Assignment Writing Services & Custom Essays

Order online anytime - Need help? call 0115 9667965

Employee Adaptation To Change Management In Organizations

Abstract

The objective of this research paper is to show the key factors influencing the human resource management (HRM) to adjust change management in an association. While the needs for successful change management in organizations are extended, the vital importance of them is adaptation of the employees. The article will illustrate human organizational factors to change management in critical periods and understanding organizational change overlooks the impact of the cultural and political dimensions of organizational life. The first part of this paper is devoted to the analysis of the nature and the concept of change in organizations as a perpetual and inevitable fact. Change in organization is always at the threshold of some resistance from both the decision makers and the employees. To overcome this, a brief introduction to the concept of resistance is given and then it is tried to point out the nature and cause of the resistance as well as mentioning the positive resistance and eventually the discussion will lead its way toward the transitions through these resistances. The second major discussion revolves around understanding change management competency as well as the effective strategies of managing the probable changes. It is tried to give a clear picture about this issue in details in this paper. Furthermore, in the last part ten key practical points are mentioned as the factors to solve the issue of adjustment of employees with the new circumstances. And eventually it is concluded that in spite of all attempts the employees are not in vacuum therefore these recommendations are not as the only remedy to this issue while the human beings are different in nature as a result the approaches to human concerns may vary radically.

I. The Nature of Organizational Change

In today's economy, change is all-pervasive in organizations. It happens continuously, and often at rapid speed. Because change has become an everyday part of organizational dynamics, employees who resist change can actually cripple an organization. Resistance is an inevitable response to any major change. Individuals naturally rush to defend the status quo if they feel their security or status are threatened. Folger & Skarlicki (1999) claim that “organizational change can generate skepticism and resistance in employees, making it sometimes difficult or impossible to implement organizational improvements” (p. 25).

If management does not understand, accept and make an effort to work with resistance, it can undermine even the most well-intentioned and well-conceived change efforts. Coetsee (1999) states “any management's ability to achieve maximum benefits from change depends in part of how effectively they create and maintain a climate that minimizes resistant behaviour and encourages acceptance and support” (p. 205).

A. Resistance Defined

In order to understand the concept of employee resistance, it is critical to define what is meant by the term resistance. Alvin Zander (1950) an early researcher on the subject, defined resistance to change as “behavior which is intended to protect an individual from the effects of real or imagined change” (cited in Dent & Goldberg, 1999, p. 34). Zaltman & Duncan (1977) define resistance as “any conduct that serves to maintain the status quo in the face of pressure to alter the status quo” (cited in Bradley, 2000, p. 76). In the view of Folger & Skarlicki (1999) resistance is defined as “employee behavior that seeks to challenge, disrupt, or invert prevailing assumptions, discourses, and power relations” (p. 36).
Piderit (2000) believes that the definition of the term resistance must incorporate a much broader scope. She states that “a review of past empirical research reveals three different emphases in conceptualizations of resistance: as a cognitive state, as an emotional state, and as a behavior” (p. 784).

The notion that employee resistance can be overcome cognitively suggests that negative thoughts or beliefs about the change exist. Piderit sites, “Watson (1982) who suggests that what is often labeled as resistance is, in fact, only reluctance. Armenakis, Harris, and Mossholder (1993) define resistance in behavioral terms but suggest that another state precedes it: is a cognitive state they call (un)-readiness“ (2000, p. 785).
Others attempt to define employee resistance based on the emotional factors exhibited as a result of organizational change. From their early study, Coch and French (1948) acknowledged aggression and frustration in employees as the emotional factors that caused undesirable behaviors and resistance to change. Argyris and Schon (1974, 1978) noted that resistance to change is a defence mechanism caused by frustration and anxiety (Piderit, 2000).

The final aspect of Piderit's conceptualization focuses on individual behavior in an attempt to define employee resistance to change. She cites Brower and Abolafia (1995) who define resistance as a particular kind of action or inaction. Ashforth and Mael (1998) define resistance as intentional acts of commission (defiance) or omission. Shapiro, Lweicki, and Devine (1995) suggest that willingness to deceive authorities constitutes resistance to change (2000).

Piderit (2000) claims that: although these conceptualizations of overlap somewhat, they diverge in important ways. Finding a way to bring together these varying emphases should deepen our understanding of how employees respond to proposed organizational changes. Each of these three conceptualizations of resistance - as a behaviour, an emotion, or a belief - has merit and represents an important part of our experience of response to change. Thus, any definition focusing on one view at the expense of the others seems incomplete (p. 785).

According to Dent & Goldberg (1999), individuals aren't really resisting the change, but rather they may be resisting the loss of status, loss of pay, or loss of comfort. They claim that, “it is time that we dispense with the phrase resistance to change and find a more useful and appropriate models for describing what the phrase has come to mean - employees are not wholeheartedly embracing a change that management wants to implement” (p. 26).

B. The Nature and Causes of Resistance

Symptoms are the specific behaviors individuals exhibit when they are resistant to change. According to Bhutan (1995), it is important to distinguish between the symptoms of resistance to change, and the causes behind it. These behaviors fall into two categories -- active-resistance or passive-resistance. Symptoms of active-resistance include finding fault, ridiculing, appealing to fear, and manipulating. Passive-resistance symptoms include agreeing verbally but not following through, feigning ignorance and withholding information.
Bhutan (1995) adds, "there is always the danger of identifying a symptom of resistance when you are really looking for its cause. To diagnose the causes, we must understand a person's state of mind. The most important factors that go into a person's state of mind are his or her facts, The list of reasons why individuals might be resistance to organizational change has grown since Sander's initial six published in 1950. It is safe to assume that any attempts to cover all of them would produce volumes of literature. However, there are several that are quite common and prevalent, which help provide a solid basis to understanding the concept.
Employees resist change because they have to learn something new. In many case there is not a disagreement with the benefits of the new process, but rather a fear of the unknown future and about their ability to adapt to it. de Jag er (2001) argues, 'Most people are reluctant to leave the familiar behind. We are all suspicious about the unfamiliar; we are naturally concerned about how we will get from the old to the new, especially if it involves learning something new and risking failure" (p. 24).
Low tolerance for change is defined as the fear that one will not be able to develop new skills and behaviors that are required in a new work setting. According to Kotter & Schlesinger (1979), if an employee has a low tolerance for change, the increased ambiguity that results as a result of having to perform their job differently would likely cause a resistance to the new way of doing things. An employee may understand that a change is needed, but may be emotionally unable to make the transition and resist for reasons they may not consciously understand.

Folger & Skarlicki (1995) investigated resistance to change as a response to the treatment employees receive in the change process. Specifically they focuses on resentment-based resistance -reactions by disgruntled employees regarding the perceived unfairness of the change. They claim that “resent-based resistance behaviors, which can range from subtle acts of non-cooperation to industrial sabotage, are often seen by the perpetrators as subjectively justifiable - a way to “get even” for perceived mistreatment and a way for employees to exercise their power to restore perceived injustice” (p. 36).
Paul Strebel (1996), professor and director of the Change Program for international managers at the International Institute for Management Development (IMD), attributes resistance as a violation of “personal compacts” management has with their employees. Personal compacts are the essence of the relationship between employees and organizations defined by reciprocal obligations and mutual commitments that are both stated and implied. Any change initiatives proposed by the organization would alter their current terms.

Personal compacts are comprised of formal, psychological, and social dimensions. The formal dimension is the most familiar. It is the aspect of the relationship that addresses the basic tasks and performance requirements of the job, and is defined by job descriptions, employee contracts, and performance agreements. Management, in return, agrees to supply the employee the resources needed to perform their job. The psychological dimension address aspects of the employment relationship that incorporate the elements of mutual trust, loyalty and commitment.
The social dimension of the personal compact deals with organizational culture which encompasses mission statement, values, ethics and business practices.
Strebel points out that when these personal compacts are disrupted it upsets the balance, and increases the likelihood of resistance. He suggests that management view how change looks from the employees' perspective, and to examine the terms of the personal compacts currently in place. 'Unless manages define new terms and persuade employees to accept them, it is unrealistic for managers to expect employees to fully buy into changes that alter the status quo" (p. 87).

Kegan & Lahey (2001) describe a psychological dynamic called a “competing commitment” as the real reason for employee resistance to organizational change. The change is not challenged, but rather is it resisted, or not implemented at all because the employee faces additional issue or concerns related to the change. When an employee's hidden competing commitment is uncovered, “behavior that seems irrational and ineffective suddenly becomes stunningly sensible and masterful - but unfortunately, on behalf of a goal that conflicts with what you and even the employee are trying to achieve” (p. 85).
Competing commitments should not be viewed as a weakness, but as a version of self-protection. If these competing commitments are a form of self-protection, then what are employees protecting themselves from? Kegan & Lahey believe the answer usually lies in what they call “big assumptions” - deeply rooted beliefs people have about themselves and the world around them. Many rarely realize they hold big assumptions because they are woven into the very fabric of people's existence, and thus they accept them as reality. “these assumptions put an order to the world and at the same time suggest ways in which the world can go out of order. Competing commitments arise from these assumptions, driving behaviors unwittingly designed to keep the picture intact” (p. 88).

C. Positive Resistance

Managers often perceive resistance negatively, and employees who resist are viewed as disobedient and obstacles the organization must overcome in order to achieve the new goals. However in certain instances, employee resistance may play a positive and useful role in organizational change. Insightful and well-intended debate, criticism, or disagreement do not necessarily equate to negative resistance, but rather may be intended to produce better understanding as well as additional options and solutions. de Jager (2001) claims, "the idea that anyone who questions the need for change has an attitude problem is simply wrong, not only because it discounts past achievements, but also because it makes us vulnerable to indiscriminate and ill-advised change' (p. 25).
Piderit (2000) points out that what some managers may perceive as disrespectful or unfounded resistance to change might be motivated by an individual's ethical principles or by their desire to protect what they feel is the best interests of the organization. Employee resistance may force management to rethink or reevaluate a proposed change initiative. It also can act as a as a gateway or filter, which can help organizations select from all possible changes the one that is most appropriate to the current situation. According to de Jager (2001), “resistance is simply a very effective, very powerful, very useful survival mechanism” (p. 26).
Folger & Skarlicki (1999) claim “that not all interventions are appropriate as implemented -the organization might be changing the wrong thing or doing it wrong. Just as conflict can sometimes be used constructively for change, legitimate resistance might bring about additional organizational change” (p. 37).

D. Transition and Transitional Phenomena

The process of change is simply moving from the current way of doing things to a new and different way of doing things. Bridges (1991) believes that it isn't the actual change that individuals resist, but rather the transition that must be made to accommodate the change. He states, “change is not the same as transition. Change is situational: the new site, the new boss, the new team roles, the new policy. Transition is the psychological process people go through to come to terms with the new situation. Change is external, transition is internal. Unless transition occurs, change will not work” (p. 3-4).
Morgan (1997) suggests that an understanding of the theory of transitional phenomena would provide valuable insight into organizational change, and why it might be met with employee resistance. This theory “suggests that change will occur spontaneously only when people are prepared to relinquish what they hold dear for the purpose of acquiring something new or can find ways of carrying what they value in the old into the new” (p. 238). In the event that it does not exist naturally, it may be necessary for the organization to create transitional phenomena. This would help in the “letting go” of the current way and moving forward to the new way. Morgan adds, bringing about organization change “can rarely be done effectively by “selling” or imposing a “change package,” an ideology or a set of techniques. The theory of transitional phenomena suggests that in situations of voluntary change the person doing the changing must be in control of the process” (p. 238).
Leon Coetsee (1999) attempts to explain the nature of resistance to change through a continuum model. He states that, "in organizational development literature, acceptance of change (commitment) and rejection of change (resistance) are typically treated as separate, unrelated phenomena7' (p. 204). Through his model, Coetsee argues that they are closely linked in the sense that they represent a polarity, with each being the far end of the continuum. Moving from resistance to commitment is done through sequential phases contained within the continuum.

I. Areas of Organizational Change

Organizational Change involves any aspect of an organizational change including work schedules, bases for departmentalization, duration of control, machinery, technology and operation, organizational design and structure, modifying a program, workforce and performance. Any change in the nature of an organization may lead to further than the area in which the change is made. It is obvious that change is inevitable. No matter what type of business or organization you run, significant changes will need to take place over time in order to keep up with trends, evolve, and grow. An organization that faces constant demands for change, and uses effective change management techniques when these demands must be met may experience a fundamental shift in the way in which it is operated. Sponsors of the organization begin to repeat certain activities that made the last change possible and successful, and managers learn skills that help support employees through the entire process. When this happens, employees see the need for change and are better able to understand their part in it.
Organizational change is a multi-level process that follows the natural chain of command. If you want your employees to accept the change, you will have to do so first. If you aren't taking an active part in making it happen, your employees probably won't either. When all parties do their part, the organization will have internalized its role in change and developed the necessary skills and acquired the knowledge to react in a positive way.

When this has been accomplished, an organization is sufficiently ready and able to embrace change, and has, therefore, developed competency where change is concerned. Change management competency has been shown to have direct bottom line results. This means that organizations are much more effective when they are able to manage change. Building change management competency has even become a strategic goal for many organizations, and is being more widely implemented.

A. Understanding Change Management Competency

Building change management competency in an organization is not like installing a brand new computer system in your organization, or implementing a new policy. When these things occur, someone makes the decision to do them and they are done without a change in organizational structure. Change management, however, requires a complete change in attitude. If everyone in the organization is opposed to the change, it will be much more difficult to implement than if everyone is accepting of it. Even if one level, say management, is accepting of the change that needs to take place, another level, say the employees, may not feel it necessary, and may, therefore, resist it. Effective change management requires a positive attitude, which starts with a clear understanding of how the change will both benefit and affect the organization as a whole. Individuals in an organization that is considered change competent are able to define their jobs in relation to change. They value their ability to change as one of the primary responsibilities, and are able to see both sides of any change. They are able to perform their job duties before, during, and after the change without interruption.

Change management competency is the presence of a business culture that expects change, and that reacts with the understanding, perspective, tools, and techniques that make change seem both seamless and effortless. During any organizational change, it is crucial that the business run as smoothly as ever, and that the change not affect the customer side of everyday operations. That is what change management competency is all about; the ability to make the transition from one change to another, while retaining the continuity that is expected of your organization.

B. Change Management VS Change Management Competency

Change management differs slightly from change management competency. While the objective is the same, the focus is different. Change management is the use of specific activities that are used to manage the people side of change. This includes: communication, coaching, sponsorship, and training. These activities are necessary in order to realize the success outcomes of any business change.

Change management competency is not a specific activity, but rather the ability for an organization to react to and successfully manage change time after time. It is the capability of an organization to apply the practices of change management routinely.

Change management, on the other hand, can be both taught and learned. You can teach each employee the importance of properly managing organizational change, but if these skills are not used every day by all, it will be quite difficult to establish change management competency. Also, change management competency must penetrate every part of the organization, and must be evident in all levels, especially for sponsors, managers, and front-line employees. When these parts of the organization lack the lack the fundamental understanding and skills needed to implement change, they are unable to successfully pass these skills on to the next level of employees.

C. Effective Leadership

Effective leadership is important in any organization. Today, it is very common for organizations to incorporate teams that assist in making very important decisions, completing projects, and compiling information that is necessary for every level of the business. Executives are constantly searching for ways to improve overall profitability and growth by reacting to various market place changes and opportunities that occur. By doing so, they are also insuring that business changes are implemented and realized to their full potential through effective leadership.

Here, sponsorship is very important. This includes visible participation in change throughout the life of any given project. Each project team can then support sponsors, managers, and front line employees through the change process. This can be affected with the proper tools, processes, and techniques that are designed to help manage change.

This process will undergo many changes as it is implemented. These changes will be both felt and seen on every level, and must be paid proper attention. The project teams will also help each level understand what is taking place and what must take place in order for the change to prove successful. This role is both important and crucial to the overall operation of the business.

D. The Manager's Role

Whenever an organization experiences change, whether big or small, the manager's role is among the most important. Mangers are there to coach their employees through the change before, during, and after it takes place. They also help by providing direction and steering needed for professional development. This is what allows employees to move up and become managers themselves. If they are taught the skills needed to successfully accept and implement change, they will be able to pass them on to their future employees.

Managers are also responsible for encouraging employees so they will be able to meet with successful performance. When change is gong to take place, managers inform their employees of the change, what it will mean for them, and what it will mean for the organization as a whole. It is very important that everyone in the organization understand their role in the change and knows what will be expected. Managers are also responsible for helping implement the plan for change and then help put it in motion. The employees will follow the lead of the manager, so skills and knowledge really are the key. The managers on different levels will then pass the information down until all levels are aware of the change and know what is to take place and the duties they are expected to fulfill.

E. The Role of Front Line Employees

Front line employees should be able to successfully perform in the current environment, during the transition process, and in the future. This means that they should be equipped with the tools necessary to effectively manage their personal transition through the change. This also means that front line employees should be able to quickly adapt their ways of thinking, along with their methods of performing job duties in order to keep up with the fast pace change often brings.

Because the “current state” of operation is subject to change very rapidly, as well as frequently, the speed with which front line employees are able to implement change, then become acclimated to it, if crucial. Change should be conducted smoothly in order to be effective. Too much interruption may cause problems with business continuity. If this happens, customers will take notice, and the overall organization could be effected. Because of this, front line employees should receive any necessary skills or training that will help to prepare them for the upcoming change so the transition will happen more easily.

The skills learned from managers will also help front line employees gain the ability to better handle future change that is sure to occur. It will also help them move up into higher positions, and become more competent employees. This benefits the organization because these employees will have worked there from the ground up and will know the inner workings of the business.

F. Facilitating a Change Competent Culture

A change competency culture can be established when the entire organization is considered to be change management competent. This means that everyone knows and understands their roles in the workings of the particular business or industry, and is able to react confidently and efficiently to the many changes that take place. The role of each person in the organization is crucial to a smooth transaction and business continuity. This includes several factors that relate closely to your organization.

The first factor is awareness. It is important that everyone involved is aware of the need for change, and is able to competently affect it. The second is the ability to understand change competency, along with the business risk of not developing it. If everyone around you is changing and you are not, you run a very high risk of losing clients and customers who prefer the new changes taking place around them and you. Desire is a third important factor. You must realize the impact on the livelihood and operations of your organization if change competency is not developed. This also includes developing the motivation to create organizational change competency. This also involves taking a look around you to evaluate changes that are taking place in other similar organizations, then figuring out what needs to take place in order to set your organization apart from all the rest.

G. Understanding Your Role

There are many roles in a change competent organization. Each one is specific to certain tasks and skills, and each one is necessary in order for the change to be effective. One important factor of effective change is the speed with which it is implemented. This does not mean that attention to detail should be ignored, quality is definitely preferred over quantity, but it does mean that everyone involved in implementing the organizational change must clearly understand his or her role and how it will be carried out.

If one person fails to complete a necessary task, the process of implementing the particular change could be significantly slowed. This will affect every aspect of the business, and could actually have a negative impact of overall operations. That is why it is important for everyone to understand his or her role, and to know who to consult if questions or problems arise. Everyone in the organization should work together and help each other to make sure clear communication is established and maintained, and to quickly expedite the overall process. This makes overall operations more integral and expedient.

H. The Future Vision

Every organizational goal is geared toward the future of the organization. You want your organization to outlast all others, so for you, this vision is crucial. Before you will be able to put a plan into action, you must first know and understand your vision. This is usually established before the organization is ever in operation, and is crucial when formulating necessary documents such as business plans and marketing proposals.

Once you clearly understand your vision, you must figure out how you will make it happen. Because everything around you is constantly changing, you must adapt your plans and processes in order to reach your desired result. It is also likely that your vision will expand over time to encompass a variety of other factors that you will discover as your organization grows. Growth is the key, and in order to grow, you must be willing to accept and implement change.

Once you have implemented monumental change, you will be better able to handle the smaller, everyday changes that keep your organization running. If you are able to turn what appears to be a negative change into a positive situation, your employees will learn to do the same. By setting a good example for those around you, you will establish a positive attitude and work ethic that will claim your place in the entire industry.

II. How to Adjust Employees with Change management

If organizations do not change, they lose their ability to compete. So, managers and supervisors have to implement organizational changes. It is managers' and supervisors' duty to guide employees through organizational change by being upbeat, positive and enthusiastic. They should involve employees in organizational change and interviewing them to understand their feelings about upcoming changes. In order to lead the employees through Organizational Change a few strategies are taken. Over the past several years, some organizations have experienced rapid growth; others have felt the effects of downsizing. Many markets have expanded, and just as many have crumbled. Companies have experienced greater competition and advanced technological demands. All indicators are that organizations will continue facing challenges created by sharp economic swings, keen competitive pressures, globalization of the marketplace, and reshaping of businesses worldwide. Simply put, change is here to stay, and those organizations and people who do not change will not survive.

Whether we like it or not, managers and supervisors have to implement organizational changes. Fortunately, there are several specific actions you can take to successfully guide employees through times of change and help make them some of the most rewarding and productive times your company has.

1. Involve employees. There is generally a lag between the time management discusses organizational changes and the time they are implemented. Although managers like to believe they are the only ones who know about the upcoming changes, employees usually get wind of them through informal communication. Unfortunately, that informal communication often tends to be negative. The sooner you get employees involved in the change process, the better off everyone will be. A formal communication channel is much more effective than a negative, informal one.

2. Interview employees. It is only when you accurately understand employees' feelings about upcoming changes that you know what issues you need to address. It is difficult to effectively sell employees on change without understanding their needs, concerns and fears.

3. Ask, don't tell. There's an old saying, “You can tell tough employees, but you can't tell them much.” Employees who do not deal well with change are generally the same ones who cannot be “told” anything. For this reason, it's a good idea to ask employees questions rather than telling them why the changes are taking place. One organization, in an attempt to improve both profitability and customer service, decided to move from having a specific individual responsible for satisfying a specific customer to having a team of individuals responsible for satisfying many customers. This altered the way the organization had done business for thirty years. Management tried many times to tell employees why the change was needed, but the employees remained adamantly opposed. As a last resort, management switched strategies and asked the following question: “If we keep going without any change, is our organization going to flourish in the next ten years?” Ninety-five percent of employees stated that not changing would lead to the company's demise. With this feedback, management proceeded to involve all the employees in designing the specific change strategy to be implemented.

4. Involve both negative and positive informal leaders. Every organization has informal leaders�some positive and some negative. Positive informal leaders have a reputation for supporting management. Most managers and supervisors get these positive leaders involved in implementing changes, but avoid involving the negative leaders. This is a mistake, since leaders who are not involved lack commitment to the change, and may even try to sabotage it. It's better to get the negative leaders involved in the change early in the process, find out what their objections and concerns are, and then use this knowledge to design your change strategy. If you can meet the concerns of the organization's informal leaders, they will help sell the change to the rest of the employees.

5. Don't cover all the bases yourself. Too often, supervisors try to police all activities. It's better to concentrate on effective delegation during the early stages of the change process. Delegation helps you manage and maintain your workload and gives your employees a sense of involvement, which positions them to share in the responsibility for change.

6. Raise expectations. Employees expect to do more work during the change process. While it may be more practical to expect less in terms of performance, this is actually the time to raise the performance level. Employees are likely to be changing their work habits to accommodate the changes anyway. Take the opportunity to push employees to try harder and work smarter. Require performance improvements that make the process challenging, but keep goals realistic to eliminate frustration.

7. Ask employees for their commitment. It's important to personally ask for each employee's commitment to implementing the changes. It is equally important to tell employees that you want to hear about any problems. If a negative employee does not tell you about problems, you can be sure he or she will be telling other employees about them.

8. Over-communicate. Chances are, during the change process, normal communication channels in the company won't be working as well as usual. Employees will be hungrier than ever for information. Give them an opportunity to provide input. Ask questions to get their opinions and reactions to the changes. Maintain your visibility and make it clear that you are accessible. Immediately clear up any rumors and misinformation. And if you don't have any new information�let them know that too.

9. Be firm, but flexible. It's vital to see change through to completion. Abandoning it halfway through destroys your credibility. But remain flexible and be prepared to adapt to a myriad of situations to successfully implement the changes.

10. Keep positive. Your attitude will be a major factor in determining the climate exhibited by your employees. Try to remain upbeat, positive and enthusiastic. Foster motivation in others. Compensate your employees for their extra effort. Write a little note of encouragement on their paychecks. Leave a nice message on their voice mail. Take them aside and tell them what a great job they are doing. Listen to their suggestions. Finally, encourage them to view organizational change as a personal challenge!

Conclusion:

Changing in an organization is not simple but it is a must. It promotes aims to higher levels. So, to survive and expand, organizations and the employees must adapt to changes in organizations. Employee resistance to change is a complex issue facing management in the complex and ever-evolving organization of today. The process of change is ubiquitous, and employee resistance has been identified as a critically important contributor to the failure of many well-intend and well-conceived efforts to initiate change within the organization.
In many cases, vast amounts of resources are expended by organizations to adjust employees to a new way of achieving desired goals. The natural propensity for individuals to “defend the status quo” presents a set of challenges that management must overcome in order to bring about desired change. Management must also seriously take into account and consider the myriad of problems that may result if they are not responsive to issues of resistance in the workplace. In order to facilitate a smooth transition from the old to the new, organizations must be competent in effective change management. The process of change management consists of getting of those involved and affected to accept the introduced changes as well as manage any resistance to them.
This investigation stresses that change usually involves an individual's psyche, so there are no concrete textbook answers and solutions to the problem. Since each individual is different, their perceptions and reasons for resisting are also different. As a result, researchers and scholars can theorize on how to lessen or remove employee resistance to change, but in the final analysis the only way to do so effectively is to understand the unique circumstances within each individual that is causing their particular resistance.

Order a Custom Essay

Note:

All of the example assignments that we publish on PowerfulWords have been submitted to us by students and are NOT examples of the work produced by our expert writers. All work produced by our writers is unique to the customer who ordered it. For this reason, we do NOT publish custom written work on PowerfulWords.

Use this free example below as a study aid or to help you find inspiration. Please remember to reference this example if you use it in your work.

Essay removal request