Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
Regarding business operations and using current and emerging technology, the aviation sector has some distinct hurdles compared to other sectors. This is due to several factors, including past interactions between major airlines and governments, sector regulations, regulatory challenges, and safety concerns. This means that the promise of strategic undertakings is frequently underutilized. Furthermore, organizations that struggle to change, such as airlines, are often plagued with delayed transitions and increasing expenses. For example, airline X unveiled the outlines of a massive cost-cutting initiative in March 2021 and has yet to show the ability or culture to carry out its plan successfully one year later. Customers have been adversely affected, and expenditures have risen due to repeated strikes by disgruntled personnel. This suggests that, as the rate of change accelerates, airlines change capacity will become a more important prerequisite for long-term success.
Problem: Resistance to Change in Aviation
Airline X has been operating in major European markets for over 40 years. The corporation realized in 2021 that it needed to implement significant operational improvements to stay competitive in its industry. Notably, new airlines have emerged with more cost-effective and fuel-efficient fleets. Thus, the company believed implementing the proposed modifications would embrace fresh concepts that would boost its expansion. The changes were intended to promote acquiring new technology, customers, and staff. This would allow the firm to establish a competitive edge and strengthen its performance in the aviation sector. However, most changes have failed, and many stakeholders have opposed their adoption. Undoubtedly, this underscores the need to explore the possible causes of change management failure at Airline X.
Research Literature
The era of one significant organizational change every ten years is long gone. Today, businesses must be more flexible, responsive, and fast to change due to globalization and increased competition. Firms must be willing to adapt quickly and frequently to survive in todays financial world (Schoemaker et al., 2018). Hence, economic shocks, challenges with wealth creation, inflation, and sociopolitical and technological conditions are the most common external factors prompting the deployment of change management teams. However, as a McKinsey report illustrates, not all companies are built with the fortitude necessary to remain at the top (Bughin et al., 2018). The rate of change, complexity, interdependence, and interdisciplinary nature of todays businesses is unprecedented. Furthermore, stability is a myth and a non-linear process that seems to accelerate with time.
Conversely, specific adjustments, such as deploying a new software suite, can be modest. In contrast, most change management initiatives have a significant history, such as reorienting an entire marketing approach, stopping a predatory acquisition, or restructuring a firm in response to relentless global competitors (Smith et al., 2020). Executing change at different levels enables an organization to realize its strategic goal and thrive in the modern business environment. Thus, integrating change management enables firms to generate returns for each change more effectively. Additionally, it may support the development of competencies that increase the organizations ability to manage more changes concurrently.
The procedures, employment responsibilities, organizational frameworks, and types and applications of technology within a business frequently need to be adjusted when new initiatives or projects are launched. Often, such undertakings aim to improve performance, seize opportunities, or address critical challenges. It is crucial to manage and oversee these transitions inside the company effectively. This explains why the phrase change management is increasingly popular and entrenched in the contemporary corporate world. Change management is a systematic approach to dealing with change both from the perspective of an organization and the individual (Finlayson, 2022, p. 95). This definition is inadequate because it fails to consider some of the critical facets of change management: planning for the change, implementing the change, and measuring the success of the change. Each one relies on taking the initiative to adapt to changing circumstances. Therefore, to cope with changes in the corporate world, a firm must create and adopt new processes or technology. The objective is to take advantage of these possibilities faster while improving them.
Analysis of Problem
Many reasons can explain resistance to change. Three factors have been recognized as sources of resistance: distrust, inadequate communication, and anxiety over the unknown (Smith et al., 2020). Resistance will be inevitable due to uncertainty if the intended adjustments are executed without notifying the stakeholders of their advantages and disadvantages. Stakeholder opposition to the proposed changes might also stem from distrust. For instance, any process changes would face fierce opposition if they are forced by supervisors who employees do not trust. A lack of clarity in the desired changes could similarly meet resistance from those affected. Before implementing the reforms, all workers must be informed of the reasons, significance, and possible impacts (Smith et al., 2020). In addition, personnel must be allowed to share their thoughts on the upcoming changes. If effective communication is not implemented in advance, resistance to the changes is likely to occur.
Possible Sources of Change Plan Resistance
The three likely sources of the stated resistance are Airline Xs personnel, executive team, and stakeholders. The employees will resist the proposed adjustments if the administration does not clarify their potential consequences. Conceivably, the staff will oppose the reforms out of concern for the uncertainty. Additionally, if the airlines middle management and supervisors are not briefed on the advantages and implications of the changes, they may resist them. Therefore, they must be incorporated into decision-making before implementing any changes (Smith et al., 2020). Lastly, potential opponents of Airline Xs planned change may include the airlines shareholders. Investors may decide not to support the changes if they have limited information regarding how those benefits would accrue to their portfolios.
Problem Solution
Those overseeing the change initiatives at Airline X should be quick, use a good communication approach, gauge the workers preparedness for change, and identify any possible opposition. The top management can determine when and how the changes will be implemented by assessing the companys preparedness for change. This way, they can get the word out about the planned changes when necessary. For example, by adopting an efficient communication plan, the airlines CEO can proactively discuss the advantages and consequences of the imminent changes with staff and stakeholders (Amarantou et al., 2018). Such a plan may involve emailing everyone in advance or calling regular meetings to update the staff on the proposed changes and how they will be implemented. In those meetings, the management will have the opportunity to solicit input from staff and other stakeholders on potential solutions that might help with the successful implementation of the reforms. Furthermore, if all individuals are involved in organizational change, they will appreciate and accept the rationale behind the intended reforms. By participating, employees will experience a feeling of responsibility and ownership for specific elements of the change proposal and become advocates for the suggested amendments.
Recommendations and Possible Benefits
Upon initiating the imminent adjustments, airline X must establish measures to maintain them. To accomplish the abovementioned, the organization must foster a commitment to its mission and evaluate and reinforce the transition throughout its design stage. Building enthusiasm should be a deliberate purpose included in any approach (Smith et al., 2020). If the CEO lacked motivation for the improvement, the staff would similarly lack interest in the changes. For this reason, the group tasked with overseeing the changes execution must inspire enthusiasm for the adjustments among all parties involved. The management can ensure its success by regularly reviewing and updating the change plan (Smith et al., 2020). This approach ensures that the newly implemented system is regularly monitored and assessed. Accordingly, violations will be identified and corrected to ensure that the airlines operations are not affected in the future.
Conclusion
In the last several decades, senior executives at airline companies could make long-term plans and execute them without worrying about needing to make any changes. The twenty-first century provides a different viewpoint: Markets in constant flux, globalization, shifting government regulations, new technology, rising consumer demands, and more. The above inevitably leads to the conclusion that strategic management is highly challenging and crucial over time, necessitating commensurate business changes. This discussion emphasizes the steps in change management, particularly how they occur in the aviation industry and why resistance is unavoidable. To help businesses in the aviation sector overcome opposition and take advantage of innovative solutions to challenging change scenarios, it establishes a model for executing change while limiting process obstacles.
References
Amarantou, V., Kazakopoulou, S., Chatzoudes, D., & Chatzoglou, P. (2018). Resistance to change: An empirical investigation of its antecedents. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(2), 426450.
Bughin, J., Catlin, T., Hirt, M., & Willmott, P. (2018). Why digital strategies fail. McKinsey & Company. Web.
Finlayson, H. (2022). When things happen at work (revised): People, circumstances, and what to do now A practitioners best practices compendium. FriesenPress.
Schoemaker, P. J., Heaton, S., & Teece, D. (2018). Innovation, dynamic capabilities, and leadership. California Management Review, 61(1), 15-42.
Smith, A. C., Skinner, J., & Read, D. (2020). Philosophies of organizational change: Perspectives, models and theories for managing change. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.