At my workplace, which is a logistics company, the change that was introduced involves the introduction of a performance evaluation method for the workers. The management felt the need to introduce a new performance evaluation system that would help facilitate effective work of employees. The introduction of the new evaluation method would allow employees to take on self-evaluation by filing the given form, and later to be evaluated by a panel of evaluators. The introduction of this new change is intended to promote work effectiveness among employees. This is a major change by the fact that the organization intends to find means to boost the individual employee performance, as well as, the corporate performance of the workers. The new evaluation system that was introduced is directed towards promoting initiativeness, and finding means to appraise the workers and give promotions (Bremer, 2012).
The change was communicated through a staff meeting. The management team refined the idea of the change and need to introduce the evaluation method. After it was agreed on, employees were called for a staff meeting where the change was communicated to the team. The staff meeting was a good platform for communicating the change by the fact that all employees were present and were allowed to deliberate on the change that is to be handled. This step is important for the change to happen by the fact that the meeting allowed all staff members to communicate he change (Kotter, 2012).It also become a platform that staff were allowed to connect and embrace the change.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The communication on the introduction of a new performance system was done in a positive manner. It was done in an effective way by the fact that the meeting was made to be participative. The management team was involved in communicating the change, while the staff members were allowed to give feedback to the message. The focus of allowing communication that is interactive was to allow staff members to ask questions and give feedback. It also allowed the people to learn more about the change and understand the intentions that is behind the change (Kotter, 2012). Through explaining the changes that were to be made, it became possible to have the support of employees.
The plan of implementation involved a number of steps. The change process involved the identification of what is to be improved, presenting the change to stakeholders, planning for the change, provide the resources for change implementation, implementation. The next step should be celebrating the success of the change, and lastly, to review the change to make thing. This was important in the process of allowing the change to be effectively managed (Bremer, 2012). The thing that was unclear in the forthcoming change was the nature of the panel that would review the performance report.
Conclusively, if a similar situation should arise again, the process of implementing the change probably would need to change when it comes to developing the change idea. In the first place, the change idea was refined by the management before being tabled to the staff meeting. In the future, there would be need to involve the staff at the earlier stages of change implementation. This approach would allow the staff to deeply connect and embrace the change. In addition, it would allow the people to understand the need for the change in regards to evaluation of performance.
References
Bremer, B. (2012). Organizational Culture Change. New York: Kdp Print.
Kotter, J. (2012). Leading Change. New York: Harvard Business Press.
