ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION IELS IN COURTS

In the modern society, the application of information technology is no longer an issue in the practice of law and administration of justice. The problems are how the lawyers will effectively apply technology to increase efficiency in litigation. In the contemporary society, the autopsy of successful cases depends on effectiveness in the use of technology. Benefits of the IELS in Courts The organizational innovation of embracing IELS in the courts has various benefits. The upgrade in technological innovation in the courts will enhance the process of digital imaging. According to Heidenreich and Handrich (2015), resistance to organizational innovation might be illustrated through deviant behaviors. In this context, there are possible strategies to manage resistance to organizational resistance. Some of these strategies to deal with organizational deviance include efficient communication, negotiation, and co-optation.

Effective Communication Effective communication would be applied to deal with potential organizational deviance against the adoption and implementation of Integrated Electronic Litigation System. Effectiveness in communication requires four major components that are interworking appropriate to formulate shared meaning in the court system and administration of justice. The negotiation process will include the formulation of tradeoffs so that the issues of the resisting individuals are given consideration and the necessary attention (Heidenreich & Handrich, 2015). Negotiation will be applied if it is clear that the implementation of IELS in the court will not be successful because of a party’s recommendation to include various aspects of the system. Manipulation and Co-optation The other strategy to deal with potential resistance in the implementation of IELS in the court system is manipulation.

Also, manipulation goes hand in hand with co-optation. As written by Anderson (2016), manipulation, in this case, involves the selective application of information and the conscious formulation of events. There will be the provision of a training curriculum aimed at offering training in the innovation’s provisional procedures (Dominick et al. The training curriculum will describe the role of classification, its technical processes, legal requirements, and professional association standards for all the stakeholders. The organizational innovation of adopting IELS in courts will be influenced by the court’s organizational culture. Hence, there is the need to evaluate the alignment of the new system and the organizational context. This phase will include all the primary stakeholders in determining the alignment of the proposed method to the court’s resources, goals, staffing, and organizational designs (Grusec & Hastings, 2014).

Other leaders experience difficulties when supporting consensus-driven cultures. Some leaders are even unwilling to contribute towards the implementation of intellectual capital for the court (Dominick et al. Hence, there should be advocated for competent leaders who are capable of soaring through the trial and error methods. This is because inappropriate undertakings in the leadership strategies may result in unsuitable learning curves which are at the expense of the court. The top leaders in the court should be utilized to play leadership roles in implementing the organizational innovation on the court. These forms of interactions will assist the leaders to obtain a quick view of what their followers require. In turn, it is vital in matching their innovation implementation techniques with the other stakeholders’ capabilities.

The leaders need to be transparent and accountable to their followers in the implementation of the organizational innovation of IELS in the court. When presenting the recommended innovation to the stakeholders, the leaders should be accountable for what works appropriately and any issues in the implementation phases. The aspect of accountability in leadership means that the leaders are committed to fixing issues to obtain the best outcomes (Mokhber et al. The transformational leaders will also be crucial in increasing psychological empowerment. They will build self-confidence and individual development of their followers in the court (Dominick et al. They also lead to innovative organizational climate towards embracing proposed innovations. The transformational leaders will affect the creativity of the stakeholders and rebuilt the features of the court and replace it with innovative organizational climate (Mokhber et al.

The leaders will also be vital in marketing the success of the recommended adoption of IELS in the court. When the innovation is commenced, the court should move into a transition phase, which lasts for a specific period. In this phase, the leadership of the court should ensure that there are sufficient direction and reassurance to all the stakeholders. Lastly, as noted in the Lewin theory of organizational change and innovation, there is the need for refreezing when implementing the IELS in the court (Maguire & Duffee, 2015). If the change is accepted and signs of concrete implementation indicated, the court will become stable again. Hence, the stakeholders are required to refreeze and operate under the new system. For instance, the court can cooperate with the police force when implementing the Integrated Electronic Litigation System.

Since the police force is one of the components of the criminal justice department, it should collaborate with the court in applying the IELS. The police officers are presented as the law enforcers, and in upholding the nation’s laws, they are required to collaborate with the courts in providing justice (Haas et al. This means that the court may consider co-operating with the police force to implement the IELS. The police might be crucial in providing information about the frequency of criminal activities by certain individuals. Also, leadership roles should be applied to enhance the efficiency of the proposed innovation in the court. The organizational theories as presented in the Lewin force field model and McKinsey 7-S model should also be considered in the implementation of the innovation.