Example Questions LMP Exam

As a result, Zwick (2002, p. 542) has noted that implementing change programmes in organisations that realise positive outcomes remain problematic for many organisations in the 21st century. Ayodeji & Oyesola (2011, p. 235) have postulated that organisational change is a dynamic process, which when taken poorly contribute to employee resistance to it, and eventually leads to failure of the whole process. 3|Page Organisation Behaviour; MGTS 1601; Individual Essay; Employee resistance to change Yuanli Zhang 43401163 Employees resist changes when they occur in the organisations for several reasons. Many organisations when they introduce changes are likely to stick to the ‘top-down organisational change’ process (Awasthy, Chandrasekaran & Gupta, 2011, pp.

Implementing change in an organization is complicated. It is important that a manager understands their role and responsibilities for which could very well be the success or failure of an organization. A manager should know how to handle staff resistance, and the areas that require change. There are processes that help management with assisting their staff members with adjusting to change and concentrate on the areas of importance. This process includes planning, assessment, implementation, and evaluation. The difference between a failed organization and a successful manager is when the manager has the ability to implement change with little disruption to

Resistance to change is an expected reaction of human nature. We are not accustomed to change, as it is possible to lead to failure; however, there are also ways to manage the resistance within the company.

This article discusses the pros and cons of advocating change within the workplace. It also discusses the reason (s) individuals are said to resist change because of habit and inertia, fear of the unknown, absence of the skills they will need after the change, and fear of losing power. OD approaches to organizational change presents a solid consensus that change and resistance can and should be "managed" by developing a strategy for change and using the OD tool kit of interventions such as training and communication programs, confrontation meetings, stakeholder

Organizational change is a necessary outcome when considering various scenarios contributing to the resulting vision. Perplexing as it may seem, change initiatives don’t always result in positive outcomes. In fact, many never succeed. As a change agent, one should always have formulated a vision of what change will “look” like for the organization. One would be hard pressed to paint a landscape without having a vision of what the landscape should resemble. Yet, resistance to change usually becomes a significant factor contributing to an initiative’s failure. It is likely an

Several instances exist where within an organization; changes take place regardless of the geographical position. These changes often encompass one or more individuals. In any case of a change taking place, people are likely to face abnormalities in their regular actions. A number of internal and external aspects also contribute much to this phenomenon as individuals resist change in their lives. Several instances exist where individuals portray resistance in terms of opposing change to them. This resistance in terms of change occurs because of lower tolerance level to change. This paper would take into account a number of significant aspects related to this resistance as far as change is concerned.

Leaders within a business need to be cognizant of the signs of change resistance and develop strategies to overcome them. Individuals are averse to change for four reasons: fear of loss of value, lack of understanding regarding the modification, belief change is not warranted, and an intolerance for change (Kotter, & Schlesinger, 2008). Comprehending and addressing these concerns are crucial steps between success or failure.

Introducing organisational change is often hard, the main reasons for that can be variation in perceptions of the employees, fear of disruption or failure and underlining the right approach to apply change. Then even if the change in a specific organisation is projected successfully there is still lot to be done to manage it in an appropriate way (Oakland, 2007).

At this time the manager can make the employees uncomfortable with the status quo and planting seeds of discontent by giving information to make employees dissatisfied with the present and will look to something new. All this information comes from the data that was gathered and analyzed through research and staff surveys. Managers need to plan the resources required to make the change and establish feedback mechanisms to evaluate the progress and success of the change (Sullivan & Decker, 2009, p. 70).

Employees who feel pushed out of their comfort zone may also resist change, due to the unfamiliarity of new implications or managers. The fear of uncertainties due to the lack of communication can also lead to resistance to change on an individual level. If employees are not informed of the needs of the change then the fear of the unknown can cause resistance.

In these instances, change is seen as evil and not "healthy". Change is not looked on as a positive opportunity and thus is rejected by the individuals in a company, which may result in incohesiveness within the organization and eventual collapse. Personal instances of resistance like those stated above often hold companies back because of their conservative views as they often result from lack of individual confidence in oneself to be creative. Stemming from personal instances of resistances is the occurrence of group resistance to change. Sources of group resistance to change include: Conformity to Norms (Inertia), Vested Interests, Sacrosanct, Rejection of Outsiders, Overdetermination, and threatened power. Vested Interests is probably the most interesting source of resistance because how can interest in being the best be a resistance? Vested Interests can be a resistance because it often promotes conformity to norms, as workers are less likely to contribute their ideas to the advancement of innovation and as a result the company suffers as past new ideas become old, and new ideas are needed to survive in the ubercompetitive business world today. Rejection of Outsiders can be looked on as positive or negative, but more negatively, thus placing it as a resistance to change. Rejection of Outsiders might cause more cohesion within a group to rely on each

Individuals when faced with any major change will be inevitably resistant and will want to preserve the status quo, especially if they think their status or security within the organization is in danger (Bolognese, 2010). Folger and Skarlicki believe that organizational change produces skepticism in employees which make it problematic and possibly even impossible to contrive improvements within the organization (as cited in Bolognese, 2010) Therefore, management must understand, accept and make an effort to work with resistance, since it can undermine even the most well-conceived change efforts (Bolognese, 2010). Furthermore, Coetsee states for organizations to achieve the maximum benefits from change they must effectively create and

People often resist change based on fear of the unknown, fear of loss, fear of failure, disruption of interpersonal

Resistance to change will derail even the best laid plans if not identified and dealt with in a positive, re-enforcing manner. In Organizational Behavior 6th Edition, resistance to change is defined as, "an emotional/behavioral response to real or imagined threats to an

To identify the key elements of the resistanceto change described in this situation, one may make use of the six Change Approaches of Kotter and Schlesinger.[1]The model prevents, minimizes or descreases resistance to change in organizations. According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), there are four reasons that why people resist change, three of which are applicable to this case: