The discussion paper provides a quick overview of organizational changes.
The paper defines organizational changes in this section. It also discusses some of the ways in which employees react to such changes.
Methods for combating opposition to change
Following the opening parts, the body of the article outlines numerous methods for combating opposition to change in an organization.
Relevance of shared diagnosis, change agents, and mutual involvement
The paper fully covers the relevance of shared diagnosis, the employment of change agents, and mutual involvement in decreasing resistance to change in an organization in this part.
Conclusion
The discussion paper concludes with a list of three sources that were used in this discussion.
Definition of Organizational Change
Organizational change defines the process in which a given firm changes its strategies, structures, technologies, methods of operation or even the culture of the organization (Zhou, David & Li, 2006). This process can either be continuous or take place for a distinct period. In most cases, the process takes place when a company makes a transition from the state in which it is currently to that which is desired in the future.
Reactions to Organizational Changes
Organizational changes are received with different reactions especially from the members of the company such as employees and other individuals among the staff. For instance, a section of the members may be in concurrence with the alterations while others may oppose the proposed changes to be implemented. This discussion paper will provide some of the ways that can be utilized to counter the resistance to changes in the organization by either workers or other members of the firm.
Discussion
In some instances, when specific changes have been proposed for implementation by a given organization, it is a tendency that a section of employees may be of a different opinion regarding this implementation. Some of the reasons for resisting changes may include job loss, lack of trust, poor engagement and communication, and poor timing among other reasons (Oreg, 2006). However, various ways can be used to combat such resistance that comes from the employee body.
Expecting Resistance
The first crucial thing that the organization management should do is to expect resistance. Even if it is evident that the change proposal will be of benefit to the organization, it is evident that still, there will be elements of resistance from a given section of the group. According to researchers concerning the function of the brain, resistance is not only a psychological reaction to the changes, but it is also a physiological reaction (Aagaard, Simonsen, Andersen, Magnusson & Dyhre-Poulsen, 2002). This, therefore, means that resistance should be one of the most obvious expectations during a change proposal in the organization.
Use of Change Agents
One way of combating resistance to change from the members of the organization is the use of change agents or consultants. A change agent is an individual who is responsible for initiating change in an organization to increase the effectiveness of that organization (Battilana & Casciaro, 2012). Change agents can either be internal or external. The external agents, for instance, operate as consultants for the firm and as a device that facilitates the change strategy. Internal agents, on the other hand, are involved in the continuous change processes in the organization.
Mutual Engagement
Change agents play a crucial role when it comes to combating resistance that may emanate from a section of employees or members of the organization. They must lead the members in the implementation process. This is crucial as it will communicate the benefits of the proposed changes in a broad perspective that can be understood by the members so that instances of resistance are minimized.
Also, during the implementation of organizational changes, it is of paramount importance to adopt mutual engagement to reduce the instances of resistance to changes within the organization. Mutual engagement takes place when members of a particular group spark creatively together to enter into a state of flow (Bryan-Kinns & Hamilton, 2012). Mutual engagement with employees is an important aspect in various ways, especially when it comes to the process of organizational implementation changes.
When workers are engaged in a discussion concerning the progress that should be made in a particular firm, this positively impacts the process of implementing changes. Mutual engagement with workers makes them feel valued and respected regarding their contribution, especially their opinions. This engagement will make them feel as part and parcel of the organization and will, therefore, tend to minimize the extent at which they oppose the proposed changes by the management of the organization. This is one crucial way in which mutual engagement of employees can be beneficial to the organization regarding the implementation of changes.
Shared Diagnosis
Finally, another effective way that can be employed as a remedy to resistance to organizational changes by a section of the members has a shared diagnosis. This defines the process of learning concerning the changes and dynamics of the firm to take the intended actions of improving the performance of the company (Jacobs & Heracleous, 2006). This process is important because it will help every member of the organization to learn about the benefits that can be associated with the specific changes that have been proposed by the team of management of a given organization.
For instance, if a technological change has been proposed for implementation, the diagnosis process will outline the benefits of this type of technology so that the members can have a better understanding of the reasons as to why it is crucial to have the specific technological change implemented by the organization. Shared diagnosis enlightens an individual about a particular issue so that they can have a complete comprehension of the issue. Once the employees have been equipped with the knowledge of the benefits of the changes, this will ensure that the extent of resistance to the change is minimized.
References
Aagaard, P., Simonsen, E. B., Andersen, J. L., Magnusson, P., & Dyhre-Poulsen, P. (2002). Neural adaptation to resistance training: changes in evoked V-wave and H-reflex responses. Journal of Applied Physiology, 92(6), 2309-2318.
Battilana, J., & Casciaro, T. (2012). Change agents, networks, and institutions: A contingency theory of organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 381-398.
Bryan-Kinns, N., & Hamilton, F. (2012). Identifying mutual engagement. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(2), 101-125.
Jacobs, C. D., & Heracleous, L. T. (2006). Constructing shared understanding: The role of embodied metaphors in organization development. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(2), 207-226.
Oreg, S. (2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 15(1), 73-101.
Zhou, K. Z., David, K. T., & Li, J. J. (2006). Organizational changes in emerging economies: Drivers and consequences. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(2), 248-263.