Organisational Behaviour: David Ortan Plc Case Study

On the other hand, the success of the company is in large part due to the hard work of the staff who would lose their employment. In addition, it must be determined who would perform the work of the dismissed employees and if the company would be able to function without them. Moreover, the morale and productivity

The case introduces Tony Azzara, who was retrenched by his previous company due to financial woes, as he tries to adapt himself a fresh working environment in Hickling Associates Ltd. Soon, Tony encountered difficulties in integrating into Hickling’s organization due to the apparent differences in the working culture. Stemming from the problems that he encountered in Hickling’s associates, Tony began to lose motivation to strive for better results. Fueled with the other problems, he resigned eventually. Three major issues – negative motivation, lack of communication and leadership style, will be critically examined to investigate the causes of the symptoms that are evident in Hickling’s organization. After which,

Merging with another organization has downfalls of destroying wealth from the merger. Considering the buying price is important when merging, spending too much on the merger will impound the value after the merger. Some mergers do not create wealth so capital is lost through the merger. There is no guarantee of financial gain and every formula considered with focus, just as with an acquisition. The final decision dictated by the variables. One company merging with another company takes the debt and losses of those companies in the new formed company.

During times of economic downturn, employees can feel susceptible. Employers may need to reduce contracted hours or change staff job roles to save money. This leads to staff feeling exposed and concerned about possible redundancy, which in turn effects how they relate to the organisation.

A merger is a partial or total combination of two separate business firms and forming of a new one. There are predominantly two kinds of mergers: partial and complete. Partial merger usually involves the combination of joint ventures and inter-corporate stock purchases. Complete mergers are results in blending of identities and the creation of a single succeeding firm. (Hicks, 2012, p 491). Mergers in the healthcare sector, particularly horizontal hospital mergers wherein two or more hospitals merge into a single corporation, are increasing both in frequency and importance. (Gaughan, 2002). This paper is an attempt to study the impact of the merger of two competing healthcare organization and will also attempt to propose appropriate

Because of the hasty decision to implement the change there is a very high risk of employee resistance to change. The upper management had no investment in the decision and will feel a resentment and lack of control that could trickle down through the organization. The dangers her are that original companies will become infected with a negative attitude toward the new parent company causing

Sharing information and keeping the lines of communication open with the existing employees and new employees is going to be a vital requirement for this merger. Mergers tend to leave employees anxious which create increased stress and lower productivity rates among employees (Bhaskar, n.d.). An effective communication plan can help mitigate this problem and quickly return the company to full production when the merger has been completed. Starting communication lines early also help reduce the amount of speculation employees have. Even with before a merger deal is completed employees might get a sense of what is going on through a number of different channels. This can lead to

When information is shared between the two companies it makes the whole organization better. Utilizing programs to show how effectively the company is operating can help show areas of concern. These can be accessed and addressed in a timely fashion . Because each side would like for the company to thrive, they work together . During this merger roles of the employees / department should be clearly defined . As with anything the lack if knowledge or understanding is what cause failure. As I have started before knowing when employees are aware of their roles and how to do them effectively thing run much more smoothly and are done to standard. (work by rote) .when the employee fails to understand the organization Does as well . While it s the employees job to stay well informed it is also up to management that these things be made clear. During a merger the by learning different ways of comp,eying task employees learn and management  s able to vine up with new techniques.

Mergers are such a complex concept, which can bring about a variety of emotions. I remember learning about the topic while pursuing my MBA. During that time, I reviewed companies that had merged and their history. Some were horrible stories of people losing their jobs and a loss of the mission of the company. I think that in most of these cases (the ones I learned about through MBA) the merger was done out of fear. Their company was struggling to grow, had financial issues, or policy were changing the way they needed to do business. Perhaps this was why there were negative repercussions from the merger.

Once the merger has been finalized and integration is complete, middle managers need to assess their staff to be sure that each employee is doing his or her part to make the merge as successful as possible. If there are employees who are resisting the changes being made within the company, or not buying into the new culture and vision, it is necessary to evaluate the situation and

Communication is a vital element in at these stage of change process, constantly relaying information to all stakeholders including employees who might be laid off in the merger process, managers and administration. Bozak (2003) clarifies the above saying opening up and been honest and truthful about communication settles doubts in the minds of players involved the change process, which creates a “sense of security and trust in all those involved with the proposed change.” The inclusion of direct employees in the change processes like planning and decision making will promote a feeling of belongingness and empowerment, which in both long and short run will help to overcome majority resistance, because they understand the benefits to them, the company and their target clients. During the unfreezing stage, the important point in this stage is actively engaging all parties to work towards accentuating the positive driving forces and diminishing the restraining forces so that the merger and the inherent changes are successfully

Apparently the outgoing owners were no longer concerned about the employees, much less what they'll lose, and that's an unacceptable move. Why would the company approve the merger if the existing needs of the associates were never met? It seems as if the outgoing company had no negotiating leverage; hence, it's either accept the merger and gain something or lose the merger and waste a potential financial gain. Should the new company suffer the frustration of the newly acquired employees? Unless they intentionally enter into unfair practices, they should never suffer any dissatisfaction; although, changes took place due to pressure, credit should be awarded to the company for accepting to reinstate all benefits plus an additional

First they are calling it a “merger” which could not be farther from the truth, so associates feel like they’re being lied to from the get go. The announcement brings about stress because the employees are not directly involved in decisions impacting their jobs. Stress is having a negative impact on morale within the department. The two organizations do not seem to have the same culture so they are experiencing culture clash. The employees fear job loss, which is creating negative competition to “outshine” the others, creating conflict. Change tends to create winners and losers and the latter are hardly likely to be happy with the results. As our groups get to know each other there will inevitably be conflict and perceived or real losses on both sides. “The presence of trust can enhance an organization’s efforts to fulfill its mission, and the lack of trust can constrict those efforts” (Combs, Harris, & Edmonson, 2015, p.

I can understand why the administrators did not tell the employees. I can see the concern about employees leaving the company; however, if employees could possible lose their jobs, I feel that the company would have an ethical obligation to tell their employees about the merger. Yes, I feel that honesty to the employees of this company would have been beneficial for the company. I understand that when a company is going through a merger, the company is going through hard economic times, and the layoffs of employees are simply one of the downsides to economic hardship. I still feel; however, that this company should have been honest

Mergers and acquisitions have developed to be a widespread occurrence in modern era. A merger of the size like Adidas-Armani has repercussion for the labor force of these companies transversely to the world. Although the integration of units gives an immense arrangement of significance to monetary issues and the effects, there are still some issues are the most commonly ignored ones such as human resources, financial management, marketing, sales etc.. Ironically studies confirm that the majority of the mergers not succeed to convey the preferred results because of people associated concerns. The ambiguity resulted by badly handled management issues in mergers and acquisitions have been the foremost grounds for these collapses.