Saturday, January 25, 2020

Main Sources Of Resistance To Organizational Change Management Essay

Main Sources Of Resistance To Organizational Change Management Essay Change is inevitable for modern organizations and increasing rapidly in the world due to internal and external triggers (Refer to Appendix 1) (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010). For survival, organizations must be able to anticipate change and keep reconfiguring themselves as it is critical determinant for their success although it has difficulty and challenges. Organizations that wait for an overwhelming mandate to engage in change efforts are very likely to be left behind and may struggle to survive (Lawler and Worley, 2009). For example, Nokia has already been through one successful change; turning itself from an unfocused conglomerate into a focused mobile phone producer in the 1990s. But, lack of accountability, poor leadership and complacency those came from mobile phone success has caused less competitive in the market due to customer transition from mobile phone to smart-phone (Riley, 2012). According to Nauss (1999), Jacques Nasser, Ford Motors CEO also argued that any business that is satisfied with the present state of affairs is deluding itself. Sitting still or moving at a snails pace is effectively moving backward. Organizational change must be based on intention and goal-oriented and come from within the organization to be effective (See Figure 1 and 2) according Cumming and Worley (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, 2001).It also need very careful assessment of individual and organizational capacity for change since they are potential resistance to change. In this report, we will first discuss various causes for resistance to change from those who affected positively or negatively using Arthur Bedeians four common causes for resistance to change, Kotter and Schlesingers six practical techniques to overcome these resistances and Kurt Lewins 3 phase change management model. 2.0 Resistance to Organization Change Buchanan and Huczynski (2010) define resistance to change is unwillingness or an inability to accept or discuss changes that are perceived to be damaging or threatening to individual. Carr et al also claim that its significance can be measured by those affected perceive and react to it (Salawu, 2011). As a result, change efforts are often found resisted by individuals and groups overtly and covertly due to their negative perceptions to some extent. Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman (2001) suggest a variety of sources of resistance in Figure 3 (Detail in Appendix 2). To overcome resistance to change, managers and employees must understand its reasons and sources. Arthur Bedeian cites four common causes for resistance to change (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010). 2.1 Parochial self interest Individuals are so comfort and content with their current situation and they fear that any change in organization may threaten their vested interests. It is one of major reason that people resist organizational change. According to Desler (2004), there are 4 types of organizational change: its strategy, technology, structure and employees. Structural change requires reorganizing organizational chart involving replacing, dismissing or adding personnel (Salawu, 2011). When this situation comes, employees fear to lose their existing positions. E.g. Current Burmese government involves liberal and conservative. Reorganization needs for democratic change process. It is good and can improve the status of its people, but most conservatives fear reorganization as they think that it is a threat to their status quo and interests. For these reasons, Burmas change processes encounter resistance longer time than desired and resulted as a poor country. 2.2 Misunderstanding and lack of trust Buchanan and Huczynski (2010) suggest lack of understanding the reasons and consequences can create resistance to change because it might cost them more than what they will gain. Such misunderstandings most likely occur where there is lack of trust between manager and employees. My former Singapore based Japanese construction announced to his managers an implementation of a flexible 5 days work for all site staffs. No managers resisted because they were introduced the concept of that change in management meeting. Shortly after circulating announcement, various resistances arise from site staffs who do not understand and trust the meaning of flexible working days. One rumor is that they might need to work extra hours in the evening. They were not satisfied with management decision at the beginning. According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1997), only few organizations have a high level of trust between employees and managers. So, it is easy to develop misunderstandings when organizational change is introduced. If managers do not clarify them in time, this can lead to resistance. 2.3 Contradictory assessments Another reason people resist to change is evaluation of costs and benefits differently. According to Buchanan and Huczynski (2010), it is the result of poor communication and inadequate information that causes contradictory assessments. But such resistance to change may lead to constructive criticism and improved proposals to achieve better outcomes since people have different perceptions and knowledge. E.g. My previous project director of Construction Company was shocked by his design team members who made value engineering of structural column. Although this value engineering can achieve design requirement while saving cost, he thought that it can damage the companys reputation. So he didnt allow the design proposal submission to owners consultant. He had reorganized the design team immediately that caused resistance from the people involved. As a result, company lost two good designers and crippled the design team. Different people have different skills and knowledge that may lead to resistance. For the above case, design team has more skill and knowledge than director. And resistance resulted from reorganization will be good for companys future. Low tolerance for change Buchanan and Huczynski (2010) suggest that people respond to change and uncertainty in different ways. Some are more readily to accept and adapt to changes. Others may have a low tolerance to adapt to changes since they have different abilities compared to others. Drucker (2010) also argue that the managers are the major obstacle for organizational growth since they are unable to change their attitude and behavior rapidly to meet organizational requirement. It is the result of peoples limited tolerance that lead to oppose potential beneficial changes even they know that it is positive change. E.g. an engineer in my former construction company received a significant promotion due to expansion. New position required new skill set, relationships as well as loss of some satisfactory current situation. It made him uneasy to give up certain aspects of current situation and resist changing since his tolerance for change was low and he did not understand wisely the reason of change. 3.0 Overcoming Resistance Many managers underestimate not only the variety of ways people can react to organizational change, but also the ways they can positively influence specific individuals and groups during change ( Kotter and Schlesinger, 1997, p-454). E.g. Singapore construction industry has been unable to achieve better productivity due to past experience of managers who dont understand advantages and disadvantages of the methods which they are familiar. So, organizational change becomes managements responsibility. And coping resistance resulted from organizational change becomes the haunting question for todays manager because it determine the success or failure of organization (Martin, 1975). Kotter and Schlesinger identify six practical techniques for managing and overcoming resistance (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010): 3.1 Education and Communication Education is one of most common way that communicates ideas to reconcile opposing views. Kotter and Schlesinger (1979) discuss that this program can be ideal when resistance is based on inadequate or inaccurate information and analysis especially if the initiators need the resistors help in change implementation. Afferson, M. (2010) argue that this program requires face to face communication to discuss sensitive issues since email or written notices are very weak at conveying and developing understanding. E.g. former Philips CEO, Timmer used this program to explain the future of Philips to his employees. As a result, its operating income has increased (Strebel, 1998). Moreover, Buchanan and Huczynski (2010) also highlight requirement of mutual trust to overcome misunderstanding. 3.2 Participation and involvement According to Buchanan and Huczynski (2010), it can reduce opposition and lead to employees wholehearted commitment if the managers who initiate this program address to their concerns. And it will provide employees a sense of belonging to successful implementing of change. E.g. Coch and French (1948) experimented to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of participation to overcome resistance to change involving: introducing by managers to employees, employees representative participation and all employees involvement. Based on their experiment, all employees involvement was the best for overcoming resistance. But Buchanan and Huczynski (2010) also highlighted that it is time consuming and will be useful if employees skill and knowledge has ability to cope the changes. 3.3 Facilitation and support Buchanan and Huczynski (2010) suggest facilitation and support can overcome resistance when it is caused by fear or anxiety. Such approaches include new trainings or simply listening or emotional support. According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), one rapidly growing electronics company devised this program for its employees to adapt frequent organizational changes. They employed four counselors to spent most of their time in talking, listening, educating and training to employees. 3.4 Negotiation and agreement It is another way to deal with powerful individuals or groups who create major resistance such as offering incentives to facilitate changes (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010). But they also alerted that it may become expensive for change and take more time to negotiate. E.g. Former Burmese military general have strong power to resist political reform in Burma. Current government has to negotiate with them to reach an agreement for successful change such as protecting their interests. 3.5 Manipulation and co-optation It involves covert attempts to sidestep potential resistance. Management puts forward proposals that appeal to the specific interests of key stakeholders. This information is selective, emphasizing benefits and playing down disadvantages. Co-optation involves giving key resistors direct access to the decision-making process, perhaps giving them well-paid, high-status management positions (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010, p-573). E.g. A local manager in my former Japanese Construction Company invited Japanese manager to analyze one missing item in the design. Due to busy schedule, he was unable to do proper analysis. It limited his influence on the analysis. But his commitment was subsequently very important during discussing with Japanese director. Generally, he did not like someone trying to make changes. After discussion with Japanese manager, he did not try to block the change. 3.6 Implicit and explicit coercion Although many researchers advocate supportive approaches to overcome resistances, managers have to deal with resistance coercively such as firing or transferring to facilitate change. Buchanan and Huczynski (2010) discuss such situations as where the target group is profound disagreement, has little chance of shifting their ground, and the speed is essential for survival. But Kotter and Schlesinger (1979) argued that using coercion is risky because people will resent forced change inevitably. 4.0 Conclusion Strong resistance to change may root deeply in some organizations, but change has become inevitable for todays modern organizations in fast changing business environment for survival. In Figure 1, effective change management program should be implemented properly by the managers who understand the firms culture to facilitate the change process while protecting the interests of affected person. In this report, we applied Kotter and Schlesingers approaches to manage change. Since these approaches have their limitation, they may not be likely to be effective under all conditions and circumstances. There are many prescriptive models or approaches for successful change. In reality, appropriate approaches can be implemented based on the primary cause of resistance. So, manager may need to combine various techniques to manage organizational change. Finally, we would like to suggest Kurt Lewins 3 phase change management model: unfreezing, moving and refreezing because present approaches or technology may be unsuitable in future. We can learn from the failure and success of Nokia and Apple. Apple was able to unfreeze the old technology or mind set that are outdated, develop new process and technology to move on from the old ways of doing things to the new and refreeze again when all seem okay. And they start Lewins process again since refreezing stage may be temporary in future (see figure 4) where Nokia didnt.

Friday, January 17, 2020

Nation-States in Modern Times

The natives of Waitangi in New Zealand had to give up their sovereignty to the British throne at the time that the Crown arrived in the country.   Since then, the natives have tried to fight for their right to govern their areas of New Zealand again.   If do they get this permission from the New Zealand government, which they most probably will not get in modern times, the natives of New Zealand might make their own nation-state, that is, a place that is ruled by a certain entity and occupied by people belonging to the same culture and having the same values that are unique to that group (â€Å"Nation-State,† 2007). This is the nature of the nation-state: It is a government form that may not be able to thrive in the era of globalization marked by cultural homogeneity, and featuring immigration laws, skills exchange, outsourcing, foreign direct investment and the likes. In the olden days, Greece was a nation-state.   Athens was the city-state of Greece, protecting a common culture under its own laws.   Greece was the ruler of Athens at the same time.   It had the power to dissolve Athens.   Yet, Athens was an extremely popular cultural hotbed.   It was not wise to dissolve Athens (Polopolos).   Most importantly, Greece and Athens serve as excellent examples of governance for the politicians of the modern world.   As a matter of fact, people use Greece’s example in thinking about how to develop a civilization.   Alexander the Great continues to be remembered. It is definitely possible for nation-states to develop in our day by following the example of Greece.   Weaker groups such as the natives in New Zealand represent a minority nowadays, and may not be able to form their nation-state.   At the same time, America used to be referred to as a ‘melting pot,’ even though the ‘Americanization’ of the world as a synonym for ‘globalization’ could easily have turned America into a lover of its own culture.   America could have become like Greece if it had wanted to preserve its culture; however, the nation’s political mind is very much occupied with the business sense of things. America chooses not to become a nation-state because it benefits immensely from foreigners.   What about Europe?   Can Europe become a nation-state with European Union, the Euro and its likes?   Perhaps places like France and Italy, in particular, might consider becoming nation-states with the strongest regard for their culture.   In point of fact, parts of Europe have been especially concerned in recent times with the upkeep of their traditional agricultural styles.   As an example, certain European farm products like the French cheeses have become â€Å"entwined with the national cultural identity† (Kaplan & Calzonetti, 2005).   Would globalization allow Europe or parts to Europe to turn into nation-states or city-states? – Perhaps so.   Do we expect it to happen? – Probably not. Let us turn to the Middle East.   Could it happen among the Arab nations, with the strongest ties to their culture?   Could Israel become a nation-state, with Jerusalem as its city-state?   Yes, it is possible once they stop fighting over the Middle East.   Arabs hate Americanization, apparently.   But they cannot live without America and Europe buying their oil.   They want to preserve their Islamic culture against the unIslamic behavior shown on Western television nevertheless. They also do not want American clothing to be worn in their societies.   Hijabs and extremely long skirts are still the norm in Saudi Arabia, very difficult for most foreigners to adjust to.   Perhaps Arab nations and/or Israel will be the first to turn into nation-states, if they are not already.   At this time they are not cultural states clearly because they fight too much.   At a time of peace alone will art and culture be nurtured.   Perhaps Middle East should really stop fighting now and become a nation-state if it wants to. References Kaplan, Eben, & Calzonetti, Claire. (2005, December 9). The WTO’s Troubled ‘Doha Negotiations.’ Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved 27 November 2006, from http://www.cfr.org/index.html. â€Å"Nation-State.† (2007). Wikipedia. Retrieved 7 May 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation-state. Polopolus, Leonidas C. â€Å"Athens, Greece: A City-State that Grew from Optimality in the Golden Era to Excessive Urbanization by the 21st century.† University of Florida. Retrieved 7 May 2007, from http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/kapparis/AOC/ATHENS.htm.      

Thursday, January 9, 2020

Who Invented the Sony PlayStation

The Sony PlayStation was the first video game console to sell over 100 million units. So how did Sony Interactive Entertainment manage to score a home run on its first foray into the video game market? Sony and Nintendo The history of the PlayStation begins in 1988 as  Sony and Nintendo were working together to develop the Super Disc. Nintendo was dominating computer gaming at that time. Sony had not yet entered the home video game market, but they were eager to make a move. By teaming with the market leader, they believed they had a good chance for success. The Super Disc The Super Disc was going to be a CD-ROM attachment intended as part of Nintendos soon to be released Super Nintendo game.  However, Sony and Nintendo parted ways business-wise as Nintendo decided to use Philips as a partner instead. The Super Disc was never introduced or used by Nintendo. In 1991, Sony introduced a modified version of the Super Disk as part of their new game console: the Sony PlayStation. Research and development for the PlayStation had begun in 1990 and was headed by Sony engineer Ken Kutaragi. It was unveiled at the Consumer Electronics Show in 1991, but the next day Nintendo announced they were going to use Philips instead. Kutaragi would be tasked with further developing the PlayStation to beat Nintendo. A Multi-Media and Multi-Purpose Entertainment Unit Only 200 models of the first PlayStation (that could play Super Nintendo game cartridges) were ever manufactured by Sony. The original PlayStation was designed as a multi-media and multi-purpose entertainment unit. Besides being able to play Super Nintendo games, the PlayStation could play audio CDs and could read CDs with computer and video information. However, these prototypes were scrapped. Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. Kutaragi developed games in a 3D polygon graphics format.  Not everyone at Sony approved of the PlayStation project  and it was shifted to Sony Music in 1992, which was a separate entity. They further spun off to form Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. (SCEI) in 1993. The new company attracted developers and partners that included Electronic Arts and Namco, who were excited about the 3D-capable, CD-ROM based console. It was easier and cheaper to manufacture CD-ROMs compared with the cartridges used by Nintendo. Released in 1994 In 1994, the new PlayStation X (PSX) was released and was no longer compatible with Nintendo game cartridges and only played CD-ROM based games. This was a smart move that soon made PlayStations the bestselling game console. The console was a slim, gray unit and the PSX joypad allowed far more control than the controllers of the Sega Saturn competitor. It sold more than 300,000 units in the first month of sales in Japan. Introduced to the United States in 1995 The PlayStation was introduced to the United States at the Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) in Los Angeles in May  1995. They pre-sold over 100,000 units by Septembers US launch. Within a year, they had sold almost two million units in the United States and over seven million worldwide. They reached the milestone of 100 million units by the end of 2003.

Wednesday, January 1, 2020

Types of Inorganic Chemical Reactions

Elements and compounds react with each other in numerous ways. Memorizing every type of reaction would be challenging and also unnecessary since nearly every inorganic chemical reaction falls into one or more of four broad categories. Combination Reactions Two or more reactants form one product in a combination reaction. An example of a combination reaction is the formation of sulfur dioxide when sulfur is burned in air: S (s) O2 (g) → SO2 (g) Decomposition Reactions In a decomposition reaction, a compound breaks down into two or more substances. Decomposition usually results from electrolysis or heating. An example of a decomposition reaction is the breakdown of mercury (II) oxide into its component elements. 2HgO (s) heat → 2Hg (l) O2 (g) Single Displacement Reactions A single displacement reaction is characterized by an atom or ion of a single compound replacing an atom of another element. An example of a single displacement reaction is the displacement of copper ions in a copper sulfate solution by zinc metal, forming zinc sulfate: Zn (s) CuSO4 (aq) → Cu (s) ZnSO4 (aq)Single displacement reactions are often subdivided into more specific categories (e.g., redox reactions). Double Displacement Reactions Double displacement reactions also may be called metathesis reactions. In this type of reaction, elements from two compounds displace each other to form new compounds. Double displacement reactions may occur when one product is removed from the solution as a gas or precipitate or when two species combine to form a weak electrolyte that remains undissociated in solution. An example of a double displacement reaction occurs when solutions of calcium chloride and silver nitrate are reacted to form insoluble silver chloride in a solution of calcium nitrate. CaCl2 (aq) 2 AgNO3 (aq) → Ca(NO3)2 (aq) 2 AgCl (s)A neutralization reaction is a specific type of double displacement reaction that occurs when an acid reacts with a base, producing a solution of salt and water. An example of a neutralization reaction is the reaction of hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide to form sodium chloride and water:HCl (aq) NaOH (aq) → NaCl (aq) H2O (l) Remember that reactions can belong to more than one category. Also, it would be possible to present more specific categories, such as combustion reactions or precipitation reactions. Learning the main categories will help you balance equations and predict the types of compounds formed from a chemical reaction.