Identifying the Key elements of the Resistance to Change
The reasons for people resisting change differ depending on interests and anticipation for changes. Parochial self-interest indicates that workers are more concerned with the change implications for themselves (Housel & Marian, 2011). Personal interests are considered rather than the impact of changes to business success. Regarding the case study, the union resists the changes by Nestle. The proposal by Nestle for 15 percent workforce cut was essential for organizations to realize the changes. The response by CGT shows complete resistance to change as the union safeguard the interest of employees. The firm positions by both management and union influences initiated changes negatively.
Another reason why workers resist to changes is communication problem and inadequate information. The misunderstanding between the management and employees happens as a result of insufficient information on real problems (Arif, Zahid, Kashif, & Sindhu, 2017). Miscommunication contributes to low production in the production and productivity in the organization. The Nestle’s CEO Peter Brabeck-Letmathe was quoted indicating that they have reached the point where Perrier brand development is endangered due to CGT stubbornness. The response by Jean-Paul Franck focuses in safeguarding the interest of employees especially the 15 percent cut of the workforce. Finally, the difference in assessing the situation may contribute to resistance to change. The employees tend to disagree on certain issues depending on their reasons . Positive and negative impacts of the change process provide the foundation for deciding whether to accept or resist the changes. The differences experienced between the Nestle’s CEO and the unions have greatly influenced the needed changes.
Education and communication
According to the case study about the problems at Perrier, it seems there is a lack of appropriate and accurate information. It is important to educate employees about the changes that organization tends to initiate. The communication and education ensure the workers understand the need of change in the organization (Arif, Zahid, Kashif, & Sindhu, 2017). Educating and communicating with employees helps in reducing incorrect and unfolded rumors revolving the organization changes. The Perrier management tends to manipulate organization information instead of engaging and discussing directly with employees on issues regarding sales. In reality, the Perrier sales were down, but management manipulates through antagonizing the workers. Therefore, the education and communication approach brings all the parties into an informed platform to make a wise decision on organizational proposed changes.
Participation and involvement strategy
In this strategy, the initiator gathers information and ideas from all stakeholders to take part in designing and implementing the changes. The stakeholders have the considerate power of accepting or resisting to the proposed changes. It is essential for identification and definition of the real problem as well as initiating potential solutions through participation. The management should encourage open communication through participation and involvement of all stakeholders (Arif, Zahid, Kashif, & Sindhu, 2017). According to the case study about Perrier, the Nestle and union were supposed to communicate to achieve common goals in the change process. In most situations, involving and engaging employees in organization issues help in realizing the anticipated changes easily. Therefore, participation and involvement approach is likely to lower the resistance by union leaders.
Negotiation and agreement strategy
Using negotiation and agreement approach, the involved groups tend to accept or disagree on some aspects. One group may lose out in the negotiated change whereas they have a considerate power of resisting. The union uses negotiation and agreement strategy in finding the solution for its members (Teng & Yazdanifard, 2015). Solutions are achieved either through voting on the element of changes or acceptance of offered incentives. In the Perrier situation, the union was supposed to engage the management through negotiation to agree on 15 percent workforce cut. It includes obtaining considerable early buyouts or retirements for the company to continue with the change effort (Housel & Marian, 2011). This form of negotiation and agreement approach is essential in the situation where the group resisting the change is in power as it in CGT.
Explicit and implicit coercion strategy
In most cases, this strategy is considered as last resort. The management uses all mechanism to force the changes through explicitly or implicitly approach to accept the changes . The management tends to threaten any group resisting change that it would face a job loss, firing and lack of promotion. The explicit and implicit coercion depends on the management decision on organizational changes and comes after unfruitful negotiation with the union.
Conclusion
The strategies provide platforms for CGT and Nestle to engage one another on the problems at Perrier. Identifying the element of change resistance helps the organization management and union to strategize on appropriate mechanism to overcome the problem. The organization uses different strategies in effecting appropriate changes. The impact of changes should be reviewed by management and union representative for a conclusive and strategic decision making. Therefore, the change management strategy helps in improving and overcoming resistance causing factors.
References
Arif, M., Zahid, S., Kashif, U., & Sindhu, M. I. (2017). Role of leader-member exchange relationship in organizational change management: Mediating role of organizational culture. International Journal Of Organizational Leadership, 6(1), 32-41.
Housel, T. J., & Housel, M. (2011). The Role of Business Communications Practitioners in the Computer Age. Journal of Business Communication, 23(2), 5-12.
Teng, N. C., & Yazdanifard, R (2015). Managing Organizational Change and Resistance from an Individualist vs. Collectivist Perspective. International Journal Of Management, Accounting & Economics, 2(9), 1065-1074.
