CRITICAL REVIEW OF LITERATURE ON CHANGE

Transcription

Jan. 2016. Vol. 6, No.3ISSN 2307-227XInternational Journal of Research In Social Sciences 2013-2016 IJRSS & K.A.J. All rights reservedwww.ijsk.org/ijrssCRITICAL REVIEW OF LITERATURE ON CHANGEMANAGEMENT ON EMPLOYEES PERFORMANCE1ELIJAH NG’ANG’A NJUGUNA, 2MUATHE S.M.A (PHD)1Phd Student, Kenyatta University, School Of Business, KenyaAssociate Dean, Kenyatta University, School Of Business, Kenya1talons.njuguna@gmail.com , 2muathesm@yahoo.com2ABSTRACTOrganizations are continually confronting challenges to remain competitive and successful, which compelsorganizations to regularly re-evaluate their strategies, structures, policies, operations, processes andculture. Managing change effectively is however a main challenge in the change management domainbecause of massive human involvement. Thus, managers and change agents are eager to know how toencourage and effectively prepare employees for change situation. This paper carries out a critical reviewon change management on employees performance. The paper reviews the origin of change managementconcept on employees performance from academic and management perspective, factors influencing thegrowth and adoption of the change management on employees’ performance concept, theoreticalframework of change management on employees performance and the empirical studies on changemanagement on employees performance. The paper also identifies the research gaps identified in theconcept. It also captures on recommendations of the study and the conclusions reached. It carries with it aproposed conceptual frame work in a study to be carried on the concept with independent variableshighlighted as participatory leadership, motivational commitment, training and communication. Thedependent variable was identified as change management on employees performance. All indicationspointed that that independent variables (participatory leadership, motivational commitment , training andcommunication are positively and significantly correlated to the dependent variable (change managementon employees performance).This study may contribute to the literature on change management onemployees performance particularly and may assist the management, change agents and practitioners ofhuman resources management and development, and organizational behavior in assessing, designing andevaluating new or existing programmes for change management on employees performance.Keywords: Change Management Process, Employees Performance, Change Drivers, Change Agents,Participatory Leadership And Communication.1.behaviors within an organization that supportnew ways of doing work and overcome resistantto change.INTRODUCTIONThis discussion is centred on analysing anddefining the concept of change management onemployees‟ performance.It discusses theobjectives of the critical review, the backgroundof the study, the origin of the concept as well asthe factors which are influencing the growth andadoption of the concept by organizations. Changemanagement is a structured approach totransition individuals, teams, and organizationsfrom current state to a desired future state, tofulfill or implement a vision and strategy (Serkin,2005). It is an organizational process aimed atempowering employees to accept and embracechanges in their current environment (Kubiciek,Margaret 2006). It involves defining andinstalling new values, attitudes norms and1.2 Objectives Of The Critical ReviewThe objective of this critical review is to gainincreased understanding of the changemanagement on employees performance inorganisations as a concept which has influenceon the human resources reaction on change.Therefore, the study aims to achieve thefollowing objectives: To critically evaluate theorigin of change management on employees‟performance. Evaluate the benefits andchallenges of change management on employees‟performance. Establish how the concept ofchangemanagementaffectsemployees‟performance. Conceptualize on the change9

Jan. 2016. Vol. 6, No.3ISSN 2307-227XInternational Journal of Research In Social Sciences 2013-2016 IJRSS & K.A.J. All rights reservedwww.ijsk.org/ijrssmanagement on employees‟ performanceconcept. Review the empirical studies on theconcept and identify the gaps in the studiescarried by other researchers and show how thegaps can be nal change sees change as so rapidand unpredictable that it cannot be managed fromthe top down. Instead, it is argued, change shouldbe seen as process of learning, where theorganisation responds to the internal and externalenvironmental changes. Hayes, J. (2010) notedthat this approach was more focused on changepreparation and facilitating for changes than forproviding specific pre-planned steps for eachchange project and initiative.1.3 Background Of The StudyChange management on employees‟ performanceconcept grew out of the need to make somealterations within the organisation in order tocope with the dynamic changes in the markets.Organisations were faced with threats ofcompetition and changing employees needswhich had to be met using different techniquesand production models apart from the existingones (Kotter, 2008. Change management onemployees‟ performance can be reactive, i.e.responding to changes in the macro environment,proactive in order to achieve the desired goal,continuous basis, or program by-program basis,i.e. ad-hoc basis (Del Val and Fuentes, 2003).Fundamental to the success of organisationalchange is the acceptance of the change byemployees. Palmer and Dunford (2008) arguedthat all human go through 5 stages of „grief‟(denial, anger, bargaining, depression andacceptance) when faced with a loss or change,has been seen as relevant and has been applied tothe management of organisational changeinitiatives. Trust in management was found tohave a particularly strong effect on affective,cognitive and behavioural resistance, a findingthat emphasises the importance of goodmanagement skills throughout a period ofchange. However, the study also found that anincreased amount of information given toindividuals about the change resulted in a worseevaluation of the change and an increasedwillingness to act against it.Change management on employees consists of ahard side and a soft side. The hard side refers tothe processes, systems, strategies, tactics, andtechnologies that will help to implement changesand the soft side involves behavioural andattitudinal changes (e.g. persuading, reassuringand communicating, identifying and addressingemotional reactions, influencing and motivating)that will allow the hard changes to be successful(Carter, 2008).There are various factors which have influencedand led to the growth of change management onemployees‟ performance. One of such factor isfinancial contribution or the cost and benefitsanalysis on the anticipated change brought onboard. According to Oakland and Tanner (2007)explanations, increased commitment is as a resultof the increased employee competencies due totraining and communication done during theprocess of change managementwhich haveprepared the employees for changes.1.4 Origin Of The ConceptWithin the previous literature, one of the mostinfluential perspectives within what are known as„planned approaches‟ to change is that of Kotter(2008) who argued that change involves a threestage process. The first one was unfreezingcurrent behaviour; second was moving to thenew behaviour; and, finally, refreezing the newbehaviour. The three-step model was adopted formany years as the dominant framework forunderstanding the process of organisationalchange and the effects on employees (Oswick etal. 2005). Since its formulation, the theory hasbeen reviewed and modified, with stages beingdivided to make more specific steps.Job satisfaction and motivation are overviewedas an outgrowth of achievement, recognition, thechallenging work itself, responsibility andadvancement. When these all are present in a job,positive feeling and improved performance willbe noticed. Workers need basic needs as personalgrowth and self-actualization to remain satisfiedand motivated. On the other hand, jobdissatisfaction is a result of different factors suchas company policy, supervision, interpersonalrelations, working conditions, job security andsalary. These dissatisfactions can be removed bychanging those factors which can lead toperformance improvement. Mobilization is aprocess of involving and engaging those affectedIrrespective of its wide use, Lewin‟s originaltheory has been criticised for being based onsmall-scale samples, and more importantly thefact that it is based on the assumption thatorganisations act under constant conditions thatcan be taken into consideration and planned for(Marshak and Grant, 2008). As a consequence ofsuch criticisms an alternative to plannedapproaches to organisational change wasdeveloped that is known as the „emergent10

Jan. 2016. Vol. 6, No.3ISSN 2307-227XInternational Journal of Research In Social Sciences 2013-2016 IJRSS & K.A.J. All rights reservedwww.ijsk.org/ijrssby change. Understanding what motivates andmobilizes workers towards change is of greatvalue for successful result.organisational changes where at all the times theperformance of employees is enhanced.Encouragement of freedom of expression is avital psychological support and an importantsource of energy in managing change. A lack ofopenness negatively affects not only employeesbut employers too. When workers do not expressthemselves good ideas do not surface whileimportant problems go undetected, groups makewrong decisions, because workers are afraid todisagree while valuable time is wasted forunproductive meetings (Lyndon Pugh, 2007).This leads to decline in motivation, becauseworkers no longer believe that their effort isworth full commitment.2. LITERATURE REVIEWOrganizational change can include changes interms of employees involvement, products orservices, the market it serves, the way it interactswith customers or suppliers, among others. Thisis the basis of the theoretical concerns of changemanagement on employees performance. Thissection reviews conceptualization of changemanagement on employees performance s between theories.People do not resist change automatically. Theyresist the way change is handled, because in mostcases it sounds as destabilizing at anorganizational level and threatening at a personallevel. But most reasons for resisting changing arenot tangible, because they can be based on fear,uncertainty, suspicion etc.2.2ConceptualizationOfChangeManagement On Employees Performance.Organizational change seems inevitable today,regardless of the extent to which organizationsare ready to deal with it (Bye 2007). Increasedcompetition and the need for strategic flexibilityand adaptability brought on by globalization, isaffecting almost every organization today,regardless of size, human capital capabilities,market, focus, etc. (Jaros, 2010). These changesoccur across the spectrum and include strategic,structural, operational, process and culturalchange (Armenakis, Harris, & Mossholder,1993). Managing organizational change in thecontext of employees view successfully thereforeremains one of the most important focuses of alllevels of management, just as embracing andsurviving change is important to all employees.Change initiatives however are far from easilyaccomplished, with Balogun and Hailey (2004)reporting that approximately 70% of initiativesare not completely successful.1.4.3 Factors influencing the growth andadoption of the concept.There are various factors which have influencedand led to the growth of change management onemployees‟ performance. One of such factor isfinancial contribution or the cost and benefitsanalysis on the anticipated change brought onboard. Changes were noted by McLean (2007) tolead to increased financial capability especiallywhen they were tailored to improve the quality ofproducts and employees‟ involvement to enhanceefficiency of production. In instances where thebenefits of change management on employeeshave exceeded its cost companies have fullyemerged the concept. Study by Kotter (2008)noted that organisations which adopted theorganisational changes had higher financialperformance than the organisations which hadnoted adopted changes.Critical change management theorists state thatin mainstream (change) management theory,power is circumvented by using euphemisticconcepts such as leadership, governance,empowerment, communication and motivationfor maximum performance by the employees.(Karreman and Alvesson, 2009), but observersshould not ignore the social realities of power(Pfeffer, 1992). By paying attention to powerdynamics, different perspectives on resistance tochange can be brought to light. Karreman andAlvesson (2009) suggest that power can beunderstood from three different perspectives.There has also been increased individualcommitment to change by employees. Accordingto Oakland and Tanner (2007) explanations,increased commitment is as a result of theincreased employee competencies due to trainingand communication done during the process ofchange management which have prepared theemployees for changes. Also the expectedpromotions and rewards as a result of changehave increased the individual expectations on11

Jan. 2016. Vol. 6, No.3ISSN 2307-227XInternational Journal of Research In Social Sciences 2013-2016 IJRSS & K.A.J. All rights reservedwww.ijsk.org/ijrssFirst, power can be defined as a restraining force,where one actor makes people do things that theyotherwise would not have done. In this view,resistance is an unconcealed reaction to the overtuse of force. Power focuses on how ideologiesand cultural socialization make people complywith the existing order, without explicit force andavoiding overt conflicts. This perspectiveresembles the conceptualization of resistance tochange in conventional change managementliterature.meaningful changes clearly shows that forperformance based results employees must befully engaged. The assumption underlyingcontingency theory is that no single type oforganizational structure is equally applicable ess is dependent on a fit or matchbetween the type of technology, environmentalvolatility, the size of the organization in terms ofhuman capital, the features of the tingency theories were developed from thesociological functionalist theories of organizationstructure such as the structural approaches toorganizational studies by Reid and Smith (2000),Chenhall, (2003) and Woods (2009)Fisher and Kotter (2008) contend that changeflows as follows: anxiety and denial, happiness,fear, threat, guilt and disillusionment, depressionand hostility, gradual acceptance, movingforward Steensma, (2001), including the need formore integrated ways of working (Rugman andHodgetts, 2001) and the need to improvebusiness performance Balogun and Hailey(2008). These considerations typically result instructured change programs based on theassumption that change management onemployees consists of a (limited) set ofinterventions, which are regarded as objective,measurable and linearly manageable programsthat can be realized in a relatively short time.Contingency theory turns away from the classicalorganization theory assuming that there aregeneral principals which make organizations runeffectively (Doch 2009, 36). Instead Contingencytheory argues that the best structure for anorganization varies in respect to theirenvironment. In detail the efficiency of eachstructural aspect would depend on “contingencyfactors” like – size, technology, human resourceand strategy (Donaldson 1996, 57). Thesecontingency factors are characteristics of anorganization and reflect in turn the influence ofOrganizations. Contingency theory identifieseach contingency factor of which the structureunder consideration is dependent upon(Donaldson 1996, 57). Task uncertainty is themost studied contingency factor. The factor is afocal point since it involves employees formeaningful change to be realized. Pennings(1992, 276) argues if the organization isconcerned with a lot of uncertain tasks than theorganization is less centralized and instead morerichly joined structures are necessary in order togenerate and communicate the larger amount ofknowledge and communication to employees‟remarkable performance. In contrast if anorganization is very certain about their tasks, thetasks get more centralized. Another contingencyfactor is size. Pugh et al. (1969) assumes thatsmall- sized organizations with few employeesare optimally productive and efficient hence easyto change. This factors result to changes inorganizations that requires sensitivity inmanaging the changes emanating from the newstructures. According to the theory it‟s evidentthat, changes that are experienced inorganizations during restructuring can well beexplained in the concept of the theory. This studywill therefore be anchored and based on thecontingency theory to expound on therelationship between the theory and the change2.4 Theoretical RelationshipsContingency theory is a behavioral theory thatclaims that there is no single best way to designorganizational structure. The proponent of thecontingency theory was Joan Wood (1956) whoargued that technologies directly determineorganizational attributes such as span of control,centralization of authority, and the formalizationof rules and procedures to be followed byemployees. She found that there are manyvariations in organization structure associatedwith differences in manufacturing techniqueswhich bring considerable change to employees‟performance. Contingent theory is based uponvarious constraints in an organization. theconstraints may include the size of theorganization, how to adapt to its environment,differences among resources and operationsactivities, managerial assumptions aboutemployees‟ strategies.In this study the contingent variable will befocused and anchored on managerial assumptionsabout change on employees and the performanceas a constraint variable.This approach to the study of organizationalbehavior in which explanations are given as tohow contingent factors such as technology,culture and the external environment influencethe employees and functions of organizations for12

Jan. 2016. Vol. 6, No.3ISSN 2307-227XInternational Journal of Research In Social Sciences 2013-2016 IJRSS & K.A.J. All rights reservedwww.ijsk.org/ijrssmanagement on employees‟concept as a constraint.performancemanagement philosophy is the glue that joinseveryone in an organization together so that theycan all focus their attention on the attainment ofexcellence. In actual practice; a managementphilosophy is also a personal life philosophy.There is no real difference between the two.Developing a philosophical perspective requiresthat the researcher make several coreassumptions concerning two dimensions: thenature of society and the nature of science(Burrell and Morgan, 1979). The sociologicaldimension involves a choice between two viewsof society: regulatory or radical change. Societyis viewed as unified and cohesive, whereas thesociology of radical change views society as inconstant conflict as humans struggle to freethemselves from the domination of societalstructures (Burrell and Morgan, 1979). Thesecontrasting views are the basis of distinct, andoften diametrically opposing, schools of thought– a rational view of society is the basis ofmodernism whereas a radical change perspectiveunderlies post-modernism. The other dimension,science, involves either a subjective or anobjective approach to research, and these twomajor philosophical approaches are delineated byseveral core assumptions concerning ontology(reality), epistemology (knowledge), humannature (pre-determined or not), and methodology.Whatever their sociological persuasion, theresearcher will find that

Dec 02, 2015 · on employees performance).This study may contribute to the literature on change management on employees performance particularly and may assist the management, change agents and practitioners of human resources management and development