In my opinion the most relevant chapters during this term was: Resistance to change and contingency approach to change, in the future it is important to manage change smartly, if the changes are not needed or if the changes are applying in a bad time, it can be a complication within the organization

As we know every company have been experimented changes for different reasons, which is some times difficult for the people who is working within the company. People can be resistance to changes for many reasons, for example old people can be resistance when companies need to employ new technology, we know in most cases is harder to learn new technology for old people (Palmer, Dunford  & Akin, 2008).

Other reason of resistance to change can be when employees already have routines to do their tasks, and they believe that the change is not necessary in that time. The thing that I also learned is the importance of communication that managers should have with employees, in the same time the training to employees to support the change and make it easier.

No only valuable knowledge I gained in this term, but also the experience to work in a group, as we know that we can learn a lot from mistakes. It is important to have experience to work like a group team, as every one know within any organization, employees are working together to achieve the same goal. Of course some time conflicts are there when people try to exchange ideas, or when the people are late to give the information and the rest of the team is waiting for, but still you are learning.

My experience in this term I think it was very good, changes in organizations are unavoidable, for that is important to have the knowledge about this subject and apply some of this information in the future. Working together in any organization is the key to achieve the goal. Also I learned the importance to adopt in some cases, the different cultures around the world, such leaders or workers, does not matter the ideas that they can bring to any organization can be successful for the future of any company.

REFERENCES                 

Palmer, I, Dunford, R & Akin, G, 2008, Managing Organizational Change: a multiple perspectives approach, 2nd Ed, McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.

In my opinion the most relevant chapters during this term was: Resistance to change and contingency approach to change, in the future it is important to manage change smartly, if the changes are not needed or if the changes are applying in a bad time, it can be a complication within the organization

 As we know every company have been experimented changes for different reasons, which is some times difficult for the people who is working within the company. People can be resistance to changes for many reasons, for example old people can be resistance when companies need to employ new technology, we know in most cases is harder to learn new technology for old people (Palmer, Dunford  & Akin, 2008).

Other reason of resistance to change can be when employees already have routines to do their tasks, and they believe that the change is not necessary in that time. The thing that I also learned is the importance of communication that managers should have with employees, in the same time the training to employees to support the change and make it easier.

No only valuable knowledge I gained in this term, but also the experience to work in a group, as we know that we can learn a lot from mistakes. It is important to have experience to work like a group team, as every one know within any organization, employees are working together to achieve the same goal. Of course some time conflicts are there when people try to exchange ideas, or when the people are late to give the information and the rest of the team is waiting for, but still you are learning.

My experience in this term I think it was very good, changes in organizations are unavoidable, for that is important to have the knowledge about this subject and apply some of this information in the future. Working together in any organization is the key to achieve the goal. Also I learned the importance to adopt in some cases, the different cultures around the world, such leaders or workers, does not matter the ideas that they can bring to any organization can be successful for the future of any company.

REFERENCES                 

Palmer, I, Dunford, R & Akin, G, 2008, Managing Organizational Change: a multiple perspectives approach, 2nd Ed, McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.

The value of contingency approach to change, argue that the style of change will depend upon the scale of the change, and the receptivity of organizational members for engaging in the change (Palmer, Dunford and Akin, 2006).

Change management models have more variation and flexibility, for that they have been considerate one of the best options to apply in organizations; the problem is that is not clear which of the models offered can be the best one to use for managers. However, contingency theorists challenge this concept and argue that the change will depend upon the scale of the change.

As we all know some companies make changes sometimes be unnecessary, sometimes because there are management changes, new staff, implementations, changed strategies, etc There may be various reasons for change within an organization, but often the problem that may occur internally with the staff is the resistance to change, and this can occur when staff does not think change is necessary or not a good time to do it (Saee, 2005).

However contingency approach to change focuses a little more like a necessary change. One example can be the external environment such as: Political, Economic, Social / Demographic, Technology, for example if the changes are necessary for any of these causes, It is also easier for employees accept the changes and they can cooperate to work together and do it the best way possible. This contribution by the employees without doubt makes it easy to change in any organization.

Contingency approach are more ambiguous and require greater choice and decisions by managers about what type of change situation they are facing, also is one of the specific  style of leadership. Contingency approach may be less attractive in practice to senior managers who lack the skills to adopt differing models of leading, depending upon the particular change circumstances (Palmer, Dunford and Akin, 2006). 

REFERENCES

Palmer, I, Dunford, R, Akin, G,  2006: Managing Organizational Change: a multiple perspectives approach, McGraw-Hill, New York. 

Saee, J, 2005: Managing Organizations in a Global Economy; An intercultural Perspective, Thomson, United States of America

According to (Grieves, J, 1996) mentioned that three central issues, or problematic that emerged in the three first decades of the twentieth century informed the later development of OD: the problem of control and compliance, the application of technology, and the increasing sophistication of organization analyses. However it is impossible to disentangle OD from research into organizational behaviour and the latter emerged, by and large, as a reaction to the rational so-called scientific approaches to management.

In the case of DuPont the Orlon manufacturing operation had been shut down, the equipment was dismantled and they sent it to China. No one framed the changes as needing unusual attention, change management was not a rubric used to either accomplish or explain what was going on. More changes were coming, whether there was any formal practice of change management or not.

Therefore, to improve or solve any problem that is presented in any organization, first it is important to identify the real problem and then look for the solution of the specific problems.  Develop people and continually improve was the main point in the organization, for that one of the Directors of DuPont, was expending time and he conducted interviews with workers and managers for around six months, in this way he was learning about everyday life there.  Common-sense model of work performance unique to this scene was the local organization theory that people used for getting along at work. This theory was used every day by everyone to introduce change for improvement.

Palmer, Dunford, Akin, 2006, Managing Organizational Change; a multiple perspectives approach , McGraw-Hill, United States.

Grieves, J, 2000 : Introduction: the origins of organizational development; Journal of Management Development, vol. 19, issue 5, Emerald.

This time will discuss three issues that may be difficult to manage in any organization, which are:

Dislike of change: dislike of change, is one of the barriers that employees reflect when change coming, especially if employees are familiar with the current routine and it is easy for them. Another reason in this case is the technology, this can cause panic among employees, especially older people that have to learn something new.

Lack of Conviction that Change is needed: I think this point is the most difficult to manage, because employees may reflect lack of motivation, thinking that the way they are working on, it is incorrect.

One of the normal questions that the employee can do is “What is the problem?” there are many reasons that may account for complacency, including a track record of success and the lack of any visible crisis. People are likely to react negatively to change when they feel that is no need for the change (Palmer, Dunford, Akin, 2006).

Make a change, specially in multicultural company’s I think is more difficult, as you know people who is working in a company like that, they are from many different country’s, that means is that they have different culture, or ways to think as can be difficult to manage.

Belief that the timing is wrong: This is other point of the resistance to change in an organization, may be that employees of the organization are under pressure or crisis at the time, which may make them think that it is not the best time for a change. It is important to know how can handle a change in that moment, because that the resistance to change on the part of employees can affect this process of change.

REFERENCES

Palmer, I, Dunford, R, Akin, Gib 2006: Managing Organizational Change; a multiple perspectives approach, McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.

Waddell, D, Sohal, A, 1998, Resistance: A constructive tool for change management: Journal Management Decision, Vol. 36, no, 8, pp. 543-548, Emerald.

According to (Palmer, I, Dunford, R & Akin, G, 2008) in 1994 Airbus, who was one of the stronger rival of Boeing, had a more booking orders, even that Boeing was stronger that Airbus. It was the reason why Boeing had to make some internal and external changes for the good of the company.

One of the diagnosis that can help Boeing, is identifying which aspects of an organization’s activities or properties are those most needing attention.
Not just for Boeing, for all companies in general is important to identify the problem to solve it.

In a competitive and rapidly changing marketplace, industrial companies are constantly involved in the development of strategies for keeping up, staying ahead or setting new directions (Goetsch, D, 2006). All changes are good for any company to improve their quality or services to the customers.

In Boeing case study, the changes were made within the company wich was favorable and as a result of that, demand began to increase dramatically. But an unexpected manufacturing crisis ensued and the reputation for Boeing took dramatic turn. Apparently Boeing had to it business dealings and a lack of communication within the organization appeared to have been the source of this problem.

That manufacturing crisis probably can be avoided if the companies provide a guide to the sequence of actions to take in a change situation.
Finally Boeing took some strategies to increasing the efficiency of the company, also other strategy was to update their technology systems, downsize their operations and reestablish relationship with their suppliers (Palmer, I, Dunford, R & Akin, G, 2008).

References

Boeing, 2009: Boeing, About Us, Viewed 22 of August 2009, http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices/aboutus

Goestsch, D, David, S (2006); Quality Management; Introduction to Total Quality Management for Production, Procession, and Services, Fifth Edition, Pearson, Unit States of America.

Palmer, I, Dunford, R & Akin, G, 2008, Managing organizational change: a multiple perspectives approach, 2nd edn, McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.

According to (Palmer, I, Dunford, R & Akin, G, 2008) in 1994 Airbus, who was one of the stronger rival of Boeing, had a more booking orders, even that Boeing was stronger that Airbus. It was the reason why Boeing had to make some internal and external changes for the good of the company.

On of the diagnosis that can help Boeing is identifying which aspects of an organization’s activities or properties are those most needing attention.

Not just for Boeing, for all companies in general is important to identify the problem to solve it. In a competitive and rapidly changing marketplace, industrial companies are constantly involved in the development of strategies for keeping up, staying ahead or setting new directions (Goetsch, D, 2006). All changes are good for any company to improve their quality or services to the customers.

In Boeing case study, the changes were made within the company wich was favorable and as a result of that, demand began to increase dramatically. But an unexpected manufacturing crisis ensued and the reputation for Boeing took dramatic turn. Apparently Boeing had to it business dealings and a lack of communication within the organization appeared to have been the source of this problem.

That manufacturing crisis probably can be avoided if the companies provide a guide to the sequence of actions to take in a change situation.

Finally Boeing took some strategies to increasing the efficiency of the company, also other strategy was to update their technology systems, downsize their operations and reestablish relationship with their suppliers (Palmer, I, Dunford, R & Akin, G, 2008).

References

Boeing, 2009: Boeing, About Us, Viewed 22 of August 2009, http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices/aboutus

Goestsch, D, David, S (2006); Quality Management; Introduction to Total Quality Management for Production, Procession, and Services, Fifth Edition, Pearson, Unit States of America.

Palmer, I, Dunford, R & Akin, G, 2008, Managing organizational change: a multiple perspectives approach, 2^nd edn, McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York.

Due to heavy losses suffered by the string (Starbucks) were forced to the closure of 200 stores in the United States and other 100 more in other parts of the world, between these countries this Australia that of 85 stores 61 were closed. Howard Schultz is the president and CEO of Starbucks Coffee Company, he said that the decision to close stores in Australia will help to support the continued growth of them business, also mentioned “While this decision represents business challenges unique to the Australian market, it in no way reflects the strong state of Starbucks business in countries outside of the United States” (Starbucks Newsroom, 2008).

As result the string was forced to the reduction of its staff, and to the relocation of some employees, in an article published said that may the error of Starbucks was the strong and fast investment in stores in some biggest cities in Australia, such as Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane (Australia’s New, 2009), which seems to me contradictory when management of Starbucks company discussed that they only were curious of the Australian market, and really they did not know how the people was going to react to this product.

While the American people can think that is one of the best cafes, the Australian people may think otherwise due to the strong and bitter taste that they are not accustomed. In the weakening consumption throughout the world is experiencing, Starbucks continues a well-developed plan to strengthen the business, looking for a change with greater operational efficiency and preserving the strengths and the reputation of the chain (Starbucks).