How Technology Has A Negative Impact On The Environment

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.

Many people may resist change because they fear they will lose their jobs, status or position. It may be because they do not fully understand the purpose of change, or they may have a different perspective on the change than their management. “Individuals, groups, and organizations must be motivated to change. But if people perceive no performance gap or if they consider the gap unimportant, they will not have this motivation. Moreover, they will resist changes that others try to introduce,” Bateman and Zeithaml explained. Many times change for people at work

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 pr

The effects of technology usage have long been a topic of debate, with the negative consequences often being brought up. Authors such as Robert Samuels, Alison Gopnik, Nicholas Carr, Gary Small and Vorgan Gigi have all addressed this topic in their own articles. In Samuels’ “Breaking Down Borders: How Technology Transforms the Private and Public Realms,” he discusses the creation of private bubbles in public spaces due to technology, and the consequent alienation of others. “Diagnosing the Digital Revolution” by Gopnik argues that the habits that tech users have today have always existed, while Carr’s “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” states that technology is actively changing the way humans think. “Meet Your iBrain” by Gigi and Small covers how technology affects brains and alters them. This paper will use the articles and an interview with a peer to analyze the perceived negative effects of using technology, particularly worse memory, shorter attention span, exacerbation of bad habits, and shifting emotions.

Change is constant in both our professional and our private lives. Our children grow up taking for granted things like powerful personal computers that we could not envision at their ages. The idea that human beings naturally resist change is deeply embedded in our thinking about change. Our language, our assumptions, and our mental models about change all seem to imply that something in our natures leads us to resist change. However, it is easy to find examples of human beings, from childhood on through old age, actively seeking out change of all sorts. Human beings do not necessarily resist change automatically; however, many people do resist being changed, i.e., having changes imposed on them.

““The people who resist change will be confronted by the growing number of people who see that better ways are available; thanks to technology.” – Bill Gates (Quotes about Change from Successful Entrepreneurs, n.d.)”. Bluntly put by the richest man in the world, and I believe he is putting into scope how embracing and preparing for change offers better understanding of environments, market places, trends, an even the happiness of consumers. Technology offers one of many tools to help guide managers to develop and implement change management into current practices. New philosophies and work trends are evolving by many managers and organization, and also resistance to change is showing the extreme of the inevitable being embraced or not. The

Change is inevitable in this world, how we handle it is what makes the difference. While most agree that change is typically a challenging issue for an organization it does not mean that is can not be accomplished with little to no upset. Be it a simple change or a major project there are strategies that can be used to make the change a positive experience for both sides of the change; but first an understanding of resistance to change must occur.

Resistance can take various forms such as grievances, restricted output, high turnover and aggressive behaviour towards management (Bernerth, 2004). Diefenbach (2007) maintains that employees commonly react to change with resistance because the preference for stability and continuity is an important facet of human nature. Hence, employees are reluctant to change their daily routines at work for new change initiatives (Turner-Parish, Cadwallader & Busch, 2008; Lawler & Worley, 2006; Bernerth, 2004). Research conducted by Peus, Frey, Gerkhardt, Fisher and Traut-Mattausch (2009) supports this in finding a correlation between employees’ change commitments and their perception on how it impacts their work routines. The more disruptive the change is to their routines, the more likely employees will react with resistance. Connell and Waring (2002) further maintain that, because radical changes are implemented with little or no consultation or communication, radical changes are less likely to be understood by employees, and as a result, employees become confused and resistant to change (Kitchen & Daly, 2002).

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

Since human beings are adaptive and familiar with change, how is it that they often resist change in their work environment? This question had troubled managers since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and the fast peace of change required by the electronic age has made

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:

Technology is something that has been evolving for thousands of years, and even more years to follow. In 1441, a German inventor named Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press, making printing 500 times faster and new ideas to be passed around. In 1608, Galileo Galilei, an Italian Astronomer, built the first telescope, enabling new scientific discoveries to be found. These technologies allowed advancements to the human society, but not all new technologies are used for the better good. Technology has caused a negative impact on society because it allows new dangers to arise with social media, it causes you to lose privacy due to the government, and it inhibits our ability to discover and acknowledge differing ideas.

Technology is defined as anything that makes life easier. There are times where technology can make life easier just as a phone can make your life easier by allowing you something to use to stay in touch with those people that are around you. There are also times where technology can make life harder because it is used against nature and can ruin places. Some of those times are: the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, China’s environmental degradation, World War II, and the second Industrial Revolution. These are all times in history where the environment took a turn for the worst because of the newest technology that was created and used.

An environment in which change may be the only constant is a challenge to every organisation and manager alike (Hayes, 2007). The need and pressure for change being consistent, it is crucial