Managers' role in implementing organizational change: Case of the restaurant industry in Melbourne

Abstract

ABSTRACT The restaurant industry is an integral segment of the hospitality sector that is sensitive external environmental changes. In order remain competitive, restaurants must be flexible quickly react and adapt external environment challenges. Due the close interactions and relationships between employees and managers, there can be direct effects on a restaurants performance when internal and external occurs. This research project was conducted in the city of Melbourne, known its fine dining and cosmopolitan style cuisine. The study investigated managers' role when initiating and implementing organizational in order minimise possible employees' resistance change. The findings support previous theoretical approaches effective management. The key elements support were effective communication, employees' attitude and perception of managers' undertaken actions. You know, I'm all progress. It's I object to Mark Twain, cited by Pietersen, 2002 INTRODUCTION Change, defined as an effort that consists of actual physical changes operations and different emotional stimulation (Bernerth, 2004) is painful in the workplace, going from what is certain and known the otherwise. Employees lose the comfort of the known and the familiar, the sense of competency they used possess, the status and/or financial security they once enjoyed and networks they have gone at length build. Though we all rationally recognize that progress means change, and that we all need progress, but not even the prospect of attaining benefits from would make everyone ready and willing, or indeed able, embrace change. On the contrary, it is widely believed that most would resist change. Duck (1993) bluntly points that change is intensely personal and Pietersen (2002) reckons that for many people, the spectre of produces what is sometimes called the Factor- Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Since is widely accepted as almost always top-down and induced by the management, those being managed would also almost always resist change, imposing an imperative managers overcome the resistance before it could bring the forward. Resistance is often understood from the management standpoint as a perceived behaviour of organization's members who refuse accept an organizational (Cheng & Petrovic-Lazarevic, 2004; Coghlan, 1993). It is also defined as a multifaceted phenomenon which introduces unanticipated delays, costs, and instabilities into the process of a strategic (Ansoff, 1988). Bemmels and Reshef (1991) understand it as any employee actions attempting stop or delay change. Obviously being viewed as adversarial and detrimental, resistance has gained a negative connotation (Waddell and Sohal, 1998) that allegedly confounded the problem of effecting by promulgating a dichotomous thinking of labour versus management (Dent and Goldberg, 1999). Recently, an appreciation of resistance from a more pluralistic employee-centred perspective and its role in organizational (Waddell and Sohal, 1998) has lead the resistance interpretation from a psychological point of view (Conner, 1998), as a natural outcome of people's internal defence mechanism (Bovey and Hede, 2001), or background conversations among employees that constitute the constructed reality (Ford, Ford, & McNamara, 2002). Paterson and Hartel (2000) interpreted resistance as a people's cognition and affect or the perceived organizational justice done, while Rousseau (1989), McLean Parks and Kidder (1994) find it significantly related with the violation of the employment psychological contract. Resistance may be categorized into three groups of factors (Mabin, Forgeson & Green, 2001): organizational, group and individual. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.