Rebuttal HC2 team favour OP

The thought of Change is inevitable is so correct and appropriate, but the ways to adapt those changes are indispensable for successful implementation of reform. Every point and aspect put forward by the HC2 team to the best of our knowledge by the points mentioned in their post we redefined it as following:

Who moved my cheese

The premise of who moved my cheese “if you do not change you become extinct.” It was written
in the wall of the maze in the story. Change initiatives always bring out resistance in individual team members. People have complex emotions and feelings attached to their job. Most job seekers look for job stability, and benefits. Coincidently those that constantly seek security are the ones who are riddled with worry about losing it. Hem and Haw learn that learning to face your fears is quite freeing (2010, Johnson).

In facing resistance, it is the Managers and Team Leaders responsibility to stop the resistance in their tracks.  Wouldn’t it be the leader’s job to create mass buy-in? When dealing with resistance to change have you considered a lack of knowledge? I work for Fraser Health as well, and we have run across this many times and found the strength to be an education gap. If you look at Bridges Change Model, it explains that people experience a change in three phases, Losing, the neutral zone and the new beginning. Not all people will experience each period at the same time. Resistance can be expressed in both the losing phase and the neutral zone.  Once an employee has genuinely let go of the old ways, accepted the new style only then can they move onto the new beginning phase (2017, Bridges).

Change is a part of life, and we must adapt to it regularly as it arises. Hem and Haws’ story is a good one but if don’t change you don’t become extinct, stagnant and behind the times, yes, but not gone.

“Don’t Just Focus on Senior Leaders…Involved middle managers and keep them engaged.”

The Health Angels discussed the strategy of involving middle managers and keeping them engaged, saying without the engagement of the middle manager, the change initiative is doomed to fail. Their argument has merit – middle managers are the striking face of organizational leadership to frontline staff. However, the Health Angels fail to mention the effect of other factors which may hamper leader’s efforts to effect change.

One such factor is the influence of a union. Union-management relationships can often be adversarial (Hoffman & Brown, 2016). Management’s goals are to deliver results, while the union believes management sees the collective as a hindrance (Furlong, 2011). Management also perceives union leadership members as “working for somebody else,” when they are still employees of the organization (Furlong, 2017).   As such, management and unions may feel “like an arranged or forced marriage without the option of divorce” (McCorriston, 2013). Vancouver Coastal Health has employees who belong to different unions, such as the Hospital Employees Union and the British Columbia Nurses Union. Based on personal experience, the shop stewards often held much influence, sometimes even more than managers and leaders.

Union-management collaboration can increase productivity, product quality, and employee satisfaction, as well as decrease employee turnover (Ostrowsky, 2005). Workers feel they have a voice while management sees a heightened sense of involvement and ownership (Mahan et al., 2018). There is a need to cultivate these relationships, which require extensive training, open communication, and joint decisions (Furlong, 2017).

Another factor is the nature of the middle manager’s position. Middle managers, by their very name, have the unique position of being both a “victim” and a “carrier” of change (Giangreco & Peccei, 2005). Change targets the function of the middle manager, making her a victim, while the middle manager must echo these changes to frontline staff, making her a carrier.  Anicich & Hirsh (2017) conclude “middle managers often find themselves stuck in between various stakeholder groups, which can produce relentless and conflicting demands.” Middle managers may be at higher risk for burnout and turnover, bringing into question their effectiveness as they may not remain in their positions for long – Anicich & Hirsh (2017) say middle managers are at higher risk for hypertension, heart disease, stress, anxiety, and disrupted cognitive performance.

To conclude, middle manager engagement is important but does not adequately explain failed initiatives initiated from senior leadership. Other factors such as the union and the nature of middle management may contribute to the failure to change.

“Take aggressive action to avoid the commitment dip.”

We believe HC2 organization needs to have a consultation on their progression. Articulating the elements and assisting with the various tools required to clarify the objective of the HC2 organization.

Committed employees bring added value to the organization, including their determination and proactive support, high productivity and an awareness of quality. Non- the committed employee can work against the organization and hold back the organization success.

The best way for organizations to thrive in the face of this new reality is to become continual learning engines. In practical terms, that means, the organizational strategy, the vision, the directions, and the tactics adopted to move toward success—ought to be held in an ongoing state of formulation, implementation, reassessment, and revision (Hughes, Beatty, & Dinwoodie, 2014, p.4). “Implementation entails collective (or conjoint) action among interdependent individuals and work units. Coordinating action across many individuals and groups and promoting organizational learning are good examples of collective (or conjoint) capabilities” (Weiner, 2009). It’s the kind that makes decisions and takes action not just to boost the organization’s current performance but also to strengthen the organization’s future effectiveness and competitiveness. Therefore, the organization learns and enhances its capabilities in the VUCA world. It is the iteration over time (Hughes et al., 2014, P. 21). And it is a learning process involved everyone in the organization. It requires to model behaviors that support the change, and adopt the servant leadership approach to leverage organizational members to collaborate and bring the best of their employees as a whole towards the change. 

As Bandura and others noted, “efficacy judgments refer to action capabilities; efficacy judgments are neither outcome expectancies nor assessments of knowledge, skills, or resources. Change efficacy is higher when people share a sense of confidence that collectively they can implement a complex organizational change” (as cited in Weiner, 2009).

“Servant leadership is considered as a controllable independent variable that affects the dependent variable of organizational performance.” (Aij & Rapsaniotis, (2017).

Are the mindsets of people in the organization ready for something new and different?

The theory described in Weiner’s article (2009) treats organizational readiness as a shared psychological state in which corporate members feel committed to implementing an organizational change and confidence in their collective abilities to do so. Therefore, thinking about organizational readiness is best suited for examining regulatory changes where collective behavior change is necessary to implement the change effectively and, in some instances, for the shift to producing anticipated benefits.

 So, change is a shared team property-that is, a shared psychological state in which organizational members feel committed to implementing an organizational change and confidence in their collective abilities to do so. This way of thinking about organizational readiness is best suited for regulatory changes where joint, coordinated behavior change is necessary to implement the change effectively and, in some instances, for the shift to producing anticipated benefits. In Weiner’s theory (2009), resources and other structural attributes of organizations do not enter directly into the definition of readiness. Instead, they represent an important class of performance determinants that organizational members consider in formulating change efficacy judgments. This view is consistent with Bandura’s (as cited in Weiner, 2009) contention that efficacy judgments focus on generative capabilities–that is, the ability to mobilize resources and orchestrate courses of action to produce a skillful performance.

Stay Focused During 3 Months

The Health Angels support the idea that “Stay focused during the first three months…success depends on it.” To adopt a change, a person needs to make a new habit because a change of behavior is not just enough. As stated by Clear (n.d.), “On average, it takes more than two months before a new behavior becomes automatic — 66 days to be exact. And how long it takes a new habit to form can vary widely depending on the behavior, the person, and the circumstances. In Lally’s study, it took anywhere from 18 days to 254 days for people to form a new habit.”

There is a perfect example of how an only change in behavior can affect the success as there are thousands of students coming to Canada for their studies, but not every one of them can be able to make it to the end. Some, of them, end up by going back to their home Country as they failed to make it a habit to adapt to this significant change of their life. But it is true that adapting to that change is becoming necessary these days as stated by Goldsmith (2016) “Life can be difficult to navigate in our fast-moving society. Things are changing so quickly these days that by the time you’ve opened the box of your new cell phone, it’s probably out of date.”  So, it is no harm to adapt to change, but changing behavior only is not just enough.

There is another argument put forward by Health angels that “…daily reminders in the form of mail or a short text message.” It is true that encouragement is necessary to adopt any change but at the same time, poking them and reminding them on a daily basis could be frustrating. It might appear to be more like implementing change on them rather than helping them to adopt it.

References:

Aij Kh, Rapsaniotis S. (2017). Leadership requirements for Lean versus servant leadership in health care: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Healthcare Leadership. 9,.1-14. doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S120166

Anicich, E., & Hirsch, J. (2017). Why being a middle manager is so exhausting. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2017/03/why-being-a-middle-manager-is-so-exhausting

Bridges, W. (2017). Managing transitions: Making the most of change. Place of publication not identified: Da Capo.

Clear, J. (n.d), How Long Does it take to form a New Habit? Behavioral Psychology, Habits. Retrieved from: https://jamesclear.com/new-habit   

Furlong, G. (2011). Cultivating effective management-union relationships in the unionized workplace. Retrieved from https://irc.queensu.ca/articles/cultivating-effective-management-union-relationships-unionized-workplace

Furlong, G. (2017). Best practices for the union-management relationship in the workplace. Retrieved November 9th, 2018, from https://irc.queensu.ca/articles/best-practices-union-management-relationship-workplace

Giangreco, A., & Peccei, R. (2005). The nature and antecedents of middle manager resistance to change: evidence from an Italian context. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(10), 1812–1829. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500298404

Giangreco, A., & Peccei, R. (2005). The nature and antecedents of middle manager resistance to change: evidence from an Italian context. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(10), 1812–1829. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500298404

Goldsmith, B. (2016). Adapting to Change, Positive Changes can be as difficult to accept as negative ones. Psychology Today. Retrieved from: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/emotional-fitness/201603/adapting-change

Hoffman, R. C., & Brown, M. O. (2016). Employee ownership and union labor: the case of United Steel Workers of America. Labor History, 58(3), 350–371. Retrieved November 9th, 2018, Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/0023656x.2017.1255540

Hughes, R. L., Beatty, Collarelli-Beatty, K., & Dinwoodie, D. L. (2014). Becoming a strategic leader: Your role in your organization’s enduring success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Johnson, S., Bracken, B., Johnson, L. D., Lowenheim, A., Hamby, D. A., Red Tree Leadership & Development (Firm), Double Take Productions., … Owen-Stewart Performance Resources. (2010). Who moved my cheese?. Orem, UT: Spencer Johnson/Red Tree 

Lepsinger, R. (2010). Closing the execution gap: How great leaders and their companies get results. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Mahan, B., Maclin, R., Ruttenberg, R., Mundy, K., Frazee, T., Schwartzkopf, R., & Morawetz, J. (2018). Labor-management cooperation in Illinois: How a joint union company team is improving facility safety. New Solutions: A Journal of Environmental & Occupational Health Policy, 28(2), 227–239. Retrieved November 9th, 2018 from https://ezproxy.student.twu.ca:2420/10.1177/1048291118759303

McCorriston, R. (2013). From confrontation to collaboration: Making union-management relationships Work. Retrieved November 9th, 2018 from https://irc.queensu.ca/articles/confrontation-collaboration-making-union management-relationships-work

Ostrowsky, J. (2005). Union-management cooperation: Can a company move from an adversarial relationship to a cooperative relationship and is interest-based bargaining a necessary condition to do So? Retrieved November 9th, 2018, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.558.4213&rep=rep1&type=pdf 

Weiner, J., B. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Sciences, 4,67. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67