Organizational Change and Personal Characteristics of Change Agents - Assignment Example

Organizational Change Name: Course: Tutor: Institution: City and State: Date: Question One A personality clash refers to presence of conflict between individuals due to the incompatibility of their personalities leading to disagreements in their approaches to issues. One major perspective offered to this ideology is the extraversion and introversion that reflects opposite dimensions of human behaviour (Rothstein & Goffin, 2006 p. 54). An organization recruits its employees based on professional qualifications and experiences hence employees possess different personality traits. Personality differences may result in conflicts over major organization’s decisions but this does not justify organizational conflicts. Presence of personality differences does not allow employees to provoke conflicts since employees must work together in harmony to attain the organizational goals (Burr 2003 p.56). Various reasons exist for employees’ conflict in a working environment and personality clashes only mask the real causes of conflict. Social constructionism observes that meaning and understanding of the world occurs in the joint coordination of humans. Reality construction therefore emerges from the social interaction of people using language for communication (Burr 2003 p.74). The obtained perspective therefore emerges from a combination of human choices rather than human judgment. Social constructionism may assist in the analysis of the human traditions passed on from one generation to another. Organizational culture forms an example of these traditions since it determines the beliefs and conduct of the employees. The employees have a relational structure that determines morality and social levels of certain employees within the organization. This may cause major conflicts within an organization since some employees assume superiority over others which gives them an assumed right to avoid accountability for their actions. The employees act in accordance to the existing culture instead of the independent use of their personal judgment. Employees with similar personalities may therefore disagree on issues especially when working in different positions (Wanberg & Banas 2000 p. 140). A conflict arising from this situation therefore does not emerge from personality differences but from the pre-determined roles of the employees. Positioning refers to the social identities and definitions adopted by certain individuals within a social set up. This results in major conflicts between superiority and inferiority among the individuals within the society. In this situation, the superior class feels entitled to power hence infringing on the rights of the other classes considered inferior. This results in ideological conflicts of these social groups due to the varying interests in various situations. In this scenario, personality differences do not matter since social positioning takes the centre stage and dictates the relationship of individuals (Burr 2003 p.61). The management needs to approach conflicts as an opportunity to improve existing processes rather than causes of failure. Conflicts within an organization emerge from different reasons that do not involve personality clashes. The managers should view personality differences as an advantage due to the different ideas generated from the employees. It should find measures to accommodate these differences and enable the employees to compromise their interests to find a common ground. Management should refrain from blaming personal conflicts on personality clashes and instead highlight the actual causes of conflicts. Question Three The Lewin’s Force Field Analysis observes that a situation’s balance exists due to the interaction of two opposing forces; driving and restraining forces (Jabri 2012 p.609). The driving forces seek to promote change while the restraining forces resist change and attempt to maintain the status quo. Change within an organization upsets the equilibrium of the interaction between these forces that begin to compete against each other. An organization may seek to adopt a computerized accounting system to improve accountability and transparency. For effective change, the management must strengthen the driving forces or weaken the restraining forces. The driving forces may include the employees’ motivation towards a perceived better position due to embracing change (Yousef, 2000 p.20). Education of employees on the benefits of adopting the new accounting system would motivate them to embrace the change and facilitate its implementation. Equipping employees with necessary skills to operate the new system would facilitate their accommodation to the introduced change. Restraining forces emerge from fear of change due to the uncertainty associated with new situations. They may also include technical factors such as unavailability of sufficient computers and skills. The use of case studies may weaken the resistance and demonstrate the actual positive effects of embracing the computerized system. Once the driving forces overpower the restraining forces, change takes course and the employees adopt the accounting system hence achieving a new quasi-equilibrium. In approaching organizational change, the management should focus on techniques that strengthen the driving forces while minimizing the restraining forces to facilitate the desired changes. Weick and Quinn’s model explains organisational change in terms of episodic and continuous change (Jabri 2012 p.610). Episodic change involves intentional and discontinuous changes to replace existing practices with new systems, skills and people. Failure triggers this form of change to deal with the undesirable consequences. Continuous change on the other hand involves unplanned and ongoing changes that emerge continuously occur in response to the organization’s day-to-day activities. According to this model, the Lewin’s model appears as an episodic model of change since it involves intentional activities to institute changes in the current situation and direct the organisation to a new equilibrium. The continuous change framework involves a slow process of change that allows the employees adapt to the changes and regain capacity to accommodate further changes. The highly competitive environments within which organisations operate require the adoption of a continuous approach to change in order to maintain the competitive position. In the case of introducing a computerised accounting system, change begin with adoption of technology in the organisation’s operations, relevant training of personnel to operate computers then automation of processes that include accounting. This way, the organization gradually adapts to industrial changes without interrupting its operations while maintaining its competitive position. Question Four A complacent conversation involves a situation where the individuals feel satisfied and confident about their abilities thus they feel no need to change to improve their situation (Jabri 2012 p.228). A conversation between two employees in the sales department revealed contentment with the current level of performance and resistance to accommodate the finance manager’s pressure to expand the sales volume. This involved adopting high levels of technology in promoting products. A resignation conversation emerges due to a history of failure that triggers lack of confidence of the individuals to handle change (Jabri 2012 p.229). The individuals blame themselves or the organization for the cause of failure and these conversations reflect this situation. This form of conversation features regrets and complains about the events that led to failure. A conversation within the accounts department featured a number of employees who had failed in implementing a new accounting system. They blamed themselves for the failure and lacked the confidence to try the implementation process again (Ford et al 2002 p.111). Cynical conversations also occur due to historical failure experienced by the parties (Jabri 2012 p.229). External forces beyond the control of the individuals cause failure in this case. These conversations reflect the realization of a reality where individuals cannot control every situation. One such conversation featured a group of employees who expressed ignorance of the management on the employees’ issues raised during meetings. The employees lacked confidence on the management to solve their issues. Behavioral Tendencies Examples of Utterances What might have been said Denial Self-blame Disapproval Contentment Gratification Low morale Contempt ‘We do not need to change the level of technology, the current systems are sufficient’ ‘My position does not offer me enough opportunities to contribute to the organization’s goals’ ‘Why do they bother, this will not work anyway’ ‘No worries, we are doing fine’ ‘We cannot fix what is not broken’ ‘What is the point of all this? This new accounting system will not work’ ‘Why are they holding all these meetings, they never make a difference’ ‘We could adopt technological advancements, they might improve our systems’ ‘I could improve performance in my current position to improve the overall organization’s performance’ ‘We could try this in a new way, it might yield better results’ ‘We need to maintain this level of performance’ ‘We need to adopt prevention rather than curative measures’ ‘We could try and accommodate the new accounting system, it might work this time’ ‘If we could participate appropriately in these meetings, they might yield results’ Question Five The Victimization Story: Sarah: I am sorry for being late again yesterday; I worked late into the night trying to balance the accounts as usual. They will not give me a break after all the work I have been doing lately. John: You should probably apply for a sick leave… Sarah: I tried last week but the big fish rejected it. Apparently, I have not worked enough to deserve one. I do most of the work in our department yet they gave daisy a leave for two weeks on Tuesday. They assigned amateurs to my team so I end up doing all the work for them since they cannot handle filling a simple ledger. John: Ask your boss I am sure Andrew would understand your situation and do something about it, would he not? Sarah: I doubt that. Last week he gave a speech during our weekly meetings about how women should not gain privileges because of their gender but should earn it. He thinks women are weak and cannot fight their battles I would not want to portray such a picture to the men in our department. John: I am sorry about your situation its worse than mine. We got a raise last week to cover our extra hours. Sarah: I have not gotten a dime for my extra input despite raising the issue with the management. They really do not appreciate our input; I should probably stop trying too hard. The Revised Version: Sarah: I am sorry for being late again. The team and I have been working hard to beat the deadline like everyone else. I hope to get a break this time. John: You should probably apply for a sick leave… Sarah: I will try applying for another one; the last time I applied, we were not so overworked. Daisy got one last Tuesday she probably needed one to sort out her personal issues. I think they will grant me one this time since I have been working as hard as the others in the department. I have also been teaching my new teammates to improve their performance, which is an opportunity for me to develop my skills (Jabri 2012 p.154). John: Ask your boss I am sure Andrew would understand your situation and grant you a leave, would he not? Sarah: I could try. He encouraged women to improve their performance which I have done quite well lately I am sure he will appreciate my efforts. I have gained respect among my peers for being a hard worker. He could probably offer us a raise too for the good work. John: I am sorry about your situation its worse than mine. We got a raise last week to cover our extra hours. Sarah: We could try applying for a raise since we have been working very long hours, which has improved our performance. We have accomplished almost all the set targets in the last one month. Question Six Personal Characteristics of Change Agents: Self-Efficacy: this refers to the abilities of an individual to mobilize motivation, resources, and courses of action necessary to attain control over events. Locus of Control: it refers to the individual’s view of their abilities to control the prevailing environment. Core Self-Evaluations: this involves a person’s appraisal of their capabilities and worthiness. Openness to experience: this involves the adoption of coping mechanisms to deal with the changing environment. Personal resilience: this refers to optimism and confidence that enable one to deal with negative experiences. Attitudes to change: this refers to a person’s behaviour tendencies and cognition about change. Positive attitudes reduce resistance to change and vice versa. Competencies: Sufficient knowledge: the change agents must possess knowledge of the behavioral theories and various methods of change in order to decide the most appropriate cause of action. Relational skills: the agents must have the ability to listen to the workers concerns, observe, and identify these concerns for improved relationships with the workers. Sensitivity: they must possess the ability to identify the perceptions of others on the motivators of change. Integrity: it involves the ability to operate within the set human values (Kendra & Taplin 2004 P.65). Own Style of Influencing Change: The trans-theoretical model offers a comprehensive guide to the process of change. Adopting this theory offers strategies to guide employees through the change process (Oreg 2003 p.114). The first step involves introducing the idea of change to employees and explaining the advantages of the change. This would include offering sufficient information about the intended change, the process involved and the expected outcomes. The next step involves informing them about the small changes required in their routine work to attain the intended change (Jabri 2012 p.211). Then the small changes begin to take effect gradually and eventually the major changes begin to show. The process ends with the maintenance of this change and ensuring attainment of intended results. This process will offer employees sufficient time to adapt to the changes and to embrace the changes introduced. An example: Influencing the change in behaviour of a particular employee begins with informing them the need for a change in behaviour. The employee must see the benefits gained from the change in behaviour to make change desirable. Involving the family and friends institutes a support system to facilitate the process. Taking subtle steps offers the confidence to make bold steps that eventually effect the change. Regular follow-ups on the progress ensure the maintenance of this change in the end (Oreg 2003 p.114). References Burr, V. 2003. Social Constructionism, 2ndEdn. London and New York: Routledge. Ford J. D. , Ford L. and McNamara R. T. 2002. Resistance And The Background Conversation Of Change . Journal of Organisational Change Management 105-221. Jabri, M. 2012. Managing Organizational Change. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Jick, T. D. and Peiperl, M. A. 2003. Managing Change, Cases and Concepts, 2nd edn International, McGraw Hill. Kendra, K. A. and Taplin, L. 2004 Change agent competencies for information technology project managers, Consulting Psychology Journal, Practice and Research, 56(1), 20–34. Oreg, S. 2003. Resistance to change, developing an individual differences measure, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 680–693. Rothstein, M. G. and Goffin, R. D. 2006. The use of personality measures in personnel selection, what does current research support? Human Resource Management Review, 16(2), 155–180. Wanberg, C. R. and Banas, J. T. 2000. Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace, Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 132–142. Yousef, D. 2000 Organizational commitment and job satisfaction as predictors of attitudes toward organization change in a non-western setting, Personnel Review, 29(5–6), 6–25. Read More