What trends in the literature seem most applicable to the change-related problem you identified within your organisation?
There are several trends in literature related to the problem of planning on how to effect the change of expanding our operations through our growth project in order to increase market share. According to Palmer and Dunford (2008), managers have a great difficulty in achieving their proposed change outcomes since they are faced with variety of outcomes that they cannot plan appropriately. They proposed that managers should adopt a coaching or interpretive approach during planning that would ensure that they involve their employees in identifying possible change outcomes. Brockner and James (2008) supported the argument of these scholars by stating that most executive managers prefer seeking the opinion of their employees during the process of planning for change. They argued that employee involvement facilitates quick-change process since a manager cannot capture psychological mindset of employees. The model developed by Armenakis and Bedein (1999) focussing on strategic orientation, perceived performance by top managers and pressure for change will be applicable to this problem of planning. This is because it will help managers know the external and internal forces that may affect their planning process.
How has any of the relevant research you reviewed supported your thoughts regarding the problem? Have any different viewpoints on the problem been offered by the research?
Research by Palmer and Dunford (2009) support my thoughts regarding the problem of planning within a short time for change in our organization. They argued that managers should adopt the coaching image since resistance to change is common in every organization and thus managers should consider appreciating the personal capacity of their employees. This supports my thoughts since when deciding on which investments project that our company should undertake, I will take into consideration the personal capacity for each employee and the benefit they will bring to the project. Brockner and James (2009) argued that it was difficult for managers to perceive change and crisis as an opportunity for development since they do not plan effectively. They argued that managers only focus on short-term outcomes while planning for change and that is why they always view crisis as threat. The viewpoint offered by Amenakis and Bedein (1999) was different since they claimed that managers could not succeed in planning for change since business environment is dynamic and thus managers cannot perceive future outcomes.
Limited time Offer
Based on your analysis of the relevant research, how might you redefine the problem as originally identified for future activity?
Based on my analysis of the relevant research, I may redefine the problem of planning for change and propose that managers should first study how their employees would react to change and consider involving them during planning for future activity. According to the argument of Tsoukas and Chia (2002), managers should first obtain a more complete understanding of the micro-processes of change at work for any change to be successful. Caldwell (2003) supported this argument by stating that change is simply too complex and thus it was necessary for managers to involve their employees during planning since it involves a high risk for one individual to lead. Carmelli and Schaubroeck (2008) stated that most businesses failed in planning and managing change since they failed to anticipate psychological, organizational and political vulnerabilities. It is thus important for managers to understand whether their employees have been affected by any previous change that may cause them to resist change. It is also important for managers to investigate whether there are any previous conflicts between employees that would cause them to resist change.
Related Review essays