Changes such as how employees are hired into the organization, training and development, performance evaluation, and employee relations are all factors that affect an organization (Mello 2015). This can be an barrier for organizations who fail to look at unsuccessful endeavors as learning experience and enforce consequences for failure. Based on Mello, people are creatures of habit and are resistant to change. This can cause strategies to fail. Conclusion The reason organizations experience these barriers when implementing Strategic Human Resource Strategies is due to the culture of the organization and the employees’ resistance to change.
This trend is detrimental. According to Kim (2006), the influences managers have in determining the behavior exhibited by their employees often define whether their firms are headed for failure or success. In most cases, moti... ... middle of paper ... ...vation of their employees. All the theories brought forth regarding employee motivation rotate on the need to make sure that employees are fully satisfied by offering both monetary and non-monetary incentives such as training, promotion and a safe working environment. It is often difficult for employees to devote themselves and engage fully in teamwork activities whenever their leaders favor some of their counterparts while showing bias against others.
(Law, 2015) That leadership style works well with trying to achieve goals to compete with competitors. Task-oriented leaders can be very autocratic as their primary focus is to get the most immediate task completed. The leader is concerned only with task accomplishment therefore the team suffers through lack of motivation and retention. (Russell, 2011) Sometimes it can be stressful for the employee with multiple tasks to do with deadlines coming up. The weaknesses of the task-oriented style include a fear of breaking the rules among employees, which may lead to a lack of creativity, low morale and high turnover.
Being in a position of management, it is your responsibility to ensure that your team of associates are well informed on what they need to accomplish. With poor communication, there may be a lack of understanding of what is expected. This creates a domino effect in which every step down the way is performed. Beyond the consistency of strong work production, the morale in the workplace may be affected. It can be disheartening to an individual to put so much effort into what they are being paid to do just to find out that because of poor communication their work may have all been for nothing.
People who think that the change may cause them to lose their job will oppose it. Bad timing also plays a major role in the sense that temporary circumstances may suggest that change should be postponed. At many times corporations may be unsuccessful with change because of lack of resources. This includes skills, abilities, finances, knowledge and staff needed to implement the change. Employees may also be resistant because they have no perception of personal gain with the change.
First, managers were uncomfortable with their role in managing the vicissitude. Some feared recrimination while others did not have the experience or implements to efficaciously manage their employees resistance. Managers withal were concerned about the demands and responsibilities placed on them by the new business processes, systems or technologies. • Fear of job loss: Managers felt that if change occurs the system changes and that can have effect on their job security. Middle management is often the victim of large-scale business change.
The costing system provides information that is useful to managers for minimizing wastage and allocating resources to different departments. The traditional costing system is a costing system which calculates a single overhead rate and applies it to each job or department. This system has several flaws which make it outdated and ineffective in today’s business environment. One of the most important drawbacks of the traditional costing system is that it tends to over-emphasize on meeting standards such as price and efficiency without considering other important factors like quality, on-time delivery, and customer satisfaction because of which the products of other companies form better alternatives and pose a tough competition to the organization. It also stunts any scope for improvement or innovation as it is too focused on sticking to the set benchmarks.
Excessive turnover and absenteeism normally will result in the organization paying additional cost to recruit and train new employees which can and normally will impact the company bottom-line. The problem with many companies today is the inability to recognize that job satisfaction is directly related to their bottom-line and therefore, do not place job satisfaction as one of its urgent administrative priority. This issue is based on organizational failure to recognize the substantial advantages an organization could realize by making an effort to influencing employees’ outlook. When an organization has content employees, they are more inclined to be productive and committed to work and their employers. It is imperative that organizations establish a work environment that entice, inspire and retain the best people which in turn will be beneficial for organization.
According to Becom and Insler (2013), a study conducted by State of Performance Management showed a high number of companies considered performance management as ineffective. Unfortunately, without the support of the senior management and thorough understanding of the purpose of performance management and its process, the system may become chaotic, misaligned expectations and ultimately cause low morale and employee engagement as well as high turnover. Major parts of the performance management system is not well designed and clarified and fails to function as expected (Bae, ). Additionally, performance management implementation challenges also include employees’ resistance of the new system (Becker, Antuar, & Everett, 2011). These challenges in implementation will require introduction to overall
Now, living in the 21st century has taught me how fortunate we are to witness the new inventions and discoveries created by NASA to explore outer space. Space agencies, such as NASA, has taught us how the Earth really looks and has led to new inventions that contribute to our lives. During these past few years of space discoveries, many people have argued against spending money on investing space explorations and have claimed it to be a waste of money. It's a shame that these people think space is just a waste of money when really, it's a contribution to our life and an essential realization of how we can expand our world. Space exploration should get priority funding because it will benefit education, jobs, and informs us of natural disasters.