Read The Background Of Work Redesign Below Done By The Inter

Read Thebackgroundof Work Redesign Below Done By The Internal Consulti

Read the background of work redesign below done by the internal consulting team. As external consultants, you want to tell them what they did well and what concerns you have about their process and recommended actions. Include the following information: Create one list to specify the analysis and work redesign strategies used. Create a second list identifying the factors for change that were successfully addressed. Create a third list identifying any factors that deserve more attention. For at least one of these factors, identify how you might have used a different change management practice to handle it. Remember that no matter how many individual items are raised, feedback should be focused on the top 2 or 3 actions to change. Pay particular attention to issues related to handling resistance because they pertain to creating conditions for effective change. What they did well could be a longer list and does not need to be limited. Background Background: International Accounting The situation: Back office operations supporting the global operations were all in HQ in the United States. While some countries had financial staff, the majority of business financial services were supplied from this HQ group. Problems: Processing expense and budgetary costs for this unit were skyrocketing (over 20% a year). The operation is very people intensive and is seen as highly inefficient (by management, the workers in the unit are frustrated too, and the “internal customers†are clearly not satisfied with the quality and timeliness of the work). One measure of the problem is that the regions and local countries vociferously complained about the charge backs from the unit. Better services could be gotten locally, for less cost. Internal interviews and a questionnaire uncovered backlogs in work, especially in answering customer inquiries. Audits showed proof problems, and records did not match. There was high turnover and poor training of newer staff. Errors were increasing, and adding a quality and compliance staff did not seem to help at all. Actions: When the problem was first raised, the internal OD team conducted a series of interviews with management and customers. They suggested that the employees take a survey to assess motivation and identify problems from their view. The survey used was a Job Diagnostic, derived from the work of Hackman and Oldham on job enrichment. It measured the five classic elements: task significance, variety, and identity (along with autonomy and feedback). The survey was mailed to the employees' homes so they would not feel threatened, but no announcements at work were made. The return rate was so poor, several meetings were held (by management without a consultant) to explain why they were sent and what they were hoping to do. Given all the problems and concerns raised at these meetings, the internal consulting team was asked to hold team building sessions. They did, and the same issues were raised—everything seemed to be back at square one (which, essentially, it was). This time, however, the questionnaire was explained and time at work was given to fill it out. With 100% participation, the internal staff was able to see that restructuring the work would improve and address most of the “complaints†raised by management and the workers. Background Workflow was mapped and it was discovered that many of the problems arose from a “functional†structure: each specialty function doing work and feeding it into a coding and routing group. Questions came into the coding and messaging group (part of routing) who could only check on the numbers and had no expertise to understand the real issues. They would call the supervisors of the functional units who would then involve the compliance and quality people to investigate, frequently taking weeks to get back to the message center with a definitive answer (usually the problem was already resolved, but the customers hated getting the explanation weeks after the resolution occurred). The operations were restructured around market/geographic groups. The specific jobs were realigned to comply with the tenets of Job Enrichment with a complete customer focus rather than a functional expertise bent. This worked well, but improvements were still needed. Measurement was instituted to help focus on service quality and improving productivity. This worked very well, but personnel problems were still rampant and cooperation was low. Staff levels were decreased, but expenses were not! The head of finance has asked you, as an external consultant, to evaluate all that was done and recommend how to proceed. He is ready to fire everyone and distribute the functions to the new region offices just to get rid of his headaches.

Paper For Above instruction

Analysis of Internal Work Redesign Efforts and Recommendations

The internal consulting team embarked on a comprehensive effort to address significant inefficiencies and frustrations within the back-office operations of the international accounting division. Their approach involved strategic analysis, organizational restructuring, and targeted interventions aimed at improving service quality, reducing costs, and fostering a more customer-focused work environment. While their actions demonstrated multiple strengths, there are critical areas where further attention and alternative practices could enhance the effectiveness of the change process.

Analysis and Work Redesign Strategies Used

• Workflow Mapping and Functional to Market-Based Restructuring: The team analyzed existing workflows and identified bottlenecks resulting from a functional organizational structure. They then redesigned the workflows around geographic and market segments, aligning jobs with customer focus and operational efficiency.
• Employee Engagement through Job Diagnostic Surveys and Team Building: To assess motivation and uncover employee issues, they employed Hackman and Oldham’s Job Diagnostic Survey, coupled with team-building sessions to foster communication and shared understanding.
• Implementation of Measurement Systems: Metrics focused on service quality and productivity were introduced to monitor performance and facilitate continuous improvement, specifically targeting backlogs and errors.
• Process Analysis and Root Cause Identification: The team conducted audits, interviews, and record reviews to pinpoint systemic problems such as errors, record mismatches, and lengthy resolution times.

Factors for Change Successfully Addressed

• Organizational Restructuring: Transition from a functional to a customer-focused, geographic structure, which improved workflow clarity and responsiveness.
• Employee Participation: Achieved full participation in surveys and involvement in team-building activities, indicating increased engagement and buy-in for the change efforts.
• Process Efficiency Gains: Introduction of targeted measurements and workflow analysis led to better monitoring and some operational improvements, including quicker responses.

Factors That Require More Attention

• Handling Resistance and Employee Morale: Despite participation, persistent personnel problems such as high turnover, poor training, and low cooperation remain. Resistance to change, especially among staff feeling uncertain or overwhelmed, was insufficiently managed.
• Change Sustainability and Long-term Engagement: While initial restructuring showed short-term benefits, the team did not sufficiently embed continuous change practices or foster ongoing commitment from employees and managers.
• Leadership and Communication Practices: Communication was limited, exemplified by the mailing of surveys to employees’ homes and minimal on-site announcements, potentially undermining trust and transparency.

Alternative Change Management Practices for Addressed Factors

Addressing employee resistance and morale might have benefited from more participative or transformational change management strategies. For instance, involving employees in co-creating solutions through facilitated workshops and active feedback loops could have fostered a deeper sense of ownership. Implementing regular town hall meetings, transparent communication channels, and change champions from within the staff could have mitigated resistance more effectively (Carnall, 2007). Furthermore, deploying broader change management frameworks, such as Kotter’s 8-Step Process, could have helped in establishing urgency, forming guiding coalitions, and creating a compelling vision that aligns with staff values and concerns (Kotter, 1998).

Conclusion

The internal team’s work redesign and process improvement efforts demonstrated commendable strategic analysis, stakeholder engagement, and structural realignment. However, issues related to resistance management, morale, and sustainable engagement suggest that a more comprehensive, participative approach informed by change management best practices could yield better long-term results. Focusing on fostering trust, involving employees in decision-making, and ensuring continuous communication are critical to effectively implementing and sustaining organizational change.

References

• Carnall, S. (2007). Managing Change in Organisations. Routledge.
• Kotter, J. P. (1998). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
• Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250-279.
• Burke, W. W. (2014). Organization Change: Theory and Practice. SAGE Publications.
• Hiatt, J. (2006). ADKAR: A Model for Change in Business, Government and Our Community. Prosci Research.
• Burnes, B. (2004). Kurt Lewin and the Planned Approach to Change: A Reappraisal. Journal of Management Studies, 41(6), 977-1002.
• Prosci. (2020). Change Management Methodology. Retrieved from https://www.prosci.com
• Palmer, I., Dunford, R., & Akin, G. (2009). Managing Organizational Change. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Louis, M. R., & Sutton, R. I. (1991). Changing Perspectives on Organizational Change. Organization Change and Development, 2, 323-349.
• Apparatus, D. (2010). Employee resistance to organizational change: State of the art. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 311-327.