Essay Example on New Technology: Embrace or Resist?

Introduction

Recently, technological advancement in the global economy and the business environment has forced new changes in organizations. A company will spend millions and dedicate a lot of time to implement a new technology tool only for it to be discarded by business units and employees. The same users who embrace technical changes in their personal lives will often resist cutting-edge solutions at work.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

As Erwin & Garman (2010) observed, introducing new changes into an organization also present significant challenges to management. It is because they are well equipped with leading innovations and not managing the implementations. Bad execution and managing change are some of the primary reasons why users resist change. Every individual prefers consistency and stability in personal and professional lives, as Erwin & Garman (2010) observed. Therefore any situation that will disrupt the sequence of things, threaten their self-interests, or increases stress is always avoided by all means possible. As Juma (2016) observed, change in technology is associated with innovations such as adopting new products, processes, and practices.

Reasons for User Resistance to Change

To begin with, poor communication on changes is a crucial reason why employees often resist changes. How the leaders will convey the change process is vital as it determines their reactions, as Juma (2016) observed. If one cannot communicate how, when, why, and how the change will be implemented, then users are more likely to oppose the amendment. What is rational to the management may fail to be logical to employees. In particular, people who strongly believe that the existing technologies have been working perfectly over the years, then destabilizing their way of life is often rejected. When changes are implemented with little or no communication, most users feel that the change is being a force on them (Juma, 2016). According to a survey by Delaney & D'Agostino (2015), most of the information was communicated at the initial stages of the changes. As time progressed, less and less information was passed on. As a result, it led to the set goals being criticized along the process as people imagined the worst that could happen. They thus began to believe their exaggerated perceptions as there were no constant briefings to address the emerging issues.

Fear of the unknown and anxiety about the new changes result in employees resisting further reforms. When implementing change, some employees feel the importance of sticking to their past methods, which have become more secure and predictable, as Adu, Appiah, & Okpoti (2016) observed. When the applications they were used to before worked for them, a change brings panic of failure to achieve in the future. The less the management understands the effects changes will have on them, the more fearful they become as Quast (2012) emphasizes.

A technological change will also mean learning new skills, and others fear that they will not be able to adjust well to the transitions (Adu, Appiah, & Okpoti, 2016). Therefore, the only way to respond to such anxiety is through resisting the modifications. When others have made up their minds that the changes will not work out for them, it becomes more challenging to implement the change. However, different age groups had various levels of fear of changes and their impact. In a study on the anxieties as a result of digital transformations, Saran (2017) pointed out, young workers between the ages of 18 to 24 years were more fearful of digital disruptions compared to the older staff who were more than 55 years. He also noted that 61% of employees were experienced anxieties when their organizations introduced new technologies in their program, while another 49% expressed fear when digital transformation proposals were initiated. He however concludes, people do not fear the unknown, but rather the end of what they know and are used to.

Workers also resist change is organizations when their job securities are threatened. Advancement in technology or product change means working smarter, reducing cost, and saving on time as Frey, & Osborne (2017) concludes. As a result, users will oppose such changes that lead to their roles being reduced or eliminated. According to the staff, any change from the management is detrimental to their position in the company. Quast (2012) points out that the magnitude of their resistance will, however, be determined by their satisfaction as employees.

When a staff is more experienced, and with a higher level of job satisfaction, they can handle changes better than those who are not. They possess a more optimistic attitude towards the switch, unlike the unhappy workers who view the move as an opportunity to lay them off (Quast, 2012). In 2017, Mark Zuckerberg, the Facebook CEO, announced 3000 vacant positions to review millions of posts on Facebook (Wagner, 2017). It was in response to an increased number of violent and sexually inappropriate content that was uploaded in the last few months and would take up to two days to remove them. They already had 4500 people globally working on flagging the same. Should the company decide to embrace Artificial Intelligence fasten the flagging progress, then all these employees would lose their job.

Consequently, people will fail to support a change if they are not confident in their abilities to adapt to the same (Frey, & Osborne, 2017). Therefore, whenever they feel endangered by their weaknesses, they tend to protect themselves through resistance. A study by Frey & Osborne (2017), which emphasized the disruptive impacts of changes in technology, showed that in the United States, 47% of jobs were vulnerable to replacement by technological advancement. Therefore, it is more likely to change the number of occupations and tasks available soon. With such trends of job loss, any employee would feel threatened should there be a new change in their workplace. For instance, Balliester & Elsheikhi (2018) discovered that 35% of jobs in the U.K might be gone in the next two decades due to new technologies being implemented in workplaces.

In addition, forcing change too quickly will often be met with resistance. Finding a balance between urgency and giving users time to adjust to the transition is often a factor to consider (Lawrence, 2020). When the leaders push hard for change to happen, they often neglect essential elements of the change plan and, as a result, are met with resistance. These are individuals who are used to a comfortable way of doing things, handling transactions using a given procedure, and solving their problems in a given duration of time.

Often, after a technology rollout, leaders unreasonably expect to see immediate improvement from the workers. When such results are not observed, they end up being impatient with their workers who, as a result, resist the new changes (Lawrence, 2020). This means a better innovation was implemented, but the people were not part of the equation, thus rejecting the new invention as 'it is not working.' The implementation process was the problem as it expected too much from the users. When Optical networks transitioned to the new communication tool Slack, their mantra was 'we are going to escort you through the change' (Optical Networks, 2018). It ensured every employee is part of the changes; thus, people could not oppose it. The changes were not imposed on them, but rather, they had the time to adjust in the transition process.

For technological changes to be implemented, the management has to be aware that a specific resistance from users is part of the implementation process. Therefore, measures should be in place to address issues before, during, and after a change has been put into practice. When one is informed concerning the reasons behind a resistance before implementation, it provides a better and prepared procedure to manage the resistance (AL-Ameri, 2013) adds.

Recommendations before Changes

Before initiating the change, it is essential to develop a communication action plan (Beatty, 2015). Some of the action plans would be announcements of the changes, one-on-one meetings, and strategies to collect feedback. Next, there is a need to identify every stakeholder that should be notified about the changes before putting them into operation (Beatty, 2015). It is a significant step as it entails everyone whom one will communicate to. Then identify every possible effect of the change to them will be and the best method to communicate to them.

Lastly, it is vital to spend time learning and discover some of the possible issues for every involved party, thus making it easier to address their concerns, as Beatty (2015) concludes. The National Society of French Railroads (SNCF) established the Official Computerized Reservation System for European Tourism (SOCRATE) in 1993 as one of the official reservation systems for all European train travels (Mitev, 1999). This system was, however, an adaptation of Sabre, which was a successful American airline reservation system that United Airlines were using. Before implementation, the leaders checked with a few representing participant groups but tampered with the data to justify the installation date that was set. This was the beginning of the end, as immediately changes were initiated, there was immediate chaos from every corner as Mitev (1999). First, to purchase a ticket, it took much longer than the older system, and neither of the workers knew how to use the ticketing interface as the design was poorly done. Almost every day, it was reported that the system had crashed. As a result, there were double bookings, empty train seats, and booking of non-existent trains.

Had the management consulted all stakeholders and communicated the changes early before implementation, then such embarrassments would have been avoided. Clear and consistent communication means that you collect feedback from the parties involved, thus conform the change to their needs. It will also reduce the degree of resistance as users have been part of the changes. Lastly, managers of change should organize a series of departmental training within a week of implementation to ensure the teachings are still fresh in mind on the launching day.

Proposals during Change

When implementing change, management should employ a pilot program to help smooth out the transitions. As Breau (2017) addresses, a pilot program is a trial and error test conducted for a short period that projects how the changes will be in practice for the entire organization. When such a program succeeds, it results to advocates who are experienced with the new system hence share the news with others. They can also be useful in ironing out any queries from the rest of the team. Having a final consumer who champions the new technology is essential in aiding the adoption of the same hence reducing resistance from users.

Leaders should also implement the changes one step at a time as it will prevent overwhelming users and gives them a chance to adjust steadily (PSI, 2020). Vodafone has adopted 'Crawl, Walk, Run' strategy when effecting change (Kerr & Moloney, 2019). When one begins changes in one group, and it succeeds, then the crawl step is complete, thus time to move to the next level. This is where they integrate learning in three more groups, and should it succeed; then the modifications are implemented in the entire company.

Furthermore, engaging users who are against technological changes allow the management to comprehend their point of view and addressing their troubles (PSI, 2020). When the implementers listen and consider the workers' ideas and concerns, as it makes them part of the change....