Stakeholder analysis and engagement project - MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: 1. Discuss common reasons why change is resisted and how managers commonly view resistance. 2. Critically examine the key theoretical concepts of resistance considered in this subject and how they are linked to the two key theoretical ontologies used in this subject. 3. Critically examine the relationship between power and resistance, and the ethical issues that these raise in relation to the managerial and resistant positions. 4. Critically discuss the implications of power and resistance for the role of the change agent in ethically managing change, in both the dialogical and problem-centric approaches to change management Answer: Answer 1 One thing that is constant in the business is change. There is a need to understand the reasons people are resistant to change to develop effective change management strategies. According to Hon, Bloom, Crant (2014) lack of competence, fear of unknown, being deeply connected to the old methods and connected to status quo are the factors that cause an employee to be resistant to change. Change requires change in the attitude, skills and perspective and most managers are not ready for transition. Mangers take proactive steps when recognise that there is a greater risk in standing still. Change creates stress. Lack of mental resilience creates resistance. Lack of motivation creates saturation and exhaustion among employees who lack zeal to participate in change. Other factor causing workplace resistance is the miscommunication about the need of change. Mangers often believe that the current model of work is effective in profit maximisation or to gain competitive advantage. According to the Kotters change model creating the urgency or sense of the need is the first and foremost step to manage the change resistance. Therefore, poor communication is the barrier to change (Chappell et al., 2016). When mangers do not inform or involve employees in decision making it is difficult for them to give the full support to the employees. Negative perceptions such as change will favour another department or group leads to anger and resentment. Managers fail to perceive need of effective leadership skills to change the employees resistance. Further, most of the management change models focus on the rewards and benefits to trigger change in managers and employees. When the employees do not see any benefit for change or anticipate unwanted outcome they turn resistant. Use of coercion employed by mangers to trigger change only leads to compliance but not a productive change (Ybema, Thomas, Hardy, 2016). Taking the example of Uber, it is successful in its strategies despite tremendous resistance from the policy makers. It keeps changing the pricing system based on the customers needs and wants. It was not possible for the taxi service companies to initiate such change as they were making s trategies to continue the business as usual. There was no strategy to ensure customer satisfaction. The managers of taxi company failed to implement change when they perceive that their success is guaranteed due to pre-established position. Uber did overcome the resistance with innovation (Bashir, Yousaf, Verma, 2016). Answer 2 The principal agent theory highlights that the resistance and conflicts due to change arises as the firm tends to increase its profitability, while the employees tend to maximise their utility. It can also be supported by neoclassical theory according to which an organisation makes a change assuming that it will give lucrative value in future. Agent theory is also supported by neokeynesian theory (Gong, Tang, Liu, Li, 2017). The key concept to resistance in an organisation is that it is difficult to survive without profit maximisation. This goal cam be achieved by paying the employees appropriately as per their contributions and utilise the employees effectively and efficiently while demanding more of their time. On the contrary the employees tend to maximise their utility by demanding good environment, investing less efforts, high salaries and better facilities. Employees are assumed that they cannot survive without these efforts and achieving personal goals. Sometimes the demands of the firm prevent them from achieving their own gaols. It leads to conflict between the organisation and the employees. This conflict is followed by resistance to change (Lipson, 2017). Agency theory helps in resolving the resistance due to conflicting goals between organisation and employees. Agency theory helps both to work on common good. It may include by monitoring the behaviour of agents, providing incentives, evaluating the outcomes, and making efficient contracting with the agent. However, the solutions given by the agent theory are more biased towards fulfilment of firms goals. It may decrease the satisfaction of the employees. Therefore, it can be argued that the theory is unrealistically one sided. It leads to exploitation of employees. It considers the efficient markets without considering the external forces and its irregularities (Hayes, 2014). A more realistic approach is given by Stakeholders theory that resolves the conflicting goals between organisation and employees. It emphasises on the fact that a firm must consider the needs of employees and society instead of focusing on profit maximisation. The theory emphasises on maintaing a satisfactory balance between the conflicting and divergent goals/interests. However, the theory does not highlight standards for allocating relative weights to the interests of the various constituencies. The theory does not emphasise on optimal contracting. It does not instruct the firm to follow clear-cut steps. The theory is criticised to have long term approach (Kaptein, 2017). The two key theoretical ontologies used in this regard are Rationalist (Cartesian) and Social (Relational) theories. In the rationalist approach the organisation removes the human elements. In this approach each element is seen separately. According to this approach change is viewed as an objective phenomenon and considers people as separate to change. It involves the principle of I think, therefore I am. This approach thus, widens the gap between the self and other as the leaders drive the change and the workers only implement (Lowe et al., 2016). Using this model, resistance to change can be overcome by implementing the strategy based on the internal or external driver of change. Rationalist approach thus emphasise on objective set of principles and guidelines. On the other hand, the Social (Relational) approach is socially constructed by the people. It involves collaborative effort. This approach considers people as centre of change, which is a social construction. In this approac h every member of the organisation is expected to be the part of designing and implementing the change. It means it follows the principle ofWe listen and talk, therefore we are (Missonier Loufrani-Fedida, 2014). It can be concluded that irrespective of the ontology being subscribed an organisation must have understanding of different theories and implement the best possible solution. Answer 3 Managerial position gives power and control. Managers tend to engage in the paternalistic management owing to their power and control in the organisation. The mangers tend to execute their power in controlling people through orders, procedures and regulations. This is unpleasant to most employees. Traditionally management views the control dominated model as effective option. Managers tend to be tough and concentrated on imperatives using physical power such as intimidating behaviour or turning highly vocal. The managers misuse their power that creates conditions of multiple unfairness. It may be distributional level, interactional and at procedural level (Hatch, Cunliffe, 2013). This creates resistance among the employees. When the employees tend to succumb, the paternalistic management is preferred even more. There is literature evidence of destructive behaviour adopted by the manger and the abusive supervision. It is may be advantageous in meeting the targets and set goals. It ha s many negative outcomes (Bareil, 2013). According to Bareil (2013), abusive supervision leads to low level of satisfaction among employees, higher level of turnover and hampers the commitment and justice perception. It creates psychological distress among the employees. These factors relate the power to resistance among the employees. Eventually the employees engage in behaviour that can restore their autonomy. It is argued by Hkk, Vhsantanen, Paloniemi, Etelpelto (2017) that the negative reciprocity beliefs are expected to affect the relationship between power and resistance. When the mangers use the reward power that is to give rewards for high performance, the resistance is decreased. Overall, it can be concluded that there is emotion-laden differences among the group of members. It creates a political power and failure to implement change. Managers who rely on their rank to create change often make fail attempts. It is due to creation of resentment and resistance. Owing to the power and resistance various ethical issues arise. Ethical practices support change in any organisation. The change agents should not prefer change process at the cost of respect and dignity of the employees. When the managers use power to bring change that only serves self-interest, it is considered an unethical practice. If an action of the managers is the cause of the dishonest commitment. For instance, employee theft, lying to employees, abusive supervision, lack of transparency is the indicator of unethical behaviour (Hatch, Cunliffe, 2013). A manager or a leader is expected to maintain a fine line between being shrewd and exhibiting unethical practice. A manager can use the power of position to increase the employee engagement. If such actions lead to suffocation of the employee activities or employee conformity then it is consider unethical. Ethical issue that arise due to imbalance between power and resistance are lack of constructive criticism, lack of openness or clear communication, and absence of conformity to workplace (Tran, Tian, Sankoh, 2013). Lack of code of ethics will not make the employees or managers accountable for their actions. Thus, the resistance is increased. The negative relationship between power and resistance does not let the organisational culture to develop and promotes unethical behaviour (Bareil, 2013). One of the most popular examples of ethical issue arising due to relationship between power and resistance is the Enron 2001 scandal. In this organisation, the mangers driven by profit forced the employees to conduct questionable accounting system to modify the stock price of the company. Similarly, in Seven eleven stores in Australia, wage abuse was prominent. When the employee resisted the underpayment, the managers manipulated the working hours. This ethical blindness arsed from power and resistance relationship. Both Enron and Seven Elevan disregarded the employees respect and created unethical culture (Azibi, Azibi, Tondeur, 2017). Answer 4 The dialogic change model is the result-oriented, structured planning and implementation of the Stakeholder Dialogue. The principles guiding the approach are voice, listen, respect and suspend. It is influenced by the postmodern philosophy and interpretive approaches. It attributes to relational ontology. In this approach change is initiated by changing the mindset and thought process of people. This approach requires the change agent to be generative and adaptive leader. The change agent may fail to engage people emotionally due to weak alignment and mutual respect for individual perspective of cost and benefits. Without any rationale there will be lack of emotional coherence. This is a transformation approach but the relations are identified as power interactions (Bushe Marshak, 2016). For instance, it is a common experience in educational institutions, where the curricular issues are resolved while the voice of teaching staff dominated that of families. Since the subordinate posi tions are always dominated it is unethical as interactions are not based on equality. The implications may include resistance as the change methodologies are fluid and it takes long time to implement action. There is an increased uncertainty as stakeholders cannot predict change. However, there are more positive implications than negative in this approach. The positive implications due to power and resistance are active engagement of all the stakeholders and consider the impact of involvement. The change agent may have constant communication even during conflicts due to power and resistance (Bushe Marshak, 2016). On the other hand the problem-centric approach is rational process and sees change as orderly process. It attributes to rational ontology. The positive implication in implementing change ethically is leaving little space for corruption. The process of change management involves less key players and the decisions are made quickly. There may be more balance between power and resistance as the change methodologies are said to be predictive. It adds to certainty and comfort from stakeholders thereby, decreasing resistance. The negative implication includes failure to measure the human impact on organisational culture. It is criticised for not having the appreciative engagement. The change agents may communicate the change after the fact or during it. There is no communication in the planning process (Hoke, 2015). However, since dialogic approach is considered more appropriate for initiating change ethically as it involves appreciative enquiry and involves broad team. The transformational change may help disrupt the status quo and allow employees to see old situation from new perspective. Employing the total quality management is a dialogical approach. This approach is also used in mitigating the climate change via international negotiations. References Azibi, J., Azibi, H., Tondeur, H. (2017). Institutional Activism, Auditors Choice and Earning Management after the Enron Collapse: Evidence from France.International Business Research,vol. 10, no.2, pp. 154. https://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v10n2p154 Bareil, C. (2013). Two Paradigms about Resistance to Change.Organization Development Journal,vol. 31 no. 3, pp. 559-71. Retrieved from: https://search.proquest.com/openview/5d682d6e1f0856146d360521b396c733/1?pq-origsite=gscholarcbl=36482 Bashir, M., Yousaf, A., Verma, R. (2016). Disruptive business model innovation: How a tech firm is changing the traditional taxi service industry.Indian Journal of Marketing,vol. 46 no. 4, 49-59.doi:10.17010/ijom/2016/v46/i4/90530 Bushe, G. R., Marshak, R. J. (2016). The dialogic mindset: Leading emergent change in a complex world.Organization Development Journal,vol. 34 no. 1, pp. 37-65. Retrieved from: https://search.proquest.com/openview/0638fd2e427fc5d88dd6ab941cee3705/1?pq-origsite=gscholarcbl=36482 Bushe, G. R., Marshak, R. J. (2016). The dialogic organization development approach to transformation and change.Practicing organization development 4th Ed, pp. 407-418. Retrived from: https://w.gervasebushe.ca/practicing.pdf Chappell, S., Pescud, M., Waterworth, P., Shilton, T., Roche, D., Ledger, M., ... Rosenberg, M. (2016). Exploring the process of implementing healthy workplace initiatives: mapping to Kotter's leading change model.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine,vol. 58 no. 10, pp. e341-e348. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000854 Gong, D., Tang, M., Liu, S., Li, Q. (2017). Reconsidering production coordination: A principal-agent theory-based analysis.Advances in Production Engineering Management,vol. 12 no. 1, pp. 51. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.14743/apem2017.1.239 Hatch, M. J., Cunliffe, A. L. (2013).Organization theory: modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives. Oxford university press. Retrieved from: https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=enlr=id=tv4CMvRMwooCoi=fndpg=PP1dq=resistance+in+organisation+due+to+power+and+control+ots=SmMaaSGLXssig=VvDgNuYiksDfgzReByoudYPSkT8#v=onepageq=resistance%20in%20organisation%20due%20to%20power%20and%20controlf=false Hayes, J. (2014).The theory and practice of change management. Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from: https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=enlr=id=-jMdBQAAQBAJoi=fndpg=PP1dq=Agency+theory+of+change+management+ots=51ShaumHMssig=OI22qhvBXTJh0Oau3gBqnfCr_hQ#v=onepageq=Agency%20theory%20of%20change%20managementf=false Hoke, R. (2015). Building Collegiate Entrepreneurship and Collaborative Strategies in Morocco.Workforce Development and Entrepreneurship Education in the Middle East North Africa, pp. 170. Retrieved from: https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00KND5.pdf#page=172 Hkk, P. K., Vhsantanen, K., Paloniemi, S., Etelpelto, A. (2017). The reciprocal relationship between emotions and agency in the workplace. InAgency at Work(pp. 161-181). Springer, Cham. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-60943-0_9 Hon, A. H., Bloom, M., Crant, J. M. (2014). Overcoming resistance to change and enhancing creative performance.Journal of Management,vol.40 no. 3, pp. 919-941. Retrieved from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0149206311415418 Kaptein, M. (2017). The battle for business ethics: A struggle theory.Journal of Business Ethics,vol. 144, no. 2, pp. 343-361. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-015-2780-4 Lipson, M. (2017). Organization Theory and Cooperation and Conflict Among International Organizations. InPalgrave Handbook of Inter-Organizational Relations in World Politics(pp. 67-96). Palgrave Macmillan UK. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/978-1-137-36039-7_3 Lowe, S., Lowe, S., Rod, M., Rod, M., Kainzbauer, A., Kainzbauer, A., ... Hwang, K. S. (2016). Exploring the perceived value of social practice theories for business-to-business marketing managers.Journal of Organizational Change Management,vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 751-768. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-09-2015-0154 Missonier, S., Loufrani-Fedida, S. (2014). Stakeholder analysis and engagement in projects: From stakeholder relational perspective to stakeholder relational ontology.International Journal of Project Management,vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 1108-1122. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.02.010 Tran, Q., Tian, Y., Sankoh, F. P. (2013). The Impact of Prevalent Destructive Leadership Behaviour on Subordinate Employees in a Firm.American Journal of Industrial and Business Management,vol. 3 no. 7, pp. 595. Retrieved from: https://file.scirp.org/pdf/AJIBM_2013112210590912.pdf Ybema, S. B., Thomas, R., Hardy, C. (2016). Organizational change and resistance: An identity perspective.The SAGE Handbook of Resistance, 386. Retrieved from: https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=enlr=id=1eEADQAAQBAJoi=fndpg=PA386dq=Use+of+coercion+employed+by+managers+to+trigger+change+only+leads+to+compliance+but+not+a+productive+changeots=RJpUbjEjEmsig=KrROPchn8r60TOHukOhJWgN_948#v=onepageqf=false