What factors should have alerted Hogan to the problems that eventually came up at Fancy Footwear?
Despite the associated positive impacts of change, people always resist change at varying degrees. The main reasons why people resist change are because change is disruptive and stressful. After completing her MBA, Brenda Hogan replaced Max Worthy as the division manager. She took the position with the intention to change the management style from autocracy to participative management. However, she never anticipated associated resistance to the change she wanted to implement. She instituted worker productivity groups, which held two meetings in a week. One factor that could have alerted Hogan of looming problems was the slow pace of progress in the number of people participating in the groups.
In addition, she had not offered adequate information to group members on the importance of such changes. The resulting communication problem made it difficult for those involved in the groups to understand the sense of participating in such discussions (Keyton, 2010). Another factor that could have alerted Hogan was the lack of management skills and motivation among group members to engage in such initiatives (Kachaner, George, & Bloch, 2012). Most employees were approaching their retirement age and did not see the importance of engaging in group discussions. Most of the workers have been doing the same job for a long and all that they needed was to learn new ways of doing their jobs. The proposed changes did not match the needs and expectations of the target group.
The lack of a reward system following individual participation in these groups could have also alerted Hogan to the problems that eventually came up at Fancy Footware. Hogan did not design rewards, which would support the ideas and suggestions as well as performance. Implementing a successful change requires a solid reward system to compensate individual efforts (Daft, 2009). In conclusion, Hogan did not solicit ideas from employees before establishing the groups. She could have consulted with the employees to get an idea on the type of changes they could easily adopt.
Could Hogan have instituted her changes without eliciting a negative reaction from the workers?
Hogan could have instituted her changes without eliciting negative from the workers if she considered factors affecting change process. Employees’ resistance to change is a natural reaction because change always requires new way of thinking and doing things. The uncertainty of what the change will bring makes people resist change. By the degree of management capabilities and approach, a manager can affect the degree of resistance to change downwards. Hogan could have reduced the intensity of natural resistance to change by taking necessary actions and involving the employees involved in the change process. According to the case study, one of the employees concluded that “the last thing you want to do is learn a new way of doing it” (Case Study). Hogan brought a new change without involving the employees in order to get an idea on the type of change the employees wanted. As it turned out, most employees did not see the sense of engaging in group discussions that have direct impact at the department level.
Majority of employees at the company perform technical jobs that do not require management skills. Another way of instituting change without experiencing resistance is through engagement of the right resistance managers (Griffin, Texas, & University, 2009). Hogan failed to engage the right personnel in instituting her change process. She could have approached the change process by involving supervisors and department managers to communicate the idea directly to the employees. Hogan could have also taken her time out and listen out to the concerns of the people following awareness of resistance to change. This requires managers to address people’s values in response to resistance to change to reduce the negative impacts of resistance. As such, Hogan could have spent some time considering the impact that the change could bring and the resistance she could receive for her strategy. In conclusion, anticipating resistance to change is what managers need to ensure a successful change.
References:
Daft, R.L. (2009). Organisation theory and design. Cengage Learning.
Griffin, W. R., Texas, A., & University, M. (2009). Organisational behaviour, 6th ed. Cengage Learning.
Kachaner, N., George, S., & Bloch, A. (2012). “What you can learn from family business.” Harvard Business Review.
Keyton, J. (2010). Communication and organisational culture: a key to understanding work experiences. SAGE.
