The Day They Announced The Buyout.

Productivity suffered that day because employees were shocked by the news, preoccupied with worry and consequently, could not concentrate on their duties. The resistance to change was very immediate. From the moment Diane walked into the work environment, employees were already gossiping and complaining about the buyout. The gossiping and complaining took time and effort away from job duties and resulted in decreased productivity. Less overt changes in the employees’ response that effected productivity were decreased motivation and less commitment to their jobs. Additionally, due to the uncertainty of the situation, many employees were sitting around talking about the “what ifs” instead of doing their jobs. In times of crisis, people generally turn to each other for support and comfort. This is what happened in this situation, albeit, at the expense of productivity.

Most people reacted negatively to the situation because in general, individuals and organizations are very resistant to change. Once individuals have gotten into some routine, which they regard as the status quo, they feel comfortable with this state. Change, threatens to undermine their habits and people become defensive. Employees may have also reacted negatively because they found their job security threatened. Although the company did not formally announce that workers were to be laid off, the potential of the situation occurring was present and when the President could not guarantee that all the jobs would be retained, employees became even more vulnerable. Not only is job security threatened, but for the employees who had greatest potential to lose their jobs, financial security is also threatened. “What’s going to happen now?” “Who will pay the bills if I lose my job?” “How long will it be before I can find another job?” “Will my family and I be able to cope during my period of unemployment?” These are very common questions that would probably be running through the minds of many of the workers. The buyout potentially threatens not just the employees’ job, but also their financial stability as well as their lifestyle. For employees who are retained, they may resist the change of entering a new organization. These employees would most likely be concerned with whether the change will lead to a loss of income. Would the new company compensate them in the same way? Would they continue to receive all the benefits that they received in their present position? They may also be resistant to change because there would be new procedures to be learned and perhaps they would not be up to the new challenge. Moreover, hearing others relay their worry about their jobs and future influences other workers and causes them to worry as well. Another reason why employees may have reacted negatively to the buyout was because of how the shareholders would benefit from their loss. The president, who had already defaulted in his promise to advise the employees of any potential change, would have the most to gain. Employees felt betrayed and became angry and resentful of the greedy owners. Finally, the way in which employees found out about the buyout and the uncertainty surrounding it would be a major source of dissatisfaction among employees. Employees found out about the buyout from other coworkers, who heard it from the branch manager, who in turn, read it from a newspaper article. The president had promised to always let the employees know what was going on with the organization but in this situation, he faltered. This stirred distrust of management within the employees. Workers wanted reassurance that they were not going to lose their jobs, but they did not get it. The uncertainty caused many workers to jump the gun and imagine the worst possible situation.

Whenever there is change within an organization, there will always be some resistance. At the organizational level, bureaucratic organizations, such as the one illustrated here, are especially opposed to modifications of their structured systems. At the individual level, people will be resistant to change because change brings uncertainty and uncertainty brings stress. Sometimes effective communication can help ease the negative feelings associated with change. In this situation however, employees were not invited to participate in the planning for change. It was just dropped on them. When companies face financial difficulties, employees take from the message of downsizing that people don’t matter in the organization.