The Impact Of The Adaptation Of The Excellence Model Focusing In How People Criteria Can Affect Employee Productivity

The Impact Of The Adaptation Of The Excellence Model Focusing In How People Criteria Can Affect Employee Productivity

By Student’s Name

Code+ course name

Professor’s name

University name

City, State

Date

Table of Contents TOC o “1-5” h z u HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094794” Table of Contents PAGEREF _Toc387094794 h ii

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094795” Declaration PAGEREF _Toc387094795 h iv

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094796” Abstract PAGEREF _Toc387094796 h v

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094797” List of Tables PAGEREF _Toc387094797 h vi

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094798” List of Figures PAGEREF _Toc387094798 h vi

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094799” 1.0.Introduction PAGEREF _Toc387094799 h 1

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094800” 1.1.Background PAGEREF _Toc387094800 h 1

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094801” 1.2.Mohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment PAGEREF _Toc387094801 h 3

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094802” 1.3.Problem PAGEREF _Toc387094802 h 4

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094803” 1.4.Significance of the Problem PAGEREF _Toc387094803 h 4

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094804” 1.5.Research Questions PAGEREF _Toc387094804 h 5

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094805” 2.0.Literature Review PAGEREF _Toc387094805 h 6

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094806” 2.1. Introduction PAGEREF _Toc387094806 h 6

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094807” 2.2. EFQM PAGEREF _Toc387094807 h 6

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094808” 2.2.1. People PAGEREF _Toc387094808 h 6

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094809” 2.2.1.1. Who are Mohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment’s people? PAGEREF _Toc387094809 h 7

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094810” 2.3. People results PAGEREF _Toc387094810 h 9

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094811” 2.3.1. Understanding the importance of people results PAGEREF _Toc387094811 h 9

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094812” 2.4. Reasons for employees resistance the EFQM dispensation PAGEREF _Toc387094812 h 10

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094813” 2.2. Reasons and Solutions PAGEREF _Toc387094813 h 10

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094814” 3.0.Methodology PAGEREF _Toc387094814 h 18

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094815” 3.1. Introduction PAGEREF _Toc387094815 h 18

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094816” 3.2. Deductive Approach PAGEREF _Toc387094816 h 18

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094817” 3.3. Sampling Design and Sampling Methods in the Study. PAGEREF _Toc387094817 h 19

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094818” 3.3.1. Population and sampling frame PAGEREF _Toc387094818 h 19

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094819” 3.3.2. Sample size PAGEREF _Toc387094819 h 19

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094820” 3.4. Questionnaires PAGEREF _Toc387094820 h 19

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094821” 3.5. Likert Scales PAGEREF _Toc387094821 h 20

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094822” 3.6. Secondary Data from Online Sources PAGEREF _Toc387094822 h 20

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094823” 3.6.1. What are secondary data? PAGEREF _Toc387094823 h 21

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094824” 3.7. The Research PAGEREF _Toc387094824 h 21

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094825” 4.0.Results of the Empirical Research PAGEREF _Toc387094825 h 22

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094826” 5.0.Conclusion and Recommendation PAGEREF _Toc387094826 h 28

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094827” 5.1. Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc387094827 h 28

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094828” 5.2. Recommendations PAGEREF _Toc387094828 h 29

HYPERLINK l “_Toc387094829” References PAGEREF _Toc387094829 h 30

DeclarationThis paper is a product of my original research efforts. I have acknowledged any contributions made by others through clearly indicating the contributor and their contributions using references to literature. I acknowledge all collaborative reassesses that that have had significant impact on my papers.

The research was conducted under the guidance of my professor [Name] at the institutive of [name]

AbstractWhen considering the current global competition and economic liberalization, quality is now emerging as a key factor for gaining a competitive advantage. The quality nature of a commodity or service determines whether an organization retains, adds or loses customers. Low quality leads to discontented customers and, therefore, the loss of future sales and costs related to immediate waste and rectification. Implementation of quality systems, therefore, becomes mandatory. However, it becomes tricky when employees are not ready to adopt a new dispensation. Literature from various source indicate the employee are prone to resisting change. Through a review of literature it is clear that employee resist change due to various reasons. Employees at Mohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment have exhibited resistance to adoption of ne EFQM dispensation thus having negative impact on the people and people results parameters of the model. Furthermore their resistance impedes improvement of quality. This paper find out why Mohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment are reluctance to change and recommend solutions that the mange can adopt to encourage the employees to change.

List of Tables TOC h z c “Table”

HYPERLINK l “_Toc386869674” Table 1 Sources of Resistance PAGEREF _Toc386869674 h 26

HYPERLINK l “_Toc386869675” Table 2 Evolution and Strategic PAGEREF _Toc386869675 h 28

List of Figures TOC h z c “Figure” HYPERLINK l “_Toc386869705” Figure 1 Lewin’s Force Field Theory, (George & Jones 2002) PAGEREF _Toc386869705 h 11

HYPERLINK l “_Toc386869706” Figure 2 Attitudes towards change, (Kreitner 2004) PAGEREF _Toc386869706 h 16

HYPERLINK l “_Toc386869707” Figure 3 Deductive Reasoning PAGEREF _Toc386869707 h 21

IntroductionBackground

When considering the current economic liberalization and global competition, quality is now emerging as a key factor for gaining a competitive advantage. The quality nature of a commodity or service determines whether an organization retains, adds or loses customers. Low quality leads to discontented customers and, therefore, the loss of future sales and costs related to immediate waste and rectification. Technological innovations have made geographical boundaries meaningless, thereby giving rise to customers with perfect information about the market conditions. The business environment is increasingly becoming more complex with the marketplace transforming from being locally based to globally (Balcı 2002). This has subjected managers to constant pressures to look for alternative methods of improving logistics and cost minimization, and ultimately, to improve competitiveness. Customers are becoming increasingly sensitive to the rising standards, and hence, are more rational in their decision-making processes. Because customers have access to a wide range of commodities to choose from, they will only go for those commodities that maximize their consumption objective. For rational consumers, quality cannot be regarded as an optional factor in their objectives, and it is from this factor they derive utility (Erturgut 2007). Because of the global revolution, this persistent increase in demand for quality products and services gives organizations have no option but to invest substantial resources in those strategies that aim at developing total quality management.

People form an essential component of the quality management system. Therefore, effective way to introduce TQM within any organization is through training, development, and the empowerment of personnel. The organizational leadership needs also to ensure that the focus on quality is not solely motivated to generate profits for shareholders (value creation), but that it becomes a culture in the organization.

Shareholders can claim full ownership of physical resources within their organizations. However, the most crucial component of a business’ resources, namely employees, can never be fully owned by stakeholders. Employees are the driving force and the lifeblood in any organization, yet they are the most difficult element to mobilize for maximum return on investment for shareholders (Saatçioğlu 2006). The best way to manage this resource is by creating a conducive working environment within the organization that favors the retention of its best employees and avoids hiring unproductive ones (Pennington 2001, p. Xii).

With the exodus of skilled workers gaining momentum, the major consideration for organizations should be on the retention of existing talents and ways to mobilize manpower resources for quality services that are superior to that of their rivals, and ultimately, gives them a competitive advantage in the industry (Zsuzsanna & Tamás 2012). The only major concern in this instance is a complete commitment towards quality. This would pave the way to output improvement by the already focused employees while creating a breakthrough that reaches out to the unmotivated staff and motivate low output. According to Smit, (2000, p.117) this can be achieved using two strategies: first, ensuring that quality becomes part and parcel of organization’s culture and secondly, motivating the team to integrate quality into their personal lives.

According to Ceronio (1996, pp. 312-313), the more common misconception in the world of business is that the entire economic structure revolves around money. What Ceronio misses in his arguments is that markets consist of people and, therefore, the societal foundation of transactions could be defined as one of the people serving people. This holds true to the symbiotic relationship exhibited between employers and employees, i.e. they interact as people with one goal to serve each other and equally serve the customers (Eskildsen & Dahlgaard 2000). The trend is also visible in the interaction between employees and their customers.

Mohammad bin Rashid Housing EstablishmentMohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment is a public government entirety with a corporate identity. It was established. The established was instituted to facilitate provision of proper housing to the citizens of the Dubai emirate through provision of a numbers of services related to housing (Government of Dubai, 2014). The establishment facilitates provision of housing services to citizens under one roof. The service include, alternatives like provision of governmental houses, residential plots, giving house loans, ready houses, maintaining and expanding existing houses, and overseeing standards in the housing industry (Government of Dubai, 2014).

The firm is responsible for several housing projects in multiple locations across Dubai. For instance at the moment, the firm has housing project at Oud Al Muteena, Al Warq and Al Barsha. Some of the projects have about 1500 villas while other have up to 3000 villas. The firm extends its service to other related activities such as sewerage drainage works, lighting works and street furniture, telecommunications and electrical works, portable water and irrigation systems.

The firm contributes to and stimulates national economy growth through its investment programs, as well as initiating critical partnership between the private and public sectors. The establishment has a very succinct vision, “Appropriate housing for each national.” It has stayed true the meaning of its vision especially through the developing, building and implementing the Emirate of Dubai housing strategy (Government of Dubai, 2014). It also engage in establishments of legislations the help it to realize its vision and mission. It is a strategic organization in the Emirates of Dubai housing industry. It has also supported several corporation initiatives between local and international entities. The organization’s mission states the organization intention to achieve stability in the society developing through a range of housing solutions to citizens (Government of Dubai, 2014). The organization focuses quality, cost efficiency, diversity creativity and embraces internationally accepted standards

Problem

It seems that most organizations are adopting an excellence model to ensure that their business focus on customer, continues improvement and human resources management. MRHE adopted the excellence model in 2008, however it seems that employee are still resistant to it and do not yet have an understanding of the benefits of using the model in their work. In addition, they still believe in the old system, which means that they think they can continue to do their work without using the model. Also, training was not an issue because many training sessions have been held for that purpose and to establish the culture of excellence.

Significance of the Problem

Nowadays world is in constant change, driven in large part by managers, policymakers, and government officials who are engaging in smarter, more efficient practices. The excellence model can help employee to define their strengths and areas that need improvement. If they continue to resist accepting the model, they will not improve as employees. This paper provides insight into why they resist changes and highlights the benefits that they can gain by implementing the model. Furthermore, employees are the focus of this research because they are ultimately the reasons to be satisfied or unsatisfied with the services that a company provides.

Research Questions

H1: The Excellence Model directly and positively influences employee productivity, especially as it relates to people criteria and results criteria.

H2: Changing employee culture is essential before implementing the change

H3: Leadership commitment is important to support resources and capabilities and motivate people

Literature Review2.1. IntroductionThis section will involve a review of literature on EFQM’s people and people results parameters. It will explore the importance of people to an organizations such Mohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment. It will also explore literature on the importance of people results and what the people results are (Eskildsen & Dahlgaard, 2000). Afterward this literature rearview will explore literature on why the employees are not taking up the EFQM model and realizing people and people results despite the training they have received. Treating preference of employees’ to stick to the old dispensation as a form of resistance the literature review will explore literature on employee resistance to change. It will explore employees reason to resist change and have this resistance can be reduced.

2.2. EFQM2.2.1. PeopleThe people parameter of the business excellence model (EFQM) espouses the importance of people within the organization. The people provide the organization its vision, inspiration and keep the organization alive (Prabhu et al, 2000). People provide the important competencies and skills that are needed to enable the organization to realize its objectives. The people provide the necessary labor that yield the good and service that the organization specializes in supplying. It is one of the basic and most important resources an organization can boost of owning. With the changing and challenging economic time, the intelligent use of people resources greatly determines and influences that success of the organization.

2.2.1.1. Who are Mohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment’s people?Mohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment people are basically all the people who contribute their efforts, either skilled or non skilled, to the organization to enable it realize its objectives. These can be classified as follows

Full time paid employees

Employees that serve on a part-time basis or have a piece of contract or short-term contract with the organization.

Temporal employee hired during peak period to help meet increased demands during peak time

Sub-contractors

Subordinated staff such as cleaners, guards and kitchen staff

The meaning of people to Mohammad bin Rashid Housing Establishment

Good organizations recognize and appreciate the importance and contribution made by people to their success. In order to realize the needed success, an organization must have the necessary people, not just any people. Even with advance technology, no organization can success without the appropriate people in place. It is necessary to engage the abilities and enthusiasm of the people effectively

First it is important to plan your people properly and manage them to realize success. It is difficult to determine the kind of people needed unless an organization has clearly stipulated goals to achieve. Although these may sound straightforward, many establishments labor with the status quo without really understanding what they are attempting to do.

It is also beneficial to develop or improve people’s competencies and knowledge’s to enable them achieve what is required of them (Eskildsen, Kristensen & Juhl, 2000). The organization must choose the right people with proper qualifications and skills it is important to match the people with the employment culture or the organization culture. Apprising the employee subsequently helps an organization find out what skills the employees may be lacking. Once the gaps are recognized the business can find an appropriate way to train the people to ensure that they deliver what the organization needs. Even competent employee need frequent training to boost their morale and competence. Training also enhances their confidence and reduces the feeling of neglect by the organization.

Involving and empowering employees is also crucial under the people parameter. Empowering employees and having them involved in critical affairs of the organization such as decision making boost the performance of the employees. Involving and encouraging employees can entails activities such as encouraging them to create teams. They should have proper functional teams. The organization can also directly empower them through responsibilities and an environment in which they can make their own decisions

Communication with the people is also critical. The organization must ensure that the organizational objectives are properly communicated from the managerial level to the most basic level. Instructions must also be properly communicated

Recognizing and reward exemplary performance can also help improve the productivity of the people. This is because recognizing any reward good performance improves morale and encourages the employees to enhance their performance. It also indicates that the firm cares about its employees. Organizations have to adopt appropriate approaches or practices or recognizing and rewarding good performance.

Consistent review and appraisal of employees is important. This determines whether people know what they are doing. They should know what is taking place in the organization so as to understand how they fit in. They should know how to positively affect on customers. Appraisal can take place through staff meetings, surveys, appraisals, and assessments.

2.3. People results2.3.1. Understanding the importance of people results

Satisfied and highly motivate people are essentials since they are the factor that differentiates one organization from another. The keep an organization alive and perform better when they have a job satisfaction. Proper people results must have people with appropriate perceptions toward the organization and their responsibilities to the organizations.

Also, the people must be able to yield positive results according to stipulated performance measure. The performance indicators that exhibit proper performance results include proper internal communications, adequate career development and training, leadership performance, engagement and involvement, targeting setting to enhance competency and performance management, and proper leadership performance.

It is necessary to develop proper path to the results. This path is determined by the extent which the organization demonstrates need for movement towards the specific goals. First, the organization starts with setting achievable target that are relevant to the organization’s aspirations then developing appropriate strategy to meet the targets. The organization should then develop proper trends in accordance with the EFQM requirements

2.4. Reasons for employees resistance the EFQM dispensation

Employees tend to resistance to new developments in their organizations (Jones & Dugdale 2002). However, their efforts to form a formidable plan or solution that can be applicable to various contexts for realizing the anticipated outcomes have been thwarted by the complex nature of activities involved in transforming an organization (Ford & Ford 2009).

Developing a list of the different causes of failure witnessed in the implementation processes is not difficult; however, the pronounced barrier is the resistance to change (Kaplan & Norton 2008). The problem has been there throughout modern times, unfortunately, there is no consensus on its neither content nor occurrence ways that have been mentioned by researchers who have explored it (Lines 2004). Our literature review will explore the concept of change resistance based on the perceptions of some renowned researchers in this field.

Although, resistance has been the culprit for impeding change, a voluminous number of arguments that support change resistance as a positive phenomena exist in the literature (Shaw 2002). There are many literature books and scientific literature papers on the topic, and the majority of them have different perspectives on the issue (Dent & Goldberg 1999). To avoid repetition, we will seek to find appropriate to review authors who have represented all of these various perspectives in terms of resistance to change.

2.2. Reasons and SolutionsLewin (1951), (adopted from George & Jones, 2002) one of those who pioneered in coining the concept of resistance to change, developed the force-field analysis model which studied resistance during the process of organizational change. Lewin saw two dissimilar types of forces embedded within an organization (George & Jones 2002). One faction works toward change while the other faction works against it. Once the forces of these two factions create a balance, the organization faces inertia. Therefore, to change this equilibrium status, organizations need to strengthen the pro-change faction and weaken the anti-change faction. Managers who intent to embrace change should craft ways to weaken the net-impact that might be caused by resistance forces and consequently reinforce the group that supports change. The figure below shades some light about the basis of Lewin’s force field analysis model in the context of the organization (George & Jones 2002).

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 1 Lewin’s Force Field Analysis Model (George & Jones 2002)An organization with level P1 performances has a balanced state, i.e. pro-change and anti-change forces obtain a balance at level P1. When the organization conducts a performance appraisal and decides to adjust it by transforming certain processes in the organization, three options are available: Either increase or multiply, if possible, changes; weaken the anti-change forces; or execute both of them concurrently. If the implementation succeeds, the organization moves to level P2 and to improve its performances.

For Lewin (1951), (Adopted, George & Jones 2002) change involves a dialectical approach of two conflicting forces; however, for Zander (1950), (adopted from Dent & Goldberg 1999) resistance can only be explained by focusing on individuals and their perception toward change. Zander views resistance as a typical response of an individual who has an interest in safeguard him/herself and his/her interests against possible effects of change efforts. Of great interest is how Zander, in his analysis, differentiates the causes from symptoms of resistance. He advises managers to concentrate on causes rather than simply removing the symptoms of resistance encountered when implementing changes. According to Zander (adopted from Dent & Goldberg 1999), change initiatives face resistance for six major reasons:

Individual interests that conflict with change

Ignorance of pre deposited institution within the group

The presence of strong forces barring individuals from changing

The presence of different interpretations about the change and its consequences

The existence of ambiguous thoughts (those that might be affected by change) about the state of change

Failure by top management to lead by example, and instead, impose a strong top-down authority on people likely to be affected by the change.

Researchers from the U.S are remembered for conducting one of the earliest empirical studies on resistance to change, and which yielded a fertile foundation for academic debates about the subject. The first empirical study on resistance, conducted in “Harwood Manufacturing Company” by John R.P. French and Coch (adopted from Sinan & Hakan 2009), answered two basic questions: “Why do human beings oppose change so vehemently?” and “What step are needed to overcome this opposition?” (Sinan & Hakan 2009). The postulations behind their theory for opposition to change are that individuals are prone to frustrations during the transformation process, and hence they have to react to it based on the pre-established group forces.

Before comprehending the impact of change initiatives and the employees’ reactions towards them, it is important to discuss the four different groups composed by Sinan & Hakan (2009), and which have deferring degrees to the change process. Although, the first group was deliberately sidelined from the process based on the questions of “Why the transformation is required and what face it should put-on?” the last group was allowed to take part in all activities of strategy development, intensive discussions about essentials and the implementation to opinion conferences. The remaining two groups were allowed to participate at specific levels, but the first and last groups had special consideration because they were crucial determinants to the study’s outcome (Ramón 2012). The first group was only given instructions outlining how they were supposed operate and their duties under the new system. Surprisingly or not, the group performed poorly compared to the pre-change period and some members personally retrenched themselves from the implementation. The last group was allowed to take part in the transformation process. Initially, the group recorded a decline in output; however, within a very short period the group was back on track, recording better performances. After conducting broad experimental research, Sinan & Hakan (2009) concluded that the people and groups that directly take part in the development and effecting of change are least likely to contest change as compared to kept away from the process.

The attempts to check on resistance had taken different courses based on the individual’s own perception. According to Sinan & Hakan (2009), Lawrence (1954) later analyzed the outcomes of the study conducted by Coch & French (1948) and offered a unique approach. He concluded that the factory in question encountered resistance to change because while the different treatment towards each faction did not affect participation, it did harm the “social status quo in the factory.” This means that the reason behind the poor performance by the employees and eventual resistance to change materialized because they felt that their social status in the organization had been degraded. Another cause was attributed to the ignorance that exists in the pre-change setting. Based on the conclusions drawn from the empirical studies and their consequences, Lawrence studied the dimensions of change, namely social and technological (Sinan & Hakan 2009). These two dimensions were to form the basis for evaluating a change’s outcome. Lawrence then developed the essential points to be taken into account by managers in supervising change and managing resistance (Sinan & Hakan 2009).

Managers should consider employees’ interest while implementing change

Top-down information flow should be accessible to employees so that they can understand what the changes mean.

Managers should develop alternative approaches to change such as guiding and counseling since not all employees are easily open to change.

Similarly, conflicts between departments and amongst staff have to be addressed.

Managers should understand their role in disseminating information to the staff at various levels so as to succeed with implementation their plans.

Innovations and implementations of the new initiative can be achieved through the provision of new job definition.

For a long time, resistance to change has been pictured as an eminent obstacle to organizations aspiring to transform their course of actions. The reluctance on the part of staff to change is frequently tackled by schemes that recognize subject change and opposition from managerial perception. On the other side, the Flower (1962) model provides a different view, and according to him, most change initiatives are unsuccessful because the very managers who initiate the change often do not understand it themselves. In other words, managers fail to persuade their staff who oppose changes because they see the process of change as easy and straight forward, i.e. moving from one status to another. Therefore, it is advisable for managers to understand how these attempts impact employees during the transition processes to be successful (Jones & Dugdale 2002).

With the introduction of change initiatives, employees begin experiencing various problems that are only partially understood by the managers. The first issue concerns the lack of clarification about the ideas of change. Unless people become familiar with the meaning of and the need for the changes, they will never accept them. Rigidity on the way the anticipated change is to be implemented comes in second. If managers emphasize on a mono-way of procedures and act in an authoritative manner, resistance will automatically materialize. The third problem is concerned with sudden change of social status at workplace. Lastly, if employees assume that change will lead to an increase in workload, then they are least likely to embrace this change. Kreitner (2004) also approached the resistance issue by focusing on the likely responses from employees and suggests a framework to help managers overcome resistance. He identified three stages involved in change process. First, when managers coin new strategies, they usually create a state of unrealistic optimism. The managers’ view on the idea of change can be defined as a peculiar way of doing business that can facilitate the improvement of organizations. During the second stage, the staff begins to feel that the changes are worse than the status quo and are not as reasonable as initially thought. Stage two is opposite of the first stage and at this point employees are likely to disrupted by the prevailing circumstances. With the decline in the attitudes of employees toward change, the likelihood of facing resistance becomes much higher. According to Kreitner (2004), the organization can move to stage three through constructive managerial efforts. Stage three is marked as a constructive direction because in this stag