Reference no: EM132836444

Part A: Answer 2 (TWO) questions only from Part A. All questions are of equal value.

Question 1

Kotter and Schlesinger (2008), unit Supplementary Readings Topic 3, argue there are four "most common" reasons why people resist workplace change: (1) parochial self-interest; (2) misunderstanding and lack of trust; (3) different assessments; and (4) a low tolerance for change. Which of these four reasons best explains the reaction of the warehouse employees to the workplace change attempt outlined in the "Introduction of new technology at FoxMeyer Drugs" (Topic 3 class activity, discussed in Week 4 class) case study?

Question 2

Both Gould, Barry and Wilkinson(2015) and Marchington and Kynighou (2012),unit Supplementary Readings Topic 8, discuss aspects of the "Varieties of Capitalism" (VoC) framework to explain similarities and differences in management decision-making and industrial relations outcomes. How useful is the VoC framework in understanding contemporary workplace change? In your answer discuss relevant examples.

Question 3

Bashshur and Oc (2015), unit Supplementary Readings Topic 7, state at page 1546: "When voice is ignored, many of the positive outcomes turn negative. Ignored voice can lead to turnover, absenteeism, and withdrawal across all levels of the organization as well as punishment for the voicer." Is it possible to argue an employer and a workforce have shared interests when management ignores the "voice" of its workers?

Question 4

Muffels and Wilthagen (2013), unit Supplementary Readings Topic 9, at page 113 suggest the concept of "flexicurity" combines various forms of organisational flexibility and workforce security: "On the one hand It encompasses external numerical (hiring and firing), internal numerical (working-time flexibility) but also internal functional flexibility (to adapt the internal work organization swiftly to changes in product demand) and wage flexibility; on the other hand it includes job and employment security but also income security". By discussing a relevant example, how might flexicurity result in "win-win" workplace change outcomes?

Part B: 

Please read the Business Information Solutions case study below:

Business Information Solutions (BIS) is an information and communications technology (ICT) support company. It provides ICT support for firms in the tourism, accommodation and travel industry. It has 45 clients who outsource their ICT to BIS. The 45 clients include airlines, hotels, resorts, travel agents, and tour operators. Currently, BIS allocates its clients to one of its eight (8) service regions. Each region has a regional head office (RHO). Each region is supported by one of its four (4) Client Liaison Information Centres (CLICs). At the RHOs and the CLICs the following types of staff are employed:

• Senior software designers (Snr SDs), all have relevant university-level qualifications with many having postgraduate degrees. The Snr SDs also have considerable ICT work experience, ranging from 10 to 20 years.
• Software designers (SDs), are mostly recent IT bachelor degree graduates (with a few studying part-time for a degree) with limited ICT work experience, ranging from 2 to 8 years. The work of SDs is supervised by a Snr SD.
• Senior technicians (Snr Techs), who are either TAFE qualified or have lengthy work experience. Many of the Snr Techs are former telecommunications company employees (e.g. Telstra) with between 5 to 15 years work experience with a telecommunications company.
• Technicians (Techs), who are mostly young (under 25) with no qualifications and little ICT work experience but just have a "flair" for computer systems and IT. The Techs gain considerable on-the-job training under the supervision of Snr Techs.
• Client relations offices (CROs), who operate the BIS call centre at each RHO and also process client accounts. None of the CROs have formal qualifications but they do have extensive retail and sales industry experience with a customer relations focus.

These BIS staff are promoted into higher paying classification levels based on a combination of their supervisor performance rating, client "work satisfaction" reports, and the attainment of new and relevant qualifications. For example, Techs can be promoted to Snr Techs, and SDs can be promoted to Snr SDs. For Snr SDs and CROs they can advance to a higher pay increment based on a similar method.

The 4 CLICs are designated by points of the compass: North, East, West, and South. CLIC East and CLIC West are smaller than both CLIC North and CLIC South. BIS uses an ICT system called "Computer Automated Recovery Display System" (CARDS). This is old technology first developed in 2003. It is intended that CARDS will be replaced with the more recently developed system called "New Automated Technology Control" (NATCON). CLIC East has almost made the transition from CARDS to NATCON, and it is expected this will be completed in the next few months.

Last year a new CEO was appointed. Six months after her appointment the new CEO forwarded to the Board of Directors a draft "Organisational Change Proposal" for approval. The draft proposal is:

The tourism, accommodation and travel industry is confronted with serious economic problems. The deteriorating economic conditions are affecting the entire industry, including BIS clients. As a result, BIS is confronted with significantly reduced revenues, increasing operating costs, and minimal earnings growth projections for the foreseeable future. Therefore the current and mid-term income levels for BIS are correspondingly too low for our current cost levels.

To respond to this new external environment, a plan for the long term and to create a modern and flexible organisation is proposed. A "results improvement program" will allow for investments in equipment maintenance, replacing the aging CARDS with the NATCON platform, and staff development. Funds for these investments will come from a reduction in operating costs and not increased income growth through higher pricing for BIS clients.

Annual cost savings of between $5.5 million and $8.5 million are anticipated under the results improvement program. These savings will be accomplished by downsizing personnel by about 30% from current levels: the current staffing at the RHOs and CLICs of 336 will be reduced to 239.

• Savings would be achieved first by reducing the number of regions and consolidating the number of RHOs from the current 8 to only 4.
• Savings would next be achieved by reducing the number of CLICs from the current 4 to only 3 by having the functions of CLIC East absorbed by CLIC North, to create a new CLIC North-East.
• Personnel numbers at CLIC West and CLIC South will also be reduced.

The decrease in staff numbers at the RHOs and the CLICs will not mean a reduction in client services, for any gaps in service levels will be filled by increased reliance on the CARDS platform.

To effect the restructuring it is proposed to call for expressions of interest (EOI) for voluntary redundancies from the RHO and CLIC staff.

Table 1: Current RHO and CLIC staff profile by job classification.

Table 2: Proposed RHO and CLIC staff profile by job classification.

Question 5

Will the implementation of the draft Organisational Change Proposal be successful if achieving the changes in staff profiles at the RHOs and CLICs relies only on voluntary redundancies? If so, why? If not, why not?

Question 6

Will the implementation of the draft Organisational Change Proposal be successful if achieving the changes in staff profiles at the RHOs and CLICs relies only on involuntary(forced) redundancies? If so, why? If not, why not?

Attachment:- Industrial Relations.rar