Survivor Syndrome - Essay Example

Survivor Syndrome INTRODUCTION The financial standing of organizations worldwide weakened owing to the drastic effects of the economic downturn which struck the world economy in 2008. Initially my organization seemed to remain safe within the shield of long term contracts which were valid for several more months until the renegotiation process took place, but it was obvious that the crisis had devastatingly affected our clients, and it instigated them to reconsider the terms of the contracts at the time of renegotiations, resulting in a cutback in premiums offered at the same quantity and quality of service, which my organization had to accept in order to cope up with this sudden loss of finance in the time of no alternatives. Costs and expenditures throughout the business were reassessed and ample of savings were generated, but this endeavor was insufficient to handle the demand of the situation, leading to the consideration of the least favorable option- downsizing. DOWNSIZING Downsizing is a widely known tool which is utilized by organizations as a response to some critical situation in which the financial condition of the business requires immediate improvement: such as a response to merger or takeover; or upgrading of the market status in time of technological change; the restructuring of the organization in order to improve efficiency; or simply following the philosophy of ‘smaller is better’ (Mirabal and DeYoung, 2005, 39). However in the case of my organization, this tool was used as a last resort following a menacing economic recession, therefore cutting costs was the main objective behind the harsh step. Downsizing basically refers to the reduction of the number of employees working in a firm by layoffs, attrition, redeployment or giving early retirements to the workers, however it must be noted that this tool should be used in a strategic manner and not haphazardly, therefore planning must take place well before the downsizing plan is implemented, it should be a part of the strategic management plan of every business regardless of the need or not, since it would give the business a start off in case the need arises, thus it is better to be prepared in order to control the aftereffects of this tool, such as the most well known affect on the individuals known as the ‘survivor syndrome’ and the other negative effects of downsizing on the financial matters (Sahdev, 2004, 166). According to Fong and Kleiner, downsizing results in excessive workload for the remaining employees in form of longer working hours, the pressure from the administration to put in overtime efforts, and the increased burden due to additional tasks being added to the job description of the survivors without any addition to their pays, they are also required to increase productivity by working at a faster pace (Fong and Kleiner, 2004, 9 – 10). However, my organization did not include the downsizing aspect in the strategic management plan, and thus the entire implementation process was ad hoc, which resulted in mass confusion and misinformation on part of both the administration and the employees, it was sheer luck that the redundant staff did not question the process and silently accepted the decisions due to their understanding of the situation of the organization. As according to Mirabal and DeYoung, the organization should undertake all the right steps in the downsizing process in order to minimize the consequences, which could negatively affect the core competencies, productivity and the behavior of the employees in the organization (Mirabal and DeYoung, 2005, 39), but since this strategy was not implemented by my organization therefore we need to focus on measures that could minimize the aftereffects of sudden and unplanned downsizing. SURVIVOR SYNDROME AND MY ORGANIZATION Organizations worldwide are experiencing changes in their operational matters as a result of the advent into the era of technology which has brought about extreme unpredictability in business decisions, thus questioning the long held principle of job security being an underlying feature of employee contract. The entire concept of security has become an exception rather than a reality, since there is no assurance that a firm or even the industry would continue to exist in the near future, thus making the concept of consistency pretty much elusive in contemporary times, hence as the operations and workings of organizations evolve over time, it leads to downsizing, and the several negative effects which follow. Massive academic literature has been devoted to the study of the emotional and psychological impact of downsizing on an individual, the affect now commonly referred to as the ‘survivor syndrome’. It is generally accepted that the employees who remain within an organization when it has undergone downsizing also suffer the implications as profoundly as those who have left, these survivors may feel insecure of their position, and become cynical about their work, resulting in demotivated and demoralized remaining workforce (Pepper et al., 2003, 481-491). This pertains to the loss of trust between the management and the employees, and often due to the fear of further restructuring of the organizational structure which could lead to their dismissal, or it could be a mixture of both concepts. Regardless of the reason behind this emotional condition, the continuing development of stress, anxiety and insecurity adversely affects the productivity and performance of the employees (Baruch and Hind, 2000, 29 – 30). This was quite visible in my organization, since it was never communicated to the remaining employees that the downsizing process had ended, instead they were made to start work immediately, and the return to their duties without any help from the administration resulted in a performance degradation, and the entire scene of downsizing became a hushed up act which nobody spoke about, this further deepened the aggrieved situation of the workplace. The survivors were merely holding onto the employment due to no opportunity elsewhere owing to the severe economic conditions, their morale had suffered a shock, and their productivity had went down the lane, they were furthermore forced to put in additional work without increased compensation, which worsened their already demotivated state of mind. This practice of ignoring the aftereffects rather than reintegrating the workforce and gaining their confidence on part of the management was the major factor contributing to the dire condition of my organization. SURVIVOR SYNDROME- A MANAGEMENT MYTH ONLY? Studies conducted throughout time have devoted considerable attention to the concept of the survivor syndrome, but there is a dilemma which the researchers face pertaining to this issue, that whether this phenomenon is inevitable or is a mere result of improper handling of the downsizing activity. According to the study conducted by Baruch and Hind in a procedural manner, it was revealed that the survivor syndrome was not a myth but a phenomenon which is conditional upon the measures undertaken by the management following the downsizing to restore working conditions and induce stability and consistency in the environment which could either make or break the employees morale. If the management of an organization makes the extrication of fear and anxiety from the workers’ minds a key issue, and thus initiates a fair and decisive selection process by the involvement of the trade union, in addition the process should seem generous such as offering redundancy and retirement packages to the employees, the communication process should also be kept direct and the management should be easily approachable in order to avoid the survivor syndrome from taking effect. Furthermore, those who have to be kept must be given the feeling of importance and their significance in the organization must be communicated to them in a proper manner so as to boost their morale. Lastly, feedback should be attained and the measures should be introduced to remove any remaining fear and anxiety from the minds of the workers (Baruch and Hind, 2000, 30 – 35). Furthermore, according to Travaglione and Cross, the survivor syndrome could be prevented through effective management on part of the administration, they do not deny the existence of the syndrome, but state that it could be avoided if preventive measures are employed (Travaglione and Cross, 2006, 10). This entire process was not implemented in my organization, neither was communication proper and direct, and nor the management undertook any sort of regenerative practices, which resulted in the presence of the survivor syndrome in the workers of my organization. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT AND REDRESSING IT Downsizing results in the damaging of the psychological contract of the employees with the management of an organization, this contract is not written, it is an acceptance of an agreement between the two entities of a relationship of trust. This contract is unique since it evolves with passing time and is voluntary, therefore it is informal and subjective to changes, and it also has the negative side of being used as a means of exploitation of the employees or attaining undue generosity from the management. Downsizing of the workforce results in damages to the security and stability that this contract provides to the employees and it is agreed upon widely that the effects of the violation are felt and suffered more by the employees than the employers, largely because the employees do not have any power at the macro level of the organization (Sahdev, 2004, 166; West, 2000, 7). This presents the need to redress the psychological contract in order to avoid any negative impacts on the productivity and performance of the employees. The approaches adapted must be designed according to individual mindset of the employees, and should be subjective as according to the nature of the contract, otherwise some employees would feel being left out of the regenerative process and this alienation would trigger the survivor syndrome. The contract should shift from being one of mutual reliance and dependence to that which is centered upon the principles of self reliance and acceptance of changes and transitions in the work environment (Sahdev, 2004, 166 – 167). It must not be ignored that employees who survive the downsizing process are affected by the redundancy process, since the stress of losing a job is next to the stress experienced as a result of the death of a relative or friend, and this could drastically affect the performance of the survivors (Appelbaum et al., 1997, 281). The organization is responsible to manage the claims which the employees present forward as a result of stress-related problems they suffer post downsizing practice. The redundancy survivors can make a number of claims to the organization’s administration which must be handles with due care and patience, in order to be successful in these claims, the employee must ensure that the employer has breached the duty of care that they must provide to its workforce, and due to this breach of law, the employee has undergone personal suffering, this injury must also have been a reasonable and foreseeable result of the treatment done by the employer, if these conditions are not met then the employer is not liable to fulfill the claims of the employees. The employers must carefully monitor and control the amount of workload levied on the remaining workers and the duties they are asked to perform, otherwise they could be proved liable under the Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (People Management, 2008). INCREASED STRESS AT WORK AND DIMINISHING MORALE Stress at work is one of the major causes behind work problems such as absenteeism, lost productivity and diminishing performance and morale. The anxiety and fear related with job security is the fundamental factor behind work related stress; this fear is induced in the employees mostly by the downsizing practice undertaken by the organization. According to Employee Benefits/HSA Healthcare research studies 2005 it was revealed that approximately 12.8 million lost working days in a year were due to stress (Employee Benefits, 2005, 15), which is massive enough to affect the overall performance of the organization and hampers its progress in achieving the organizational objectives, however companies tend to ignore this critical issue and only about 10% companies worldwide take any initiative to implement policies which would tackle this anxiety and mental trauma amongst their employees or create a stress-free work zone, therefore continuous support from the organization is essential to overcome such problems (Employee Benefits, 2005, 15 – 16). Many organizations and analysts believe that the loss of productivity or diminishing performance and morale is not necessarily the result of the downsizing process, but it could be attributed to other factors such as relationship problems, financial stress on the mind of the employees or any family related dilemmas, but it still remains a baffling question and is yet to be explored. However, according to Robert Karasek’s job strain model, the crux of the stress and the affect on physical and mental health of the employees occurs when they are exposed to working conditions of increased workload and low levels of control and decision making, and the lack of participation on the part of the administration to rectify the negative consequences of their enforced working pressures ( Karasek, 1990). This seems to be one of the major causes behind the negligence of my organization in taking any rehabilitative measures, the non-belief in the concept of the survival syndrome and the denial of their responsibility of the induced stress, anxiety, fear and depression in the employees, and the overtime working hours, the negative working conditions, the stressful workplace environment and the loss of contact amongst the employees and management which resulted in the survivor syndrome taking effect. My organization should have undertaken proper preventive measures once the downsizing process was implemented, they ignored the following of procedural steps in the entire process, and to worsen the situation, they also ignored taking any post downsizing corrective measures. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is evidently visible that the menace of the survivor syndrome has struck my organization, resulting in demoralization and de-motivation of the workforce; therefore in order to improve the working conditions and bring the organization out of this hard time, the management must undertake port-downsizing measures which should repair the psychological contract, and create a stress-free work zone. According to John Putzier there are four ways in which the organization can use to get the remaining workforce back on track: the communication should be kept open and easy, in the form of meetings or direct counseling, trust should be reestablished and hence the reliance on grapevine should be reduced since it becomes hyperactive during downsizing and results in misinformation; ‘Family Days’ could be celebrated so that the employees could feel less stressed and the family feels a part of the job process, this would remove the stress imbued by the family-work gap; the employees should be addressed to during lunchtimes, over a good meal, so that they feel relieved and part of the process, this would also establish trust between management and workers; lastly, the administration should focus on measures which would lighten up the work environment and reduce the stress levels, fun ideas and activities should be undertaken which are tailored according to individual specifications (Putzier, 20). According to Appelbaum and Donia, the informative measures implemented by the organization pre and post downsizing would considerably reduce the stress levels and the aftermath of the downsizing, effective communication is the key in realistically overcoming this negative situation for my organization (Appelbaum and Donia, 2000, 348). Furthermore, according to Baruch and Hind, a change program should be implemented, which should create awareness amongst employees that transition was absolutely necessary and the organization feels their stress, efforts should be taken to repair the psychological contract through introduction of best practice in terms of policies and effective communication on part of the employer, such that the employees feel a sense of belonging (Baruch and Hind, 1999, 303 – 304). Since nobody is aware of what the environment would bring about next, resulting in unpredictability regarding the economic conditions, therefore the organization should undertake efforts which continually work for the employees’ development, the skills knowledge and resources of all employees should be maximized such that they feel a commitment to their work (Kaye, 2002, 38). If my organization implements this post downsizing efforts, it could substantially improve the working atmosphere and the financial standing of the company. References Appelbaum. S H and Donia. M (2000) ‘The realistic downsizing preview: A management intervention in the prevention of the survivor syndrome (Part 1)’. Career Development International, 5, 7, 333 - 350 Appelbaum. S H; Delage. C; Labib. N and Gault. G (1997) The Survivor Syndrome: Aftermath of Downsizing. Career Development International, 2, 6, 278 – 286 Baruch. Y and Hind. P (1999) ‘Perpetual Motion in Organizations’. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 2, 295 - 306 Baruch. Y and Hind. P (2000) ‘Survivor Syndrome- A Management Myth?’. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15, 1, 19 – 45 David Gibson (2008) Helping Staff to recover from redundancy survivor syndrome. www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/law Employee Benefits (2005) ‘Rising Stress is a Corporate Blind spot’. Centaur Communications, December 2005, 15 - 18 Fong. K and Kleiner. B H (2004) ‘New Development concerning the effect of Work Overload on Employees’. Management Research News, 27, 4 – 5, 9 – 16 Kaye. B L (1998) ‘The Kept on Work Force’. Training and Development, March 1998 Edition Karasek RA, Theorell T. 1990. Healthy Work. New York: Basic Books Mirabal. N and DeYoung. R (2005)’Downsizing as a strategic intervention’. The Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, March 2005, 39 - 45 Pepper. L; Messinger. M; Weinberg. J and Campbell. R (2003) ‘Downsizing and Health at the United States Department of Energy’. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 44, 481 – 491 Putzier. J (2005) Moving Past Survivor Syndrome. Executive Excellence,19, 1, 20 Sahdev. K (2004) ‘Revisiting the Survivor Syndrome: The role of leadership in implementing downsizing’. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13 (2), 165 – 196 Travaglione. A and Cross. B (2006) Diminishing the Social Network in Organizations: does there need to be such a phenomenon as ‘survivor syndrome’ after downsizing. Strategic Change, 15, 1 – 13 West. G B (2000) ‘The Effects of Downsizing on Survivors: A Meta-Analysis’. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Accessed August 11th 2010 from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-04202000-14520000/unrestricted/new-etd.pdf Read More