ABSTRACT
This study took a critical look at the activities of manufacturing organizations in the area of Teams Approach to the Management of Change in Nigerian manufacturing organizations, with three manufacturing organizations from southern part of Nigeria as the focal point for the study. The study determined if team approach to change management would bring about an increase in productivity, and attempted to ascertain if there was a significant relationship between team approach to management of change and organizational ability to survive. The study also sought to ascertain the strategies, challenges and prospects of team approach to change management and to ascertain if managerial roles to team approach to change management compared favourably with Mintzberg’s model on managerial roles. The study was carried out using survey design. Both primary and secondary data were utilized for the study. A sample size of 389 was used for the study. The research instruments employed was structured questionnaire and an interview. The descriptive statistics of simple percentage, tables, means, frequencies and standard deviation were employed to analyze the data, while the inferential statistics of Z-test was used to test the first, second, third, fourth and sixth hypotheses, while the fifth hypothesis was tested with Spearman’s Rank correlation coefficient at alpha level set at 0.05. The findings of the study among others revealed that the manufacturing organizations studied
agreed that team approach to change management brought about increased in productivity in the sampled organizations. This was true with a calculated Z value of 15.933 which was greater than the table Z value of 1.645 and that there was a high positive relationship between the organizational ability to survive and team approach. This was true at a sample mean of 4.420, sample standard deviation of 0.944 and calculated Z score of 29.346. It was found out among others that the strategies adopted to change management were building self-managed teams/human resources strategy, cost reduction strategy. The finding also revealed that team approach ushers good prospects in the area of improved performance/productivity, coordination of department, plans and polices. It was recommended that the strategic managers of the manufacturing organizations should share their perception, knowledge and objectives with those affected by change. This can involve a major and expensive programme of training, communication, and motivation and should give priority to the role of building effective teams and this should be backed by policy. Conclusively, every business needs to have a strategy and this strategy must be related to changing environmental conditions in order to survive and maintain growth, and be ready to take maximum advantage of the challenges and opportunities presented. Two models were developed. One on pressure for change showing forces of change in manufacturing organizations, and the other on team approach processes to change management indicating processes to be adopted in change management.
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY
Work is a group-based activity and if organization is to function effectively it requires good teamwork. Katzenback and Smith (1993) define a team as a small number of people with complementary skills who work toward common goals for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. A team depends on its own members to provide leadership and direction. Teams can also be organized as departments. Bailey-Scudamore, (1991) opine that many organizations face a volatile environment in which change is nearly constant and if they are to survive and prosper, they need to adapt to change quickly and effectively. Human resources are almost always at the heart of an effective response system; this is because effective leaders work with subordinates and co-workers to create visions and strategies as means to achieve the organization’s goals. Rapid change can put employee under a great deal of stress, and unless the organization develops support mechanisms to keep it manageable both the firm and employees may pay a heavy price (Gomez-Mejia, et al, 2001).
The question of organizational change is central to all kinds of organizations. It is the way in which organizations thrive, grow and stabilize rather than wither and decline. Yet achieving change presents one of the most intransigent problems for both
organizations and individuals. Change is the only thing in this world that is permanent. Many people view change as a threat and indeed it is reasonable to be somewhat apprehensive. Change can be described as a natural and continuous part of individual and organizational growth and development. The day-to-day management process in these days, one way or the other involves managing change. An organization is subject to many pressures for change from a variety of sources. Moorhead and Griffin (1989) mention four areas in which the pressure for change seems most powerful. These are people, technology, information processing and communication and competition.
Everyday people experience significance changes in their lives and careers. These changes may involve accepting a promotion at work, transferring to new office or even starting a new family. Some of these changes are chosen by ourselves while others are imposed on us. The ways people react to change differ. One will likely welcome changes which provide one with options and resist changes which give you no choice.
Irrespective of any force that influences change in any organization, the change must be planned. McAfee and Champagne (1983) define a planned change as any deliberate attempt to modify the functioning of the total organization, or one of its major components, in order to improve effectiveness. The planned change efforts can focus on individual, group, or organizational behaviour. Change and change management are concepts that have come to assume greater importance in the discussions of top executives of most companies.
Mckee (2005) suggests that one of the most significant essentials for success during transition is teambuilding and maintain that leaders that can challenge, motivate, and empower their teams through change are successful. Mckee goes further to state that leaders who can keep their work teams focused during changes will have organizations and businesses, which thrive. Since change is something we have to live with, the better we are able to manage its introduction and consequences the better for all. If an organization refuses to change, such organization will be changed. It is better to be quick than to be dead.
McAfee and Champagne (1983) assert that forces of change, also known as change drivers or change initiators, can either be external or internal. The external change drivers are those forces that are outside the control of management but have made change imperative. Since the management has little control over them they have a greater effect on organizational change. No organization can operate in vacuum. An organization must interact with its external environment if it is to survive. The organization’s physical, financial and human resources are obtained from outside and the clients and customers for the organization’s products and services are also there. Therefore, anything that interferes with or modifies that environment can affect the organization’s operations and cause pressure for change. These include government policies, political development, technology, competition, changing consumer behaviour, industrial practices, external stakeholder interests, socio-economic environment, and customer capabilities.
Mullins (1996) opines that internal change forces are pressures for change, which come from within the organization for which we have reasonable measure of control. These may include the appointment of new Chief Executive Officer, new organization objectives, managerial policies, technologies, employee attitudes, operation start-ups, business relocation, mergers and acquisitions. Mullins goes further to state that both external and internal forces for change, are not found in isolation. They are interrelated. More often than not, external change drivers create internal change drivers, which lead to organization change.
If change is important then more important is its management. When change is not properly managed the result can be disastrous because of the possibilities of resistance among people. To successfully manage change one needs to understand basic concepts and strategies to build commitment and acceptance to change in all levels of the organization.
Since change is something we have to live with, the better we are able to manage its introduction and consequences the better for all. In view of this, it is imperative that individuals, groups and corporate bodies must consciously plan for managing change if the rewards from it are to be maximized.
It is certain however, that today’s organizations face quite specific challenges. These include increasing internationalization (the introduction of the term “globalization” to a business strategy), rapid advances in technology, uncertain political environments, and faster product life cycles. Competition from international producers has forced managers in domestic firms to re-assess the ways in which they organize. In technology, for example, fears that the Japanese organizations might be doing it right has prompted many European managers to study and copy their manufacturing processes, and other forms of inventory processing. Coupled with these manufacturing changes has been an increased emphasis on product and service quality. Not only do manufactured products and service delivery need to be of the highest standard for firms to compete effectively, management processes and human resource aspects of the organization need to be as effective as possible. The ultimate intention is to design an organization which is effective and efficient today and is also flexible enough to change quickly and responsively to any future changes in its environments.
Mullins (2005) states that the relationship between the organization and its members is governed by what motivates them to work and the fulfillment they derive from it. Socio-economic changes, especially in the role of the government, have also had a great impact on all organizations in the private, public and voluntary sectors. The rapid industrialization at the turn of the century brought with it a whole host of changes focusing not only on the development of new technological processes for the emerging organizations, but also on the social and economic transformation of a previously rural-based community to an urban-based labour force.
The manager has always had to cope with and handle change. It is endemic to organizational life. Possibly, the reason for the greater emphasis on managing change today lies in its increased perversity into all aspects of our lives. Not only is technological change taking place, but also there are changes occurring at all levels of social and institutional practice. Personal values are questioned. Work is no longer a natural part of individuals’ lives. Managers are no longer accepted as natural leaders. They have to earn and justify their position. And, at bottom of all this, is the almost inevitable link between change and organizational survival. Those organizations which do not respond to the challenges and changes facing them are likely to become
old-fashioned and will not work well in the evolution of modern society. They will become old-fashioned, uneconomical to run and, ultimately, will close down, thus compounding the over bloated unemployment figures (Robert, et al, 2002).
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Teams are a major feature of organizational life and can have significant influence on the successful implementation of change. Most change can disrupts teamwork. Unless people are involved, committed and prepare to adapt and learn; objectives, plans and future desired states may likely to founder on the resistance, which is often viewed as negative responses. Also attempting to change the culture of a defensive group into that of intentional group is not easy. The intervention strategy is likely to be perceived as threatening members of the group. The danger of domination of the team by some powerful members, the difficulty in placing responsibility for a bad team decision, the effects of selecting poorly qualified persons as members, and team decisions may result from compromise.
The absence of an explicit concept of strategy may result in members of the organization working at cross-purposes. The intention of top management may not be communicated clearly to those at lower levels in the hierarchy who are expected to implement these intentions. Obsolete pattern of behaviours may become very difficult to modify. Also without an explicit statement of strategy it may become more difficult for expanding organizations to reconcile co-coordinated action with entrepreneurial effort.
However, member’s willingness to put in effort is generated through making the team work to be motivating. The ability of the leader to persuade and influence his followers, which in turn, depends largely on how much power the leader possesses, will determine how effective team-oriented approach to change management will succeed. To some extent the leader’s effectiveness in the interpersonal area can be judged by the team’s practical achievement. In the competitive economy, above all, the quality and performance of the managers determine the success of a business.
Whatever the degree and content of the change, its implementation can still pose large problems for organizations and their staff. To get people to accept and implement the new ways of doing things is neither a swift nor an easy task. Goals that are not measurable and realistic that are set can become obstacle to achieving change. Groups, too, can become formidable obstacles to achieving change. Resistance can seem irrational and develop without warning, interrupting any activity at any time. The major team problem may be that of conformity, which raises its head in a number of guises ranging from groupthink – where within the group there is excessive conformity to method and content of decision – to organizational culture, where there is pressure from outside the team to make decisions in such a way to fit what is considered acceptable by the wider organization. With the wide use of teams, interpersonal and inter-group conflict may arise. In addition, conflict between organizations as well as between organizations and their environment needs to be dealt with.
Survival of the organizations will depend upon it ability to adapt to change and to the demands of its external environment. Commitment to the objectives and policies of the organization, people’s cognitive limitations and then uncertainties and fears, may mean a reluctance to accept change. Organizations may also find it difficult to make short-term, rapid changes in resource allocation. The very complexity of environmental influences may itself hinder rapid change.
The time and other resources requirements for running team, the danger of domination of the team by some powerful members, the difficulty in placing responsibility for a bad team decision, the effects of selecting poorly qualified persons as members, and the most team decisions may likely result from compromise posses great challenges to team approach to change management.
To this end, it would be pertinent to investigate the strategies, challenges and prospects of team approach to management of change in Nigerian manufacturing organizations. This will enable one to say with some air of confidence the extent to which managers of these organizations can cope with change using the team approach.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The specific objectives of the study include the following:
1. To ascertain determinant of team effectiveness in management of change in the sampled Nigerian manufacturing organizations.
2. To ascertain if the management of organizational change is hindered by inability to cope with the challenges of team approach.
3. To ascertain if strategies for change management are compatible with team approach to change management.
4. To ascertain if managerial roles in the team approach to change management in Nigerian manufacturing organization compare favourably with Mintzberg’s (1973) model.
5. To find out if there is relationship between team approach to change management and organizational survival.
6. To ascertain if team approach to change management holds good prospects for sustenance and viability in Nigerian manufacturing organizations.
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What are the determinants of team’s effectiveness in management of organizational change in Nigeria manufacturing organizations?
2. Is management of organizational change hindered by inability to cope with the challenges of team approach in Nigerian manufacturing organizations?
3 Are strategies for change management compatible with team approach to change management in the Nigerian manufacturing organizations?
4 Do managerial roles in team approach to change management in Nigerian manufacturing organizations compare favourably with Mintzberg’s (1973) model?
5. What is the relationship between team approach to change management and organizational survival?
6. What good prospects do team approach to change management hold in the sustenance and viability of Nigerian manufacturing organizations?
1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
To provide answers to the research questions the following null and alternative hypotheses have been developed.
1. Ho: Team’s effectiveness to change management in Nigerian manufacturing organizations cannot be determined.
| H1: | Team’s effectiveness to change management in Nigerian manufacturing organizations can be determined. | |
| 2. | Ho: | Management of organizational change is not hindered by inability to cope with the challenges of team approach in Nigerian manufacturing |
| organizations. | ||
| H1: | Management of organizational change is hindered by inability to cope with the challenges of team approach in Nigerian manufacturing organizations | |
| 3. | Ho: | Strategies for change management are not compatible with team approach to change management in Nigerian manufacturing organizations. |
H1: Strategies for change management are compatible with team approach to
change management in Nigerian manufacturing organizations.
| 4. | Ho: | Managerial roles in the team approach to change management in manufacturing organizations does not compare favourably with |
| Mintzberg’s (1973) model. | ||
| H1: | Managerial roles in the team approach to change management in | |
| manufacturing industries compares favourably with Mintzberg’s (1973) | ||
| model. | ||
| 5. | Ho: | There is no relationship between organization ability to survive and team approach to management of organizational change. |
| H1: | There is relationship between organization ability to survive and team | |
| approach to management of organizational change. | ||
| 6. | Ho: | Team approach to change management in Nigerian manufacturing organizations does not hold good prospects for sustenance and viability. |
| H1: | Team approach to change management in Nigerian manufacturing organizations holds good prospects for sustenance and viability. |
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This study is beneficial to many people.
(1) To the manufacturing organizations, this study will enable the manufacturing organizations to know how to lead a business enterprise into successive radical changes in order to keep pace with accelerating technology and shifting social economic force through the use of team approach to change management in order to retain competitive edge, for survival, for growth. The organizations would be able to identify variety of sources in which pressure for change seems most powerful, and if the organizations are to survive and prosper, they need to adapt to change quickly and effectively. This is because many organizations face a volatile environment in which change is nearly constant, and unless the organization develops support mechanisms to keep it manageable both the firm and employees may pay a heavy price.
(2) Practicing managers and general public
This study x-rays the challenges, and prospects associated with teams approach to change management and strategies employed in management of change in manufacturing organization. This would enable leaders\managers to understand that leaders that can challenge, motivate and empower their teams through change would be successful, and how effective leaders can work with subordinates and co-workers to create visions and strategies as means to achieve the organization’s goals. Irrespective of any force that influences changes in any organization, the change must be planned. The plan can focus on individual, group, or organizational behaviour. Since change is something we have to live with, the better we are able to manage its introduction and consequences the better for all, and if organization refuses to change, such organization will be changed. Those organizations which do not respond to the challenges and changes facing them are likely to become old-fashioned and will not work well in the evolution of modern society. They will become old- fashioned, uneconomical to run and, ultimately, will close down, thus compounding the over bloated unemployment figures.
Managers are no longer accepted as natural leaders. They have to earn and justify their position. The manager needs to know how best to elicit co-operation of staff and direct their performance to achieving the goals and objectives of the organization. The manager must understand the nature of human behaviours and how best to motivate staff so that they work willingly and effectively.
(3) Researchers
Students and researchers will benefit immensely from the work, as it will be useful sources of research material.
1.7 DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY
This study is limited in scope to three manufacturing organizations with reference to
May & Baker Nigeria Plc, CUTIX Plc, West African Glass Industry. It examined the
challenges, strategies and prospects of team approach to change management in
Nigerian manufacturing organizations.
1.8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
While undertaking this research, the following constraints were encountered. One of such constraints is finance. The study covered three manufacturing enterprises in southern part of Nigeria. A lot of traveling was involved in visiting these enterprises while distributing the questionnaire and interviewing the respondents. Also a lot of secretarial work was required in typing, photocopying and duplicating materials. All these require funds to accomplish.
Secondly, the researcher was faced with the problem of time. The researcher had to combine this work with the workload in the office and family.
Another problem faced by the researcher was the negative attitude of some respondents. Some of them claimed that they were too busy and refused to accept our questionnaire. Even some of those who accepted our questionnaire refused to answer certain questions in the instrument. In all, however, we obtained responses, which we consider adequate for the study.
1.9 OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS
We set out below operational definition in respect of terms which we have used.
Team: It is a number of people with complementary skills who work toward common goals for which they hold themselves mutually accountable.
Team approach: This concerns the direction in which human and material resources will be applied in order to increase the chances of achieving selected objectives.
Change management: It is a structured approach to transitioning individuals, teams, and organizations from a current state to a desired future state.
Change Agents: Change agents are the individuals or groups of individuals whose task is to effect the desired change in an organization.
This material content is developed to serve as a GUIDE for students to conduct academic research
TEAM APPROACH TO THE MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE IN THE NIGERIAN MANUFACTURING ORGANIZATIONS STRATEGIES CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS
A1Project Hub Support Team Are Always (24/7) Online To Help You With Your Project
Chat Us on WhatsApp » 09063590000
DO YOU NEED CLARIFICATION? CALL OUR HELP DESK:
09063590000 (Country Code: +234)
YOU CAN REACH OUR SUPPORT TEAM VIA MAIL: [email protected]
09063590000 (Country Code: +234)
