Running head CHANGE MANAGEMENT .docx
- 1. Running head: CHANGE MANAGEMENT 1 ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR (CHANGE MANAGEMENT) 5 Change Management Change management outline Introduction The concern of employees in many organizations in the contemporary times is embracing change. The prevailing situation suggests that a significant number are unwilling to cede from embracing the traditional way of doing things to adopt the new strategies. The innovation of technology is making such change mandatory. However, there is constant resistance halting the progress of organizations (Zafar & Naveed, 2014). In a bid to explore the reality in the workplace that affects relationship amid employees and the management, the study will examine the subject of change. The focus on the paper will be on the implication of behavioral change, technological change and structural adjustments that affects the overall outcome of operations in organizations. Discussion
- 2. The research paper will examine the reason for people’s resistance to change to facilitate the formulation of strategies that can aid the company president address the problems at the workplace. The objective is facilitating capitalization on change because of its inevitability at the workplace. The study seeks to address the cause of the flexibility in embracing new ideas. The intent is to encourage the formulation of a solution that facilitates capitalization on the change to help the administration realize the goal of participation in a given undertaking (Agboola & Salawu, 2011). The proposals on training and other means of addressing change will feature in the discussion. The study will also highlight the implication of resistance on the progress of organization since scholarly material indicate that inability to adopt to changes is hindering the introduction of new systems for steering organizations operations. The link between technology adaptation and progress of organization will feature in the section. Another subject for redress in the paper is the relationship between the role of leadership and the attitude of the employee towards experimenting with new ideas (Belias & Koustelios, 2014). The exploration will enable the management devise strategies for promoting coordination at the workplace with the intent is inspiring employees towards embracing new ideas. The study will seek to explore the relationship between employees adaptability to new idea to the possibility of integrating new systems into operation for the progress of the organization (Husain, 2013). As things stand, the behavior is affecting the decision to invest in technological resources for use at the company. Presentation I will explain the results using theoretical methods that rely on data collected from the empirical studies examining the trends in the contemporary workplace. The background materials serving as the guide in the study will facilitate the formulation of the hypothesis proven as qualitative research.
- 3. The reliance on figure about projection in the work environment will aid in the conveyance of the data validating the claims of the researcher. Statistical tools reporting changes in the workplace will aid in the projection of the findings concerning employee behavior and its implication on the economic prospectus of the company. I will back the findings with the previous conclusion by other professionals who explored the current situation in companies then used their recommendation in affirming the claim of the study. The study will conclude with a reiteration of the hypothesis that change is inevitable in the workplace and the ability of the employee to adjust affects the outcome of operations. Resources The scholarly publication examining the trends in the contemporary times in different workplaces will serve as the critical resources for the study. The research will identify peer review sources with verifiable information as the reference article for the study. The researcher will also rely on records of the company and reports about previous undertaking in the analysis of the present situation. The researcher will also infer on ideas of the employees serving in various departments as the source of information about the operations of the company. References Agboola, A. A., & Salawu, R. O. (2011). Managing Deviant Behavior and Resistance to Change. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(1), 235-242. Belias, D., & Koustelios, A. (2014). The Impact of Leadership and Change Management Strategy on Organizational Culture. European Scientific Journal, 10(7), 451-470. Husain, Z. (2013). Effective communication brings successful organizational change. The Business & Management Review, 3(2), 43-50.
- 4. Zafar, F., & Naveed, K. (2014). Organizational Change and Dealing with Employees Resistance. International Journal of Management Excellence, 2(3), 237-246 TMGT 361 Assignment VI Instructions Lecture/Essay Randomness What does random mean? It means it wasn’t controlled, that mere chance cause it (whatever it is). Random is not the same as merely being mixed, or disorganized, or no discernable pattern. If I take different densities of different sizes of pebbles and I put those pebbles in a bottle and I gently shake the bottle, the pebbles, due to their size and shape and density and how I shake the bottle will settle. Though I might be able to discern any pattern, though a different mix of pebbles or a different type of shaking could result in a near infinite settlings, the settling wasn’t random. If I use all the same size and shape and density of pebbles, and I shake the bottle enough that every pebble has an equal chance of being in every position—now I achieve, or for all practical purposes, achieve a random arraignment of pebbles. Randomness is not achieved unless every possible outcome (every pebble location, every coin or die toss outcome, every card that can be dealt) that can occur has an equal change of occurring. If any outcome has a greater chance of occurring than another outcome (e.g., heads more than tails on a coin toss) we know instinctively that something is not right. The reason a coin toss is considered fair is because it is random, i.e., there is no impartiality or bias in the event, heads and tails had an equal and random probability of occurring. There is an argument that noting is truly random, that if we enough information we could predict everything perfectly. Philosophically this may be true but we live in a real world where multiple forces and sequences of events affect things to the point where we can’t predict coin tosses (using fair coins
- 5. and tossing the coins in a random fashion). Numerous, mostly undetectable and/or uncontrollable forces and imperfections influence every process and outcome. We cannot make a perfect circle nor a perfect drill bit. We cannot perfectly repeat every shot of the basketball. We cannot make two perfectly identical nails or ballot moves. Do not think that every mistake or error is random; most are not; they have a cause, a special, assignable, or attributable cause (even though we may be unaware of the cause). We cannot do anything about random error (which may be termed common cause or expected error). The oldest and core part of quality as a profession or discipline is to reduce non-random error. Therefore, it would be very useful to separate random errors (which you cannot control or eliminate) from non-random errors. Sometimes the cause of the error leads to an obvious and clear mistake. Often, mistakes are not clear. Often we don’t know something is a mistake. Think of the seemingly random nature of people getting sick before we knew there were germs and how to pasteurize. There was a cause and we didn’t know it. Similarly, most actions, products, and processes are affected by random and non-random error. Statistics have greatly helped us separate special cause from common cause error. With statistics, we can be certain of the probability that something is random or not—we may not know or every know the cause of the non-random error or how to prevent it, but we can still identify it. We will learn about statistical tests in a future lecture. Many tables, charts, and graphs that we use to make quality decisions are based on statistics and the probabilities of outcomes. Without, the table (or the math calculations that created the table) we wouldn’t know if 2 heads in row is unusual enough that we label it as non-random. Two heads in a row happens 25% of the time. If we labeled this as non-random, we would have made a bad conclusion most of time. Five heads in a row only happens due to randomness 3.125% of the time. Are we willing to label a 3% random occurrence as non-random. If I flip a coin 5 times and
- 6. get 5 heads are you going to accuse me of cheating? If one hundred people each toss 5 coins, the probability is that 3 of those people will toss 5 heads. Do you accuse those three of cheating? Ten heads in a row naturally, randomly occurs slightly less than 1 time in a 1,000. If the card or lottery player makes a 1 in a 1,000 or 1 in a billion win, was it cheating? Maybe. What we would do determine (usually statistically, based on probabilities) if the outcome was unusual and then see if the cause can be determined to be random or assignable. Sometimes we just go with the odds. If I am monitoring a manufacturing process and something happens (goes wrong) that only randomly happens 1 in a 1,000 times, the other 999 times it happens it will not be random. If I take action (which takes time and money and slows production) to fix thing, I will only being trying to fix something that cannot be fixed (for random error cannot be changed) 1 in a 1,000 times. Note the decisions have to be made concerning the above, decisions that require judgment and non-quantitative reasoning. · What is an error, mistake, or any other occurrence that I should be concerned about. We often do not realize what we should be concerned about. · How do I detect an error or occurrence of interest? · The previous bullet is often answered by—how extreme does my result have to be before I label it as non-random, e.g., 1 in 10, 1 in 1,000? When do I call the coin tosser or card player a cheat? How certain do I want to be that something unusual (cheating or other non-random error) is occurring. Initial Post See the general assignment instructions for information about the quality and quantity expectations and evaluation criteria. VI. Sampling and measurement. Write up the results of the following, answering the questions, discussing any results and interpretations.* a. Get a deck of standard playing cards. Let the deck be the lot or population (n=52; don’t use the jokers). Shuffle the deck 7
- 7. times. Assume the king of hearts (the suicide king) is a defect. A good deck has no defects; a bad deck has at least one defect. What is the proportion defective based on what you know about the deck? Pretend you don’t know anything about the population (the deck, because in real life you don’t; you only can make estimates of the population based on samples). Based only on the sample do the following (remember, you don’t know what is in the deck, you don’t know if there is a suicide king or not). Draw a random sample of 4 cards. Did you get a defect? Do you have a good or bad deck? Return the sample of 4 to the deck (sampling with replacement) and draw another sample of 4 and repeat: for this sample, do you have a good deck or not? b. Assume a good deck is 25% of each suit (out of 52 cards, there are 13 each of hearts, spades, diamonds, and clubs). Deal 4 cards. Did you get 25% of each suit? (You can just focus on one suit if you want; you will learn the same thing.) Why or why not? Basing your decision only on the sample, do you have good deck or not? Put the 4 cards back and reshuffle. Repeat the above. Do this for a total of 10 samples. Average the 10 sample proportions for all 4 suits. What can you conclude about a single sample compared to the population? What can you conclude about the average of sample proportions compared to a single sample? What can you conclude about the average of sample proportions compared to the population? Draw a sample of 3 cards. From this sample only is it possible to get 25% of each suit? Replace the sample of 3 and draw a sample of 1. Repeat with a sample of 5. Is it possible to get 25% of each suit? What conclusions can you draw from this?
- 8. With replacement, draw a sample of 10, 26, 51, and 52 (the entire population). What was the proportion of the suits for each sample? What can you conclude about the results? c. Shuffle the deck and put it face down. Randomly remove one card and keep it face down so that you do not know what card was removed and which ones remain. Deal a sample of 4 cards. Do you have a good deck (25% of each suit)? With replacement, deal samples of 25 and 51. What can you conclude about the results? Do all the preceding yourself (you can use someone else’s cards :). The point is for you to experience first-hand how random error can and will make the sample results, e.g., the cards you dealt, be different from the population. With any wisdom and life experience at all, you already know this. But you might not have thought about it the way we need to in this class. Note that you are being prepared to understand the concept and perform a test (judge or conclude) to see if the results you expect (from knowing about the population) are similar or not to what you got in the sample. Page 2 of 3 Change Management List of collected resources 1. Agboola, A. A., & Salawu, R. O. (2011). Managing Deviant Behavior and Resistance to Change. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(1), 235-242. 2. Belias, D., & Koustelios, A. (2014). The Impact of Leadership and Change Management Strategy on Organizational Culture. European Scientific Journal, 10(7), 451-470. 3. Husain, Z. (2013). Effective communication brings successful
- 9. organizational change. The Business & Management Review, 3(2), 43-50. 4. Lorenzi, N., & Riley, R. T. (2000). Managing Chnage. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 7(2), 116-124. 5. Zafar, F., & Naveed, K. (2014). Organizational Change and Dealing with Employees Resistance. International Journal of Management Excellence, 2(3), 237-246. Message to a company president Change is inevitable in all organizations and company. It takes several forms. It may be due to technological advancements, organizational structure, human resource needs, changing the market and industry dynamics, and for competitive purposes among others. Although the change may be highly recommended and necessary, human beings tend to oppose changes that disrupt their normal lives or ways of operations that they are accustomed. They may also oppose changes due to several other reasons some of which include selfishness, fear of losing their positions and privileges, lack of appreciation for the need of the change itself, and disruption of their friendly interactive circles. The manager should be prepared to handle the resistant to change. He or she is the overall in-charge personnel to ensure that the changes are adopted and implemented accordingly. As such, he or she should be aware of the reasons that make employees resist change in order to recognize them and handle them accordingly. Resistance to change has the potential to cause loses to the company in the form of lost opportunity, dragged transformation, and actual monetary loses. Therefore, the manager should act decisively and strategically to ensure a smooth transition that is not marred by crippling resistance. There are several approaches and strategies that the manager can deploy to ensure the smooth transition and operations. First, he or she needs to understand the causes of resistance in general and the precise reasons that would potentially lead to resistance
- 10. in his domain. Knowing this information helps the manager to anticipate and counter resistance accordingly. Secondly, the manager should be aware of the strategies and approaches of countering change resistance in his or her subordinates. Some of these strategies include effective communication to the staff, involving the staff in decision making, use of change agents, and training of the staff members. Communicating to the subordinates effectively helps avoid apprehension, fear, and confusion that often mar change implementation. Including them in the decision-making process regarding the change itself makes them feel appreciated and instills a sense of ownership of the change. Change agents, on its part, helps the manager communicate to the staff to alleviate their fear and convince them that the need is necessary. Change agents also encourage the staff to accept the inevitable change instead of fighting it. Training, on the other hand, helps the staff develop skills to use in the new structure or way of operations. The third strategy that the manager should be conversant with regarding change is the manner in which to monitor and evaluate it. Change cannot be avoided in the workplace. Similarly, employees are bound to display a certain degree of resistance to the proposed changes. Therefore, it is the mandate of the manager to ensure minimal resistance and smooth transition. He or she should, therefore, be conversant with all the aspects and matters pertaining to change.