How People Are Managed and How They Lead - Essay Example

? How people are managed and how they lead Table of contents Portfolio Assignment Whetten and Cameron p261) citing Bowman (1964) write that,“Surveys have consistently shown that the ability to effectively communicate face to face is the characteristic judged by managers to be the most critical in determining promotability”. 1. One way to improve communication is through ‘Supportive Communication”. Discuss what Whetten and Cameron mean when they define this concept of communication. Why do they consider it so important? 3 2. There are eight principles to supportive communication. Four of the eight principles are: Congruence not Incongruence, Descriptive not Evaluative, Problem not Person Oriented and Specific not Global. Explain the meaning of the concepts and using ideas from your own experience give examples of their meaning. 3 3. Read the case study and discuss the issues, in terms of supportive communication which it raises. 4 Portfolio Assignment 2 1. House, R.J. in his ‘Path Goal Theory of Leadership’ and Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. in their ‘Situational Leadership Theory’ offer two contingency models of leadership. Discuss, with reference to these two models of leadership the basis upon how leaders engage with their staff to help them improve their performance and gain commitment. 6 2. Discuss the nature and components of transformational leadership. How does transformational leadership differ from the behavioural models of leadership, such as Tannenbaum, R. and Schmidt’s, ‘Continuum Model’ and Contingency models of leadership such as the ‘House’ and ‘Hersey-Blanchard’ models discussed above. 7 Portfolio Assignment 3 1. Analysis of the case study 9 2. Research suggests that adults do not follow a well developed set of principles when they make decisions. Discuss how leaders might reflect on the appropriateness of a decision in terms of ethical considerations. Give examples to support your answer. 10 Portfolio Assignment 4 1. Resistance to organisational change, particularly when the change is ‘soft’ in nature, can stem from the individual or from the organisation. Discuss the nature of, and explore the reasons why, change is often resisted. 12 2. From a management perspective how can this resistance be overcome? 13 References 14 Bibliography 17 Portfolio Assignment 1 Whetten and Cameron (2011, p261) citing Bowman (1964) write that, “Surveys have consistently shown that the ability to effectively communicate face to face is the characteristic judged by managers to be the most critical in determining promotability”. 1. One way to improve communication is through ‘Supportive Communication”. Discuss what Whetten and Cameron mean when they define this concept of communication. Why do they consider it so important? The term ‘supportive communication’ as used in the book of Whetten and Cameron aims to highlight two characteristics of communication: the potentials of communication to help towards the achievement of the goal set and the freedom provided to both parties in order to state their views (Whetten and Cameron 2011). Supportive communication is a mode of communication that can be quite important in certain organizational events, such as interviews (Whetten and Cameron 2011). Indeed, an interview between a candidate and the employer would have more chances to lead to the development of a successful cooperation if both parties were allowed to show their concerns and their perceptions in regard to the issues discussed during the interview (Whetten and Cameron 2011). In other words, for Whetten and Cameron supportive communication can be used for enhancing cooperation and trust in the workplace. No other mode of communication, apart from supportive communication, offers to both parties the chance to feel equal, a condition that can be quite crucial in certain cases; for example, using supportive communication an interviewer can identify the actual willingness of the interviewee to work as a member of a group (Whetten and Cameron 2011). On the other hand, the interviewee could identify the expectations of the organization by its members, as these expectations are revealed through the discussion made and under the terms that both parties are free to state their view, as the supportive communication concept accepts (Whetten and Cameron 2011). 2. There are eight principles to supportive communication. Four of the eight principles are: Congruence not Incongruence, Descriptive not Evaluative, Problem not Person Oriented and Specific not Global. Explain the meaning of the concepts and using ideas from your own experience give examples of their meaning. Supportive communication can have different modes, under the influence of the organizational environment but also the characteristics of employees and leaders (Carroll 2013). In practice, it has been proved that choosing the appropriate supportive communication principles can be vital for the effective promotion of communication within each organization (Carroll 2013). The eight principles of supportive communication could be analyzed as follows: a) congruent communication; it reflects the willingness of each party to pay attention to the issues set by the other party (Wood 2010); for example, in the context of congruent communication the interviewee cannot answer simply ‘I don’t know’ when the interviewer asks the interviewee asks his view in regard to his expectations from his potential cooperation with the organization, b) Descriptive, and not Evaluative, communication reflects the accurate description of a specific organizational issue (Whetten and Cameron 2011); for example, when being asked which strategy should be used for eliminating losses of data, an employee would reply making specific suggestions and not say ‘I don’t have something in mind’, since such answer would be out of the scope of Supportive Communication, c) Problem and not Person oriented; this principle shows the emphasis on the problem rather than on the person who caused the problem (Whetten and Cameron 2011). In the previous example, emphasis should be given on the loss of data and the potential strategies for avoiding such phenomena in the future; emphasizing on the employee who failed in preventing the loss of data would possibly lead to inter-organizational conflicts, a fact that could reduce the level of trust and communication across the organization; d) Specific and not global; according to Conrad and Poole (2011) instructions and orders related to each organizational task should be specific; using not clear orders could lead to critical delays in the completion of tasks and to the limitation of trust, especially by employees’ side (Conrad and Poole 2011). The above principle could be made clear through the following example: when assigning a task, managers need to explain to the employee involved all the aspects of the task, unless it is a task that the employee completes on a daily basis, i.e. unless of the cases of work routines. 3. Read the case study and discuss the issues, in terms of supportive communication which it raises. John arrives at work after a tough night at home. His partner was taken ill with appendicitis pains, an abdominal painful complaint which needs urgent surgery, during the night. He took him to hospital where he was taken immediately into the operating theatre. After spending three hours waiting at the hospital for news of his partner he drove home only to find that his elderly neighbour had been burgled. John, after calling the police, and cleaning up the mess left by the intruder and the police, managed to get one hour of sleep before getting ready for work. He arrived at work forty minutes late; which was the third time that month. John approached his boss, Sati, and started to explain the reason why he was late. John happened to be the third person who he had seen about lateness that morning. Sati was involved with finishing a report that he had expected John to have been working on. He acknowledged John and whilst still typing away, invited John to explain his lateness. In a distracted way Sati acknowledged John, as he (John) was talking. However, before John had fully completed his account of the previous evening and night’s events, Sati explained to John that he was always late and his lateness was causing problems for the factory. Sati said that he was fed up and would be giving John a written warning for lateness, which would be placed in John’s file for three months. John protested that the circumstances were such that he had no control over the time he arrived for work that morning but Sati was already on his feet and heading towards the human resources department to tell them what he was going to do. In the above case there is a series of supportive communication issues involved. At first level, particular emphasis should be given on the fact that the two parts of the discussion are not given the equal chance to state their views, a term that it is vital in the context of supportive communication, as described by Whetten and Cameron (2011). The inequality of the discussion’s parts is reflected to the following fact: although Sati has asked John to given explanation in regard to his lateness, he hasn’t left to John enough time to explain the reasons for which he had to be late the particular morning. In addition, the non-alignment of the above discussion with the principles of supportive communication is reflected to another fact: Seti claims that John has been always late, a claim that it is not specific. Indeed, instead of focusing on the facts related to the particular event, the lateness of John the specific morning, Seti refers to the lateness of John in general, a behaviour that it is not accepted in the context of supportive communication. If the principles of supportive communication would be respected, then Seti would focus only on the lateness of John that morning and not on John’s lateness in general. At the same time, the responses of Seti to John have been evaluative and not descriptive, as the supportive communication concept requires. Seti does not pay attention on the events related to the problem, the lateness of John, but just stated his views in regard to John’s performance in the organization, as this performance has been related by Seti to John’s lateness. It should be noted that connecting the lateness, of just 3 times, of John with John’s performance in general is an unaccepted behaviour under the terms of supportive communication where only discussions based on the description of specific events, and not of generic evaluations, can be tolerated. Particular reference should be made to the following fact: Seti focuses on the person, i.e. John, and not to the problem, i.e. lateness. He has not tried to evaluate the events that led to the problem so that suggestions are made for avoiding similar problems in the future. He has just used the discussion as a tool for expressing his feelings in regard to a general issue, the lateness at work, only in regard to the case of a particular employee, which is not fair taking into consideration the times that John has been late in the past. It is clear that the discussion between John and Seti does not meet the terms of supportive communication, a fact that could lead to important organizational problems especially if such approaches would be used every time that discussion would be required on various organizational issues. Portfolio Assignment 2 1. House, R.J. in his ‘Path Goal Theory of Leadership’ and Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. in their ‘Situational Leadership Theory’ offer two contingency models of leadership. Discuss, with reference to these two models of leadership the basis upon how leaders engage with their staff to help them improve their performance and gain commitment. The differentiation of leadership styles under the influence of changes in the organizational environment is the key characteristic of the Path Goal Theory of Leadership, as developed by House (Chance 2009). In addition, the Path Goal Theory emphasizes on the fact that ‘subordinate and environmental characteristics can affect the relationship between leadership style and subordinate outcomes’ (Chance 2009, p.116). In other words, ‘the personal characteristics of subordinates and the environmental pressures’ (Chance 2009, p.116) are the factors defining the relationship between the leader and his followers, meaning especially the level at which the leader is able to influence the decisions and the behaviour of his subordinates (Chance 2009). It should be noted that the Path Goal Theory is based on the view that the leader can motivate his followers at such level that the achievement of the goals set by the leader can be secured (Leitner 2007). For achieving the above target the leader, as the Path Goal theory accepts, can choose among four different behavioural modes, being: a) a Directive leader, focusing on the goal set, the time framework for its achievement and the process required, b) a Supportive leader ‘cares for its subordinates rather for the achievement of the goals set’ (Leitner 2007, p.8), c) the Participative leader welcomes the comments of his subordinates in regard to his decisions (Leitner 2007) and d) the ‘Achievement-orientated leader’ (Leitner 2007, p.8) focuses on the identification of goals set; at the same time, the above leader ‘highly relies on the ability of his followers to achieve these goals’ (Leitner 2007, p.8). In the other words, in the context of the Path Goal leadership theory, a leader can choose among the above behaviours for motivating his staff to increase their performance and their commitment to the organization. Among the above four behaviours, the Participative leader seems to have more chances to enhance the performance and commitment of his subordinates, at the level that the particular leader keeps a balance between the employees’ needs/ characteristics and the organization’s goals and potentials. The leader based on the Situational Leadership theory uses a different approach for motivating his followers to increase their performance and commitment. The Situational Leadership theory emphasizes on the ‘level of development of subordinates’ (Chemers 1997, p.56), as this development is achieved mainly through the initiatives taken by the leader. Also, the above theory focuses on the power of situations to influence the leaders’ behaviour (Fairholm and Fairholm 2009). The term situations, as used above, can refer to a variety of facts/ characteristics related to the organizational environment (Fairholm and Fairholm 2009). In practice, the above theory is used for implementing training programs that would secure the personal development of employees, as subordinates (Chemers 1997). It should be noted that aligning leaders’ decisions with the situations, as developed in the organizational environment, can be a challenging task (Williams 2008). An example of the use of the above theory in practice would be the following one: the leader of an organization can decide to increase the performance and commitment of employees in a particular organizational department where the average educational level of staff is low by introducing an intensive training program that would employees to understand better their role as members of the organization. 2. Discuss the nature and components of transformational leadership. How does transformational leadership differ from the behavioural models of leadership, such as Tannenbaum, R. and Schmidt’s, ‘Continuum Model’ and Contingency models of leadership such as the ‘House’ and ‘Hersey-Blanchard’ models discussed above. The transformational leadership has two characteristics/ aspects: a) it reflects the need for ignoring self-interests and for supporting the achievement of the organizational goals, as set by leader, b) it shows the potential of the leader to persuade his subordinates to look beyond the organization’s current status and to support innovation and change (Gerome 2008). In the context of the transformational leadership the high involvement of employees/ subordinates in the achievement of organizational goals is considered as quite necessary (Schruijer and Vansina 1999). In fact, the particular leadership style requires from employees to be willing to participate in teams and cooperate so that organizational performance is kept at high levels (Schruijer and Vansina 1999). It should be noted that a transformational leader highly supports the transformation not only of his followers but also of himself using as basis ethics and trust (Mendonca and Kanungo 2006). Reference should be made to the theory of Bass on transformational leadership. According to Bass (1985) transformational leadership has two key characteristics: ‘emotional and intellectual’ (Bass 1985, in Doh and Stumpf 2005, p.199). The first of these components, emotional, can be further divided into ‘charisma and inspirational leadership’ (Doh and Stumpf 2005, p.199). The transformational leadership model, as described above, is differentiated from other leadership models. For example, if comparing the above model with the Continuum model, the following differences would be identified: a) the Continuum model emphasizes on the existence of three factors that influence a leader’s decisions: ‘the pressures made at the level of the leadership, the pressures against the followers and the pressures against the environment’ (Lussier and Acqua 2009, p.159); in the Transformational leadership style no need for referring to all these pressures exist, b) the Continuum model is closer to the Autocratic leadership style, emphasizing on the power of the leader to take decisions without being influenced by the views of his subordinates (Walsh 2009); the Transformational Leadership style is closer to the democratic leadership style, valuing the views of subordinates in the development of leader’s decisions (Walsh 2009). Differences can be also identified between the Transformational Leadership style and the Path Goal Theory; the latter emphasizes on the use of goals as the basis for the development of leader’s decisions (Marturano and Gosling 2008); in Transformational Leadership style goals are not a priority for leader’s decisions (Marturano and Gosling 2008), b) in the context of the Path-Goal theory the leader’s decisions are influenced by the characteristics of subordinates and of the environment (Marturano and Gosling 2008); in the Transformational Leadership style these characteristics are not decisive in regard to the development of leaders’ decisions. A similar different seems to exist between the Transformational Leadership style and the Situational Leadership Theory; the latter is based on the view that situations, as related to various aspects of the organizational environment, can highly influence a leader’s decision (Chemers 1997). In the Transformational Leadership theory the power of situations to influence a leader’s decisions seems to be limited (Lussier and Acqua 2009). Portfolio Assignment 3 1. Analysis of the case study Usman, was walking from his student flat in Wolverhampton early one morning on his way to the University. He always left early because he liked to go into the library to read for an hour or so before going to his first class at 9 o’clock. He felt safe walking to the library building, at that time in the morning, because there were usually people around and anyway the University had plenty of surveillance cameras to monitor the area in and around the campus. As he was walking he noticed a package lying in the gutter. It was an unmarked sealed envelope. He could see because of its bulk that it contained something; so he made the decision to see what was inside. To his utter astonishment he saw that it contained a number of ten Pound notes. He looked around but, at that moment, could see no one who might own the letter and its contents. He decided to put the letter in his bag, to go about his morning’s business, and then to go home and have a think of what was best to do. At home, after class he re-opened the letter and counted its contents; the package contained ?1,500 in new notes. Usman decided to take the package to the local police station. The interesting part of the experience for Usman was that he was a student of ethics and that night, rather than go and meet his girl friend, he decided to reflect upon why he had decided to hand in the package. He decided to use the classification of moral judgement as developed by Kohlberg. Using Kohlberg as a basis for your reasoning, consider the options why Usman might have decided to hand the envelope to the police. Usman did not go to the police immediately. He kept the envelope in his bag and preferred to take a decision after returning home. This fact shows that Usman had contradictory thoughts in regard to the particular event. At the end, Usman decided to follow the moral judgement theory of Kohlberg in the context of which the delivery of the envelope to the police seemed as inevitable. The behaviour of Usman would be understood if referring to the particular theory. The theory of Kohlberg aimed to explain which are the most appropriate criteria for deciding ‘what is right and what is wrong’ (Lee 2005, p.73). In the context of the particular theory, moral development has a series of stages: in the first stage, which is synonymous with the infant age, the decision on right and wrong can be based only on the potential existence of punishment for a particular action (Lee 2005). The second stage of moral development refers to ‘growing children’ (Lee 2005, p.75). In the above two phases moral judgment is not based on personal beliefs but rather ‘on instructions from authority or individual interest’ (Lee 2005, p.76). In the specific case, of particular importance are the third and fourth stages of Kohlberg’s theory; these stages refer to ‘teenagers and adults’ (Werhane 1999, p.21). During these two stages people are likely to develop the following behaviour: they expect the approval/ disapproval of their environment, they take into consideration the rules of their social group, they start to have concerns on the rules of law and they are willing to respect the moral values as developed locally and globally (Werhane 1999). In the specific case, Usman, being between the two stages, of teenager and adult, he thought of the provisions of law in regard to similar cases. He also took into account the moral rules of his social environment, the university but also his family. Being influenced by these factors, Usman decided to report the event to the police, as the moral laws, locally and globally, would recommend. It should be noted that for Kohlberg moral judgement is highly based on the following two criteria: a) the role that the individual plays in a particular situation/ event and b) the potentials of the results to be reversed, in case that the decision taken is proved wrong (Monchinski 2008). In addition, Kohlberg believed that there are just few people that are able ‘to understand fully the perspectives of others’ (Gaus 2011, p.214). These people have reached the highest stage of moral development, as described by Kohlberg (Gaus 2011). In the above case, Usman could have decided to keep the envelope, especially since no witness existed in the scene, when Usman found the envelope. Usman knew that he could avoid reporting the event to the police but he also understand the perspectives of others, a condition found in the sixth stage of Kohlberg. Indeed, the person who lost the envelope would probably have to cover the relevant damage, a fact that Usman took into consideration for taking his decision. 2. Research suggests that adults do not follow a well developed set of principles when they make decisions. Discuss how leaders might reflect on the appropriateness of a decision in terms of ethical considerations. Give examples to support your answer. Because of their position, leaders are often considered as a pattern in regard to ethical behaviour (Duignan 2012). For this reason, leaders need to set ethics as the key criterion of their decisions and their behaviour within their organization (Duignan 2012). In organizations operating in certain sectors, the involvement of leaders in ethics is highly critical (Duignan 2012). For example, in educational institutes of all types, leaders need ‘to frame their actions in ethical terms’ (Freeman & Stewart 2006, p.7 in Duignan 2012, p.95). Indeed, in these organizations, followers are often not fully aware of ethics and their value (Duignan 2012). Leaders in the above organizations can highly influence the perceptions of their followers in regard to ethics, a fact that it is verified if referring to the second and third stages of Kohlberg’s theory, as presented above; in these two stages, that refer to children and teenagers, individuals are highly influenced by the moral rules as applied in their environment and as highlighted by supervisors, parents or teachers (Werhane 1999). On the other hand, Knapp (2007) claims that in the educational sector leaders often ignore ethics preferring to focus on the financial and legal aspects of their decisions. This phenomenon has been expanded as a result of the extensive turbulences in the global financial markets and the increase of risks that educational institutes have to face in regard to their financing (Knapp 2007). The above fact proves that ethical considerations can be important for leaders but the power of ethics to influence leaders’ decisions may be limited under the pressure of other factors, such as competition and lack of adequate resources (Knapp 2007). From another point of view, Sims (1994) noted that leadership cannot be considered as irrelevant to ethics. It is explained that the identification of the ethical framework of each organization is a responsibility of the organization’s leader (Sims 1994). This means that the unwillingness of a leader to promote ethics could threaten the viability of his organization, at the level that no organization could survive without the support of an effective ethical framework, which is often described using the term Corporate Social Responsibility framework (Sims 1994). Arnold et al. (2005) also emphasize on the unique role of leader to promote ethics within the organization. According to Arnold et al. (2005) in modern organizations the promotion of ethics may not be direct but it can be incorporated in strategic plans focusing on various organizational needs. The leadership plans for promoting equality and fairness in regard to employee promotion and for securing the continuous learning for all employees are common examples of such plans (Arnold et al. 2005). Moreover, Johnson, Scholes and Whittington (2008) explain that not all leaders are able to effectively promoting ethics. Charismatic leaders, i.e. those who are able to inspire their followers, are more capable to promote ethics in their organization (Johnson, Scholes and Whittington 2008). In opposition, the transactional leaders, who focus on organizational processes rather than on the successful implementation of organizational vision, are not equally powerful to persuade their followers in regard to the ethical implications of their decisions (Johnson, Scholes and Whittington 2008). Portfolio Assignment 4 1. Resistance to organisational change, particularly when the change is ‘soft’ in nature, can stem from the individual or from the organisation. Discuss the nature of, and explore the reasons why, change is often resisted. As in all human activities, in work also, change in inevitable (Harigopal 2006). In the past, changes were more difficult to be implemented due to the existence of ‘clear distinctions between markets, between political practices and between the various aspects of life, for example, the private life from work’ (Harigopal 2006, p.19). Today, these distinctions have been eliminated and changes are quite difficult to be controlled, a phenomenon common in organizations of all sizes (Harigopal 2006). According to Wagner-Tsukamoto (2003) organizational change is closely related to human behaviour. In fact, it has been proved that organizational change can be effectively explained using ‘human behavioural variables’ (Wagner-Tsukamoto 2003, p.190). This means that organizational change can be evaluated by referring to the behaviour of employees at all levels of the organization (Wagner-Tsukamoto 2003). However, the influence of other factors on organizational change cannot be rejected (Wagner-Tsukamoto 2003). For example, the environment of the organization, such as competition or markets’ performance, seems to be quite powerful in influencing organizational change (Wagner-Tsukamoto 2003). In order to understand the role of resistance in destroying plans for change it would be necessary to refer to the definition of resistance. According to Myers, Hulks and Wiggins (2012) resistance can be described as ‘a restraining force that attempts to maintain the status quo of the current situation’ (Myers, Hulks and Wiggins 2012, p.151). From another point of view, resistance has been defined as ‘intentional acts of commission or omission that defy the wishes of others’ (Ashforth and Mael 1998, p.90, in Myers, Hulks and Wiggins 2012, p.151). In other words, two are the key characteristics of resistance: a) the effort to keep things unchanged and b) the expression of personal will of one or more individuals. There have been different views in regard to the development of resistance to change. Taylor, Doherty and McGraw (2012) note that change is usually resisted for one of the following four reasons: a) because the interests of certain individuals are threatened by the attempted change, b) because trust between employees in different organizational sectors is at extremely low levels; reference is made not just to trust between employees and managers but also between non-managerial staff, c) because the perceptions for the expected outcomes are highly differentiated, d) because the cost of the attempted changes is high (Slack and Parent 2006, in Doherty and McGraw 2012, p.227). On the other hand, Hussey (2000) notes that ‘changes usually bring excitement’ (Hussey 2000, p.25); from this point of view, resistance to changes would be normally low (Hussey 2000). However, resistance to change can be extensive since ‘not all people are equally willing to accept risk’ (Hussey 2000, p.25). The above view verifies the literature presented above according to which resistance to change is inevitable. Of course, there are always chances for managing resistance effectively, especially if understanding the perceptions of employees in regard to change (O’Reilly 2002); for example, scientists would welcome change if its necessity would be clearly explained by the change manager using ‘relevant facts and figures’ (O’Reilly 2002, p.193). 2. From a management perspective how can this resistance be overcome? When having to manage change, managers may face difficulties. The lack of experience in handling such situations can prevent a manager to realize the needs of such plan and to estimate the potential responses of employees to change (Scott 1995). In any case, it seems that there are certain practices that can help a manager to overcome this resistance successfully. At a first level, it is necessary for the manager to give to employees the chance to state their view in regard to the change plan involved (Scott 1995). Trying to imposing situations or behaviours could lead to opposite results from those initially estimated since people are highly likely to respond negatively when changes on their daily routines, either in work or in private life, are attempted (Scott 1995). Towards this direction, Myers, Hulks and Wiggins (2012) supported that the efforts of managers to impose their decisions without giving any explanation to subordinates can automatically lead to resistance, as the particular activity of managers is considered as an attempt to show their power within the organization. In this context, the manager that manages change need to explain to employees the necessity of change and the expected benefits, either in the short or the long term (Scott 1995). In other words, employees should be treated as valuable members of the organization and not as just individuals who are obliged to follow orders (Myers, Hulks and Wiggins 2012). At the same time, the change manager could introduce reward schemes for motivating employees to support the attempted change (Paton and McCalman 2000). For example, employees that would be able to fully meet the requirements of the change plan would be given an award, monetary or non-monetary (Paton and McCalman 2000). In organization where performance-based rewards are part of the organizational strategy it would be easier for such initiatives to be taken (Paton and McCalman 2000). Koehle (1997) notes that changes have more chances to be welcomed by employees when the change manager uses the follow two practices: a) first, he checks carefully the potentials of the organization to face the challenges related to the change plan involved and b) he develops a detailed plan for controlling resistance (Koehle 1997). The use of certain strategic tools, as the Force-Field analysis, could help the change manager to manage resistance (Koehle 1997). In the context of the Force-Field analysis two key forces are identified and evaluated: ‘the driving forces, i.e. those forces that will promote change, and the restraining forces, i.e. the forces that will set barriers to change’ (Koehle 1997, p.1998). In any case, the change manager needs to identify in advance and to evaluate appropriately the potential responses to employees to change (Harigopal 2006). This task would be developed before applying the change plan involved (Harigopal 2006). In this way, any major problems from extensive resistance to the attempted changes would be avoided (Harigopal 2006). It should be noted that the responses of employees both ‘at individual and at group level’ (Harigopal 2006, p.335) need to be taken into consideration by change manager when developing a plan for overcoming resistance to change. References Arnold, J. Silvester, J. Patterson, F. Robertson, I. Cooper, C. and Burnes, B. (2005) Work Psychology: Understanding Human Behaviour in the Workplace. 4th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education. Carroll, C. (2013). The Handbook of Communication and Corporate Reputation. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Chance, P. (2009). Introduction to Educational Leadership and Organizational Behavior: Theory Into Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Eye On Education. Chemers, M. (1997). An Integrative Theory of Leadership. London: Routledge. Conrad, C. and Poole, M. (2011). Strategic Organizational Communication: In a Global Economy. 7th ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Doh, J. and Stumpf, S. (2005). Handbook on Responsible Leadership and Governance in Global Business. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Duignan, P. (2012). Educational Leadership: Together Creating Ethical Learning Environments. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fairholm, M. and Fairholm, G. (2009). Understanding Leadership Perspectives: Theoretical and Practical Approaches. New York: Springer. Gaus, G. (2011). The Order of Public Reason: A Theory of Freedom and Morality in a Diverse and Bounded World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gerome, S. (2008). An Examination of Relationships Between Transformational Leadership Behavior and Interactive Justice Perceptions Among Membership of a Local Chapter of Human Resource Professionals. London: ProQuest. Harigopal, K. (2006). Management of Organizational Change: Leveraging Transformation. London: SAGE. Hussey, D. (2000). How to Manage Organisational Change. London: Kogan Page Publishers. Johnson, G. Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2008) Exploring Corporate Strategy. 8th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Knapp, J. (2007). For the Common Good: The Ethics of Leadership in the 21st Century. Greenwood Publishing Group. Koehle, D. (1997). The Role of the Performance Change Manager. Alexandria: American Society for Training and Development. Leitner, A. (2007). Concept of Leadership and Management Within the Manufacturing Industry. Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag. Lussier, R. and Achua, C. (2009). Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill Development.4th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Marturano, A. and Gosling, J. (2008). Leadership: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge. Mendonca, M. and Kanungo, R. (2006). Ethical Leadership. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill International. Monchinski, T. (2008). Critical Pedagogy And The Everyday Classroom. New York: Springer. Mullins, L.J. (2007) Management and Organisational Behaviour. 8th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education. Myers, P., Hulks, S. and Wiggins, L. (2012). Organizational Change: Perspectives on Theory and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. O’Reilly, C. (2002). Winning Through Innovation: A Practical Guide to Leading Organizational Change and Renewal. 2nd ed. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Paton, R. And McCalman, J. (2000). Change Management: A Guide to Effective Implementation. London: SAGE. Schruijer, S. and Vansina, L. (1999). Leadership and Organizational Change. Chelmsford: Psychology Press. Scott, C. (1995). Managing Change at Work: Leading People Through Organizational Transitions. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Senior, B. and Swailes, S. (2010) Organizational Change. 4th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education. Sims, R. (1994) Ethics and Organizational Decision Making: A Call for Renewal. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group. Taylor, T., Doherty, A. and McGraw, P. (2012). Managing People in Sport Organizations. London: Routledge. Wagner-Tsukamoto, S. (2003). Human Nature and Organization Theory: On the Economic Approach to Institutional Organization. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Walsh, W. (2009). The Evaluation of Leadership Styles in Relationship to Job Performance. London: ProQuest. Werhane, P. (1999). Moral Imagination and Management Decision-Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Whetten, D.A. and Cameron, K.S. (2011). Developing Management Skills. 8th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Williams, C. (2008). Management. 5th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Bibliography Burke, W. (2010). Organization Change: Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. London: SAGE. Cameron, K. (2012). Positive Leadership: Strategies for Extraordinary Performance. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Conner, D. (2006). Managing at the Speed of Change: How Resilient Managers Succeed and Prosper Where Others Fail. New York: Random House Digital Inc. Daft, R. (2008). The Leadership Experience. 4th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. DuBrin, A. (2012). Leadership: Research Findings, Practice, and Skills. 7th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Hrivik, H. And Llesdal, A. (1995). Ethics and Consultancy: European Perspectives. New York: Springer Huber, G. and Glick, W. (1995). Organizational Change and Redesign: Ideas and Insights for Improving Performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. King, N. and Anderson, N. (2002). Managing Innovation and Change: A Critical Guide for Organizations. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Lang, M. (2011). Transformational Leadership. Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag. Palestini, R. (2003) The Human Touch in Education Leadership: A Postpositivist Approach to Understanding Educational Leadership. Lanham: R&L Education. Shriberg, A. and Shriberg, D. (2011). Practicing Leadership Principles and Applications. 4th ed. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons. Singh, K. (2009). Organisation Change and Development. New Delhi: Excel Books India. Sperry, L. (2013). Effective Leadership: Strategies for Maximizing Executive Productivity and Health. Oxon: Taylor & Francis. Van Wart, M. (2012). Leadership in Public Organizations: An Introduction. 2nd ed. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Wood, J. (2010). Communication Mosaics: An Introduction to the Field of Communication: An Introduction to the Field of Communication. 6th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Zaccaro, S. and Klimoski, R. (2002). The Nature of Organizational Leadership: Understanding the Performance Imperatives Confronting Today's Leaders. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Read More