Human Resources: Managing Organisational Change - Essay Example

Human Resources: Managing organisational change In this era of rapidly changing environment, change of all kinds at different aspects, levels and degrees are occurring everywhere, every minute whether internally or externally. As such, it could be within us, the people around us , the entities or organizations in existence and in society to a large extent. This is observed to be due to major events/occurrences that we feel or are in our midst which may be personal in nature or global in scope and the rapid innovations in technology causing change in our way of life. An important event to one’s life may be a change in job while new or advanced technology procedures are worldwide. In this scenario, a contemporary leader is faced with the problem on “ how to manage in order to ensure as minimal resistance to organisational change as possible”. It may be well first to understand the meaning of the term “change” and what is referred to as organisational change. Oxford American Dictionaries define change as the “act or instance of making difference.” The concept of organisational change refers to “organization-wide changes as opposed to smaller changes such as adding a new person, modifying a program etc. Examples of organization-wide change might include change in mission, restructuring operations (e.g. restructuring to self-managed teams. layoffs, etc. ) new technologies, mergers, major collaborations, “rightsizing” new programs such as Total Quality Management, re-engineering, etc. “(http://www.managementhelp.orgchange.htm) On the other hand, William Tracey in the Human Resources Glossary defines Human Resources as “ the people that staff and operate an organization. . . as contrasted with the financial and material resources of an organization. The organizational function that deals with the people. . . Further, “Human Resources” or HR refers to the workforce managed by any employer. As the most important asset for any business leader, employees need to be effectively managed in order for optimal efficacy to be achieved. … properly managing a workforce is a lot more complicated than, say, the company’s material capital such as machinery, computer systems, etc.(http://www.hrvillage.com/human-resources/definition.htm) It is observed that organizational change is a threat to the area of human resources. Craine 2007 asserts that most people like things to be comfortable, and familiar. They like to be capable and confident. Change affects people’s ability to feel comfortable, capable and confident because it means that they must learn new systems, work in new ways and accept new responsibilities. Ultimately, resistance to change would affect organizations’performance. There have been some issues and theories which emerged/have evolved as a result of studies made by management and organisational development experts linking human resources and organisational change. Further, strategies to mitigate resistance to change have been recommended. In this light, the different issues and theories regarding management of organisational change shall be examined to provide a well-rounded discussion on how a contemporary leader can manage organisational change successfully (entail minimal resistance from the human dimension ) thereby ensuring that the goals and objectives of the organisation is achieved. The Nature of organizational change There are conditions necessary for the institutionalization of change in an organisation. The legal definition of organizational change indicates that organizational change occurs when a company makes a transition from the current state to some desired future state. Managing organizational change is the process of planning and implementing change in organizations in such a way as to minimize resistance and cost to the organization while simultaneously maximizing the effectiveness of the change effort. There are two key factors for managing organisational change. This can be gleaned from the definition of change management as referring to the leadership and direction of the process of organizational transformation especially with regard to human aspects and overcoming resistance to change. (http://www.skills2lead.com/definechange.html) Issues Related to Human Resources and Managing Organisational Change 1. Emotions in organizations David Lee, an internationally recognized authority in organizational and managerial practices underscores the important role of emotion in organizations. He states that management is waking up to the fact that their success is directly related to their ability to work productively with employees’ emotions. They are realizing how well they elicit and sustain positive emotional states in their employees plays a major role in their organization’s success or failure. This is because emotions directly influence the five major sources of competitive advantage consisting of: intellectual capital, customer service, organizational responsiveness, productivity, employee attraction and retention. (http://www.humannatureatwork.com/Employee-Motivation-Articles-2htm) 2. Managing workplace relationships Relationships in the workplace is an issue with regard to managing organizational change. It is because in the workplace, managing relationships assumes significance due to myriad-relationships- your peers, superiors, subordinates, partners, clients, customers, etc. . . and for everyone there’s a different code of conduct. . .But why manage relations. The answer is that managing people is a calculation and that relationships should not get static. They must develop and grow. A good working relation is dynamic; avoid making it boring and predictable. (http://www.info.shine.com/Career-Advice-Articles/CareerBuilding/managing-relationships-at-work/1385/cid28 3. Trust and distrust in organizations The literature on trust and distrust in organizations show there have been many perceptions and models of trusts. However,” most theorists agree that whatever else its essential features, trust is fundamentally a psychological state . . .First and foremost, trust entails a perceived vulnerability or risk that is derived from individual’s uncertainty regarding the motives, intentions and prospective actions of others on whom they depend. . . Other influential definitions construe trust as a general attitude or expectancy about other people and the social systems in which they are embedded (Garfinkel 1963 and Luhmann 1988). However, several organizational researchers have argued the usefulness of conceptualizing trusts in terms of individuals’ choice behavior in various kinds of dilemma situations (Arrow 1974, Kreps 1990, Miller 1992). Further, a number of scholars have also suggested an adequate theory of organizational trust must incorporate more systematically the social and relational underpinnings of trust-related choices (Mayer et al 1995, McAlister 1995, Tyler and Kramer 1996). According to these arguments, trust need to be conceptualized not only as calculative orientations towards risk but also a social orientation toward other people and toward society as a whole. Among the benefits derived from trusts are: 1) reducing transaction costs within organizations, 2) increasing spontaneous sociability among members and 3) facilitating appropriate(i.e. adaptive) forms of deference to organizational authorities. (http://www.portal.psychology.uoguelph.ca/faculty/gill/7140/week_3_Ja.25/Kramer_ARP1999.pdf) 4. Organizational Learning The organizational learning theory “ states that in order to be competitive in a changing environment, organizations must change their goals and actions to reach those goals. In order for learning to occur, however, the firm must make a conscious decision to change actions in response to a change in circumstances, must consciously link action to outcome, and must remember the outcome. . .the initial learning takes place at the individual level; however it does not become organizational learning until the information is shared, stored in organizational memory in such a way that it may be transmitted and accessed and used for organizational goals. The learning process involves three steps: data collection, interpretation and adaptation/action. (http://www.fsc.yorku.ca/york/istheory/wiki.index.ph/organizational_learning_theory#Organizational_learning) 5. Diversity Management Diversity management focuses on managing the difference within a company’s workforce, capitalizing on the benefits of diversity and minimizing workplace challenges. It contributes significantly to the bottom line. The main ways diversity management produces the diversity dividend are towards improving the efficiency of HRM functions, fostering superior decision-making, problem-solving, creativity and innovations . . . However, a diverse workforce does not in itself, translate into bottom line benefits for companies to reap a diversity dividend. Diversity must be managed in order for companies to reap a diversity dividend. The above-indicated issues are from different standpoints but emphasized its importance to enable a contemporary leader to manage resistance to change successfully which means reducing employee resistance to a minimal or manageable level. This would be realized if relationship in the workplace and organizational learning are dynamic while employees are helped to have the best work attitude to deliver good performance. On the other hand, the leader has to develop skills in handling people of diversified personalities and traits as well as in using trust as a tool to channel it towards reducing employee resistance to change. Key Theories On Managing Organisational Change 1. Four forms of resistance to change According to Kottier and Schlesinger (1979), there are four reasons that certain people are resisting change: Parochial self-interest( some are concerned with the implication of the change for themselves and how it may affect their own interests, rather than considering the effects for the success of the business) Misunderstanding (communication problems; inadequate information) Low tolerance to change (certain people are very keen on security and stability in their work.) Different assessments of the situation (some employees may disagree on the reasons for the change and on the advantages and disadvantages of the change process. Kottier and Schlesinger (1979) set out the following six (6) approaches to deal with this resistance to change: 1. Education and Communication – Up-front communication and education helps employees see the logic in the change effort. This reduces unfounded and incorrect rumors concerning the effects of change in the organization. 2. Participation and Involvement – When employees are involved in the change effort they are more likely to buy into change rather than resist it. 3. Facilitation and Support – Managers can head off potential resistance by being supportive of employees during difficult times. Managerial support helps employees deal with fear and anxiety during a transition period. This approach is concerned with provision of special training, counseling, time off work. 4. Negotiation and Agreement – This can be done by allowing change resistors to veto elements of change that are threatening or change resistors can be offered incentives to leave the company. 5. Manipulation and Co-Option – An effective manipulation technique is to co-opt with resisters. Co-option involves the patronizing gesture in bringing a person into a change management planning group for the sake of appearances rather than their substantive contribution. This often involves selecting leaders of the resisters to participate in the change effort. These leaders can be given a symbolic role in decision making without threatening the change effort. 6. Explicit and Implicit Coercion – Managers can explicitly or implicitly force the employees into accepting change by making clear that resisting to change can lead to losing jobs, firing, transferring or not promoting employees. The above reasons manifested by employees in an organization where change is ongoing clearly show the importance of the human aspect in dealing with change. Different persons have different reactions to change as well as the way they assess the reasons for change. Likewise, channels of communication and feedbacking system are also to be considered to avoid misunderstanding between management and staff. The reasons for implementing change should be made clear to the workforce for change to succeed. Experience of executives in the past showed learning insights in managing change. Two of the biggest mistakes in managing change include not understanding the importance of people. 60 – 75 percent of all restructuring failed - - not because of strategy but because of the “human dimension” and not appreciating that people throughout the organization have different reactions to change. (http://www.winstonbrill.com/bril001/html/article_index/articles/501-550/article506_body.html 2. The human response to trauma and change According to Dai Williams (1999), transitions are the natural process by which humans respond to trauma and change. We have to go through several stages to fully adopt to major events in our work and personal lives. Bereavement, injury, separation or redundancy and new relationships, jobs or relocation radically change our lives. Good events as well as bad destabilize our minds, requiring us to radically alter our understanding of the world. This takes longer than most people realise often with a period of deep inner crisis about 6 months later until we can let go of the past and adopt fully to our new reality. The transition cycle advanced by Dai Williams is indicated below: Well Being First Shock Personal Adjustment Inner Contradictions Inner Crisis Reconstruction & Recovery This theory also indicates that if events are understood and supported, these can be turning points and opportunities. If not they can lead to serious errors of judgment, depression, breakdown, broken relationships, careers and sometimes suicide. Transition awareness and transition management skills are fundamental issues for leaders who need to transform organizations and societies. Transition is an individual process, thus, leaders can impede or facilitate transformation but not demand it. (http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/futures.htm) The transition cycle in responding to trauma and change can serve as a tool in understanding the people affected by the change effort in the organization. It can serve the purpose of instituting change if reaction to change is viewed with an understanding of the transition process and positive attitude to help and guide the affected person/s towards reconstruction and recovery and eventually to the Well-being Stage. Thus, the process of organizational change is facilitated. 3. Managing the Cycle of Change Kevin Craine (2007) introduced the Change Cycle which is referred to as a four-step cycle of emotions that individuals are likely to experience when faced with change. He also recommended ways for assisting people in various stages of change. He asserted that change is natural, emotional and inevitable. But resistance to change can be a problem to organizations intending to make changes or implement new technologies. The change cycle consists of the following: The Comfort Zone – where people reside emotionally before dramatic change occurs. They feel in control of their lives and work. This is characterized by acceptance, control, competence, complacency and boredom. The “No” Zone – The beginning of the end of the way things have always been and is characterized by several forms of emotion (shock, denial, anger, resentment, frustration and sabotage). The Chasm – People in the chasm are in limbo. They know they cannot go back but each wonders “How do I fit in the picture?”Manifestations are bargaining, depression and anxiety. The Go Zone – The organization enters the “go zone” when everyone is truly on board and ready to go. This is characterized by: acceptance, excitement, clarity, creative, tension and implementation. The contemporary leader’s role is to understand the natural reaction to change, the cycle of change and skillfully implement ways of assisting the people affected by change so that resistance is brought to a minimum and thus accept change . Kevine’s theory of cycle of change as compared to the other theories such as that of Kottier & Schlesinger and Dai Williams, is broader in scope and more detailed. It cuts across the concepts of the other two theories while the three theories all aimed to reduce resistance to change especially in organizations desirous to institute change and ensure its success. The theory of Dai Williams and Craine’s theory have similarities as both indicated the stages that one goes through when faced with change. On the other hand, the model of change of Kottier and Schlesinger attempted to look at the problem of change resistance by analyzing why people react to change and also recommended approaches to deal with their resistance to change. The three theories complement and supplement each other. A contemporary leader can use these theories in their organizations based on purpose and practicality to manage resistance to change successfully. Conclusion Change is inevitable in our personal lives, in organizations, in society in general. It is a challenge to a contemporary leader on how to manage in order to minimize resistance to change and manage this resistance successfully. Armed with insights from experience of executives in the past and studies done by management and organization development experts, he can face the task of managing resistance to change in the light of managing change in the organization. The importance of managing resistance to change is conveyed in the following statements that “managing change means managing people’s fears. Change is natural and good but people’s reaction to change is unpredictable and irrational. It can be managed if done right . . .The front-end of an individual’s resistance to change is how they perceive the change. The back –end is how they are equipped to deal with the change they expect.” (http://management.about.com/cs/people/a/MngChng092302.htm) However, it should not be discarded in the light of managing organizational change the leader himself as he cannot give what de does not possess. When change endeavors fail, he assumes that failure is due to resistance to change of people in the organization. The resistance feedback can be used by the contemporary leader in assessing himself and using feedback in finding a better solution with regard to change. Then the contemporary leader can proceed to managing resistance to change and be confident of positive outcomes., thus, managing change in the organization is attainable. The job of a contemporary leader is to ensure resistance to change is reduced to a minimum and manageable level thereby managing change is attainable. This will prove beneficial to the organization on one end and also to the people in the organization on the other end. Bibliography http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/management-corporate- culture/115844 http://www.definitions.uslegal.com/m/managing-organizational-change/ http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/futures.htm http://www.hrvillage.com/human-resources/definition.htm http://www.management.about.com/cs/people/a/mngchng092302.htm http://www.managementhelp.org/mgmt/orgchange.htm http://portal.psychology.ouguelph.calfaculty/gill/7140/week_3_jan.25/kramer_ARP1999.pdf http://www.skills2lead.com/define-change.html http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_kottier_change_approaches.html http://diversityworking.com/employerzone/diversitymanagement http://humannatureatwork.com/employee-netmotivation-articles-2.htm http://www.fsc.yorku.ca/york/istheory/wiki.index.php/organizational-learning- theory#organizational-learning http://www.winstonbrill.com/bril001/html/article_index/articles/501-550/article506_body.html Read More