Implementing Organizational Change - Case Study Example

? Business Case Study Organizational Change (College) Organizational Change Introduction As it was found in the study, Custom Food and Feed Corporation is facing a number of problems. The first problem identified is a lack of concern for safety or environmental or quality controls. In addition, it was found that the human resources management was essentially authoritarian in nature, thus creating a great degree of communication and cooperation problems. Furthermore, the frontline supervisors are selected from within the workforce and without any specific set of criteria. In addition, there is high degree of favoritism in the company. In order to implement successful change, it is necessary to identify the problems and their underlying reasons. It is identified that the company runs 365 days a year, seven days a week, and 24 hours a day. In addition it is pointed out that there is a general lack of safety at the workplace. Moreover, nepotism and lack of supervision are clearly visible to all. It is very evident that there is the need for a total change in the organization’s culture if these problems are to be addressed. However, simple discussions of change will not help solve the problem as the old culture will reemerge in a short while. On the other hand, as Hebert (2009) points out, in order to successfully implement a plan for organizational cultural change, the human resources department of the company should secure leadership and ensure employee participation in the change process. Evidently, leadership buy-in and employee participation are two sides of the same coin. Once the human resources department manages to get total control, it should ensure that all the affected parties are a part of the changing process and are committed to it. Participation in the change process ensures that employees understand their stake in a successful outcome. However, even though there is active employee participation, there is very high possibility of cognitive discord. So, it is for the human resource department to identify this element of disagreement throughout the change and provide guidance. The issues It is recognizable from the description that there is low morale among the employees from top to bottom. The first thing that is found lacking here is motivation. As is evident from studies (Clegg, Kornberger & Pitsis, 2005, p. 253), all people are motivated intrinsically and extrinsically. However, most people show preference of one form of motivation to another. In the case of this company, it is highly necessary to avoid the authoritarian management practices and the evident nepotism. So, it becomes highly necessary for the human resource management department to make its managers and supervisors aware about the need to ensure intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. In fact, studies have proved that more than two-thirds of employees want to get appreciated in their jobs. In addition, it is proved that when verbal praise and recognition are given both publicly and privately, they produce great efforts. Some other forms of intrinsic motivation are challenging work assignments and schedule flexibility. It is evident that when used appropriately, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation help improve employee morale. Another point of consideration is operational issue. To ensure product quality, the key is monitoring and measuring processes and making any necessary adjustments. Here, the concept of Panopticon as proposed by Bentham seems useful. According to him (as cited in Clegg, Kornberger, & Pitsis, 2008, p. 18), it is effective to ensure performance quality if there is a belief among the employees that they are being observed, but by an unseen being. In other words, if the principle of inspection and surveillance is properly instilled, it can ensure that the employees will feel responsible for what they do and say. The benefits of Panopticon are enormous. It can act as a system of records and rules, making each of the staff feel responsible for their acts and deeds. However, there is warning from the management about the possibility of resistance to change from all layers of staff. The empirical works on organizations prove that in all organizations, some members able to exploit and use seemingly impersonal rules for their own ends. As it is evident from the description, there is evident nepotism in the company. It is very clear that this tendency will be seen as illegitimate. Actions that bypass or subvert the official hierarchy are seen as illegitimate. In the case of the present company, it is provided that the plant managers are totally responsible for production decisions and the promotion of staff, thus giving them a chance to exercise unauthorized and illegitimate power. In a study among two US Air Force bomber wing commands, the flight crew had greater formal authority, but the ground had a central role for the safety of the flight crew. Soon, it was found that due to the dependence of flight crew on them, this situation conferred a degree of power on the ground crew. In another instance, in a study conducted in a French state-owned tobacco factory, uncertainty provided a group to show undue power. In the company, most of the maintenance workers were females, and male production workers wanted their help to ensure proper functioning of their machines. This allowed the female maintenance workers to enjoy illegitimate power. In fact, resistance is considered as a common phenomenon as whenever there is the application of authority, there is high possibility of resistance. In the case of the present company, it is evident that the company management had a totally authoritarian way of treating its employees. It is pointed out by researchers that when employees are treated like commodities, there is a higher possibility of resistance. For example, recently, an organization taken over by an American firm introduced some new management ideas ranging from corporate culture campaign and collective bonus scheme. However, the employees found the system ‘propaganda’, and the bonus scheme made the employees feel more tied to the cash nexus than to the corporate culture. So, they decided to distance themselves from the management by resisting any promotion. They opted to stay away from management by preferring the shop floor to the office, thus defeating the very purpose of bonus. At this juncture, it seems useful to see what is meant by concertive control. Studies have proved that employees feel more closely watched when there is team-based work instead of close supervision by a manager. In other words, ‘concertive control’ refers to a substantial consensus about values, high-level coordination, and a degree of self-management by members in an organization. The argument favoring this step is that cutting out bureaucratic offices and rules will flatten hierarchies, cut costs, boost productivity and increase the speed with which they respond to the changing business worlds. The benefit of this approach is that employees will collaborate to develop the means of their own control. This along with the Panopticon for observation will make each employee feel responsible for what they do, and this control will ensure discipline in the whole team. It seems a wise idea to replace hierarchical management with team management (self-management) thus avoiding the issue of illegitimate power. In the team management system, there is a team of 10 15 people who do not require a formal supervisor as they themselves handle the role of a supervisor. Instead of the hierarchical management system of the supervisor giving instructions, the self-managing teams and employees are able to gather and analyze information, and are collectively responsible for their actions. In the new system of team management, there is no formal rules imposed by the supervisor; instead, the management provides a value based corporate vision that acts as the formal guideline for the employees. In their day to day functioning, employees look into these broad principles and infer appropriate action. In addition, unlike the hierarchical system in which the supervisor has to check if instructions are followed, the self-coordinating teams can guide their own work and are able to interact with other areas of the company. Finally, in the new system, the self managing team is responsible for completing their job functions satisfactorily. Thus, it is possible to avoid the high degree of supervision. However, there are certain things to be taken care of while trying to implement changes. The first thing is to have a clear vision of the goals to be achieved, and this vision is to be achieved in consultation with the direct stakeholders in the organization. The next step is to identify the people both within and outside the company who are important to achieve the set goals. Then, it is necessary to identify the points of view of each stakeholder about the goal set to achieve. Thereafter, it is necessary to understand as to what are the power bases for each of the group that can exert power. Then, it is time to find out ways to gain more control over these power groups. There are certain effective steps suggested by Thornton to handle resistors to changes. Thornton’s (2009) first suggestion is to listen to their concerns and comments, and when their views are heard and acknowledged, resistors are more likely to become open to other points of view. In the opinion of Butera (2009), getting internal clients to accept any organizational change is not easy and hence a painful process. So, according to her, the key elements of ensuring effective implementation of change in an organization are the presence of a leadership with commitment and active participation, an employee force that accepts change, proper implementation of training, effective communication of the vision, regular observation of improvements and the communication of results, and proper inclusion of performance appraisal and compensation. So, it is evident that if a change is to be implemented, it has to be done well in advance. Solutions (1) The kick-off event The first step of the suggested solution is to have a kick-off event. In this kick-off event, the changing strategy of the company- from a hierarchical management to team-management -will be announced. In addition, the introduction of Panopticon to monitor employee behavior will be announced. Along with this announcement of policy changes, there will be detailed explanation of the compelling reasons for the change. Furthermore, the human resource department will explain how the new changes are mutually beneficial for the employees and the company. However, this kick-off event is not simply about introducing policy change, it will detail the benefits of such a change. The event will be exciting and festive, and employees who exhibited outstanding performance in the past will be appreciated. In addition, there will be mementos that indicate the change initiative ranging from t-shirts and hats. (2) Training and Orientation There will be extensive training and orientation as a part of the policy changes. There will be detailed explanation of how the new system will be in practice, and how to meet the requirements of the changed role. (3) Monitoring and Measuring The support group of the human resource management department will be responsible for monitoring employee performance and results. Necessary changes will be made according to the results. (4) Regular Progress Reports There will be regular newsletters, group meetings, memos, e-mails, videos and all other forms of informal conversations to keep the employees informed about the progress of the policy changes. In addition, the human resource department will hold regular meetings to discuss the progress. References Butera, A. (2009). “Using conflict resolution for sustained organizational change”. Protiviti Inc.1-4. Retrieved from http://www.protiviti.com/en-US/Insights/Browse-by-Content/Featured-Articles/Documents/Using-Conflict-Resolution-for-Sustained-Organizational-Change.pdf Clegg, S., Kornberger, M & Pitsis, T. (2005). Managing and organizations: An introduction to theory and practice. US: Sage. Hebert, S. (June 19, 2009). Changing Corporate Culture. Retrieved from http://www.heberts.net/changing-corporate-culture/ Thornton, P. B. (Jan 25, 2009). “Implementing organizational change. Great Leadership. Retrieved from http://www.greatleadershipbydan.com/2009/01/implementing-organizational-change.html Read More