Innovation, Ethics & Change-Hypocrisy - Essay Example

Change management Introduction We live in an unpredictable world, where we are constantly bombarded by changes. If it was not for change the world as we know it today may not have been. There has been a dramatic and wide-reaching change of the way things are done in the world of business causing the major players to adapt quickly or lose an opportunity to gain competitive advantage. Various managers come across employees who are resistant to change, however, it should be known that such resistance is not opposition and instead it could mean something positive. However, there are employees who are resistant change due to personal fears like heavy tasks, lack of adequate experiences or knowledge to handle the new projects among others ((Kegan & Lahey 2001). Resistance change is human nature and the employees should undergo certain trainings to accept change. The managers are also encouraged to ensure the employees’ opinions with regard to certain changes, whether positive or negative is not held against them. This discourse is about guidance to help employees accept change within organizations. Reasons why employees resist changes There are several reasons why various employees resist change. Some employees could be perfect in their areas of duties. For instance, an employee could choose to associate himself with other races or tribes as this could seem as a let down to his personality and even the family. Such employees will always address his peers sarcastically to discourage them from further participations. The managers should identify such employees and guide them or counsel them since such attitude could limit the overall productivity of an organization ( Kegan & Lahey 2001). Mistakes in any working organizations are to both the employees and even the managers. Global financial crisis was a mistake of the top most leaders in the financial institutions as well as the legislators. The legislators involved despised opinions of various experts and their decisions still have impact to the global economy to the current date. We may have the urge to accept change but there are factors called the sidetracks that may limit our abilities to embrace such changes. One of the sidetracks is the ‘forces within’ and these are our personal thoughts that encourage resistance to change. This could also be attributed by the people surrounding us. Emotional attachment could also hinder us from accepting changes for instance, Yahoo boss turned down deal termed as one of its kind, when Microsoft was ready to buy its search engine at $22 B, in 2008. The boss could not part with his innovations as he had strong emotions towards it. Furthermore, we may look upon other parties to help decide on certain changes and this could compromise our general acceptance to change depending on the consulted party. It is wise for one to think for himself when it comes to accepting or resisting change. We may consult other experts for more information but the basic thoughts and decision should come from ourselves ((Prevett 2013) Organizational changes can lead to the creation of many opportunities, but are often met with resistance for the following reasons. The manner in which employees take news of an impending transformation of the organization depends largely on how the information is presented to them. Changes in an organization emanate from the top decision-making organs of the company . It is up to these bigwigs of the company to seek effective ways of passing on details to their subordinates. It is imperative that the issues arising from the sharing of such information (any questions complaints) are comprehensively dealt with before the commencement of the implementation of the changes. If the management ignores this simple undertaking, information is bound to spread through the ranks alright but it is most likely that the information will be skewed; filled with second-hand information, half-truths and inaccuracies. This cultivates feelings of being duped among the employees. The process of information sharing in a company may be very sound but does everyone feel included in the decision-making process? Employees need to feel that they have their input in major decisions of the company. Organizations need to solicit advance input so as to give every member of the company the opportunity to voice their opinions and ideas. Another cause of change-hypocrisy is brought about by ego. It has been noted that employees acting in their own self-interest, instead of the interests of the organization tend to have difficulty adapting to change. These individuals seek primarily to advance their own agenda and to do this they require that the status quo remains unchanged (Urhuogo and Williams 2011)). They therefore actively derail the transformation process by placing obstacles to the implementation of change. Phenomena such as social media and growth in technology have revolutionized business. This has led to the need of individuals with different skills set in modern companies. When the organizational changes involve the requirement that the employees master new skills, this is met with greatest resistance especially when it comes to new technology. To ease tensions arising from such change the companies should offer training and education to its employees. The other contributor to change-hypocrisy is lack of trust in the organization. It becomes very difficult for members to accept organizational changes when they feel they cannot trust other members or even the management staff. Faced with the looming transformations, they attribute the change to a hidden agenda on the part of the top decision-making organs to harm them. They can go as far as assuming that they will soon face the axe (Elkin, Strach 2006). Change management methodology With these negative effects waiting to plague companies under transformation and the identification of some potential organizational causes of change-hypocrisy, it is clear that there is an urgent need for a smooth process of managing organizational change. Modern organizational change is largely brought about as a result of exterior innovations rather than internal ones (Boone and Van Den Bosch 1997). It directly affects all departments of the organization from to management to lowest subordinate. If a company can learn strategies that ensure that it adapts quickest to change, it can create a competitive advantage for itself, while the companies that are reluctant to change get left behind. This can result in far-reaching profit and success. Change management is the application of a structured sequence of steps or principles that help an organization cope with the challenges of taking on organizational change to achieve a desired outcome. It entails thoughtful planning and sensitive implementation, with great emphasis on consultation with, and involvement of, the people affected by the changes. In determining the approach to adopt in change management, the organization must find answers to some questions and analyze four major aspects: levels and goals (what does the company want to achieve through this change?), sequence of steps to be followed (who is affected by this change, and how will they react to it?), measurement system (how will the company know that the change has been achieved?) and the implementation (how much of this change can the company achieve by itself, and what parts of the change do they need help with?) ( Neal, 1999). Long-term organizational change has the four characteristic features: scale (affects all or most of the organization), magnitude (changes the status quo), duration (lasts for months, if not years), and strategic importance. No single change management methodology is suited for every company, but there is a set of practices, tools, and strategies that can be adapted to a variety of situations. The first step in the change management process is preparing for the change. Change management should begin with a methodical diagnosis of the current situation in order to accurately determine both the need for change and the capability to change. The objectives, content, and process of change should be specified clearly at the outset to avoid losing sight of what is important (Kulkarni ,2000). The change management team should use different assessment tools to determine the organization's readiness for change. This process gives the team valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities they may face during the change management process. In this stage there is need to determine the scope of the change, the number of people who are going to be affected by it, the rate at which the transformation will take place (gradual or rapid change). The team further tries to forecast the impact the change will have on the organization (What type of resistance can be expected? How much change is already taking place if any? What is the background of the impacted groups?). The change management team should takes this time to assess its own strengths prior to the beginning of the process, monitor assumptions, risks, dependencies, costs, return on investment and cultural issues. Secondly, the organization needs to address “people issues” that will arise from the introduction of the organizational changes. In any company transformation process there have to be human side issues. If new skills and capabilities are required or jobs are changed then human side issues are at the centre of it all. In such cases employees begin to develop feelings of uncertainty and a distrust of the intentions of senior management and change-hypocrisy begins to creep in. It is important to develop a preventive approach to such issues rather than dealing with them on a reactive basis. In trying to do away with resistance the company should include the most vocal members of staff who are opposed to the change as the influence the rest of the workers in the company. Calming the fears of the vocal employees in tantamount to assuaging the resistance among all employees. Change is inherently unsettling for all staff of an organization and when it begins to take place the natural response of all employees is to look to the Chief Executive Officer and other top leadership for direction, strength and support. It is up to the leadership to find ways of motivating the rest of the organization while challenging them to perform to their best despite the transformations. Change comes with its stresses and the senior management should lead the way in modeling the acceptable behavior during the change process. This keeps the morale among employees up and causes them to greet the changes with a great deal of zeal that can only propel the company to great success post-transformation. Organizational change management should align groups’ expectations, integrates teams and create deep social understanding about leadership’s styles and group dynamics. It should also create an understanding of the culture and behaviors the changes intend to introduce. When this is achieved then change occurs at the level of the individual employee. Every level of the organization has a role to play in the transformation process from the initial strategies to design and implementation. The change management process must accommodate every layer of the organization so that responsibilities and the resultant change are spread evenly in the organization from top to bottom (cascade leadership) (Chaudhuri 2010). A multiline insurer with poor earnings decided to follow this “cascading leadership” methodology at each stage of the organization with the aim of changing behavior and performance in preparation for going public. Top leadership set the strategies and targets, the next level of leadership in the hierarchy designed the core of the change initiative and the leaderships from lower levels of the organization were in charge of implementation (Harvard Business Review 2011). This methodology saw the company’s earnings double ahead of the set schedule hence demonstrating its effectiveness in change processes. The next step is communication and communication planning. Change leaders often make the mistake of assuming that others understand the issues, feel the need to change, and see the new direction as clearly as they do. Change managers also assume that if they communicate clearly with their employees, their job is done. However each employee’s readiness to hear and understand the need for change depends on many factors. Effective communication requires that the change managers consider the audience they are addressing, what is being said (the key message) and when it is being said (Buining 2008). In the initial stages of the process, communications should be designed to create awareness around the need for change and the potential risk associated with resisting change. Similarly, at each stage in the process, communications should be designed to share the right messages at the right time. The audience needs to be carefully considered; how one would address front-line employees differs from the way one would address supervisors and executives. This is because their particular needs for information varies based on their role in the implementation of the change. Ideally the flow of information should be in from the bottom and out from the top and should solicit the input and feedback of all employees. In cases where the transformation requires that employees master new skills, there is bound to be misinterpretation of this to mean that people will lose their jobs. The organization should devise an effective education, training and skills upgrading scheme for its employees. It is important to create awareness about the change and the required skills to remove fear and prevent opposition to change (Kramar and Syed 2012). Once effective communication and training has been carried out, employees will tend to question the need for the transformation, whether the company is headed in the right direction and whether they think it would be worthwhile for them to commit to making the change happen. The leadership should therefore clearly express the formal case for change. In developing the formal case for change, the leadership should confront reality and distinctly express a convincing need for change. They need to demonstrate faith that the company has a feasibly successful future and the required leadership to get there. Finally, they should provide guidance on acceptable behavior and decision making procedures (Freedman 2010). All these should be compiled into a written company document that can be accessed by all employees. The various levels of leadership will then customize this message to suite the various audiences (technicians, supervisors, senior management) and its end result will be the create and reinforce leadership team alignment towards achievement of the required organizational change. Downsizing, for example, is a change that can threaten employees’ sense of well being and morale. The experience of living with the possibility of redundancy and watching others leave has become part of the working experience for many employees. Survivors of downsizing begin to be narrowly focused and unwilling to take risks. To minimize the effects of downsizing and remain competitive, the company can set up meetings with its surviving staff and present an honest business case to convince them that downsizing was the only way to keep the business viable (Linsley, 2008). By confronting reality and helping staff understand the need for such change, the leadership is able to motivate the organization to follow the new direction in the midst of the new challenge. Instead of feeling demoralized and uncertain about the future, survivors will feel a renewed resolve to help the company advance. The next step in the change management process is preparing for the unexpected. People react in unexpected ways and for this reason; no change program goes completely according to plan. Employees that are expected to put up resistance may be very receptive of the new changes, there may be a change of senior management or there may be an unanticipated shift in the business environment requiring the company to take a totally different direction. For effective change management, there is need for continual reassessment of the company’s impact and the organization’s willingness and ability to adopt the next wave of change (Bowden and Mulnix 2005). To be able to do this the change management team must analyze data from the field to make informed decision and adjustments as and when required to do so. The final step in the process is the after-action evaluation. Early successes and long-term wins must be recognized and celebrated. To reinforce and cement the change in the organization and celebrate the contributions of employees, individual and group recognition is also a necessary component of change management. When all is done it is important to step back from the whole program, evaluate successes and failures, and identify process changes for the next project. Recommendations Organizations planning to bring about changes to company procedures and processes are met with various obstacles that can render the change process crippled or even lead to loss of company earnings. To curb such occurrences the following recommendations need to be taken into consideration (Yum 2007). Before any company transformation implementation begins, road map on how it will be done should be present to bring some sense of order to proceedings; a sound change management team should also be selected. Education and communication are keys to helping all those affected to understand the need for change and the ways it will affect them. There need not be any barriers to this throughout the ranks of the company (Harzing & Pinnington 2011). It is also important to solicit feedback from the employees. Companies need to be seen to be involving all ranks of the organizations in decision-making processes so that no one feels left out. The company should help employees deal with the stresses of the organizational change by offering support through training and counseling programs. To slow down the growth of resistance to the organizational change, the company should involve the most vocal resistance leaders Conclusion There is a prevalent fear of the unknown among many employees, and the very nature of change is moving from a comfort zone into the unknowns that the future holds. However through a systematic application of the change management principles, change can be presented to the employees in a manner that draws them into the process rather than scare them away. Every company should adopt these procedures for smooth company transformations. Bibliography Boone, P, and Van Den Bosch, A.J. (1997) Discerning a key characteristic of a European Style of Managemen (Int. Studies of Mgt. & Org., Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 109-127). Bowden, R and Mulnix, M. (2005) Business Education: A View of U.S. and European Management Styles.(Problems and Perspectives in Management,) Buining, F. (2008) FORZA http://www.fredwerk.com/pages/download_articles/articles/da7.pdf Chaudhuri, A. (2010) Yes: Indian Style of Management – Theory „i‟ Management. Elkin, G and Strach, P. (2006) Lessons From The Indigenenous East For Western Organisations? (Inderscience Enterprises) Freedman, J. (2010) The Business Case for Emotional Intelligence. The Emotional Intelligence Network. http://www.academia.edu/1293046/The_Business_Case_for_Emotional_Intelligence ‘The Real Reason People Won’t Change’ (Kegan, R and Lahey, L., 2011), Harvard Business Review. (2011) On Change Management. Harvard Business School Press.. Harzing, A., Pinnington, A. (2011) International Human Resource Management. London: Sage Pub. KRAMAR, R., & SYED, J. (2012). Human resource management in a global context: a critical approach. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, Palgrave Macmillan. Kulkarni N (2000). The Painter’s Mistake. The Asian Fable. http://www.sermonillustrator.org/illustrator/sermon2c/painter's_mistakes!.htm Linsley,A.(2008) Business Ethics & Multiple Intelligences. http://college-ethics.blogspot.com/2008/07/business-ethics-and-multiple.html Neal, J. (1999) Spiritual perspectives on individual, organizational and societal transformation (Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 12 No. 3, 1999, pp. 175-185.) Prevatt, H. (2013). Don’t Be Defeated By The Enemy Within. http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/Appointments/article1240974.ece): Urhuogo, I and Williams, V. (2011) ‘Leading Innovation and Change: Assisting Employees in Lifting Where They Stand’ in The Journal of Business Studies Quarterly. Vol. 2. No 2. pp.80-97. Yum, J. (2007). Confucianism & Communication: Jen, Li and Ubuntu (China Media Research,3/4). . Read More