Human Side of Change and Its Relation with Success

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 222
  • Published : February 28, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview
Matriculation/Exam Number: s1158302 / B020676
Course Name and Code: Organisation Studies/BUST08011
Tutor’s Name: Dr Tom Calvard
Assignment Due Date: 27/10/2011

Question Number: 2

Text of Question: A survey by McKinsey & Company (2008) reported that two-thirds of organisational change initiatives fail. In what ways could a fuller understanding of the ‘human’ aspects of change help improve this success rate?

Everyday, a new idea occur , a new technology changes our view, a new customer with novel tastes join into our market , our economic conditions change, the time is ticking away so fast that even our social and cultural values change. Considering these triggers of change, it is inevitable that change is an continuous process and each manager,regardless of their leading style, has to know how to apply effective change management in the organization if he wants to be a successful leader. Hence, understanding the human aspects of change is a key point in the process of effective change management.

However, during the world war, we had army organizations that such a bureaucratic and rigid structure was useful in order to manage these organizations. There was not almost any concern of the human side of change. If there any change occurs, employees under the organization had to obey even if the change do not suit their principles. There was almost no participation and consultation of employees. Besides, it was unuseful to make an effort on understanding human aspects of change. This management style that is fulled with commands and disiplinary issues could be useful during the middle of 20th century when operating environment more stable, but as it is mentioned at the beginning things are changed now.

In our high velocity environment, organizations could not be managed as before. According to Warren Bennis(1969),“bureaucractic structures cannot cope with complexity” and he used a term of “adaptive structures” as a way of solution especially for managers who try to answer the changing demands of environment (Huczynski and Buchanan 2007:593). In these adaptive structures, changes are designed as respond to environmental conditions and there is also high amount of employee participation and consultation in organisational decisions. Furthermore, results of the study mentioned in the articles of Peccei, Giagreco and Sebastiano (2011) showed that “organisational commitment, along with employees' perceptions of the benefits of change and their involvement in the change process, had a significant negative direct and indirect effect on resistance to change” (p.185).Therefore it could be inferred that instead of using employees as a tool for achieving organizational goals, it is highly supported that managers should collaborate with employees. In this situation “participative management” becomes more of an issue during the change process since if it is not applied sufficiently it could cause unwanted results like; “psychological contract violation, such as higher turnover, lower trust, lower job satisfaction, higher neglect and lower commitment to the organization” (Conway and Briner 2005 in Freese, Schalk and Croon 2011:407).

However, if we consider the study in the article of David Buchanan, Tim Claydon and Mike Doyle(1999); “More respondents agreed(46 percent) than disagreed(44 percent) that ‘Consultation may be the key to effective change, but we don’t have the time and resources to do this properly’ (p.28). Therefore, it can be inferred that, during the organizational change process when the time and resources are restiricted, participative employee management loses its significance. It is also supported by the Australian Research that it may be necessary to manage rapid and radical change in a directive or coercive manner, as a traditional participative approach would be too time consuming and thus ineffective(Dunphy and...
tracking img