Information on changes rarely trickled down to everyone that
needed it. For example, management wanted to change the reporting
and process we used to allocated sales from different regions to their
respective categories at the end of the month. a This allocation was
done during month end close by manual journal entry. a This change
created six extra hours of work during our peak closing period
creating new work papers to prepare the journal entry based on the
new report. Management changed the reporting two more times
over the next few months, again at month end, creating the same re-
work at a critical time. a The accounting department was left out of the
loop until the changes had been made and were told to implement
them each time. a If the accounting department had been given the
heads up on the change, it could have been suggested to evaluate the
changes in a test environment during a slower period during the
month and once management was happy with the allocation of sales,
moved to production with a process already in place. Unfortunately,
that was not a one-off situation, as multiple times the accounting
department was left scrambling to fix something at the last minute
that was a result of an error or change the department had not been
properly informed of or consulted on.
Coming from that type of environment, I believe that transparency
and communication are key. a Reina and Reina, in Chapter Three talk
about Trust of Communication and how sharing information leads to
collaboration. Any changes made by a company can possibly be
considered as uncomfortable by the employees. By giving more than
just the “need to know” information, you let people know the
reasoning behind changes made and not just the actions to perform it.
Management might not always think that the “why” isn’t always
important enough to disseminate to their employees. However,
providing this information can lead to a better process understanding
for the person who actively performs the specific duties affected by
the change. It also allows the processor to give feedback from a
performance perspective on how the changes would increase or
decrease production as well as any issues or kinks that might affect
how the changes are implemented since they are the ones with hands
on experience. This sharing of information also can give the
employee a feeling of being respected and of being included in the
decision-making process instead of being just a cog in the machine. a It
can also reduce anxiety by knowing why management is making
changes and how it will affect the employee instead of leaving
ambiguity by just stating the change. a For example, if a company were
to just state that they were moving from an alternating three-shift
pattern to a two-shift pattern without any further information, the
employees working shift could assume that the company was not
doing well and lay-offs were in the future. However, if the company
were to explain the reason behind change in the shifts was because
they were increasing the production floor space to be able move all
employees to two permanent shifts because employees were not
happy with “swing” shifts, it would increase morale knowing that the
employees’ concerns were heard and alleviate any fears of lay-offs.
References
Cardon, P. (2021).
Business Communication: Developing Leaders for
a Networked World.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Reina, D., & Reina, M. (2015).
Trust and Betrayal in the Workplace :
Building Effective Relationships in Your Organization.
Oakland:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
