The Role of Individual Employees in Embracing Change - Dissertation Example

? Change: Research ment: the role of individual employees in embracing change can prove to be problematic to the running of an institution. Rationale: the running of a company is dependent on many factors such as the company’s policies and managerial strategies, the company’s infrastructure and above all the employees of the company. The satisfaction of the employees is as valuable as the infrastructure in regard to production. In the event of change, most managers focus on the company’s ability to handle the change in three main ways, infrastructure, strategy and productivity. Noted, some managers do attribute the productivity of the company to employees and, therefore, take steps to prepare the employees for change. However, the ability of an individual to perceive change goes beyond mastering new principles while maintaining productivity in the face of new policies and technologies. The personal disposition of an employee plays a crucial role in successfully adopting changes implemented. Psychologists are clear on the differences in personality and how they affect working skills and managerial skills (Brunstein 2001, p.83). Individual characters are indeed beyond the scope of the company; however, the company can maintain these diverse characters for the smooth running and subsequent integration of employees in the course of a change. An employee’s motivation and morale are crucial to the productivity of a company. Motivation and morale can be high or low as a result of a change. External or internal locus of control will determine the modes of motivation necessary for the individual to be productive. In light of this, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation will determine the success of changes in a company. The leadership of a company is responsible in ensuring that proposed changes appear in a positive light. Therefore, the personality of the individual at the position of leadership will determine the interpretation of the changes (Brewster 2012, p.108). Interpretation of changes in a company also relies on the perceptual capabilities of not only the persons in leadership but also of the subordinates. Perception is dependent on the level of education of an individual, their personality types, and their level of motivation. In retrospect, the success of change implementation can be at the disposal of individual employees in which case their failure to be integrated can result in the failure of the company to integrate change (Clark 2000, p.41). Research question: Is the slow integration or failure thereof of a new policy, strategy or technology in an institution dependent on failure of the system or on the individual’s ability to integrate and, therefore, conform to change? Is the individual motivated or demotivated by change and how do they perceive change? What is the managerial level perception and interpretation of change? Change is necessary for the effective running of an organisation (Handy 1996, p.70). The mangers perception of change: a “good” leader does not impose changes. Managers do is to trust that the workforce is capable of navigating its way around huddles caused by the change. After interpreting the requirements of change and providing the necessary equipment and policies that come with it, they retire to their managerial cocoons. This is not an expert thing, but the autonomy the manager entrusts the workers at this point is crucial to the running of the organisation. The organisation’s ability to cope with change has no universal formula (Handy 1996, p.72) because pressure arising from change affects organisations differently. In the same way, individuals do not react the same way to change, but their collective reactions will determine the course of change in an organisation. The desire for individuals to take personal responsibility for their careers is apparent in the current working trends. Individuals advance their education when they get jobs for the sake of promotions. People now pay interest in the running of organisations they work for in various ways. Some buy shares; others take the time to learn the strategies of the organisation and not just for legal reasons. Employees are aware that their actions and omissions in regard to following company protocol will bear consequences whose burden they will bear. However, there is no gauge to measure individual integration of an employee. Therefore, when an organisation falls due to policy inefficiency, introduction of new technology and strategies and factors external to the organisation, the management takes the full blame. This is logical because the management is responsible for the planning and execution of change and should, therefore, take the blame (Daft 2010, p.23). Charles Handy describes the process of change to take a Sigmoid Curve shape; in which case, there is a possibility that management may avoid experiencing a down turn hence the need to introduce a new strategy as a previous one peaks. Shear and tear of psychological commitment in light of progressive subjection to continual forces of change. The skills of the manager will make or break the organisation. Indeed managing someone and managing oneself is two different things. Hence the manager is subject to personal conflicts in the process of change while trying to avoid the same conflict on subordinates (Gensse 2007, p.18). Personality types: (Seligman 2004, 299) the Holland typology is the assumption that person’s characteristics attract them to certain jobs. In which case, the theory assumes that this person is capable of coping with the challenges that come with that job. Holland emphasises on knowledge of self in which case a person has a clear identity and, therefore, a defined focus in regard to motivation work and achievement thereof. The society is extremely dynamic, and as changes spur so does the need for an individual to redefine themselves or their choices. (Seligman 2004, p.298) Personal Environmental Correspondence Theory, the person and the work environment need to be congruent for the person and the organisation to be successful. He further states that personality traits and motivations should be matched to the working environment characteristics and rein forcers. He then describes adjustment as both active and reactive. Reactive mode workers attempt to change themselves while in active mode; workers attempt to change the environment. This theory examines the possible reactions of employees in light of change and their attempt to adjust. However, there is the need to describe results that occur after reactive or active modes. Secondly these theories focus on job suitability and career management. Contrary to popular belief, there are no equal opportunities at the workplace. This fact is as a result of factors such as prejudices based on several factors. The main cause of prejudice is the individual’s perception. Perceptual distortions may lead to Halo effect, Horn effect labelling Stereotyping and figure ground ambiguity. These misconceptions can lead an individual to be confused on how to fit into the environment. Prejudices on the manager’s account are the failure of the system; however, they are not sufficient to warrant the failure of progressive change strategies (Statt 2000, p. 43 & 44). Philosophy, in analysing truth, focuses on perception as a main source of data. The relativity of truth is due to distortion in perception. In the same way, the theories that describe personality are relative hence they are not universally applicable. Managers and fellow employees may look to such theories to interpret a situation in which case this may distort the person’s ability to cope with change. Individuals do not derive influence from rational observable factors. It is up to an individual, to make choices that will enable them to cope with change (Statt 2000, p.44) Therefore, this research focuses on human experience, perceptions and interpretations hence phenomenological in nature. “Individuals goals and perceptions are crucial in the act of interpretation (Earl & Kemp 1999, p.280)”. An inductive approach in this case is more appropriate as the aim is to explain failure or success of changes in regard to human behaviour (Proctor 2006, p.60). Methods used: 1. Interviews 2. Questionnaires 3. Sampling method Sampling framework: The research will involve distribution of 30 questionnaires to 6 companies. Two will be local based such that their transactions are within the country. Another two will involve dealing with foreign persons such as is the case of hotels. The other two will be companies or institutions that rely heavily on machinery, and other modes of technology such as computers. The two local based companies with little or no foreign ties and not heavily reliant on technology will represent non changing entities. The second category of companies dealing with tourists and trading in foreign currency will represent the changes within and without the company. Finally, the two companies reliant on technology will represent the change as a result of change in technology. The interview questions will include the analysis of the work history of the individual. Secondly, how the individual deal with change within the institution, departmental shifts or moving from one institution to another (Zichi 2000, p.46). Technical problems: there is a possibility that the questions answered within the premise of the company will denote biased leanings as an employee is afraid to appear disloyal to their employer. In sight of this, the interview section will cover any discrepancies. The respondents will not be from the six companies, and they will not be interviewed on the basis of where they work but on the basis of their work experience. Interviews will involve purposively selecting individuals. The main focus of the interview will be to get the opinions of people outside their working environment (Zichi 2000, p.46). Ethical problems: changes made within an institution are not merely in line with protocol but also to stay ahead of the competition. Most companies prefer to keep such strategies a secret, or in cases where people are aware of these strategies, the company will not willingly confess to be applying them. It is the duty of the researcher to keep such information privilege in the event that they stumble upon this information. However, the interviews will require that the researcher come into contact with the respondent. It is imperative that the researcher keeps their emotions and opinions separate from the objectives of the research (Zichi 2000, p.38). Bibliography: Brewster, C., 2012, Handbook of Research on Comparative Human Resource Management, Massachusets: Edward Elgar Publishing. Brunstein, I., 2001, Human Resource Management in Western Europe, London: Walter de Gruyter. Clark, J., 2000, Human Resource Management and Technical Change, New York: Sage Publications. Daft, R. L., 2010, Understanding Management, New Jersey: Cengage Learning. Earl, S., Kemp, S., 1999, The Elgar Companion to Consumer Research and Economic Psychology, New York: Edward Elgar Publishing. Gensse, C., 2007, Ethical Management - Efficient Management, Time to Change Paradigm, New York: Lulu.com. Handy, Charles., 1996, The Changing Work of Organizations, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Proctor, E. J., 2006, Why Science Matters: Understanding the Methods of Psychological Research, New York: John Wiley & Sons. Saunders, M., 2009, Research Methods for Business Students, New York: Prentice Hall. Seligman, L., 2004, Diagnosis and Treatment Planning in Counseling, New York: Springer. Statt, D. A., 2000, Using Psychology In Management Training: The Psychological Foundations of Management Skill, New York: Routledge. Zichi, C., 2000, Hermeneutic Phenomenological Research: A Practical Guide for Nurse Researcher, New York: Sage Publications. Read More