(Mt) – MMH 356 ADKAR Methodology of Change Management Case Study Paper

SOLUTION AT Academic Writers Bay

MMH356 – Change Management Trimester 1, 2022 Assignment 2: Group Report DUE DATE AND TIME: PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE: WORD COUNT: HURDLE DETAILS: Friday 29 April, 2022, 8.00 PM 40% 3,000 words None Learning outcome details: Unit Learning Outcome (ULO) Graduate Learning Outcome (GLO) ULO 1: Demonstrate a sophisticated and nuanced understanding of theoretical frameworks, key concepts and contemporary human resource and management issues associated with organisational change ULO 2: Use digital technologies to locate and access information relevant to change in a real‐life organisation, and to then effectively communicate that account using a specified academic referencing style and specified professional report format ULO 3: Critically describe, analyse and evaluate practical change‐ related behaviours, processes and outcomes by referring to organisational change theories and concepts ULO 4: Selectively apply evidence‐based theories and concepts to change opportunities and instances within real organisational contexts in order to improve the likelihood of more effective human resource and/or more efficient management outcomes GLO1: Discipline specific knowledge and capabilities GLO 3: Digital literacy GLO 4: Critical thinking GLO 5: Problem solving Assessment feedback: Students who submit their work by the due date will receive their marks and formative feedback on CloudDeakin by 20 May 2021, 8.00pm. Students who submit the Report after the due date may not receive their results until after those released for on‐time submissions. Deakin’s Bachelor of Commerce and MBA are internationally EPAS accredited. Deakin Business School is accredited by AACSB and EQUIS. Group work: You are required to form a group of three (3) for Assignment 2. This reflects one of Deakin University’s Graduate Learning Outcomes of Teamwork. Sometimes, when completing group assignments, you may run into problems with group members. These problems may result from different levels of experiences, expectations and attitudes to work, or other commitments that group members have, etc. It is strongly recommended that the group contribute to and agree to a team charter to address issues/contingencies as they arise. The Unit Team expects that all group members will contribute equally to all assignments; in your third year of study, everyone should expect and display total commitment to your study. Pre-work The key to a great group outcome in this setting (tertiary education) is to engage your prospective team members in early discussion about expectations, constraints and contingencies. When choosing a team consider whether you have appropriate diversity in your team as this will add to the depth and richness of your discussions and increase your learning. The more informed everyone is the better the selection process. If you have worked with others in the cohort before and know their standard of work and level of communication, you should proceed. If you don’t, then perhaps set a small task with a deadline to assess integrity (they do what they say they are going to do) and ask to review a sample of previous work (no surprises then down the track) for transparency. The more your expectations can be thrashed out in the earlier stages, the easier it may be to work through competing deadlines and challenges as this submission deadline comes closer. Enrolling in your group Once you have worked out your team members, please enrol into a group, using the Groups function under Tools in the MMH356 main toolbar. Students are required to self-select into teams of three. On the odd occasion, a group may have a reduced membership of two (the numbers just fall that way), or groups may experience an issue which is better addressed by removing one group member – but there will be no change to the assignment brief. If a group has not been formed by a date to be advised, the Unit Chair will allocate remaining students into a group and post group membership in a News Item. Working on your group assignment Identify the best platform on which to collaborate on such as Microsoft tools Office 365, OneDrive and Teams. Exchange a range of contact options with each other to stay in touch regularly – it’s not only a common courtesy but also reassures everyone is working to the benchmarks set. Keep in mind the line that separates collaboration with collusion. Do NOT use assignments from previous trimesters as a “reference” because the assignment brief will be different. If you need some support, seek help from library staff, or the Unit Chair. Page 2 of 7 Countdown to the deadline Once formed, if group members run into problems or believe that a group member is underperforming, not responding to messages, or has not made an equal contribution, advise the Unit Chair as soon as possible (which doesn’t mean the day before the due deadline!!). This will enable the UC to take appropriate steps to ensure the problem does not continue. Some remedies include the Unit Chair contacting and counselling the underperforming group member (first and preferred approach), and/or potentially applying a reduction in marks to the group member based on their reduced contribution (via a combined group member’s peer review/unit chair moderation). Assignment task: Locate and read the Dan Murphy’s (DM) case study, in the Assignment 2 folder. Noting the past events surrounding and contributing to DM’s situation, you have now been appointed by DM as a change management team to complete the following tasks: 1) Identify a significant change initiative in the Darwin region that will enable DM to regain the trust of its shareholders, employees and most importantly, the public (this can be any pro-active change and does not have to relate to the liquor licence scenario outlined in the Dan Murphy’s case study). In providing a rationale for this initiative, you must clearly explain why the change initiative has been chosen and what the outcome will be once the initiative has been successfully implemented (ie. what value will be generated). 2) A successful change implementation can only be achieved if those parties impacted by the change (ie. stakeholders) are convinced that the change is worthwhile and that the resultant benefits outweigh the costs involved. In relation to the change selected, you must clearly state who the stakeholders are (remembering that these stakeholders may not have been present in the liquor licence scenario detailed in the Dan Murphy’s case study), how they are impacted and what their level of interest, power and influence is. (Tip: The stakeholder grid was covered in the unit and remember that stakeholders could comprise individuals and/or teams). 3) The successful implementation of your change initiative is a critical undertaking for DM and therefore; a. DM has stipulated that you must utilize the PROSCI ADKAR methodology to guide your implementation project. Drawing from the unit content and further research, you must explain and apply each phase of the methodology in detail. b. Within the above discussion, how will you know the outcome of each phase has been achieved in relation to the three major stakeholders? (N.B The ADKAR model stipulates that you cannot move to a subsequent phase until the outcome relating to the previous phase has been achieved). Page 3 of 7 Assignment format: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (5 marks) Provide an overview of the whole report for time poor executives. An exemplar of an executive summary is included in the Ass 2 folder. INTRODUCTION (5 marks): Identify the significant change initiative recommended for DM to regain the trust of shareholders, employees and the public. Provide the rationale for your selection and the expected outcome (value generated for DM). BODY (25 marks): Stakeholders (10 marks) Identify the stakeholders, and what their level of interest, and power/influence is. You should provide a stakeholder map and accompanying analysis of how each stakeholder or stakeholder group will be impacted. ADKAR (15 marks) Explain each phase of the ADKAR methodology in detail. You must also identify what measures will indicate that the outcome/s pertaining to each phase has been achieved. STRUCTURE, CITATIONS AND REFERENCING (5 marks): This section will assess the structure of your report (appropriate page and section layout and use of headings and sub-headings to promote flow), citation format and usage within the discussion, and the accuracy of the reference list. For referencing, use a minimum of four (4) academic sources AND four (4) non‐academic sources relevant to your Report. Use https://www.deakin.edu.au/students/studying/studysupport/referencing Page 4 of 7 Report requirements: LAYOUT You must include the following sections in your Report (asterisked notes are explained below table): Title Page new page, Roman numeral page number i, but page number invisible; not included total word count Table of Contents new page, Roman numeral page number ii, NOT included total word count List of Illustrations new page, only include list of any diagrams, figures or illustrations, don’t include actual diagrams Roman numeral page numbering NOT included total word count Executive Summary* new page, Roman numeral page numbering approx. 400 words to provide a guide NOT included total word count Introduction (change new page, proposed and rationale) Arabic numeral page number 1; approx. 500 words (+/- 10%) Included in word count Body: Stakeholder map & new page, discussion Arabic numeral page numbering approx. 500 words (+/- 10%) Included in word count new page, ADKAR Arabic numeral page numbering total approx. 3,000 words (+/- 10%) Included in word count References new page, all sources in the one section, according to Australian Harvard Guide to Referencing, Arabic numeral page numbering Asterisked notes: * Refer Generic Report Writing Guide on CloudDeakin for detailed advice about: (i) what types of information to include in which report sections; (ii) how to number the sections; (iii) how to apply Roman and Arabic pagination for the different sections; and (iv) how to write and present your recommendations. Page 5 of 7 FORMATTING: Submission of a formal report which is presented and formatted at a professional standard is an important and assessed Learning Outcome for this assignment, and also a valuable employment skill. Please apply the following: • • • • • • • Font: Size 12 Times New Roman, Calibri or Arial Line spacing: 1.5, no indentation, but one extra line spacing between paragraphs Headings and sub‐headings Section numbering: Alphanumeric or decimal outline of up to three levels Pagination: Roman page numbering and Arabic page numbering used as requested above Header and/or footer: Group #, unit code and assessment task name Total word count: provided on Title page SUBMISSION: 1. Save your assignment as a Word file (.doc or .docx) with a file name which includes your Group number, unit code plus the name of the assessment task. e.g. Group#_MMH356_Report 2. One student only to upload the group report. 3. Click on the Assignment Submission Dropbox within MMH356 on CloudDeakin to declare that the Report is totally your own work written in this Trimester for this unit and submit your assignment. 4. Check carefully to confirm that your report was submitted and received correctly. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS • Assignments are on time if they are submitted via CloudDeakin before the due date/time. • You may resubmit your assignment, at any time up until the due date/time. • Do not, under any circumstance, email your assignment to the Unit Chair or Cloud Coordinator. It will not be assessed. • Requests for Special Consideration, extensions or variation to the assignment task will be considered only if caused by some unexpected, unpredictable and unavoidable event AND supported by documentation. Requests and documentation must be emailed to the Unit Chair [email protected] before the assignment due date. • Late submissions without extensions will be accepted up until five days after the due date/time, with 5% of available marks deducted per day (or part thereof) late. All assignments are now due at 8:00 pm; the late penalty in MMH356 will be applied when the assignment is submitted after 23.59pm of that day, and 5% thereafter for each additional day late. • Plagiarism declaration: By clicking on the SUBMIT button to submit your assignment, you are declaring that the work is entirely your own, except where material quoted or paraphrased is acknowledged in the text by use of quotation marks and citations where appropriate. You are also declaring that it has not been submitted for assessment by any other student or by you in any other unit or course. Page 6 of 7 ASSIGNMENT RESULTS Your report results, rubric scores and feedback will normally become available in the Assignment Folder in CloudDeakin within 15 business days of the due date. If you have been granted an extension for the assignment, your score and feedback may be released later than for on‐time submissions. Before results are returned to students, the unit team will moderate the marking process to ensure that the same marking standards are applied to all students within the unit and to check all assignments for plagiarism using Turnitin software. Marking penalties will be applied to reports which contain evidence of plagiarism, collusion or other forms of cheating. If any student believes an error has been made in the marking of their assignment and wishes to request a review, they must: (1) email the Unit Chair ([email protected]), from their Deakin email account, within 5 working days of the CloudDeakin release of marks, and (2): (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) attach e‐copies of their assignment and their completed Grade Form Rubric; identify the specific rubric criterion involved; explain why their work should have received a higher score for that criterion; and support their claim by referring to specific evidence from their assignment. Receiving a disappointing result is not a justification for review. In the rare case of a review being granted, the reviewed score will be final. That score may increase, decrease or remain unchanged from the original. Page 7 of 7 Dan Murphy’s in Darwin: ‘a disastrous proposal’ Mike Bengough and Dr Andrea Howell Dan Murphy’s is a highly successful liquor store with 248 outlets throughout Australia and is a fully owned subsidiary of Woolworths Group Australia (WGA). In 2019, WGA merged its drinks and hospitality businesses (Endeavour Drinks and the ALH Group (ALH)), to establish the Endeavour Group Ltd (EG). The merger was a strategic initiative to enable the de-mutualisation of EG from WGA at a future time. According to Rickard (8 June, 2021) while WGA stated the sell off was to “enhance shareholder value through a greater focus on each business’ core customers offering and growth opportunities”, the “real” reason was that WGA wanted to exit the poker machine business. As the owner of 12,400 electronic gaming (poker machine) licences, Rickard suggested WGA was increasingly off the radar for many fund managers because of its ownership of poker machines. EG was listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) in 2021. In its promotional material, Dan Murphy’s tells the story of its namesake (Gibson, 2021): “One man built his reputation on a handshake. He made a promise that no matter who you were, or what you’d like to drink, he’d have that drink at the lowest price.” However, that promise appears to have cost WGA a lot of money and a heavy hit to its reputation. A five-year battle to acquire a liquor ‘megastore’ approved in Darwin and sited near three ‘dry’ or alcohol-free areas, was abandoned in April, 2021 following a strong and sustained backlash from Aboriginal and health groups. Northern Territorians’ average per capita consumption of alcohol is among the highest in the world. Rates of alcohol harm are shocking, including presentations to hospital emergency departments, traumatic head injury, hospitalisations for acute alcohol disease, alcohol-related domestic violence and child abuse (Thorn, 2021). Therefore, the advocacy for this ‘disastrous proposal’ by one of Australia’s biggest corporations had the potential to put Aboriginal health and wellbeing at grave risk (McInerney, 2021). Initially, WGA did not bow to pressure from local groups and mounted a robust defence of the Darwin site. It even went so far as to seek a change of legislation before accepting the decision of an independent review panel early in 2021 (refer to the Timeline at the end of this paper). In the aftermath, WGA CEO Brad Banducci issued an apology and conceded the organisation did not listen to the concerns of indigenous groups, the voices of First Nation people inside of WGA, and their advisory panel, and did not follow their Reconciliation Action plan. “It’s deeply ironic that we can sit here and talk about our support for the Uluru Statement of the Heart 1 but that needs to be reflected in how we run our business and the things we need to change”, said Mr Banducci (Mitchell 2021b). “We need to get our own house in order”. 1 The Uluru Statement of the Heart was developed in 2017 to enable Indigenous Australians to have a voice in matters of law which affect them What was at stake? For Woolworths, the $40m investment was welcomed by local business groups as an answer to economic stagnation and greater consumer choice (Gibson, 2021). What began in 2016 with the original application to build the liquor megastore at the proposed location, saw a five-year run of rejections, appeals, opposition and discussion. Cumulatively, this put pressure on EG (CEO Steve Donohue), to announce in November 2020 that it had agreed to move the site of the proposed Dan Murphy’s Darwin store to be further away from these communities. The group said this decision had been made after extensive consultation with community groups. Interestingly in December, 2020 WGA announced it had commissioned an Independent Panel Review (IPR) of the Darwin plans, which would review health concerns, stakeholder engagement and other processes behind the store. At the time, WGA Chairman Gordon Cairns said: “We acknowledge that there are some in the community that feel they have not been adequately consulted regarding the proposed store. The IPR will provide a further opportunity for them and other stakeholders with a legitimate interest in the development to express their views” (Allen, 2021). For local indigenous, health and community groups, issues with alcohol related problems meant there was vehement opposition to the planned investment. The proposed megastore was within walking distance of three dry Aboriginal communities, including Kulaluk, Minmarama and Bagot. Olga Havnen, Chief Executive of Danila Dilba said Darwin was already “awash with takeaway liquor” and that “we don’t need another store, especially one located so close to three dry Aboriginal communities.” She also stated: “There’s no harm caused to the community by taking the time to properly consider the public interest and community impact of the proposal. But there is a lot of potential harm in a rushed process that neglects the public health impact” (Allen, 2021). For the NT Government, it see-sawed between attempts to curb alcohol-related harm and promote development. When elected in 2016, the government made it clear it was serious about the territory’s alcohol problems. It reinstated the Banned Drinkers Register; appointed former Chief Justice Trevor Riley to conduct a ‘root and branch’ review of the territory’s alcohol policies and legislation; and accepted all but one of the 220 recommendations of Riley’s review, including establishing an independent liquor commission. However, this began to change once the reforms came into effect. The 400 square metre ban was repealed, the government’s opposition to WGA’s proposal evaporated and it seemed to become less enamoured of the commission’s ‘independence’ (Thorn, 2021). Sydney-based lawyer Danny Gilbert was scathing in his review, which found WGA and the government worked together to find a way around the barriers to the development’s approval. They ultimately decided to legislate their way out of the difficulties, bypassing the independent Liquor Commission and giving the Director of Liquor Licensing the power to fast-track an approval. “Instead of doing its own dirty work, the government had engineered a process that made the Director of Liquor Licensing responsible for determining the application” said Thorn (2021). Community groups expressed disappointment over the decision and accused WGA of “corporate wilful blindness”, comparing the decision to the destruction of Juukan Gorge 2 by mining company Rio Tinto (Powell, 2020, 2021a; Knight, 2021). “I believe the decision by WGA chairman Gordon Cairns and CEO Brad Banducci to aggressively pursue their desired outcome is a good example of corporate wilful blindness,” said Olga Havnen. For business investors, Dan Murphy’s withdrawal may have ongoing ramifications according to Opposition leader Lia Finocchiar: “The Gunner government’s reaction and continual shifting of the goalposts made it very clear, even to the most casual observer, that the Northern Territory is not a 2 Rio Tinto developed mining projects in heritage areas by blowing up 40,000 year old caves (Knight, 2021) good place to do business (Gibson, 2021)”. The NT Chamber of Commerce chief executive Greg Ireland concurred saying the “scrapped” proposal would mean the loss of new jobs and affect the perception that the NT was a place to do business (Read & O’Mallon, 2021). However, for other business leaders such as Australia’s richest man, Andrew Forrest, the decision to withdraw made sense. Mr Forrest had previously criticised the company’s choice to open a “dirty big grog shop” near the Indigenous community (Powell, 2021). The aftermath Woolworths/Endeavour Group In the upper echelons of corporate Australia, brand reputation trumps local profits (Gibson, 2021). When opponents of the project took their fight directly to the WGA board, warning its national reputation was at risk if it allowed its subsidiary to proceed with the controversial Darwin project, the Board took note and commissioned an independent review. That report was highly critical of WGA officials, Michael Gunner’s Labor government, and the actions of the territory’s Director of Liquor Licensing Phil Timney, in approving the development in the face of the opposition from health experts and the wishes of Darwin’s Indigenous community. WGA management agreed, apologising: “We did not do enough in this community to live up to the best practice stakeholder engagement to which we hold ourselves accountable,” Mr Cairns, WGA Chairman said. “In particular we did not do enough stakeholder engagement with a range of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and organisations.” BUT WGA CEO Brad Banducci denied the company had done anything wrong in April (Allam & Butler, 2021). “There’s nothing wrong with what we’ve done, but we can improve it, and we have high aspirations for the way we should operate,” he said. He then sought to put some distance between WGA and the EG; at a shareholder briefing on April 29, 2021 he did not rule out the prospect of a Dan Murphy’s outlet opening elsewhere in Darwin but stated future plans were a matter for the WGA subsidiary which is demerging from the supermarket chain (Breen, 2021): “What we have announced today is that we will not be proceeding on the current location,” he said. “As to whether there’s a future Dan Murphy’s in Darwin that would be up to the Endeavour Group but certainly in any engagement process going forward we will take on board the Gilbert Review findings and adjust how we consult on those matters.” WGA then formally surrendered its liquor licence back to the NT Government on April 29, 2021. In a letter to the IRP Chair, Danny Gilbert, on June 9 WGA Group Chairman, Gordon Cairns, Group CEO, Brad Banducci and Group Sustainability Chair, Holly Kramer stated: “We clearly failed to meet our expectations and we deeply regret our insensitivity to critical stakeholders in Darwin and beyond, and our own external Indigenous Advisory Panel, whose advice we did not seek. For that, we unreservedly apologise. At the heart of our reflections today is strengthening our foundations for deeper, and more thoughtful and meaningful relationships with First Nations’ peoples. Relationships built on listening, learning and education. Relationships underpinned by equity and respect. Without those foundations it will not be possible for us to achieve our ambitions for full reconciliation”. Banducci also admitted, in June 2021, that ‘The buck stops with me . . . I’ve learnt a lot’’(Mitchell, 2021a; Butler, 2021). Powell (2021) reported that WGA’s executives would not lose their bonuses but chief executive Brad Banducci has pledged to base a portion of WGAs’ long-term executive remuneration in the future on the company’s reputation to ensure issues such as those with the sinceaxed Darwin store would not be repeated. External stakeholders Olga Havnen, Danila Dilba Chief Executive said it was a win for ensuring big corporations take into consideration the social and economic impacts of their businesses: “Those things have got to be taken into consideration. This is why we have environmental laws. This is where we have restrictions on the sale of certain products. For example, we don’t sell alcohol to kids – there’s a reason for that. I think these sorts of social responsibilities need to be taken into account and considered seriously, and that it’s not enough just to focus on the profits. Profits don’t come before people or before the environment,” she said (McInerney, 2021). Several external stakeholders have also called for greater corporate responsibility (McInerney, 2021). The Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) welcomed the news that WGA had cancelled its plans for the store saying it was good that the retail corporate had listened to the concerns of Indigenous groups. But it also sounded a warning, saying it was “disappointing to hear from the CEO Brad Banducci that WGA may search for a new location for the store”. “These stores will cause serious alcohol harms wherever they are, and it’s time major retailers listened to the expert public health advice on these issues,” the PHAA tweeted. The Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) also welcomed WGA’s decision, saying the news “comes as a relief to specialist physicians who have been seriously concerned about the impacts of building a liquor megastore and the harms that it would bring to the community. When we increase the access to alcohol in the community, we see a direct increase in alcohol related harms,” said President John Wilson. “After all the progress that’s been made in reducing alcohol related harm in the Northern Territory, building a liquor megastore would have been a disappointing and an unnecessary step backward. We hope that this will herald the start of a process where more socially responsible decision making is made by commercial entities about the impacts of alcohol-related harm in the communities they serve.” AMSANT, Danila Dilba, Foundation for Alcohol research and Education (FARE) and NTCOSS are asking the retail giant to release the Gilbert Review immediately, “in the interests of transparency”. “This is an important opportunity for Woolworths and other big alcohol retailers to re-assess their community consultation processes and acknowledge the harms their stores do to so many communities across Australia,” they said. “Communities should not need to fight so hard for so long ever again – this a unique opportunity for a re-set of liquor store approval processes in the NT and indeed across the country.” Timeline The key dates and strategic moves by Woolworths and other stakeholders (FARE, 2021): 2016 • • The NT Government amended the Liquor Regulations to make it a condition of a store licence that the retail floor space was limited to a maximum of 400 square metres3. Woolworths applied to substitute an existing licence for a Dan Murphy’s store and threatened to take the NT Government to court. 2017 • • • 2018 • • • 2019 • • • • • 2020 • • • 3 Woolworths applied to the Federal Court of Australia to have the amendments made under The Liquor Amendment Regulations 2016 declared invalid on the basis that they were not within the regulation making powers of the Government. It later withdraws the case from Federal Court action against the NT Government An independent review into alcohol in the NT — the Alcohol Policies and Legislation Review (Riley Review) established to tackle the high level of alcohol harm in the NT. The Alcohol Policies and Legislation Review Final Report made a range of recommendations to reduce alcohol harm in the NT. o One of the recommendations from the Riley Review comes into effect: a five-year moratorium on new take-away liquor licences began 27 October, 2017. o However, the 400 square metre rule would be repealed. The NT Government announces legislation to re-establish an NT Liquor Commission. Woolworths lodged an application to build a Dan Murphy’s liquor outlet on the corner of Osgood Drive and Bagot Road, Eaton. Woolworths applies to NT Liquor Commission for licence; it commences its next legal action, applying to the NT Liquor Commission to open the first Dan Murphy’s store in Darwin despite the application being opposed by Aboriginal communities, members of the public, and organisations including FARE, NTCOSS, Danila Dilba health service, Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance NT, Public Health Association NT, and Amity Community Services. The NT Liquor Commission denied the application for substitution (see 2017) on 20 September 2019, noting the “potential for a significant increase in harm due to the use of liquor, over and above that already occurring within the community areas”. The Northern Territory Government overhauls the Liquor Act 1978 in response to the 2017 Alcohol Policies and Legislation Review Final Report (the Riley Review) and the NT Liquor Act 2019 comes into effect. Woolworths appealed the NT Liquor Commission decision to the NT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NTCAT). Woolworths faces shareholder scrutiny when asked to approve re-structure plans NTCAT dismisses Woolworths’ application on the grounds that it could be made in relation to premises that existed. Woolworths applied to the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory for leave to appeal the Tribunal decision. Legislative Assembly introduced the Liquor Amendment Bill 2020 and referred it to the Legislation Scrutiny Committee for inquiry. As a result, Woolworths withdrew from the Supreme Court action since the legislation changed the Liquor Act 2019 to remove the barriers to the application identified by NTCAT. FARE took the unprecedented step of formally writing to the Board of Woolworths asking them to properly consider and reassess their Director responsibilities under the Corporations Act 2001. “In light of the LC Decision, FARE’s position is that it is reasonably foreseeable that to continue to pursue the proposed development will carry with it significant reputational risk to Woolworths.” About 1.5 times as big as a tennis court (The measure of things, 2021) • • • • 2021 • • • • • • • • Woolworths lodged an application to have the case reconsidered at NTCAT. However, it sought an adjournment of public hearing to early 2021. Government introduces legislation to bypass independent Liquor Commission process; power now granted to the Director of Liquor Licensing to decide on the Woolworths’ Dan Murphy’s application without following the laws of natural justice or considering the previous decisions by the Liquor Commission or NTCAT. Woolworths can propose an alternative location without submitting a new application and without seeking the views of the community at the new location. The current NTCAT proceedings would be terminated, and the Director’s decision would not be reviewable by NTCAT. Moves by the NT Government to weaken its alcohol policy reforms were condemned by leading NT Aboriginal, health and social groups and community members. Supermarket giant Woolworths faced increasing pressure from Darwin-based health and Indigenous community groups to reconsider a controversial plan to open one of its biggest Dan Murphy’s liquor outlets in the city. The announcement that a Dan Murphy’s outlet would relocate to an alternate site fails to alleviate the concerns of Aboriginal community health advocates. 130,000 signatures ignite the “keep grog out of our communities” petition. NT Community continues to speak out, refuting Gordon Cairns (Woolworths Chairperson) claims of community consultation during Woolworths AGM. 45 organisations and community leaders signed an impassioned open letter to Woolworths Chairperson Gordon Cairns. This letter was published as a full-page advertisement in the Australian Financial Review (9 Dec AFR). The Director of Liquor Licensing officially approved Woolworths’ application despite strong community objection. Four high-profile business, health and Indigenous leaders appointed to an independent panel established to review Woolworths’ plans to build a store close to dry communities in Darwin. Indigenous community groups in Darwin hit out against the Woolworths Group for what they say is the company’s failure to have genuine community consultation over the construction of a Dan Murphy’s liquor store. Community groups criticise Woolworths for divisive tactics during push to build Darwin liquor store: “It’s wedging Aboriginal groups against each other. This is the game that they’re good at, big corporates, they love it, and we’re calling on them to cease it. Take a social conscience in all of this and listen to the Aboriginal leadership here in the Northern Territory and withdraw your application now.” – John Paterson, CEO AMSANT Call for Reconciliation Australia to pull support for Woolworths over Darwin Dan Murphy’s Danila Dilba launches legal action against Woolworths, NT Liquor Licensing director over Darwin Dan Murphy’s Community leaders say new Dan Murphy’s store will add fuel to fire of town’s drinking problem On April 30, Woolworths abandoned its plan for a Dan Murphy’s in Darwin. Following Woolworths’ decision, the company formally surrendered its liquor licence back to the NT Government, which was granted to them by the Director of Liquor Licensing in December 2020. This means that, for now, there is no back door open for Woolworths or any of its subsidiaries to build a liquor store in the area. References Allam L and Butler B (29 April, 2021) Woolworths pulls pin on Dan Murphy’s store in Darwin near three dry Aboriginal communities. Accessed 6/8/2021 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/apr/29/woolworths-pulls-pin-on-dan-murphys-storein-darwin-near-three-dry-aboriginal-communities Allen B (8 March 2021) Legal action launched over Darwin’s Dan Murphy’s. Accessed 6/8/2021 https://theshout.com.au/national-liquor-news/legal-action-launched-over-darwin-dan-murphys/ Breen J (29 April, 2021) Woolworths cancels Dan Murphy’s store plans for Darwin near three dry Indigenous communities. Accessed 6/8/2021 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-29/darwindan-murphys-store-plans-cancelled/100103262 Butler B (9 June, 2021) Damning independent review criticises Woolworths’ push to open Dan Murphy’s in Darwin. Access 6/8/2021. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jun/09/woolworths-must-overhaul-lobbyingactivities-after-failures-over-proposed-dan-murphys-outlet-in-darwin-review-finds FARE (2021) Timeline. Accessed 5/8/2021. https://fare.org.au/darwin/ Gibson, J (30 April 2021) Woolworths has abandoned its plan for a Dan Murphy’s in Darwin. But is that the end of the story? Access 5/8/ 2021 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-30/danmurphys-darwin-woolworths-nt/100105088 Knight E (10 June, 2021) Woolworths has just had its Juukan Gorge moment. Accessed 6/8/2021. https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/woolworths-has-just-experienced-its-own-juukangorge-moment-20210609-p57zlp.html McInerney M (29 April, 2021) Indigenous health leaders welcome Woolworths decision to scrap Darwin Dan Murphy’s megastore. Accessed 6/8/2021 https://www.croakey.org/indigenous-healthleaders-welcome-woolworths-decision-to-scrap-darwin-dan-murphys-megastore/ Mitchell (Dec 12, 2019) Woolworths Dan Murphy’s under fire over first Darwin store. Accessed 5/8/2021 https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/woolworths-dan-murphy-s-under-fire-over-firstdarwin-store-20191211-p53izz Mitchell (29 Apr, 2021) Woolworths dumps plan for Dan Murphy’s store in Darwin, for now. Accessed 5/8/2021 Retrieved from https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/woolworths-dumps-danmurphy-s-mega-store-in-darwin-20210429-p57ndi Mitchell S (10 June, 2021a) Woolworths’ mea culpa: Dan Murphy’s review finds major failures. Access 6/8/2021 https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/woolworths-mea-culpa-after-dan-murphys-review-finds-major-failures-20210609-p57zce Mitchell S (10 June, 2021b) Dan Murphy’s debacle shows need for Indigenous voice. Accessed 5/8/2021 https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/woolworths-dan-murphy-s-debacle-shows-needfor-aboriginal-voice-20210609-p57zlf Patrick, Aaron (April 20, 2020) Should Woolworths board stop a morally dubious liquor barn? Accessed 5/8/2021. https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/should-woolworths-board-stop-amorally-dubious-liquor-barn-20200419-p54l5w Powell D (18 December, 2020) ‘No different to Juukan Gorge’” controversial Darwin Dan Murphy’s store approved. Accessed 6/8/2021 ‘No different to Juukan Gorge’: Controversial Darwin Dan Murphy’s store approved (smh.com.au) Powell D (29 April, 2021a) Woolworths axes Dan Murphy’s store in Darwin after review. Accessed 6/8/2021 https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/woolworths-axes-controversial-darwinstore-after-review-finds-failings-20210429-p57ncm.html Powell D (9 June, 2021b) Woolworths execs won’t lose bonuses despite damning Dan Murphy’s report. Accessed 6/8/2021 https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/fundamentally-failedindependent-review-slams-woolworths-over-darwin-dan-murphy-s-store-20210609-p57ze0.html Read M and O’Mallon F (2021) NT business lobby mourns lost jobs from dropping Dan Murphy’s. Accessed 6/8/2021 https://www.afr.com/companies/retail/nt-business-lobby-mourns-lost-jobsfrom-dropping-dan-murphy-s-20210430-p57nrz Rickard P (8 June 2021) Woolworths and Endeavour – what you need to know and do. Accessed 12/8/2021 https://www.nabtrade.com.au/investor/insights/latestnews/news/2021/06/woolworths_and_ende a The Measure of Things (2021). Accessed 5/8/2021 https://www.themeasureofthings.com/results.php?comp=area&unit=m2&amt=400&sort=pr&p=1 Thorn, M (2021) NT Liquor Licensing boss should be removed after Dan Murphy debacle. Accessed 5/8/2021 https://www.themandarin.com.au/163607-nt-liquor-licensing-boss-should-be-removedafter-dan-murphy-debacle/ Woolworths Group Limited (2021) Independent Panel Review into the proposed Dan Murphy’s development in Darwin. Accessed 6/8/2021 https://www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/page/community-and-responsibility/corporateresponsibility-news-updates/people/independent-panel-review-into-the-proposed-danmurphy%E2%80%99s-development-in-darwin MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report [This is an example of a good report] The ADKAR methodology of Change Management: A case study on organisational issues across three Australian companies Word Count: 4,379 [names have been left off and spacing has been minimised purposely] 1 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report Table of Contents Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………………..3 1.0 Overview ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4 1.1 Swan Care ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..4 1.2 WA Communications ………………………………………………………………………………………4 1.3 RSPCA …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..4 2.0 Implementation of the ADKAR Model ………………………………………………………………….6 2.1 Swan Care ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..6 Initiative 1 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..6 Initiative 2 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..7 2.2 WA Communications ………………………………………………………………………………………….8 Initiative 1 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 Initiative 2 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 2.3 RSPCA ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..11 Initiative 1 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………11 Initiative 2 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………12 3.0 Findings ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………14 References ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….16 2 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report Executive Summary This report appraises three organisations; RSPCA, Swan Care and WA Communications, and their readiness to adopt proposed changes to their operations. Following occupational physician, Dr. Niki Ellis’ diagnosis of factors contributing to workplace stress, each organisation raised various concerns. It was found that all three organisations experienced a team member versus senior management ideology and approach from lower-level stakeholders when the organisation was attempting to address their own challenges and issues. Across the organisations there were contrasts identified in the level of engagement from head office and senior management varying from strong leadership and result driven decisions as experienced at WA Communications, to general involvement at Swan Care with aspects of misalignment compared to a lack of management to achieve outcomes at RSPCA. Each organisation’s readiness for change is appraised using Prosci’s ADKAR model (Prosci 2021), a model that evaluates an entity’s awareness, desire, knowledge, ability and reinforcement of a proposed change. Using the ADKAR model, each organisation exhibited varying degrees of receptibility to their respective changes. The three organisations displayed a collective awareness and desire for the need for change, however, it was found that the division between management and lower-level employees prompted differing degrees of this desire for change within the organisations. The knowledge of how to change varied amongst the organisations. WA Communications suffered from conflicting perspectives between upper management and floor staff regarding how, and to what standard the change should be administered, whereas it was revealed both RSPCA and Swan Care required a standard of information to be introduced to inform the organisations of how to change. All three organisations displayed a rudimentary capability to administer the proposed initiatives, however, the inherent challenges of each job, and the lack of sufficient synergy between management and employees complicates the organisations’ capacity to efficiently adopt change. Each of the organisations present as having strengths and areas of weakness in relation to their readiness for change. Reinforcement is the final component to a successful change, and it is critical to the longevity of the transformation. Without proactive participation in the continued implementation of the change by all involved, there is a chance that all efforts and intentions to effect change will go unrealised. It is important to understand that the proposed initiatives can result in success only if all elements of the ADKAR model are observed to be in action. 3 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report 1.0 Overview 1.1 Swan Care Swan Care is a not-for-profit retirement living and aged care organisation with two locations both based in Western Australia. It focuses on providing in-home care and assisting older Australians with living independently in their own homes. Swan Care is facing issues with a declining workforce and an increase in the level of stress experienced by the team members working in the organisation. This has impacted the level of absence of team members which ultimately will shape the level and quality of care the residents receive. In response to this issue, Swan Care has increased its reliance on external carers to fill positions however, this only addresses the issue in the short term. Following Niki Ellis’ actions at Swan Care (Vines et al. 2010a), Swan care has realigned to further overcome some shortcomings of the company through implementing a new HRIS (Human Resource Information System) which aims to improve the onboarding of new team members to ensure they all receive adequate training and support alongside improve the team member retention rate through better recording staff absences in the new HRIS system and reward team members who record high attendance 1.2 WA Communications Perth’s Police Communication Centre (WA) is a 24/7 emergency response call centre, staffed by both police and civilians. The communication centre responds to over 150,000 emergency calls per year, often relaying urgent distress calls and high-intensity situations to emergency services. Newly appointed boss, Superintendent Alf Fordham has been entrusted with increasing the efficiency of the communication centre’s response time and strengthening the centre’s accountability to the public. Fordham has adopted a top-down approach in revamping WA’s efficiency by increasing organisational expectations to standardise the centre’s aptitude, however a lack of transparency in assessing employees has engendered several concerns within the organisation. These were identified as a lack of commendation and transparent feedback for employees, and an inherently stressful work environment due to an exposure to a saturation of traumatic emergency reports and the “low-control, high-demand” (Vines et al. 2010) nature of emergency responses. Additionally, lower-level employee input was excluded in engendering organisational change, whereby managerial decisions were made from senior, yet inexperienced members. 1.3 RSPCA The RSPCA is an Australia-wide independent charity with a mission to protect, shelter, and rehome animals in need (RSPCA 2021). The organisation subsides on community 4 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report contributions and receives very little government assistance. Staff at the Queensland RSPCA are presenting with compassion fatigue which is a malady understood through the lens of Figley’s (1995) Secondary Traumatic Stress Theory. STS theory posits that suffering and stress symptoms can be transferred to individuals dealing closely with trauma. In this case, animal attendants at the RSPCA work closely with abused and abandoned animals, many of which must be euthanised. This generates constant stress for these employees, resulting in burnout (Figley 1995). It was identified by Niki Ellis that carers can’t help but be empathetic and without support, they will inevitably experience a strain on their mental health and wellbeing (Vines et al. 2008). In addition to the prevalence of compassion fatigue, staff feel unsupported by senior management and an ‘Us vs Them’ culture has emerged. 5 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report 2.0 Implementation of the ADKAR Model 2.1 Swan Care Initiative 1 Improve the onboarding of new team members to ensure they all receive adequate training and support To address the issue of lower team member retention rates and high team member absences, Swan Care is implementing a new Human Resource Information System (HRIS) in order to ensure that new team members joining the organisation are having a positive experience. The importance of an organisation’s onboarding process can not be undermined (Krasman 2015) and through implementing this new system it allows Swan Care to improve the on-boarding experience of their team members joining the organisation. Awareness The issue of understaffing is apparent for all team members within Swan Care, both the carers, General Managers and those in the head office of Swan Care. The issue of understaffed shifts is the primary contributor to the level of stress experienced by carers and ultimately leads to an increase in the level of team members leaving Swan Care. This cycle of team members experiencing work-related stress and leaving further contributes to the issue of understaffing. The organisation is aware that one way of addressing this issue is to increase the number of new team members joining the organisation. Desire Team members within Swan Care are motivated to address the issue as they can understand the direct correlation between low staff numbers on a shift and the impact it has on their workload during that shift. When Swan Care was able to incorporate an additional team member in each shift as a “floater” between floors the decrease effect on team member stress was directly identified. Therefore, the desire to adopt a new system such as a HRIS is strong for team members within the care home if the project team can directly relate the positive impact it will have on staff retention rates and the number of new team members joining the organisation. Ultimately, this will help address the issue of understaffed shifts. Knowledge It is important that current team members understand the new onboarding process as a result of the HRIS as this may draw additional people to apply to join Swan Care as word of mouth spreads regarding the support and training the organisation offers. Furthermore, it is important that not only do the carers understand the new process, but the General Managers of the organisation are aware in order to ensure that the new system is embedded within the organisation and remains after the initiative has been implemented. Ability After a new team member joins the organisation it is important to ensure the onboarding process has adequately prepared the new team members for their position. With the new 6 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report HRIS it will allow all new team members to complete a survey regarding their experience as well as an assessment style questionnaire to ensure they understand all that is required for their role. This allows Swan Care to identify which team members may need additional support as well as reinforces with them that Swan Care is committed to their development and feedback. Reinforcement Ensuring that key stakeholders that are involved in the change initiative are provided continuous support during and after the implementation ensures that the project is embedded permanently. By reconnecting each stakeholder such as the carers back to the organisation’s purpose and highlighting again the reduced stress load possible if the project is adopted fully. Establishing support resources such as a helpline will give the team members confidence to continue adopting the change and ask questions if they need support. Initiative 2 Improve the team member retention rate through better recording staff absences in the new HRIS system and reward team members who record high attendance At the centre of care of organisations such as Swan Care, are its hundreds of team members who provide care to the residents. The importance of ensuring that there are an adequate number of team members working so that team members are not overwhelmed and stressed is significantly important in Swan Care. By implementing a system that better records and reports on the number of staff absences as well as identifies team members who rarely call in sick is important in order to allow management to reward and promote this behaviour. Awareness The organisation including the carers and senior management are aware that they have an issue regarding the number of team members who call in sick or leave work during a shift. Addressing this issue is the primary focus of Swan Care in order to mitigate the effects on team member’s sentiment at work and the level of care received by residents. Desire Team members within Swan Care are motivated to address the issue of understaffing as it directly impacts their experience at work. However, it is still important to specifically state to each key stakeholder the work processes that will be impacted as a result of the HRIS and better recording of absences. By reinforcing with team members the ability of the system to automatically identify team members who rarely use sick leave and that these team members will be rewarded provides additional motivation for team members to attend work. This should ultimately reduce the number of team members calling in sick. Knowledge Implementing a new core system which a majority of Swan Care’s workforce will utilise requires a significant amount of in-person training alongside the development of support 7 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report resources. Ensuring all team members get adequate training is critical to ensure a successful implementation of the project. It is important that the team members are continuously reminded and asked if they know how the new recording, reporting and rewarding of team members who have low absences works in order to ensure the full effect of the policy is experienced by the organisation. Ability Ensuring all team members who use the HRIS have ongoing access to support is important to ensure the change initiative is embraced by the whole organisation. Implementing new policies within the organisation requires a level of understanding and communications from the head office. For instance, designing informative posters about how the HRIS works. Reinforcement To continue to reinforce the new policies and system it is important team members from head office attend the home to promote the benefits. However as seen when Niki aided Swan Care, it is important the home office team member remains at the home after the meeting to show the carers the home office is dedicated to addressing the issues of understaffing and work-related stress. 2.2 WA Communications Considering the problems uncovered in WA, two changes are proposed that may progress the organisation from its current state. The first proposal is to adopt a more consistent and transparent employee feedback system that emphasises proactive development opposed to purely addressing and amending faults. This would depart from the existing remedial training service for employees that require improvement, and would focus on a more direct appraisal of employee efforts. The second change is to increase the ability of employees to provide greater input in logistical decisions to prevent inappropriate work demands being set. Initiative 1 Revamp feedback and recognition system to emphasis proactive employee development Awareness Following the ADKAR model (Prosci 2021) for diagnosing an entity’s preparedness for adopting change, WA must fore mostly display an awareness for the need of such a proposal. The lack of a transparent feedback system appears to be a pressing issue within WA, whereby employees have stated “positive feedback is good… we don’t get any of it,” and that the lack of feedback is “the most stupid thing…about [WA].” This indicates a collective awareness of the need for an overhaul in WA’s feedback system. Desire Concerns arose regarding WA’s internal audit, whereby certain operator’s responses to emergency calls were evaluated against unknown criterion set by WA’s upper management. Upon entering an action planning meeting, employees indicated they were uninformed whether their efforts were “up to scratch” or “below par”. Following Niki Ellis’ action 8 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report planning meeting, employees agreed that WA’s management must provide “fair, transparent feedback” to reassure them that their current efforts are sufficient or not. This exemplifies the desire of WA employees to adopt such a change. Knowledge There are two types of knowledge from a change management perspective, the first being one’s comprehension on how to adopt a change, and the second being one’s knowledge of how to effectively work proceeding the change (Prosci 2021). WA employees suggested a revamped feedback system should provide a “balance… between criticism and positive reinforcement”, and the foundations for such a system is present in the positive reception to WA’s remedial training and consultative committee. This suggests employees understand what makes a successful feedback system, and that WA is appropriately equipped to provide feedback to employees. However, WA’s management maintains that efficiency and accountability of emergency response operators must be standardised to a high level, yet the existing employee feedback system only seemed to acknowledge when employees “do the wrong thing,” without indicating whether anyone “[is] doing a good job,” and no evidence suggests positive reinforcement occurs without seeking appraisal of one’s work. This suggests the standard required of WA has not been adequately established, obscuring the operators’ knowledge of what to model their performance against. Company wide training should occur that establishes the standard that employees must operate at, opposed to solely learning from criticisms of poor performance. Ability Hiatt (2006:33) states that factors impacting one’s ability to implement change include psychological blocks, and the time available to develop the needed skills to adopt the change. Fordham’s aim to standardise the centre’s efforts against an unknown criterion to employees has generated “negative feelings” amongst workers. Furthermore, operators are constantly exposed to “secondary trauma.” These factors may inhibit the receptibility of change, as operators may believe they already know what the appropriate response to emergency calls are. Moreover, the “low-control, high-demand” work environment diminishes the ability for consistent standards to be set for a given scenario, and reduces the time employees can learn to adopt such changes. Reinforcement Although the ability for employees to adopt changes to a feedback system is likely inhibited by the inherent nature of the job, the positive reception to remedial training suggests “negative” feelings towards feedback initiatives will dissolve. Whilst Fordham maintains that random internal audits should be conducted to assess the aptitude of employees, the ability for queries and concerns of one’s work to be relayed to upper management for feedback allows for meaningful reinforcement for the individual (Hiatt 2006:38). Employees may further receive informal assurance of their efforts through immediate praise or criticism of one’s efforts, or through formal, regularly scheduled employee-management meetings. 9 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report Initiative 2 Extend current decision-making change management system into a universally inclusive system. Awareness Experienced employees at WA have expressed that “they don’t have a say” in decisionmaking matters. They proceeded to state that “decisions made by [management] are never born out of experience.” This displays an awareness that excluding relevant members from operational decisions creates a discrepancy between managerial expectations and employee abilities. Desire As mentioned previously, Fordham’s audit was conducted with a criterion unknown to employees. Moreover, the criterion was set by managers that “[have] never operated the radio.” There was a consensus following Ellis’ action planning meeting that “operators want to be given a greater say” in operational decisions for standards to be more appropriate for the operators. Knowledge Hiatt (2006:28) indicates the appropriate use of available resources for education and training contributes towards the knowledge of how to change. Considering resource dependence theory (Hayes 2018:199), Fordham’s role as a change agent has inadequately considered operators that work on-floor control the resource vital to the centre’s survival: the reception and transferring of public emergency calls. This indicates a primary inhibiting factor of increasing employee input in decision-making is Fordham and the upper management’s reluctance to increase employee control. However, WA’s implementation of a consultative committee provides some means for floor employees to contribute suggestions and solutions, albeit restricted to discussing the way employees do work. Ability Although WA’s consultative committee provides means for employee input, the committee only meets on a quarterly basis and consists of volunteer representatives for each shift’s taskforce. Furthermore, the committee is restricted to “discuss issues that specifically relate to the way they do work”, which, whilst aligning discussions with relevant organisational objectives, inhibits organisational interventions from occurring at a macro level (Hayes 2018:431). This opportunity for input should occur more frequently, and extend beyond solely vocal employees to strengthen employee satisfaction and commitment towards organisational change. Reinforcement Whilst Fordham has expresses concerns over the “negative feelings” towards his top-down approach, he remains adamant that the changes itself, including decision-making, are unnegotiable. Changes are likely to be sustained if the success of a change can be celebrated (Balluck et al. 2020). In WA’s current state, this would be reflected in the successful adoption of an employee’s proposal, either through the consultative committee, or via an anonymous complaints/recommendations system to increase employee input to 10 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report occur companywide. Ellis suggests giving workers as much control as appropriate alleviates the stresses of a “low-control, high-demand” environment, and the ability for WA to enforce, and reinforce operators’ input in logistical decisions is vital to increasing efficiency within the centre. 2.3 RSPCA Initiative 1 Introduce a counselling service that staff can utilise to manage and mitigate symptoms of compassion fatigue Counselling is an effective remedy proven to help alleviate the symptoms of compassion fatigue in those affected by the daily difficulties of the helping professions (Cerney 1995). Awareness The concerned stakeholders all appear to have a clear awareness for the need for change. Animal attendants and middle management speak freely about the prevalent compassion fatigue and burnout that is occurring. HR and Senior Management also display an understanding of the need for this change, and have stated that they will support actions that will “truly help the staff” (Vines et al. 2008). Desire Overall, at the point of desire is where the organisation is getting stuck. According to Prosci (2021), desire is where the majority of change agents encounter the most difficulty. In RSPCA’s case, it is not desire on behalf of the attendants that presents as an issue, but desire on behalf of senior management. Despite what management vocalised to Niki, they are reluctant to be visible in the change process. This is showcased by their absence at change meetings, their lack of willingness to approach the attendants with the issues that have emerged, and by accounts of past issues left unresolved. Desire is the point in the change process that prompts the question ‘What’s in it for me?’ (Balluck et al. 2020). This personal decision for change has been showcased by attendants, middle management, and HR. The level of desire of senior management can be improved through education on the benefits of them visibly supporting a counselling service, such as improved staff morale, a lower rate of turnover, less onboarding and training, and streamlined work processes, all of which reduce costs. Knowledge Niki Ellis provided information to management about the signs and symptoms of compassion fatigue, educating them on this phenomenon. HR mirrored back to Niki their understanding of compassion fatigue as a form of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. HR can thus be involved in educating the animal attendants on what counselling can provide for them; clarifying that it is a beneficial, confidential and supportive service that is available for them to utilise (Nyagaya 2015). It is important too that the animal attendants understand that they won’t be perceived as weak or ‘not cut out’ for their jobs, as such beliefs have prompted significant fear amongst them. In order to alleviate this fear, visible support of this initiative needs to come from senior management. 11 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report Ability HR has expressed that the company has the financial capacity for more resources which supports the company’s capability to enact this change. It must be discerned how and when this counselling service could be offered to staff, whether on a full time, part time, or contractual basis. HR, finance, and senior management must work collaboratively to establish what is feasible. Reinforcement Reinforcement would require continued funding for this service, as well as consistent participation by all involved. Of crucial importance is senior management’s continued endorsement and visible support of this initiative. A change agent must check in with the organisation frequently in initial stages, and then periodically, so as to monitor the progress of the change. Initiative 2 Involve HR in taking Senior Managers from ‘Managers’ to ‘Leaders’ in order to change the perception of ‘Us vs Them’ between employees and senior management Animal attendants at the RSPCA have been quite vocal about their perception of an ‘Us vs Them’ dynamic between themselves and senior management. This appears to be due to a sense that they aren’t supported and management haven’t stepped up to lead the present or past proposed changes. Attendants have aired concerns that senior management may just be paying lip service to important issues without being visible and active in these processes. The initiative involves HR working with the CEO and General Manager to implement leadership training, exposing them to key leadership tasks such as: Sense Making, Visioning, Sense Giving, Aligning, Enabling, Supporting, and Maintaining Momentum and sustaining change (Hayes 2018:165). HR will also offer workplace leadership training, such as a program offered by company iHR Australia (iHR 2021) which can be delivered online for time-poor managers. Awareness The RSPCA’s animal attendants have a strong ‘Us vs Them’ mentality that they vocalise, stating that senior management neglect to treat them ‘like adults’ (Vines et al. 2008). They are hesitant to approach senior management. Senior management claim to not know about this, and state that they are approachable and would like the issue to be remedied. RSPCA’s CEO raises an interesting point that the animal attendants potentially create, or at least promote this culture amongst themselves, feeding off of one another (Vines et al. 2008). HR is a force in between both parties and presents as advocating for both. Awareness on behalf of HR regarding the lack of leadership is present, but they appear to conceal this in the presence of senior management. 12 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report Desire The animal attendants verbalise their desire for the change, but they lack trust in the change being implemented due to past experiences of proposed change followed by no action. The desire of senior management may be the biggest hurdle with this initiative, with these individuals displaying a lack of Sense Giving, which is where leaders articulate the vision for change to their subordinates and respond to any feedback given (Hayes 2018). Senior management can be incentivised by being educated on the benefits of adequate leadership training to promote the reduction of the culture issue they currently face. Knowledge Senior management present as having little knowledge about effective leadership, this is evidenced by their lack of willingness to attend crucial change meetings, for instance. This initiative provides them with information on the distinction between a leader and a manager so that they are equipped to move the company forward by developing a vision, communicating the new direction and motivating and inspiring staff rather than simply managing them in a logistical sense (Kotter 1999). Ability HR has stated that the company has additional financial resources. This funding can be utilised for a leadership training course for the CEO and General Manager, as the complaints by the animal attendants are centered around these individuals. Reinforcement Reinforcement would require the CEO and the General Manager to permanently adopt leadership roles and continue to make this a priority. Continued training for these individuals so as to solidify their understandings around leadership vs management may also be needed. Reinforcement would be aided too by the animal attendants being tolerant and patient with the rate at which things shifted while senior management transitioned into this new way of running the organisation. If reinforcement is maintained, any divisive culture perpetuated by the attendants themselves will be diluted. 13 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report 3.0 Findings Common themes found across all organisations were a ‘Team member vs Senior management’ mentality amongst lower-level staff. This created a perception of division and left staff feeling they lacked support, which contributed to the stress that they were experiencing. In the cases of Swan Care and RSPCA, this perception was exacerbated by the staff, and with WA Communications, this division was generated more so by management. Prevalent across all cases also was staff burnout and occupational stress due to the intense nature of these workplaces. Poor communication and inefficient, misdirected execution of the change were common in WA Communications and RSPCA. Differences in issues were evident in the way management interacted with the change and with the staff throughout the implementation of the change. RSPCA management claimed that they wanted change implemented, but they did not rise to the occasion and make themselves visible in that change. With Swan Care, management were generally involved, visible and proactive in implementing the change. WA Communications saw strong initiatives and actions for change by management, but a lack of understanding of what was needed by staff to effect the change successfully. Across the three organisations the issues were generally driven by groups of people rather than single individuals. This is due to the fact that the issues identified by the organisations impacted a large part of their organisation. From issues with staff attendance at Swan Care, to team members experiencing compassion fatigue at RSPCA, to inappropriate work demands at WA Communications, all these factors impacted large numbers of team members. For Swan Care, WA Communications and RSPCA there were two main groups identified that contributed to addressing the issue. These include senior management and the lower-level employees. Similarly, in both Swan Care and RSPCA both groups contributed to the issue however the lower-level employee was the main driving force behind raising the need for the change. In comparison, WA Communications experienced similar contributions relating to the issue across the two groups. The ADKAR analyses indicated that both internal and external environmental factors, and the inherently onerous nature of the jobs influenced the organisations’ readiness for change. It was apparent that all three organisations displayed a high awareness for the need for change. Notably, the lower-level staff of both Swan Care and RSPCA displayed a higher desire to adopt the proposed changes than their respective senior managers, whereas WA demonstrated a universal high desire for change. Moreover, WA recognised how they should adopt their initiatives, however their upper management’s “top-down” predisposition to transform the organisation resulted in an approach that was misaligned amongst the centre. Contrastingly, the knowledge of how to adopt change for both Swan Care and RSPCA required information and knowledge to be gathered to implement the respective initiatives. The ability for all three organisations to adopt their initiatives was primarily hindered by the inherent nature of the jobs, as the time-consuming and mentally 14 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report demanding tasks resulted in an exposure to secondary trauma and employee burnout which would prove difficult to alleviate. However, each organisation displayed an ability to enact changes that would mitigate the challenges faced by employees in mentally-taxing work environments. It is further apparent that a significant amount of internal support and resources are required to sustain the reinforcement of the changes for all organisations. 15 MMH356 – Change Management – Group Report References Balluck J, Asturi E and Brockman V (2020) ‘Use of the ADKAR and CLARC Change Models to Navigate Staffing Model Changes During the COVID-19 Pandemic’, Nurse Leader, 18(6): 539546, doi: 10.1016/j.mnl.2020.08.006 Cerney M (1995) ‘Treating the “heroic treaters’, in C. R. Figley (ed), Compassion fatigue: coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized, New York Brunnerhlazel. Figley C (1995), Compassion fatigue: Toward a new understanding of the costs of caring. In B. H. Stamm (Ed.), Secondary traumatic stress: self-care issues for clinicians, researchers, and educators, The Sidran Press. Hayes J (2018), The Theory and Practice of Change Management, Fifth edn, Palgrave, London. Hiatt J (2006) ADKAR : a model for change in business, government and our community, 1st edn, Prosci Learning Center Publications, Colorado iHR Australia (2021), iHR: Leadership and Management Training Programs, https://ihraustralia.com/workplace-training/leadership-management, accessed 8 May 2021. Kotter J (2009), ‘What leaders really do’, IEEE Engineering Management Review, 37(3):18– 28, doi: 10.1109/EMR.2009.5235494 Krasman M (2015), ‘Three Must-Have Onboarding Elements for New and Relocated Employees’, Employment Relations Today, 42(2):9-14. Nyagaya L (2015), Relevance of Secondary Traumatic Stress, its predictive factors and coping strategies among psychotherapists in Nairobi and Nakuru Counties of Kenya, Egerton University, Kenya. Prosci (n.d.) The Prosci ADKAR Model, Prosci, accessed 12 May 2021. RSPCA (2021) RSPCA: about us, https://www.rspca.org.au/about-us, accessed 8 May 2021. Vines R Ellis N, and Shanahan S (18 March 2010), Stressbusters, Swan Care (episode 3), (television program), ABC Television, Sydney. Vines R, Shanahan S, and Ellis N (16 March 2010), Stressbusters, RSPCA (episode 1), (television program), ABC Television, Sydney. Vines R, Walker M, Ellis N, and Shanahan S (19 March 2010), Stressbusters, Police (episode 4), (television program), ABC Television, Sydney. 16



error: Content is protected !!