The impact of organizational change on the perceptions of UK managers

Abstract

Redundancy, delayering, downsizing, and various other forms of organizational change have become increasingly prevalent. This article focuses on the impact of different forms of organizational change on managers' perceptions of the organizations they work within and the comparison between changes that involve redundancy and/or delayering and those that do not involve such changes. The literature has many accounts of the negative effects associated with redundancy and delayering, but are these effects unique to these types of change or are they a consequence of negative experiences of a range of organizational changes? Hypotheses were tested to assess, first, whether there are differences between different levels of management, notably between directors and nondirectors in the way they perceive organizational change, second, to assess how change has affected managers' perceptions of their organizations and their working lives, and third, to explore if different forms of change are associated with differences in managers' perceptions of their organizations “as a place to work”. Hypotheses were tested with data from a cross-sectional survey with 830 managers from the UK. Organizational changes include cost reduction and culture change programmes, delayering, mergers/demergers, outsourcing, redundancy programmes, and contract/ temporary workers. The analyses reported here indicate clearly that specific forms of change are associated with managers' reports of their experiences at work; some forms of change (notably redundancy and delayering) seem to have particularly damaging implications for managers' experiences in the workplace. The analyses also show that there is a difference in the way directors and nondirectors perceive the changes. Finally, the article considers strategies for ameliorating the effects of change including the role of HR

Organizational changes: A precursor of bullying at work?

“…Such instrumental acts may lead to frustration and aggression among co-workers (Neuman & Baron, 2003), ultimately resulting in bullying (Salin, 2003). Worrall et al (2004) state that redundancy is probably the most evocative and fear-inducing form of organizational change, and, in general, studies on downsizing report the most dramatic consequences for organizational members when personnel reductions are carried out (Kets de Vries & Balazs, 1997;Worrall et al, 2004). However, in the present study, relationships between the composite predictor Personnel and Salary Reductions and exposure to task-oriented and person-oriented bullying were relatively low.…”

“…Contemporary working life is characterized by frequent organizational changes (Fay & Lührman, 2004;McKinley, Mone & Barker, 1998;Worrall, Parkes & Cooper, 2004) with a variety of documented negative outcomes for employees; such as lack of control, increased work loads, role conflict, strained interpersonal relationships and job insecurity (Burke & Nelson, 1998;Kets de Vries & Balazs, 1997, Marks & De Meuse, 2005, Seo & Hill, 2005. Such findings also indicate that characteristics of organizational changes may indeed have severe consequences such as an increase in harassment and bullying at work, as has been proposed by several -------------------------------* Anders Skogstad, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Stig Berge Matthiesen, Ph.D., Professor, PhD, and Stale Einarsen, Ph.D., Professor, are …”

Prospective relationships between career disruptions and subjective well-being: evidence from a three-wave follow-up study among Finnish managers

“…However, managers' well-being can be seriously challenged as a result of the increased requirements for Xexibility encountered in today's organizations. From the employees' viewpoint, this increased Xexibility has resulted in career instability, job insecurity, and underemployment (Dooley 2003;D'Souza et al 2003;Lau and Knardahl 2008;Rugulies et al 2008), a fact that could concern all groups of employees, including managers (Armstron-Stassen 2005; Holden and Roberts 2004;Worrall et al 2000).…”

The Thought Worlds of Marketing and Sales: Which Differences Make a Difference?

“…We define power imbalance between M & S as the extent to which power over market-related activities is biased toward either marketing or sales. Second, internal change has been demonstrated to encumber internal working relationships and attitudes (Reilly, Brett, and Stroh 1993;Worrall, Parkes, and Cooper 2004) as well as marketing's interfunctional relationships (Maltz and Kohli 2000;Maltz, Souder, and Kumar 2001). We define internal dynamism as the extent to which organizational structures, processes, leadership, and strategy within the organization change frequently.…”