UNIVERSITY an adaptation to the environment (Barr, Stimpert

UNIVERSITY OF
PORT HARCOURT

SCHOOL OF
GRADUATE STUDIES

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

FACULTY OF
MANAGEMENT

DEPARTMENT OF
MANAGEMENT

 

ASSIGNMENT ON:

Managing change resistance in strategy
implementation

 

      NAME: KANU PRECIOUS .C.

NO.:
G2016/MSC/MGT/FT/002

COURSE:
Strategy and Structure

LECTURER: Dr.
Eketu

 

 

 

 

 

 

Abstract

This study looks into change resistance, concentrating on the management of
change resistance in strategy implementation. It offers an in?depth education of resistance to change. Through a more examined
technique, this research looks into approaches in managing resistance to change
and connecting resistance to the advantage of the organization. This paper via
empirical research displays systematically the consequence of change resistance
in strategy execution and how managers can use and work through change
resistance. It also expresses which resistance vary most, range of change and contributing
clues around where establishments ought to pay distinctive consideration when introducing
a change procedure.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction

After strategies have
been agreed on, the following process is the implementation of the agreed
strategy. Strategy implementation is an essential and vital portion of an
organization. It is the procedure of apportioning
resources to support the approved and preferred approaches. This process
includes the diverse management activities that are indispensable in putting
strategy in motion, begin certain tactical controls that supervise growth, and ultimately
achieve organizational goals. While execution of strategies are necessary in an
organization, resistance to change of such strategies is unavoidable. There is certain
to be a reaction to the execution of said strategies. The goal of this paper is
to illustrate how a good and pleasing management of change resistance would reassure
and rise quality and growth in strategy Implementation.

 

Literature
Review

(Lawrence, 1954; Maurer,
1996; Strebel, 1994; Waddell and Sohal, 1998, among others) emphasize that the
basis for the lack of success of many change initiatives can be found in
resistance to change. (Beer and Eisenstat, 1996; Goldstein, 1988; Lawrence,
1954; Piderit, 2000; Waddell and Sohal, 1998) looks at Resistance as a source
of information, being useful in learning how to develop a more successful
change process.

The general aim of
organizational change is an adaptation to the environment (Barr, Stimpert and
Huff, 1992; Child and Smith, 1987; Leana and Barry, 2000) or an development in
performance (Boeker, 1997; Keck and Tushman, 1993).

Type
of changes

The first type of changes
are small changes that modify certain minor parts, looking for an enhancement
in the current situation, but keeping the general working structure (Blumenthal
and Haspeslagh, 1994; Goodstein and Burke, 1991; Greiner, 1972; Levy, 1986;
Mezias and Glynn, 1993; Nadler and Tushman, 1989; 1990). The second type of
changes are strategic, transformational, and innovatory or second order ones.
They are radical conversions, where the organization totally changes its necessary
structure (Blumenthal and Haspeslagh, 1994; Ghoshal and Bartlett, 1996;
Goodstein and Burke, 1991; Marshak, 1993; Nadler and Tushman, 1989, 1990),
looking largely for a new competitive benefit (Hutt, Walker and Frankwick, 1995)
and affecting the basic competences of the organization (Ruiz and Lorenzo,
1999).

 

Conceptual
Review

Dependent variable:
Change
resistance

Independent
variable:
Strategy  Implementation

Empirical
Review

Behavior

Behavioral approach concentrates
on individual attitudes in clarifying the nature of change. This approach
conceives the change in organizations as highly reliant on on associates of
organizations and their behavior. The failure or success of getting planned outcomes
should be examined in the performances of individuals and the situations
(Cameron & Green, 2004). The nature of change in the organizations can be
understood by studying the behaviors of people and their effects. According to
behavioral tactic, by generating appropriate surroundings and useful involvement
approaches; change can be coped and organizational advancement might be attained.
The main worry of change agent should be behaviors, observations and approaches
of people in the procedure of transformation execution and managers should
concentrate on refining announcement, group performances, organizational values,
organizational learning and enthusiasm in workshop in order to accomplish anticipated
outcomes and positive modifications (Christensen, Marx & Stevenson, 2006).

CHANGE PROCESS

(
Newstrom & Davis, 1997)

Diagnosis
of drivers of change and resistance to change: Diagnosis, which
is the first step of change procedure, aids us to comprehend exterior and interior
drivers which force organizations to change. Potential resistance foundations
should also be taken into deliberation while analyzing.

Choosing
change agents: In harmony with the kind of change that has been essential,

Suitable change agents
should be nominated in order to apply change plans. Change agents can be
internal, who are associates of the organization; or external, who can be hired
as specialists. At the same period, change agents should also be well-suited to
manage resistance.

Strategy
building: In this step, by bearing in mind the needs for
change, a suitable plan for change, which will renovate organization from its current
state to a preferred position, is estimated to be industrialized

Strategy
application: Application of change strategies requires managerial
and leadership abilities. Time, cost, accountability and moral subjects should
be taken into deliberation while executing change agendas.

Evaluation: General
advancement and efficiency of appling should be appraised in order to regulate achievement
of change in attaining aimed goals. The essential point is not to disregard
that change is a recurrent process in the shape of a circle; and therefore
strategies should be adaptable enough to upcoming change forces and resistance
factors that might arise from employees.

Institutionalize
Change:
The change process and management are estimated to be relocated to the
long-term enhancements by evolving and introducing useful mechanisms like
learning organizations. The important point that should be stated here is that
change is the ongoing process, which is not guiding. The process should be
thought as a circular that the outputs of processes can be the inputs or
sources of change processes. In other words, the process can be considered as a
flow action in which every step is supported by the previous one.

 

Structure

The other view has come
from the structural approach and it has described the nature of change as
structure? and focuses on reshaping and restructuring organizations.
Consultants or change agents should provide functioning mechanisms (structure)
to managers in order to achieve successful change and decrease the anxiety in
organization (Hirschhorn & Barnett 1993). Structures have been emerged from
the interactions of groups of people that work and aim to the common purposes
(Seel, 2002). It is also possible that structures can be created from outside
by experts, namely external experts.

Level of Change

As human beings, we have
lived in social being where we have confronted to the diverse level of change
in daily life. Individuals could be assumed as the core part of change; that
is, change in individual is the starting point of the change of all systems.
But individuals are not isolated from the environment. They are also part of
different groups at different levels. There have been intense webs of
communications between individuals and groups. (Cameron & Green, 2004).
Therefore, in this part, we will study three different levels of change, which
will give us a all-inclusive understanding about how change should be managed:

§  Individual level of change

§  Team level of change

§  Organizational level of change

 

Significance is being put
on the level inquiry paralleled to the other heights of change, because it
contains significant rudiments which will organize the ground for the conversation
of resistance management. It is believed that for fruitful change application
and resistance administration, key rudiments of these three levels needs to be
understood by manager/change initiators.

 

Individual Change

Even change has been
coming from the external world, the opinion and responses toward change arises
internally, and hence this puts to individual to a central position in enlightening
the level of change. The exterior world, which individual are a part of it, has
not been stable. It has been vibrant and subject to continual changes. The
individuals, as a part of the environment, also bump into these changes and
need to adopt themselves. From this point, individuals establish one of the
most essential levels which the idea if change needs to be examined and
understood. We will reexamine for diverse standpoints offered by Cameron and
Green (2004) to explain individual level change.

 

Behavioral
approach

Cognitive
Approach

Psychodynamic
Approach

Humanistic
Psychological Approach

 

These four approaches are
not contradictory to each other; instead, they function as complementary for
each other, in terms of explaining the different dimensions of individual level
change.

 

 

Behavioral Approach:

Behavioral approach concentrates
on change by observing individual behaviors when they are endeavoring to reach
their objectives and their effects on other individuals’ behaviors. The failure
or success of attaining proposed results can be examined in the behaviors of
individuals and the circumstances that form them (Cameron and Green, 2004).
This subject has been originally discussed by psychologist like Pavlov (1928)
and Skinner (1953) in order to comprehend the relation between behaviors and circumstances
and the effects of rewards and punishment systems to the behaviors of
individuals. Pavlov (1928) mainly examined the behavior itself under traditional
conditioning; though Skinner (1953) has advanced the issue to study the probable
effects of the behaviors. He planned that there could be also the learning
behavior with the positive and negative effects of rewards and punishments.
According to him, there are four possible situations that might arise after
using rewards and punishment systems

Actions

 

Positive

Negative

Addition

Positive
reinforcement Pleasant and increases
likelihood
of repeat
behavior

Punishment

Unpleasant
(for example, an electric
shock)
leading to decline in repeat
behavior

 

Subtraction

Extinction

Evading
of an
unpleasant
inducement
increases
the likelihood
of
repeat behavior

Negative
reinforcement
Elimination
of a pleasant stimulus
decreases
the likelihood of repeat
behavior

Skinner’ Model, Rewards
and Punishments (Cameron&Green, 2004)

These investigates in the
arena of psychology have earnestly formed the trends in academics, mainly in
organizational improvement methods, by connecting incentive to behaviors in workstation.
Douglas McGregor (1960) examined the motivation in the organization’s workplace
by paralleling two diverse management supposition called theory X and theory Y

 

According to Theory X, Individuals;

According
to Theory Y, individuals;


do not like the working


view working as a natural necessity


expect to be directed and controlled

-expect
encouragement rather than
imposition


demand feeling if security


perceive organizational as a way to get rewards


are motivated by rewards and
punishments


view their work as self actualization and satisfy themselves with
achievements


are unwilling to take responsibility – do not have ambition towards their
work

 


can take initiative and responsibility when a
suitable
work atmosphere is created
 


do not use their imagination
 

 

Theory X and Theory Y,
(Adopted, Mc Gregor 1960)

 

In theory X, workers are presumed
as naturally not motivated to work; on the contrary in theory Y, workers are eager
to work; and under appropriate atmosphere, they can work more effective and driven.
In summary, he reached the conclusion that the managers who implemented theory
Y beliefs were more fruitful to grow the efficiency and motivation of workers
in workplace.

Frederick Herzberg (1968)
has also studied on the motivation for the best performance of workers.
According to him, there are two types of drivers that workers have in
workplace: hygiene factors, which resulted from the desire of workers to avoid
deprivation; and motivators, which ensued from the craving of workers to learn
and grow. He mentioned that hygiene factors and these include, financial
earnings (payment), guidelines of the organization, quality of management,
relations between associates, working atmosphere, social status within the
organization and security. Herzberg (1968) argues that fulfilment of these features
do not have a optimistic impact on employees’ motivation. However if employees
lack any of these, it influences their motivation negatively. On the other
hand, motivators are expected to contribute employees’ performance directly and
these are learning, undertakings, the nature of work, taking accountability,
gaining acknowledgment and personal improvement.

To summarize the
behavioral approach, change in individual can be understood by examining the effects
of individual behaviors and motivating aspects in terms of cumulative
performance and decreasing the resistance factors. For attaining fruitful
change within the organizations, the behaviors of employees and their replies
(negative and positive) should be examined carefully Following steps, proposed
by Cameron and Green (2004), present an substitute model for change
implementation.

BACK TO TOP
x

Hi!
I'm Nicholas!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out