.


:




:

































 

 

 

 


The research of employees loyalty level and size of company influence to change resistance




2016


II

( ())

 

 

 

ɻ

II

2016


656.2: 338

65. 372

: .., ...,

: . .II. : --, 2016. 326 .

 

 

ISBN 5-7287-0290-2

 

 

, . , , , .

 

, .

 

 

ISBN 5-7287-0290-2 --,

, 2016

 

II, 2016

BUSLOV I., BUDAEV N., KOCHERGIN E. THE RESEARCH OF EMPLOYEES LOYALTY LEVEL AND SIZE OF COMPANY INFLUENCE TO CHANGE RESISTANCE.. 8

HOMASHKO D., NOVOZHILOV M. THE INVESTIGATION OF POST INFLUENCE TO STAFF RESISTANCE TO ORGANISATIONAL CHANGES. 10

ISLAMGULOVA I. THE STUDY OF RUSSIAN COMPANIES EMPLOYEES RESISTANCE TO CHANGE AND OF COMMUNICATIONS ROLE IN ITS REDUCTION.. 12

KARPACH A., KORNEEVA E. THE STUDY OF RUSSIAN COMPANIES EMPLOYEES RESISTANCE TO CHANGE AND OF COMMUNICATIONS ROLE IN ITS REDUCTION.. 14

KHARKOVA M., SHASHKINA A. THE INFLUENCE OF WORK EXPERIENCE AND AGE OF THE EMPLOYEES FACTORS ON EMPLOYEES POSITION TO CHANGES IN COMPANY.. 16

KUZNETSOVA E., LUKINA U., NOVASH CH. THE STUDY OF RUSSIAN COMPANIES EMPLOYEES RESISTANCE TO CHANGE AND OF COMMUNICATIONS ROLE IN ITS REDUCTION 18

MOSIN I., SUCHKOVA M., TSYGANKOVA E. STUDY OF THE RESISTANCE TO CHANGES AMONG EMPLOYEES OF LLC ADIDAS GROUP COMPANY.. 20

.., .., .. .. 22

.., .., .. - .. 23

- .., .. 27

.. 34

.., .. .. 36

.. - 39

.. ƻ. 41

.. 43

.., .. ... 46

.., .. . 48

.., .. Ļ. 53

.., .. - ... 56

.. .. 60

.. .. 65

.., .. .. 70

.., .. .. 73

.., .. .. 77

.., .. 81

.., .. - .. 83

.., .. .. 87

.. . 90

.., .. ... 99

.., .. .. 104

.., .. .. 107

.., .. 111

.., .. - ... 115

.., .. Ļ. 119

.., .. .. 123

.., .. Ļ .. 125

.., .. .. 127

.., .. - .. 129

.., ., . ... 132

.., .. -.. 135

.., .. .. 136

.., .., .. .. 140

., . ... 145

.., Ҩ .. - 146

.., .. 148

.., .. . 153

.. ܻ. 155

.. .. 158

.., .., .. .. 162

.. .. 165

.., .. 167

.. Ļ : . 172

.., .. - .. 174

.. .. 178

.. ... 180

.. .. 183

.., .. Ļ. 185

.., .. .. 188

.. .. 192

.. Ļ, .. 195

.., .. - 198

.., .. , ... 203

.. ( 1997-1998 .) 205

.., .., .. .. 208

.., .. . 210

.., .. 213

.., .. 218

.., .., .. .. 222

.., .., .. . 226

.., .. .. 229

.., .. EFQM .. 233

.., .. / / ... 236

.. , 240

.. ... 243

.., .., ܨ .. .. 246

.., .. .. 249

.., .. .. 252

.. .. 254

Ш .., .., .., .. 1917 ., . 257

Ш .., .., .. .. 259

Ш .., .. : .. 263

.. .. 267

. .. 272

.. ʻ. 275

.. Ļ 280

.. .. 284

.., .. -2 -ܻ .. 290

.., .. . 292

.., .. 295

.., .., .. л. 297

.., .. - .. 303

.., .. .. 309

.., .. - - Ļ. 312

.., .., .. .. 315

.. .. 318

., . Ȼ ӻ .. 321

.. .. 323

 

 

338

THE RESEARCH OF EMPLOYEES LOYALTY LEVEL AND SIZE OF COMPANY INFLUENCE TO CHANGE RESISTANCE

Buslov I.

Budaev N.

Kochergin E.

 

, . , . .

, , , , .

 

Aim of the study: definition of the main reasons which cause the employees to resist changes in company.

Goals of the study: to study the change resistance theory; definition of reasons and actions of staff resistance factors of organizational changes in Russian companies; development of program and recommendations which will help to overcome the resistance to changes in Russian companies.

Methodology:

Desktop research of the theory of employees resistant to the changes);

Quantitative survey of the studying targeted audience (using resume form) [1].

The main factors of resistance to the changes:

1. Size of the company (small company 100 employees, medium company from 100 to 1000 employees, big company over 1000 employees);

2. Length of service; 3.Level of loyalty to company management.

The reasons which make people to resist the changes in companies are divided to personal barriers and structural barriers. Every single man in any situation takes care about his own prosperity. So when employee feels comfortable and stable the most thing he is afraid of is that this stable situation can be ruined. Here instantly works the self-protection mechanism.

First of all structural objects depends on the size of the company. The larger the organization, the greater it the interdependence of the subsystems, as a consequence - the inertia of organizational structures and higher resistance to the transfer of privileges to certain groups.

Also big influence on high level of resistance to changes can be provided by bad experience of the previous years, when there was a bad try to improve something.

According to the theory of Stewart Heller [2] there are three types of negative reasons to resist changes in companies:

Rational type of negative reasons is the lack of understanding details of the plan, the confidence that the changes are not necessary, lack of faith in the effectiveness of the changes, waiting for the negative consequences.

Personal type of negative reasons. It means the fear of job loss, anxiety about the future, insult to the resulting change in the course of criticism, fear of interference from the management.

Emotional type is shown in the general tendency for active or passive resistance to any change, lack of involvement, apathy initiatives, shock, distrust to the reasons that caused the change.

We found out some main factors the resistance depends more. Here they are:

ü lack of awareness of staff;

ü consequently, fear of the unknown;

ü lack of staff involvement in the process of entering innovation;

ü reluctance to abandon their traditional way of working.

Based on the above factors, it can be concluded that we have chosen factors (size of the organization, the work experience, the level of confidence in the leadership) should have the greatest value on the formation of the results of our research.

Hypothetically, the small size of the organization is to increase the awareness of staff about the ongoing changes in the companies and large, therefore, on the contrary.

A little experience in the organization preclude the existence of ingrained habits of employees in the workplace and in the methodology of work. Thus, if an employee works for a long time, he formed a clear understanding of their responsibilities and it would no longer be so easy to change anything in your daily routine.

And the third one level of loyalty to top managers. This factor consists of two factors (about them we wrote little bit earlier). So the level of loyalty is high when the employee is new or he is not working for a long time. If person works for a long time the level of loyalty is lower.

It should be notice that there were 45 respondents from different companies. And they all did it anonymously, so the level of loyalty to the answer is nearly 95%.

Conclusions

The result of this study, carried out by our research group, is partial (and complete, as not all 100% of this hypothesis is not confirmed, but it is the place to be) confirmation of the hypothesis of our research group, which factors influence more on the resistance power:

1. Size of the company. In small and medium-sized companies employees have relatively free access to the company management. In large companies they dont have such opportunities. In the medium-sized organization (up to 100 people) any employee of virtually unhindered, if necessary, can update its interesting details straight from top managers.

2. Length of service. If length of service is short the level of resistance is much lower, because employee do not have his own habits in the company. So the level of loyalty is also high. Of course, this factor doesnt work on 100%, at least because it depends on his colleagues. If his colleagues will behave bad, they will have different points of view on lifestyle or something else, it can force his will to change something in the company. So this factor is not stable (50\50)

3. Level of loyalty to top managers. Respondents that said that they completely trust there top managers support changes more. They are more awared employees, but not always agreed with managers. But they are ready to work more to reach there aims and goals and they are ready to change something in the company.

 

References

1. Ivanova E.A., Suchkova M.V. Study of the Resistance to Changes Among Employees of Trading Company on the Example of LLC Adidas Group/ International Scientific Conference Scientific Discoveries Czech Republic, Karlovy Vary Moscow, Russia, 28-29 January 2016. p.128-133.

2. .. : / .., ...- .: - , 2014.- 304 .

 

338





:


: 2016-10-23; !; : 534 |


:

:

: , .
==> ...

772 - | 733 -


© 2015-2024 lektsii.org - -

: 0.072 .