Decision making concerning matters pertaining to change requires appropriate strategies.

Respond to AL post
AL Post:
A few years back, our company decided to move away from cutting paychecks in paper
form and use a direct deposit only format. This was done so that our payroll and finance
could account for each employees deposit quickly and more efficiently than with paper
checks. Many “old school” employees did not want to convert to direct deposit and it took a
bit of convincing. Now, all employees are required to use direct deposit. Recently, they have
done a trial run with direct deposit of expense checks. Again, there were issues because
expense checks in paper format could be cut in a matter of days, whereas direct deposit
was only done twice a month.
The decision structure in the expense check situation is programmed. Therefore, the
process for decision structure was very low. The payroll and finance managers have
already worked out the kinks from the previous issues with paychecks. In this case, the
employees that were against the change were more involved than those that had already
accepted direct deposit as the way to receive their paychecks (McShane &Von Glinow,
2013).
The source of decisions was made based upon information gathered from the Executives
was high. This is not always the ideal way to gather information, since lower level
employees are not considered in the decision making process (McShane & Von Glinow,
2013). They also surveyed the employees here to see how many would prefer direct deposit
of expense checks and, the response was overwhelming. The only individuals that took issue
with the new direct deposit for expense checks were those with high expense check values,
mainly Executives. This was because it was not guaranteed that they would receive the
reimbursement direct deposit prior to the bill due date. Therefore, managers decided to do
a test run on all the Executives.
The decision commitment was relatively low because only the Executives were testing the
new expense check direct deposit. Ultimately, they would be making the decision. Many
employees preferred direct deposit because they had a hard date of when the funds would
be received. Also, because their expense reports were not as involved and lengthy as upper
management, finance could process their reports in a few days and they would receive their
funds on the 15th of the month or the 30th. By not participating in the trial, employees
could not commit to the ACH deposit of expense checks because they were still relying on
the older methods of payment.
The risk of conflict was also low in this case because employee goals and the organizations
goals were the same (McShane & Von Glinow, 2013). The goal was to simply the receipt of
expense checks and, in turn it would simply how finance accounted for them. Since many
employees agreed that direct deposit was the easiest way to attain this goal, the only conflict
that would arise would be if the executives did not agree to the new method.
Unfortunately, I have to agree that using the Executives instead of the 100, 200, 300 series
employees was the best decision. Executives are more likely to approve the new method of
payment if they had the chance to utilize it first. Employee involvement is this case was not
affected as severely as if it were regular payroll because not all employees are subject to
monthly reimbursements. While it made it easier for accounting, it did not affect other
departments. Whether or not expense check direct deposit is going to be used is still in the
decision making process.

RESPOND TO AL POST 2
McShane S.L. & Von Glinow, M.A., (2013). Organizational behavior: Emerging knowledge
in global reality. 6 ed. New York. McGraw Hill/Irwin
.

Respond to AL post

Decision making concerning matters pertaining to change requires appropriate strategies.
In most cases, management of change in many organizations lead to conflicts as other employees
or stakeholders remain adamant to change (McShane & Von Glinow, 2013).
In reference to the AL post, I am of the opinion that all employees have a right to be
involved in the decision-making on issues that affect them. Top executives should permit
employees to contribute their views on the introduction of direct deposit of expense checks as the
issues concern them too. The survey carried out suggests their approval of the system. The
change will help to facilitate their clearance and improve efficiency. The other reason why they
support this change is because; most of them will not be affected because they do not have high
expense check values.
It is also important to note that this change is not appealing to the management and that is
why they have a feeling that they should not allow employees to air their views. Most of them
are beneficiary and by allowing this change, they stand a chance of losing some of their benefits.
This therefore, shows that people will embrace or refuse changes based on the intrinsic benefits
they will accrue from the change. It is therefore, important, that modalities are in place to
manage change. All the stakeholders should support effective change that stands to enhance
achievement of the objectives in an entity.

RESPOND TO AL POST 3
This is therefore, a typical example of where change is embraced based on the impact it
has on individuals and not on the organization. Therefore, in this case, I vehemently feel that, all
the stakeholders should be involved in the decision making to avoid conflicts.

Reference

McShane S., & Von Glinow, M. (2013). Organizational behavior: Emerging knowledge in
global reality. 6 ed. New York. McGraw Hill/Irwin.

Looking for Discount?

You'll get a high-quality service, that's for sure.

To welcome you, we give you a 20% discount on your All orders! use code - NWS20

Discount applies to orders from $30
All Rights Reserved, Nursingwritingservice.com
Disclaimer: You will use the product (paper) for legal purposes only and you are not authorized to plagiarize. In addition, neither our website nor any of its affiliates and/or partners shall be liable for any unethical, inappropriate, illegal, or otherwise wrongful use of the Products and/or other written material received from the Website. This includes plagiarism, lawsuits, poor grading, expulsion, academic probation, loss of scholarships / awards / grants/ prizes / titles / positions, failure, suspension, or any other disciplinary or legal actions. Purchasers of Products from the Website are solely responsible for any and all disciplinary actions arising from the improper, unethical, and/or illegal use of such Products.