The practicality of changing an organization’s culture. Is it possible?
Change is tough,
especially when done the wrong way. Many companies have hundreds of posters, wallet cards, and slogans all over stating their leader
behaviors or ideals. We get monthly computer based
training about the leader behaviors. Writing up some MBA speak and passing it our via email and computer articulate training is easy. Actually making it work is not.
Where I work, not once in three years has another human shared their experiences about the leader behaviors. Had the HOME method been applied to all levels of employees, we might have more success. It is obvious through our history we needed a change.
In the past few years two companies merged. Each with a unique culture and way of doing things. Both had very different cultures. Both had problems and successes. An investor would hope the best from both worlds would come together to form the new company.
This required change. Change that was harmonized and accepted as different from both sides of the new company.
Many of the existing staff from either company did not see the reason for the change and thus did not adopt it. There is no oneness or unity. Our performance is results based and competitive against our peers. So working together is not always best for the bottom line. This creates a sense of animosity. Each unit operates in secrecy apart from other units. There is often infighting for resources and space that there is little feeling of membership in a bigger picture. Communication and exchange is done via rumor. Rarely is any ‘official’ word passed down. Another method that could have been used is the MARS method (Motivation, Ability, Role Perceptions, Situational factors). Again, we have failed in that our motivation is skewed towards keeping a job in uncertain times and performance reviews, not common goals.
Roles are unclear as many senior leaders have departed and not been replaced, so these vacancies lead to ambiguity and many of the staff are very uncertain how to proceed. The lack of some oversight has allowed bullying and other situational factors to take over, causing a decrease in morale and productivity.
Change management can be a positive force and have an appreciable impact on a company, but only if its is supported and believed in at all levels. Bad management and behaviors must not be tolerated and it requires constant vigilance, especially in the early moments of change. A failed attempt at change can harm a company via debased morale, lost productivity and lost trust more than no change at all.
Planning is crucial and obtaining constant feedback from all levels and listening (not just hearing) the feedback will lead to better results. Change isn't easy but it can be done.
Where I work, not once in three years has another human shared their experiences about the leader behaviors. Had the HOME method been applied to all levels of employees, we might have more success. It is obvious through our history we needed a change.
In the past few years two companies merged. Each with a unique culture and way of doing things. Both had very different cultures. Both had problems and successes. An investor would hope the best from both worlds would come together to form the new company.
This required change. Change that was harmonized and accepted as different from both sides of the new company.
Many of the existing staff from either company did not see the reason for the change and thus did not adopt it. There is no oneness or unity. Our performance is results based and competitive against our peers. So working together is not always best for the bottom line. This creates a sense of animosity. Each unit operates in secrecy apart from other units. There is often infighting for resources and space that there is little feeling of membership in a bigger picture. Communication and exchange is done via rumor. Rarely is any ‘official’ word passed down. Another method that could have been used is the MARS method (Motivation, Ability, Role Perceptions, Situational factors). Again, we have failed in that our motivation is skewed towards keeping a job in uncertain times and performance reviews, not common goals.
Roles are unclear as many senior leaders have departed and not been replaced, so these vacancies lead to ambiguity and many of the staff are very uncertain how to proceed. The lack of some oversight has allowed bullying and other situational factors to take over, causing a decrease in morale and productivity.
Change management can be a positive force and have an appreciable impact on a company, but only if its is supported and believed in at all levels. Bad management and behaviors must not be tolerated and it requires constant vigilance, especially in the early moments of change. A failed attempt at change can harm a company via debased morale, lost productivity and lost trust more than no change at all.
Planning is crucial and obtaining constant feedback from all levels and listening (not just hearing) the feedback will lead to better results. Change isn't easy but it can be done.
No comments:
Post a Comment