Change Scenario
Olusanya Oyeyemi
Walden University
MMSL 6661
Dr. Evan
Duff
16 December 2015
Abstract
For any
organization to measure up to the millennium standard, it must implement
frequent development changes which must be discovered by someone and
implemented after unanimous agreement by leaders. This paper shows the change I
have nursed in my organization for years and its pros and cons for both the
organization and the employees.
Understanding the Organization
I have
served four years plus in the military and within those years my observation
for significant change was that graduate employees both as enlisted and
officers were not employed into a relevant discipline to their degree. It is
very common to see a historian or an economics by profession heading
engineering division where technical skill is necessary. Even though the officers
might be more of management but even the enlisted are not considered for their
previous college degree, which might be of assistance and consistency in
their career.
The
problem encounter was that most of these people have to start studying new
career from scratch, in many cases, the career that have nothing to do with
their initial degree. Therefore, military have to start training them from the
beginning, in most cases they are not interested or passionate about the newly
enforced career but because they don’t want to lose their job they will just
follow the order. That is, they cooperate without commitment. For instance, I
studied electrical/ electronics engineering in college and was employed into
the military as enlisted, even with my four years of experience in electrical
design in oil and gas, the military still changes my career into engineman,
maintaining and repairing auxiliary equipment. Even though I was
employed within engineering yet, I was not allowed to work on any electrical
fault on wiring or troubleshooting. Many officers or enlisted were employed
into a totally different profession.
As a
leader in the position of making or suggesting changes, from recruiting
station, I will introduce or suggest that personnel should wait for relevant
vacant to their initial profession or background are available before going to
boot camp or commission. This idea will aid both officers and enlisted who
have a degree to cope fast, remain on course in their career development and
work within their interest.
The
risk is that to make a change it must go beyond my command to
training and recruiting centres of the military, which means the whole body of
the military has to come to an agreement to effect the change that is a long
process. The benefit is that it will reduce the time and money spends on
training while the risk is that some degree holder may still need to train and
retrains to do their job.
Making Decision
Addressing
each of the four categories of Roberto’s suggestion on how the managerial lever
could help an effective change leader in the decision process, Navy is my case
study on how to minimize the potentials of enlisted college graduates.
Composition
Navy is a
big organization, and to make such change one have to involve Commander naval
education and training command, Naval education and training command, Naval
education and training command force master chief petty officer, Commander
naval service training command, Naval service training command, command master
chief petty officer, Command officer recruiting training command, Recruiting
training command, Command master chief petty officer, Executive officer
recruiting command military training director, Fleet commander (RTC), Fleet
leading chief petty officer (RTC). All these people in the top position plus
some chiefs and first class petty officers that work directly with the enlisted
in the field are the perfect teams to deliberate on such decision. The chief
and the first class petty officer have enough facts and data of how many enlisted
college graduates that retain navy job up to ten years compare with those that
were able to be commission as an officer. Chief and first class will “offer a
fresh point of view” (Roberto, 2009, p.35), different from those top executives
but they are better as devil’s advocate.
Context
I will make
sure that chiefs and first class are allowed to talk freely and if possible
present the fact and figure before lesser executive members to reduce the fear
of intimidation. I will also encourage all executive to obey the Richard
Hackman’s ground rules of “being polite and courteous to one another for smooth
and harmonious interaction among participants” (as cited in Roberto,2009,
p.41).
Communication
To
coordinates a successful deliberation, I will employ both structured and
unstructured approaches to encourage free and open deliberations. Roberto
inferred that leader’s ‘light touch’ encourage participants to engage in a free
exchange of ideas and opinions (2009, p. 43). Finally, I will make sure we end
up in reconciling our differences and find a common ground before the final
decision is taken.
Control
My main job
as an effective change leader in the deliberation is to moderate and mediate
the deliberation. If we are unable to reach a common ground then I will turn to
arbitrator orientation as Roberto suggested, making sure that everybody find
satisfaction at the end of the day. Despite the fact that “announcing an
initial position may discourage individuals from expressing dissent and
offering minority view” (p.61), I will “provide a clear process roadmap to the
discussion with a prepared mind (p.55), and show members that I am not creating
the appearance of consultative process (p.49), assuring them that their
contributions are valuable and count.
Expectancy Theory (Cognitive):
Vroom/Lawler
Both
Lawler and Vroom based their theory on three assumptions that; behaviour is
related to performance – output expectancy, rewards mean different thinks to
different people, and that behaviour influences success. These views
corroborate Burke point that worker is highly motivated when they realise that
there is a reward attach to their behaviour and it is worth vying for (p.182).
In
2010, I was chatting with a church member in Nigeria on our way from a church meeting.
During our conversation, he told me his son had an accident that day in school
and his employer has taken care of the boy even before they told him. In his
commendation and praise, he said, “ even if it require flying the boy out of
the country, they will not hesitate. Oh! God, help me, never to step on their
toes “. He was satisfied with his job, he never dreamed of any better offer
anywhere else and was ready to abide by all his organization’s rudiments and
could go the extra length to satisfy them in other to protect his job. Lawler
and Porter argued that job satisfaction influences absenteeism and turnover
(1967).
In U.S.
military, employees look at the benefit, not the job risk. They have one of the
best medical programs any employer could enjoy in the country, their
educational benefit cannot be compared to any other organization; Tuition
Assistance when on active duty, Gi Bill when out of active duty plus the
housing allowance and Textbook stipends. When I was on deployment and my wife
gave birth to my first child, the kind of caring Navy Fleet and Family gave
could not be monetized. Service members are rewarded for good
conduct every three years in service, which keep them out of trouble to protect
their job. Petty et al inferred that “individual job satisfaction and job
performance are positively correlated” (1984).
The
most interesting thing is that, the expectation of reward shape both behaviour
and performance of employee, this is in agreement with the expectant theory of
Vroom and Lawler which Burke concluded that “it is imperative that
organizational members believe that the measuring and reward processes are
administered in a fair and just manner (p.182). As a leader, I will not only
make sure the there is provision to reward employees’ behaviour but also
involve them in the relevant decision – making for assurance of transparency in
reward measurement.
Creating a strategy for Change
Leading change
in Navy will require a long process and many procedures because is a big
organization. Sequel to the rank of people listed that will involve, at my
prelaunch phase, I would reflect on my proposed change of making sure all
college graduate employ are commission into officer not as enlisted. Employing
college graduate into commissioning program and aligning, their discipline with
their post will enhance their performance and commitment to the job. In
self-awareness, I would re-visit my evidences in relation to performance. For
instance, the attitude of college graduates that were employ as enlisted
compare to those that were employed, as officers would be evaluated with data
and figure of those that retain their job after ten years.
Establishing my
motive that is, to maximize employee’s potentials, Burke inferred that “ the
emphasis is on which motives are the more important ones for leading change…and
that ambition is the ‘only inherent character trait that is essential for
effective leadership ‘” (O’Toole, 1999, as cited in p. 304). Align individual
needs and value with the organization’s culture, maintain the culture of the
organization of one on one training by modifying it with just using college
graduate as officer, for faster understanding of their responsibilities. These
will establish the need to for change before the resistors, because it will
give a clear vision to the change. Burke pointed out “a robust vision mobilizes
appropriate behavior” (p. 312).
At the launch
phase, I would involve those aforementioned executives and enlisted.
Communicating the necessity of the change, how it will save the organization
millions and time they spent in training officers.
The change
process will be implemented gradually so that, people would not even notice
when the change leaves it’s comfort zone, even with whatever associated stress
the change process is still under control. I would also avoid blaming others,
using people as scapegoat, and appealing to authority figures for answers
(p.318), but rather exercise patient and perseverance to allow the creative
idea to do their work. Here, I will apply self-control to “listen, not
defensive when people come up with their own view, and display patience as mush
as necessary (p.320). I would employ my buy-in attitude by matching my behavior
with my words and finally make sure I have a reliable successor who believes in
the change possibly a new talent or an outside professional. Burke suggested
that it is better to hire from the outside or shift over from other parts of
the organization (327), which has good understanding of the change and show a
strong buy-in attitude.
Making a Persuasive Point
To design my
persuasion plan, I will search and collect real data of enlisted sailors with
bachelor degree cadre in navy for the past ten years in comparison with number of those that
retain their job till dates with the officers that join same period as well. Do
the same thing by getting data of those that their career is different from
their area of concentration in their bachelor degree program that still retain
their job after ten years in comparison with their counterpart that maintain
their professionalism of same career. These data will help me to make a
realistic point in reference to facts and figure available.
In the process
of gathering information for reliable fact and figures, I will also request a
survey in which sailors both the enlisted and officers give their feedback on
their altitude to work – only the enlisted that have bachelor degree. Develop a
program that will show fulfillment differences in sailors that were employed
into career same as their bachelor degree and those that were giving different
job responsibility. Like History student or economics heading engineering while
engineering student is heading administrative or food and supply.
In this
circumstances, negotiation will be employ to address the issue. First, I will
meet all the executive members one on one prior to the general debate on the
issue. Showing them my fact and proof of the benefits of aligning employee
degree in job placement. This is where my persuasion skill will come in, it is
very easy to persuade individual than a group of people. From experience, when
you meet people one on one, it shows a kind of respect, and that you cherish
their opinion – meaning that you value their integrity and contribution. It is
possible to win seven out of ten prior to the general deliberation.
In most cases,
some of them will even tell you who to meet to properly channel your course for
approval. Roberto corroborated this when he said that “a high degree of mutual
respect among team members tends to enhance their ability to disagree with one
another in a constructive manner. Individuals listen more carefully and give
more weight to opposing view if they value the capabilities and expertise of
their colleagues and if they high regard for the manner fellow team members
tend to conduct themselves” (2009, p.122-123).
To address
conflict at different stages, first I will brief the people working closely to
the information source the purpose of my findings, second, I will use those
that will benefit from the change by requesting data within their reach to
buttress my point. These people will be overjoyed to be a contributor to a
movement that will benefit them, and release any information within their
reach. Thirdly, I will give individual that I met and are supportive roles to
play at the general discussion, so that I won’t be the only one talking. Set a
ground rules that we must all abide by during the deliberation, reframe
opposition’s point of view instead of been defensive when confronted. Roberto inferred
that “instead of rejecting their hardline position, you treat it as an
informative contribution to the discussion (2009, p.125).
Genuine
persuasive process will require research and investigation so that those who
might have been hurt by direct confrontation during the deliberation are
comforted. Such reconciliation will repair wounds to secure the deliberation
from further or future conflict during implementation stage. Roberto argued “if
leaders discover that some fallout has taken place after a difficult debate…
They need to address those issues head on before another contentious decision
process takes place (2009, p. 133). This action will assure one voice, because
all that silent to avoid further confrontation may nurse a saboteurs ideas that
will disrupt the whole deliberation if not recognize and take care of
immediately after the deliberation.
Analyzing Groups
We can do much
more with are team – Shawn Shatten. If we have this thought we will use every
means to maintain harmony by resolving conflict within our working group to
maximize opportunities. In the Deutsch large-group methods for dealing with
change and conflict, under that method that create the future, the model I like
most is future search that create a future vision for the organization. This
group will search the past, present and future and set format for the action
planning of the organization. They will involve stakeholder participation,
minimize differences, search for common ground, self-managed small groups.
Deutsch et al. inferred future search begins with a statement of purpose from
the sponsors, and then everyone is asked to participate at their tables in an
activity that reviews the history of the community, the world, and each person
over the past thirty years (2014, p.925). The purpose of every change is to
meet up with the global demand to remain in business in the competitive market
and maximize profit. Whitney pointed out that “The new millennium brings with it a context of
globalization and a demand for organization development processes that engage
large numbers of people, on line, and in person simultaneously in the co-creation
of our shared future (1998).
Under
methods for work design, the model I like most is participative design. Here,
the process is bottom up, where each unit will design, coordinates, and
controls its own work. Management responsibility is the norm using six design
principle to redesign work. There is always joy of inclusive where members have
the opportunities to contribute, it usually enhances trust of fairness. McGarry
inferred that the bottom-up approach in large-group method for work design
assume every development organization must first completely understand its
process, products, software characteristics, and goals before it can select a
changes meant to improve its process (1994). This is corroborated by Deutsche
et al that the underlying principle here again is that there is a great deal of
wisdom and experience in the people who do the work and deliver the service
(2014, p.931).
The third
method is the method for discussion and decision making where a conversational
process that helps a group explore an important issue by overarching theme or
question to be explore. The most important thing of this model is that they
listen to diverse viewpoints and suspending premature judgement encouraged.
Brown and Isaacs pointed out that this method is useful in settings with
potential conflict because it does not allow people to cluster in their
interest group, but continually expose them to different viewpoints in a very
personal and relational setting” (Deutsch,2014, p.936).
My four
stage plan will look like this, preparation; I will define the purpose of
deliberation, give a set rules that will guide over discussion. Second stage, I
will encourage building relationship with the other party, here they will
introduce themselves and make sure we have all necessary representative to
ensure trust. Third, exchanging information to know each other better for
better negotiation. The forth one, inventing and exploring options to give room
for flexibility and “uncompromising stance on resolving the interests that
motivated the negotiation (Deutsch, 2014,p.803).
These are the people
that I will involve in the change process in navy; Commander naval education and training command, Naval education and
training command, Naval education and training command force master chief petty
officer, Commander naval service training command, Naval service training command,
command master chief petty officer, Command officer recruiting training
command, Recruiting training command, Command master chief petty officer,
Executive officer recruiting command military training director, Fleet
commander (RTC), Fleet leading chief petty officer (RTC). Some chiefs and first
class petty officers that work directly with the enlisted in the field, their
roles are as follow; all the commanders of training commands will present the
data of all enlisted with college degree that they have recruited in their
various command for the past ten years, as well as data of their counterpart in
officer. In addition, they will provide the financial budget used in training
those candidates for that period. Fleet leading chief petty officer’s role is
to provide the data all his enlisted crew with a college degree that retain
their job for the period of ten years. Show what navy gain or lose in line with
degree holder over that period. The selected chiefs and first class petty
officers’ role are to supply a real figure for those data and realistic
viewpoints of personnel’s attitude to work – both officers and enlisted with
the same degree.
Potential roadblock for
gaining a consensus may be the fear of intimidations; chief, and 1st class
petty officers may be afraid or scare by some executives to speak their mind.
In addition, representatives of affected enlisted may fear that they may lose
their job or being challenged of selfishness and hold reasonable points that
may be very useful. Set rules will help in this scenario to help every
participant to contribute free without fear of any intimidation.
From the larger group
method, the first one that I will use is “’the search conference’ to create a
future vision” (Deutsch et al, 2014, p. 924). This group will set format that
will scan their environment for history, present and future of the navy if we
succeed to implement a changing or retain the present system. We are going to
use the in-house member; no expert will be necessary, make sure we rationalize conflict
and encourage open discussion. Secondly, I will use “’Appreciative inquiry
summit meeting’ to build the future on recognizing and expanding existing
strengths (Deutsch et al, 2014, p.925). These people will use storytelling
method from their daily experiences to strengthen the deliberations. They will
address the system change as needed to support the desired future and plans the
implementation and sustainability of the change outcome.
Reference
Burke, W.
(2014). Organization change: Theory and practice (4th ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Coleman, P., Deutsch, M.,
& Marcus, E. (2014). The handbook of conflict
resolution:
Theory and practice (3rd ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Sage
Publications, E. version.
Lawler,
E.E. III and Porter L.W (1967). The Effect of Performance on Job
Satisfaction. Industrial
Relations. Blackwell Publishing Limited.
Petty
M.M., McGee. G.W., and Cavender, J.W. (1984) A Meta – Analysis of the
Relationship
Between Individual Job Satisfaction
and Individual Performance. Academic of
Management Review, University of Alabama. Vol. 9, No. 4,
712-721.
Martyn, T and
Frank, M. (1994) Top-down vs bottom-up process improvement, IEEE software
11.4 , 12.-13. Retrieved from Walden
University Database.
Roberto, M. (2009). Why great leaders don't take yes for an
answer: Managing for
conflict and consensus. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.
Showers B.
& Joyce B. (2002). The Evolution of Peer coaching. Educational Leadership.
Retrieved from: EBSCO; http://sfxhosted.exlibrisgroup.com/waldenu?sid=google&auinit=B&aulast=Showers&atitle=The+evolution+of+peer+coaching&title=Educational+Leadership&volume=53&date=1996&spage=12&issn=0013-1784
Thomas, D.A.
(2001). The Truth About Mentoring Minorities; Race Matters, Harvard Business
Review
Whitney, D. and
Cooperrider, D.L (1998), The Appreciative inquiry summit: overview and
Applications. Employment relations Today, John Wiley and Sons, inc/Business.
EBSCO
host. Retrieved from Walden
Database.
