Introduction
Change management is challenging for most people and organizations since the first reaction is most times resistance. Despite that, change cannot be avoided since the world keeps changing, calling for subsequent changes in organizational activities and cultures. Consequently, the executive teams in the firms must implement the change processes even amidst resistance. The management should understand that the steps used to effect change in one setting might not be effective in another setting. Moreover, the managers should always know that the management efforts ought to be customized to the characteristics of the change at hand. For the customization process to be successful, the management should fully comprehend the psychology of change and the best practices to follow. Emotional intelligence plays a vital role in reducing friction and understanding other people's emotions. As a result, emotional intelligence should be applied in the implementation of change processes within the organization. In this project, a top government official called Ken Hetman was interviewed on what their experience in change management was. This paper includes the interview details on emotional intelligence and change management within the government. It also includes personal views on the process of change management.
Emotional Intelligence and Change Management
Mr. Ken indicated that making changes in the government offices and departments was not always an easy process as people most times resisted the changes. He posited that whenever the management would announce a need for change, some of the employees would fear that they were being sacked. They would feel that their jobs were being declared obsolete and the fear of change brought tension and resistance. As a result, the management had a hard time convincing people that the change was for the nation's benefit, as it would cause more productivity and efficiency. In this regard, I felt that the problem was with the communication as right communication and preparation before the change process can reduce the tension. One of the key aspects of communication is the message sender, whereby individuals prefer to hear about the change that would affect them personally from their immediate supervisors. The receiver takes the message more positively if it comes from people that they work with on a regular basis. However, if the messages relate to business issues and opportunities for growth, the CEO and executive senders are more preferred. Such changes could relate to the external customer and competitor factors that the change will address and the current issues that face the organization. The CEOs also communicates the financial risks that would face the firm if the change were not implemented. Upon communicating, the management should listen to the employees to understand what they heard as some may have processed their own information. From that point, it is easier to start the transition process as all people have an understanding of the expected changes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Emotional intelligence also plays a vital role both to the management team who communicate the message and to the employees who are the receivers of the information. However, the managers and leaders should still understand that some employees were comfortable with the status quo. In this regard, they should not be surprised by resistance and should instead expect and plan for it. The management should also be patient with the employees as they adjust to the change process. Moreover, the administration must deal with the root cause of the resistance that could come from middle-level management as it could delay or antagonize the change process.
Secondly, the Mr. Ken indicated that some changes in the government agendas failed because of the failed history of the change sponsors. In this case, I suggest that authority for change is vital whereby the executive sponsor or the person who has the power to legitimize the change must be strong. If the person is not strong enough to effect the change, failure is predictable. In addition, the sponsor must be credible and competent in the eyes of the followers. They must not have led projects that failed before because the bad history will reduce the employee's morale and expectations. The executive sponsor should be active and visible over the change implementation process for their disappearance makes followers confused. The change manager must also show authority by ensuring that they do not shift the project priorities midstream. In this regard, the executive sponsor has three audiences to manage: peers, middle-level managers, and employees. To the first group, the sponsor should get a support system by communicating effectively about the change. The peers and key stakeholders assist the project to be a success as the guiding coalition. On the other hand, the executive sponsor should communicate their expectations in terms of supporting the change to the mid-level managers, and manage the resistance from this group. Finally, to the employees, the sponsor should send the message as they explain the future vision that the organization has and the reasons for the change.
Additionally, Ken highlighted the fact that there are two types of changes based on type and size. The first type is incremental change while the other is the radical change. Incremental change takes place over a long time with the objectives being to make small deliberate improvements to successful proven business processes. Consequently, these are driven by the desire to improve specific operations in the organization over time. On the other hand, radical change happens when dramatic change is needed over a short time period. This is often driven by a crisis or a sudden opportunity, which faces the organization. Consequently, the changes should offer dramatic performance growths in businesses. It replaces what existed with something brand new making the previous ways and methods of operation obsolete. The managers organizing the changes must understand that each of the change processes calls for a unique set of rules and regulations. Nonetheless, each of the cases must be assessed beforehand to determine the best way to handle the situations.
Finally, managers should understand that change is a process. They should never treat change as single announcement or meeting, and the process of change management must never be reduced to a single event. Instead, managers must be visibly active during the change processes in the organization. They must create within the workers the desire to implement the change and offer them the knowledge required for the implementation.
Conclusion
The interview session with Mr. Ken was educative as I learned that change implementation could be challenging even in the government offices. As a result, it is vital to understand the key principles of change management to avoid failure in the change process implementation. It is also critical to understand that resistance is likely to be experienced and it can be reduced by using the right candidates to communicate the changes. For instance, personal changes should be communicated by the supervisors to the employees while organizational changes are better received when communicated by the CEO. The executive change sponsors must also show authority and push the agenda up to the very end. This calls for their active participation and visibility throughout the change process. Another key point for all managers to note is that emotional intelligence plays a critical role in the management process.
