02LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Importanceof organizational change.Change is the management and is the integral part ofan organization (Szamosi and Duxbury 2002). Keeping in view the above citationor observation, importance of the organizational change is absolutely clear.But before I go to depth of the importance, I would like to clarify what is theorganizational change process? It is the process of optimization of performanceto its ideal state (Jones 2004).
It is core objective of an organization tomake continuous improvement to adjust the changes (Weick, Quimm 1999). In mypoint view, Lewin’s 3 states of changes is the best description of changeprocess. Lewin proposed a three steep process for successful organizationalchange, Unfreezing, moving and freezing (George & Jones 2002).Pin point of the change process which is responsiblefor successful implimantation is employees so employees participation is veryimportant. Mintzberg and Waters (1985) emphasis on the participation of theemployees. Participation is the indicator of positive effects on the strategyprocess. It is noticed that the involvement of employees change, in strategywill reduce organizational resistance and create a higher level ofpsychological commitment and also qualitatively better strategic decisions (Kimand Mauborgne, 1998).
2.2 Why Employees Resist ChangeResistance to change is the phenomenon that effectsorganizations through employees and important factors which can effect and influencethe success percentage of organizational changes, which could be new technologywith innovation, new policies and SOPs, and new organizational structural body.Maurer (1996) observed that 2/3rd of organizations are failed tosuccessfully implement the change process, resistance was the little factor butcritically important contributor to that failure in the whole process.
According to Clark (1999), most employees may have been given limitedopportunity to be involved in the organizational change practice. It shows thatthe involvement is related to resistance. Ashforth and Mael (1998) described it as deliberateacts of omission and commission. Shapiro, Lewicki, and Devine (1995) observed thatwillingness to deceive authorities constitutes resistance to change. Block(1993) discovered that the resistance may occur when people distrust or havepast compulsions, having different understandings of the situation. Graham(1986) noted that some employee resistance to organizational change process ismotivated by their own internal fears.
Brower and Abolafia (1995) defined resistance as aparticular kind of action or inaction, while. Sagie, Elizur, and Greenbaum(1985) used compliant behavior as evidence of reduced resistance. Although the concept of resistance to change has beenwell expressed, this concept has also limitations and juridictions. Jermier,Knights, & Nord (1994) argued that the interests of managers should not beprivileged over the interests of workers when processing organizational change.Most of the times, managers blame others for the failure of the initiative ratherthan accepting of their role in its failure (Argyris, 1990).
It is also showsthe resistance from the individual because someone is fully adjusted in presentstate of structure so he feels fear. On the other hand differences inparticipant responses to change usually reflect either misunderstandings aboutthe change or individual characteristics and attributes. Watson (1982) whichshows the hidden benefits of managers to be sustain the present system. Now we will try to understand the reasons why employeesreact negatively to change process: Personal loss – Right or wrong, people are afraid they will lose something, particularly. Security – a concern about job loss through a reduction in force or automation.
Money – a concern about loss of money through a reduction in salary, pay, benefits, or overtime or through increased expenses because of a move to another location that is farther from their home. Pride and satisfaction – a concern about ending up with jobs that no longer require their abilities and skills, such as automation through computer-aided design in engineering departments (e.g., a “button pusher” instead of a “skilled craftsman”). Friends and important contacts – a concern that a move to another location will no longer allow contact with friends and important people, resulting in loss of visibility and daily contacts. Freedom – a concern that a new boss will replace confidence and personal freedom with closer supervision that provides less opportunity for decision-making. Responsibility – a concern that jobs will be reduced to menial tasks without responsibility. Authority – a concern about a loss of power and authority over other people because of reorganization takes place or a new boss who decides to withdraw authority.
Good working conditions – concern about being moved to a less desirable work location, e.g., from a large private office to a small one or from an office to a desk in a partitioned work area.
Status – concern about loss of job title, responsibility, or authority that will result in a loss of status and recognition from others, such as when another layer of management is inserted between a subordinate and his or her manager. No need. This type of resistance is epitomized by a reaction such as ?What’s the matter with the way things are now?” or “I don’t see any reason why we should change.” More harm than good. This kind of resistance occurs when people feel the change is a mistake that it will cause more problems. Although sometimes this reaction is justified, it is particularly common when people at the lower levels of an organization feel that top management makes changes without knowing what’s going on “down on the line.” Disrespect: Lack of respect is that factor which creates a wide line which may cause of disrespect in response as well as the can cause of exhausting.
It is way of keeping organization environment pleasant otherwise honesty in work also compromises. Bad timing: Changing in the timing is very important and crucial factor which is hard to accept. Employees are also compelled by domestic problems and have a rigid timing in the perception, so it is hard to change the timing. Challenge to authority: Sometimes, authority holder officer reject the change because he may be have personal grudges or simply want to show his importance. Secondary source information: There are many of managers which are sensitive about learning of the change.
They wait until they hear it “from the horse’s mouth.” It is the mindset of the managers, I think so they are compelled by their nature to do so. 2.3 Why People Accept or Welcome Change There are few factors which encourage someone toaccept the changes in his, Rothbard, Piderit, & Dutton (1998) point outthat only one reason is there that employees accept change keeping in mind thattop management will address their problems as well. Porter and Lawler (1968)suggested that what is the level at which an individual try to accept change isdetermined by expectations.
Harper (2001, P.10) urged those organizations whichimplement change must encourage the employees which allow for the “sloughing ofyesterday” because it will force to thinking. Make available man and money forthings, creates willingness to act. (Deci & Ryan 185) investigated thatinternalization can be supportive for person’s autonomy or accepting changes.
Cognitive evaluation theory (Journal of organizational behavior Vo.: 26, Issue04, 2005, P. 331-362) deals with extrinsic and intrinsic motivations and saysintrinsic motivation urges individual to accept the change.
A solution has to be proposed that will reduce themember’s inscure feelings and resistance to change (Schein, 1992)Employees will accept the change when they willclearly their secure future and benefits, the attitude of the employees willautomatically change.Reasons for a positive reaction to change include: Personal gain – When changes are made, some people may gain such things as new job titles, more responsibility, more money, and more authority. In short, they may stand to gain any of the things the loss of which would lead to change resistance. More security – a perception of greater security in a job, perhaps because more of personal skills will be used, such as when there is a change in an engineering department to computer-aided design and an individual feels more effective working with computers than using a pen to design on a drafting board. More income – a hope for a salary increase, more benefits, an incentive, or profit-sharing program, or more overtime. More authority – a hope for promotion to a position of greater authority, or a new boss who allows more authority than was available under the previous boss.
More status/prestige – a hope for a new title, a new office, or a special assignment that carries with it status and prestige. More responsibility – a hope for a job change that provides new responsibility, or a new boss who assigned more responsibility than the previous one did. Better working conditions – a hope for a new work schedule, new equipment, or other conditions that make the job easier or more enjoyable. Increased personal satisfaction – a hope for a greater feeling of achievement because of a chance to use their abilities more to eliminate some of the obstacles that had stood in the way of personal performance. Better personal contacts – an expectation of being moved to a place with greater opportunity for contact with and visibility to influential people. A new challenge – the expectation of more rewarding work. Less time and effort –Another reason why change may be welcome is if the change actually makes the job easier and requires less time and effort.
Forexample, work simplification programs carry the slogan “Work smarter, notharder,” and changes that can actually deliver on this promise are oftenwelcomed. it can reduce the- physical effort required to do the job. Respect for the source – If people have a positive attitude toward the person or the department from which the change comes, they will be more likely to accept and even welcome the change. Effective communication – People who are asked to do things instead of told to do them may react very positively, as are those who perceive they have had some input effecting the change.