Case Steve Jackson Faces Resistance to Change
The Harvard Business Review of Steve Jackson Faces Resistance to Change case study intent is to provide an intricate description of how employees resist change. Different personality traits, egotism, awareness, and social diversity are all factors that affect the outcome when implementing a system that will create change within an organizations workforce. Education, training, and employee expectations of what and individual must become accustomed are major contributors to resistance.
All too often, when a person(s) is notified there will be changes in a process, the first reflection contemplated, is what type of commitment is it going to take to complete training, and how much emphasis will be engaged on learning the task. Engaging in a general task, which might be considered outside the scope of their general knowledge, expertise, or responsibility towards the subject matter, is normally perceived as a hindrance. Situational constraints vary from person to person, and most believe in the philosophy “if it works, don’t try to fix it.
Case Steve Jackson Faces Resistance to Change Essay Example
” When individual values conflict with conscious deliberation about choices that creates changes, it is difficult for anyone person not to consider the lasting effect the situation carries on his or her values, behavior, and means of support. Ultimately, the company’s responsibility to ensure they remain productive and competitive in their respective markets, must systematically introduce changes to subordinates with clear objectives, and a rational intellect that counters the negative influences, which may arise with change.
First, change requires fore thought when evaluating antiquated systems, especially when the individuals linked to the change are entrenched in a familiar system. Corporate milestones mandate observations in the business practices in order to maintainproductivity, maximize profits, and remain competitive in their prospective markets. Peter Drucker perceived, “Most business failures are not the result of things being done poorly. Businesses fail most often because the assumptions on which the organization has been built and is being run no longer fit reality”. Retrieved March 10, 2014 from http://www. innovationexcellence. com/blog/2011/07/02/. Steve Jackson’s primary responsibility is to observe and implement new software. The company’s current method serves the business well, however, in today’s technical society the average life cycle for most software products is 4 years. Assuming that Jackson followed company protocol when the BSO evaluation commenced, he compiled information, and reports, that supported taking a more in-depth review of the new software. Strategic measures, financial, and risk assessment characteristics were preformed supporting the recommendation for change.
Throughout the process, Jackson’s display of communication was excellent, utilizing face-to-face, emails, and group meeting techniques. Most importantly, he educated high-level management, supervisors, and peers during various stages of discovery. The actions exhibited by Jackson are professional and well executed during the introduction of the new software proposal, and all stakeholders were very receptive to the recommendation. Although, Jackson’s facilitation of the product was very comprehensive. Unfortunately, there are situational constraints that affected the transformation of the new software, and threaten the success of the project.
On several occasions, Jackson’s efforts in search of Mike Barnett’s participation were ignored, and all attempts failed. Establishing a mandatory development kick off meeting for the project would affectively place accountability on stakeholders to attend and review the software agenda. This would allow for an open dialog, and every individual would have the opportunity to take part, and officially address his or her concerns. All stakeholders that did not attend the mandatory training would be responsible for the make-up training, which holds all personnel and departments accountable.
Furthermore, by actively involving other coworker’s establishes interaction, and stimulates team-building concepts, which provides a sense of ownership in mapping how the project model incorporation would migrate through each department efficiently. Project managers could assign department teams to assess the effects on their departments, and then conduct rational presentations on the pros and cons of implementing a new system, or install detailed provisions, if required, to address any additional company, or department concerns.
Although, organizational structure is not the total responsibility of Jackson, the company’s senior managers believed, “Western’s organization chart looked more like a guide than a roadmap,” the BSO software case is a perfect opportunity for Abu Dija to step up and provide leadership in correspondence with the other department vice presidents and corporate heads. (Author: Andrew C. Inkpen, Christine Pearson Publisher: Harvard Business Review Ed/Year: 2011 Product Number: TB0275-PDF-ENG).
Ensuring a great idea, and assembling a team that delivers a new and innovative concept to existence is a great start in restoring employee confidence, while producing a successful team project. However, the leadership qualities displayed by Westerns middle management is mediocre. Although Barnett is highly respected throughout the company, Dija should have engaged fully in the situation, even if it placed their personal relationship in jeopardy. Of all the individuals involved, Dija is the one person that has a personal relationship with Barnett, and should understand his character, as well as, his concerns.
With personal insight, it takes less time to develop a plan of intervention, and then confront the problem head on. Instead, he continued to delegate his responsibility to rectify issues with a disgruntle employee to Jackson. Not once did Dija inquire about his concerns, or take the opportunity to actively search for resolution. Possibly, Barnett may have needed individual training, or an assistant to keep from falling behind in his duties during the transition period, yet the only message received from management was the company is moving forward with the implementation of the software, with or without you.
During the two demo presentations, at no point did Barnett present any constructive criticism, or objectives of why the BSO software change was detrimental to the company. He emphatically indicated that productivity would slow down, the software is to complex, and the shift would cost time, money, and the probable loss of a few of the company’s most valuable people. This leads me to think that his confidence in adapting to new concepts are in question, or he possesses an internal fear to change that would disrupt methods in which he conducts his personal affairs.
In retrospect, the comment revealed by Barnett that indicated the company could “lose a few valuable people” was an exit behavior emotional reaction that may come to terms if the department cannot resolve his dilemma, based on his discontentment with the software change. From the beginning, he has voiced negative opinions of the new software with extreme disgust. Immediately after consulting Abu Dija, his resentment turned to accusations toward a respected employee without merit, which constitutes a form of employee harassment.
Ultimately, the email could become a human resource matter, which could lead to a negative impact on the company’s reputation. As department leader of International Bidding and Contracts, this crisis has the propensity to critically affect the company globally. Privately, he has shown clear signs of discuss with the new direction the department is moving, as the supervisor of a twelve person department, his attitude can directly influence other employees emotional consistency creating a larger network of workforce resistance.
Barnett’s frustration with the BSO software change has reached the point of no return, rationally and emotionally. Therefore, Jackson should setup a meeting with Barnett; utilizing a mediator to establish an open dialogue, which allows Barnett to express his concerns freely and confidentially about the new agenda. Chances are during the meeting some good information may arise, and important facts will be revealed.
Display some empathy, understanding how he feels, then reverse the issue by asking questions that will determine a solution to the concerns. Keep control of the conversation, stay persistent, and address whatever topic is relayed. Try not to expend an extreme amount of time on emotional encounters, focus on primary issues; most importantly, discuss hard-facts to determine the root cause of his protest. However, Jackson should not patronize Barnett; this could escalate his reactions, which can cause him to shut down.
At this point, if self-fulfilling prophecy happens when one person’s actions control another person’s behavior, then it obviously noticeable that Bennett’s negative behavior is controlling the entire department. Especially the distress he has placed on Jackson and Dija. This unfriendly and callous environment, that has developed, may result in discriminatory actions for all parties involved. Therefore, it is essential that corporate leaders take charge to resolve this issue. ?