Добавил:
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Скачиваний:
21
Добавлен:
22.06.2014
Размер:
27.14 Кб
Скачать
  1. Companies that do not change will not survive. So they should leave past behind and adapt to change. Managements that hang on to weakness for whatever reason - tradition, sentiment, or their own management weakness - won’t be around in the future. Recent years have seen massive restructuring. Companies downsized and delayered, getting rid of levels of middle-management in order to become leaner, flatter, supposedly more efficient organizations-Often the reasoning was that computer networks allow top managers instant access to information that was previously gathered and transmitted upwards by middle managers, whose other main function was to communicate executives key messages downwards to the workforce, and in this they were accused of diluting or confusing the messages, or worse. With fewer organizational layers, top managers say they can communicate more directly with front-line employees, the people who actually produce the goods or services, and deal with customers. With less direct supervision, employees have often been encouraged to make more decisions for themselves in a process of empowerment.

  2. Resistance to change is the most natural of human reaction and is based on uncertainty and fear - fear of losing your job, fear not being able to cope with a new situation. It’s based on lack of trust in the decision-makers and it’s based on a complete feeling of lack of control over the situation. The way to manage resistance is not to completely ignore it but actually to manage it as if it were natural. Companies realize that their most precious asset may well be its people, and above all what they know. A company's accumulated knowledge and experience is part of company culture and is increasingly seen as a key to success. Many now believe that this collective knowledge and accumulated years of experience is something to cultivate and develop. Some companies have appointed a chief knowledge officer who creates systems to make this knowledge available to the company as a whole in a process of knowledge capitalisation. The difference between winning and losing will be how the men and women of a company view change. If they see it as a threat, the company loses. But if they are provided with the educational tools and are encouraged to use them - to the point where they see change as an opportunity, then every door the company must pass through to win big around the world will swing open.

  3. SWOT analysis is a general technique which can be applied across diverse functions and activities, but it is particularly appropriate to the early stages of planning for a TIPD visit. Performing a SWOT analysis involves the generation and recording of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in relation to a particular task or objective. It is customary for the analysis to take account of internal resources and capabilities (strengths and weakness) and factors external to the organisation (opportunities and threats). SWOT analysis can provide:

  • a framework for identifying and analysing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats

  • an impetus to analyse a situation and develop suitable strategies and tactics

  • a basis for assessing core capabilities and competences

  • the evidence for, and cultural key to, change

• a stimulus to participation in a group experience.

Change involves some risks such as:

  • job insecurity

  • threat of redundant

  • apathy

  • resistance to change.

But there are some opportunities:

  • increasing company loyalty and image

  • increasing of level of motivation and inspiration

  • progress report

  • empowerment

4. A new Chief Executive came on board and the client had to significantly reduce its costs. It had been trying to compete with its major competitor on a basis of volume and was trying to be cheaper. And its major competitor was four or five times its size and there was just no way that could happen. And the new Chief Executive came in and within three weeks had published exactly what he was trying to achieve. And every single person in the organisation knew this chap's vision. They knew they were going to segment the market - they were going to go for corporate, high spend, high profile customers, and they were going to ignore the mass volume residential market which was a lot bigger, and with much larger margins. And the company was going to go for much more value-added. And the Chief Executive made absolutely clear, right from the beginning, exactly what he was going to do. He talked about the number of heads he was going to have to take out of the organisation. So he talked about the pain - he was absolutely honest about it. But he also talked about the gains and explained his vision in a lot of detail to everybody but in a number of face-to-face communications and in a weekly letter that he wrote to everybody in the organisation. Every week a letter came out from this chief executive saying exactly what progress had been made, exactly what he was still aiming to do - what the next steps were. And this happened after week.

He was a very effective manager. And the second thing he did was move very quickly on the painful stuff. So he very quickly took out the people who didn't fit. So sometimes the decisions were hard, but he made them and he made them quickly.

Соседние файлы в папке Экзамен 3 курс