Understanding and Coping with Change
Introduction
Change is inevitable in the current business scenario. This can be attributed to the increased competition whereby organization needs to maintain their competitive advantage. For this to be possible, it is imperative for all the sectors in an organization to accept change positively. This is inclusive of the individuals involved in the business. This requirement dictates that individuals within a business should embrace change in order to ensure success. However, there are internal and external impediments, which result in an individual resisting change. Therefore, in order for individuals to be able to cope with change, it is crucial for them to be aware of the factors that cause resistance to change. Considering a real business scenario, it is evident that resistance to change is experienced. Despite the need for change in the business scenario, individuals are influenced internal and external to resist it.
Employee Resistance to Change
An instance where resistance was evident is an employee in a freight company. The development in technology has resulted in innovations, which have been adopted by freight companies. This change required the company to change the operations in order to remain competitive. In order for this change to be successful, it was essential for employees to change their attitudes and perceptions concerning technology. It was also essential for employees to develop the necessary expertise to handle the newly adopted technology. These requirements met resistance from the staff whereby the individuals were apprehensive about the impact of the changes in their daily mandates. It appeared that the staff was timid and indifferent when the management attempted to encourage them to adopt the changes. This situation was a challenge for the organization’s management and had a negative impact on productivity. The resistance by the employees was detrimental to the growth and competitiveness of the business.
Factors Causing Employee Resistance
Considering the aforementioned case, it is essential to consider what internal or external factors that resulted in the resistance for change. In the aforementioned scenario, the resistance to change appears to be internal in that the lack of knowledge was the main cause for the resistance (Burke, 2010). The employees appeared to be unknowledgeable about the change’s influence in productivity and competitive advantage (Hellriegel and Slocum, 2007). This resulted in the employees failing to acknowledge the significance of the change in their mandate. In addition, the employees also had no knowledge on how to handle the changes. The adoption of technology in the freight business required the employees to have skills to handle this change. Therefore, the resistance by the employees appears to be motivated by inadequate knowledge. Another factor, which resulted in the resistance, was that the self-interests of the employers conflicted with the change. For instance, the employees were afraid of job loss in the organization. Therefore, in order to safeguard their positions, they opted to resist the proposed changes in order to retain the status quo (Hellriegel and Slocum, 2007). Considering the external factors that caused a change in the employees, it is apparent that the employees did not trust the management. The employees were afraid that the plan by the management to adopt technology was aimed at reducing the staffing requirements of the organizations. These notions due to the mistrust resulted in the employees undermining the organizations efforts towards change. Therefore, it is evident that the resistance experienced in the aforementioned scenario was because of factors, which were both internal and external.
Kotters Theory of Change
The resistance by the employees was detrimental for the organization’s progress. Therefore, it is crucial for the organization to identify the appropriate strategies to address the situation. The Kotter’s theory has been identified as a suitable approach of encouraging change in an organization. According to the theory, the employees will experience the eight steps identified in the theory. The employees will first be sensitized about the urgency of the proposed change. They will be given information in order to comprehend the need for the changes (Poole and Van, 2004). In addition, the leadership will be required to be proactive in preparing the employees for the change. This will require teamwork between the leadership and employees in order to create an impetus for the change. It is also essential for the organization to be vivid about the company’s vision. This will enable the employees to comprehend what is to be achieved with the change. This vision needs to be communicated through the organization in order to encourage a positive reaction to the change (Burke, 2010). Considering that there are barriers to change, it is crucial for the management to have rewards and recognition for employees who facilitate change. According to the theory, targets, which are short term, are essential in motivating the staff to adopt the change. It is crucial for the organization to evaluate the change process and build on the success. The change promoted during the process should be maintained in order to ensure long-term success.
Conclusions
Change is an actuality in the contemporary business scenario. Despite this, there are instances where there is resistance from the employees. This may be due to internal or external factors. Considering this, it is essential for organizations to ensure that they have appropriate strategies to counter the resistance. Kotter’s theory has been identified to be the suitable approach to facilitate change in organizations.
References
Burke, W. W. (2010). Organization change: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Hellriegel, D., & Slocum, J. W. (2007). Organizational behavior. Mason, Ohio: Thomson/South-Western.
Poole, M. S., & Van, . V. A. H. (2004). Handbook of organizational change and innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
