What Does It Change? Essay

The rapid technological development, an ever increasing knowledge workforce and the shifting of accepted work practices is making change an ever present feature of organizational life (Burnes, 2004). While many organizations appreciate the need for change, as many as 70% of the change programmes do not achieve their intended outcomes (Balogun and Hope Hailey, 2004). Change is an extremely complex process that can have both negative and positive outcomes and it is important that the change process is conducted as efficiently and effectively as possible. A number of authors stress that the reasons behind the failure of change initiatives can be found in resistance to change. Resistance causes costs and delays in the change process (Ansoff, 1990) that are difficult to anticipate (Lorenzo, 2000) but must be mindfully kept into consideration. The second most prevalent problem behind successfully managing change is the lack of inclusion and appropriate communication which often leads to fear and anxiety among the employees. Another reason why these initiatives fail is the lack of motivation leading to major attrition in the human capital. The certification program is designed with a view to address these issues and ensure a smooth transition

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

John Kotter, a leading advocate and educator in change initiatives, expresses two essential characteristics that must be present in any change initiative. First, any change that is considered to be useful and necessary must go through a multi-step process that will transcend obstacles in its way. Second, it is essential that any change initiative must be lead by effective leadership (Kotter, 1996). However, any leader in a change initiate must reconcile the reality that a major component to mankind’s instinctive nature is that people have an inherent need for predictability and order (Hogan, 2007). Leaders must, therefore, consider that initiatives may be experienced in ways that contradict this basic need leading to employee resistance (Bernerth, 2011). Considering such a potential obstacle, Kotter developed an eight-stage change process to guide organizations through initiatives in ways that may retain employee stability and enable employees to maintain a sense of identity and understanding (Huy, 1999).

Every organization deals with several challenges when they have to make the decision of changing and structuring the organization frame. Organizational change is a complex systemic undertaking (Bolman and Deal, 2013, p.378). It is common for employees to be resisting to change when they are not well informed as to why the changes are being made and when they do not have clarity of what is going to happen next. Bolman and Deal did a phenomenal job explaining the four frames which are human resources, structural, political and symbolic fram when reframing organizational change. It is important for the leadership to understanding how each frame affects the employees by knowing the mission, training and participating with the staff.

The organization must implement specific strategies to identify and resolve resistance to change. O Connor (1993) stated "In an organization, resistance is opposition or witholding of support for specific plans or ideas. It can either be intentional or unintentional, covert or overt" (p. 30). Employees will likely consider how change affects them personally and that may naturally cause some resistance. One of the most important things an organization can do to minimize resistance is to address these personal concerns. It is also important to identify any potential loss or gain that comes from implementing, or not implementing, the change initiative. Leaders

Organizations can face change for any number of reasons. Managers must be the leaders in change in order to influence employees. Complacency is an obstacle to change. According to Organizational Behavior and Management, “It is management’s responsibility to show employees why they should want to change” (Ivancevich, Konopaske, & Matteson, 2014, p. 507). By creating a sense of urgency, employees can recognize the need for change. The ability of employees to recognize the need for change combats the problem of complacency. Kotter, in Leading Change, states

Change is a fact of organizational life that develops in response to interpersonal, cultural, environmental, and other external factors that fluctuate and change for various reasons. Employees can display varying levels of resistance ranging from aggressive resistance to apathy (Spector, 2012). Resistance is a concern because it undermines the effectiveness of the change implementation process, but there are tools available which leaders can utilize to reduce this possibility. The essential tools will be discussed in this paper along with the reasons for utilizing them in a change implementation process.

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:

When an organization is implementing change, there is usually resistance from its members. The resistance is usually brought about by the members’ fear of the uncertainties related with the change. For instance, there are instances when some organization members fear that the changes might lead to them losing their jobs. In order to avoid such fears, leaders are supposed to employ innovation when it comes to implementing change.

Organizational Development (OD) has become more and more important for today’s organizations because the world is moving so fast that organizations have to find ways to be more effective, more innovation, more customer-driven, and more agile. Cumming and Worley (1997) define organizational development as “a process that applies a broad range of behaviour science knowledge and practices to help organizations build their capacity to change and to achieve greater effectiveness”. Therefore, OD will help organizations understand how people act to change and which change methods can work with the resistance to change that usually occurs in organizations undergoing change. In the study of organizational development, it is

Change is inevitable in business life, those who can manage it well will be beneficial from the change, as Mr. M Beer (2003) stated. However, resistance, as an obstacle of the process of change, can hold back the development of managerial change (David Foote, 2001). Bhutan(1995) claimed that it is important to understand one’s state of mind in order to make them accept the change. To figure out the possible reasons why people tend to resist when it comes to make some changes. According to De Jag er (2001) , most people are reluctant to change resulting from their suspicions and fear to the new challenges. Resistance can also occur when change goes against their habits or values ( Robbins & Sanghai, 2006). Kotellnikov (2001) stated that employees could resist because they have an inadequate understanding of the purpose and meaning of change. To achieve maximum benefits from change, managers must try to minimise resistance behavior first ( Coetsee ,1999).

When change is being implemented within an organization by its leaders, the consequences of it can be underestimated or ignored by them, resulting in crises and, eventually, failure of the change efforts. In order for change to succeed, specifically in today’s business world, where organizations are constantly undergoing change at a fast rate, companies should educate their employees in understanding and supporting change.

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:

Organizational change is the movement of an organization away from its present state and toward some desired future state to increase its effectiveness. (George et al, pg 567) Organizations need to change in the modern day market place. New technologies, globalization, foreign trade, investments and constantly shifting marketplaces demand the need for flexibility, adaptation, and change. The downside to this is in an organizations employees. People by nature resist change. In a workplace environment, where familiarity is present with an employees set of tasks and processes, change becomes more difficult to introduce and accept. There are basically three groups associated with a resistance to change. They are on an