1,314
21
Essay, 14 pages (3500 words)

Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample

Organizational alteration is a construct that on a regular basis occurs due to the nature of today’s concern environment. ( McNamara. 2007 ) It is common in concern communications.

scheme. direction and leading. ( McNamara. 2007 ) Change occurs when an organisation revolutionizes parts or its full scheme and/or wants to alter the manner it operates.

( McNamara. 2007 ) Therefore. it involves the realigning of organisational procedures and operations. In order to stay competitory and successful in today’s concern environment.

organisations must continually undergo alterations by being advanced. ( McNamara. 2007 ) Therefore. alteration plays a major function in the length of service. adulthood. and success of any organisation.

In today’s concern environment. there are many factors that compel organisations to alter such as globalisation of markets and quickly germinating engineering. “ Organizations must alter because their environments alteration. ” harmonizing to Andrew Sturdy in his article Management Beneath and Beyond Organizational Change Management: Researching Options. ( Sturdy.

2003. p. 652 ) Today. concerns are bombarded by improbably high rates of alteration from a big figure of internal and external beginnings. ( Nadler.

1981 ) Internal force per unit areas tend to come from top directors and lower-level employees who push for alteration. ( Goff. 2000 ) On the other manus. external force per unit areas tend to originate from alterations in the legal. competitory. technological.

and economic environments. ( Goff. 2000 )Peoples have deep fond regards to their organization’s normal work groups. responsibilities. procedures.

and operations. ( McNamara. 2007 ) Therefore. every alteration in an organisation experiences some degree or kind of opposition. Change opposition involves the pessimistic feelings and ideas about a alteration ( s ) in an organisation. ( McNamara.

2007 ) It can ensue in jeopardizing or sing losingss in productiveness and profitableness in an organisation. ( Oreg. 2006 ) Thus. managing and get the better ofing the opposition to alter in an organisation is indispensable to its endurance. Pull offing organisational alteration is the procedure of planning and implementing alteration in organisations in order to minimise employee opposition while maximising the effectivity of the alteration attempt. ( Nadler.

1981 ) It involves advancing the construct of alteration in organisations and holding the accomplishment to pull off and take alteration efficaciously. ( Nadler. 1981 ) Furthermore. the intent of this research is to research the drive forces and opposition of organisational alteration and schemes for get the better ofing the opposition to alter in today’s concern environment. INTERNAL Drive FORCES TO CHANGEOrganizational alteration proposals frequently come about as a consequence of jobs faced by an organisation. ( Varelas.

2005 ) Harmonizing to McNamara ( 2007 ) . “ Change normally occurs because the organisation experiences some trouble. ” “ But sometimes the most constructive alteration takes topographic point non because of jobs but because of chances. ” ( McNamara. 2007 ) Internal drive forces or factors that stimulate alteration originate from inside the organisation via employees and/or directors.

( Varelas. 2005 ) Some internal drive forces that influence or stimulate organisational alteration are budget. working conditions. and/or internal political relations. ( Varelas.

2005 ) Therefore. the determination to implement organisational alteration can originate from jobs that the organisations face or from presented chances. Some illustrations are: when an organisation reallocates its resources to come in a new country of concern or when an organisation makes productiveness betterments to increase cost efficiency. Many organisations tend to implement alterations in order to increase cost efficiency either through budget cuts. layoffs.

and/or equipment ascents. ( Varelas. 2005 ) These alterations are non ever lasting in nature due to the fact they are stimulated by jobs faced by the organisation. ( Varelas.

2005 ) If organisations overcome their issues. they normally rehire those who were laid away and raise their budgets to criterions. ( McNamara. 2006 ) On the other manus. if equipment ascents necessitate a specific cognition or accomplishment.

this could take to a continued consequence of the alteration and employee replacings. ( Varelas. 2005 )Directors and employees besides have the capableness to originate and act upon organisational alteration. ( McNamara. 2006 ) Managers who want to integrate betterments in the organisation have the power to magisterially originate alteration. ( McNamara.

2006 ) However. it can be sometimes hard for directors or employees to act upon alteration in an organisation based off leading entirely. ( McNamara. 2006 ) The power of influence in organisations remainders with those who are held in high respects refering expertness and virtue by their equals and/or colleagues. ( McNamara. 2006 ) Therefore.

employees frequently times keep more influential power than directors in this instance. In some state of affairss. organisations are encouraged to alter for more positive grounds such as profitable chances. ( McNamara. 2006 ) For case.

Burger King and McDonald’s late decided to widen their operating hours because of the chance to increase net incomes based on a study on late dark eating wonts. This organisational alteration provided each organisation the chance to stand out in a really moneymaking market. Harmonizing to Varelas ( 2005 ) . “ the difference between a company’s existent public presentation and the public presentation of which it is capable. ” is called a public presentation spread.

( Varelas. 2005 ) Recognition of a public presentation spread frequently provides the motion for alteration. as companies strive to better their public presentation to expected degrees. ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 ) Furthermore.

this is the type of spread where legion enterprisers stumble on chances to venture in new countries of concern. ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 )EXTERNAL DRIVING FORCES TO CHANGEHarmonizing to Hoisington ( 2007 ) . there are several external drive forces that spark and influence organisational alteration such as additions in scientific cognition and engineering. planetary competition.

etc. ( Hoisington. 2007. p. 137 ) As new engineering arises. organisations must alter or accommodate in order to systematically vie with their rivals.

( McNamara. 2006 ) As organisations globalize. the figure of rivals additions and do it more of import for organisations to be flexible when it comes to alter in order to stay competitory. ( Hoisington.

2007. p. 137-138 ) As organisations enter the market place internationally. they are susceptible to foreign ordinances and authorities policies.

( Varelas. 2005 ) Therefore. they must alter and/or adapt to these ordinances and policies in order to make concern in foreign states. There are strong grounds to back up the impression that the addition in scientific cognition and the detonation of engineering is a major external factor that drives organisational alteration.

( Hoisington. 2007. p. 141 ) As engineering additions and the demand for specialised cognition additions.

organisations are pressured to alter. ( Hoisington. 2007. p. 141-142 ) These alterations include retraining current employees.

engaging specialised workers. and updating antediluvian equipment. ( Sturdy. 2003 ) Technology enables an organisation to spread out in footings of end product and input while cut downing the figure of necessary forces. Furthermore. engineering and scientific cognition are linked to the deskilling of the work force even though it can besides be linked with additions in the employment.

( Sturdy. 2003 ) Technology has lifted the ratio of skilled to unskilled workers due to the fact that skilled workers are called upon to keep and interact with setup that has replaced unskilled workers. ( Sturdy. 2003 ) RESISTANCE TO CHANGEThe most common cause for organisational alteration attempts to neglect is opposition from employees. For many employees.

alteration appears endangering which makes it difficult to have their support to implementing alterations. The impression of alteration opposition suggests that pessimistic feelings and ideas about alteration exist. ( Pardo et al. 2006 ) Furthermore.

“ individuals aren’t truly defying the alteration. but instead they may be defying the loss of position. loss of wage. or loss of comfort. ” ( Dent & A ; Goldberg. 1999 ) Resistance to alter can be thought of as a barrier to any organization’s ends and/or scheme.

Resistance to alter is defined as “ behavior which is intended to protect an person from the effects of existent or imagined alteration. ” ( Dent & A ; Goldberg. 1999. p.

34 ) It is besides defined as “ any behavior that serves to keep the position quo in the face of force per unit area to change the position quo. ” ( Bridges. 1991. p. 76 ) .

In add-on. it is defined as “ employee behaviour that seeks to dispute. interrupt. or invert prevalent premises. discourses.

and power dealingss. ” ( Folger & A ; Skarlicki. 1999. p.

36 ) In today’s economic system. alteration is customary in all organisations and it normally happens at a fast gait. Employees normally hasten to support the “ status quo” when their comfort zone or security is threatened. ( Pardo et al. 2006 ) Resistance is an ineluctable reaction to any major alteration in an organisation. Therefore.

it can impede organisational prosperity if non handled decently. It is of import to distinguish between the behaviours of opposition to alter. which are active opposition and inactive opposition. ( Pardo et al.

2006 ) Behaviors of active opposition consist of faulting. roasting. and pull stringsing. Behaviors of inactive opposition consist of verbally following with the new regulations but non really staying by them. ( Pardo et al.

2006 ) Typically. employees resist alteration if they are forced to larn or execute a new undertaking. ( Bovey. 2001 ) In add-on. opposition is caused when there is a fright that a individual will non be able to go accustomed to the new needed accomplishments.

Therefore. employees may defy due to fear of occupation loss or position. because they may be nescient to the intent of the alteration or because they disagree with direction on the alteration. ( Bovey. 2001 ) Furthermore. when implementing alteration in an organisation.

directors should expect to some opposition from employees. ( Oreg. 2006 ) MANAGING AND OVERCOMING RESISTANCE TO CHANGEThere are legion avenues in which directors can take in managing and get the better ofing the opposition to alter. Education and communicating is one common manner directors can cut down opposition by employees. ( Kotelnikov. 2001 ) This scheme involves directors informing employees about the nature and logical thinking of the alteration before it is implemented.

( Kotelnikov. 2001 ) They can make this via rich channels ( face-to-face meetings ) . studies. electronic mails.

teleconferencings. or single meetings. ( Kotelnikov. 2001 ) Another common avenue utilized by directors to pull off and get the better of opposition is via participatory direction and employee engagement in both the design and execution sections of the alteration attempt. ( DeLuca. 2007 )“ Employees who are involved in direction determinations understand them better and are more supportive.

” DeLuca explained. ( DeLuca. 2007 ) Furthermore. this attack is one of the best attacks for covering with organisational alteration is to hold an unfastened line of communicating between directors and employees. Peoples deal with alteration better when they are involved and empowered in direction determinations.

( DeLuca. 2007 ) Management should guarantee employees understand why. when. and how the alteration is happening.

Peoples are more positive about alteration when they are non worrying about the unexpected. An organisation may be able to discourage some of the opposition met by alteration by engaging alteration leaders who use rich channels in pass oning the alteration to employees. ( Schuler. 2003 ) Change leaders are typically believable people who possess regard.

virtue. and expertness in the organisation. Change leaders can be a valuable plus to any organisation who plans or does implement a alteration because surveies have shown that “ employees are more willing to listen and follow leaders with informal power instead than directors with important power. ” ( Schuler.

2003 ) Additionally. several organisations overcome opposition to alter via dialogue and wagess. ( Schuler. 2003 ) This involves offering employees inducements to guarantee their cooperation with the alteration attempts. ( Schuler. 2003 ) Conversely.

some organisations punish employees who do non collaborate with the implemented alteration by employment expiration and increased work loads. ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 )A decrease in productiveness will happen in any type of organisational alteration because people need the clip to accommodate and set to the alteration. ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml.

2002 ) The standards used to find if the organisational alteration was successful is the sum of productiveness lost and the sum of clip it takes to recover the original productiveness degree of the organisation. ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 ) Therefore. the main end of pull offing organisational alteration is to “ ensure that schemes for covering with human reactions to alter are wholly incorporated with other facets of the alteration attempt in order to make the coveted ends intended by the execution.

” ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 ) ” The figure below. based on a 1990 U. S.

Department of Labor survey. illustrates the alteration impact and recovery procedure both with and without the application of a formal organisational alteration direction procedure. ” ( Self. 2007 )Harmonizing to Bateman and Zeithaml.

“ managing alteration efficaciously requires traveling the organisation from its current province to a hereafter desired province at minimum cost to the organisation. ” ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 ) . The writers identified three stairss for organisations to follow when implementing organisational alteration: ” Diagnose the current province of the organisation. This involves placing jobs the company faces.

delegating a degree of importance to each 1. and measuring the sorts of alterations needed to work out the jobs. Design the coveted future province of the organisation. This involves visualizing the ideal state of affairs for the company after the alteration is implemented. conveying this vision clearly to everyone involved in the alteration attempt.

and planing a agency of passage to the new province. An of import portion of the passage should be keeping some kind of stableness ; some things-such as the company’s over-all mission or cardinal personnel-should re-main invariable in the thick of convulsion to assist cut down people’s anxiousness. Implement the alteration. This involves pull offing the passage efficaciously. It might be helpful to pull up a program. allocate resources.

and name a cardinal individual to take charge of the alteration procedure. The company’s leaders should seek to bring forth enthusiasm for the alteration by sharing their ends and vision and moving as function theoretical accounts. In some instances. it may be utile to seek for little triumphs foremost in order to pave the manner for later successes.

” ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 ) There is no 1 correct class of action or scheme when managing and overcoming organisational alteration opposition. ( Elving. 2004 )Therefore. each state of affairs is different and requires a different scheme or set of schemes.

Harmonizing to Bateman and Zeithaml. “ Effective alteration directors are familiar with the assorted attacks and capable of flexibly using them harmonizing to the state of affairs. ” As a consequence of this truth. alteration direction is a extremely sought after accomplishment in today’s concern environment. ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 ) CONCLUSIONOrganizational alteration is inevitable and organisations must be prepared to cover with planned or unplanned alteration consequently.

( McNamara. 2007 ) For organisations to develop. they frequently must digest alteration at assorted checkpoints in their development. ( Muir. 1996 ) Knowing how to discourage some of the possible negative opposition to alter can help in the success of an organization’s overall scheme. ( Muir.

1996 ) Understanding organisational alteration in concurrence with the behaviours of opposition to alter is optimum for any firms’ success. ( Muir. 1996 )Therefore. organisational alteration attempts with small or no opposition better the public presentation of organisations and the employees in those organisations. ( Armenakis et al.

1996 ) Employee opposition to organisational alteration is a many-sided issue confronting direction in the diverse and ever-changing concern environment of today. ( Armenakis et al. 1996 ) The procedure of alteration is ineluctable and employee opposition has been recognized as chief subscriber to the prostration of many attempts to implement alteration within organisations. ( Armenakis et al. 1996 ) Regularly. big sums of resources are expended by organisations in order to familiarise employees in advanced operations and procedures.

( Patrick. 2001 ) The inclination for employees to continue the “ status quo” shows challenges that direction must get the better of in order to convey approximately coveted alteration. ” ( Bateman & A ; Zeithaml. 2002 )In add-on. for directors to ease an easy passage from the old manner of making things to the new manner of making things.

they must hold an apprehension of alteration direction. ( Armenakis et al. 1996 ) In short. the procedure of managing and get the better ofing alteration opposition involves act uponing employees to purchase into the thought of the alteration ( s ) every bit good as handle any opposition that may happen. This probe emphasizes that organisational alteration can at times be a good or bad thought.

Organizations should take the clip to develop schemes for implementing organisational alteration. In add-on. organisations should besides be after to meet opposition to alter in every facet of their proposal to alter. In my sentiment.

organisations should ne’er alter for the interest of alteration. because repairing a job that doesn’t exist is making a job in my eyes. Conversely. I do believe that organisations should alter if necessary and seek to maintain up with the times refering engineering and rivals.

Furthermore. if organisations study change direction. so they can break gestate on how to cut down or extinguish employee opposition to alter if it occurs. ( Armenakis et al. 1996 ) In my sentiment based upon this research.

the lone true manner to efficaciously pull off and get the better of opposition to alter is to understand the sole fortunes within each employee that is doing the opposition to alter. This nevertheless is an unrealistic undertaking in most instances due to a deficiency of resources and clip restraints. ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY1. McNamara. Carter.

( 2007 ) . Organizational Change and Development. Retrieved November 4. 2007.

from Free Management Library. Website: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. managementhelp. org/org_chng/org_chng.

htm # anchor1323812. Nadler. David. ( 1981 ) . Pull offing Organizational Change: An Integrative Position.

The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. Vol. 17. No.

2. 191-211. Retrieved November 9. 2007. from Sage Diaries Online database.

3. Muir. Clive. ( 1996 ) .

Workplace Readiness for Communicating Diversity. Journal of Business Communication. Vol. 33.

No. 4. 475-484. Retrieved November 9. 2007.

from Sage Diaries Online database. 4. Armenakis. A. .

Harris. S. . ; A ; Mossholder. K.

( 1993 ) . Making Readiness for Organizational Change. Human Relations. Vol.

46. No. 6. 681-703. Retrieved November 9.

2007. from Sage Diaries Online database. 5. Goff.

L. ( 2000 ) . Change Management: Retrieved November 9. 2007. from ComputerWorld Quick-study.

Website: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. computerworld. com/news/2000/story/0. 11280.

41308. 00. hypertext markup language. 6.

Elving. W. J. ( 2004 ) . Communicating Organizational Change: the function of information.

communicating clime. and uncertainness on preparedness for alteration. consequences from three instances. Retrieved November 8. 2007. from All-Academic.

Inc. Website: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. allacademic. com/meta/p112743_index. html7. Bovey.

W. ; A ; Hede. A. ( 2001 ) .

Resistance to organisational alteration: the function of cognitive and affectional procedures. Leadership ; A ; Organization Development Journal. Vol. 22. No.

8. 372-382. 8. Oreg.

Shaul. ( 2006 ) . Personality. context. and opposition to organisational alteration. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology.

Vol. 15. No. 1. 73-101.

9. Dent. B. ; A ; Goldberg. S.

( 1999 ) . Challenging “ Resistance to Change” . The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. Vol. 35. No.

1. 25-41. 10. McNamara. Carter. ( 2006 ) .

Driving Forces and a New Organizational Paradigm. Retrieved November 4. 2007. from Free Management Library. Website: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.

managementhelp. org/org_thry/paradigm. htm11. Varelas. Elaine. ( 2005 ) .

Driving organisational alteration. Retrieved on November 7. 2007. from HR Center: The Hire Authority. Web site: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. Boston.

com/jobs/hire_authority/110705. shtml12. Hoisington. Steven. ( 2007 ) . Implementing Strategic Change: Tools for Transforming an Organization. New York: McGraw-Hill. 13. Self. Dennis. ( 2007 ) . Organizational alteration – get the better ofing opposition by making preparedness. Development and Learning in Organizations. Vol. 21. No. 5. 11-1314. Schuler. A. J. ( 2003 ) . Get the better ofing Resistance to Change: Top Ten Reasons for Change Resistance. Retrieved on November 8. 2007. from Schuler Solutions. Website: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. schulersolutions. com/resistance_to_change. html15. DeLuca. Joel. ( 2007 ) . Get the better ofing Resistance to Change: Get the better ofing Intellectual. Emotional. and Behavioral Resistance in Organizations. New York: Evergreen Business Group. 16. Patrick. Frank. ( 2001 ) . Taking Advantage of Resistance to Change to Better Improvements. Retrieved on November 9. 2007. from Focused Performance. Website: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. focusedperformance. com/articles/resistance. html17. Pardo del Val. M. ; A ; Martinez- Fuentes. C. ( 2006 ) . Resistance to Change: A Literature Review and Empirical Study. Retrieved on November 9. 2007. from Valencia University. Spain. Web site: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. uv. es/~pardoman/resistencias. PDF18. Kotelnikov. Vadim. ( 2001 ) . Organizational Invention: How To Pull off the Complex Process of Organizational Change. Retrieved on November 10. 2007. from Business -eCoach. Website: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. 1000ventures. com/business_guide/crosscuttings/change_organizational. html19. Sturdy. Andrew. ( 2003 ) . Beneath and Beyond Organizational Change Management: Researching Options. Organization. Vol. 10. No. 4. 651-662. 20. Bordia. P. . Jones. E. . Gallois. C. . Callan. V. . ; A ; DiFonzo. N. ( 2006 ) . Management Are Aliens: Rumors and Stress during Organizational Change. Group ; A ; Organization Management. Vol. 31. No. 5. 601-621. 21. Bateman. T. ; A ; Zeithaml. C. ( 2002 ) . Pull offing Organizational Change. Retrieved December 13. 2007. from Encyclopedia of Small Business. 2nd erectile dysfunction. Website: hypertext transfer protocol: //findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_gx5201/is_2002/ai_n19121369

Thank's for Your Vote!
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 1
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 2
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 3
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 4
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 5
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 6
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 7
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 8
Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Page 9

This work, titled "Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample" was written and willingly shared by a fellow student. This sample can be utilized as a research and reference resource to aid in the writing of your own work. Any use of the work that does not include an appropriate citation is banned.

If you are the owner of this work and don’t want it to be published on AssignBuster, request its removal.

Request Removal
Cite this Essay

References

AssignBuster. (2021) 'Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample'. 16 December.

Reference

AssignBuster. (2021, December 16). Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample. Retrieved from https://assignbuster.com/organizational-change-in-todays-business-environment-essay-sample/

References

AssignBuster. 2021. "Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample." December 16, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/organizational-change-in-todays-business-environment-essay-sample/.

1. AssignBuster. "Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample." December 16, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/organizational-change-in-todays-business-environment-essay-sample/.


Bibliography


AssignBuster. "Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample." December 16, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/organizational-change-in-todays-business-environment-essay-sample/.

Work Cited

"Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample." AssignBuster, 16 Dec. 2021, assignbuster.com/organizational-change-in-todays-business-environment-essay-sample/.

Get in Touch

Please, let us know if you have any ideas on improving Organizational change in todays business environment essay sample, or our service. We will be happy to hear what you think: [email protected]