Human Resource Management
Student’s name:
Professor’s name:
School name:
Abstract
This report is based on a case study of “ Wholesome Provisions,” a rapidly growing catering company in human resource management. The challenges faced in their production line where employees are complaining over salary, performance appraisal methods used, job allocation and classification, and adaptability to changes. Labor capital is the prime resource of production in every organization. Therefore, in this study, I analyze challenges and possible recommendations to solve better production issues.
Adaptability to change in the organization
Adaptability to change in the organization is a common problem that many Human Resource Management departments face, and Wholesome Provisions is no exception. Change is not easy, but the company must stay afloat in the competitive market. It must be flexible in accommodating these changes. Change influences the environment, market, competition, and customer. Changes in the organization can be technological, structural, procedural, or managerial. Changes are normally accompanied by employees feeling insecure about their jobs and the anxiety of adapting to the changes. Changes in the organization can result in disequilibrium of activities, disruption of teamwork, and in some instances, it can lead to favoritism.
Therefore, the HRM department is tasked with ensuring that employees embrace changes in the organization by managing their morale, cooperation, and training to upgrade their handling changes.
Wholesome Provisions has encountered a lot of changes, growing from a family business into a mid-size company. The compensation method’s adoption based on the quality and quantity of work produced for the last years had been partially welcomed, with some employees like Jen Green being indifferent towards the idea. Rodger Smith does not value transparency in performance evaluation; he does not involve the employees to ascertain weaknesses; neither does he offer positive critics. The performance appraisal method undermines the employee’s social needs. There is a conflict over job allocation and compensation where clear guidelines determine which position is entitled to what amount of salary.
Furthermore, employees have a low commitment towards work, where the issue of reporting to work late is alarming, and they spend most of the production time doing personal stuff like engaging in social media. Wholesome Provision has failed in embracing the new technology of adopting software that will monitor employee’s activities.
Recommendations
To reduce resistance to change in terms of technological change, Wholesome Provision can establish a resource base of purchasing software to manage employees’ activities with company resources.
To manage resistance to change by employees, the company can employ Kurt Lewin’s model to change approach, which involves three stages: unfreeze, implement change, and refreeze ( Burnes, B. (2004)).
Unfreeze stage. This stage assumes that individuals’ minds are frozen at a status quo and want to remain that way. For the implementation of change to occur, the minds of individuals involved need to be unfrozen by educating them that the proposed change is for their own benefit.
Implementing change. This movement to change involves giving people the necessary resources needed to facilitate easy adoption of change. However, management can experience some resistance here.
Refreeze. Lewis assumed that employees might tend to go back to the original state if the reinforcement of change is not done appropriately. Refreezing can be done through conducting follow-ups by the management.
Wholesome Provision should consider transparency when appraising employees and use favorable methods of appraisal. Employees should be involved in making work-related decisions to minimize resistance to changes. There should be room for negotiations and agreement, especially where employees’ physiological and safety needs are involved.
References
Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K., & Prennushi, G. (1995). The effects of human resource
management practices on productivity (No. w5333). National bureau of economic research.
Burnes, B. (2004). Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: a re‐appraisal. Journal of Management Studies, 41(6), 977-1002.