Culture change in any kind of institution is not easy to manage, there has to be a sense for the need to change, its acceptance, and hard work put into effect the change. Certain barriers may occur in bringing up the change (Rita, Larry & Peter, 2009).
Barriers to Effective Implementation
Lack of proper knowledge of the success and failures of the health institution would be a barrier to setting up the right strategies and goals to be achieved. Thus the president should have been hired from the institution itself and should have been working there for a given period to note the achievements and current letdowns (Juliane, Steward, Hull & Menech, 2004). The main barrier the president and the institution itself would face is acceptance to change, with certain employees holding back to their way of working and not having the willingness of observing current practices and beliefs (Chapple, 2002).
The president ought to have come with an outside team from an outstanding institution to state the benefits of changing their principles of working and improving them for the excellence of the institution. This would build up a challenge to the employees and show a need to change their culture (Rita, Larry & Peter, 2009).
The strategy failed to show the urgency to accept change, thus the employees would not see or have much need to lose their past way of working and follow up the president’s new strategies. The same power that drives one to accept culture change is the same one that makes an individual abandon his way of life and work principles, thus the whole institution needs to have been advised clearly on the need for change in the institution.
The introduction of new personnel or staff changes would lead to resistance by the existing staff with the latter viewing it as if the president is looking down upon them (Juliane, Steward, Hull & Menech, 2004). The president and the executive team ought to build up and equip the existing staff with up to date skills to enable build the institution by taking them through workshops, seminars and allowing each employee to take part in decision making involving each department they are based in (Rita, Larry & Peter, 2009).
Communication through heads of departments would not lead to the effective transformation of information by the employees; certain heads of state may fail to deliver information. The president and executive team need to have regular meetings with every member of a specific department and have open discussions to share views to affect the growth of the institution (Chapple, 2002).
Use of sheer force of authority based on the President’s view may lead to resistance being stiffened. Thus, the president should allow active participation of all members of the institution appreciating their intelligence and aiming at comprehending their views (Juliane, Steward, Hull & Menech, 2004). Lack of full participation by all employees might lead to a breakdown of how the goals are to be met. The executive committee should put up performance contracts for all employees and see to them being achieved (Rita, Larry & Peter, 2009). This would aid to identify the progress and participation of all individuals in the institution. It would also identify the weak areas in which the institution is failing and note the individuals not undertaking their responsibilities.
The executive team failed to look upon the concerns of the community itself and focused on the staff, thus the institution would face a barrier in identifying if the changes brought up are being appreciated by the consumers themselves who are the community (Sheila & Hunsen, 2007). The institution should put up an effective customer care unit whereby complaints and comments can be put up to know how each problem can be tackled and note if there is an improvement. The use of questionnaires would also affect to know the progress of strategies that had been put up and if the goals are being met (Chapple, 2002). The institution would not face much growth as it did not set up a strong competitor; this would help up push the employees and motivate them to challenge the developed organization.
Lack of trust among different departments and employees would be a big barrier. This was shown through the questioning of certain strategies that were put up and so would hold back their work in fear of losing their positions due to the urge to prove he/she is worth. The executive committee needs to understand each individual’s views and put up their concerns into consideration (Peter, Franke & Jamelich, 2008). The institution would also face a problem whereby the employees would request an increase in pay as they are shoved to deliver profitable performance with an increase in responsibilities. The best way the executive committee would deal with this is by providing bonuses to the employees at the end of a given fiscal period (Sheila & Hunsen, 2007).
Finally, the main barrier the institution would face is how to solidify the new culture and keep the strategies and goals achieved. This would be enhanced by frequent performance evaluation every department of the institution done by an external team.
Chapple, D. (2002). Principles of health management: Communication in an organization. New York: H & Holt Company.
Juliane, H., Steward, H., Hull, C., & Menech, J. (2004). Theory of culture change: Bonuses and salary increase. Journal of Administration and Management, 7(7), 567-587.
Peter, J., Franke, C, D., & Jamelich, C. (2008). Culture change: Cultural changes in an organization.Journal of Management, 62(2), 67-98.
Rita H., Larry L., & Peter, J. (2009).Leading culture change: Overcoming barriers to culture change, Delivering the Vision, 8(3), 56-76.
Sheila, T. & Hunsen, and P. (2007).The Managers good guidance: Barriers to culture change. Management of Organizations, 3(1), 65-78.