The purpose of this report is to investigate the impact of change when Rapid Supply Electronics Components Limited (RSEC) acquired Electronic Bits Fast (EBF). With the growing need to counter competition, RSEC saw acquiring EBF as an opportunity to become a market leader. RSEC plans were to integrate EBF’s system and processes to improve its service delivery and products development. Though the idea was good, RSEC had carried no in-depth analysis put enough supporting systems up to ensure the success of their strategy. Just eleven months after the acquisition, the board swiftly made its intentions clear of integrating all logistics, sales and customer service functions. The board made this decision without enough expert knowledge of how to implement the system across the whole company. For a change to succeed, the board needed to bring every member of the organization the change would affect directly or indirectly on board (Simatupang, Govindaraju and Amaranti, 2016).
The goal of the project was to absorb the brand values and customer service principles of EBF in addition to sales and logistics system. The integration of the three components would have created and captured value from the merger. The project aimed at introducing the RSEC staff to the newly acquired system from EBF. The operations designed to create a centralized head office for the functions. This would have helped RSEC to reduce the costs associated with these functions plus aid the company to provide services efficiently. RSEC had a good plan to counter competition from other companies though the strategy was not well thought through. The company management wanted to capitalize on an available opportunity though they were in a rush, did not use experts and had limited knowledge on the task at hand.
RSEC faced many issues that always accompany any change implementation in any organization. The problems presented a lot of challenges to the management. The biggest problem was that rather a new system benefits the company; it just managed to help the company create losses. The problems began with poor communication of the change about to be implemented (Bernardes, 2015). The employees who were going to be affected by the new system got the news at the same time as every other employee. The employees were not consulted or given a chance to air their views. Most of the employees were against this change as they knew it would interfere with their routine and since RSEC was acquiring EBF, the new staff would have to adjust to RSEC’s system.
The employees did not see a need for a centralized system since to them the individual departments were performing well. The change involved some employees relocating to the central office in Sydney. These employees were not alerted before the change implementation process started to give them ample time to prepare themselves and their families and to hand over pending issues. The change rendered many customers service staff redundant and thus was released by the company. Those who did not feel like moving were also left unemployed. The high turnover of customer service staff paralyzed the operations of the centralized unit. The manager was having a hard time in meeting the set goals and objectives given limited resources regarding staff. The change did not progress as well as planned due to the staff shortage and the speed of the change. In Sydney, much time is spent to train replacement agency workers leaving a lot of work undone thus tainting the brand image and increasing customer complaints.
Problem Analysis and Justification
RSEC has experienced a lot of problems brought about by the need for a centralized system. The company’s problems began right from the acquisition (Paun, 2015). Though the acquisition was a brilliant idea by RSEC the process involved was shoddy and could not bear any profits for RSEC. RSEC did not openly communicate its intentions to the employees because it did not want to raise alarms and needed the merger to go through smoothly. Though the management could justify its reasons not to involve its employees, the action proved costly to the organization. The employees were an integral part of ensuring smooth change transition and success of the centralized, integrated function. The board had a success roadmap which they wanted to follow. The board made prior decisions about centralizing these primary functions even before the merger was complete and all necessary systems put in place.
The board appointed the business systems manager from the original RSEC Company as the change manager. The business systems manager seemed to have technical expertise necessary to facilitate the implementation of the change. This was justified to the board as the manager had collaborated with the board during the development of a change plan and they thought he had the required knowledge to oversee the implementation process (Antonellis, 2016). The board was in a hurry to implement the new changes that it got rid of redundant employees quickly even before the system was a success. The board wanted to reduce the costs incurred and because it had faith the system would succeed. In doing so, the board got rid of skilled employees who could have helped the company succeed. Some actions of the board were justified, but the impact they had on the organization were severe. The resultant effect was a company performing poorly with fewer staff and a poor communication channel in addition to poor managerial decisions.
In this section, the report tries to develop some alternative solutions to RSEC organization and their acquisition of EBF. The acquisition proved to be a good strategic move to the company. The main goal the board had in mind was to centralize the main function s and adopt a system that would make them very competitive in the market. The company could have taken up the services of a consultant to help the company determine its cost drivers and ways to reduce the production cost in addition to designing brand values and customer service principles. Consultants have adequate knowledge and could advise the management on what to do. The consultant could have carried their investigation and determine what actions the firm can undertake to become cost drivers and improve their service delivery.
Alternatively, the company could have first tried if the system is capable of achieving success for the two companies (White, 2006). Before enrolling the centralized system into full operation, the company could have adopted the change and try it out for a year or more to determine its suitability. It is crucial for companies to first try out a new system and carry out an in-depth evaluation of the system before settling on the final decision. RSEC could have adopted another solution to its problems through training. The organization could have trainers in the field of customer service to equip both managers and employees of competent skills and knowledge in quality customer services. Learning and training can help an organization counter the high competition in the industry. The trainers carry out research and have the up to date knowledge of the skills in the market. The organization could have gained a lot through training.
The following recommendations constitute some of the best actions RSEC could have taken on the issue at hand. To ensure that change is successful, the organization has to involve every member of the organization. By bringing every member on board, the organization will move forward as a single unit thus minimizing the chances for change resistance (Fox and Keisling, 2016). Through minimizing resistance to change, the organization would have reduced employee turnover and retain its talented employees. Before, during and after the implementation of change, the organization needs to develop an efficient and open communication channel. Communication is crucial during change implementation. Through effective communication, stress and conflict are minimized as all the issues are handled professionally. An open communication channel with information flowing up and down the organization helps the organization implement change that will have the support of the employees. During the implementation process, all the queries concerning the new system and any change needed to the system are made.
The organization needed a professional consultant in organization change management to oversee the whole implementation process (Charlie, Perry and Loh, 2014). Consultants are useful to management by offering expert information needed to make the change implementation process successful. The implementation process determines the viability of the change to the organization. The company needs to develop a good rapport with the employees. The Human Resource (HR) manager already recognized that the employees are feeling less valued and have no morale to work. To improve the morale of the employees, the HR department needs to offer incentives such as outdoor training and seminars, offer gifts and financial rewards and also seek the services of counselors (Jarkas and Radosavljevic, 2013). Giving the employees an opportunity to be part of a decision-making process will also motivate them especially the older RSEC staff. The replacement agency workers need to have professional on the job trainers and not fellow employees to ensure that productivity goes on.
Change implementation is a necessary process for the organization to achieve its set goals. The implementation process should involve every member of the organization directly or indirectly affected by the change about to occur. To implement the recommendations, the organization could have sent information to every staff some weeks before the change management process kick starts (Dehmlow, 2016). Every employee should know the role he or she should play in the implementation process. It is important to bring the organization together at this point. Any employee stuck should seek assistance as soon as possible. The organization should tell the truth to the employees of what the coming changes contain and what benefits will accrue to the organization and the employees from the new system. There is no need for an organization to implement change and in the process lose all the talented and skilled employees due to poor change management. The employees should know they are very important and the change is for the better.
Due to the limited number of staffs, the organization needs to implement an on the job training. The new employees should learn the specifications of the job while they are doing the job. The organizations should have professional trainers at the workplace and find coaches to help equip the new staff with the required set of skills. It is crucial to the organization for production to continue so as to satisfy the clients in the market and to address any customer issues that may crop up (Du Plesis and Mabunda, 2016). The organization also needs to provide an excellent communication system that can adequately support the implementation process. The communication channels should be open and give priority to any feedback regarding the implementation process. It is worrying that the board thinks the implementation process was successful while in the division units there is chaos. A good communication channel helps the organization avoid such issues and give the board real time information to address the issues.
To motivate the employees, first, the organization needs to establish a good rapport with the employees. The organization has to be swift to turn around its misfortunes and capitalize on the opportunity as earlier planned. The inducements need to help the employees focus on the work and improve their productivity. The employees need to feel like part of the organization’s future and that they have job security. To employees, job security is always a priority. For this employee saw their fellow employees lose their jobs, the organization will need to reassure them of job security. The implementation process is not easy, and it needs the A-game from the management and the board.
ANTONELLIS JR., P. J. (2016). Change Management: Recommendations for Prechange Success. Fire Engineering, 369(8), 49-54.
Bernardes, A., G. Cummings, G., Gabriel, C. S., Martinez ?vora, Y. D., Gomes Maziero, V., & Coleman-Miller, G. (2015). Implementation of a participatory management model: analysis from a political perspective. Journal Of Nursing Management, 23(7), 888-897.
Charlie Chi Cong, M., Perry, C., & Loh, E. (2014). Integrating Organizational Change Management and Customer Relationship Management in a Casino. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 18(2), 1-21.
Dehmlow, M. (2016). Editorial Board Thoughts: The Importance of Staff Change Management in the Face of the Growing "Cloud".Information Technology & Libraries, 35(1), 3-6.
Du Plessis, T., & Mabunda, T. T. (2016). Change management in an academic library in the knowledge economy. South African Journal Of Libraries & Information Science, 82(1), 53-61.
Fox, R. E., & Keisling, B. L. (2016). Build Your Program by Building Your Team: Inclusively Transforming Services, Staffing and Spaces. Journal Of Library Administration, 56(5), 526-539.
Hettema, J., Ernst, D., Williams, J., & Miller, K. (2014). Parallel Processes: Using Motivational Interviewing as an Implementation Coaching Strategy. Journal Of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 41(3), 324-336.
Hughes, M. (2016). Who killed change management?. Culture & Organization, 22(4), 330-347.
McKenna, P. J. (2016). The Darwinian Imperative: Strategies for Overcoming Obstacles to Change. Of Counsel, 35(5), 10-16.
Jarkas, A. M., & Radosavljevic, M. (2013). Motivational Factors Impacting the Productivity of Construction Master Craftsmen in Kuwait.Journal Of Management In Engineering, 29(4), 446-454.
Kazaz, A., Manisali, E., & Ulubeyli, S. (2008). EFFECT OF BASIC MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS ON CONSTRUCTION WORKFORCE PRODUCTIVITY IN TURKEY. Journal Of Civil Engineering & Management, 14(2), 95-106.
Million, A. J., & S. Bossaller, J. (2015). Strike While the Iron Is Hot: Change Management in the Context of a New Political Administration. Journal Of Library Administration, 55(2), 92-113.
P?UN, M. (2015). ETHICAL PROBLEMS IN THE CONTEXT OF MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE SPECIFIC TO CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY. Revista Academiei Fortelor Terestre, 20(4), 433
Simatupang, T., Govindaraju, R., & Amaranti, R. (2016). Change Management Perspectives in an ERP Module Implementation: A Case Study in a Telecommunication Company. Jurnal Teknik Industri, 18(1), 51-61.
Vedenik, G., & Leber, M. (2015). CHANGE MANAGEMENT WITH THE AID OF A GENERIC MODEL FOR RESTRUCTURING BUSINESS PROCESSES. International Journal Of Simulation Modelling (IJSIMM), 14(4), 584-595.
White, J. (2006). Effecting Change in Periodicals Service: Management Models and a Process. Serials Review, 32(1), 22-25.