Module Name- Managing Organizational Change

Word Count-2977

Coursework Question:

Critically evaluate the implementation of a specific case of organizational change. Building

on this, reflect on what you can personally learn from this case analysis about change
management and how you might benefit from these insights in the future.

Introduction:

People who work on the night shift at Washdale Manufacturing were acting in a
"unacceptable" way, so the company made changes (Dawson & Andriopoulos, 2017). The
night shift workers changed their tasks and duties so that they could have a "sleep time" in
their schedule. The "sleep time" additional to the night shift workers' schedules caused
machines to breakdown. The machines were used beyond their capacity for the first hour in
order to meet their goals. Machines broke down while management was looking into them.
They confirmed the "sleep time" schedule in the night shift workers' schedule. In the last
few years, management has made it more difficult for people to do the right thing at work.
They were pressured to do this by their coworkers, and they had little to no other options.
It's been a good thing that management has been talking about this. Most employees, both
on the night and day shifts, have said they're happy that the "inappropriate" work behavior
has been changed.

When businesses develop development objectives, they often consider the practicality of
adopting change; yet, this is a difficult process to navigate. The ability to effectively manage
change is a vital skill that businesses must master in order to guarantee that the particular
changes are properly accepted by all stakeholders and that the changes result in the desired
end. This debate will look at the Washdale Night Shift case as a way of determining whether
or not the move was well organized and implemented. It will be crucial to demonstrate the
significance of context in evaluating the unfolding processes of change by drawing on
frameworks such as the Dawson processual approach. Specifically, it will consider the
compelling reason for the change, which was that the night shift employees were fired
because the business could no longer tolerate their unseemly conduct. Although the
adjustment was made in accordance with Jabri's participatory dialogical method, no
discourse took place in order to tackle the problem. It will be utilized instead to illustrate
how the change agents (the management) used their authority to affect the change inside
their company. The change was undertaken by the Washdale management despite strong
opposition from the impacted workers; nonetheless, the requirement for behavior change,
supported by the processual approach, ensured that the process was successful. The
management was thus not justified in firing the night shift personnel since the breakthrough
had been bolstered by controlling the organization's capacity to cope with opposition and
execute the change.

Review/Analysis of the Case :

Managing change, without a question, can be a daunting undertaking for any firm.
According to Dawson and Andriopolous (2017), the Dawson's processual approach
framework asserts that change is a multifaceted process that is subjectively experienced. A
business should determine the precise dynamics that govern how change will be executed.
Managing change is inherently difficult, given that it entails maintaining numerous variables
in flux (Dawson & Andriopolous, 2017).

Management Justification in its Decision to Sack the Night Shift :

Hybridization, pro-active change, and the kaleidoscope theory of change :Kaleidoscope

change theory has three ring organizational change contexts, contextual aspects, and
implementation characteristics (Muravu, N. 2020). Washday's reengineering team and the
company's senior management were responsible for the overhaul of the company's
business processes.

The foundation of hegemonic power is a set of shared ideas and beliefs that are not formally
acknowledged. Hegemonic power can only be defeated by its manifestation, making any
effort to fight it futile. Due to the hegemonic dominance, there is no pushback to its
expressions. In terms of resistance, coercive power resembles hegemonic power. In order to
use coercive force, one must have the authorization to do so. Few examples of resistance to
the demonstrations of coercive authority exist, maybe due to apprehensions about
noncompliance.
Machiavellianism management, as proposed by Vladu (2013), may result in the
establishment of a false best practice in an organization as a result of hegemonic
dominance. Machiavellianism management is characterized by the promotion of short-term
gains at the price of ethical value in a company. It is possible that, in the context of
hegemonic power, a communal endorsement of Machiavellian tactics would result in the
establishment of hegemonic power. Because there is no official acknowledgement of a
hegemonic power, most expressions that relate to this power are recognized as suitable or
improper reactions, depending on the situation (Mastio & Dovey, 2019). Therefore, the
abstract authority provided by hegemonic dominance may result in the establishment of
bogus best practices inside an organization.

Even in the common behaviors of night shift workers, hegemonic authority was evident, as
proven by the fact that all night shift employees were "forced" to include "sleep time" into
their separate timetables (Mastio & Dovey, 2019; Dawson & Andriopolous, 2017). It is
reasonable to believe that this power was established as a result of the primary advantage
of "sleep time" in the night shift at the price of the company's machinery failing. In essence,
this is a textbook example of a Machiavellian behavior that has been transformed into
hegemonic authority (Vladu, 2013; Mastio & Dovey, 2019). Nygaard et al. (2017) concluded
that coercive power is counterproductive in terms of promoting corporate ethics and
removing improper conduct in reaction to the dynamics of power. Washdale Manufacturing,
despite this conclusion, does not seem to support it in this instance. Washdale
Manufacturing wanted to identify and execute a solution in order to avoid incurring extra
expenditures as a result of machine wear and tear that was not essential. Employees on the
night shift were subjected to coercive measures in order to remove their unacceptable
conduct. This was also warmly received by the vast majority of workers, particularly day
shift employees and maybe night shift employees who were "forced" to embrace the "nap
time" practice by their superiors. In Washdale Manufacturing, there are a significant
number of workers who have less Machiavellian tendencies, which might explain this
(Vladu, 2013; Dawson & Andriopoulos, 2017). In a sense, this vindicates the choice of the
management to take action against the night shift personnel.

How the Management’s decision Defies the Participative Dialogical Approach:

The management at Washdale Company disregarded the participative dialogical method by
failing to provide an opportunity for communication with affected employees. Jabri (2012)
emphasized that change is a socially constructed process that occurs over time as
participants engage in talks. Participants should be given sufficient time to consider their
roles in the change and be prepared to adapt to whatever components are implemented.
Frequently, a desirable language that takes into account the plight of all parties is preferred.
In this instance, a participatory strategy is taken in order to incorporate everyone's
perspective on the modification. Dawson (2014) emphasizes that any change that is initiated
through dialogue is highly likely to make sense to those who are prepared, thereby
increasing their readiness for change. It is critical to emphasize that a participatory approach
fosters the correct environment, which is certain to lessen resistance to change. In the
Washdale night shift case, management found at responsible for imposing its judgments
without extensive engagement with employees. The workers lacked a discussion platform
that would have enabled them to participate in the impending transition. Without a doubt,
they would have embraced the new developments and adapted their behavior to fit the
new strategy's requirements.

When it comes to Machiavellian concepts, Vladu's (2013) interpretation claimed that

individuals, namely workers in an organization, exhibit Machiavellian inclinations. It is
possible that some persons have more Machiavellian inclinations than others, and that
others do not. Regardless, it is still a problem in the workplace, particularly when it is
allowed. In order to get a minor, but "harmless," profit, a stronger Machiavellian propensity
suggests that the individual has a high tolerance for sacrificing ethical business procedures.

There is unquestionably an ethical problem with the "sleep time" habit of night shift
personnel, and this should be addressed (Dawson & Andriopoulos, 2017). However, in the
instance of Washdale Manufacturing, the Machiavellian scale of gauging whether an
employee has strong inclinations or not does not typically apply since the company is a small
one (Dawson & Andriopoulos, 2017; Vladu, 2013). According to the evidence presented in
the lawsuit, many people working the night shift were "forced" to adhere to the group's
identity by peer pressure. As a result of the commercial methods that were universally
"accepted," it is reasonable to believe that this was impacted by a hegemonic power that
was established (Mastio & Dovey, 2019). This may show that the scale does not merely
assess “unethical” action, but also the factors that caused it.

The fact that most workers knew about it but didn't tell management is also unethical.
Following the results of the night shift group's “unethical” actions, it is likely that these
spectators are likewise affected by an abstract hegemonic authority (Mastio & Dovey, 2019).
As previously stated, the scale alone cannot be used to this group of persons; power must
also be taken into consideration.

Management is a “Blood Sport” :

Political strategies, the use of power, and Machiavellian practices all play a role in change
management at times in an organization. It can't always be helped (Vladu, 2013). People
who write about change management in 2008 say that it's like a "blood sport." In the end, it
all comes down to the circumstances of the change management and how far an
organization will go to make a goal happen, a change. Also, it's interesting to see that
Machiavellian practices that use power and political strategies often lead to resistance to
change, which leads to the use of these tactics and strategies in the first place.
If you use the case of Washdale Manufacturing, it can be seen that there is some kind of
power that comes from having employees who work night shifts follow "sleep time" rules
(Dawson & Andriopoulos, 2017). People who support "sleep time" may have used a political
strategy to get this change into the night shift workers' practices, even though it wasn't
stated in the facts of the case. This has turned what was supposed to be an ethical thing into
something that isn't supposed to be done in order to reach personal goals. Politics and
playing the "sport" have also been used to bring about changes that might not have been as
bad at first. Then, it is clear because so many people made "sleep time" a part of their
schedules.

The Pros and Cons :The Kotter 8 steps model has the steps that leads change in an
organization (Kotter, J.P. 1995/2007).Buchanan and Badham (2008) contend that managers,
as change agents, it's important to get involved in the politics of change management. It is
said that those who know how to play the "sport" from a political aspect may take
advantage of the weak. "Sport" enthusiasts will benefit from this as they continue their
pursuit of knowledge.It's also worth noting that Buchanan and Badham (2008) include the
Machiavellian management approach in their work. According to Vladu (2013), most
individuals exhibit Machiavellian inclinations. According to Buchanan and Badham (2008),
those with stronger Machiavellian inclinations must be able to employ Machiavellian
methods to attain their goals. In these cases, there will be some stuck between two teams
playing the "sport," and they will be forced to choose which side has the larger hegemonic
strength, which they subconsciously want to be a part of.

The “Pros” of This Stance :Kumar and Thibodeaux (1990) stated that an organization's use of
politics and power might lead to the successful implementation of change management
strategies. Resistance to change is frequently overcome by the application of power and
political techniques. When developing a strategy, it is important to consider "engaging"
individuals who will be directly affected by the change. This is done by taking advantage of
that information. In a game of poker, there is a well-known phrase that you should play the
type rather than the cards.

The “Cons” of This Stance : Offered any use of political strategies in an organization,
Machiavellian practices that may be unethical at best can be opened up (Vladu, 2013; Kumar
& Thibodeaux, 1990). It's a competition between people who play the game, and some people
win and some people lose. When there is a lot of resistance to change, it may be hard to reach
an all-win situation for everyone, with no compromises, without having to make any. Some
people will have to give in to an unethical practice because they are afraid of what will
happen if they don't follow the rules.

Conclusion:
Hegemonic managerial authority can be both advantageous and detrimental to a business.
Hegemonic power is a term that refers to a form of power that derives from an abstract
source (Mastio & Dovey, 2019). Hegemonic power exerts sway over a particular sort of
behavior, regardless of whether it is deemed ethical or unethical. In some ways, this
contradicts Vladu's (2013) notion of Machiavellian inclinations with hegemonic power
outweighing all other tendencies, regardless of their magnitude. In light of Buchanan and
Badham's (2008) assertion that management is a "blood sport," the application of
hegemonic power in a political strategy for controlling resistance to change may be
extremely beneficial. The application of power and political methods can result in a
successful change management effort.

It's also worth noting that Machiavellian techniques can have an effect on management's
hegemonic power (Vladu, 2013). For those with stronger Machiavellian tendencies,
Machiavellian activities sometimes emphasize short-term rewards that may not have "bad"
side consequences. Employees with stronger tendencies may promote their causes for
change and may even achieve hegemonic power. This may result in greater harm on a
broader scale if the power gained by unethical behavior is used to devise change
management tactics.

Exploring the decision through political entrepreneurial approach:

It is possible to assess the Washdale management shift from Buchanan and Badham's
political entrepreneurial approach. The theory proposes that, in order to wield real power,
individuals with the ability to affect social change must increasingly rely on the services of
change agents (Buchanan & Badham, 2008). According on how they are implemented, a
change agent's job might be legal or illegitimate. Extensive and representative engagement
may be used to achieve change more effectively, according to this paradigm (Buchanan
Badham, 2020). Decisions that appeal to everyone are based on these principles. Night shift
management, on the other hand, lacked both of these characteristics when it made the
choice without a comprehensive participatory framework. Employees should be consulted
in the development of a new change plan by management. As an example, it may have
included representatives from both the day and the night shifts. That night shift workers
were fired because of their lack of cooperation was a clear violation of Buchanan and
Badham's paradigm. It is possible that a political entrepreneurship strategy may have been
adopted in light of the decision's extreme character; for example, a behavior repertoire
could be crucial in generating the right image of what's to come (Bjorkman and Sundgren,
2005). Self-interested management was exposed by a lack of attention given to this
dimension.

Summary:

Management's hegemonic power implies that this style of management uses abstract power
to affect behavior (Mastio & Dovey, 2019). Although Washdale Manufacturing's
management did not impose this form of authority, it was represented in the firm in a
different manner by forcing night shift workers to observe the "sleep time" routine (Dawson
& Andriopoulos, 2017). Due to the effect of hegemonic power, Machiavellian inclinations,
whether low or high, were no longer regarded in whatever practice the night shift personnel
desired to pursue. It made little difference if night shift personnel did not wish to adhere to
"sleep time" procedures. In other ways, they were never given the opportunity to challenge
this practice because they were afraid of the repercussions of not adhering to it. To rectify
this behavior, management used their coercive authority. As a consequence, the elimination
of the "nap time" practice delighted most workers with fewer Machiavellian inclinations.
Employees who have voiced their relief are unable to communicate their opposition
because they are afraid of the consequences of a non-conformist behavior.

The story of Washdale Manufacturing reveals an intriguing view on management's

hegemonic authority and Machiavellian management, and how both might be employed to
bring about effective change management. Political techniques and the use of power,
regardless of whether the motivations for change management are ethical or immoral, are
instruments that may be used to manage opposition to change. Perhaps the most difficult
hurdle to effective change management is resistance to change. Political techniques and
power may be utilized to handle opposition and lead to effective change management.

References

Agboola, A.A. and Salawu, R.O. 2(011) Managing deviant behavior and resistance to change.
International Journal of Business and Management. 6(1), p.235

Balogun, J., and Hope Hailey, V. (2008) Exploring Strategic Change, 3rd ed, London, Prentice

Hall [Accessed: 16 January, 2021].

Buchanan, D., & Badham, R. (2008). Power, politics, and organizational change: Winning the
turf game. Sage Publications.

Buchanan, D.A., and Badham, R.J. (2008) Power, Politics, and Organizational Change.
Winning the Turf Game. (2nd edn). London: Sage.

rd
Dawson, P., & Andriopoulos, C. (2017). Managing change, creativity, and innovation (3
ed.) Sage Publications

Mastio, E., & Dovey, K. (2019). Power dynamics in organizational change: an Australian case.
The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 39(9), 796-811.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-07-2019-0142

Nygaard, A., Biong, H., Silkoset, R., & Kidwell, R. E. (2017). Leading by example: values-based
strategy to instill ethical conduct: JBE. Journal of Business Ethics, 145(1), 133-139.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2885-9

Zapposinsights.com. 2021. Holacracy & Self-Organization | About | Zappos Insights.

[Online] Available at: <https://www.zapposinsights.com/about/holacracy> [Accessed

22 January 2021].