The Importance Of Resistant To Change

INTRODUCTION

Increasingly the global business setting has become very unpredictability which makes systematic strategic planning more difficult. It must be noted that proactive change requires strategies that are flexible and creative. In this assignment, I will provide best practices for communicating change, suggest ways in building relationships with managers who are resistant to change and propose strategies for managers to support a change process.

BEST PRACTICE FOR COMMUNICATING RECOMMENDATION In the business world, organisations worth is based on its timely delivery of results and its flexibility to create and innovate. This is judged by the organisation’s ability to make use of its available staff knowledge in an integrated manner

Piderit (2000) also said that it is rare for employees to resist change without noting the consequences of their action. In agreeing with Hultman (1995) the restructuring and downsizing processes at the Neninah Airlines was faced with resistance. Some of the resistance was active in the sense that some employees became very critical while others tend to sabotage the whole process. Some other employees showed passive resistance by outwardly showing support for the change but inwardly were not implementing the change. In support with the views of Palmer et al. (2006) we realised that resistant to change cannot be judged from only one dimension and that it was my responsibility as an HR manager to guide the restructuring and downsizing process. Some of the action taken to build and maintain positive relationships with some managers who were resistant were as

For us to get buy-in from managers these steps were followed: firstly, at the onset of the restructuring process, we did a market survey on the current trends of doing business in the aviation industry. This provided enough justification for abandoning the traditional ways of doing business and provided recommendations for moving forward. This was presented to senior managers for adoption, though this report was thoroughly interrogated yet it was adopted. Secondly, Upon adoption of the report, it was presented to other middle-level managers and their supervisees (Beckhard and Harris 1987). The airline was very explicit in explaining the troubles of the company and its impact on employees. Regular monthly update on the financial status, current business strategy and plans were all presented. The heads of department received series of training that will equip them to communicate the changes occurring in the organisation and preparation for any possible