).

Effective implementation of project changes by an organization requires the full involvement of the stakeholders at different levels. This makes them understand the reasons behind their involvement and benefit from such projects. Additionally, it gives them opportunities during forums to give their opinions and make possible recommendations on what and how it should be conducted (Goodman & Truss 2004). However, such changes may fail to create an opportunity that may allow for negotiations, collaborations, or cooperation. Such experiences depict an approach towards change in a more open manner through consultations (Weick & Quinn, 2009). This makes the stakeholders feel the recognition and develop an attachment to the organization.

In MBRHE, the information flow department was experiencing serious challenges in disseminating information and controlling the flow of the same. This was a sign of dire weakness in the firm. The human resource management systems in the organization seemed to be dangerously out-of-date and reluctant in transforming the communication breakdown into an efficient, reliable, and relevant communication channel (Grant 2011).

Opting for a quick fix to this problem would have only provided a bandage solution and cover-up series inconsistencies, which were responsible for the massive loss of resources such as time, labour, and technology in information dissemination across the company departments. The employee turnover had grown to extreme levels in the company. The rates were high that it was almost reaching the double mark as compared to other firms offering the same services. The statistics revealed that as a result, the human resource department was losing a lot of time in managing this database since the information and communication channels between departments operated below standard level.

In order to reverse the worrying trends indicated above, several feasible recommendations were made. To begin with, the transaction reporting, documentation, and auditing department were to be improved to ensure independence in reporting. Besides, self-sufficiency model was to be incorporated as a potentially effective strategy for reviewing the implication on policy creation platform in financial accountability.

Also, to streamline information and communication flow, the firm was to reduce dependence on in house communication channel and outsource a better system, which would ensure that information management and dissemination are balanced across its departments. When properly handled, it was expected that the proposed change would address the issue of strategic management by encouraging proactive communication and authenticity of decoding and encoding channels.

The Process of Change/Change Model

The company adopted the bench-marking initiative through the appreciative inquiry4-D cycle as a change management model to streamline service delivery to ensure efficiency via a proactive quality mitigation channel that reports the progress of the intended quality improvement system. According to Chrusciel & Field (2006), significant quality improvement can only be achieved if the scope of quality is broadly understood within the organization and the employees are committed to using of their quality knowledge to continuously improve work processes and practices.

Benchmarking initiative reinvented the efficiency in service delivery stages in terms of interaction with the customers, line of visibility, line of internal interactions, and support processes for the MBRHE organization (Daly, Teague, & Kitchen 2003). All these stages were vital for improvement in the quality of service delivery. With relation to the MBRHE, the change process analysis is summarized in the diagram below.

The appreciativeinquiry 4-D model.


The organization has a stable employee engagement strategy which involves continuous training on patient care and proactive performance.


The current team charter at the organization recognizes talent and outstanding performance among the employees through rewards and promotion. The reward and promotion are enshrined in the current organizational quality principle charter.


The team priorities are designed and implemented continuously for every six months of operations. The key strategies in the team priority alignment include patient care module, counselling support, and proactive logistics execution to ensure organizational sustainability.


There are set down deliverables that are measured against the expected performance level for all personnel. This is measured within the 360-degree feedback channel as a prerequisite for optimal performance. The achievements of the organization and employees are benchmarked within the general performance charter against previously recorded output.

The success puzzle for quality improvement and organizational change implementation management strategy delivery for the MBRHE operated on the periphery of the soft skills involving the timeless vision of organizational principles. Besides, defining value of the business, determining requirements, clarifying the vision, building teams, mitigating task, resolving issues, and providing direction complete the response projections were addressed in the proposed quality service delivery system (Green 2009).

Quality planning was an important policy that aimed to promote long term success in business objectives. Furthermore, quality planning was focused on benchmarking of efficiency of the operations and service delivery initiative, accreditation initiative, and staff performance and skills assessment initiative. As indicated in the results of the appreciative inquiry4-D cycle analysis, the strategic planning process integrated the 360-degree feedback against performance benchmarks to ensure that organization performance and employee performance were congruent to the goals of the MBRHE organization (Holten & Brenner 2015).

Resistance and Handling Opposition

Limitations brought about by the change process are normally pegged on lack of proper handling of the process by management. This is not always true, as some disadvantages cannot be avoided. A major disadvantage of change is that, more often than not, it leads to resistance. In the case of the MBRHE organization, the risk was higher as they were looking for ways to cut costs. Some employees were worried that proposed change would leave the organisation in a worse off place than before (Lind & Stevens 2004).

With the need for the MBRHE organization to change, comes along the need for a large financial outlay. For a company that has been reporting losses, this was very hard for the management who were afraid that they will have to look for other ways of raising the money, as the revenues they get cannot even cover the costs of production (Kitchen & Daly 2002).

In order to address the above challenges, the change implementation process internalised employee’s feelings, attitude, and perceptions to assist the management in reorganizing the change process. This was achieved through creating a positive attitude among the employees to produce a positive influence towards the change strategy and plan. The change managers bridged the gap between employees during organizational change to provide a positive union between management and new policy as perceived by the employees (Oreg 2006).

In order to restore the faith of workers, the two factor theories were employed by the change managers to boost the morale of all employees. The theory asserts that the needs of workers may be divided into two categories, including hygienic factors and motivators. Hygienic factors are issues that affect the satisfaction of workers while motivators are factors that are integral pertaining to the jobs (Mayfield 2014). The complete employee inclusion in decision-making provided a platform for individual cohesion, positive attitude, and feeling towards the change at the MBRHE organization.

Critical Success Factors of Change Management

From the data gathered, the supervisors interviewed identified the aspects of communication, expectation management, commitment, and positive attitude as responsible for the success of the change process at the MBRHE organization. The change process underwent a testing phase to ensure it was foolproof. During the test phase systems, the system was used experimentally to ensure that the software has no faults, that is operating according to specifications and in the way users expect (Matos, Simoes, & Esposito 2014).

This activity had three parts namely clarification of application, feasibility studies, and approval of application. The key aspect of the process analysis was to understand all the important facets of the company and the components of the change. The critical success factors of change management in relation to the MBRHE organization are summarized below.

  1. Expectation levels: Employee’s inclusion in the decision-making process during change process increased the level of expectation with minimal resistance to the elements of the change. Each employee was prepared to provide efficient services without the feeling of burden before and after the change.
  2. Commitment: The management created flexible rules to enforce an organizational change to accommodate slow and fast learners. Each employee was trained to be committed to his or her job description thereby, increasing the level of commitment to the organization change process.
  3. Level of communication: The level of cohesion between the staff and management was strengthened when the employees are included in the decision-making process during change management (Grant 2011). The level of communication was directly proportional to the success of the organizational change.
  4. Positive attitude: Employees inclusion in the decision-making process during organizational change created a positive attitude towards the organizational change. A positive attitude improved the communication level in the organization during and after the change process.


In conclusion, the success of any change management plan depends on the acceptance and the progress monitoring system. With the support the stakeholders, the change process at the MBRHE was implemented successfully through the appreciative inquiry4-D cycle as a benchmarking initiative. Building positive attitude, commitment, communication, and managing expectations made the change process at the MBRHE successful.


The change managers should embrace a consultative approach to ensure that potential success factors, which guarantee smooth and successful change process, are followed. This can be addressed by introducing an accreditation initiative to establish the relevance of the change initiative (Weber & Tarba 2012). Basically, accreditation initiative functions on the need awareness as part of confidence mitigation in an organization (Robbins, Millicent, & Jones 2010).

The accreditation is aimed at satisfying employees’ needs through building confidence in the change image as necessary to demystify any negative perception towards the change. Accreditation initiative as an aspect of change management refers to activities which are employed to promote and maintain interest towards a proposed initiative. The assurance will aimed at handling issues that might affect the change process, especially in the dynamic MBRHE organization.

Appendix 1

Questionnaire Survey

What is your gender? Tick where necessary.

  • Male
  • Female
Gender Number count Percentage
Male 59 100%
Female 0 0%

What is your age?

  • 25-35 years
  • 35-45 years
  • 45 years and above
Age Number count Percentage
25-35 years 9 8%
35-45 years 25 46%
45 years and above 25 46%


  • Higher/senior/top management
  • Middle Management
Job Position Response Percentage Response Count
Higher/senior/top management 72% 40
Middle management 28% 19

How did you participate in the implementation of stronger internal control mechanisms?

What strategies did your team used to minimize resistance to the change?

  • Stakeholder training
  • Stakeholder communication and assurance
  • Stakeholder inclusion as part and parcel of the change
  • All the above
Opinion on level of acceptance Response Percentage Response Count
Stakeholder training 5% 3
Stakeholder assurance 5% 3
Stakeholder inclusion 10% 6
All the above 80% 47

What were the positive sides of the change?

What were the negative sides of the change?

In your opinion, what is the level of acceptance of the change?

  • Highly Accepted
  • Accepted
  • Neutral
  • Not Accepted
  • Highly Not accepted
Opinion on level of acceptance Response Percentage Response Count
Highly accepted 70% 43
Accepted 25% 13
Neutral 5% 3
Not accepted 0 0
Highly not accepted 0 0

Reference List

Abrell-Vogel, C & Rowold J 2014,”Leaders’ commitment to change and their effectiveness in change – a multilevel investigation”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 900-921.

Armstrong-Stassen, M 2005, “Coping with downsizing: a comparison of executive-level and middle managers”, International Journal of Stress Management, vol. 12, no. 2, pp 117-141.

Burnes, B 2003,”Managing change and changing managers from ABC to XYZ”, Journal of Management Development, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 627-642.

Chrusciel, D & Field, D 2006,”Success factors in dealing with significant change in an organization”, Business Process Management Journal, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 503-516.

Daly, F, Teague, P & Kitchen, P 2003,”Exploring the role of internal communication during organisational change”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 153-162.

Goodman, J & Truss, C 2004, “The medium and the message: communicating effectively during a major change initiative”, Journal of Change Management, vol. 4, no. 3, pp 217-228.

Grant, R 2011, Contemporary strategic management: An Australasian perspective, John Wiley and Sons Australia, Milton.

Green, M, 2009, Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools, and techniques of organizational change, Wiley, New York.

Holten, A & Brenner S 2015,”Leadership style and the process of organizational change”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 2-16.

Kitchen, P & Daly, F 2002,”Internal communication during change management”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 46-53.

Lind, B & Stevens, J 2004,”Match your merger integration strategy and leadership style to your merger type”, Strategy & Leadership, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 10-16.

Matos, P, Simoes, M & Esposito, M 2014,”Improving change management: how communication nature influences resistance to change”, Journal of Management Development, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 324-341.

Mayfield, P 2014,”Engaging with stakeholders is critical when leading change”, Industrial and Commercial Training, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 68-72.

Oreg, S 2006, “Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change”, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp 73-101.

Robbins, T, Millicent, B & Jones, M 2010, OB: The essentials, Pearson, Melbourne.

Weber, Y & Tarba, S 2012,”Mergers and acquisitions process: the use of corporate culture analysis”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 288-303.