Organizational Change Management - Case Study Example

Running Head: Organizational Change Management Organizational Change Management Name Course Lecturer Date Organizational Change Management Executive Summary Organizational change is an important process toward organizational improvement. However, change in most cases creates anxiety which may lead to resistance to change. Change can be visualized and organized change requires an approach that will take into account various factors, so that its value may be achieved (Harvey, 2002), through incremental learning as efficient change process depends on preparation, facilitating mechanisms and processes of monitoring and evaluation with the change plan (Lakomski, 2001; Harvey, 2002). Resistance result from personality, differences in situation analysis, role strains or lack of comprehensive communication and information for change (Robbins et al., 2008) From analyzing the integrated case study, the major changes identified by me are: Firstly Melinda Henderson and Deborah Walcott’s working relationship deteriorated after David Gunsberg (executive manager) announced that Melinda Henderson is to be in-charge of five staff members (including Deborah) at HIA Brisbane because Melinda is to be promoted as the executive support manager. Secondly, major issue is management change brought about David Gunsberg. The third issue that is very evident in the case study is change stress. Proposed solutions are: Firstly, change is a process which should take into account the personnel and their response to change and thus it should be preceded by concrete efforts to prepare, facilitate and maintain change before, during and after a change is introduced (Dahl,2011). Secondly, hostility should be addressed by involvement, communication, education, agreement and implicit coercion to people who may resist (Crabtree & Space, 2004). Thirdly, change stress is dealt with through coaching, counseling and mentoring (Harvey, 2002). Introduction From the case study written by Tee &Ashkanasy (2011) the authors stated that Housing Industry Association (HIA) was founded in 1965, and is the largest Australian residential building organization, with offices in every capital city in Australia. In Brisbane there were major changes taking place in relation to management reporting levels. Plus the executive director, David Gunsberg promoted his secretary to executive support manager and was put in charge of five staff members. Deborah, the office manager felt threatened by the change management since she was used to coming work late, take two hours lunch break as well as leaving earlier giving some excuses that she has to pick her kids. It becomes clear that the newly elected executive support manager will be supervising Deborah that brought about some element of threat to Deborah because she has to take directions from Melinda and may not be allowed to carry-on her previous habits at work like coming in late and leaving early. Despite the discussion that took place between Melinda and Deborah, their relationship deteriorated to an extent that Deborah is not able to tolerate Melinda’s new role. The conflict between Deborah and Melinda continued on and Deborah requested for a transfer to another section so that she is not reporting directly to Melinda. Integrated Case Analysis: Q1: Why Deborah reacted negatively towards Melinda. Her reactions were not justified Deborah reacted negatively towards Melinda because she felt threatened of losing her accustomed lifestyle of 15 years in the workplace. She was concerned that Melinda’s promotion would result to more and different work, longer working hours and with no flexibility in her working arrangements, hence the resistance. Workplace indifferences among employees are detrimental in the sense that they conversely cause social isolation (Robbins et al., 2008) rumors, attacking a person’s private life and personal attributes, excessive criticism, withholding job responsibility and verbal aggression (Crabtree & Space 2004). Indeed, Deborah keeps distance and badmouthed Melanie as well as inciting and isolating from anyone who never agreed with her point of view (Tee &Ashkanasy, 2011). Deborah felt threatened by Melanie’s new position resulting to a negative and unethical behaviour in the workplace. Dahl (2011), points out that many conflicts and indifferences arise in an organization due to the fact that certain people resist change. Precisely, Deborah behaved in this manner to resist change in the organization. Resistance to change in an organization means strongly opposing the change. Various theories and models have been developed in a bid to explain and solve the issue of resistance to change. According to Stanley et al (2005), various reasons are attributed to individuals’ resistance to change. A major reason why certain people resist change in an organization is due to parochial self-interest. These individuals are concerned with only the implication of the intended change for themselves as well as how it affects their interests, and not necessarily taking into account its effects in benefiting the business. This has been manifestly evident in Deborah who felt that Melinda’s promotion will affect her well accustomed behaviour of 15 years in the company. Deborah reacting negatively towards Melinda can also contribute to relationship conflict. Therefore resistance may arise from low tolerance for each party to another. (Stanley et al., 2005) Moreover, Deborah resisted change due to her different consideration of the situation. Thus certain individuals are greatly keen in regard to security as well as stability within their work much discussed by (Stanley et al., 2005). As a result, Deborah argued that Melinda did not deserve promotion having worked for the company for only two years compared to her 15 years. In an attempt to impose her intentions, Deborah badmouths Melinda which is termed unethical workplace practice (Kaptein, 2008). Finally, resistance to change may arise from communication problems (Lakomski, 2001). Deborah had inadequate information about Melinda’s expertise resulting to misunderstanding of her ability to handle the new position having worked for just two years in the company. According to stage of change theory, an employee’s readiness for change is a vital factor to consider when introducing any change in an organization. As such, HIA was obligated to design and introduce an instructional program in preparing all employees under the supervision of Melinda beforehand. Employees are therefore taken through stages of instructional strategies to prepare them for Melinda’s promotion. By so doing, resistance to her promotion from Deborah and any other person under her supervision would be reduced. From the above perspective, Deborah was not justified in behaving negatively in the workplace and towards Melinda. Firstly, Melinda’s promotion came from the executive director on the bases of expertise and performance. This is only after her two years work in the company contrary to Deborah’s 15 years without promotion. Plainly, Deborah’s resistance to Melinda’s promotion was baseless as she misunderstood that the promotion was offered on the bases of productivity rather than length of service. Furthermore, Deborah’s chronic problems such as lateness, leaving early and taking more than the scheduled hours for lunch disqualifies her capability. Chen&Tjosvold (2007), argues that negative chronic behaviors of managers and senior personnel are likely to be adopted by their juniors. This implies that, Melinda was the better choice for the position considering that such unethical behaviors were not found in her work practices unlike Deborah. In this case, Deborah’s attitude was unjustified. Additionally, Stanley et al (2005), asserts that lack of proper balance between the family and the work can negatively affect ones attitudes towards organizational change. From the case study, Deborah always left early to go fetch her children from school. This was not the case with Melinda; hence her eligibility for the position which has been described to come with increased workload. Q 2: What Melinda could have done to better resolve the issue with Deborah? Crabtree and Space (2004), observes that negative behaviors within a workplace reduce productivity, spoil morale among other employees in addition to costing the organization business. As established above Deborah was generally resisting change. Therefore, Melanie was obligated to involve change approaches in order to deal with the resulting resistance. As a manager, Melinda needed to assume a facilitative and supportive approach toward Deborah. Her resistance is mainly caused by adjustment to the problems and at this difficult time, she really needs support from the manager. This can help her deal with anxiety and the fear which result from a view that the novel employee is promoted before her. The transition period has brought a perception of detrimental effects to Deborah and thus it is important for Melinda to offer her counseling, special training and possibly time off work for her to heal psychological (Chen&Tjosvold, 2007). Melinda should also focus on participation and involvement where Deborah will be involved in information and activities matters (Harvey, 2002). If Deborah is involved in organizational matters, she will possibly buy into the changes that have occurred rather than resist it. This will ultimately lower resistance to change and possibly promote her participation and support of organizational decisions and outcomes. Being over other managers and departments, Deborah and other groups may present considerable resistance. Offering incentives to Deborah such as allowing her to have veto roles can reduce her threatening behavior (Harvey, 2002). Moreover, Melinda could have engaged a consistent communication approach. In addition to scheduled meetings with Deborah, Melinda could have immensely and consistently used other communication means such as memos, emails and circulars which would show her response and probably in the long run promote face to face communication. This tactic is argued to be a vital way in overcoming resistance to change. More and more up-front communication would have helped Deborah see the logic contained in the change effort for the sake of the organization as well as her career life. By so doing, the incorrect and unfounded rumors regarding the effects of this change would have been reduced and at long last eradicated. Actually, consistence upfront communication to change resistors acts an education program that gradually provides correct information and analysis that will eventually change their perception (Harvey, 2002).Finally, as last resort, Melinda could use implicit and explicit coercion approach. Making clear that her accustomed behaviors are no longer allowed in the organization and set ground and instructions are to be followed reduces resistance to change Harvey, 2002). Melinda is obligated as manager to exercise authority by explicitly directing the employees. Q3. (I)Is organizational change more stressful for team members or team leaders? Stress is a normal human reaction to pressure when countered with dangerous or challenging situations (Australian psychological Society, 2012). The pressure comes from the strain that we set on ourselves as well as occurrence around us. Organizational changes are difficult phases in an organization life cycle; they are illustrated by contradictory sentiments among the members of the organization and lack of recognition and trust. Organizational change is more stressful to team members; this is because they find it hard to integrate the new policies or modernism into their daily practices. Since organizational change involves changing of organizational behavior of employees fail to learn as well as making routine of these behaviors in a short period of time, which makes them feel stressed (Armenakis et all, 1993). The top management through strategic communication should talk to the team members. Through storytelling and informal communication, an organizational change can be addressed effectively. Matters such as uncertainty and behavioral responses are addressed in order for enhancing employees gratification towards change (Invernizzi & Romenti, 2009). Q3.(ii) Possible stressors for organizational members experiencing change in the workplace as depicted in the case study. Organizational change is a critical life occurrence, which has possibility in evoking stress feedbacks as well as other negative consequences in employees (Rumbles & Rees, 2012). ‘Managing change is a challenging and important task. If you apply a process and use a variety of tools, you can design a change plan that people will accept and work hard to implement a less disruptive change’ http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_56.htm The anxiety and confusion that comes as a result change management and insecurity of being unaware of what lies ahead proves to be a possible stressor to employees of an organization undergoing (Farler et all, 2012). The emotional reactions that employees’ shows while the organizational change is taking place can be related to personal loss. The shock or denial that employees experience when the organizational change is announced to them is a possible stressor as happened to Deborah. The employees become anxious to know how the change will affect them and will not be in a position to listen to any other information. As seen in the case study, Deborah becoming angry because of Melinda’s promotion, most of the employees terms it as unfair for someone who has worked in an organization for few years being promoted. The employees experiencing change at a personal level feels threatened as well as fearful. As change is implemented, it becomes a reality which employees may resist or adjust to it (Farler et all, 2012). Q4. How organizational culture influences organizational change? Organizational culture is a set of norms, principles, beliefs as well as ways of behaving collectively which gives every organization a unique character which are structured and changed over time (Schein, 2006). Culture of the workplace promotes healthy competition in an organization. In regards to this, employees work hard to perform better than their fellow workers to earn recognition as well as appreciation of the superiors, the culture of the organization inspires the workers to achieve (Grawitch et all, 2007). Additionally, the culture dictates on how the workers should interact in the organization. A good culture should encourage the workers to stay motivated and devoted towards the management. The organizational culture is a representation of certain predefined plans which acts as a guide to the employees and also gives them direction in an organization. Therefore organizational culture is then backbone to efficient management as it is well understood by organizational personnel. It is necessary for every organization to have guidelines, for the workers to work accordingly (Management Study Guide, 2013). Every organization is identified by its own culture which creates the brand image of an organization, as every organization has its own culture that is different from other organizations. Through entrepreneurial organizational culture, the communication between the management and the members is deepened during the process of change. Through the (EOT), communication is enhanced as vital and significant of the constitutive ability of communication in a firm. In addition, it removes psychological barriers among workers, generates positive energies as well as exploits feelings of improvement related with organizational change positively. It insists on the vital role of leading values as the most influential leverages to distribute combined energies towards common objective (Invernizzi & Romenti, 2009). This is what makes an organization distinct from others. In addition, it brings all the workers on a general platform. This means that all the employees in an organization should be treated equally and there should be no feeling of neglect or left out in the organization. For the employees to deliver best at the workplace, it is important for them to adjust well in an organization culture (Child, 1994). On the other hand, organizational culture unites the workers from different backgrounds, whereby a sense of unity is promoted at the workplace. It also promotes healthy relationship amongst the workers whereby no one should take work as a burden and employees moulds themselves according to the organizational culture (Management Study Guide, 2013). There are some organizations that follow a culture where all the workers in the organization are required to report in the office at the right time irrespective of their title. This is important hence it promotes punctuality among workers which eventually benefit them in the long run. Organizational culture makes people successful professionals (Cockburn & Highsmith, 2001). In addition, organizational culture extracts the best of each team member. This mostly happens in an organization where the management is very specific on the reporting system, whereby the workers submit their report at the end of the day. No word should be forced to work since the culture motivates employees and makes them successful in the organization (Management Study Guide, 2013). Proposed Solutions: From the case study, three main issues identified include organizational change, hostile relationship between Deborah and Melinda, and thirdly, change stress. Organizational change is inevitable and thus the organization structure, roles and activities keeps on being adjusted for an organization to respond to internal and external demands. Workplace conflict seems an inevitable fact in many cases. However, various models and theories have been developed which help in resolving conflicts successfully. In regard to above case study, dual concern model may effectively applicable for conflict resolution in the company. This conflict resolution model as a conceptual perspective assumes that individuals prefer various methods in dealing with a conflict based on the two main underlying dimensions: assertiveness which is a concern for self and empathy being a concern for others (Leung et al., 2002). In this case, HIA Brisbane could engage this model to balance the employees concern about satisfying their personal needs or interests as well as those of others. Basically, under this model Melinda could have used the cooperation conflict style which concerned by both pro-social and self-behaviour, to ensure her relationship with Deborah is mended without any of them getting demoralized, but rather get an amicable solution to satisfy both parties in line to organizational objectives. An action plan to organizational structure change may involve where David, Deborah and Melinda should attend change management seminar for three days. Through attending and learning why change is important and how change can help to develop one another’s capabilities can improve performance of individuals. Have a common assessment of the situation so the change may be understood and taken with minimal resistance. Education and communication effectively reveals the need, prepare people to new situations and reduce role strains as the management is able to approach specific issues that the workers express as challenging (Rhydderch et al., 2004). Coaching, mentoring and counseling come in at this stage. Identify change agents, facilitators, idea generators and mediators to involve all on board as different people in the organization are well equipped with different roles that can promote holistic approach to performance (Rhydderch et al., 2004). Do constant evaluation to ensure that change is adopted and then create more challenging situations to make change and adaptation a continuous thing. To manage stress HIA may indulge in various strategies such as encouraging participation of employees in decision making to reduce role stress, setting realistic particular and stimulating organizational goals among other things (Bond & Bunce, 2000). Conclusion: In conclusion, organizational change is a way of life in business and. Resistance to change is natural and healthy as noted in the case study, but the top management should assist the team members to adjust to the new policies. Change evokes stress to the employees who becomes uncertain of their job security, but the management should be clear to their employees on their security as well as try to convince them on the necessity of change in the organization. On the other hand, the employees in an organization undergoing change should abide with the organizational culture that defines the role and responsibility as well as illustrating the way every employee should be handled without neglect or left out because this reduces the detrimental outcomes that occur in case the promoted employee changes at once and reveals new approach to interactions. References: Armenakis, A. A., Harris, S. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1993). Creating readiness for organizational change. Human relations, 46(6), 681-703. Australia Psychology Society. (2012). Managing Stress. Melbourne: Australian Psychology Society Ltd. Bond, F. W., & Bunce, D. (2000). Mediators of change in emotion-focused and problem-focused worksite stress management interventions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 156-163. Chen, N. Y. F., &Tjosvold, D. (2007). Guanxi and leader member relationships between American managers and Chinese employees: Open-minded dialogue as mediator. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(2), 171-189. Child, J. (1994). Organization: A guide to problems and practice. SAGE Publications Limited. Cockburn, A., & Highsmith, J. (2001). Agile software development, the people factor. Computer, 34(11), 131-133. Crabtree, S., & Space, I. (2004). Getting personal in the workplace. MANAGEMENT, 888, 274-5447. Dahl, M. S. (2011).Organizational change and employee stress.Management Science, 57(2), 240-256. Farler, L., Gar, C, S. (2012). Workplace Stress in Libraries. New Information Perspectives, 229. Grawitch, M. J., Trares, S., & Kohler, J. M. (2007). Healthy workplace practices and employee outcomes. International Journal of Stress Management, 14(3), 275. Harvey, T. R. (2002).Checklist for Change: A Pragmatic Approach for Creating and Controlling Change. Rowman& Littlefield. Invernizzi, M., Romenti, S. (2009). Identity, Communication and Change Management in Ferrari. Corporate Communications, 484. Kaptein, M. (2008). Developing a measure of unethical behavior in the workplace: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management, 34(5), 978-1008. Lakomski, G. (2001). Organizational change, leadership and learning: culture as cognitive process. International Journal of Educational Management, 15(2), 68-77. Leung, K., Koch, P. T., & Lu, L. (2002). A dualistic model of harmony and its implications for conflict management in Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19(2-3), 201-220. Management Study Guide. (2013, May Saturnday). Management Study Guide. Retrieved from http://www.managementstudyguide.com/importance-of-organization-culture.htm Rhydderch, M., Elwyn, G., Marshall, M., & Grol, R. P. T. M. (2004). Organisational change theory and the use of indicators in general practice. Quality and safety in health Care, 13(3), 213-217. Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A., Millett, B., & Waters-Marsh, T. (2008). Organisationalbehaviour. (Sixth edition).Frenchs Forest NSW: Pearson Education Australia. Rumbles, S., Rees, G. (2012). Continous Change, Organizational Burnout and the Implications for HRD. HRD Professional, Schein, E. H. (2006). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 356). Jossey-bass. Stanley, D. J., Meyer, J. P., &Topolnytsky, L. (2005). Employee cynicism and resistance to organizational change.Journal of Business and Psychology Van Tonder, C. L. (2004). Organisational change: Theory and practice. Van Schaik. Website reference: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_56.htm Read More