Knowledge Taken from Psychology for Managers, Managing Change in Business Organisation - Research Paper Example

?Managing Organisation Table of Contents To Be Effective, Managers Need To Draw Upon Knowledge Taken From Several Disciplines 3 (A) Importance of Knowledge Taken From Psychology for Managers 3 (B) Problems Related With the Use of Knowledge Taken From Psychology by the Managers 5 Managing Change in Business Organisation 6 (A) Kurt Lewin – Force Field Theory 8 (B) Rosabeth Moss Kanter – The Change Master 10 References 12 Bibliography 14 To Be Effective, Managers Need To Draw Upon Knowledge Taken From Several Disciplines (A) Importance of Knowledge Taken From Psychology for Managers The environment within which an organisation has to operate is considered as one of the important factors for successfully running the business at any place as it influences almost every aspect of the organisation. It can include the nature of the business, location, price of the products, or the personal policies. Hence, it is important to learn about the various aspects of organisational environment including economic factors, political framework, socio-cultural aspects, technological aspects and legal aspects. Similarly, a manager plays an effective role to understand the each aspects of the environmental factor in order to take an organization in the path of success and development (NIOS, 2012). However, social environment is one of the most important factors which influence the internal business environment to gain sustainable growth and development in the marketplace. In an organisation, a manager should have the sufficient amount of knowledge regarding psychology in order to effectively deal with the employees and for maintaining the socio-culture environment in business. Psychological knowledge is considered as a method to understand the issues related with people in the workplace. In addition, it provides measures to deal with these issues in a tactful way. The psychological knowledge plays an effective role in terms of manager development as it assists to create a psychologically healthy work environment in an organisation. With this concern, the application of psychological knowledge by the managers in an organisation is associated with personal change and development. Furthermore, it has been observed to be useful in order to deal with social environment of an organisation. The social environment of an organisation comprises of social aspects such as traditions, customers, beliefs, values, interpersonal relationship with colleagues or peers as well as with the superiors. Therefore, it can be identified that to create a healthy working environment in an organisation without having any conflict with peers, superiors, customers as well as with the immediate followers, it is necessary to have a sufficient amount of knowledge related with the psychology to be effective and competent in near future (Lee, 1999). Similarly, an effective manager ought to be able to handle conflicts in a smooth and tactful way. The issues that can arise include health care difficulties regarding sexual harassment and/or employee disputes. On the contrary, effective managers should have the capability to identify the needs of an employee and reward them accordingly with various rewards and incentives which in turn is most likely to boost their morale and lead them to enhance their performance in near future. It is totally dependent upon effective managers to create circumstances under which employees experience friendly and competitive working environment. Thus, a manager requires an adequate knowledge of psychology to survive successfully in the competitive environment (Wirth, 2004). With due consideration to this aspect, it can be stated that psychological knowledge with reference to behavioural science assists the managers in an organisation to improve their work performance with the help of interaction with individuals and within and between groups. Subsequently, it can be identified as an ‘inter-alia’ which refers exploration of status, power, authority and influence within formal and informal organisation. It often builds the job-related skills in order to enhance the career with a competitive edge (Gutknecht & Miller, 1990). (B) Problems Related With the Use of Knowledge Taken From Psychology by the Managers It has been identified that most of the organisations are facing increasingly dynamic and changing environment. With this consideration, organisations possess more complex and imprecise problems which in turn affect the whole organisation. Thus, due to the application of change in organisational environment, problems can never be completely resolved. Thus, it creates a necessity for the managers to become problem analyst as well as to solve instead of being decision maker (Iyer, n.d.). In the similar context, behavioural science comprises variable factors such as psychology, sociology, administrative management and role theory among others. Consequently, it creates difficulties for the managers to integrate all these elements with regard to organisational design and analysis (Gutknecht & Miller, 1990). Implication of psychological knowledge by the managers in an organisation can often create problem for them as it is associated with the nature of human beings which is quite unstable for every individual. In addition, it has been observed that understanding of the human behaviour is considered to be extremely difficult as it is potentially unpredictable. It can be often acknowledged that managers apply different theoretical assumptions in order to formulate strategies and policies in an organisation according to their previous learnt theoretical concepts. However, it can be unsuccessful in terms of human behaviour as it is referred as impulsive in nature. Moreover, the managers can face problems related with psychological knowledge when they deal with a particular group and/or team. A group is comprised of a number of people varying in terms of their values, beliefs, culture as well as needs. As a result, it creates dilemma for the managers in implementing the approach of psychological knowledge (Gutknecht & Miller, 1990). With this concern, it can be stated that the study of organisational behaviour is one of the important aspects in order to deal with people of an organisation successfully. As a result, it assists the managers to be effective and efficient in terms of aligning individuals, groups and formal structures with the organisation’s needs (Gutknecht & Miller, 1990). Managing Change in Business Organisation In the modern era, organisational change is playing a significant role for an organisation in gaining competitive advantage which in turn can assist it to achieve its desired objectives and goals. Thus, organisations should encourage their employees to obtain the change process in their business environment to successfully operate the business (NIOS, 2012). Managing change is considered as a very important aspect in the success of every business. However, several of the organisations response to the change process due to the external business environment which is also known as reactive change, such as economies of scale, political factors, globalisation, technological development and legal factors among others. On the contrary, various organisations respond to implement change as the management decides that there is a need to change which is further referred as proactive change. Such process includes job insecurities, need to achieve goals, quality improvement, higher productivity, customer satisfaction and need to gain flexibility in organisational structure, process and system among others (Cummings & Worley, 2008). In this context, there are a few major reasons for which people tend to resist change at work. The first and foremost reason is that people primarily identify change as a negative aspect since it at times creates job insecurity for them. For instance, if an organisation obtains an advanced technology in its manufacturing unit in order to improve the quality as well as productivity. It might cause insecurity in the mind of people that they might loose their jobs due the application of advanced technology. Similarly, people tend to fear from the unknown changes, which increase the resistance to change. When people work in a particular culture as well as environment then they tend to be habituated with that and which in turn increases the resistance to change in the working culture. The other measures for resistance to change can be identified as interpersonal relationship within an organisation as it can influence the interest and recognition of a person (Gutknecht & Miller, 1990). Therefore, organisations can apply two change models such as “Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Theory” and the “theory of Rosabeth Moss Kanter – The Change Master” in its operational process which in turn can assist them in order to overcome the resistance to change in the business environment that has been illustrated as follows. (A) Kurt Lewin – Force Field Theory According to Lewin’s theory “all behaviours in organisations is the result of an equilibrium between two sets of opposing forces- “driving forces” and “restraining forces”” (Wells, 2006). Source: (Wells, 2006) The above diagram comprises two opposing forces such as driving forces and restraining forces. Driving forces are referred to those forces that move forward for application of change management process and promoting change in an organisation. There are various change drivers that are associated with the driving forces that motivate to implement the change in the business environment such as increased efficiency, customer demands, executive mandate and trust in unit leader among others. On the contrary, restraining forces includes those forces which cause noteworthy difficulties for the overall organisational development. It includes lack of training, lack of incentives, fear from the change process and capital investment among others. These restraining forces offset driving forces and direct to the negligence or resistance to change. Subsequently, when these two forces come into their equilibrium point then it has been observed that there is no change in an organisation and everything remains in their desired state (Wells, 2006). In the similar context, Lewin suggested a three-stage approach for changing behaviour of the employees as well as of the organisations. The first stage referred as ‘unfreezing stage’ where organisation attempts to motivate the employees to obtain the change process in an organisation. According to the theory, this phase encompasses the human behaviour. It describes that human behaviour is mostly influenced by their past observational learning and organisational culture. Thus, Lewin’s change model suggests that before implementing the change in an organisation, organisation should motivate their employees to obtain the change in their career and enhance their performance which in turn can assist an organisation in order to gain competitive advantage. An organisation can motivate its employees with the help of training and employee development activities such as coaching, mentoring and e-learning among others. The next stage is considered as ‘change stage’ that illustrates what needs to be changed in an organisation to make it more effective and efficient in the marketplace. It is conducted according to the demand of the customer and market with a purpose to remain competitive as well as for the sustainable growth. The ‘refreezing stage’ is referred as the final stage where the employee becomes habituated with the applied change method. It includes development of new self-concept and identity along with the new interpersonal relationship between the employee and organisation (Wirth, 2004). (B) Rosabeth Moss Kanter – The Change Master According to Rosabeth Moss Kanter, an organisation can identify two different ways in which companies approach innovation in its business environment. First approach is known as ‘integrative approach’ which includes the holistic aspects to encompass with the problems of an organisation. With this concern, an organisation can implement creativity in its working culture with the help of new and innovative ideas. On the contrary, the other approach is known as ‘segmentalist approach’ that put emphasis on solving the problems on the basis of the structural division of an organisation (Kanter, 1984). Moreover, Moss Kanter also suggests a few important measures to deal with resistance to change in an organisation. According to Moss Kanter, the top management of an organisation should support the applied innovation along with integrative learning. An organisation always has one division which is termed as “culture of pride” where innovation is already applied and it rewards competitive advantages for the organisation. Thus, this division should provide significant assistance and share experiences to other parts of the business where the change is supposed to be applied in near future (Kanter, 1984). In the same way, an organisation can enhance its lateral communication for overcoming the resistance to change. Furthermore, an organisation can obtain flatter structure in its process along with enhanced empowerment for the employees in order to avoid resistance to change. The other measure which is suggested by Rosabeth Moss Kanter in terms of overcoming the resistance is that the change plan of an organisation should be explicit to the employees who are involved in a change process directly and/or indirectly. In a similar way, the management committees of an organisation should provide complete assistance for the implementation of change process in order to avoid the resistance to change (Kanter, 1984). References Cummings, T. G. & Worley, C. G., 2008. Organization Development & Change. Cengage Learning. Gutknecht, D. B. & Miller, J. R., 1990. The Organizational and Human Resources Sourcebook. University Press of America. Iyer, M., No Date. Organizational Behavior. W. Jack Duncan Book Review. [Online] Available at: http://www.hrfolks.com/articles/orgn%20mgmt/organizational%20behavior.pdf [Accessed March 07, 2012]. Kanter, R. M., 1984. The Change Masters: Innovation And Entrepreneurship In The American Corporation. Simon & Schuster. Lee, K. E., 1999. A Change In The Outlook For Psychology In Management – From Skill-Building To Personal Development. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 14, Iss. 7/8, pp. 589-601. NIOS, 2012. Business Environment. Module -3 Business Around Us. [Online] Available at: http://www.nios.ac.in/srsec319new/319EL3.pdf [Accessed March 07, 2012]. Wirth, R. A., 2004. Organizational Change Through Influencing Individual Change A Behaviour Centric Approach To Change. Influencing Individual Change. [Online] Available at: http://www.entarga.com/orgchange/InfluencingIndividualChange.pdf [Accessed March 07, 2012]. Wells, S., 2006. Force Field Analysis. Mini-Tutorial Quality Management. [Online] Available at: http://www.freequality.org/documents/knowledge/Mini-Tutorial.pdf [Accessed March 07, 2012]. Wirth, R. A., 2004. Lewin/Schein’s Theory. Organizational Change. [Online] Available at: http://www.entarga.com/orgchange/lewinschein.pdf [Accessed March 07, 2012]. Bibliography Blair, A. M. & Hitchcock, D., 2001. Environment and Business. Routledge. Phillips, J. R., 2006. The Change Masters, by Rosabeth Moss Kanter. New York, Simon & Schuster, 1983. Human Resource Management, Vol. 22, Iss. 3, pp. 313-317. Read More