Overcoming Obstacles and Resistance to Organizational Change - Literature review Example

Name: Lecturer: University: Course: Date: Introduction In the contemporary world, the process of change is more of a norm than an exception in all organizations and institutions. Change in this context refers to ability of the organization to update its organizational capacity and make structural adjustments to respond to competition and technological advances to derive maximum efficiency. Management of changes occurring within the organization is dependent on the leadership and hence the management plays a big role in facilitating this process. The Central South Wales community health centre has an opportunity to implement changes. Potential hindrances to change in the health centre will include the management itself, employees and structural rigidity. It is critical that some changes take place to enhance access and provision of better quality services. Additionally, some managerial changes need to be initiated in developing the community facilities through which people can receive better services. Management coupled with other factors as organizational change and rebellious workers have devastating effects on the change. In this discourse, we will analyze various reasons why the management and organization’s staff pose as the greatest obstacles in implementing despite being the most responsible for implementing new strategies in the health facility. Beside I will address ways in which the obstacles that hinder the process of change can be surmounted. Resistance to organizational change in social services Management play a significant ensuring that new strategies for governance are put in place. The commitment of the management in the change process is instrumental for ensuring that social services department in Australia achieves its efficiency through changes in policies, structures and operations. ‘Managerialism’ and the rigidity of an organization to respond to change pressures in various contexts fail to accept change for varied reasons. The management should show commitment in leading the process of change. The commitment of an organization to change is dependent on the leadership style that managers adopt and structures of governace (O’Hallran et al, 2008). To evaluate the performance drivers, the managers ought to understand that change is not an option but rather than a prerequisite. The managers may pose great obstacle when they perceive change as such (Hill and Jones 2008). The health centre structure needs to be in effect to realize the objectives of a more efficient system by introducing new managerial structure to touch on the lives of their clients. The provision of home based care for the group of clients whose needs compel them to receive their services from other facilities not located within the health centres. The managers oppose changes that undermine their capacity as leaders and challenge their authority and power. This may be reflective of cultural lag within the organization where the organizational culture is not flexible enough to accommodate changes (O’Halloran et al, 2008). An effective change initiative within organization seeks to redress all sectors and departments that are caught up by the organizational lag. The managers also stand as a hindrance in change process when they refuse to be held accountable in the manner in which managerial input to change is done. In reference to Deming cycle of change process, it is imperative that the manager assume the role of planning and prepare the organization for changes. Besides, implementing and gauging the performance of the plans. The evaluation of the efficiency of the system should also include providing recommendations for improvement. The managers may lack the urgency to effect these changes. The interpretation of this could lie in the managers perception of change and hence the resistance to change. Additionally, the social workers and health workers in Australia resist change that is often seen as a risk towards an unknown future. Most employees would rather stay with the old ways of operating than make adjustments to accommodate change (Fischer and Karger, 1997: 156). All stakeholders will only welcome the process of change if they clearly understand that the consequences of remaining still are dire than implementing administration and structural changes. The community health centre may be so determined to introduce some new ways of providing leadership and management. However, this would impossible if we were to forget the fact that human beings are social beings who always feel connected and contented with the old patterns of interaction of people and may have already established some attachments with organizational management and ways of operating. The changes that need to be introduced might require that the leadership changes and reshuffles that may affect the employees. At the very least, people who have interacted with certain leadership, become emotionally attached with the old way of doing things in reference to their managers. These attachments often feel threatened when the process of change tend to come to define new way of governance and administration. This will alter the human relationships that previously existed. This is a major reason for resistance although in many cases people tend to trivialise these relationships. While suggesting new ways of doing things it imperative not overlook observational learning. The processes of change have no role models to be associated with unlike the old ways. In this context, people might feel uncomfortable to accommodate changes that will significantly alter the way people interact or even share. For instance, in the department of social services, the social worker whose job description entails visiting the elderly and providing the substance abusers with counselling might find difficulties while trying to adapt to a new management style that may require them to work in another field. Again, people might resist change when the evidence that such radical transformation will enhance productivity in future or it will be better is not presented in terms of facts. All stakeholders or people who will be affected in the process of change within the department of social services must be well aware of the changes that will be implemented and the gains that the company stand to gain in the end (Hansenfeld, 2009). In the unit of social services department that deals with alcoholics and drug dependant people, introducing changes might be very difficult as a lot of conviction will need to be used to make the patients and the nurses to accept change. A huge reason why people stand opposed to the process of change is that people start to feel threatened. This fear is justifiable. Firstly, new technology will invite possession of new skills and competencies. Not all people feel that they possess enough competence to interact with new technology and therefore they feel that their jobs are at stake. Secondly, people will feel threatened and anxious due to the uncertainty. Many key players of this inclination find it difficult to consult and seek clarification on the issues of change. This stage causes many key players to lack the urgency of changing the old ways. Scepticism is also a characteristic of human nature. Every decision that we make to implement change, as change agents, managers or policy makers, must be very consistent sceptical nature of human beings. Managerialism as an aspect of many departments, the managers will just want to oppose without founded reasons. Sometimes, is because they just do not see such moves as positive or as able to yield results as planned. The sceptics serve a very functional role in the process of social change as they may contribute positively in the manner that the organization or the institution might mitigate the risks of failure. Employees fear hidden agendas in the process of social change. In this context, some reformers are not trustworthy to their clients besides not all the change agents may solicit trust from the social workers. They might mistrust the moves by the change agent for previous mistakes. Thus, people should not bear the blame for not trusting you because of probably the agent of change blemished past. Overcoming obstacles of change Management is crucially involved in comprehensive explanation of what the company or the institution stands to gain in terms of operational efficiency and satisfying the clients by addressing their needs to the employees. The most important thing is to ensure that a large number of employees and social workers are on board whilst calling for radical or gradual changes in the way of operating and changing the organizational structure. As indicated above the greatest impediment to change is the managerial structures and employees. Thus, to overcome these obstacles, the change agents need to enhance positivity from both the management and employees. The employees will need a lot of conviction to establish why the company is taking such radical move towards the reforms. It is therefore imperative for the change initiator be an effective communicator. In organization that the flow of information if top down, like in social services department, people will always tend to blame the manager or the organization for effecting changes. As Markham puts it, the manager ought to explain with a lot conviction the need for change and how the process will affect the employees, patients and the client and whether these changes will be direct or indirect affect them (1999: 134). This will be aimed at ensuring that the agent attains the majority or numbers that are significant in ensuring that the process of change is welcome. People become uncertain of how the changes will impart on their lives and as such effectiveness of change. Effective communication is a big remover of obstacles of resisting (Adamson et al, 1988: 234). It is in the realms of effective communication that the change agent emphasizes the roles of all employees regardless of the changes. This helps to fight the self identity crisis that people face when they their careers are on the verge of extinction due to adoption of new technology. All the clients, social workers and employees should be made understand that change is unending and continuous process that makes the institution responsive to external pressures of global demands (Lymbery, 2007). All the processes and skills require updating for the clients to continue receiving the best possible care. Adoption of new machines and technology to help in diagnosing the conditions of the clients, facilitate recovery besides proper monitoring of the recovery progress should be communicated to the stakeholders to serve in the best interest of the institution. The change agents should welcome resistance to change as a positive. The employees are justified to oppose change because of it is only through the consequences that we can deem of the change process effective (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002: 69). Thus, some resistance serves as an opportunity to review the risks involved in changing the current system and ensure that they are mitigated. Additionally, it is imperative that the managers put into consideration the views and opinions of those resisting change. In recognition that the performance of any institution is dependent on the motivation of employees, it is imperative that the social change agent assumes the approach of a supportive leader during the process. People who are negatively affected by the process of change should be supported financially and emotionally for their loss. According to Appelbaum et al, research has shown that when laid off employees are treated with dignity, the motivation among the remaining employees remains high and performance is boosted (1999: 45). The participation of all the employees and the clients is pivotal to the whole process of change. People tend to resist the decisions that emanate from without. Thus, the change agent should ensure that the employees are involved in every step and contribute significantly (Markham, 1999: 123). This makes it easy for them to own the process and significantly reducing the resistance. Participation also boosts the self-esteem of the employees. Negotiation with the employees who vehemently oppose change is crucial in overcoming the resistance. The employees may only be suffering from the emotional phase of grief. Thus, by negotiation the employees and clients may feel supported and compromise the opposition of employees. Nonetheless, the negotiation might not be fruitful as anticipated but may help the employees to overcome the process slowly and with less remorse. The employees may refuse to accept the process however involved the might have been. It is therefore within the discretion of the manager to initiate changes amid resistance. This entails forcing the changes if the changes are imminent and inevitable. This might be detrimental to the work commitment and motivation of the workers although the essence of change overcomes these elements of resistance. Conclusion The process of change is systematic and can result from within or without the institutions of social services. Within the organization, the primary drivers are the employees and the organizational structure itself. The external pressure to effect change may prove the biggest catalyst to effect in the field of health and social care. Changing the manner in which the administration and the governance is implemented. Decisively, it is agreeable that the management and organizational structure are important in addressing the process of change. References Adamson, N., Briskin, L., McPhail, M. (1988) Feminist organizing for change Don Mills, ON: Oxford Appelbaum, S.H., Everard, A. and Hung, L.T.S. Strategic downsizing critical success factors Management Decision Vol.37, No.7, pp. 535-552 Fisher, R & Karger, H. J. (1997) Social work and community in a private world White Plains, New York: Longman Publishers, pp 149 – 173 Hansenfeld Yeheske (2009) Human Services as Complex Organizations New York: Sage, pp.608 Hill C. W. L and Jones G. R. (1998) Strategic management: an integrated approach Fourth Edition London: Publisher Houghton Mifflin Company, Pp 471 pages Heifetz, R.A. & Linsky, M. (2002) A survival guide for leader Harvard Business Review, Vol.80, pp.69 Lymbery Mark (2007) Social Work: companion to learning New York: Sage publishers Markham J. Donna (1999) Spirit Linking Leadership: Working Through Resistance to Organizational Change Canterbury: Paulists Publisher, Pp. 143 O’Halloran K., McGregor L and Simon W. K (2008) Charity law & social policy: national and international perspectives on the functions of the law relating to charities. Fourth Edition New York: Springer, Pp.616 Read More