The Problem Of A Firm Needs Improvement

43-45). Top-down change process provides prescription that has only been developed by top managers and given to lower cadre employees down the ranks to consume without their input. According to Bovey & Hede (2001, p. 540) resistance occurs at the individual level, where employees are motivated by psychological factors to change that include resentment, frustration, low motivation and morale, fear, and feelings of failure. At the same time, earlier publication by Yilmaz & Kilicoglu (2013, pp. 17-18) identified four factors that motivate employees to resist changes in the organisation: employees focusing on self- interests as opposed to those of the organisation, having inadequate understanding of

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.

The vertical hierarchical structure and authoritarianism in bureaucratic organizations is what distorts communication, and reduces accountability, responsiveness and commitment towards core activities (Morris, Farrell, 2007). Instead a flatter hierarchy with decentralized management would be more favourable. It would be cost-efficient as wages would be allocated to fewer levels of management. For example, Call centres in the US adopted flat hierarchies to achieve minimization in costs (Bozionelos, 2008). Subordinates at lower levels of management will be expanded which will motivate staff and provide greater opportunities and sustainability wherein management leads and engages, but does not control and delegate (Dhillon et al. 2015). And consequently,

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.

Other common terms for the idea of organizational decentralization include: team self-management, self-management, shared control, distributed leadership (Lambe, Webb, & Ishida, 2009) and holacracy (Robertson, 2007). While these terms may have small differences they all describe the common theme of distributing power across organizations. Several concepts help to explain why decentralization and the encouragement of teamwork throughout an organization are often superior to traditional management structure.

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

Suggested reasons for resistance include: loss of control, shock of new, uncertainty, inconvenience, threat to status, competence fears. It is important to try to diagnose the cause of employee resistance as this will help determine the focus of effort in trying to reduce/remove the issue.

According to Palmer, Dunford, and Akin (2009) there are six different approaches to managing resistance to change which are, situational, let nature take its course, thought self-leadership, creative counters, tinkering, kludging, and pacing approach, and finally the power of resistance approach. While all of these different methods or approaches for dealing with change have positives and negatives, some are better than others. For example, Kotter and Schlesinger’s situational method is great in that it recognizes some situations need to be treated differently than others. However, they suggest that manipulation could be used and while they explain the dangers of this approach, its application is very limited and the rewards don’t outweigh the risks.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze a case study related to issue of control and how organizations can utilize different approaches of control in order to improve quality and performance in all arenas, domestic and global. The focus of this case revolves around Lincoln Electric, an Ohio based company that has set the bar for how to develop and implement a successful management system. This paper will use the Lincoln Electric case analysis to present recommendations on how managers can use control methods to enhance employee performance, increase employee participation and empowerment, and improve organizational quality in

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:

Market control uses the free market to evaluate and control performance. However, limitations exists in this control theory as it depends on output control and is only effective when the product can be defined, priced and when competition exists to make price meaningful. Bureaucratic control uses the standardization of behaviour through procedures and rules and depends on behaviour controls and the existence of a hierarchy system for supervision. The limitation lies in the rapid changing environment, which makes environment uncertain, thus, difficulty to access results may cause these controls to fail (Jaffee 2008). Therefore, clan controls would be most efficient under such situations. It uses culture, norms and expectations to control performance and group behaviour. By establishing desirable culture in organisations, members of the organisation would sanction undesirable behaviour. This is useful for professionals as they are commited to behave according to their profession. However, the professional commitement may not be to the interest of the organisation thus, making it a limitation to this form of control.

In a centralized organizational structure one individual is responsible for making all the decisions and maintains control of the company by giving direction. While Decentralized organizational structures often rely on several persons with the authority to make final decision for the company’s well being. Some benefits associated with a centralized organization are as follows: Reduction in cost in the work environment, having a focused vision on one common goal and Reduction in conflict. A Few drawbacks of a centralized organization include, No secrecy because all ideas and decisions are conveyed to all, No special attention and Delay in work. Advantages associated with Decentralization are; Huge relief is provided off the top managers, Greater use is made of employees skills and Decision making is left up to educational and well informed people.

Controls are measuring sticks to see if the desired goals are being met. Successful managers create parameters for their employees and implement controls within a criteria to confirm if the job is being done to standard. Case in point, I give quarterly performance counseling’s to each subordinate in my department on performance, being efficient at the job and using problem solving techniques. Controls to an extent border along the lines of micromanaging, but it can also be used to emphasize how well the subordinate is doing too. All quarterly counseling’s are not corrective in nature, but it is a great assessment tool for exceptional job performance as well. The usage of controls is part of my responsibility as a supervisor to ensure the goals are being achieved to standard.

Rapid changes in the global economic market entail transformations affecting not only the external environment of organizations, but also its internal operations and processes (Hall, 2008; Hodgetts, 2002). One important change that has altered the nature of contemporary organization is the “acknowledgement, development and systematic use of the skills and knowledge of employees” (Ramirez et al 2007, p 496). The central role of employees’ participation in the success of the organization involves not only “high performance work systems… [but] they also involve the decentralization of decisions and work enrichment that is providing employees with opportunities for involvement in decision-making and innovation.” (Wood & de