Organizational Change in todays business environment Essay Sample

both social and economic contexts.

According to McNamara (2007), any changes made in an organization will encounter resistance of some form. This resistance involves negative emotions and thoughts towards the alteration(s) being implemented.

According to Nadler (2007), failure to manage and overcome resistance to change can result in reduced productivity and profitability for an organization. Therefore, managing organizational change is crucial for its survival. This involves planning and implementing change in a way that minimizes employee resistance and maximizes effectiveness (Oreg, 2006).

The topic of the research is how to effectively manage and lead organizational change, which was introduced by Nadler in 1981. The aim is to identify the driving forces and obstacles to change within today's business environment. Organizational change typically arises from issues faced by an organization, as proposed by Varelas.

According to McNamara (2007), change happens in organizations due to either problems or opportunities. Internal driving forces for change come from employees and/or managers within the organization.

(Varelas, 2005) Organizational change is influenced or stimulated by various internal factors such as budget, working conditions, and internal political relations.

In 2005, organisational changes can stem from issues that an organisation faces or opportunities that arise. For example, an organisation may reallocate resources to enter a new area of business or improve productivity to reduce costs. Often, organisations implement changes to increase cost efficiency via budget cuts or layoffs.

Changes in organizational processes and equipment heights, as noted by Varelas (2005), are typically temporary solutions to address ongoing problems within the organization.

According to McNamara (2006), when organizations overcome their issues, they usually rehire those who were laid off and elevate their budgets to standards. However, if

equipment upgrades require a particular knowledge or skill, a different approach may be necessary.

According to Varelas (2005), there could be ongoing consequences resulting from organizational changes and replacing employees. Meanwhile, McNamara (2006) notes that both managers and employees are capable of initiating and influencing organizational change. McNamara also emphasizes that managers hold the authoritative power to introduce improvements in the organization.

In 2006, McNamara noted that although leadership often drives organizational change, it can be difficult for directors or employees to respond appropriately. The ability to influence within an organization ultimately lies with those who are respected for their expertise and virtues by their peers and colleagues. Therefore, it is important to recognize and involve these influential individuals in the change process.

In certain situations, employees may have greater influence than directors. Organizations may be advised to change for beneficial reasons, such as opportunities for profit (McNamara, 2006).

Burger King and McDonald's extended their operating hours later into the night after studying late night eating habits in order to increase profits. This organizational change presented an opportunity for both companies to excel in a highly lucrative market. According to Varelas (2005), the difference between a company's actual performance and its potential performance is referred to as a performance gap.

(Varelas, 2005) Companies often use the recognition of a public presentation spread as a catalyst for change in order to improve their performance to expected levels. (Bateman ; Zeithaml, 2002) Additionally.

The following type of expansion is when entrepreneurs discover opportunities to venture into new areas of interest (Bateman ; A; Zeithaml, 2002). Hoisington (2007) explains that there are various external driving factors of organizational change, including advancements

in scientific knowledge and technology, as well as global competition.

According to Hoisington (2007, p.137), as new technologies emerge, businesses need to adapt or adjust in order to effectively compete with their competitors.

According to McNamara (2006), as organizations expand internationally, the number of competitors also increases, making it crucial for organizations to adapt to changes and maintain competitiveness. Hoisington also supports this notion.

According to a source (2007, p. 137-138), when organizations expand to the international market, they are vulnerable to regulations and policies enforced by foreign governments.

According to Varelas (2005), organizations need to modify and adjust to regulations and policies of other countries to conduct business. The development of scientific knowledge and rapid advancements in technology are compelling factors that influence organizational changes.

(Hoisington, 2007, p. 141) The demand for specialized knowledge is increasing along with the advancements in engineering technology.

Hoisington (2007) suggests that organizations face pressure to implement changes, including offering retraining options for their current staff (pp. 141-142).

By adopting specialized workers and modernizing outdated equipment, technology can increase an organization's productivity and efficiency while reducing the need for manpower. However, it should be noted that this may also lead to the loss of certain workforce skills while simultaneously creating new employment opportunities due to advancements in technology and scientific expertise.

Sturdy (2003) states that technological progress has led to a higher proportion of skilled workers, as unskilled positions have been replaced by technology requiring trained operators and maintainers. Unfortunately, employee resistance is the most prevalent cause for failed organizational change efforts due to many employees being resistant to change.

Implementing changes can be difficult to achieve when perceived risks are involved. Resistance towards alterations suggests a negative

and pessimistic attitude towards change (Pardo et al., 2006). Other factors may also contribute to the challenge of gaining support.

As per Dent & Goldberg (1999), the hindrance to change is not a direct denial of the change itself, but it is a reaction to the possible loss of position, revenue or ease that might come along with it. This resistance can pose difficulties for an organization in accomplishing its objectives and executing its plans.

The term "Resistance to change" is characterized as actions that seek to safeguard an individual from the actual or perceived impacts of change, as stated by Dent and Goldberg (1999, p.).The definition of resistance, as per Bridges (1991) on page 76, is any behavior that preserves the current state when faced with pressure to alter it.The meaning of add-on is when employees behave in a way that challenges or opposes common beliefs and discussions.The text highlights the significance of trust and power dynamics in relationships (Folger & Skarlicki, 1999, p.).

According to Pardo et al. (2006), change is common in all organizations within today's economy and typically occurs quickly. In the face of major changes that threaten their comfort or security, employees tend to resist abandoning the "status quo."

Improper handling of opposition can hinder organizational prosperity. It is crucial to differentiate between active and passive opposition behaviors towards change. (Pardo et al.)

Pardo et al. (2006) classified opposition behaviors into two categories: active and passive. Active behaviors encompass blaming, teasing, and manipulating while passive behaviors involve verbally agreeing with new policies but not following them.

Bovey (2001) states that when employees are required to learn or perform a new task, they often resist change. This

resistance can also be caused by their fear of not being able to adapt to the necessary new skills.

According to Bovey (2001), when an organization introduces a change, employees might oppose it for various reasons such as apprehension of losing their job or position, insufficient comprehension of the change's objective, or dissent with the management's verdict.

According to a report from Oreg in 2006, directors should expect resistance from employees when managing and overcoming change. However, there are several methods directors can use to handle this opposition. One such strategy, described by Kotelnikov in 2001, is education and communication. This entails informing employees about the proposed changes' nature and rationale before implementing them.

Kotelnikov (2001) suggests that organizations can accomplish their objectives by employing diverse channels of communication such as in-person meetings, research, and email.

Kotelnikov (2001) states that teleconferencing and individual meetings are commonly used to manage opposition, while DeLuca (2007) proposes that participatory management and involving employees in the planning and implementation stages of change initiatives can also be effective. This approach allows workers to gain a better understanding of the process and increases their likelihood of being supportive.

According to DeLuca (2007), keeping communication between managers and employees open is an effective way to manage organizational change. It is crucial to involve and empower employees in decision-making processes as they are more capable of handling change through this approach.

(DeLuca. 2007) It is important for management to ensure that their employees comprehend the reasons, timing, and procedures of any changes taking place.

According to Schuler (2003), people are more open to change when they do not worry about unforeseen events. To minimize resistance to change, an organization can

employ change leaders who effectively communicate the changes to employees through multiple channels. These leaders are typically respected individuals who are deemed credible.

Having characteristics such as virtue and expertise within the organization can be advantageous. Change leaders are beneficial to organizations when implementing changes because studies have found that employees are more likely to listen and follow informal leaders rather than those in positions of significant power such as directors (Schuler).

Furthermore, according to Schuler (2003), various organizations address resistance to change through communication and incentives. This approach entails motivating employees to participate in alteration initiatives. Conversely, Schuler (2003) suggests an alternative viewpoint.

According to Bateman & Zeithaml (2002), some organizations use measures like job termination and increased workloads to penalize employees who resist changes. However, any organizational change is bound to result in reduced productivity as people require time to adjust and adapt.

In 2002, Bateman & Zeithaml established that the standards for measuring the success of organizational change include the amount of productivity lost and the time it takes to restore the original productivity level. Therefore, managing organizational change involves fully integrating strategies for addressing human reactions to change with other aspects of the change effort in order to achieve the desired implementation goals.

The figure shown in the HTML tag below, which references Bateman and Zeithaml from 2002, depicts data from a study conducted in the United States in 1990.According to Bateman and Zeithaml, the Department of Labor survey showcases the effects of changes and recovery methods with and without implementing a formal organizational change management process (Self, 2007).According to Bateman & Zeithaml (2002), successful management of organizational change involves transitioning the organization from

its current state to a desired future state with minimal cost. The authors suggest three steps for implementing organizational change, starting with diagnosing the current state of the organization, which entails identifying problems.

One approach to address organizational issues involves assigning priority levels to each issue and assessing the necessary changes to solve them. Another step is to envision the desired future state of the company after the changes are made and effectively communicate this vision to all involved in the alteration process.

When establishing an agency of passage to a new province, it is crucial to prioritize maintaining stability. This means ensuring that certain aspects of the company, such as its overall mission and key personnel, remain constant even during times of turmoil in order to reduce people's anxiety. The successful implementation of this change requires effective management of the transition process, which may involve creating a plan and allocating necessary resources.

It is advisable for a cardinal figure to spearhead the alteration process and for leaders to inspire employees by sharing goals and being role models. The implementation of minor achievements can also help prepare the way for future accomplishments.

According to Bateman and Zeithaml (2002), there is no single correct approach or strategy for managing and overcoming resistance to organizational change. As stated by Elving (2004), each situation is unique and requires its own specific set of strategies.

According to Bateman and Zeithaml (2002), effective change managers are capable of using a variety of approaches flexibly depending on the situation. Therefore, change management is a highly desirable skill in the current business landscape. Ultimately, organizational change is unavoidable, and organizations must be equipped to handle planned

or unexpected changes accordingly.

According to McNamara (2007), organizations often need to undergo changes at various stages in order to develop. Muir (1996) suggests that mitigating potential negative resistance to change can greatly enhance an organization's overall strategy.

According to Muir (1996), it is crucial for firms to comprehend the relationship between organizational change and resistance behaviors in order to succeed. Organizational change initiatives that face minimal opposition lead to improved performance for both the organization and its employees, as noted by Armenakis et al. (1996).

According to Armenakis et al. (1996), employee resistance to organizational change is a complex issue that management must confront in today’s diverse and constantly evolving business environment. The authors also acknowledge that resistance from employees is a leading factor that can cause attempts at implementing change within organizations to fail. Despite this challenge, businesses often invest significant resources into introducing new procedures and processes to their employees.

According to Patrick in 2001, employees' resistance to change presents challenges that management must overcome to achieve desired results. Additionally, Bateman and Zeithaml stated in 2002 that managers should enable a smooth transition from old practices to new ones.

According to Armenakis et al. (1996), managing and overcoming resistance to change involves influencing employees to accept the proposed changes and addressing any opposition that arises. It is important for individuals to have an understanding of change management. This study highlights the fact that organizational change can have positive or negative impacts.

In my opinion, organizations should allocate time to create strategies for implementing organizational change, while also planning to address resistance to change in all aspects of their proposed changes.

Organizations should not change just for the sake

of change, as this can create problems where there were none. However, if necessary, organizations should adapt to new technologies and competitors.

Based on the research by Armenakis et al. (1996), organisations should study change direction to anticipate and address employee resistance. This can help them develop strategies to minimize or eliminate such resistance.

When it comes to managing and overcoming resistance to change, the most effective approach is to comprehend the unique circumstances of each resistant employee. However, this method may not always be possible due to limitations on resources and time. ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. McNamara, Carter.

Retrieved on November 4, 2007 from "Organizational Change and Development" (2007).

The following text is from the Free Management Library website, which can be accessed via the hypertext transfer protocol at http://www.managementhelp.org/org_chng/org_chng/.

html #anchor1323812. The book "Managing Organizational Change: An Integrative Perspective" was authored by David Nadler in 1981.

The 17th volume and issue of The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science.

The information, ranging from 191-211, was obtained from the Sage Diaries Online database on November 9, 2007.

In 1996, Clive Muir authored a publication.

The Journal of Business Communication's Volume 33 addresses Workplace Readiness for Communicating Diversity.

The article titled No. 4 with page numbers 475-484 can be retrieved from the website on November 9, 2007.

The text is sourced from the Sage Diaries Online database, specifically the author Armenakis.

Harris, S. and Mossholder, K.

The article titled "Making Readiness for Organizational Change" was published in the journal Human Relations in 1993 (Vol.).

On November 9th, the article titled "No. 6: 681-703" was obtained.

The following information is taken from the Sage Diaries Online database from the year 2007, and was written by Goff.The ComputerWorld Quick-study

website provided information on Change Management as authored by L. (2000), which was accessed on November 9, 2007. The source of this information was in the form of an HTML tag enclosed within

and

tags.

URL: http://www.computerworld.com/news/2000/story/0.11280

HTML 6 is identified as 41308.00.

In 2004, Elving, W.J. examined the importance of information in conveying organizational changes.

On November 8, 2007, All-Academic provided data on climate communication and uncertainty related to preparedness for change. This information was gathered from three case studies.

Visit Bovey's webpage at Inc.

The citation for the work by W. A. Hede is as follows: A. (2001).

The role of cognitive and emotional processes in resistance to organizational change is discussed in Leadership, A, and Organization Development Journal, Volume 22, Number.

The state of Oregon measures 372-382.8.

The European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology published an article in 2006 entitled "Personality, Context, and Opposition to Organizational Change" by Shaul.

Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages 73-101.

9. Dent, B., A. Goldberg, S.

The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science published an article titled "Challenging 'Resistance to Change'" in 1999. This was in Volume 35, Issue Number unspecified.

McNamara and Carter published a work in 2006, with the title "25-41.10".

Obtained from the Free Management Library website on November 4, 2007, the article discusses the driving forces behind a new organizational paradigm. The source URL is http://www.

Elaine Varelas discusses organizational paradigms in her 2005 article available on managementhelp.org/org_thry/paradigm.htm11.

The Hire Authority's HR Center website offers information on driving organizational changes. The webpage, with a hyperlink of "http://www.Boston," was accessed on November 7, 2007.

The following sources provide information on overcoming resistance to change in organizations:

12. Hoisington, Steven. (2007). "Implementing Strategic Change: Tools

for Transforming an Organization." New York: McGraw-Hill.

13. Self, Dennis. (2007). "Organizational alteration – overcoming opposition by creating readiness." Development and Learning in Organizations, Vol.21, No.5, 11-13.

14. Schuler, A.J. (2003). "Overcoming Resistance to Change: Top Ten Reasons for Change Resistance." Retrieved on November 8, 2007 from Schuler Solutions website: https://www.schulersolutions.com/resistance_to_change.html

15. DeLuca, Joel.(2007). "Overcoming Resistance to Change: Overcoming 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 9th , 2007 from Focused Performance website:

https://www.focusedperformance.com/articles/resistance.html

17.Pardo del Val M.; Martinez-Fuentes C.(2006) ."Resistance to Change : A Literature Review and Empirical Study ". Retrieved on November 9th , 2007 from Valencia University Spain website : https://www.uv.es/~pardoman/resistencias.PDF

18.Kotelnikov,Vadim(2011)."Overcoming Resistance To Organizational Changes".Retrieved on February the first ,2022 from E-Coach website:
https://www.slideshare.net/VadimKotelnikov/overcoming-resistance-to-organizational-changeThe Business-eCoach website offers guidance on achieving organizational change with its article "Organizational Invention: How To Pull off the Complex Process of Organizational Change," retrieved on November 10, 2007. Various sources are recommended for overcoming resistance to change within an organization, including articles, books, and studies that provide strategies and tools for managing this challenging process. Topics addressed include identifying reasons for change resistance, dealing with opposition and creating preparedness, addressing emotional and behavioral resistance, and taking advantage of resistance to implement improvements. Resources such as Sturdy's (2003) article "Beneath and Beyond Organizational Change Management: Researching Options" published in Organization journal; Bordia et al.'s (2006) study "Management Are Aliens: Rumors and Stress During Organizational Change" published in Group & Organization Management journal; as well as Bateman and Zeithaml's (2002) entry "Managing Organizational Change" from Encyclopedia of Small Business may be helpful for organizations seeking to

manage change more effectively.