Management change is a process that that means a lot to the company. It may be considered as a ceremony by some people, yet it is an activity that will affect the progress of an organisation. Before a decision is reached at to terminate the services of a CEO and bring in another one, a lot of consultation has to be done among the board of directors. It is usually hoped that the change will have a positive impact on the organisation. As much a CEO has influence on the management of the organisation, it all depends on the people that will stand with them to give them the necessary support. Their work may hence be in vain if the people they are leading are not in agreement with them.
The position of the chief executive officer is the highest in business managerial rank. The performance of a business unit basically depends on the principles that are observed by the highest management. The process of identifying the correct person to take up the position is usually a critical one where by many things are put into consideration. The company has to ensure that a person that is selected for the position has recorded a history of integrity and performance (Robbins, 2002). Most companies tend to retain CEO’s that have recorded a substantial growth within the company with the fear that bringing in a new one may interfere with the growth. Each organisation is usually established for the purpose of fulfilling certain laid down objectives. Unless such objectives are adhered to by the subsequent CEO’s, the purpose of its establishment will be defeated. The company will hence look for an individual that understands the objectives of the organisation and also ready to adapt and practice them.
Most of the companies that have a reputation of experiencing growth over along period of time have had CEO’s that have served the company for a considerable period of time. They embrace the business as their own and strive at ensuring that the organisation fulfils its set objectives. The transition process is therefore a crucial moment that requires the management to take critical measures (Koch, 2007). When handing over the responsibility to the new management the company has to ensure that the work is being given to a person that understands what he is entailed to do and that he or she will embrace the responsibility appropriately. In most cases companies will handover the responsibility to a person that has served with the company for a considerable amount of time and therefore is acquainted with the activities of the company. If the company fails to get an appropriate person, they will go for a person that has served in a similar capacity in another organisation.
A CEO who knows when his or her service of tenure will come at an end is usually expected to mentor a predecessor who will take up the position after him. The serving CEO is required to watch the people that are working closely with him and decide for himself who will be the most suitable for the position (Crum, 1998). This is usually done in consideration of their performance and the closeness they keep with the CEO. The chief executive director is therefore meant to train them and allow them to perform some of their duties for the purpose of training them for the upcoming responsibility. It is usually expected that the CEO allows some of his junior staff to perform some of his responsibilities under his supervision so that when he leaves, the work of the company is not paralyzed. Such a leader is supposed to watch his juniors do the managerial work and give them the necessary advice. They are meant to understand that anything including their indefinite departure through death may occur which may have negative effects on the company if there is no one to take up the responsibility.
CEO Transition in a Health Care Organisation
A health care organisation is a critical area that requires the leaders to be well acquainted with the kind of work that they are doing. It is not like any other business institution where the general rules apply. As much as it may be easy for a chief executive officer of another business setting to take over another similar post in another organisation, health care setting is different and not any CEO can handle the post. Apart from knowing the fundamental requirements of management, a CEO of a health care centre is required to be informed a lot about health and medicine. He or she is therefore basically required to have served in the medical field for a considerable time. A chief executive officer of a health care setting should have the ability of integrating business managerial skills into health. He or she needs to know how to merge both principles in order to realise results. Considering the requirements of such an individual, most health care organisations engage in activities that are meant to bring up leaders in various capacities (Carter, 2005). From the first day that an employer is posted to the work, they are given various responsibilities that will prepare them for leadership positions. A health care organisation unlike other organisations that deal with goods and services as their main products; deal with people in need of good health. The growth of their institutions therefore depends on the results that their patients will have which will promote their good will. The growth of other business settings depends on the commendable services that they offer to their clients while in health care, it is about the long-term effects of their services. Health care institutions are usually surrounded by people that are relying on the expertise of the doctors and nurses and can therefore not afford to make mistakes.
Health practitioners are basically dealing with individuals that are in desperate need. They may not be in a position to defend their self or demand how treatment should be administered unto them. They are wholly dependant on the doctors with the hope that whatever they do to them will restore them back to health. It is usually the results that such patients’ will receive from the hospital that will make them opt for it the next time they are in need of health care (Smillie, 2001). A hospital that has recorded commendable results from patients will also receive more clients. A hospital that has recorded a history of making professional mistakes like administering wrong medicine, wrong diagnosis and poor quality services may never be visited by patients and thus shutting down. Once a reputation of a hospital has been ruined, it becomes difficult to restore the same. When it comes to health, nobody will want to take a risk, they would rather use all the money that they have to obtain quality health care services rather than go to a hospital that has a bad reputation. We have had of several cases where people take business risks and gamble with their money, but when it comes to health nobody wants to take risks.
This is one of the biggest challenges that the management of health care institutions are faced with. As much perfection is almost impossible in any business undertaking, they are faced with the task of ensuring that their clients are satisfied with their services. This is the reason why leadership in health organisations is not a responsibility of few individuals in managerial position but one that has to be exercised by the entire staff. It is usually the joint efforts of the team that would produce commendable results (Luecke, 2003). It is not like any other business setting where by the mistake of one person affects a single department, which can be corrected by terminating the services of such an individual. In a health care setting, if a nurse makes a mistake, the reputation of the entire organisation will be affected and thus paralysing its activities. This is basically the reason why several health care institutions take their time when recruiting their staff. Even after recruiting them, they take them through a series of training to ensure that they have a proper understanding of their responsibilities.
Throughout their training they are reminded of what their professional entails and have hence to perform it with a lot of compassion. As much it is a career that will earn them a living, they are to put that aside and realise that it the human life they are preserving. They are to act with caution knowing that the individual that they are dealing with holds the reputation of their organisation as well as being depended on by other individuals. Apart from the technical training that they receive from their various institutions, they have to undergo practical training to ensure that they adequately apply what they have learnt to restore health (Robbins, 2002). Before a trainee is given a demanding responsibility in the hospital or any health care organisation, they must prove to the management that they are skilled enough to handle the responsibility that is a head of them. This implies that they have gone through various mentors and are therefore acquainted with various issues that pertain to hospital management. The main reason why leadership issues in health care organisations are not taken for granted is because of the dedication that is required. The hospital management understands that taking up the topmost responsibility is a serious issue that requires advance preparedness.
Health care organisations value the contributions that their employers make to ensure that the hospital grows substantially. They have hence set up an employee motivation program that will enable them to perform better. The organisations cherish employee performance as they are the main people that will promote the growth of the hospital. The management is required to keep a close watch on the employees to ensure that nothing is hindering them from performing to the maximum. The human resource department is usually composed of people that are ready to listen to the issues of their employees and do all that they can to ensure that their work is not compromised. In dealing with such issues, the human resource department needs to ensure that even if their issues are not adequately handled, they are given a hearing that will be satisfactory to them. In case they are completely unable to solve their issues, or are found to perform as per the required standard, they are sent off so that their ultimate conduct does not affect the entire institution.
Among the motivation strategies that are used by the management to motivate their employees are good remunerations and allowances especially to them that have to work during odd hours and emergency times, awards for the best performing employees, special retreats especially when there is no much work to do and free guidance and counselling programs. The employees are also granted medical covers considering the kinds of risks that they are exposed to when carrying out their duties. They are also trained to observe certain precautionary measures so that they are not exposed to the risk of being attacked by diseases. They are also encouraged to undertake regular medical checkups so that they avoid the risk of being victims of complications. When carrying out diagnosis, employees may not know the exact disease that the patient is suffering from and thus being at a greater risk. With the changing climatic conditions and the sophisticated lifestyles that people are adapting, communicable diseases are immerging day by day and thus putting health care workers at greater risks of being attacked. There have been a number of cases that have been reported where by health care practitioners that were attending to the patients succumbed to their illnesses in their efforts to grant them treatment.
It is usually difficult to know the kind of disease a patient is suffering from unless they are diagnosed. It is also not easy to carry out a diagnosis of a new disease as they keep showing contradicting results (Bridges, 2003). Another challenge that is usually faced by the hospital management is handling patients with a strange medical condition. Usually when a new kind of disease has been reported, the medical staffs is not required to carry out any treatment until when correct diagnosis has been done and the right treatment identified. The medical staffs are however required to be there to offer the patients the assistance that they need despite the risks that they are exposed to. There may be literally no one to blame if the medical employees are infected with such illnesses but the management will have to take the full responsibility of ensuring that the situation is put under check. This means that the work of hospital management is not an easy undertaking; it requires one to be ready to handle some strange occurrences.
When it comes to handling employees, the management needs to take extra caution so that the hospital runs smoothly. Patients and other clients that are wholly depending on them for health restoration may feel let down if employees are not performing to their best (Napier, 2004). Dissatisfied employees in a hospital institution may use some disastrous means to protest. Some may decide to pay back on the patients by giving them wrong medications. They may find it difficult to convince their various managers how serious their situation is and therefore go back to work with a lot of anger within their hearts. The anger will be reflected back to the patients that they are dealing with and thus putting the entire institution into trouble. The managers are therefore required to be sensitive to the needs of their juniors so that their clients are not affected.
For the management to ensure that the issues of employees are adequately handled, they regularly organise meetings with employees to ensure that they know what is affecting them (Markides, 2000). It is usually a time for employees and the entire management to come together and discuss the issues that are affecting them. It is through such forums that the people get to know and understand each other and thus working towards fulfilling the objectives of their formation. Considering that it is a field of professionals, they consider such a time as an opportunity to share on what they think can be done to improve their performance. There are some of the suggestions that are arrived at during such meetings that improve the management of the hospitals. It is also a time of bonding and getting to know what is in their minds and thus dealing with them accordingly.
Such meetings also have an impact on the management of the organisation as they help them identify future leaders. By allowing the employees to participate in various contributions and discussions, they are able to know the strengths and weaknesses of people and thus putting them in various responsibilities (Mayle, 2006). There are some basic things about individuals that may not be learnt during the normal working hours, it requires them to break the routine and get into other deeper interactions. Leaders in managerial positions are required to be on the look out during such times and see if they can identify people who can effectively take up their positions in case their term of service expires. The hospital management considers all their employees as leaders considering the efforts that they employ to ensure that they are mentored into reliable people. Leadership mentorship starts from the time an employee is posted to the organisation until when his tenure of service expires or is terminated.
Working with People
Working with people is a fundamental requirement of an organisation. An organisation is composed of people with different ideas and from varying backgrounds who have to work towards fulfilling common goals. The effect of working with such individuals may not be felt much among colleagues as much as it will be felt by the managers. It is quite challenging to make people to follow you and submit to what you are advocating for (Martin, 2005). Organisational managers are endowed with the responsibility of uniting people and making them to work towards fulfilling the set objectives by the company. It is not always a simple thing because the people will not basically believe you for what you say but also what you practice. It is not always about getting people to do the right thing but also showing them how it is done by personally doing it. In order to gain respect from people a leader must show a high level of integrity and performance by basically understanding how to deal with them. There is usually a certain level of performance that is expected by leaders from their junior staff, when such expectations are not met, the leaders may tend to be harsh on the employees concerned.
When managers and other organisational leaders are found in a certain crisis, they tend to look for means that will bring a quick solution into the situation. Some the measures that they take urgently may not be appropriate and thus worsening the situation. Unless the managers know how to deal with different employees, they may end up creating more enemies than friends (Christensen, 2006). For a hospital organisation, the end results may be more disastrous than it may have been earlier thought and thus creating more problems. It is therefore critical for a manager to be a person that understands the different personalities of people and hence treating them accordingly. One of the first steps that are undertaken by a new manager when they enter into office is winning the favour of the people. This can be achieved by getting people to trust you.
Developing the trust of subordinates is the greatest achievement that a leader can have. This basically means that they can come to you at any time with the confidence that you are going to listen to them. They will also have the boldness to approach you when they have an issue to bring across (Badowski, 2004). Even though giving subordinates such an amount of freedom may be disastrous, it can be done with limitations as the boss makes them to respect them. They should know how to balance between employees that are approaching them for serious matters and those that are after their own interests. Managers should hence avoid giving them excess freedom to tell them anything as they may not be submissive to the directives that he may give them. They should however keep them close so that in case of serious issues, they do not keep it to themselves. Some managers choose not to bring all the employees close to them but confide in one or a few. They do this with the hope that if any issue arises among the employees, they will come and tell them.
This may be considered to be a wise way that a manager chooses to deal with the issues that arise among employees but again it is one of the channels that give rise to certain issues. The other employees that have not been privileged to be close to their bosses may start feeling as if they have been neglected (Munro, 2005). The favour that a small group of employees receive from their bosses may cause contentions in the company which may have negative effects on the employees concerned. They may start sidelining them with the though that they are taking negative reports about them to their bosses. Even though such issues can not be completely gotten rid off in an organisation due to the different personalities that exist, managers can always handle them appropriately to prevent them from getting worse. A leader should be sensitive to the happenings in the organisation and know when to employ a certain kind of strategy to solve issues.
However much a manager may desire to adequately know and understand all their employees, it may never happen that way. One needs to not only know how to deal with them but also bear with them. Change is inevitable to people and thus making them to display different characters with the changing circumstances. People are influenced by many circumstances that make them to display a character and nature that may not always be desirable. Managers need to be prepared for such changes and know how to deal with them to ensure sanity in the work place (Laws, 1998). Top managers should view knowing people as a daily adventure that has to be appreciated and accepted. Even though some of the characters that are displayed by people may be irritating, the management will not always have in place the kind of characters that they desire. They may desire to terminate the services of one employee because of or conduct and recruit another one that may be worse than the former. It is hence advisable that they try identifying the better part of an individual’s character and utilizing them rather than focusing much on their shortfalls.
This does not however mean that the managers should compromise with negative conducts of employees, there are certain limits that have to be observed and if an employer proves unruly then there is no point of retaining them with the hope of changing. There are however some habits that can be imparted on employees at their place of work which may be of great help (Smillie, 2001). Employee training is usually an ongoing process that the management has to embrace. They may be posted to work when they have little understanding of how things are to be done, but as they interact with other colleagues they get to understand what is required of them and thus utilizing it to the maximum. As much as skills are imparted, character can also be imparted. This mainly depends on the kind of environment that they encounter at their place of work. It is therefore possible for the leaders to create an environment that will have a positive impact on the employees who join.
Dealing with Fellow Leaders
As a leader f an organisation, one has to appreciate the fact that there are also other leaders in different departments. They hence need to be consulted on certain matters and also participate in the decisions making of the organisation. They are usually placed in different capacities where they are in charge of other subordinate members. They are the spokesmen in their various departments (Randall, 2004). Departmental heads usually have frequent meetings to see how they can merge their ideas to ensure that the organisation performs well. Apart from the seasonal report that they have to submit to the top management about their performance, they are also supposed to meet and discuss on the various developments in their various departments. Considering the different responsibilities that they have, reaching a consensus during meetings may not be easy. Every departmental leader in the organisation may claim to have a bigger responsibility and thus requiring more attention than the rest of the departments.
Departmental heads usually feel that they have the same abilities and thus pushing for their decisions to be implemented (Leban, 2005). The company may want to implement a certain decision and seek the view of departmental leaders. It may be difficult for the company to finally find a decision that will be implemented as they seem to be no agreement. Despite the different views that they may have they need to allow each one of them to air out their views and analyse them for implementation. Departmental heads need to learn how to work together by allowing others to air out their opinions without being intimidated. They also need to realise that there subordinates are looking up to them for guidance and direction and what they discuss will ultimately have an impact on them. The other top managers also rely on the discussions that are carried out by departmental heads to come up with decisions to run the organisations. Departmental heads may not have similar qualifications and experience, but that should not be used as an avenue to despise the views expressed by their colleagues. They need to appreciate that they are also there to learn which at times comes through making mistakes.
There may be issues among departmental leaders which need to be handled with a lot of care. The differences should not be that magnified that the other subordinates get to know about them. This may make them to poison each other against the concerned leaders and thus having a negative picture of the organisation. They are supposed to be good examples to their subordinates who are looking unto them as mentors. Despite their positions of leadership, they need to know that they have other leaders ahead of them that they need to account to (Markides, 2000). They are hence required to a show a certain kind of treatment to their bosses the similar way they would wish to be shown by their subordinates. Leaders in managerial position may at times behave in a way that suggests to the top management that they are more superior to them and thus not giving them the respect that they require. They may be handling sensitive departments which cause them to feel as if they own the entire organisation.
Transition is a period that can not be avoided in any organisation. It reaches a time when some people have to leave their positions and allow others to take over. Changes in positions of leadership may happen due to the death of the person that was previously holding it, resignation, termination due to bad conduct, change in career line and retirement. Some of these changes may occur indefinitely and thus requiring the management to take urgent steps to find a replacement (Munro, 2005). Considering that they are inevitable, an organisation needs to be prepared for the change by mentoring others that will possibly take over. This is the basic reason why most organisations venture much into employee training during their tenure of services. It is basically done to prevent confusion in case the organisation is hit with such kind of uncertainties. In case of retirement and retrenchment, the organisation may be ready and hence make the necessary preparations.
The period of transition is not always smooth especially for the new leader, however much preparations that they may have done prior to their appointment, they always need extra time to adjust. It is the time that they come to a realisation that they have a lot of responsibilities at their disposal and thus feeling a little bit nervous about it. Such people therefore need a lot of support from their colleagues as they adjust to their new position. As they adjust, they are bound to make mistakes here and there and hence need to be understood and supported (Napier, 2004). Depending on the reason that made the former leader to leave his position, the new one may be required to make certain adjustments. The transition is usually smooth if the former leader was aware and the new one was also prepared for the same. The two may have time together to arrange the files and several other things from each other. The new manager may therefore not have problems adjusting to the new position. The mantle is considered to be passed on well which also leaves room for them to consult in case they find that some things are not clear to them.
In cases where the transition was not expected, the new manager may take time to adjust to the new responsibility as they get to learn most of the things on their own. They may be encountered with a lot of mess which therefore requires them to correct before they open anew chapter. A change in management may at times mean a new makeover in the company. A leader always aspires at making substantial changes during their tenure of service, for them to achieve their targets; they may come up with new principles that have to be followed by the employees. If a new manager has succeeded a manager that was not serious with their work, they may tend to come up with strict rules with the hope of changing the situation positively (Mayle, 2006). Some of these changes may not be appreciated by employees who were probably used to the former management. They find the changes ridiculous and overwhelming; this may thus cause a lot of resistance on them. During this season, a lot of things may occur which will generally impact on the organisation either positively or negatively. This is the time when employees that can not adjust with the new strategies leave the organisation and look for other opportunities elsewhere. Depending on the number of employees that may decide to quite due to the pressure that has been mounted on them, the organisation may have a new breed of workers.
In some instances, the whole fraternity of workers may decide to come together in resistance to the new management. They may agree to resist the changes as a group with the hope of influencing the management. Dissatisfied workers may stage a demonstration and thus paralysing the activities of the organisation. The management has to move in quick to see what can be done before everything runs out of hand (Martin, 2005). There are mainly two alternatives that will be taken by the management; one is to revise on the new laws and agree with the workers on what will be satisfactory to them and the organisation and second, to remain stern with the new changes and ask those that are not ready to adjust with them to quit the organisation. The management will reach to a certain decision after considering all the options that are available to them. Transition is therefore a period that may work well for the organisation or not. If the management is changed without the notice of the employees, they ma resist the new management and demand for the restoration of the former. There are some changes that happen in the organisation that the management chooses to keep them from the knowledge of their employees.
At times the management may not see the importance of explaining to their employees the reason why the services of a certain manager were terminated. They hence leave their employees with a lot of suspense which may ultimately affect their performance. What comes into their minds is that there could be a certain kind of investigation that is taking place of which they fear they may be victim of the same. They therefore work in fear contemplating on the next decision that may be taken. As difficult as it may seem to be, the employees have a right to know what is taking place to instil confidence amongst them (Blackard, 2000).They need to be assured that the change was done in a fair manner and that it will not affect them negatively. Whenever there is a change in management, the employees need o know the criteria that has been used to facilitate it so that they also watch their conduct lest they fall victims of the same. However tough the situation may seem to be, the management needs to find a means of instilling harmony among the employees.
Transition in the organisation may at times be brought about during board meeting where the stakeholders make various adjustments. They feel dissatisfied on the way the company is being managed and thus raising the need to change the top leadership. Stakeholders recognize that the top management has a direct influence on the way the company will be run; they therefore feel that the best way to change the overall performance of the company is to change the top leadership. As they make some such adjustments, they may already have an alternative in mind which they simply bring forth for discussion. The management may thus be pressurized to make the changes by the board of governors of which they have to adjust to. The managers of the company may not be able to resist the changes that are being brought about by the board members but to adjust to them (Munro, 2005). They are however endowed with the responsibility of making the employees to understand why such changes were reached at since they participated in the meetings. During board meetings, the stakeholders review the performance of the company to see whether the objectives that were set are being fulfilled or not. Every financial year, the board lays down targets that have to be achieved by the end of that year. However if they experience a negative growth in the year they expected to perform better, they review some things that could have led to the same. Unless there was something appreciated that made the company not to perform better, the board may decide to bring changes to the top leadership. Unless the company managers have a valid reason to explain what led to the poor performance of the company, they will have no alternative but to adjust to the new changes.
Most of the drastic changes that take place in the company can not be basically blamed on the new CEO; it is mostly the pressure that has been mounted on them by the board of governors who require high performance. Considering that the board members and the stakeholders are the proprietors of the company, the managers have to do as per their directives. They therefore consider that unless they employ strict measures, the expected targets may not be reached (Goodwin, 2005). The board members may also decide not put in new management but to give the former ones a chance to perform as expected. They are usually warned that unless they meet the targets, someone else may take up their positions. This is usually the reason why the former management may employ tougher measures at the beginning of the year. It is usually as if a new CEO has been put in place and thus making employees to display a resistance that they would in case of a new CEO.
No matter the kind of changes that may be implemented by the new management, they will not bear the much needed fruits unless they get the support of the employees. There is a lot that is expected from the employees in ensuring that the desired changes are implemented. The employees are therefore expected to accept and appreciated the new changes and assist the management in meeting the desired targets. They are required to understand that when the company grows they will also grow (Aris, 2005).When they work with such an attitude, they will look at the changes as opportunities to do their best to boost their skills. When they submit to the changes that the management is bringing across, they make their work easier and thus working together in harmony. If the changes have been brought about as a result of the board of governors, the employees should understand that they are being faced with similar dilemmas as they are facing but they have no alternatives. When the managers are made to work under pressure they will pass on the pressure to the employees.
Before a new CEO understands the greater responsibility that awaits them, they may tend to be exited about it and thus not perform as expected. This mostly happens in cases when one of the managers has been promoted to such a higher rank. They usually see it as a privilege not understanding that there is a much higher service that is required of them. They may have had the perception that the work of CEO is mainly to give directives to the other managers and wait for them to submit a report of what they are doing. As truth dawns on them that it is more than giving directives, they discover how overwhelming the task is and start working harder (Martin, 2005). They realise that they have an entire group of employees looking unto them and thus expected to display a high level of integrity. Their lives cease being their own and become a concern of the entire organisation. As they hold the position for the very first time, there is a lot that is expected of them as the organisation expects them to perform better that their former CEO. They are expected to set the pace that will be adapted by the entire organisation. The performance of the organisation wholly depends on the objectives that they adopt. They will be credited for good performance and be blamed for bad performance. Before the board of governors identify the other possible means that they have led to the failure or success of the company, they will first be held responsible.
Change of business management just like any other form of change has a negative connotation on the progress of the company. Continuity of any enterprise is highly at risk during this time of change in leadership (Bartlett, 1998). However this change ought to be managed effectively to reduce the negative its effects it may have on the organization. Proper planning therefore needs to be done in advance with the objective of diluting the impact of changes in leadership of a company. The company ought to have systems in place for managing the exit of a CEO in order to handle the shocks that accompany it. When leadership change happens unceremoniously it may be a delicate situation which might not end smoothly. The essence of such a plan is to avoid unnecessary inconveniences and turmoil which might arise from an unplanned exit. Change of leadership is a typical situation that involves a temporary diversion in the way business is done. It can consequently be described as a bridge in the affairs of the company. How a company handles such a situation determines its continuity thereafter. Performance is usually a key component which the company risks losing unless a change of leadership is handled properly. The outcomes of a company might suffer severely from an unplanned change or exit of a leader. The handling of a change of management needs to be done with great caution. It is advisable to outsource the process to consultants unless the company’s staffs are of noble expertise.
The entire process of managing change should not always be general in nature. A company needs not feel bound to use a similar structure. It is a proven fact that any change management strategy be crafted to meet the specific needs of the company in question. This often requires a clear diagnosis of the company and coming up with a plan that purely represents the company’s persona (Chase, 2006).Transition strategies differ from one company to the other, having a personalized structure is the best. The way the company handles outgoing officers has a lot of impact on its impression in the minds of its employees. All the events during the transition period are keenly observed by the employees as it represents the company’s attitude towards them; they always see it as how they will one day be treated. Such an event is supposed to be handled with utmost care as it affects the company’s image long after the transition.
The role of communication cannot be overemphasized; the transition team should come up with an effective method of reaching out to the population on matters of concern to erase confusion. Communication deals with the issues that create uncertainty, it is an effective tool of defusing tension among people (Beach, 2006). Actions and decisions taken ought to be explained to counter ambiguity. In case nothing is said of what is happening it gives room for people to jump to their own conclusions. Preparing the employees especially senior ones for the task of acquainting the new executives is an equally important task. Under normal circumstances the new executives become curious about the various units of the company, their progress, plans and needs. The senior employees need to be prepared for this daunting task. They are supposed to realise that the greater responsibility is on them which will be imparted to their junior employees.
As the topmost leader in the organisation, the CEO is required to know how to behave in different situations to ensure balance. There is no particular treatment that can be said to be most workable. CEO’s that have succeeded a CEO that was performing well may tend to adapt and apply the management strategies with the hope that they will perform likewise (Cummings, 2008). As much as this is advisable, they should realise that every CEO sets targets that they know they will be able to fulfil. Principles that will work for a certain CEO will not always work for the other. It is therefore necessary for them to implement targets that they can practice so that they do not mount unnecessary pressure on their subordinates. They are to look for unique ways to implement their objectives and work as per their capabilities.
The process of getting a new CEO is a crucial moment that requires special attention. From the time the organisation thinks of changing them to the moment when the new CEO, adjust to the new position it requires a lot of dedication. Before the decision of change is finally reached on, there need to be a lot of consultations among the other managers and employees. The board of governors may feel that the change is necessary without evaluating the consequences that it will have on the organisation. As much as they have the ultimate authority over the management of the organisation, they need to appreciate the views of other managers and put them into consideration. Employees are real people that understand the situation of the organisation and have a bigger influence on managerial issues than the board members. It should be realised that they are the employees that determine the progress of the company (Mayle, 2006). Their views should therefore be considered at a certain extend and the management work towards fulfilling their needs. Organisations that value their employees and employ motivational strategies that will encourage them to perform well, are likely to have safe transitions. They are likely to embrace the new change with the confidence that the management will not fail them.
Aris, A. (2005). Managing media companies: harnessing creative value. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Badowski, R. (2004). Managing up: how to forge an effective relationship with those above you. New Jersey: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
Bartlett, C. (1998). Managing across borders: the trans-national solution. United kingdom: Harvard Business Press.
Beach, L. (2006). Leadership and the art of change: a practical guide to organizational transformation. New York: SAGE.
Blackard, K. (2000). Managing change in a unionized workplace: countervailing collaboration. California: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Bridges, W. (2003). Managing transitions: making the most of change. New Jersey: Perseus publishers.
Carter, L. (2005). Best practices in leadership development and organization change: how the best companies ensure meaningful change and sustainable leadership. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
Chase, L. (2006). Operations management for competitive advantage. California: McGraw-Hill.
Christensen, P. (2006). Managing complexity and change in SMEs. California: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Crum, R. (1998). Restructuring and managing the enterprise in transition. New York: World Bank Publications.
Cummings, T. (2008). Organization development & change. New York: Cengage Learning.
DuBrin, A. (2008). Essentials of Management. New York: Cengage Learning.
Goodwin, N. (2005). Leadership in health care: a European perspective. New York: Routledge.
Koch, R. (2007). Public governance and leadership. New York: DUV.
Laws E. (1998). Embracing and managing change in tourism: international case studies. New York: Routledge.
Leban, B. (2005). Managing Organizational Change. Cornell: John Wiley & Sons.
Luecke, R. (2003). Managing change and transition. United Kingdom: Harvard Business Press.
Markides, C. (2000). All the right moves: a guide to crafting breakthrough strategy. United kingdom: Harvard Business Press.
Martin, J. (2005). Presidential Transition in Higher Education: Managing Leadership Change. New Jersey: JHU Press.
Mayle, D. (2006). Managing innovation and change. New York: SAGE.
Munro, A. (2005). Practical succession management: how to future-proof your organisation. California: Gower Publishing Limited.
Napier, N. (2004). Managing relationships in transition economies. California: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Randall, J. (2004). Managing change, changing managers. New York: Routledge.
Robbins, S. (2002). The truth about managing people– and nothing but the truth. FT Press.
Smillie, I. (2001). Managing for change: leadership, strategy, and management in Asian NGOs. California: Earth scan.