Each year, countless of companies fail due to the inability to change. While sometimes the issues are hard to identify or almost no one discovers them, a lot of times people have already recognized the flaws but are unable to transform their organizations. Before attribute these failures to stubborn managers or single-minded employees, let’s examine what actually happens in people’s mind when organizational changes occur.

Driving organizational change can trigger people’s fear and activate the same portion of the brain which deals with physical threats. In this article, McFarland suggests that people’s fear of being unable to navigate in the workplace will increase organizational resistance. Employees consider their key needs, “status, certainty, autonomy, relatedness, and fairness”, to be deprived by the change and it would always be better to avoid such loss. Moreover, neuroscientists found that the “burning platform atmosphere” at work triggers a limbic response in employees. A burning platform is a practice to motivate employees to change through threatening them, and it has now been proven to be ineffective to reach organizational goals.

Neurosciences reveals how brain react when perceiving organizational change.

It seems like humans do not have full control over themselves. While this fatal statement can be depressing to changemakers, let’s not forget how little time humans(specifically, homo sapiens) have been free from day-to-day physical threats. Our ancestors went through those times which they have to be always prepared for fight, and this psychological defending mechanisms have long been hard-wired in our brains. To turn off the alarming system is by no means an easy task, but making people focus on evidence, fact, and how they can benefit from the change will certainly help. Moreover, letting employees be involved in decision making, effectively communicating the visions to the employees, and demonstrating short-term positive outcomes of the change will help the reinforcement.

Managers and exec often assume that employees know their plan and purpose of the change, however, the reality has been the opposite. It is worthwhile to invest time in educating and communicating with employees, rather than executing the change plan arbitrarily.

Word Count: 338

Over the semester, I work with my assigned group members to examine, analyze, and solve a movie case which involves management issues. While we dedicated our time to solve the problem, we ourselves are also a live case on teamwork. Using the Five-Stage Model of Group Development, I would now reflect on the establishment and functioning of my case project group.

Our group, though not the energetic, hyper type of group, had formed well in the initial stages (Forming and Storming). We treated each other with respect, and we talked to each other in a friendly manner. Having just mentioned that, I noticed that my group members have differing personalities: Some of us were task-oriented and valued efficiency over effectiveness, while others were creative and would like to explore a variety of ideas before jumping into the work process. I was the latter type of person, and since the harmony within groups is important, I tried to present my ideas in a more timely manner so that creativity and efficiency co-existed.

As the deadlines of the project drew near, some issues emerged in the norming stage. Although the team structure was solidified, it was not an interactive group. We did not establish a norm of challenging each other’s ideas, and as a result groupthink influenced our performance. It is usually easier for tired university students to focus on “getting the job done,” however, this mentality can hinder growth and the potential of project. Also, I agree with the point brought up by Homen that different expectations on the result of the project will lead to the deviation of commitment among group members. The person who aims for a perfect outcome will inevitably contribute more on the project, and the workload will never be even.

Additionally, our group did not establish a habit of communication. We were concerned about the effect of our suggestions on our relationships with each other, and thus we rarely directly pointed out how each member can improve on their performance.

Finally, our group performed adequately in the case report and presentation. Although there are issues in our group, we have made large progress in finishing the job. We practiced hard for the presentation, and the final effort lead to a satisfying outcome.

Word Count: 396

Work Cited:

Langton, N., Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2006). Organizational behaviour: Concepts, controversies, applications (4th Canadian ed.). Toronto: Pearson Canada.

As a human, living with diversity can be difficult. Our brains are long hard-wired to prefer those behaviors and cultures that are similar to ours while unconsciously reject those which are different from ours. However, working with different cultural groups is inevitable in today’s globalized world. Below are a couple of main differences that I found significant when working in multicultural settings.

• Task Completion > Relationship building

I discovered that personal relationship in the workplace is not highly valued in North America. People will directly challenge each others’ ideas in meetings, even when they understand that conflicts might arise and personal relationship might be affected. Also, it is the completion of task that solidifies work-place relationship. In Taiwan, however, it is the other way around; cultivating personal relationship is more or less necessary for successfully completing a task.

• Seniority is relatively irrelevant

I found out that seniority(age or year of study) does not really play a role in providing suggestions or opinions in organizations in Canada. If one has some constructive criticisms regarding the policy of an organization or discovers some flaws in a project, he or she is more than welcome to speak up and change the status quo, regardless of their age. On the other hand, East Asian’s high-context culture emphasizes seniority in an organization. If a novice suggests that some operations in the organization is not effective, the people who have spent more time in the organization will consider this as an offense.

I heartily agree with Claire that most people are unable to fully understand another culture and that the potential to embody exotic culture is limited. However, I believe that a mutual respect between different cultures is possible. Differences certainly exist, but some universal rules, such as delivering friendliness(smile) or being caring can be applied to build successful relationships.

Cross cultural communication is more subtle than we think.

Word Count: 311