Change Readiness Assessment for the U.S. Branch

Change Readiness Assessment for the U.S. Branch

A Singaporean software services provider expanded operations into the United States as a new market. Service delivery continues, but so does the unrest amongst the employees. They are distraught that the company is not offering optimal workplace welfare to foster growth. Neither is the company considerate of its new market and workforce. Therefore, it became imperative for the firm to evaluate human resources management and probe operations to identify flaws. As a result, it was identified that the company suffers a high employee turnover. Current employees also feel frustrated by management.

Exiting employees cite poor HR management practices as the main reason for leaving the U.S. branch. In addition, exit interviews highlight the relationship with management, lack of training, and career development opportunities as critical drivers of employee turnover. Feedback analysis also identified other causes of employee turnover. The results are summarized in the chart below. Major domains and functions faulted by the evaluation must change to rejuvenate employees and motivate them to work at the branch.

 The pie chart groups the reasons for employee turnover. Most of the reasons for exits are internal. Only 18% of employees left the branch because of external factors affirming the necessity of instigating the appropriate changes. The company should improve its onboarding and management practices based on the feedback from exit interviews.

Employees’ Confidence

Employees are the core of businesses and organizations because they actively participate in operations and business processes. The relationships between the U.S. branch’s employees and management are heavily strained. Employees are dissatisfied with the management’s low efforts for change. They feel unheard by the company, which continues to frustrate them. They have a high degree of willingness to adopt changes, but the company remains focused on operations. It is crucial for employees to feel the management values their contributions. This affects their performance, but decision-makers are less interested in making changes.

Employees’ confidence in management will continue to reduce unless an intervention is staged. Although operations are ongoing, reductions in employee confidence impact motivation to work at and for the U.S. branch (Sajjad, Ghazanfar & Ramzan, 2013). It is part of the reason some have already left, and more will follow if the situation remains unchanged. Having entered the US markets recently, the software services provider should implement policies and practices that align with human resources. It must forge lasting relationships with critical employees. Senior management at the Singaporean headquarters should urgently improve workplace welfare. The focus should be on building a superior employee-employer relationship.

Middle managers who interact with employees at the branch level should improve their management activities. The company exhibits strained relationships with human resources as it faces high employee turnover and current employee frustrations. The employees are not asking for wholesale changes but want to start internally. Ideally, management should discuss the current affairs with the employees directly. Middle managers should also encourage employees to share their opinions. They should not disregard recommendations from employees. The first and most crucial step is to show them the branch values them.

Managers always work for the employer by implementing their vision. However, there is a clear gap between policy and reality for the company's management. Jurisdictional differences are not helping because of the gaps in culture and policies. The company uses a leadership style that is ineffective in the United States. Feedback from exit interviews indicates a transactional leadership style that creates power distribution gaps. Middle managers have limited control over organizational culture and structure because they lack decision-making autonomy. The company should facilitate middle managers in implementing effective policies. However, it should provide oversight to align the policies with its corporate objectives.

Opportunities to Increase Change Readiness and Trust

There are various opportunities to increase change readiness and trust. Each opportunity has an impact on the organizational structure and culture. Implementation will also change some of the existing structures and involve resources. The least resource-intensive change opportunity is inclusivity. The employees currently working at the branch understand the dynamics. They are ideally posited to provide recommendations due to their experience with the company. Another opportunity is a change in organizational culture. For example, the company can use a flatarchy at the branch to smooth operations and relationships during transitions.

The company can also position its middle managers as change agents by granting them autonomy. Middle managers must use the newly-granted autonomy to listen to employees’ change recommendations. Thorough evaluation and follow-up on recommendations will improve relationships and motivate employees. Motivated employees will be a deviation from the current frustrations. In any case, creating awareness for changes is crucial. Employees must know and prepare for changes, which relies on their knowledge of the change. When these initiatives are adopted, change readiness and trust in management will increase.

Cultural Considerations

According to Hofstede’s cultural dimension model, the problem areas in the U.S. branch are long-term orientation and power distance (Hofstede, 2011). The company has a high power distance index because leaders in Singapore dictate all operations regardless of the variables involved. They encourage bureaucracy with them at the apex. Middle managers in the U.S. branch have limited power over operations. Gaps in organizational culture emanate from their inability to implement effective policies and practices. The Singaporean company has a short-term orientation. They focus on work and have little regard for sustainable operations. Their continued negligence of employee turnover in the past and inability to improve human resources management affirms the problem. 

References

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), 2307-0919.

Sajjad, A., Ghazanfar, H., & Ramzan, M. (2013). Impact of motivation on employee turnover in telecom sector of Pakistan. Journal of Business studies quarterly, 5(1), 76.