Mergers across departments are one of the major organizational changes that might witness a high employee resistance. In the same vein, the decision to merge Savannah and Chatham County police officials in 2015 raised some skepticism and fear among employees. In fact, the merger decision opened a debate between the city and county officials. While sharing the costs was one of the reasons of disagreements, supervision also created a rift. In the city's response to the county, it was agreed that both managers will work independently to review the chief's performance.Succinctly, the merger case between police departments tends to shift the focus towards the whole theory of change management and employees' resistance.
Business contours have become dynamic than ever before, and organizations can hardly afford to sustain the competition without undergoing the required change. Of this necessity is the fact that up to 70 percent of change initiatives fail for a range of reasons as low employee involvement, poor implementation, improper communication, and sagged collaboration. More often than not, change initiatives are ill-thought, and managers end up in losing the very focus of the purpose of change. Delving a bit deeper into the topic, the author elaborates some potential causes of the resistance in general and also with regard to the merger case of Savannah and Chatham police. In addition, the paper delineates a linkage between communication and resistance and makes a strong case for using appropriate communication strategies to lessen down the chances of change failure.
Change usually means going from the known to the unknown. Individuals not only exhibit variations in experiencing the change but also highlight different levels of their ability and willingness to adapt to the variations. Scholars have opined that resistance stems from various sources as personal(social, economic, and emotional), cognitive, and organizational.
French et al.(2008) vindicated that organizational change may create a threat to the existing social relations. Employees also fear that the change process may impact their rights and authorities negatively. Moving from the known processes to the unknown makes them feel like hitting in the dark thereby pushing them towards denying the change. It was also one of the reasons with the merger case. The city and county officials had a prolonged debate over the allocation of administrative and investigative functions pertaining to each department.
Organizational sources emanate from the fear of employees that the company is not either fully prepared to implement the change, or there is a mismatch between the demand and supply of required skill-set. Scholars have explicitly acknowledged the role of proper communication channels in pacifying the resistance. Employees are often unable to comprehend the significance of change because of poor coordination among the authorities. Additionally, the initiative fails because of the trust deficit between the management and employees.
Finally, there are cognitive sources that point towards the lack of change perception among employees. They often dread the possibility of a new culture in the organization that may hamper existing values, principle, and postulates. Additionally, they might feel undervalued and uninformed and refuse to embrace the change.
Apparently, employees' skepticism in the case of the Savannah and Chatham County merger might have risen from one of more of these reasons. Financial and organizational concerns were haunting the negotiations since a year. For example, the division of payment precincts between the two was among the primary causes of resistance. Additionally, organizational differences and different modus operandi might have created cynicism among employees. Explicitly, the merger lacked any formal communication plan. It might have left the employees uninformed thereby peeping up the resistance.
Potential Causes of Resistance
Clearly, lack of communication is one of the key spoilsports in an organization's change plan. Scholars are unanimous that poorly managed communication results in rumors and exaggerates the negative aspects of change. Communication, as scholars have vindicated, not only creates a community spirit in the organization but also candidly informs employees about their tasks and policies. Thus, initiating the change without properly conveying all pros and cons to the employees will only prove counterproductive. In line with these purposes of communication, savants have constructed some relevant postulates:
1. Communication affects the readiness of change by informing employees about how their work will get altered because of the change process.
2. In community creating role, communication enhances the commitment and trust of employees towards the management; it positively affects the readiness of change.
3. Lack of communication peps up uncertainty that negatively affects the readiness of change.
4. Communication will have an impact on the feelings of uncertainty and job insecurity.
These suggested propositions highlight the impact of communication not also on information but also on uncertainty. It means that imparting proper information to employees will lessen down their apprehensions and increase the readiness for change. Explicitly, there is a positive relationship between effective communication and readiness for change; it further entails that resistance is likely to be at low levels in the cases where authorities properly convey the information to the employees, using the appropriate communication strategies at the right time.
Different Types of Communication Strategies
Scholars aver that the change process comprises of different stages, and the adopted communication strategy should coincide with those levels. The purpose of communication strategy in the primary stage is to bring out employees' preparedness. The approach, in the initial phase, involves communicating the need and change objectives by highlighting the discrepancies between actual and desired outcomes. Both face-to-face and written communication are effective at this stage.
A lot of activities happen in the organization when the change actually takes place. Level of uncertainties and rumors appear as many employees are not directly involved in the change process. Communication, at this level, needs to provide the detailed and accurate information to employees about their job roles in the change process. At the same time, the communication must be candid so as to dismiss the prevailing misunderstandings.
Communication stage in the final stage must be to support new ways. It should focus on answering employees' questions and address their grievances. The responsibility of communication falls down to immediate supervisors and managers. The flow of information must be multidirectional, continuous, and concrete.
Having reviewed all the three communication strategies, I feel that verbal communication is the most effective during the change process. As there is lots of skepticism and dilly-dallying, just sending circulars or updating information on the company WebPages might not solve the purpose. Top authorities and managers must be physically accessible to accommodate employees' concerns via effective in-person communication. Nevertheless, I cannot ignore the importance of body gestures, but that only comes after the verbal messages.
The Communication Plan
It is crucial to note that communication is not the sole panacea to overcome resistance. It is a nuanced approach initiated by defining the change, determining the causes of resistance, developing the strategy, effective implementation, and timely evaluation. The same holds good for the present case. While coming to the negotiating table can resolve internal differences, conveying clear and candid goals have, to an extent, paved the way in finalizing the merger. In the future, the resistance must be overcome by placing a proper grievance redressing mechanism in the departments.
References
Blanchard, K. (2015). Mastering the Art of Change. Retrieved May 23, 2016, from kenblanchard.com: http://www.kenblanchard.com/img/pub/blanchard_mastering_the_art_of_change.pdf
Elving, W. J. (2005). The Role of Communication in Organisational Change. Corporate Communication An International Journal , 129-138.
French, R., Rayner, C., Rees, G., & Rumbles, S. (2008). Organizational Behavior. Chichester: John Wiley.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Forces for and Resistance to Organizational Change. Administration and Supervision Journal .
Quimby, K., & Curl, E. (2015, December 15). Chatham County Sending Savannah a Fifth Police Merger Proposal. Retrieved May 23, 2016, from Savannahnow.com: http://savannahnow.com/news/2015-01-16/chatham-county-sending-savannah-fifth-police-merger-proposal
Zener, M., & Smelzer, L. (1992). Development of a Model for Announcing Major Layoffs. Group and Organization Management: An International Journal , 446-72.
