Green Mountain Resort Read The Case Study

Green Mountain Resortread The Case Studygreen Mountain Resort Diss

Green Mountain Resort read The case study: Green Mountain Resort (Dis)solves the Turnover Problem from the end of Chapter 2. Answer the following questions in a three page APA style paper; include outside sources to support your answers:

a. Which of the six change images discussed in the chapter can be identified in the assumptions about changing turnover that were held by:

• Gunter?

• The hospitality literature?

• The consultant?

b. How did these assumptions influence prescriptions for dealing with “the turnover problem?”

c. Choose another change image and apply it to “the turnover problem.” To what new insights does this lead?

d. What conclusions do you draw from this about the statement at the start of the chapter that “if we only draw upon one particular frame, then this will take us away from thinking about what is going on from an alternative perspective?”

Paper For Above instruction

The case study of Green Mountain Resort provides rich insights into organizational change management, particularly regarding employee turnover in the hospitality industry. Through examining the assumptions held by Gunter, the hospitality literature, and a consultant, as well as exploring different change images, we can better understand the multifaceted nature of addressing turnover issues. This essay discusses these perspectives, analyzes their influence on change strategies, applies alternative change images to the problem, and reflects on the importance of multiple frames in organizational analysis.

Assumptions about changing turnover: Gunter, Literature, and the Consultant

Gunter, a manager at Green Mountain Resort, primarily operated under a rational-empirical view, assuming that employee turnover could be mitigated through direct interventions such as improved pay, benefits, and working conditions. This perspective aligns with Lewin’s change model, emphasizing manageable, incremental adjustments without challenging underlying cultural or systemic issues (Burnes, 2004). Gunter believed that turnover was a problem of ‘people leaving’ due to clear deficiencies that could be rectified with straightforward solutions, reflecting a technical-rational assumption that organizational issues are primarily technical problems.

The hospitality literature tends to adopt a socio-technical perspective, recognizing that turnover is influenced not only by tangible factors like pay but also by organizational culture, employee engagement, and career development opportunities. Scholars in the field emphasize the complexity of turnover, linking it to job satisfaction, workplace environment, and management practices (Baum, 2015). However, much of this literature still operates within a framework that sees turnover as a problem to be fixed by managerial interventions, often assuming that external factors such as incentives or policy changes directly impact employee retention.

The consultant’s perspective tends to be more systemic, viewing turnover as a symptom of deeper organizational issues, including leadership style, communication patterns, and organizational culture. This viewpoint adopts a holistic change image, emphasizing transformation and learning rather than simple fixes. The consultant might argue that preventing turnover requires cultural change, employee involvement, and addressing underlying assumptions about management and communication practices (Schein, 2010). Thus, the assumptions differ significantly: while Gunter sees turnover as a straightforward problem, the literature and consultant place it within a broader, more complex context.

Influence of Assumptions on Prescriptions for Dealing with Turnover

Gunter’s assumptions influenced a prescription centered on technical fixes: increasing wages, offering better benefits, and improving working conditions as direct solutions. These recommended actions are quick to implement and measurable, aligning with a rational approach that assumes straightforward cause-and-effect relationships (Hiatt & Creasy, 2010). However, such prescriptions may overlook deeper cultural issues that influence employee loyalty and engagement.

The hospitality literature, while recognizing complexity, often still emphasizes managerial strategies such as improving job design, training, and reward systems. While these are important, their focus on individual or environmental factors often neglect systemic or cultural change, thus limiting the scope of solutions (Kim et al., 2009).

The systemic perspective of the consultant suggests that prescriptions should include organizational development initiatives, cultural change strategies, and leadership development programs. These approaches are more comprehensive but require higher investment and commitment over the long term, which organizations may resist due to short-term focus or resource constraints (Cameron & Green, 2015).

Applying a Different Change Image: The Systemic/Whole-Organization Perspective

Choosing the systemic/whole-organization change image shifts focus from individual or isolated problems to viewing turnover as an emergent property of complex organizational systems. Applying this perspective to the turnover problem involves examining how organizational culture, leadership practices, communication flows, and systemic processes contribute to employee retention or attrition (Morgan, 2006).

This approach brings insights into underlying organizational dynamics, such as how leadership styles influence employee morale or how communication barriers create disengagement. It encourages viewing turnover as a symptom of organizational health rather than a standalone issue. Consequently, solutions involve holistic organizational development, including participative decision-making, cultural alignment, and fostering a sense of community and shared purpose (Senge, 2006). This broadened lens reveals interdependencies and complexities that simplistic fixes might miss, emphasizing the importance of systemic change over piecemeal interventions.

Reflections on Multiple Frames and Organizational Understanding

The statement at the start of the chapter underscores the limitations of relying solely on one perspective or frame when analyzing organizational issues. Drawing upon only a technical-rational frame, for example, narrows the focus to tangible solutions such as pay increases, potentially ignoring deeper cultural, psychological, or systemic factors influencing turnover. Conversely, using multiple frames—technological, cultural, political, or systemic—enables a richer, more nuanced understanding of the problem (Bolman & Deal, 2017). It fosters a comprehensive approach that considers diverse influences and encourages adaptable, long-term solutions.

Applying multiple frames helps organizations avoid the trap of simplistic solutions or tunnel vision. It enhances diagnostic accuracy, promotes stakeholder engagement, and increases the likelihood of sustainable interventions. As advocated by Bolman and Deal (2017), recognizing different organizational ‘lenses’ provides a more holistic picture, thereby improving change management outcomes. For Green Mountain Resort, adopting multiple perspectives could lead to more innovative and effective strategies to address turnover that resonate at individual, cultural, and systemic levels.

Conclusion

Understanding how different perspectives influence change strategies is crucial in effectively managing organizational issues like employee turnover. Gunter’s technical view, the hospitality literature’s socio-technical approach, and the systemic insights of a consultant each offer valuable but limited lenses. Applying alternative change images, such as a systemic or holistic perspective, can significantly enrich understanding and intervention strategies. Ultimately, embracing multiple frames encourages organizations to move beyond surface-level fixes towards more sustainable, organizational-wide change. Recognizing the limitations of any single perspective is essential for fostering adaptive, resilient organizations capable of addressing complex challenges like turnover.

References

• Baum, T. (2015). The business of hospitality and tourism: A guide to better management. Routledge.
• Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. John Wiley & Sons.
• Burnes, B. (2004). Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: A re-appraisal. Journal of Management Studies, 41(6), 977–1002.
• Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2015). Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools, and techniques. Kogan Page Publishers.
• Hiatt, J., & Creasy, T. (2010). Change management: The people side of change. Prosci Learning Center Publications.
• Kim, W. C., Mauborgne, R., & Lee, K. (2009). Blue ocean strategy: How to create uncontested market space and make the competition irrelevant. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Sage.
• Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. John Wiley & Sons.
• Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. Doubleday.