Organizational Structure Issues
Organizational change is the overall process of changing the organizational process, procedures, strategies, culture and technologies for dealing with significant organizational issues and bringing improvement in overall organizational progress (Hornstein 2015). However, change initiatives are always likely to face several issues, which can hamper the process of organizational change. In this study, will be dealing with the issues related to the change initiatives of Green Mountain Cellular Telephone Company (GMCT). The general manager of GMCT thought about some changes for meeting the turn-on-target of system operation. Moreover, the study will identify and evaluate the key issues facing the change initiatives at GMCT. Furthermore, the study will also provide some alternative recommendation for bringing successful change in the organization.
Green Mountain Cellular Telephone Company (GMCT) was facing a serious issue of delay in start providing cellular services to the customers. The general manager of the company Erik Peterson was responsible for checking solving this problem. However, at each step, Peterson faced problems in his change initiatives towards solving the genuine issue turn-on-target of the company.
The first problem, which can be highlighted in the change initiatives of Peterson, was the problem of organizational structure. On arriving on Hanover, Peterson had realized that had to report to Jeff Hardy instead of Jenkins. Hardy had never any experience in system operating. Consequently, Peterson was unable to get any support and advice, which could be specific to the problem. According to Kuusela, Keil and Maula (2017), effective organizational structure follows smooth flow of information between upper level and lower level managers dealing with the serious issues of organization. Furthermore, the conflicting relationship among different levels of managers ultimately hampers the main organizational focus (Shah, Irani and Sharif 2017). Likewise, in GMCT, there was a conflicting relationship between the Peterson and Hardy in regards to solving the issue of delay in turn-on-date. Furthermore, Hardy was not also able to provide any specific advice to Peterson for resolving the issue. Hence, Peterson faced issue in his further thinking to take the change initiatives. On the other hand, Al-Haddad and Kotnour (2015) opined that unambiguous relationship between the managers of difference hierarchy leads to shift of organizational focus from the main concern. Likewise, ambiguous relation between Hardy and Peterson hindered their ability to focus on their change initiatives.
Upon arrival on Hanover, Peterson discovered that initial construction of cellular tower was several weeks behind the schedule. Moreover, the construction of cellular tower was being performed by a subcontractor, who would never be able to meet the turn-on-target because of their slow rate of working. The organization was also receiving increasing numbers of complaints from the locality, as the subcontractor was cutting the privately owned tree and property. In such situation, Peterson wanted to replace the subcontractor and contact a new construction company for the betterment of construction of cellular tower. However, the management of the head quarter of GMCT was reluctant for this decision. This issue was related to resistance to change on the part of management body.
Resistance to Change
According to Lord, Dinh and Hoffman (2015), organizational members are often resistant to change because of the fear of faulty implementation approach. Likewise, the management body was unsupportive to Peterson in terms of replacing the subcontractor, as they assumed replacing them can lead to increasing issues. On the other hand, Cordery et al. (2015) opined that organizational members often agree with the change, but they do not agree with the way of changing. Likewise, the management of GMCT was initially not agreed with the decision of replacing subcontractor. However, the general manager ultimately convinced the management for his decision, but it quite delayed the overall process of change.
The general manager found difficulties in getting his chief engineer, Cart Andrew, who was responsible for planning and ensure smooth supplying of equipments for the cellular system. Moreover, the general manager indentified that Curt had difficulties in handling and planning the aspects of chief engineer’s job. He realized that the chief engineer had no administrative ability and not prior knowledge for starting up a brand new operation. Hence, Peterson wanted to replace Curt with someone, who had more start up experience and pre-operating experience. However, the management of the organization was unwilling to replace Curt, with a wrong interpretation of Curt’s performance for handling the start up. According to Kwiatkowski (2017), issues of interpretation occur, when two individual come different conclusion regarding same stimuli. Likewise, the performance level of Curt was interpreted differently by Peterson and management of Los Angeles. Such conflicting views can lead to conflicting organizational decision. Moreover, the management did not also replace Curt, which was ultimately hampered the overall process of change.
Peterson also highlighted the issue of conflicting and ineffective organizational culture of GMCT, which was highly responsible for creating issues in change process. Moreover, with the conflicting relationship of the new employees with Curt hindered their ability to concentrate fully on their peak performance. Apart from that, the salary difference between Todd, the supervisor of radio engineering and Trevor, the supervisor of customer relationship department. Moreover, despite of being almost at same level, effective worker and cooperative, Todd was drawing 20% less salary than Trevor, which was quite frustrating to Todd.
According to Elstak et al. (2015), effective organizational culture gives a sense of equality to all the employees of organization, which motivate the employees towards better performance. However, inequality in the compensation structure of GMCT led to ineffective organization culture, which hindered the ability of the employees to participate fully in change process. On the other hand, Cullen et al. (2014) opined that cooperation between the employers and employees leads to cooperative and collative organizational culture, which encourage the employees in organizational success. However, despite of trying to change the behaviour of Curt, Peterson failed to change his negative attitude, which ultimately hampered the process of change.
Organizational Culture
Peterson wanted to make agreement with the local government for using the fire department’s communication tower as GMCT cell site in neighbouring town. He was feared that, if he angered the fire department, he may face zoning problems in the towns. For this, he had been promise free phones and cellular services to the fire, police and emergency service operation. Moreover, fire department tower was extremely important for the overall design of cellular system of GMCT. However, hardy was unwilling to sign such agreement with local governments. Hardy had very unrealistic image of the local situation. Moreover, he was only concerned about the budget and return of investment.
According to Lockett et al. (2014), sensemaking based on prediction leads to understanding of situation preceding the explanation and it requires less input. Likewise, Hardy predicted the local situation based on wrong sensemaking process, which led to delay in public relation for the overall execution of the system. On the other hand, Ala-Laurinaho, Kurki and Abildgaard (2017) opined that sensemaking often lead to prediction of situation without either understanding or explanation, which undermines the real issues behind the situation. Likewise, Hardy’s wrong sensemaking undermined the issues of public reputation associated with GMCT. In this way, Peterson faced in initiating the changes in public relation with the local government.
GMCT is recommended to improve their organizational structure for better implementing their cellular system within turn-on-target. Moreover, the organization should frame flat organizational structure instead of framing matrix organizational structure. In such organizational structure, Peterson, the General Manager of GMCT will be able to employ his own ideas and concepts for the betterment of service instead of any hindrance from the upper managers, who do not have any experience in system operating. On the other hand, the organization can also improve its organizational culture for bringing equality among the employees. The feel of fairness among the employees will lead them to perform better towards completing the whole system operating process within turn-on-target.
The management of GMCT should overcome their resistance to change in some aspects for bring progress in the system operating of cellular service. Moreover, the management should understand the value of change towards adding value in completing the project within deadline. It will help Peterson to employ right construction company for building cellular tower. However, it can be costly for the organization, which will ultimately increase the overall cost of the project to build cellular tower. Moreover, the organization is recommended to understand the value of change and make their organizational culture for adapting those changes towards start providing service within turn-on-target
Conclusion
While concluding the study, Peterson, the General Manager of GMCT, faced extreme issue in implementing the change with the changes in organizational structure. Moreover, Peterson faced extremely issues in reporting to Hardy, who had no experience in system operating. The general manager did not get any advice in making change for completing the project within time. On the other hand, the organizational culture of GMCT was not also supportive to Peterson, which hindered him in many aspects of his change initiatives. Hence, GMCT is recommended to improve their organizational structure, organizational culture and overcome the resistance to change by understanding the real value of organizational change.
Reference List
Ala-Laurinaho, A., Kurki, A.L. and Abildgaard, J.S., 2017. Supporting sensemaking to promote a systemic view of organizational change–contributions from activity theory. Journal of Change Management, 17(4), pp.367-387.
Al-Haddad, S. and Kotnour, T., 2015. Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2), pp.234-262.
Cordery, J.L., Cripps, E., Gibson, C.B., Soo, C., Kirkman, B.L. and Mathieu, J.E., 2015. The operational impact of organizational communities of practice: A Bayesian approach to analyzing organizational change. Journal of management, 41(2), pp.644-664.
Cullen, K.L., Edwards, B.D., Casper, W.C. and Gue, K.R., 2014. Employees’ adaptability and perceptions of change-related uncertainty: Implications for perceived organizational support, job satisfaction, and performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(2), pp.269-280.
Elstak, M.N., Bhatt, M., Van Riel, C., Pratt, M.G. and Berens, G.A., 2015. Organizational identification during a merger: The role of self?enhancement and uncertainty reduction motives during a major organizational change. Journal of Management Studies, 52(1), pp.32-62.
Hornstein, H.A., 2015. The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), pp.291-298.
Kuusela, P., Keil, T. and Maula, M., 2017. Driven by aspirations, but in what direction? Performance shortfalls, slack resources, and resource?consuming vs. resource?freeing organizational change. Strategic Management Journal, 38(5), pp.1101-1120.
Kwiatkowski, C., 2017. Effective Communication as a Major Key to Successful Organizational Change. Journal of Quality and Environmental Studies, 7(2), pp.22-29.
Lockett, A., Currie, G., Finn, R., Martin, G. and Waring, J., 2014. The influence of social position on sensemaking about organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 57(4), pp.1102-1129.
Lord, R.G., Dinh, J.E. and Hoffman, E.L., 2015. A quantum approach to time and organizational change. Academy of Management Review, 40(2), pp.263-290.
Shah, N., Irani, Z. and Sharif, A.M., 2017. Big data in an HR context: Exploring organizational change readiness, employee attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Business Research, 70, pp.366-378.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
