Organizational Mergers and Leadership Dynamics

Introduction

Organisations in the modern dispensation are susceptible to various changes in their quest to remain committed and competent in the production of goods and services, for them to suit in global markets. Many of the organisations are operating in a highly competitive environment and that prone to technological dynamics and thus tend to be flexible enough to accommodate such changes. Additionally, the need for organisational shareholders to deliberately change their operational designs, and internal structures has all rekindled a spark for reconsidering how the organisations in question are managed. In this context, seeking management dissertation help can provide valuable insights into effective strategies for adapting to these evolving demands.

It is for such prepositions that this essay seeks to examine the contemporary workplace challenges and in particular organisational amalgamation (mergers); and while applying proposed academic theories get to evaluate managerial approaches and interventions paramount in the pursuit to ensure the employees therein are motivated, committed and sentimentally attached to their areas of jurisdictions. Besides, this essay in the last bit will seek to present my development plan based on my first-hand experiences I have gathered in the line of career development in the managerial domain; and thus get to provide such a program that can benchmark my growth between the present and future indicated time.

Organisational Mergers

In the realm of organisational mergers; two or more firms interact in to negotiate and agree to work together as a single unit to produce goods and services. According to Cartwright and Cooper (1992), acquisition and mergers began a long time ago and yet has continually span to the present context, and has indeed been a vital strategy by which companies achieve corporate diversity, rationalisation and growth. In this contemporary arena, firms ought to deal with the incorporate challenges of mergers and acquisitions, for them absorb the disturbances triggered by mergers and acquisitions (Berquist, 1993).

The scholars who have ventured in related literature reminds us that there are a plethora of factors affecting organisations in the realm of merging and that those holding leadership positions ought to induce a relevant organisational change and a course of stakeholder acceptance of the impending “chaos”( Michaela and Burke, 2000). The problem rests on the threshold of choosing the relevant course of actions that are achievable within the ability of the firm to absorb the introduced change with existing resources. Early research proposed by the Great Man Theory of leadership according to Judge et al., (2002) conveys that the situation also underscores a vital role in establishing the efficiency of a leader; and that to be a leader one must act peculiarly in peculiar circumstances (Yukl, 2002)

There is no shortage of literature on the concepts of leadership and leadership typologies. For instance, Conger and Kanungo (1988), propose that leaders must promote organisational change through the creation of the vision. The theories of transformation leadership echo that change in the organisation is achieved through the implementation of sinister vision ns by leaders through actions that are deemed to change the internal cultural fabrics and structures (Bass and Alvoro, 1994). Additionally, according to Kouzes and Posner (1987 p.30), when propagating a substantial change; “Leadership is the art of mobilising others to want to struggle for shared aspirations”. Consequently; leaders must be skilful in the art of change management logistics if indeed we aspire to be the successful agents for change and inspire others to follow suit (Van Knippenberg and Hogg, 2003).

Weber (1978, considers cultural change as a “Charismatic intervention of a unique and idiosyncratic sort” and indeed echoed that concepts along power and its interests and fundamentals. The leadership behaviours primarily determine the culture of an organisation and how different clusters of internal stakeholders react to it. Additionally, the leaders are primary sources of influence of organisational culture and designs (Schein 1982). Furthermore, there were those scholars like Mumford et al., (2002) who held the view that organisational latitude and general climate and culture do represent a generalised social construction over which the managers contain a significant control and influence.

Since leadership is a collective aspect, Social Theorists maintain that the change from individual to group level of identity is useful in the critiquing of leadership in organisational contexts especially after an amalgamation or merger (Van Knippenberg and Van Leeuwen, 2001). Social identity theory reflects on the premise of self-concept; which it refers to as social identity which originates from memberships in social constructs and differentiates with the individual personality which mainly focuses an individual’s characteristic as a unique being (Hogg, 1996 ). In most effective organisational settings, leadership is mostly impacted by how the leaders are perceived by the people led. Whereas the social identity notion is critical when studying power and leadership; it is not the individual perspective (Dick, 2004).

The impact of leaders to organisational members lies on how they regard and treat them. Weber (1996) argues that when employees trust their leaders, and what they are doing, I give the impression that leaders are performing their duties well. There is a need for leaders to comprehend the function of management in the context of organisations; which revolves controlling, organising, and planning; and distinguish such roles from leadership which mainly focuses on motivating employees towards change.

Moreover, literature has suggested and illuminated how the concept of motivation affects an organisation’s willingness to absorb change when required. According to Amabile (1998), leaders can inspire employees’ performances in their attitudes and perceptions through a well-conceived motivation. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy on needs is deemed instrumental in quenching the needs of employees in workplaces. A well-satisfied employee tends to function well with optimal concentration. Abraham Maslow noted that it is almost impossible to lead a person who is constrained the provisions of fundamental physiological needs. He observed that human needs vary with urgency with the lowest in his pyramid considered as the most basic one must fulfil to achieve others.

Motivation is a blueprint for not only employee motivation but also retention. A well-structured organisational system that takes cognisance of employees’ efforts and rewards them is deemed to function harmoniously and sustainably. Motivation helps to rekindle the employees’ potential to do well in their areas of assignment continually. By so doing, the employees tend to concentrate while doing the best they can to keep up in the pedestals of efficiency within the organisational running (Amabile, 1998).

Change Management Approaches

Mergers are complex situations comprising of various interplays that can amount to either business success or failure. The very nature of alliances is that they influence very many aspects of an organisation, which thus bring forth a complicated sort of organisational change process. In most scenarios, much business which tried to merge consequently failed. In spite of the presence of robust literature in the area of mergers, little is still presented on the approaches that can effectively lead to successes after a merger (Hit, Harrison and Ireland, 2001).

According to Naddler, Thies and Nadler (2001); effective cultural change rests on the threshold of embracing collaborations and working together especially between the Chief Executive Officer and the executive team. The high ranking leadership ought to resume their roles as chief architects of the introduced change process; Additionally, Cartwright and Cooper (1993) project this proposition, by saying that it is critical enough to integrate stakeholders into the change process. The association of all stakeholders excites the effect of owning the whole designs for change, therefore inducing a less resistant force to change. However, the problem rests in the respecting cultural difference that characterises various stakeholder extractions. Cartwright and Cooper, besides, suggest that directing efforts on senior management alone can lead to the emergence of multiple cultures in the company, cultural collisions and low rates of adaption to change.

Ashkanasy and Holmes (1995) because of the cultural collisions suggest that the corporate management should be bestowed the mandate of ensuring cultural and human factors are proactively integrated in the eve of merging. Managers are key players in the identification of instrumental values and behaviours that can bear good fruits for the organisation, and thus cultivate those (Argyris, 1993). Whereas Schein (1992) emphasises the role of leaders in communicating that which is wrong and right; Jung (2001) perceives managers as vital players in initiating, transforming and institutionalising the cultures in the organisation. A well converting cultural fabric within the organisation not only motivates employees; but also retains them to work amicably for the achievement of goals.

Managing Shifts in the Corporate Culture

Organisational culture is typically prone to change alongside the spinning wheel of time, which therefore become necessary that the managerial officers become aware on which is the best time to embrace the change (Watzlawick et al., 1974). When organisations merge, there is a great deal of uncertainty resting on the premise whether the introduced changes are viable or not. The cultural transformation of an organisation should encompass the changing of individuals’ behaviours and minds and sensitising them on the rationales for adopting the proposed philosophies and norm of doing tasks (Sathe and Davidson 2000).

According to the Cultural Organization Model developed by Hatch (2000); the role of employees and leaders in creating and executing the organisational culture is emphasized. To absorb change, on ought to, first of all, understand it, and lay the foundation for accepting it. The roles of a leader in adapting organisational culture are vital, which include staff selection, alleviation of rebels, socialisation, communication and leading by example. Corporate culture according to Martin (2002) should be perceived through a spectrum of three fundamental perspectives which are; integrated, fragmented and differentiated. All three aspects can be found in an organisation simultaneously. Martin’s propositions are deemed correct especially in an event when the strategy for management change entails approaching every domain step by step.

Consequences for Individuals

The consensus which brings together firms to form mergers can threaten peoples’ job security and undermine their wellbeing and self-esteem (Terry, and Callan, 1998). As enterprises merger, there is a probability that some employees from different orientations lose their employment opportunities in due course. The nature of processes that contain the whole process of amalgamation are critical determinants of how individuals are impacted; such that irrelevant sorts of appraisal can lead to people being unaffected while positive assessment creating challenging opportunities for employees; and negative examination causing individuals to feel threatened and duffer damage or harm (Ivancevich, Schweiger and Power, 1987).

Research has demonstrated that when amalgamation happens on existing firms, the stakeholders operating under such firms undergo stressful destabilisation processes whose effects must be looked into for the merger to get success (Panchal and Cartwright, 2001). In a more generalised view, when organisational crises happen; the management will tend to tighten the control to impact change and induce a more significant rate of constraint on the involved stakeholders. The type and extent of limitations produced in such situation are highly dependent on the sort of culture being merged. Cartwright and Cooper associate this with four cultural typologies namely; role, power, support and achievement. The two scholars also maintain that during organisational change, especially amalgamation; organisations tend to tighten control by inducing a stronger level of constraint while limiting individuals’ ability and freedom to make choices on their lives.

Adoption of Change

Organisational leaders in many cases encounter resistance in their line of duty execution (Davy et al., 1998). The scholars argue that “the only thing certain about organisational acquisitions and change is that nothing is certain (pg.9). Besides, they seem convinced that the “employee problems” are behind the failure of many mergers. Thus, the embedded causative agents of employee resistance are a fundamental domain which ought to be studied and understood to improve on the success of amalgamation.

On the eve of amalgamation, the leadership position assumes that it can re-orient the employees’ reputation by changing the cultural construct of the organisation, which is wrong. Valikangas and Okumura pinpoint that employees tend to deliberately rend themselves impermeable to change because of the leaders’ insensitivity towards what motivates them. Consequently, amalgamations get to be characterised by reduced motivations. Valikangas and Okumura encourage a sort of leadership that is structured with influences that are congruent with the norms and behaviours of employees. During the occasion of change, organisational leaders thus ought to induce an atmosphere of psychological inspiration and safety for people to interact in the new reputation and tests on the new culture. (Zammuto, Gifford and Goodman, 2000).

Stakeholder Perceptions of Leadership in Times of Change

The pursuit to propel an organisation into the adoption of a new one is one of the most significant challenges constricting the contemporary managers (Bluedorn, 2000). In many mergers, change happens exclusively on the leaders. Leaders are endorsed to act exemplarily and indeed exhibit the actual characteristics of change agents. Truce and Beyer (1993), note that transactional leaders are better placed in the discourse of sewing new cultures into organisations. These leaders find a need to involve participants in the decision making processes. The leaders also consider communication as a critical tool for disseminating the change and its implications to every stakeholder.

Leadership is a vital tenet bringing about social change and influence, in which people want to feel apart, reinforced and supported during the eve of change. The interactions between individuals and their leaders do affect the efficiency and appropriateness of a leader. Due to that, there is a need to develop an in-depth mastery of understandings of employer-employee relations, or the relationships embedded between leaders and their subjects they govern in an enterprise (Markus and Wurf, 1987).

A Critical Reflection of my Experiences Concerning Leadership and Professional Practice

This section seeks to provide a different extraction of experiences I have gathered in my school of experiences and academics in the business really. Through various encounters and interactions in the classroom and social spectrum; I have come to learn and appreciate the role of leadership, and the particular traits one ought to possess to administer leadership roles efficiently. Through pondering over myself, and through what colleagues and friends attribute me off, a solid basis for my on awareness is inculcated, which indeed sets me into the realisation of my capacity as a managerial enthusiast and practitioner.

Kolb’s model of experiential learning and its four components including concrete experience, conceptualisation, reflective observation and active experimentation provides me with a framework for learning through extended spectrums of issues of life. Besides, an introduction to academic models such as behaviourist, situational leadership models, post-heroic theories, and trait model, and transactional models have all participated in filling me with helpful insights of what matters as a leader, while working towards learning such traits.

Communication Skills

Communication is one of the integral parts of effective leader and leadership. In both written and spoken art, discussion has been a paramount aspect, especially in business-related deals. Through my friends especially way back in high school, I developed a motivation to perfect. The student leadership positions I upheld required that I improve in spoken art to be able to communicate fluently and understandably to my colleague. Additionally, through group work and discussions in school, I got to learn o how to be confident and got used to speaking. To a large extent, my colleagues and the immediate environment shaped my oral communication skills.

As a writing enthusiast, I developed a writing habit as a hobby. While writing on various subjects, my art attained resounding fame in college, and high school levels. Some of the articles I wrote got to the limelight of large public audiences who found them inspiring and well communicated. The sort of satisfaction and complement granted me increased motivation to write more.

Motivation

Darue et al., 2011, present a transactional leader as one who builds a suitable rapport with his/her subjects; and one who believes in employee motivation as a driving force for performances. Transactional leadership traits are important because they motivate affinity between a leader and the people he/she leads. As a motivator, I have learnt from my seniors and teachers especially while I was in high school; that motivation is the food for the soul, yet which can ignite huge individual potentials, and thus performances. The greatest of leaders are meant to inspire their subjects into performances.

Ability to Learn

I am a believer of the premise that great leaders can learn through every experience and encounter both at workplaces and beyond. It is on this premise that I have immersed myself into a flexible leader, able to adapt to situations and learn from them. As a behaviourist, I equally believe that behavioural orientation and actions play a role in determining my success as a leader which makes me interrogate my deeds more often. This I do especially during self- examination, and reflection before engaging in various activities. According to Elliot (2011), the behaviourist model of leadership echoes that leadership skills can be acquired rather than being inherent. Leadership according to behaviourist theory is also constructed on the threshold of learnable reputation.

Other traits such as self-confidence, assertive, and problem-solving skills have also capacitated me to confront leadership dexterously. The workplace environment is characterised by different challenges and conflicts which require relevant skills to administer. I learnt such skills through experiences, and offline reflections are accompanying such situations. However, my master of the ability mentioned above still requires stepwise perfection. Learning is a lifelong process, and thus I cannot say I have the monopoly of such skills named in this essay. The following action plan can boost the understanding and move closer to who an efficient leader is;

Conclusion

In report concludes by emphasising the need for elaborate stakeholder participation during the integration of organisational changes. In mergers, many issues are overlying the process which must be dealt with. Managers in this context pay critical role in ensuring the adoption of change, and contentious areas of concern are administered. As presented in the text, there is a need to learn on a daily basis; as a manager; to gather more insights and experiences in the area of leadership. As the world of business is susceptible to change, so does the need to lay flexible business foundations which efficiently respond to such changes.

References

Amabile, T.M., 1998. How to kill creativity (Vol. 87). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Argyris, C., 1993. Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104.

Ashkanasy, N.M. and Holmes, S., 1995. Perceptions of organizational ideology following merger: A longitudinal study of merging accounting firms. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(1), pp.19-34.

Bergquist, W.H., 1993. The postmodern organization: Mastering the art of irreversible change. Jossey-Bass.

Bluedorn, A.C., 2000. Time and organizational culture. Handbook of organizational culture and climate, 1, pp.117-128.

Burke, W.W., 2011. A perspective on the field of organization development and change: The Zeigarnik effect. The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 47(2), pp.143-167.

Cartwright, S. and Cooper, C.L., 1993. The role of culture compatibility in successful organizational marriage. Academy of Management Perspectives, 7(2), pp.57-70.

Conger, J.A. and Kanungo, R.N., 1988. The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of management review, 13(3), pp.471-482.

Davy, J.A., Kinicki, A., Kilroy, J. and Scheck, C., 1988. After the merger: Dealing with people's uncertainty. Training & Development Journal, 42(11), pp.56-62.

Derue, D.S., Nahrgang, J.D., Wellman, N.E.D. and Humphrey, S.E., 2011. Trait and behavioural theories of leadership: An integration and meta‐analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel psychology, 64(1), pp.7-52.

Elliott, R., 2011. Utilising evidence-based leadership theories in coaching for leadership development: Towards a comprehensive integrating conceptual framework. International Coaching Psychology Review.

Hatch, M.J., 2000. The cultural dynamics of organizing and change. Handbook of organizational culture and climate, pp.245-260.

Hitt, M.A., Harrison, J.S. and Ireland, R.D., 2001. Mergers & acquisitions: A guide to creating value for stakeholders. Oxford University Press.

Hogg, M.A., 1996. Intragroup processes, group structure and social identity. Social groups and identities: Developing the legacy of Henri Tajfel, 65, p.93.

Judge, T.A., Bono, J.E., Ilies, R. and Gerhardt, M.W., 2002. Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of applied psychology, 87(4), p.765.

Jung, D.I., 2001. Transformational and transactional leadership and their effects on creativity in groups. Creativity Research Journal, 13(2), pp.185-195.

Markus, H. and Wurf, E., 1987. The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual review of psychology, 38(1), pp.299-337.

Michela, J.L. and Burke, W.W., 2000. Organizational Culture and Climate in Transformations for Quality and Innovation, w: Handbook of Organizational Culture & Climate.

Mumford, M.D., Scott, G.M., Gaddis, B. and Strange, J.M., 2002. Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. The leadership quarterly, 13(6), pp.705-750.

Nadler, D.A., Thies, P.K. and Nadler, M.B., 2001. Culture change in the strategic enterprise: Lessons from the field. CL Cooper, S. Carwright and PC Earley, The International Handbook of Organizational Culture and Climate. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester.

Panchal, S. and Cartwright, S., 2001. Group differences in post-merger stress. Journal of managerial Psychology, 16(6), pp.424-433.

Terry, D.J. and Callan, V.J., 1998. In-group bias in response to an organizational merger. Group dynamics: Theory, research, and practice, 2(2), p.67.

Van Knippenberg, D. and Hogg, M.A., 2003. A social identity model of leadership effectiveness in organizations. Research in organizational behaviour, 25, pp.243-295.

Wikangas, L. and Okumura, A., 1997. Why do people follow leaders? A study of a US and a Japanese change program. The Leadership Quarterly, 8(3), pp.313-337.

Zammuto, R.F., Gifford, B. and Goodman, E.A., 2000. Managerial ideologies, organization culture and the outcomes of innovation: A competing values perspective.