Managing People at Work: The Housing Industry Association - Case Study Example

Managing People at Work How might the situation be influenced by organizational or national level culture? 6 Conclusion 7 References 8 Huseman, Richard C., Logue C.M., & Freshley D.L. (1977). Readings in Interpersonal and 8 Organizational Communication. Boston: Holbrook Press Inc. 8 Introduction The Housing Industry Association’s top management has just executed some changes in the organizational hierarchy, and this has caused a stirrup with some employees especially the old employees. These stirrups have been explored by many scholars and explained as resistance to change which is influenced by affective and cognitive motives. This paper seeks to explain the issues around organizational culture, change and employee behaviour as explored with the help of a case study. Deborah’s reaction and Justification for her behaviour Deborah reacted with great hostility towards Melinda because she felt threatened by the changes that had been effected. Melinda had been at the organization for only two years while Deborah had worked for fifteen years, yet she was promoted to be higher in rank than the latter. Deborah typically communicates a negative attitude towards the change since she could predict the likely outcomes to be undesirable. According to (Davis,1967) people develop and settle into a culture that in turn influences their behaviour unconsciously, giving them a sense of stability , security and the ability to respond to different situations. When this culture is interrupted by changes within the organization, their stability is shaken, the sense of security is threatened and they will respond with resistance to the changes. This clearly explains the case of Deborah’s reaction towards Melinda. In the real sense she was angered that the changes would interfere with the culture she had settled into for the last 15 years. Melinda was the innocent victim whose face represented the Housing Industry Association and Deborah’s fears and anger towards the organization were projected towards Melinda. However her reaction is not justifiable, because she is not the only employee who was affected by the shakeup in management. (Newstroms, & Davis, 1993) explore the issue of individualization, where an employee is able to wield influence on an organizations social system by challenging the culture. This clearly explains Deborah’s poor work ethics demonstrated by the fact that she came to work late, took an extra one hour during lunch break and left half an hour earlier. Melinda on the other hand had to deal with the pressures of her new job description; moving from being a support staff to managing the general staff translated into a bigger workload and higher levels of work stress. Different reviews have shown that employees react differently to change, because this interrupts the norm they have been accustomed to. According to (Paulsen et al, 2005), Organizational change interrupts employee work status and the reporting hierarchy, which in turn interferes with interpersonal relationships. In regard to this case study, Deborah was displaying a case of resistance to change. She had been used to a routine for 15 years and the leadership of Melinda was going to interfere with it, by effecting new and strict work policies. Change is constant but it is the most resisted thing by humankind, since accepting change also brings about instability before it is fully embraced. Deborah Knew she was going to face increased pressure and higher levels of stress as she tried to break free from her old habits. Preferred course of action for Melinda Conflicts are bound to occur when change occurs regardless of the circumstances. Melinda tried her part to come into an agreement with Deborah but her efforts proved futile, and their relationship deteriorated. Research that has been carried out over a period of time on workplace conflict identifies two types of conflict which are; task conflict and relationship conflict (Flagnan & Runde, 2008). Task conflict is focused on resolving problems brought about by differences in opinions, points of view and attitudes. Relationship conflict focuses on finding fault in others and does not lay emphasis on finding a solution. Melinda and Deborah were experiencing the two types of conflict with Melinda displaying the task conflict unlike Deborah who was experiencing relationship conflict. According to (Huseman, 1977) there are two ways of conflict reduction. The first is conflict reduction through an organizations hierarchy- in this case Melinda would have resorted to referring the case to a higher level for further action. However this would have resulted into serious consequences and besides she was determined to prove her competence in handling the new office. The second method is using a problem solving approach to manage conflicts, and this is probably the best way to go for any manager, despite being a difficult venture. Conflict management strategies can be further classified into avoidance and approach strategies (Faria, 1982). Avoidance strategies concentrate on protecting ones survival in the organization such as Deborah’s resistance to change, and her attempt to strike a ‘deal’ with Melinda in order to retain her poor work ethic. Approach strategies focus on problem solving and they are characterized by confrontations between the parties involved, but seek to bring in order at the workplace especially in the aspect of social relations. Comparing the notes in the previous paragraph, it is evident that Melinda was also trying to protect her position even though she was intent on ensuring the company goals are attained. Her strategy translates to the accommodating strategy that resulted into the breakdown of their relationship. She could have tried using a different approach that is the win/win style which ensures the interests of every party are put in consideration. As such she would have liaised with the executive management to introduce better working conditions such as introducing and implementing a flexible working schedule for every employee, such that each employee chooses the hours that come in and leave provided they have worked the required working hours in a day. This would have solved Deborah’s problem encouraged her to be cooperative. Is organizational change more stressful for team members or team leaders? Identify the possible stressors for organizational members experiencing change in the work place as depicted in the case study. Organizational change is inevitable within any organization that is striving to retain its relevance in the market today. However change occurs at different levels and is also perceived differently at the different levels. Current research shows that organizational change is stressful to every person but, can be more stressful to the team members who are directly affected (Braton, 2007). This though does not exempt the team leaders who have to deal with complaints from the members they lead, who express contempt directly to the leader who represents the organization. Kanter, Stein & Jick (1992) identify three clusters in any organization that are directly or indirectly affected by change; change strategists, change managers and change recipients. The change recipients (the team members) cluster experiences a high level of threat because this is the group that implements the change process. The team leaders fall in the clusters of change strategists and change managers. Though these clusters are also prone be stressed by the organizational changes, they are not directly affected since their stressors come from managing the change implementers. The organizational stressors as depicted in the case study include; extended working hours, adapting to new management which means loss of the culture different employees had settled into, taking orders from someone who has been promoted from support staff. The mode of communication for such a major change is wanting even though it is effective. The executive director being the change strategist would have sought the audience of his staff (face to face), explained his decision and also allowed for their input. How might the situation be influenced by organizational or national level culture? Organizational culture has a great impact on the employee’s effectiveness in their work and also influences employee behaviour. According to (Ojo, 2012) an organizations culture should be tailored to accommodate employee development over time, and create an environment that helps them improve on their job performance. In the case study, employees like Deborah had individualized the social system of the organization and her work ethic demonstrates an inability to perform as desired. This is a major loophole in the culture of a nationwide organization like the Housing Industry Association. To begin with the association appears to have an organizational culture of communicating via email and as such the change recipients do not have any option but to accept and implement the changes. On the other hand the national executive director personally communicates to the staff, implying that they have a national level culture in running the association. The situation in this case study is largely influenced by the national level culture of management, which appears to do very little in motivating its own employees. The performance, commitment level, and ethical behaviour of staff like Deborah is inadequate much as (Shani and Lau, 2005) believe that this behaviour is determined by the organizations culture to a large extent. On the other hand Melinda is appointed to office and the case study does not highlight any event where she was empowered with the managerial knowledge through training seminars or workshops, which (Stewart, 1991) believes equip employees in leadership with the necessary skills. Conclusion The case of Deborah and Melinda is so typical of what happens across organizations regardless of their size and nature. It is therefore; very important for executive level management to continuously review whether the impact the organizational culture has on their employees is what they would desire. It is important that employees are taken through continuous professional development programs, which will help them, know what to do when faced with situations that involve conflict, pressure and increased work stress. References Bratton, J. (2007). Work and organizational behaviour. Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan. Davis, K. (1967). Human relations at work: The dynamics of organizational behaviour. (9th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Faria, R. G. (1982). An investigative analysis of conflict management theory and practice as Examined from the operative position of the secondary school assistant principal ship. Boston: Boston College School of Education. Flanagan, T.A., & Runde, C.E. (2008). Hidden potential embracing conflict can pay off for Teams. 28(2), 25-27. Huseman, Richard C., Logue C.M., & Freshley D.L. (1977). Readings in Interpersonal and Organizational Communication. Boston: Holbrook Press Inc. Kanter, R. M., Stein, B. A. & Jick, T. D. (1992). The challenge of organizational change: How companies experience it and leaders guide it. New York: Free Press Newstrom, J. W. & Davis, K. (1993). Organizational Behaviour: Human Behaviour at Work. New York: McGraw-Hill. Ojo, U. (2012). Influence of Organizational Culture on Employee work behaviour. International Journal of Contemporary Business Studies, 3(11), 47-48 Paulsen, N., Callan, V.J., Grice, T.... Jimmesion, N. (2005). "Job uncertainty and personal control during downsizing: A comparison of survivors and victims’", Human Relations, 58 (4), 463-496. Robinson, C. (2010). When conflict happens: navigating difficult interactions in senior teams – fostering a culture of constructive engagement. Business Strategy Series, 11(4), 214 - 218. Stewart, J. (1991). Managing Change through Training and Development. London: Kogan Page. Read More