Each organization has its own background perceptions, ethics, values, history, and ambitions. Therefore, a “one size fits all” change management process may not work in every organization. We must assess and adapt our process to fit the backgrounds and philosophies of each organization.
Given this understanding, we need to research and assess when, and if, an organization is ready for change, and then adopt a process to best facilitate the change process. Choose a Middle Eastern organization at which you are currently working or one in which you are familiar. (If neither is possible, conduct an internet search to identify a Middle Eastern organization which has gone through a transformation process within the last three years.) Then address the following:
Provide a brief summary of the organization (its history, culture, industry, product, and services).
Explain why a change was needed. What is the gap between the present state and the desired future state?
How strong is the need for change?
What is the source of this need? Is it external to the organization?
If the change does not occur, what will be the impact on the organization in the next two to six years?
Explain the change process that was created and implemented, identify the outcome of the change in terms of success, failures, cultural outcomes, and human resource changes.
Human Services to set a benchmark price for clinically comparable drugs that are interchangeable. Though these changes may produce more cost-effective medication, a drawback may be the lack of market diversity. Rather than having one pharmaceutical company dictating the price, the federal government is dictating the price thus creating a lack of competition. Having one body dictate everything may create tensions between pharmaceutical companies and the government; thus, change might not be made at all. Next, pharmaceutical companies spend a substantial amount of money on marketing rather than research. At this point, we are unaware of the exact cost breakdown of pharmaceutical company revenue. There is no requirement for documentation to show the difference between profits, money used for marketing, and money used for research. Often times, marketing costs are categorized into research funds. By enforcing transparency, we may have better insight into the way drug prices are set and can determine whether set prices are justified. For the past 20 years, leading drug companies earned more than 70% of their sales from products they did not develop. More transparency with prices and clinical outcomes would allow physicians, patients, and payers to understand the true value of a treatment. Ultimately, transparency is about ensuring patients have access to the drugs they need, and creating a sustainable, vibrant, and innovative healthcare system for everyone. However as with our previous proposal, we took into consideration potential drawbacks to having drug pricing transparency. If we become stricter with the way finances are reported, pharmaceutical companies may in turn resort to increasing drug prices, leading to an additional rise in costs and spending. If manufacturers are required to disclose drug pricing, the process of gathering and disseminating this information may become time intensive and potentially result in less profitability to the manufacturer (ncbi article). A decrease in profitability may cause a decline in innovation and the desire to conduct innovative research.>GET ANSWER