Resistance to Organizational Change - Coursework Example

Resistance to change Name Institution Organizational change Introduction Organizational change is the process by which an organization changes its structure and strategies to meet the changes required in the organization (Shafritz & Jang, 2015). The changes in an organization can take a wider dimension ranging from the structure, operation, production concept and the management strategy. The organizational change by itself can be a temporary process or continuous, depending on the objective of the organization and its goals. The changes in the organization can occur in a distinct period of time, and as such, the need to be disciplined and follow the objectives of the organization is necessary. The discussion concerning organizational change is widely drawn from the field of psychology and sociology due to the human character which is involved in the process (Camisón & Villar-López, 2014). Today, companies and organizations are exposed to more random changes as opposed to the cases before. Due to the impact of globalization, the organizational changes have led to the growth in capacity and revenue for the relevant organizations. The diversifications of markets have also led to the modification of products and structure to meet the newly created demand gap. The widened needs and expectations have also been attributed to the need to adjust to the changes that occur in the organization. Acccording to Camisón & Villar-López (2014), a number of changes have seen conviction of executives over their misdeeds in the organization they manage. Therefore, the need to manage change in any organization is critical to the overall outcome in terms of production and revenue for the respective company (Keil & Montealegre, 2012). The adoption of new ideas and techniques do not always occur naturally and easily, but happens as a result of hard work and focus that is needed accordingly. Changes in most cases occur with horror and fear, and as such, the effort to develop a clear and concise information regarding the change is necessary, so that the information regarding change reaches the people that need it. Broad knowledge and skills are needed to develop a proper understanding of how to develop changes and innovation accordingly. It is, however normal to experience resistance whenever changes have to occur. The understanding that the resistance is expected helps one to fully modify the strategies and the approaches that are needed to counter the resistance. Most resistance to change narrow down to baseless individuals’ fear of the change. As a leader, one must be willing to take the necessary steps and time to understand the main reasons for resistance and to conquer it as well. Resistance to change is also healthy in its own way. Keil & Montealegre (2012) clearly point out that as such, the resistance to change enables one to understand the different approaches of reasoning to the resistance. It, therefore, helps one seek clarity in what they do. The desire to relate with the employee’s feelings is paramount for proper change to happen in any organization. The understanding of the need to modify one’s efforts in handling resistance to change ensures that there is success from the change efforts. Therefore, the resistance to change is not as whole cast in the shadow as an evil aspect. Instead, the resistance offers recipe for following the right protocol when handling the organizational change. Demonization of resistance to change Resistance to change is an action taken by individuals when they perceive the intended change as a real threat to them and the way they conduct their business. The greatest issue with resistance to change is based on the threat and perception. The threat could be of either sizes and does not have to be real for it to occur. The change that occurs in organizations is usually orchestrated by the management staff. However, the reality is that in order to gain the objective of the organizations with its mission and vision the change must have support for all stakeholders. The resistances to change by the employees have been mistaken as rebellion by the staff that is involved. The resistance to changes by especially the subordinate staff brings about drastic loss of employment opportunities due to firing by the management. In reality, some of the reasons for resistance to change, when examined critically can be addressed in a more positive way, other than threats and intimidation to the staff. The belief that those staffs who do not agree with the changes are determined to bring down the company is, by itself a misplaced theory. Some of the resistance occure because of unclear reasons for the change. When the reason for change remains ambiguous and unclear, then the staff are likely to resist it, in that, they are not willing to adjust accordingly ((Shafritz & Jang, 2015). The resistances of changes concerning some of the approaches are realistic due to the very fact that the change does not take a specific approach, whether it is cost related, production targeted or any other relevant approach. The fear of the unknown can also lead to the employees resisting change. For instance, when Meyous Company Limited was changing its operation from supplier to producer of stationery. As areasult, many employees who were not employed on permanent basis were scared of the result. The fear of losing their jobs and the lack of security over the sane from the management staff did little to calm the fears. As a result, it was necessary that the human resources department needed to do a conference to calm all the fears and the concerns which resulted from the impeding changes. The resistance to change should be addressed as fast because it affects the performance standards of the employees. For this reason, it is necessary that the management should move in haste to qualm any kind o discontent that may result in the process. The resistance to change and the effect to the performance have also been viewed in a wider context as a the main threat and reason as to why there are limited options for production and service organizations. Previously successful organizations have climbed down the ladder as fast. The resistance to change also can destroy the organizations image and brand in the market and eventual loss of customers to rival organizations. The spoilt image can lead to the loss of the brand in the market. Resistance to change by the subordinate can lead to industrial strikes which put the image of the organization is a very bad situation. The loss of brand by the organization can put it in a delicate situation whereby the rival firms can take advantage of and end up benefitting from the shortcoming. The organizations in this respect always see resistance to change as an evil that must be addressed instantly. This is however, a perception that must be re-evaluated at the management level in the organization. The lack of communication to the employees is also another main reason as to why there are so many resistances to changes in the organizations. Employees would want to be consulted and be part and parcel of the team that contributed to the changes. That way, they would be more receptive to the changes and they will effect them accordingly. It is a disheartening for the employees to be pushed to accept changes they never new were taking place, for instance reduction in salaries (Nevis, 2013). When employees feel that they were left out of the change program, then they will naturally reject the changes which they will perceive as not very helpful to them. The employees would be most appreciated when they are incorporated as the team involved in the change making process. In this regard, the organizations always see the employees who resist the change as the influential to the employees who would otherwise readily accept the changes. It remains a wonder that many organizations would victimize the employees based on this criterion. However, it is the obligation of the organization’s management system to communicate the intended changes to the employees and get their feedback accordingly (Keil & Montealegre, 2012). Ethical issues on demonizing resistance to change Currently, there are complex changes in the organization framework, based on a wide variety of issues perspective and opinions among the staff. It is of utmost relevance that changes are effected from a very effective set of principles and values to ensure that they are effective in a proper ethical manner. The perception of the resistance to change as a whole deal of evil does more harm to the organization than even the good the change would have created in the organization (Nevis, 2013). The main ethical issue is the victimization of the individuals who resist change. The company, for instance Meyous Company fired over 20 staff members who were found to be opposed to the intended changes to broaden its line of operation. This victimization trend can move overboard to the extent that any other staff that are seen to relate closely to those resisting changes in the organization can also be sacked as well. The segregation of the resistant workers from the rest is yet another ethical issue that arises out of the demonization of the resistance to change. The book of business ethics by Trevino & Nelson (2010 ) describes the Meyous company limited approach in taking several of its employees on probation to ensure that they are not influencing other negatively In as far as the issue of resisting change is concerned. The resisting workers were perceived by the management as very incompetent and rebellious. The discrimination against the change resistant workers equally affects their performance standards and eventually that of the entire organization as well. Fair treatment of all workers is very necessary for an organization to move in a single defined direction, that of attaining the intended objectives. Meyous suffered a loss of over 21%dip in its total revenue earning from the period of firing the worker resistant to change as well as those who were returned to probation for evaluation. Those results and the way of dealig with challenge became a real case of concern. Zhou, David & Li (2006) describe the loss of trust by the company management on the change resistant workers as yet another ethical issue that arises out of demonization of the resistance to change. Some workers are not fully convinced that the company is in a position to manage the projected changes. This lack of trust in the change mechanism results in loss of trust between the workers and the company. The management staff also perceives the workers who are opposed to change as malicious and not of good intentions. Shafritz & Jang, (2015) however, believed that the loss of trust between a worker and the manager strains the relationship between the two parties and as such does not affect create a peaceful working environment. The ethical issues that arise due to resistance in change are largely driven by the organizations lack of understanding of the need to accommodate variant ideas from that of their own. Management of resistance to change Meyous company limited brought about a whole new dimension into the way resistance to change can be managed. After realizing that majority of their staff were becoming suspicious and uncomfortable with the changes in the operation strategy of the company, the management resulted into consulting the workers at all levels for their input (Destler, 2015). The inclusion of ideas of everyone into the change was a way by which the company stemmed that imminent fallout with their workers. Organizations can reduce the level of backlash with changes in the company by creating an inclusive dialogue where all are required to submit their input concerning the intended changes. The organization should explain to the workers on how the changes would be of greater benefit to them other than do harm to them. When the staff is allowed to embrace this idea, then it remains relevant that they are given the free will to decide on the path that they choose (Battilana & Casciaro, 2013). Innovation and technological changes in the organization are intended to make work efficiency in the company other than make the manual workers lose their jobs. The perception of the workers and the attitude largely contributes to the level of resistance they will put against the changes. Meyous company limited introduced a process of training to all its customers so as to allow them the chance to understand the need for the innovative change and the product line change as well. Communication is the key way to contain any type of resistance that may occur in an organization (Destler, 2015). Conclusion The resistance to change in an organization can take different dimension. It can vary from the foot-dragging act, pretty sabotage and outright rebellion by the staff. The best way for a leader to arrest the act of resistance to change is by first and foremost understanding the part of the rebelling team (Battilana & Casciaro, 2013). Once the directors of an organization have understood the reason for rebellion, only then can they take the relevant steps into stopping any further fallout in the organization. A listening management is likely to produce the best out of a team of workers who are more concerned about the various changes in the organizations. The demonization of the resistance to change can relate to a different aspect of ethical issues which in the end affect the standard of performance of the staff. The room created for expression should allow for a free and cordial relationship with a well spelt out reporting channel just in case there are issues which need to be addressed in the organization. Discrimination of the resistant workers can affect their level of performance and in the end the overall performance of the entire organization. An organization should be able to listen to its workers so as t stop the craze over discrimination against the discounted members. The management should be open and honest whenever they are introducing changes into the organization. The management team should also clearly define the need for change and communicate strategic decision personally in written for so as to create clarity and understanding in the organization and the staff members (Zhou, David & Li, 2006). When introducing changes in the organization, there should be no opening left for the company to return to the status quo and get things back to the way they were done before. One should be able to focus as much as possible to the positive aspect of change as much as possible so as to be able to wholly understand and accommodate it (Michel, Todnem & Burnes, 2013).. The organization culture largely contributes to the extent to which changes can be effected in the organization Frost et.al (1998) depending with the targeted objectives. The need to influence the entire workforce to read from the same script is a huge challenge that every organization should expect. The resistance to changes should, therefore, be seen as a way to effectively meet the needed standards of organization performance expectations (Shockley-Zalabak, 2011). References Battilana, J., & Casciaro, T. (2013). Overcoming resistance to organizational change: Strong ties and affective cooptation. Management Science, 59(4), 819-836. Camisón, C., & Villar-López, A. (2014). Organizational innovation as an enabler of technological innovation capabilities and firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2891-2902. Destler, I. M. (2015). Presidents, bureaucrats and foreign policy: The politics of organizational reform. Princeton University Press. Frost, P. J., Moore, L. F., Louis, M. R. E., Lundberg, C. C., & Martin, J. E. (1985). Organizational culture. Thousand Oak: Sage Publications, Inc. Gebauer, H., & Kowalkowski, C. (2012). Customer-focused and service-focused orientation in organizational structures. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 27(7), 527-537. Keil, M., & Montealegre, R. (2012). Cutting your losses: Extricating your organization when a big project goes awry. Sloan Management Review, 41(3). Michel, A., Todnem By, R., & Burnes, B. (2013). The limitations of dispositional resistance in relation to organizational change. Management Decision, 51(4), 761-780. Nevis, E. C. (2013). Organizational consulting: A Gestalt approach. London: Taylor & Francis. Shafritz, J., Ott, J., & Jang, Y. (2015). Classics of organization theory. London: Cengage Learning. Shockley-Zalabak, P. (2011). Fundamentals of organizational communication. New York: Pearson Education. Trevino, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2010). Managing business ethics. ‎Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Zhou, K. Z., David, K. T., & Li, J. J. (2006). Organizational changes in emerging economies: Drivers and consequences. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(2), 248-263. Read More