BUS 610 Understanding and Coping with Change

Understanding and Coping with Change

name

BUS610: Organizational Behavior (MOC1451B)

instructor

date

Consequences behind an individual resistance to change can be internal or external influences. Due to the fact of the significantly aggressive makeup of daily localized and worldwide organizational society continuous improvements have developed to be a critical component of every organizational process. Organizations which reject to improve themselves usually risks sacrificing the company business percentage and client commitment. In this assignment I will be analyzing the internal and external factors contributing to an individual’s resistance to change.

Consequently, the majority of business identifies the value involving change and attempting to put it into action continually to obtain the improvement of performance of an individual’s organization strategies. Although acknowledging the value of change and developing an effective change strategy is sometimes not sufficiently for organizations to be successful, since it is several obstacles to applying change in a company and individual resistance to change are among it. An individual means of resistance can be grounded within internal or external factors. The key obstacles in the areas of creating an impacting improvement strategy and applying it consist of self-interest, lack of understanding, lack of trust in management, differing assessments of the need for change, and low tolerance for change (Bacck, 2012).

Self-interest in an internal factor in which an individual’s self-confidence probably intervenes with their ability to adapt to change (Michel, By, & Burnes, 2013). A few may expect to protect their normalcy to progressively improve his or her physical goals; while other individuals may have different motivates. Nevertheless, an individual operating in his or her self-interest, rather than the company’s interest, would show signs of resistances to change.Organizational changes could prevent additional efforts, initiatives, or other personal interest or actions. It could risk employees getting discomfort and making their workflow harder; making it hard to adapt from the comfort zone to the organizational change.

When changes occurs sometimes employees have to learn new skills in order to properly perform their jobs by the new rules, and policies which could contribute to an individual resist of change due to disappointment of having to learn new methods. These sever organizational changes could also cause resistance of an individual if he or she feels that these changes affect their persona, respect, and character which is valuable to them. Lack of understanding is an external factor in which an individual’s does not understand why the organization needs to change. This could come about from the lack of communication or poor communication amongst the organization and the employees, ineffective and inefficient organizations and a series of additional factors (Oreg, & Sverdlik, 2011).

For example, if an organization develop a proper plan that could benefit their company in the long-run by generating aggressive advantages. But, when the consequences for change, the plan of applying change in addition to organizational measures and investors which is going to be impacted is not discussed to the employees, this may possibly produce the lack of understanding which could have resistance of individual to change.Lack of trust in the management in an internal factor in which an individual’s come to feel that they cannot trust the organization; they would show signs of resistances to change and adapt to organizational change (Baack, 2012). He and she could attribute the changing as a damaging root cause or may expect that they would in the end get laid off or unemployed. This feeling may also come about if an individual feels as if they are in included in the decision making process of change if organization usually asks for input before any major changes occurred.

Differing assessments of the need for change is an external and internal factor where an individual does not feel happy with the factors of change, in addition to, the benefits and/or limitations suggested change strategy that is affiliated with the change (Baack, 2012). This can cause individual to have doubt on the demand of change. Whenever an individual thinks that it is not a physical factor to them, they may not acknowledge the actual reason for the change which will cause a resistance for change. Differing assessment and perspectives could impact the organizational change where it is an individual whom thinks the intended change is not a good decision.Individuals that are resisted to change may have low tolerance for change because of the internal factors of his or her personality and/or choice for equity and constancy towards their job.

These individuals are harder to cope with since it is hard to change an individual personality. When an organization changes it may cause a business to decrease employment, shut down machines, and etc. Having the equity and constancy in mind could make an individual be resisting to organizational change if they are feeling a lack of job security and stability in the employment (Oreg, 2003).Looking at the viewpoints from an individual thoughts of change such as will there be a raise or drop in pay, raise or drop in workflow, and/or any additional financial rewards which most organizations provide employees prior to the changing procedure.These individuals which think that it will affect them financially would show signs of resistances to change. It is significant crucial that organizations to overcome an individual in addition to the company resistances to change if they plan to conduct and employ adaptability.

But the conflicts are intricate through the certainty of working with individuals resistance to change is difficult since the resistance is established upon internal and external factors. Kotter theory for change offers six change approaches which an organization could apply to overcome resistance to change such as education and communication, participation and involvement, facilitation and support, negotiation and agreement, manipulation and co-option, and explicit and implicit coercion (Baack, 2012). By using all of these methods might be applied through an organizations willingness to make sure that their change strategy would work.A plan for overcoming that resistance is developing an effective and efficient communication process where the interest of the demand to change is proper and clearly implemented in full informative information on where and why these changes will take place.

Management should discuss with the employees by getting their input and advice of the changes allowing them to be active in the decision making of the organizational improvements. This means the organizations should take all feedback from the employees in consideration before making any changes. Organization changes should be applied daily indicating change process is more beneficial in some situation instead of innovative within conditions of the changes. This plan for overcoming resistance to change will work depending on the components of resistance and the range of change, internal and external factors, rewards could help prevent the resistance to change, and to protect the change as it occurs. Meaning as the changes starts to begin it should be no resistances to change from individuals adjusting from their pervious methods to the new methods.

In today’s organization evolving organizations have to plan a design for change that will me the organization needs and their employee needs. If an organization fails to acknowledge, communicate, and correspond throughout the entire changing process individuals may develop a resistances to change which could be rooted from internal and/or external factors such as self-interest, misunderstanding, trust issues, low tolerance, differing the assessment, and other factors that contributes to resistances to change.

Reference

Baack, D. (2012). Organizational behavior. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.

Michel, A., By, R. T., & Burnes, B. (2013). The limitations of dispositional resistance in relation to organizational change. Management Decision, 51(4), 761-780. doi:10.1108/00251741311326554

Oreg, S. (2003). Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 680-693. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.680

Oreg, S., & Sverdlik, N. (2011). Ambivalence toward imposed change: The conflict between dispositional resistance to change and the orientation toward the change agent. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 337-349. doi:10.1037/a0021100