Perrier Case free essay sample

1) Identify the key elements of the resistance to change described in this situation. According to Kotter and Schlesinger, there are four reasons that certain people are resisting change, three of which seems to apply to this case: Parochial self-interest (some people are concerned with the implication of the change for themselves and how it may affect their own interests, rather than considering the effects for the success of the business). The union suggests this of Nestles. Jean-Paul Franc, head of the CGT at Perrier, sees the situation differently. In regard to the companys plan to cut 15 percent of its workforce he protests, Nestle cant do whatever it likes? He says, There are men and women who work here? Morally speaking the water and the gas stored below this ground belong to the whole region? Misunderstanding (communication problems; inadequate information) average. Management does not agree, perhaps due to a lack of information of the real problem (what is causing the lower production at this plant? ) For example, According to Nestle CEO Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, We have come to the point where the development of the Perrier brand is endangered by the stubbornness of the CGT? On the other hand, according to Jean-Paul Franc, head of the CGT at Perrier, [i]n regard to the companys plan to cut 15 percent of its workforce he protests, Nestle cant do whatever it likes. We will write a custom essay sample on Perrier Case or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page ? He says, There are men and women who work here? Morally speaking the water and the gas stored below this ground belong to the whole region. Different assessments of the situation (some employees may disagree on the reasons for the change and on the advantages and disadvantages of the change process). This applies to the above differences in assessment of the problem and solution by theNestlers CEO and the union head. 2) Construct a change management strategy for dealing with this situation. In so doing, identify what approach (es) to managing resistance you recommend and provide a clear justification for your choice. Kotter and Schlesinger set out the following six change approaches to deal with this resistance to change, four of which that could be considered for this case: 1. Education and Communication. There seems to a lack of information or inaccurate information and analysis. Instead of discussing directly with the employees that the sales were down, the manager used a form of manipulation (e. g. , place the competitions bottles water e. g. Badoit Rouge in the factory cafeteria), which further antagonized (as opposed to the intended motivation) workers. One of the best ways to overcome resistance to change is to educate people about the change effort beforehand. Up-front communication and education helps employees see the logic in the change effort. This reduces unfounded and incorrect rumors concerning the effects of change in the organization. 2. Participation and Involvement. This strategy is where the initiators do not have all the information they need to design the change and where others have considerable power to resist. This seems to be the case here, where an identification of the real problem is essential, which will include the employees in the problem definition as well as potential solutions. It encourages open communication. The Union and Nestles also need to get on the same page. When employees are involved in the change effort they are more likely to buy into change rather than resist it. This approach is likely to lower resistance and those who merely acquiesce to change. 3. Negotiation and Agreement. This strategy is where someone or some group may lose out in a change and where that individual or group has considerable power to resist. This would be an effective in dealing with the Union. This can be done by allowing change resistors to veto elements of change that are threatening, or change resistors can be offered incentives to leave the company through early buyouts or retirements in order to avoid having to experience the change effort. This approach is appropriate where those resisting change are in a position of power, like the CGT. 4. Explicit and Implicit Coercion. This is a last resort strategy where speed is essential and to be used only as last resort. Managers can explicitly or implicitly force employees into accepting change by making clear that resisting changing can lead to losing jobs, firing, transferring or not promoting employees. Working together with CGT, Nestles can negotiation a projected percentage of increased production or the suggested number of layoffs (15%) will be required.