David Orton Plc: A brief overview of merger of Orton group and Costwise
David Orton Plc was a result of merger when Orton group, distinguish British Food Retailer Company, acquired Costwise Company in 2005. British CC (competition commission) had reservations at this mighty onset of merger as companies were independently huge retailers already and their reservation was somewhat genuine. The outcome of merger could obviously be a huge monopolize and was evidently aimed at controlling the large market share. The fear laid in commission’s stance that the result of merger will ultimately monopolize certain areas of the region. Nevertheless, it took substantial time to achieve this target as costwise had recognised since very beginning that two companies differ in structure and size therefore it will take quite a while to feel the impact physically. The impression of this merger let staff members of both companies to feel uncertain and uncomfortable, especially of costwise organisation and they feared that each company will be swallowed by the other. Motivational problems related with finance were of major importance to employees of both companies and here too, employees of costwise tended to complain more. The senior management and executive members of costwise company sought to gather and discuss at large weaknesses and strengths of the organisation on realizing that employees’ attitude and perception toward merger could have substantial impact on company’s performance. This meeting cleared company and its employees’ view of the desired merger and future of company was discussed by management personnel (Huczynski, A. & Buchanan, D., 2007).
Motivational state of employees
The staff at costwise was more inadequately motivated towards the merger for the most part as capacity is intricately linked with the question of motivation. Some of the employees’ concerns were included salaries issues, intangible rewards, apprehensions, secondary benefits and recognition etc which were being abandoned by the higher management. Employees were also of the view that costwise company didn’t give them a chance to flourish and grow. They weren’t given deserving opportunities including measures and promotion which otherwise would help them to grow tithing the framework of the organisation. Conversely, management thought that employee’s reduced performance has affected the overall performance of the organisation as a whole. The organisation gave much quality of supervision, interpersonal relations, and efficient administration of regulation and policies of the company. Recognition for outstanding performances, advancement to upper level of tasks and some other general interests of employees were kept low on the other hand. Employees were bound to grow at slow pace as limited or no training programs were carried out by company’s management thus affecting the overall performance of the employees (Mullins, L., 2007). There were, nevertheless some factors which were being appreciated by the employees and which had a direct, progressive affect on employees motivation level. Those factors include sense of interaction, loyalty and trust and chemistry between employees and management which led each party to realise organisational problems occurring within the organisation. The sense of interaction and utmost respect of work were responsible to increase employees’ moral and a practice of trust and loyalty among them could be seen through observation (Kelley, H.H., 1999)
Attitudes and Perception of the employees
In any such situation, there are probable situations where attitudes and perceptions of the associated employees change drastically. One of the obvious attitudes that could be expected from employees is their felling of low self worth. This feeling is probable and any person associated with a company which is going to merge up with another company of twice its size can have it. This...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document