INTRODUCTION
Change, among other things, has an impact on present management paradigms. As a result, businesses must learn how to deal with these changes. Organizations may need to adjust their policies, methods, and medium- or long-term strategies as a result of these developments. Only through mobility and antagonism to stability can change be brought about. Humans require consistency to create routines and habits that will help them adjust to long-term changes. People can adapt to change because change management is a purposeful, well-thought-out process. If organizations want to promote new ways of doing things, they must first define and develop their values, attitudes, norms, and behaviors. Another part of change management is dealing with the workforce’s reluctance to change. One of the most crucial activities in a Change Management project is the analysis of the effects of changes.
Literature Review
During transitional phases, it is critical to learn new skills and unlearn old ones that are no longer useful. To initiate change, some type of challenge is required. This discomfort raises fears for one’s survival. “If I don’t start adapting, I’ll lose some of my characteristics,” Lewin declared in 1952. According to Lewin, this method is known as “coming to one’s senses” (Schein, 2010), and the purpose of change management is to accelerate the process of skill acquisition so that individuals can adjust to change more quickly. Change management stages include change diagnosis, study of the effects of change, change barometer, people management, and change direction and leadership.
The change management process is thought to begin during the diagnosis stage. During this phase, the current state of the organization, project team members, and the significance of their participation, as well as the risks involved with accepting or rejecting the change, must all be addressed. Depending on their position and level of involvement in the project at this level, we may be able to completely comprehend the organization using the people’s mapping technique. People who have intelligently and significantly contributed to the project’s success may also be considered. This phase involves the analysis, diagnostic, and execution methods.
The effects of changes may be assessed once the project’s primary purpose and goal have been identified. Changes in authority, cultures, roles, and attitudes within the human resource sectors, as well as management, methods, and structures created in the systemic and technology domains, all have various effects. The goals of the study will serve as a guide on how to investigate the cultural aspects of information sharing. Opposition and employee management are located on the third level. The third phase, which enables leadership and direction-giving, includes the assessment and management of change project activities, attachment to and involvement in the change project, as well as project risk at various stages. The conclusion will be the fifth and last stage of this essay.
While I was the Head of Marketing at Sykes, a global outsourcer for customer service and digital marketing, we had difficulty keeping up with the rapid expansion. Because employees were unaware of the benefits of undertaking organizational transformation, the firm spent less money on the early stages of change management. After seeing the initial, positive outcomes, Sykes actively participated in change management by delivering applications and training everywhere. Sykes developed a strong change management strategy to increase profitability and sales effectiveness across several initiatives. Among other things, the company developed a multi-year implementation strategy for IT change management. Change management was used in the call center operations, the leadership development program, and the manager training program.
People Management and Resistances:
The majority of project managers prioritize the project’s budget and schedule over acceptance and resistance issues because they believe that, while critical, they will be resolved soon. This management strategy is useless since project workers will not be able to perform to their maximum ability and will not feel like they are a part of the project if they are not convinced to join it. People will always be resistant to change. People sometimes dislike change because it demands them to adapt their routines and prepare for new learning.
These two concepts must be understood to understand the phenomena of change resistance. People are more likely to be concerned about how the proposal is being handled and will go out of their way to support it, despite their reluctance to express it. To avoid failure, resistance should be discovered and addressed at each stage of the project. Furthermore, we see three unique yet linked behaviors among project users or beneficiaries. Those that push for and promote change are another example. They are devoted to the cause and have a strong sense of belonging. Those who want to remain neutral, refrain from taking command, wait for the expected outcomes, and are unaware of the situation. They are the ones looking for logical outcomes. They are cautious and like to be safeguarded. They resolve to wait where they are without arguing. They despise change and regularly and vehemently oppose it. They are opposed to the project’s realization due to ideological differences, whether personal, philosophical, or political.
CONCLUSION
Finally, no organization can afford to be idle. As new concerns arise, processes must be improved. To avoid having the opposite effect, all changes must be thoroughly thought out and implemented before they are implemented. Sykes should therefore invest in cultural features that may benefit knowledge dissemination. Participation and cooperation in the execution of a knowledge management project will rise if the aforementioned needs are addressed.
Increasing employee involvement in organizational decisions, accountability for delegated responsibility, adherence to organizational commitment, maintenance of a win-win relationship between employees and managers, presence of a critical space free of punishment, service quality improvement, and manager accountability for their decisions, according to the results of the trust factor study, will increase staff members’ trust in Sykes.
Among the factors, organizational communication was ranked weaker than the others in Sykes. In this regard, the results show that improving the following factors, which were evaluated by the questionnaire, will be effective in improving organizational communication: increasing people’s communication in the framework of common scientific work, increasing communication in the form of informal meetings and a friendly work environment, increasing people’s communication in informal meetings outside the organization or workplace, promoting group activities and offering incentives to encourage people to do group and team activities, maintaining an easy and quick communication with managers, increasing assessment of staff performance by managers based on their team activities.
References
Hofstede, G. (1998). Identifying Organizational Subcultures: An Empirical Approach. Journal of Management Studies, 35(1), 1–12.
Huczynski, A. (1983). Training designs for organizational change. Journal of European Industrial Training.
Johnson, J. (2000). Why respect culture? American Journal of Political Science, 405-418.
Kline, S. J., & Rosenberg, N. (2010). An overview of innovation. Studies on science and the innovation process: Selected works of Nathan Rosenberg, 173-203.
Law, N. (2006, March). ICT, pedagogical innovations, and teacher learning. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, pp. 2939-2942.
Leana, C.R., & Barry, B. (2000). Stability and change as simultaneous experiences in organizational life. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 753-759.
Lines, R. (2005). The structure and function of attitudes toward organizational change. Human Resource Development Review, 4(1), 8–22.
Lok, P., Westwood, R., & Crawford, J. (2005). Perceptions of organizational subculture and their significance for organizational commitment. Applied Psychology, 54(4), 490–514
Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Managing change: The role of the change agent. International journal of management, business, and administration, 13(1), 1-6.
Piderit, S. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 783–794.
Song, X. M., & Montoya‐Weiss, M. M. (1998). Critical development activities for really new versus incremental products. Journal of Product Innovation Management: An International Publication of
the Product Development & Management Association, 15(2), 124-135.
Thompson, A., Peteraf, M., Gamble, J., Strickland III, A. J., & Jain, A. K. (2013). Crafting & executing strategy 19/e: The quest for competitive advantage: Concepts and cases. McGraw-Hill Education
Whittington, R., Jarzabkowski, P., Mayer, M., Mounoud, E., Nahapiet, J., & Rouleau, L. (2003). Taking strategy seriously: Responsibility and reform for an important social practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(4), 396-409.
write