Social Political Factors for Hindered ES Implementation - Samples

Question: Discuss about the Social Political Factors for Hindered ES Implementation. Answer: Social Political factors that could have contributed or Hindered ES Implementation To start with, there was the competence issue. It is evident that the level of skills and professionalism in an organization plays a major role in the implementation of new systems. The lack of the required skills to support the new system can cause fear which can cultivate resistance. The attitude of individuals has a great impact on the level of acceptability of the new systems. In the case that the major stakeholders are negative about the potential benefits that the new system can bring along, then it is clear that it will receive opposition. The other social factor relates to the culture of the stakeholders(Usman, A., Coombs, C. and Neil, D. 2014). In the case that the stakeholders have an in-depth belief in the workability of their current systems, then it can prove extremely difficult to change this culture that is tied to the old system into adopting other systems that will automatically call for the adoption of a new culture. On the other hand, the political factors will relate to the way the leaders in the organization handle their operations and the power that is bestowed upon them. For instance, management support is ideal in the putting in place of an ES system(Feldman, G., Shah, H., Chapman, C. and Amini, A. 2015). In the case that the management does not approve of it, then it is clear that the rest of the employees will not be ready to adopt it. The management believing in the system and offering their full support is the road map to the full adoption of new systems in organizations. Identify the presence or not of the Social- Political factors in the CorteX implementations The social and political factors that were mentioned above were manifested openly in the case relating to CorpeX. To begin with, the employees had the attitude that they were being forced upon the new system by CorpeX and it was not going to work(Grainger N and McKay J. 2015). They believed that they were not being understood by the implementers. That is the complexities that were present in their company were not incorporated in the implementation process. It is also vital to understand that the implementers of the ES had the attitude that the employees of Company Y had no intention of the system and thus they had to impose the system on them having the belief that it will bring effectiveness as it was the case in Australia. To add on, the employees were not ready to learn the new skills that could facilitate the soothe implementation of the ES. Moreover, the employees had a negative attitude towards CorpeX due to the fact that it had acquired their company instead of them acquiring it. Lastly, they felt that the system was really confusing as compared to the old system that they were conversant with. It is also evident that the general manager of Company Y was not ready to support the system. The GM only talked about the need to integrate the system but was not ready to oversee its implementation. Instead, he delegated his authority to the IT manager(Grainger N and McKay J. 2015). What lacked was a legal constraint such as the employment legislation that could restrain the employees that lacked skills in the new system to secure their jobs. A model for Change Management (and its application to the case) The model of change management that will be of the essence, in this case, will be the Katters 8 stage Change Model. The model calls for change to be taken as a campaign in an organization. The leaders are to convenience their employees on the need to embrace change. The eight stages include; creating the urgency for change, building teams that are obliged to instigate change, building a vision for change, communicating the essence of having change, Empowering the employees with the power to change, formulating of operational goals, instigating persistence and allowing the permanency of the change(Appelbaum, S.H., Habashy, S., Malo, J.L. and Shafiq, H. 2012). The model is relevant in the case given that the situation that Company Y is in was accelerated by resistance to change by both the leadership of the company and the employees. The arguments of the model are of the role of creating new attitudes amongst the employees and the leaders of the company as it was the case of the compan y to make sure that all are prepared to embrace change(Cooney, M.A., Pernick, J., Rice, K. and Monago, E.A. 2016). The strict adherence to the Katters 8 steps is the start to the implementation of ES at Company Y. For the urgency for change will be created, there will be goals and change will form, part of the culture of Company Y. Definition of Resistance to Change Resistance can be termed as refusing to accept the dynamics that are taking place in say a company or an institution by an individual or a group subject to certain factors. Why is resistance to IT driven change relatively common in Organizations Firstly, it can be related to the fact that the implementation of IT is coupled by the need to have competent skills, skills that most of the employees may be lacking. Resistance thus can be encouraged in the drive to save jobs and positions in a company(Matos Marques Simoes, P. and Esposito, M. 2014). The other factor relates to the vulnerability of the systems. The fact that the systems are sensitive to the accuracy of data is another factor. A slight error can lead to tremendous losses that can take a very long time to recover. Lastly, resistance is met in this sector due to the fact that the costs of running the new systems can be very expensive to the management(Alvesson, M. and Sveningsson, S 2015). The added costs can pose a burden to the management and can lead to the turnover of workers, losses, inefficiencies and customer disloyalty that have a great impact on the organization. Literature on Resistance Change is inevitable in an organization. Change can only be made a success through the people. Resistance is majorly an action that is promoted by the change. Resistance is not primarily driven by employees, but it can be as a result of various factors. The factors that can cause resistance to an organization are not limited to; social-political, managerial, and rational or non rational factors. Resistance is not majorly a factor that is subject to relationships or interactions in the organization(Hon, A.H., Bloom, M. and Crant, J.M. 2014). Resistance can occur at an individual level, for instance, a secretary refusing to expose required information or at an organizational level where employees can go for a strike. Resistance to change can be reduced through various ways. For example, the employees can be communicated to the importance of change, they can be impacted with the right skills, considered in the decision making process, associated in the formulation of goals and so on. Re sistance is a common reaction to change. Examples of parties that can be regarded as resistant to change in the case The parties that posed resistance in the case included the local teams in the organization, the customers, and the managers. How might the project leader and the BAs have gained an early warning of this and addressed it? The project leaders and the BAs were in a position to research and consult more on the viability of the system. That is ,they were to look at the resources that they had, the complexities they had to address and the skills that were required in terms of staff. In addition, the company would have critically looked at the way other companies that had the ES system ran their programs and the strategies that they had in place. With the knowledge of what they had to do to be prepared for the implementation, then they were to make sure that they were really ready. The project leader and the BAs would then address this through the implementation of change management that could be coupled with training of the staff. The training could incorporate bench-makings and workshops. Bibliography Alvesson, M. and Sveningsson, S 2015, Changing organizational culture: Cultural change work in progress, Routledge. Appelbaum, S.H., Habashy, S., Malo, J.L. and Shafiq, H. 2012, 'Back to the future: revisiting Kotter's 1996 change model', Journal of Management Development, vol 31, no. 8, pp. 764-782. Cooney, M.A., Pernick, J., Rice, K. and Monago, E.A. 2016, 'Utilization of Change Theory to Implement an Appreciative Advising Mode', Journal of Research, Assessment, and Practice in Higher Education, vol 1, no. 1, p. 8. Feldman, G., Shah, H., Chapman, C. and Amini, A 2015, Enterprise Systems Upgrade Drivers: A Technological, Organisational and Environmental Perspective, In PACIS (p. 83). Grainger N, MJ 2015, 'The Long and Winding Road of Enterprise System Implementation: Finding Success or Failure', Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases, 5(2):., vol 5, no. 2, pp. 92-101. Hon, A.H., Bloom, M. and Crant, J.M 2014, ' Overcoming resistance to change and enhancing creative performance', Journal of Management, vol 40, no. 3, pp. 919-941. Matos Marques Simoes, P. and Esposito, M 2014, 'Improving change management: How communication nature influences resistance to change', Journal of Management Development, vol 33, no. 4, pp. 324-341. Usman, A., Coombs, C. and Neil, D 2014, 'Use of ERP systems: a social shaping perspective', MCIS 2014 Proceedings.