Updated: Nov 9, 2020
Everyone preaches for change in the abstract but on the ground people are inclined to habit and familiar norms. Too much innovation is traumatic and will lead to revolt. Organizations are inclined to create new innovation and changes to be more profitable or for regulations.Most managers expect the new wave to be accepted immediately but in the long run things don’t turn out as expected. knowing the real cause they resort to other measures to implement the changes for example pegging the changes required to performance this later affects workers moral and ultimately output hence dwindling profits I have narrowed down two ways to make it work:
1. Tinker with Tradition; Humans are habitual,they feel comfortable with the usual,when an organization is introducing new systems the basic should be inline with the already set standards in the organization culture. For example when introducing a human resource management system the reason should be to increase performance and pay rise in the company instead of being direct and making them feel they are being monitored.
2. Play with conventions; Pay attention to the zeitgeist. If their change is too radical of its time, few will understand it, and it will stir up anxiety and be hopelessly misinterpreted. The changes must seem less innovative than they really are. For instance major apps basic idea are built on the retro aspects of the app. Instagram is built on the photoalbum, Twitter the diary an so on. In conclusion changes in organizations should consider the innate background of the personnel this brings about an overall satisfaction and high performance in the organization. As Machiavelli himself observed, the Romans used conventions devices when they transformed their monarchy into a republic. They may have installed two consuls in place of the king, but since the king had been served by twelve lictors, they retained the same number to serve under the consuls. The king had personally performed an annual sacrifice, in a great spectacle that stirredbthe public; the republic retained this practice, only transferring it to a special “chief of the ceremony, whom they called the King of the sacrifice.” These and similar gestures satisfied the people and kept them from clamoring for the monarchy’s return.