Resistance to Changing the Open-Plan Office Approach
- a. Identify the reasons for employees resisting the change to an open-plan office approach.
The employees resisted the idea of changing the open-plan office approach because first of all, it was such an expensive task in building the separate walls within the office premises. The employees suggest that since the firm is firm growing firm, the funds used in dividing the office to a closed office layout could be used in another development project of the office (Smollan and Sayers, J2009 p.435). Through the email, they suggest that the funds to be used in closed office set can be utilized for the purpose of buying more comfortable furniture for the smooth operation of the office. In addition, they said that an open office layout would create a teamwork atmosphere where employees are able to work from side to side and even communicate with their colleagues just from one end to another. This will create a smooth working environment since everyone will be almost working in the same running environments and consultations will be made easier than just going to the closed office layout (Smollan, 2015 p.301).
The employees supported the fact that the open office layout could bring more of creativity since the members will be the inability to consult one another for in case of an issue. Sharing of ideas in an open office layout could be easy and every member will be open to consulting from their colleagues for in case there is an issue that arises. Moreover, an open office will create a socialization environment where all members will be interacting and sharing the ideas. This layout brings about more teamwork and comfortable environments where all members feel comfortable communicating sharing as well working together as a team (Smollan, 2017 p.282). The employees knew the fact that closed office will not bring them together actually it will be individual dealing with activities and fewer interactions will be emphasized. There they disagreed with the idea of bringing out the closed office but supported an open layout plan.
- Explain what the partners might have done better to have minimized the resistance.
For the purpose of minimizing the cases of the resistance, the partners could seek ways through which they could settle the interest of every employee. Looking at the case where some of the employees complained about phone calls with their boyfriends, it is very true that some of the employees will not be so comfortable calling their boyfriends while others are listening. In normal circumstances, no one will like any other person to listen to what one talks with a boyfriend or a girlfriend (Smollan, 2013 p.725). The staff members could have made everything equal. Instead of giving the privilege to high ranked officials to be in closed office layout, it could be an optional plan. They could come up with an idea that the office is categorized in two ways open office layout and closed plan layout. In this case, the partners could give it a freedom that anybody who is willing to work in an open setting is free to do that. This way for those who are willing for the socialization and sharing of the ideas would be fit for the same. They could have taken the position and progress with their comfort zone. Those who wish to work in closed offices for their own confidential; they could be free for the same. This would allow them to do their confidential things like calling their boyfriends without interruptions. The calls in the meeting rooms could be advanced where the room is supposed to have another room for the urgent calls to minimize the complaints from others members about lack of communication confident in the meetings rooms (Smollan, Sayers, 2010 p.28). In the case of high ranked staff lunching in the expense of others while others allowed to lunch in the expensive shops, there could be an equal serving of all members with food in a special dining room for the purpose of equalization of the members. It does not matter even if it will be at expense of all members wishing to have dinner in the office settings. If the partners could emphasize a sort of freedom for the needs of the employees, it could be a more important thing because there would be less complains.
- a. Analyze the barriers to communication (‘noise’) that appear to exist in the law firm.
Benefits of Open Office Layout
In the law firm, there is a need for private communications. The lawyers sometimes need to communicate with their clients in a private manner. In this, it will be a communication barrier in a case whereby the lawyers have no comfortable environment for communication with their client. The office where it opens setting is emphasized in a law firm; the private communication becomes a big challenge (Smollan, 2014 p.794). The lawyers and client would like their information to be kept confidential without spread to other unauthorized personnel. In this case, many members in this open office settings will be in consultations and interactions which in most time leads to high level of noise within the working place. If there will be any lawyers who will need private communication with their client or even other lawyers concerning a confidential matter it will be so difficult (Smollan, 2016p.215).
Noise from other members who could be in their discussion will interrupt their communication or even a member or more could get the information concerning the lawyer’s communication and lure the case. In the meeting areas, communication barriers are more effective. In this zone, there will be a confidential communication between parties (Smollan and Pio, 2017 p.56). The lawyers find it so difficult to receive or make calls in the meeting rooms simply because of noise from discussion members as well as fear for information and secrets expose to other members. In this case, you find that many of the lawyers get had time holding the calls which could be urgent at the moment. The law firm is expected to have a high level of confidentially of information. Noise from members is expected to be minimal. Clients presenting their case may find it difficult to do it in open office where everyone is listening or making some communications and consultations among themselves and there for these being barriers for communication in a law firm.
- Discuss how they could be overcome.
To overcome the issue leading to noise communication barriers there could be set rules and regulation on communication basis in the office setting. First of all, the top staff members would come up with the policy on noise making. No member is supposed to cause an interrupting environment for other members in the office setting by creating unnecessary talks and social issues like discussing the games. Talking of the sports within the law firm should be a serious offense. As it is put in the case study law firm not a joking firm but a serious one. Everyone should be busy dealing with his or her daily routine. There firm should set some private communication rooms where the confidential communications could be made. This will give Lawyers good time to have communication with their clients in the more confidential way (Giæver and Smollan, 2015 p.105). In the sector of open office, the members should be monitored to make sure that they are doing what entails their business. The consultation and communication within the members should be of low tone to make sure that there is no unnecessary noise from the team members. Focusing the case in the meeting rooms, the partners are supported to have set the private rooms for communication of any private calls. The rooms are supposed to be in a separate from the meeting rooms to make sure that there is no noise interruption from the area. Communication barriers can be minimized by constructing another consultation room separated from the other working offices where the clients are able and allowed to present their case to their respective lawyers without any form of noise interruption (Smollan, 2009). All the communication between and among the members within the office should be geared towards the roles of the company. This will minimize the cases of the noise in the firm since all members will work towards the accomplishment of their goals and strategies for the firm.
- a. Discuss the sources of power the partners and others appear to have and the impact this may have on other employees.
Addressing Privacy Concerns in Open Office Setting
Owen Cheetham andJack Wynne believes that being the founder of the firm many years ago, they have power over other members in the firm. They think and believe that they know everything that concerns the firm and therefore every other member is supposed to be below their rank. Owen says directly that they are not equal from other people meaning they had power over the firm planning (Smollan and Parry, 2011 p.435). The two top-ranking staffs consider themselves as special in the firm. This is seen clearly in the case whereby they have lunch at the expense of others in the firm. They visit upmarket restaurants where they have their lunch discussion the progress of the company. Owens is not happy with the news from the memo about the equality of the people within the firm. He even calls them fake news in the memo and says, of course, they are not in the same rank in the firm. By this, he believes that everyone in the firm should recognize them as the most powerful and high ranked founder of the firm. The notion created by the two partners in the firm creates a discomfort and uncomfortable conditions for the members within the firm.
Some of the members in the firm find it a sort of discrimination from the Owen Cheetham andJack Wynne (Smollan, 2012. p. 175). Some of the employees have lost their status in the office and think that the two “fat pigs” have underpinned their responsibilities in the firm. Through this, most of the employees in the firm found that the online booking system is not in a position to work properly. The feeling of having the notion that there are some members who are less powered than you have ruined the progress of the firm and some of the employees find it so difficult to perform their activities in the most convenient way. Other employees will feel less important the firm following the fact in some of the things are discriminated for instance the top-ranked staff takes their lunch in upmarket restaurants and employees are allowed to eat from the shops near the firm which are very expensive. This form of discrimination leads to poor performance of the firm simply because there is no motivation within the workers.
- What influence tactics have been used by some of the partners and employees and how effective might they have been?
Some other partners, for instance, Owens is seen to be worried about the progress of the firm and each time tries to convince the employees and other staff his direction is right. He goes ahead to get the reviews from the kitchen staff regarding the Rugby games (Smollan, 2011 p.828). He is not happy with the response from the kitchen workers that they do not involve in the game. Actually what he is trying to get here not just knowing more rugby game but it is a kind of set up to know whether the kitchen workers focus on their duties or just watching the game. He is very rude in his communication tactics to make sure everybody bow down on him. He is not willing to have anybody else voice above him that is why he uses the tactics of being so harsh and rude in his communication. To make sure that everyone will live his rank of classes he rudely says that they are not equal and in any case, they will not be equal. These are the dictatorship tactics used by some of the leaders to overrule other in any given firm (Kark Smollan, 201 p.399). They have introduced the fine on the employees driving while a drug for the purpose of generating the funds. Owens just fined the way possible to raise the funds from the firm to enroll for his MBA fees. The impacts of tactics used by some partners have some negative impact on the progress of the law. Some of the employees find it so had to work under such environment. The firm is not performing well because the needs of the employees are not catered for. They feel discriminated and lack a sense of participants in the firm. This has impacted to less trust between the partners and employees in the firm. The employees believe that they are overruled by their partners.
References
Giæver, F. and Smollan, R.K., 2015. Evolving emotional experiences following organizational change: a longitudinal qualitative study. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 10(2), pp.105-133.
Kark Smollan, R., 2014. Control and the emotional rollercoaster of organizational change. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 22(3), pp.399-419.
Smollan, R. and Parry, K., 2011. Follower perceptions of the emotional intelligence of change leaders: A qualitative study. Leadership, 7(4), pp.435-462.
Smollan, R. and Pio, E., 2017. Organisational change, identity and coping with stress. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 43(1), p.56.
Smollan, R., 2014. The emotional dimensions of metaphors of change. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(7), pp.794-807.
Smollan, R.K. and Sayers, J.G., 2009. Organizational culture, change and emotions: A qualitative study. Journal of Change Management, 9(4), pp.435-457.
Smollan, R.K., 2009. The emotional rollercoaster of organisational change: affective responses to organisational change, their cognitive antecedents and behavioural consequences: a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Management at Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand(Doctoral dissertation, Massey University).
Smollan, R.K., 2011. The multi-dimensional nature of resistance to change. Journal of Management & Organization, 17(6), pp.828-849.
Smollan, R.K., 2012. Chapter 6 Emotional Responses to the Injustice of Organizational Change: A Qualitative Study. In Experiencing and Managing Emotions in the Workplace (pp. 175-202). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Smollan, R.K., 2013. Trust in change managers: the role of affect. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(4), pp.725-747.
Smollan, R.K., 2015. Causes of stress before, during and after organizational change: a qualitative study. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2), pp.301-314.
Smollan, R.K., 2016. Running hot and cold: How acceptable is emotional expression at work?. International Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion, 1(3), pp.215-231.
Smollan, R.K., 2017. Supporting staff through stressful organizational change. Human Resource Development International, 20(4), pp.282-304.
Smollan, R.K., Sayers, J.G. and Matheny, J.A., 2010. Emotional responses to the speed, frequency and timing of organizational change. Time & Society, 19(1), pp.28-53.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
