In this particular case study one such nursing home taking care of the elderly people have been cited, and the name of the nursing home is Evergreen which is run by government funding from the Canadian federal government. It can be learnt from the case study that there are 120 elderly residents who stay in this particular place and the building has three floors. The number of employees have been divided in the three floors and in each floor there are adequate number of employees to take care of the residents. The number of staff per person is more or less in compliance with the “Ministry of Health”. Most of the patients are having special care needs including problems like dementia, cognitive impairment and dependency on walking. There are long term illnesses that is required to be monitored by the staffs. The staffs are divided according to each floor and in each floor there are 2 or 3 day-care aids, 2 Licensed Practical Nurses or 1 Licensed Practical Nurse and 1 Registered Nurse. There is one recreation assistant provided in each of the floors who takes care of the recreational needs of the residents who are mentally depressed sometimes and needs to be happy by external recreational activities. Other staff according to the case study are “cooks and kitchen staff, cleaners, a building service worker, laundry staff, receptionists, and an administrative assistant/scheduler.”
The two managerial posts of the nursing home are Care Coordinator and the Service Manager. These managers are under the supervision of “Nursing Home Administrator” who again is under the jurisdiction of the Executive Director of the NGO or nonprofit organization that funds and runs the hospital.
The teamwork system in the nursing home is strong with the staffs that are working in non-managerial positions being closely unified in their decisions and actions. Many of the staffs are over 10 years old within the institution that has given them an authority and they feel to be independent in their working style. There has been a problem of employee attendance in the organization and as most of the staff members are working for a very long time there is lesser probability that they can be strongly brought under control by the managers who are relatively very new. There is problem of budgetary allocations, and there is constraint of budget in a lot of ways. Because there is no profit generation, increment of the number of employees is also a low probability and the present employees have to cater to the extra works and responsibilities that arises. There might be last minute leaves applied by any of the staff who might be sick or for any other exigency, such leaves are costly for the institute, as substitute staffs have to be hired for that temporary period
The cultural change that is required to be managed because of the appointment of new managers and their working styles are needed to be synthesized with the overall organizational culture that prevailed in the nursing home for all of these days (Waddell et al., 2016). Attempting to force any kind of cultural change would ruin the present system. Executive Director of the not for profit organization has created a new “board” that would help in bringing the needed organizational change as per her perception. The board had experts from various fields including management. The seven main values that have been identified as the “cornerstones” of the new culture includes “Being Passionate About Making a Difference, Find a Better Way, Taking an Ownership Mentality, Admiring Elders, WOW Customer Experience, Inspirational Caring, Working Together With Heart.”
As usually the new organizational change that was proposed was not accepted in the first instance for the psychological barrier (Beal, Stavros & Cole, 2013). What was the situation can be best understood by the fact that many of the staff members were unable to understand what was going on. There have been training of over a month in which the staff had been given extra payment for their attendance which was a necessary step (Grant, 2014). This shows the extent of effort the management wants to pay in order to bring the required organizational change. There were changes such as “learning circles”, the values printed on posters, and “onboarding”.
There are various reasons that organizational change in culture is defended by the existing employees because they are apprehensive of the new situations and new work environment (Boohene & Williams, 2012). Though it was reported to the executive that the culture was “well established”, however the administrator and care coordinator overlooked that not much change could be achieved on the ground. Some of the values which are established are already known to most of the members and some of the new changes were simply not executed on the ground. It is proper to say that the organizational cultural change that was deemed necessary by July did not go in sync with the actual requirements on the ground. There has been a lack of research on the part of the formulators of the organizational change, which could have been done more extensively.
Organizational change can be effectively implemented in an inclusive process where the employees are made a part of the change. The employees must not feel excluded which may give rise to resistance or ignorance to the changes desired (Bamberger et al. 2012). The changes cannot be properly implemented for these two reasons mainly. One, because the all the staff members were not a part of the organizational change that was enforced, and secondly, because the employees who have been working for a long time in the field feels that these changes are not so much required and they continue to work in their own work (Kempster, Higgs & Wuerz, 2014).
Organizational change is also a slow process in which the stakeholders of the change might take time to adapt to the new situations. Therefore, it is evident from the case study that it might take longer for the employees to be actually performing in the way what is desired from them in the new organizational context.
As recommendations it can be said that the management should reconsider the changes and the way these are implemented. They must make the system more democratic and feasible so that the changes come from within. Instead of values more importance should be given on the practical aspects of the change and that will help in actually bringing the difference in the organization. The staff members must also cooperate and contribute to the process of change. To achieve that the management should explain how the newly brought changes will help the staff members to work in a better and more productive way. It is undesired that the staff and the management will go into a dispute and the whole efforts of change will go into vein.
Bamberger, S. G., Vinding, A. L., Larsen, A., Nielsen, P., Fonager, K., Nielsen, R. N., ... & Omland, ?. (2012). Impact of organisational change on mental health: a systematic review. Occup Environ Med, oemed-2011.
Beal III, L., Stavros, J. M., & Cole, M. L. (2013). Effect of psychological capital and resistance to change on organisational citizenship behavior. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 39(2), 01-11.
Boohene, R., & Williams, A. A. (2012). Resistance to organisational change: A case study of Oti Yeboah Complex Limited. International Business and Management, 4(1), 135-145.
Grant, A. M. (2014). The efficacy of executive coaching in times of organisational change. Journal of Change Management, 14(2), 258-280.
Kempster, S., Higgs, M., & Wuerz, T. (2014). Pilots for change: exploring organisational change through distributed leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(2), 152-167.
Stensaker, B., V?limaa, J., & Sarrico, C. (Eds.). (2012). Managing reform in universities: The dynamics of culture, identity and organisational change. Palgrave Macmillan.
Waddell, D., Creed, A., Cummings, T., & Worley, C. (2016). Organisational change: Development and transformation. Cengage AU.