Business Change and Employment

Business Change and Employment

Question: Critically Evaluate how a Changing Business Environment Affects Perceptions of Fairness and Justice Associated with the Employment Relationship

Student Sample Answer:

Introduction

In change management, organizations must integrate all departments and individual roles in order to enhance success and business survival in this dynamic, competitive, and unpredictable business environment (Whittaker and Marchington, 2014, p. 256). Even though there are change strategies which are well intended, mostly the biggest percentage of the planned change initiatives fail. This leads to expectations which are disappointed and also the costs which are exceeding million dollars in resources used and time invested in that work. Also, there are numerous reasons as to what causes change to fail and this unsuccessful transformation is mostly attributed to employee resistance by the business management (Mitchell and Fetter, 2010, p. 300). There also exist other complex and unexplored psychological individuals needs that determine change management in the context of employee relations. Employees are very important in changing initiatives as they either ether change recipients or the change implements. The employees have a lot of commitment of large extend which determines ultimate success of most initiatives. ORDER YOUR PAPER NOW

Resistance to change and also organizational resistance, it may or may not manifest but it’s very important. On change literature, it is revealed that employees who respond negatively have many antecedents which may include loss of control, anxiety and also job insecurity (Taylor and McGraw, 2016, p. 240). Recently, most of workforces have been concerned about employer perceptions to their input and issues of fairness and justice. Research shows that when employees are treated unfairly, they can lead to less cooperation, lower work quality, and lower productivity and also increased resentment. This greatly affects employees attitudes and perceptions to business change. This paper explains how changing environment of the business affects perceptions of justice and fairness which is usually associated with the employment. It reveals literature on resistance to change, development of theoretical framework and also the hypothesis pertaining the same.

Conceptualization of resistance to change

Most employees resist change when the change is expected to pose work problems such as demotion, reduced pay, and unfair deals amongst them. Sometimes, business change is ill- motivated and created to target some part of employees while favoring others. The modern day business calls for equity, fairness and justice while dealing with workers. Failure to which, employees create conflicts, get discouraged and demotivated to perform, and end up losing their work morale. Changes in business environment are witnessed by new work methods and internal policing, new technologies, economic downturns and boom, legal requirements, changes in social culture needs and among many other factors (Santos and Stuart, 2013, p. 40). For a company to survive and compete there is need to change its internal employment policies in a manner that suits the current trend as established in the market. To employees, change is inevitable and thus must be embraced so long as it is not aimed at demotivating some while motivating others.

Resistance to change is reactions that are disgruntled by the employees on unfairness to change. Significant contributing factor to failed change, resistance may be conceived mostly by the behavior of the employees thus seeking to challenge, invert any prevailing assumptions or disrupt thus discourses the power relations (Rubery, 2014, p. 1220). Since the past, the management perceives resistance as a counterproductive act by employees where they collectively unite together to resist any plan by a business that is unfair to them all (Santos and Stuart, 2013, p. 50). Most of these perceptive differ in a significant way through seminal systemic conception in the field theory. This also explains resistance and it argued that the organizations were seen as a system which leads to resistance as it is the force which counter balances the forces which lead to change.

Over some years back, literature transformed resistance from its original systematic barrier and it became central to individual and mental based patterns that create negative responses and perceptions to workplace changes. The individually based conceptualization is a resistance which is more complex. ORDER YOUR PAPER NOW

Organizational change context

In modern day business environment, resistance to change may happen in two forms and reactions. The change reaction forms are employee reaction to transitional outcomes and also employee reactions to change processes.

In the side of employees, change is mainly played out on daily basis. Also, change implementation process involves a social exchange of ideas between the employer and the workforce that is the lender member exchange (LMX). Under this exchange in relationship, the opportunities are found in alleviating the employee resistance to change for the employee involvement and also timely and accurate information provision.

Dyadic relations and work roles are developed and negotiated over a long period of time through exchange series between leaders and its members. This helps in defining quality of dyadic relationship. Though basics of this theory, leaders develop different exchange relationships with their followers and that quality affects behaviors and attitudes of both parties (Forth et al., 2013, p. 80). This LMX is associated with resistance to change negatively. In some years back, individual responses to change where identified as desirable and compliant behaviors, or undesirable and resistant behaviors. As per the research, failure of many changes is directly attributed by undesirable and resistant behaviors which occur mostly within the employees.

Organizational justice and resistance to change

Justice posits when employees perceive that they are treated in a fair way and they are about to develop some attitudes and conducive behaviors that lead to implementation of change which is successful (Simmons, 2014, p. 606). They are also likely to contribute behaviors which are positive which may include commitment of the organization, organizational citizenship and also organizational perceived support. Justice predicts higher levels of openness to change, accepting to change satisfaction with the change and cooperation with the change. This seems to be following employees who perceive to be implementing all practices in a fair way.

Literature in justice mostly if focuses on employees and the three types of activity (Bond and Wise, 2013, p. 70). These evaluations include evaluation on formal policies and procedures where the outcomes are located, evaluation of interpersonal treatment the employees receive from the supervisors and lastly, the evaluation the employees receive from the organization. The interpersonal justice is the way of showing concern for those individuals in distributive income they receive and also the information justice is the knowledge about the procedures which show and demonstrate concerns of the people (Loosemore, Lingard, and Dainty, 2003, p. 55). The management has to demonstrate concerns of its employees together with the quality information provided to the employees. This is considered as antecedent to perceptions of the interpersonal information and justice. Distributive justice is always omitted because literature of resistance assets that procedural justice leads to change of outcomes which are considered to be greater in importance by them. Interactional justice is also omitted.

Justice as mediator between information and resistance to change

Mostly the quality of information employees receive from their managers or supervisors during change is very important to the perception of employees on justice. Organizational changes are ploughed by anxiety and provision of information thus the information provision is recognize as imperative aspect of that process.  When there is increased information to proposed changes is related to great change acceptance. Information quality is related positively to information as it offers explanation for decisions and also the information is timely, helpful and accurate (Renwick, 2013, p. 355). It is related to interpersonal justice as it demonstrates respectful; individual treatment. Also when the employees are provided with accurate information in a respectful manner, they improve buy-in in regard to changed decisions and the outcomes. The information is therefore represented in the most recent study as its important interpersonal, procedural and information justice.

When the relationship between the resistance to change and information is established, it’s reasonable to find justice that acts as mediator between the information and the resistance to change (Kersley et al., 2013, p. 2). Those organizations that provide information and accurate information about the change as it can influence how the employees feel about that change. Having a good understanding of change has led to numerous occasions that influence individual’s feelings about the change and impacts on the resistant.

Conclusion

Business owners are not being fortune tellers. Even on establishing the right strategies and plans for business growth, it is difficult to predict the future of a business. The modern business environment has become diverse and competitive in the way employment relationships are established. In the modern workplace, equity and fairness is a major feature that forms a good work environment. However, increased changes in business environment needs ranging from technology, economic changes, political and legal requirements, and social- culture needs are affecting employment relationships. Human resources is a major internal business environment factor, whose input is highly required to boost a company’s performance and profitability. For employment relationships to be strong, fairness and justice must be valued within the organization. A business environment that does not embrace fairness and justice when dealing with employees finds it difficult to perform, compete, and position itself strongly in the market and vice versa. Every kind of business environment change potentially transforms the business either positively or negatively- economic boom or collapse, new technologies, new competitors. In order to survive, businesses must adapt their strategic plans that are able to keep up with the equity, fairness, and justice changes as brought by industry changes. ORDER YOUR PAPER NOW

References

Bond, S. and Wise, S., 2013. Family leave policies and devolution to the line. Personnel Review32(1), pp.58-72.

Forth, J., Kersley, B.E., Lardies, C.A., Bryson, A., Bewley, H., Dix, G. and Oxenbridge, S., 2013. Inside the Workplace: Findings from the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey. Routledge.

Kersley, B., Alpin, C., Forth, J., Bryson, A., Bewley, H., Dix, G. and Oxenbridge, S., 2013. Inside the workplace: findings from the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey. Routledge.

Loosemore, M., Lingard, H. and Dainty, A., 2003. Human resource management in construction projects: Strategic and operational approaches. Routledge.

Mitchell, R. and Fetter, J., 2010. Human resource management and individualisation in Australian labour law. Journal of Industrial Relations45(3), pp.292-325.

Renwick, D., 2013. HR managers: guardians of employee wellbeing?. Personnel Review32(3), pp.341-359.

Rubery, J., Carroll, C., Cooke, F.L., Grugulis, I. and Earnshaw, J., 2014. Human resource management and the permeable organization: The case of the multi‐client call centre. Journal of Management Studies41(7), pp.1199-1222.

Santos, A. and Stuart, M., 2013. Employee perceptions and their influence on training effectiveness. Human resource management journal13(1), pp.27-45.

Simmons, J., 2014. Managing in the post-managerialist era: Towards socially responsible corporate governance. Management decision42(3/4), pp.601-611.

Taylor, T. and McGraw, P., 2016. Exploring human resource management practices in nonprofit sport organisations. Sport Management Review9(3), pp.229-251.

Whittaker, S. and Marchington, M., 2014. Devolving HR responsibility to the line: threat, opportunity or partnership?. Employee Relations25(3), pp.245-261.

Leave a Reply