Reenergizing Employees After a Downsizing

Re-energizing Employees After a Downsizing Case Study

Question 1

When discussing the company's activities in downsizing, Adrea should be truthful and informative in the morning briefings. Employees need to know everything that's going on so that they can make informed decisions about their jobs (Jessurun et al., 2020). Additionally, being honest and informative will help maintain a sense of trust between Andrea and her employees. For example, if Andrea were to avoid discussing certain aspects of the downsizing, employees may begin to doubt her motives and wonder what she is hiding. Employees may be more likely to trust Andrea's judgments and feel like they are a part of the process if she is completely honest with them.

Alternatively, Andrea could choose to be more guarded with the information she provides to her employees in the morning briefings. There are several reasons why she might choose to do this. First, if Andrea is honest with her employees and does not like what they hear, they may become angry or upset. Additionally, if there are any negative repercussions from the downsizing (e.g., layoffs, reduced hours), Andrea may not want her employees to know about them until necessary. Finally, suppose Andrea is not entirely sure about the details of the downsizing herself. In that case, she may choose to keep some information hidden from her employees until she better understands what is happening.

Question 2

There is a method to enhance the new versions of their tasks' satisfaction potential above that of the predownsizing versions. Employees are more satisfied with their jobs when they have the ability to apply their talents and abilities in a useful way, according to job characteristics theory (Lysova et al., 2019). Additionally, employees are more likely to be engaged in their work when they feel like it is important and positively impacts others. Therefore, Andrea could use job characteristics theory to help her decide which areas to combine for the staffers. She might search for places where the new versions of their jobs can better utilize their talents and abilities. Additionally, she could try to create teams that positively impact others. For example, she could combine the accounting and marketing departments so that the staffers would have the opportunity to work together on projects that positively impact customers.

Some employees may be more satisfied with their new job than with their old job, while others may not be. It's also worth noting that satisfaction isn't always synonymous with interest. Employees may be happy with their new employment, but they may not be engaged in it.

Question 3

The Big Five personality dimensions might assist in the decision of interdepartmental integration, since various personalities may be better suited to different work (Azucar, Marengo, & Settanni, 2018). If the aim is to blend areas in a way that minimizes stress and generates productivity, for instance, someone who has an analytical personality and can think critically and objectively would be better suited for the job than someone who is more creative and takes a more holistic view. Alternatively, if the aim is to connect areas in order to promote fresh and creative thinking, someone with a creative personality would be ideal for the job. Ultimately, it is important to consider the Big Five when making decisions about combining areas as it can help ensure that the right people are in the right roles and minimize conflict (Azucar, Marengo, & Settanni, 2018). Someone who can take on a lot more is usually highly organized and efficient, can remain calm in high-stress situations, and has a lot of endurance. Someone who can handle only a little bit more may be creative, embrace a broader viewpoint to projects, and have less stamina.

Question 4

When advising Andrea on her larger compensation budget, there are a few things to think about. One alternative is to offer everyone a short-term "retention bonus" to keep them on staff while the organization's work structure adjustments are completed and implemented (Zhao, He, Chen, & Ye, 2021). Consider how simpler it would be to send the IT department an email that said, "I'm changing the passwords for all of my connections." This way, everyone in the department would be aware of the changes, and nothing would go wrong. There is also no assurance that the retention bonus would be sufficient to keep all of the employees on board, especially if they are not pleased with the adjustments.

Another alternative is to provide everyone a more permanent raise, in light of the aforementioned scenario. This would guarantee that all of the employees are fairly compensated for their efforts (Zhao, He, Chen, & Ye, 2021). However, there are also difficulties associated with this option. The second reason is that it may be hard to come up with the cash to pay everyone a raise. Furthermore, there's no assurance that a permanent raise would be enough to keep all of them employed, especially if major changes are being implemented.

Finally, if your organization doesn't have the resources to make these adjustments on its own, you could consider asking for assistance from a larger compensation budget to support them (Zhao, He, Chen, & Ye, 2021). This would help ensure that the changes are implemented smoothly and that everyone is on the same page. However, there are difficulties associated with this option as well. One is that it could be difficult to develop the funds for supporting the changes. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the work structure changes will be enough to keep everyone on staff, especially if they are not happy with changes that are taking place.

Ultimately, there is no one-size-fits-all solution for advising Andrea regarding how she used the big compensation budget. It depends on the individual circumstances and what is best for the team. However, any of the options listed above would be a good starting point.

Question 5

When re-energizing employees after a downsizing, giving staffers a voice and input is often seen as key. If staffers feel like they’re a part of the decision-making process, they’ll be more likely to buy into whatever changes are made. However, there are also dangers associated with giving staffers too much of a voice (Susskind, Moore, & Kacmar, 2018). It cannot be easy to get everyone on the same page. Second, opening up the floor for input can often lead to chaos as staffers offer suggestions. Even if Andrea were able to rein in the suggestions, getting everyone to agree on a final plan can be impossible. Finally, giving staffers a voice can also sap Andrea’s authority and decision-making power. If staffers feel like they can go over Andrea’s head to get their way, it could lead to further disharmony in the office.

However, all of these dangers can be mitigated by setting up some ground rules for staffer input. For example, Andrea could require that staffers submit their suggestions in writing or that they only make suggestions after meeting with her to get her approval. By establishing these guidelines, Andrea can ensure that staffers take their cues from her and that she still has the final say on all decisions.

Question 6

Andrea should consider ways to make the Blaze more than just a local paper. She could focus on investigative journalism or cover important stories that lack national attention. Additionally, she could use the paper’s website and social media platforms to engage with readers in new and innovative ways. This would help keep staffers engaged and feel like their work has a larger impact.

Andrea should also continue to stress the significance of each day's work. This will assist employees feel that they are making a difference in their community and that their efforts are still valuable. Finally, Andrea should maintain an ongoing communication with staff members, soliciting their input on how Blaze may best serve the community. This will build a sense of belonging among workers and assure them that their voice is valued. 

References

Azucar, D., Marengo, D., & Settanni, M. (2018). Predicting the Big 5 personality traits from digital footprints on social media: A meta-analysis. Personality and individual differences, 124, 150-159.

Jessurun, J. H., Weggeman, M. C., Anthonio, G. G., & Gelper, S. E. (2020). Theoretical Reflections on the Underutilization of Employee Talents in the Workplace and the Consequences. SAGE Open, 10(3), 2158244020938703.

Lysova, E. I., Allan, B. A., Dik, B. J., Duffy, R. D., & Steger, M. F. (2019). Fostering meaningful work in organizations: A multi-level review and integration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110, 374-389.

Susskind, A. M., Moore, O. A., & Kacmar, K. M. (2018). Organizational downsizing: How communication networks connect with employee performance.

Zhao, W. Y., He, L., Chen, B. X., & Ye, W. (2021). A model for the evaluation of groundwater ecological compensation budget. Ying yong sheng tai xue bao= The journal of applied ecology, 32(9), 3267-3276.