VRD Industrys Problems - Case Study Example

Case Study Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 2 Introduction 3 Intervention Ladder of Inference 3 Intervention 2: Socio-technical system and team building through problem-solving 4 Intervention 3: Integrated strategic change 5 Designing intervention based survey 7 Evidence 8 Reference list 11 Introduction The paper assesses VRD industry’s problems and attempts to solve the problems using different interventions. Intervention 1: Ladder of Inference To manage systematic changes in an organisation, often organisation development interventions prove useful. The first intervention that has been used to solve the problems of VRD is Ladder of Inference, developed by Chris Argyris. The Ladder of inference illustrates that to reach a conclusion or draw inference it is necessary for follow the steps in the ladder that is, observing the available data, selecting the relevant data, affixing meaning to the data, making assumptions, developing belief and drawing conclusion and finally taking action based on the belief. The model further explains that when individual faces a particular situation they either take an action or jump to conclusion. In VRD, the implication of the Ladder of Inference can be explained as follows: the available data shows that the organisation lack strong leadership and employees are not ready to quit the status quo as they are unable to understand the need of a radical change and other factors such as ineffective communication, lack of innovation and change in management. From all these data, only those are to be selected that are relevant to organisational conflict in VRD. The data that are considered of high importance are change in management style, messy organisational structure and lack of availability of information to individuals. The assumptions that can be determined from the selected data are lack of effective flow of information in the organisation. Moreover, individuals are not involved in decision making process so they do not understand the problems in outside environment and the necessity for a change. From these assumptions it can be concluded that the main problem is not the resistance of employees but absence of communication in the system, which forces individuals to resist the sudden change. Hence, a belief can be developed that resistance of the employees will subside with open communication and greater involvement of them in decision making process. The action that can be taken by the management in this regard based on the developed belief is to have open conversation with individuals about the future strategies for organisational development and need for radical change and its effectiveness. According to the Action theory by Argyris, in critical situation like that of VRD the CEO and high management must employ productive reasoning over defensive reasoning as that will help them to bond better with employees (Argyris, 1985). Intervention 2: Socio-technical system and team building through problem-solving Many theorists and authors have supported the concept of organisational learning to mitigate organisational conflicts like the one prevailing at VRD. One of the important interventions of organisational learning is socio-technical system. According to the socio-technical system (STS) approach, work design should be such that it increases interaction between people and technology in the workplace. The STS integrates social aspect of employees along with the technical aspect of the work design to bring out greater productivity and employee satisfaction. This involves creation of self-managed teams, activities including job enrichment, job enlargement and job rotation where individuals get great exposure to the task they do, empowering individuals for task analysis and deciding strategies for process improvement. Socio-technical system along with team building approach can be useful in understanding the problems in VRD and solve them. According to Dyer, team building approach can be implemented for different situations, ranging from team building to organisational conflicts. He further identified situations that can be resolved with team building. Team building approach is useful when pattern of communication proves inadequate among individuals in an organisation (Murray and Millett, 2011). In VRD, transformation can be facilitated through team building. In a team, individuals try to understand and relate to each other. One of the important interventions of team building approach is team building through problem-solving. In problem-solving teams, team members do not question and find fault in each other’s capability; they discuss the problem as a whole and try to find an apt solution. In problem-solving teams, the management and employees leave aside the status quo and work towards the bigger problems such as, faulty production system, poor sales figure and depleting profit (Piderit, 2000). The management diminishes the hierarchical borders and explains to employees about the need of radical change from realistic point of view. The problem-solving approach helps to determine the causes of resistance among employees and reason those appropriately (Cummings and Worley, 2009). Inter-organisational trust in important in problem-solving teams, as it is lacked between management and VRD, it can be rebuilt through team building efforts. The main advantages of problem-solving teams are high level of interdependence, contribution towards mutual efforts to success, open flow of communication and shared goals and objectives. Team empowerment is one of the major philosophies that are used in these strategies to resolve organisational conflicts. It creates an open environment for discussion, decision making and operations between employees and management. Team empowerment makes individuals feel that they belong with the company and are participating in enhancing its welfare. By making VRD employees understand the need for change and allowing them to participate in decision-making, quality of work life can be improved (Kirkman and Rosen, 2000). Through problem-solving team and socio-technical system approach, it is possible for managers to locate the problems and determine the capabilities of employees; followed by implementation of appropriate job designs for them. Job design will ensure that tasks are standardised and creativity can be involved in challenging tasks. According Murray, team learning bridges gap between individuals and organisation. In team building efforts, team goals are determined through group interaction and individual objections are taken into consideration (Murray and Millett, 2011). In VDR, managers, CEO and employees can together form a problem-solving team and discuss company future plans and objectives to take decisions with mutual consent. In this way, the decision will not be one-sided, with little scope for resistance. Through participative interaction, new ideas can be generated and their consequences can be easily understood. The senior employees can share their experience with the new CEO, while he can explain them about the rapid changing environment, technology innovations and growing competition. He should take their opinion, instead of imposing decisions on them. Managers with participative leadership skills should be hired and necessary training should be imparted. Intervention 3: Integrated strategic change The third approach that can be applied in the case of VRD conflict is integrated strategic change. The concept of integrated strategic change (ISC) was developed by Worley, Hitchin and Ross (1996). It tries to eradicate the problems associated with traditional change process. The traditional change process entitles the top management to determine and delegate decisions. It gives little importance to operation-level employees for decisions related to change. As a result, conflict arises. ISC, as the name suggests, integrate all levels of management in the decision making process pertaining to strategic decisions. The process is participative in nature; hence, involves all individuals and groups present in an organisation. ISC ensures that in an organisational change, support and commitment from every member of the organisation is considered for achieving desired success. In VRD, extreme resistance was noticed when the new CEO tried to implement changes through traditional approach. The implementation of ISC approach can be helpful in VRD as it will involve all members from every management level in the decision making process and decision will be taken in an integrated manner, considering unanimous opinion. The main interventions of ISC are: 1. Assessing the current state of organisation 2. Determination of the organisational capabilities 3. Rationalising importance of culture 4. Framing strategic change plan 5. Implementation of the strategy The above mentioned interventions have been implemented in following section while discussing how an integrated strategic change process can be developed in VRD industries. Performing strategic analysis: The strategic analysis attempts to determine the willingness of leaders at senior management level and employees to adapt to the change. The change the CEO is willing to implement is a long-term objective hence it is important that employees are supportive in this situation. According to Greiner and Schein (1988), two major dimensions of ISC are keenness of managers and team leaders to accept change and that of the team members to pursue their leader’s initiatives. Exercising Strategic Choice: If the strategic change is designed through a Venn diagram, then the common zone that integrates the objectives, outcome of strategic analysis and the available option, is the best strategic choice available to the organisation. In VRD, exercising strategic choice means evaluating various ways that can ensure achieving the long-term objective. Prior to this, it is necessary to determine current state of affairs regarding the organisational structure and design; so that the future structure can be defined well. Moreover, leaders and manager’s willingness should be considered as they are crucial to a strategic change. Since it is impossible to sustain the previous management style, the company need to determine new style while weighing its methods, tools and techniques. Design strategic change plan: In VRD, employees need to be informed about present situation of the company and changes that are to be incorporated for improving its market position. The company need to explain to employees that with current structure and design, they are running in loss and this may result in discontinuity. Explaining clearly the situation will help in reducing resistance and rigidity among employees. Once understood by all members of the management, new organisation design should be proposed and the structure should be planned out. After final approval of the design, an outline of the activities, such as, type of changes and relevant cost, should be set. Implement the Strategic Plan: The last step is to implement activities to initiate the change. In the company, it may be possible that the change may bring out resistance from individuals but the company have to manage the resistance with perseverance and logical and reasonable answers. In implementation, managers need to integrate concepts such as organisational and personal learning, team adaptability and team building. Designing intervention based survey Serial no. Problem Identification Low Evidence Moderate Evidence High Evidence 1 Growing cost of production yet depleting sales and growth 1 2 3 4 5 2 Conflicts between management and employees 1 2 3 4 5 3 Unclear objectives and low commitment towards goals 1 2 3 4 5 4 Lack of leadership, communication, innovation and creativity 1 2 3 4 5 5 Employee empowerment 1 2 3 4 5 6 Resistance towards change in organisation’s policies 1 2 3 4 5 7 Individuals are threatened by new changes and modifications in the system 1 2 3 4 5 The survey checklist has been prepared keeping in view the interpersonal problems prevailing in VRD. This survey checklist includes various interventions that has been proposed earlier in this paper. The survey will be helpful in identifying problems that can be resolved with team building process. As market capitalisation and earning profit is the main objective of an organisation, first variable that has been considered in the survey is ‘growth and sales’. The second variable can be useful in determining strength or level of intra-organisational conflict. ‘Unclear objectives and low commitment’ is included in the survey as it was observed that in VRD, employees are not provided sufficient information regarding the change, except directions towards the change. Additionally, it is necessary to understand whether employees are satisfied with their leaders; whether open communication and creativity is encouraged. Alongside, the survey is also expected to determine the cause of resistance and value of employees in the organisation. Evidence The Ladder of Inference concept was first proposed by Chris Argyris. According to him, individuals often act on an available piece of information by deciding from their past experiences. The ladder involves a series of mental activities that helps an individual to reach a conclusion and act regarding the same. The decision through this process can be positive as well as negative and often influence by personal biasness. In the ladder of inference, individuals consider personal learning as a basis for decision making (Argyris, 1985). A number of times it happens that the conclusion drawn by individual depends on the knowledge they have gather unconsciously or sub-consciously over the course of time. The personal biasness involved in this concept does not make it the ‘best-fit’ approach to a problem. In VRD, if every individual takes in consideration the Ladder of Inference method to decide regarding organisational change then it is possible that the conflict may grow further as an individual’s mind is a black box and different inference can be drawn by different individuals. Hence, team building can prove to be a better intervention from employee-management perspective. According to Waddell, Cummings and Worley (2004), team empowerment and socio-technical system approach are major interventions of Organisational Learning that can be useful while implementing strategic changes in an organisation and facing resistance in the process. STS helps in improving overall work quality by including team building and work design techniques. Honold (1997) defines team empowerment as a practice of sharing power, rewards and information with employees so that they are capable of taking decisions regarding problem solving and improving operations. Team empowerment ensures that employees are adequately able to take decisions related to organisational development, resource allocation and better competency. According to Kirkman and Rosen (2000), team empowerment is the best weapon an organisation can have against various business risks and threats. In VRD, lack of information and limited communication has rendered employees reluctant and resistant to changes. Problem-solving teams ensure that a feeling of potency, autonomy, sense and meaning is developed in individuals’ life. Team building is referred to a wide range of pre-planned activities, which help individuals and groups in an organisation to improve performance and interpersonal and problem-solving skills (Waddell, Cummings and Worley, 2004). According to the authors, problem-solving team activities facilitate restructuring and strategic changes by increasing communication, mitigating confusions and conflicts and improving productivity. In VRD, lack of mutual trust and high resistance towards management decisions has led to employee and management conflicts. Waddell suggested that conflicts and resistance can be a constructive step towards organisational changes as these foreground negative feelings in the form of argument, complaint and other form of hostility. In the company, post resistance management should adopt team building activities so that trust and interest towards organisational development can be instilled among employees (Waddell and Sohal, 1998). Strategic change, as defined by Greiner and Bhambri (1989), is an important intervention by top management in order to set forth radical changes in organisation and overcome existing inertia. According to the authors, strategic change is necessary when business environment is phasing towards a major change pertaining to modification and alternation occurring in technology, processes and structures. VRD needs a major strategic change because competition is growing from China and Taiwan and the technology and structure of the company have become obsolete. As a result, company is facing discontinuities in the market and growth and sales have declined. It was pointed out by Wiersema and Bantel (1992) that the top management have to be proactive so as to overcome organisational inertia for implementing strategic change. The CEO of VRD industries needs to create a positive work environment to effectively facilitate change. Many authors have suggested that in scenarios such as that of VRD, integrated strategic change is an appropriate intervention. ISC begins with strategic analysis of the organisation and its elements. Greiner and Schein (1988) suggested that since ISC integrates every variable of an organisation, analysis is mainly based on two factors: involvement of managers and other team leaders and willingness of employees to conform to their strategies. According to them, incorporating radical changes in an organisation become a smooth process, once the lower management and top management are willing to work together. Reference list Argyris, C., 1985. Interventions for Improving Leadership Effectiveness. Journal of Management Development, 4(5), pp.30-50. Cummings, T. G. and Worley, C. G., 2009. Organization development and change. Boston: Cengage Learning. Greiner, L. E. and Schein, V. E., 1988. Power and organization development. USA: Addison-Wesley. Honold, L., 1997. A review of the literature on employee empowerment. Empowerment in organizations, 5(4), pp. 202-212. Kirkman, B. L. and Rosen, B., (2000). Powering up teams. Organizational Dynamics, 28 (3), pp. 48-66. Murray, P. A. and Millett, B., 2011. The influence of learning behaviour on team adaptability. International journal of learning and change, 5(4), pp. 256-267. Piderit, S. K., 2000. Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of management review, 25(4), pp. 783-794. Waddell, D. and Sohal, A. S., 1998. Resistance: a constructive tool for change management. Management Decision, 36(8), pp. 543-548. Waddell, D., Cummings, T. G. and Worley, C. G., 2004. Organisation development & change. USA: Thomson. Wiersema, M. F. and Bantel, K. A., 1992. Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management journal, 35(1), pp. 91-121. Worley, C. G., Hitchin, D. and Ross, W. L., 1996.  Integrated strategic change: How OD builds competitive advantage. Boston: Addison-Wesley Publisher. Read More