Challenging the Middle Manager:
Adopting the New World of Work
Determining the Middle Manager’s Readiness for Change
Master Thesis, MScBA, specialization Change Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business
Final Version December 8, 2011
FRANK VAN DER LEEDEN Student number: 1904884
Padangstraat 25 9715 CL Groningen 0031 (0)6 1025 5967 f.h.van.der.leeden@student.rug.nl
First supervisor / university Second supervisor / university
Dr. Mark Mobach Dr. Karin Prins
Supervisor / field of study Drs. Hans van der Plas
PostNL
Challenging the Middle Manager:
Adopting the New World of Work
ABSTRACT
This research specifically focuses on determining the factors that middle managers consider critical for successfully implementing the concept of the New World of Work. Five determinants for readiness to change have been used as guidelines throughout this research. These determinants are: change self-efficacy, discrepancy, personal valence, organisational valence, and senior leadership support.
The results have shown that essential elements of the New World of Work cause resistance amongst middle managers. The switch to solely managing through output and less physical presence in the office requires trust, flexibility and discipline. Even though not all middle managers possess these abilities, all middle managers experience personal benefits in working anywhere at any time. A perceived invalid reason for change will destroy the middle manager's support and commitment to the change. Even when the organisational benefits are perceived as outweighing the costs. Finally, senior leadership support is essential in gaining the middle manager's commitment and support. The combination of these elements are necessary to reach a high level of readiness to change of the middle manager.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ... 4
1.1 Research Focus ... 5
1.2 Research Question ... 5
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ... 7
2.1 The Middle Manager ... 7
2.1.1 Agents of Change ... 8
2.1.2 Recipients of Change ... 9
2.2 The New World of Work ... 10
2.2.1 Organisational Culture ... 12
2.2.2 Leadership ... 13
2.3 Resistance to Change ... 14
2.4 Readiness for Change ... 16
2.4.1 Determinants of Readiness for Change ... 17
2.5 Theory in a Nutshell ... 18
2.6 Conceptual Model ... 19
3. METHODOLOGY ... 20
3.1 Case Study: PostNL ... 20
3.1.1 Participants ... 21
3.2 Quantitative Research ... 22
3.3 Qualitative Research ... 23
4. RESULTS ... 25
4.1 Quantitative Research ... 25
4.2 The New World of Work ... 27
4.3 Readiness for Change ... 31
5. CONCLUSIONS & DISCUSSION ... 38
5.1 Recommendations ... 40
5.2 Limitations ... 41
5.3 Further Research ... 42
7. REFERENCES ... 43
APPENDIX A: QUANTITATIVE QUESTIONNAIRRE (DUTCH) ... 48
1. INTRODUCTION
In 1969, Swedish trade union leaders and politicians discussed in a large meeting what they called the New World of Work in Scandinavian industries (Lindholm, 1979). Organisations had to become more democratic, and workers had to be able to work more autonomous. This all had to lead to more efficient operations.
Effective or not, over 36 years later, computer software specialist Microsoft introduced an innovative concept that they also called the New World of Work (Gates, 2005). Same as in 1969, the aim of the New World of Work was to improve productivity. Microsoft believed that a new generation of software should enable workers to work more efficient and effective. Since the reintroduction of the term the New World of Work in 2005, the concept has developed towards a vision that aims for a perfect work-life balance. It tries to solve the struggle of organisational members who pursue careers “without sacrificing their personal lives” (Parris et al., 2008: p101). This fit between work and life has been received many different terms like ‘work-family conflict’, ‘work-family spillover’ and ‘work-life balance’ (Parris et al., 2008).
The concept of the New World of Work encourages employees to achieve this work-life balance by working time and location independent (Baane et al., 2011; Bijl, 2007). The ultimate aim is to create a sustainable productivity improvement. Not unimportant are benefits like reducing real estate costs, reducing traffic jams, and reducing the emission of carbon dioxide (CO2). These are issues that the society marked as relevant for the future (Baane et al., 2011; Bijl, 2007; Kok & Pielanen, 2011).
1.1 Research Focus
Despite their role within the organisational hierarchy, middle managers suffer from a bad reputation, are blamed for corporate problems, and are considered to have a negative impact on organisational changes (Balogun, 2003; Dopson & Neumann, 1997; Huy, 2001; Grey, 1999). Nevertheless, since middle managers have such an important position in the organisational hierarchy, their participation is necessary for successfully implementing organisational changes. This makes the middle manager an interesting group of organisational members to investigate. Because the middle manager’s impact on strategic organisational changes has already been researched, this research will specifically focus on the middle manager’s perception in a specific type of organisational change.
The popularity and widely adoption of the New World of Work makes this concept an interesting one to explore. In combination with the unique hierarchical position of the middle management, this research offers an interesting, and not yet investigated, point of view on the implementation of the New World of Work. It will determine what factors cause the middle manager to be ready or resistant to change.
1.2 Research Question
The role of the middle manager is a complex one. Their task during organisational change is challenging. The New World of Work is considered to be an organisation wide change, which will with no doubt require the middle management’s involvement.
This research aims for finding the specific determinants of readiness for change and resistance to change of the middle manager, in relation to implementing the New World of Work. Holt and colleagues (2007) suggests that there are five themes that influence the readiness or resistance of any organisational member. These determinants, which are described in section 2.4.1, will be used as a guide in finding the specific factors of readiness and resistance of the middle manager.
All in all, theory argues that the middle management is a hierarchical level that is indispensable during organisational changes. Even though the general opinion about this management layer is rather negative, its role could be crucial in the implementation of the New World of Work. Therefore this research will aim for answering the following central research question:
“What factors do middle managers consider critical, for the readiness or resistance of the middle management, in implementing the New World of Work?”
In order to be able to answer the central research question, nine propositions have been formulated. The aim of the propositions is to validate whether, and how, the middle manager is influenced by the specific variable in question. The propositions are tested by both quantitative and qualitative research. The qualitative research is specifically focused on triggering the participant to elaborate on their own experiences. The method of this research will be discussed more extensively in chapter 3.
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
This chapter will describe the elements of this research from a theoretical perspective. Starting with the focal point of this study: the middle manager. It is essential to define this specific group and its tasks and activities. Additionally, the literature’s perspective on their ability to change will be highlighted. Secondly, the concept of the New World of Work will be defined. On the basis of practical insights from writers with a lot of experience on this specific topic, the vision and aim of this concept will be described.
Next, two specific topics in the field of change management will be discussed. Both ‘resistance to change’ and ‘readiness to change’ are themes that are essential for the aim of this research as described in section 1.2.
2.1 The Middle Manager
‘Management’ enables organisations to “render productive people of different skills and knowledge to work together” (Drucker, 1985: p28). In order to be able to do so, managers control a process which organises people and resources in order to produce goods and provide services (Burnes, 2009).
Since organisational size and complexity have a major influence on its hierarchical structure, multiple management layers could be necessary in order to maintain full control of the organisational processes. Whereas top management teams are mainly focused on strategic decision-making (Liang et al., 2010), the lower management directly supervises the workers on the floor.
In search of the hierarchical position of the middle manager, Huy provides a clear definition. He states that “middle managers are people who are two levels below the CEO and one level above first-line supervisor” (Huy, 2002: p38). Implicating that middle management does not directly manage the day-to-day activities of employees. In the research of Stoker (2006: p32) middle management is defined as “the group of managers who give and receive direction.” This, according to Stoker, entails that this specific group must be in the middle of the organisation. Therefore, the specific position given by Huy could be considered as too restrictive. Anyone who is one level below the CEO and directly manages the first-line supervisor could, according to Stoker’s definition, still be a middle manager. Hence, the definition provided by Stoker will be guiding throughout this research.
Based upon their hierarchical position, the middle management seems to be a group that manages and is being managed. Shi and colleagues (2009) refer to this position as the brokerage role. Explaining that the middle manager is the actor “who mediates the flow of resources or information between two other unconnected actors” (Shi et al., 2009: p145). This is exactly why Lassen and colleagues (2009) believe that middle managers have a dual role as change recipients and agents.
2.1.1 Agents of Change
Because of the brokerage role of the middle manager, he or she has an important role in implementing any organisational change, and is essential in executing strategic plans. For this reason middle managers are considered to have a negative impact on organisational change (Balogun, 2003; Dopson & Neumann, 1997). They have a bad reputation (Huy, 2001) and are blamed to be responsible for many corporate problems (Grey, 1999). Huy (2001) states that the middle manager suffers a negative stereotype and should be considered as “the best bet for success” (Huy, 2001: p73). Arguing that they are at least as important as senior executives in facilitating radical change (Huy, 2001, 2002). For this reason, Balogun (2003) came up with four change implementation roles to highlight the issues the middle manager has to deal with.
Secondly, the middle manager is required to help others to go through the change. According to Gioia and Chittipeddi (1991), those who communicate strategic change must primarily focus on letting others realise that change is needed and will be pursued. So the middle manager helps others going through change to let them make sense of the situation (Balogun, 2003).
The third role Balogun mentions, is that apart from the change, middle managers must keep the daily business going. Emphasizing that communicating and implementing strategic change will not replace the day-to-day activities.
The fourth and last role is the actual implementation of the strategic change at the specific departments or business areas the middle manager manages. Balogun’s (2003) research indicated that this executing role costs a lot of effort and energy of the middle manager. This specific role could cause a lot of pressure on a middle manager if he or she did not succeed in realising the first role, personal change.
2.1.2 Recipients of Change
With all these personal pressures and variety of tasks the middle manager faces, it seems rather unfair to consider the middle management as having a negative impact on organisational change. Balogun (2003: p79) concludes by stating that “the interpretation that occurs as part of undertaking personal change is in fact the key task for middle managers, since it informs all the other roles.” This makes the middle manager a change recipient. They need to change personally before they can act as an agent of change.
2.2 The New World of Work
Over ages, the development of work led to specialisation and innovations that support productivity growth (Cingano & Schivardi, 2004; Bijl, 2007; Los & Verspagen, 2006). Nowadays, the main tasks of many employees in developed countries involve ‘tacit’ activities. These activities are based on knowledge which is “abstract and difficult to codify” (Gary et al., 2008: p561). It is the type of knowledge that according to Gary and colleagues (2008) can only be transferred by intensive education and cooperation.
According to Beardsley and colleagues (2006), a continuously growing number of people in developed countries is working on solving complex problems in a collaborative way (Beardsley et al., 2006). In order to be able to execute their jobs properly, they have to go through lots of information. Since all this information might not always be relevant for completing the job, the so called information-worker (Gates, 2005) or knowledge-worker (Bijl, 2007), suffers an ‘information overload’ (Bijl, 2007).
According to Gates (2005) this ‘information overload’ is caused by the inability of the knowledge-worker to effectively handle the information available. In 2005 he stated that that Microsoft would supply a new generation of software to enable people the tools to communicate, collaborate and access the information that they need. Bill Gates (2005) named the new phase of work that mainly involved tacit activities, ‘the New World of Work’.
Since the introduction of this term, the concept has been further developed. The Dutchman Dik Bijl (2007), self-proclaimed ‘Ambassador for the New World of Work’ (Bijl, 2009), captured the vision of the New World of Work by stating that this concept aims for an optimal alignment of the type of work and the type of worker, or in this case, the middle manager. Even though Bijl mainly refers to knowledge-workers, he argues that this concept could apply for other kinds of professions as well.
The question remains why this concept is called the ‘New World of Work’. Working time and place independent seems to be nothing new. Wilks and Billsberry (2007: p171) argue that people who “work in locations remote from their employer or client, using computers and the internet for communications purposes” are defined as teleworkers. A concept already introduced in 1985 as the ‘next workplace revolution’ (Kelly, 1985).
To fully understand the aim of the concept, and its impact on the middle manager, four key areas that are defined by Bijl (2007) will be discussed. These four key areas determine whether the concept comprises the vision of the New World of Work.
The first key area is technology. Bijl (2007) argues that technology is the main ‘enabler’ of the New World of Work. Stating that knowledge workers perform two main activities: working with information and collaborating with others. In digitalised form, both can take place via an ICT infrastructure (Wilks & Billsberry, 2007; Buono, 2004).
As Gates (2005) argues, the next generation of knowledge-workers applications must enable employees to enhance personal productivity, optimize team collaboration and find the right information easily. This ‘enabler’ of the New World of Work is expected to increase worker satisfaction (Bijl, 2007). But as Cadotte and Turgeon (1988: 78) argue, “low performance or the absence of a desired feature can cause negative feelings/dissatisfaction leading to complaining behaviour.” This is described by Kok and colleagues (2011) as ‘dissatisfiers’. Absence of what the user naturally expects will cause dissatisfaction. This would imply that technology could not be defined as an enabler. Specifically, technology is expected to facilitate the middle management in performing its tasks in a virtual environment. This aids them to work time and place independent since the virtual environment is always accessible (Buono, 2004). It does not contribute to more satisfaction, but could lead to dissatisfaction. Even though facilitating a well-functioning virtual environment is a precondition for successfully implementing the New World of Work, it does not mean that the concept is implemented and no further actions are required (Bijl, 2007).
The second key area is the physical workspace. Which is, according to Mobach (2009), an element that has a major influence on peoples functioning. He argues that decision makers within organisations are able to use the work environment to positively influence people’s performance. Research by General Support (2011) showed that the average occupancy rate of offices in the Netherlands is 48%, with a peak that did not exceed 63%. This implies that part-time workers, sick leave, holidays, working on other locations, all contributed to a lower occupancy rate.
Increasing the occupancy rate in combination of new innovative designs to optimize concentration or collaboration could contribute to major cost reductions in the organisation’s real estate (Veldhoen, 2005; Van der Voordt, 2004). The physical workspace in the vision of the New World of Work comprises what is called a ‘vital office’ (Bijl, 2007). Referring to employees who do not have a fixed desk, managers without an own office, and activity based areas. Especially the last element seems to be relevant in the concept of the New World of Work. Areas with multiple desks are supposed to stimulate collaboration and quick communication, while concentration areas could potentially encourage people to individually focus on executing their tasks.
Proposition 2: The middle manager perceives the change of the physical workspace as essential for the successful adoption of the New World of Work.
Thirdly, Bijl (2007) argues that organisational elements as culture and leadership need attention when the New World of Work is adopted. It is highly likely that the current style of leadership or organisational culture does not fit the desired state. Both elements are described briefly:
2.2.1 Organisational Culture
“It is widely acknowledged that change in any aspect of an organisational system is inextricably linked with the cultural context” (Danisman, 2010: p201). In the case of implementing the New World of Work it is important to be aware of the current culture and the desired organisational culture.
Current organisational culture could be influenced by the first two key areas of Bijl but also by societal norms and values (Bijl, 2007). Bijl argues that there is no such thing as a standard culture for the New World of Work. He does however emphasize that the desired culture must fit both the vision of the New World of Work and the organisation’s strategy.
Therefore careful attention must be paid to changing the organisational culture in relation to the New World of Work. Bijl (2007) proposes that cultural change should happen simultaneously with the adoption of the New World of Work, claiming that those are interrelated.
However, according to Howard-Grenville et al (2011), intentionally changing the organisational culture should be a process that is blended in the daily business and is not managed by people who possess hierarchical power. From this perspective it could be argued that the organisational cultural should already fit the intentions of the New World of Work, instead of changing it to be congruent with the vision of this concept. Since Howard-Grenville et al argues that changing the organisational culture should be part of the day-to-day activities, it could be claimed that the middle manager’s involvement is essential for the successfulness of the change effort.
Proposition 3: The middle manager perceives cultural change as essential for the successful adoption of the New World of Work.
2.2.2 Leadership
This requires managers to manage their workforce on their output. Obviously, the middle manager should also find a way to manage their subordinates on their output. Nevertheless, research (Gilley et al., 2008) indicated that organisational members at all levels hold a negative perception of their leaders’ ability to successfully implement change. This claim seems to support theory regarding the negative image of the middle manager. In order to be effective during organisational change, at least two critical skills are required: communicational skills and motivational skills. These skills must be possessed by the leader to successfully drive change.
Proposition 4: The middle manager perceives that changing the style of leadership is necessary to successfully adopt the New World of Work.
The last key area of Bijl highlights the organisational members, or specifically, the knowledge-worker. They are the ones who must work with the new technology, in the new office workspace and deal with changing culture and leadership. But in the end, the entire organisation, from front-line worker to the CEO, must adapt the vision of the New World of Work. This requires complete readiness for change of all organisational members. This specific topic will be further discussed in section 2.4.
Regardless of the specific reasons why an organisation chooses to adopt the New World of Work, it should always consider what it wants to achieve with implementing this concept. Unclear reasons for change could cause resistance to the change. Middle managers will consider for themselves whether they perceive adopting this concept as beneficial for themselves and the organisation. According to Kok and Pielanen (2011), being aware of the importance of the reasons for change will result in a strong focus that will both contribute to an effective implementation and motivating the organisational members.
2.3 Resistance to Change
As described in paragraph 2.2.1, the importance of organisational culture in the context of change becomes even clearer when relating it to resistance to change. Schein (1997) argues that in the essence, the organisational culture is the main cause of resistance to change. It is therefore not surprising that Schein (1988) also states that of all organisational phenomena, resistance to change is the one that is always present. This causes that two third of all organisational changes fail due to resistance to change (Waddell & Sohal, 1998; Maurer, 1996).
According to Waddell and Sohal (1998), most authors define resistance to change as negative employee attitudes or behaviour, which is counter-productive. This view argues that the employees involved with the implementation of the New World of Work are the ones that resist and create resistance. But as Ford and colleagues (2008) state, this one-sided perspective is always in favour of the change agent.
They argue that the change agent should not be considered as a victim but as the instigator of resistance to change. The actions of the change agent determine whether the change recipients resist the change. But as argued in paragraph 2.1.2, it is rather unfair to consider the middle management as having a negative impact on organisational change. Being both the change agent and recipient makes their position rather difficult.
Ford and colleagues try to emphasize the importance of the reasons for resistance to change. It could not be simply stated that the intended change is the cause for resistance. It depends on the organisation’s approach if the resistance decreases or increases. Either way, resistance to change does occur during organisational change. To convert resistance into readiness, it should be used constructively (Waddell & Sohal, 1998).
Ford, Ford and D’Amelio (2008) have defined three causes of which resistance to organisational change amongst employees, lower- and middle management originates.
Peccei and colleagues (2011) state that the main models of resistance to change, which apply to anyone within an organisation, refer to two key factors, which cause resistance. The first factor is the “extent to which employees perceive the change as being either beneficial or detrimental to their own interests” (Peccei et al., 2011: p186). The second factor is to which extent organisational members contribute to the change process. This implicitly implies that those factors could not only be considered as causing resistance, but as indicating readiness for change as well. It could be argued that when one perceives the change as beneficial and sees opportunities to contribute to the change, and therefore not resists the change, he or she might be ready for the change.
2.4 Readiness for Change
Armenakis, Harris and Mossholder (1993) argue that readiness is an indicator for either resistance or support for an upcoming change.
Others claim that people who are not ready to change will simply resist the change (Lewin, 1945; Redding & Evers, 1997). This statement highlights the relevance of readiness for organisational change. Since two third of all change initiatives fail (Waddell & Sohal, 1998; Maurer, 1996), a solid base of supporting organisational members could be of great importance to the successfulness of the implementation of the New World of Work.
Holt and Vardaman (2010: p1) state that readiness for change is “the degree to which those involved in change are individually and collectively primed, motivated, and technically capable of executing the change.” So being motivated is not sufficient. The middle manager needs to possess the capabilities and abilities to carry out the change.
Armenakis et al (1993) focus on the organisational side. In their opinion the entire organisation must be able to go through the change. Creating readiness for change is often compared with the ‘unfreezing’ stage of Lewin (Armenakis, 1993; Burnes, 2009). This stage refers to the extent of which people, who tend to seek a context of relative safety, are ready to change and move to a new state.
2.4.1 Determinants of Readiness for Change
Holt and colleagues (2007) have executed a research in which they specifically focused on the determinants of readiness for change. They have distinguished five elements that contribute to the readiness for organisational change of any organisational member. In this case we will replace ‘any organisational member’ for the middle manager since specific theory on readiness for change of the middle management does not exist. The five determinants are:
Change Self-efficacy
Change self-efficacy refers to the skills and abilities of a person to execute activities that are related to the implementation of the potential change. The degree to which a person believes he or she masters the necessary skills is essential for his or hers change self-efficacy. A high degree of change self-efficacy contributes to readiness for change.
Proposition 5: The middle manager believes he/she has the skills and abilities to implement the New World of Work.
Discrepancy
Discrepancy is the belief that the prospective change is implemented for the right reasons. The perceived legitimacy for the change determines whether the change recipient identifies the intended change as the right thing. A change that is perceived as legitimate contributes to a person’s readiness for change.
Personal Valence
A person’s belief that the change will benefit or harm them personally. If the change recipient believes that he or she will personally benefit of the change, he or she will show a higher degree of readiness for change.
Proposition 7: The middle manager believes that the New World of Work will bring personal benefits.
Organisational Valence
A person’s belief that the change will benefit or harm the organisation. If the change recipient believes that the prospective change will benefit the organisation, he or she will show a higher degree of readiness for change.
Proposition 8: The middle manager believes that the New World of Work will benefit the organisation.
Senior Leadership Support
The belief that the organisation’s senior management is committed and supports the prospective change. Committed and supportive senior leaders contribute to the readiness for change of change recipients.
Proposition 9: The middle manager believes that the organisation’s senior and top managers are committed to the implementation of the New World of Work.
2.5 Theory in a Nutshell
Elements of the New World of Work Determinants of Readiness for Change Organisational change requires the middle manager to change personally, help other to go through change, keep the daily business going, and finally the actual implementation of the strategic change. The New World of Work is such a strategic change that will keep the middle managers busy. Aiming for enabling the organisational members to work 'anywhere at any time', this particular concept influences all elements of work. Offices are restructured to suit new demands and the latest technology is implemented to optimally support the employees. However, the New World of Work will also require the middle manager to change his or her way of leadership which fits a new, more flexible, organisational culture. And in order to change: readiness is all. Five determinants are essential for the middle manager’s readiness for change: change self-efficacy, discrepancy, personal valence, organisational valence, and senior leader support. A low degree on any of these factors could cause resistance to change.
2.6 Conceptual Model
This chapter discussed the concept of the New World of Work. Four essential elements of this concept have been formulated in propositions. Additionally, theory on readiness for change provided five determinants for determining the middle manager’s readiness for change. These five determinants were used for formulating five propositions. Figure 1 depicts the conceptual model in which the relationships between the variables are shown. The numbers refer to the propositions.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model Middle Manager Technology Physical Workspace Organisational Culture Style of Leadership Change Self-efficacy Discrepancy Personal Valence Organisational Valence
3. METHODOLOGY
This research aims for finding those factors that determine the middle manager’s readiness, or resistance, in adopting the New World of Work. The research has been executed in two parts. A quantitative research that aimed for gathering the standpoints of each participant, and a follow-up qualitative research that aimed for exploring the thoughts behind those standpoints. The two types of research are related but have been executed separately. They will therefore be discussed individually.
This chapter will explain the methods used by executing this research. It will start with introducing the organisation where the research has been conducted.
3.1 Case Study: PostNL
According to Blumberg and colleagues (2008), case studies are a powerful type of research for exploratory research. This research has been conducted at the corporate head office of PostNL N.V. in The Hague.
In 1799 the Dutch government founded the postal company that is nowadays known as PostNL (PostNL, 2011:a). After the demerger of TNT Express in May 2011, TNT N.V. was renamed PostNL and got listed at NYSE Euronext Amsterdam (PostNL, 2011:a).
PostNL is the largest deliverer of mail, parcel and e-commerce services in the Netherlands and additionally operates in Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom. In the Netherlands, PostNL currently has to deal with two major developments on the postal market. First, since the 1st of April 2009, the entire Dutch mail market has been liberalised (OPTA, 2010:a). This resulted in competitors entering the mail market.
Since PostNL employers over 77.000 people (PostNL, 2011b), this change is considered to have a major impact on the organisation. Additionally, a large corporation is expected to employ more middle managers than any other organisation. Because PostNL initiated the implementation of the New World of Work in the beginning of 2011, this research could capture the destabilisation and moving phase of the change.
For this reason, not all departments of the corporate head office are incorporated in this research. The departments that are in the first segment of the implementation are involved in this research are: Corporate Communications, Group Procurement, User Management, Group IT, Strategy & Development, Finance & Control, Key Account Management, Human Resources, Commerce, and Retail.
All these departments are in the first segment of the implementation. The research has been executed from the start of the implementation process. All interviews have been conducted before the participant had to deal with all the aspects of adopting the New World of Work.
3.1.1 Participants
All participants are working at the corporate head office of PostNL in The Hague. The target group has been composed with regard to two characteristics. First, the participant has to be a middle manager working for PostNL. The definition of a middle manager (as described in section 2.4) explains that in order to be classified as a middle manager, the person has to be in the middle of the hierarchical chain. He or she must have a coordinating role and as Stoker (2006) specifically describes: the person has to give and to receive direction.
Secondly, the implementation of the New World of Work at the corporate head office of PostNL will be executed in two parts. Because both groups are informed and consulted in different timeframes, this research will investigate those middle managers that are the first to adapt the New World of Work. This ensures that participants are as least influenced by others as possible.
During the interviews the middle managers have been asked if they could identify themselves with the description of a middle manager. In the results chapter, the participant as described in this paragraph will be referred to as ‘respondent’.
3.2 Quantitative Research
The quantitative research tried to get an insight in the respondents view on his or hers readiness regarding the implementation of the New World of Work. The outcome of the survey will be used as a guide for the qualitative part of the research: the interviews.
The quantitative research is a questionnaire with a multiple-choice response strategy. The survey was compiled of 10 statements, covering the five critical themes of readiness for change, as defined by Holt and colleagues (2007) that were introduced in section 2.4.1. Because the quantitative research aims for identifying the participant’s standpoint regarding the implementation of the New World of Work, the statements are derived from the study of Holt, Armenakis, Feild and Harris (2007), and altered to suit this specific research. For each theme, two questions where picked.
3.3 Qualitative Research
Blumberg and colleagues (2008) argue that qualitative research with the purpose of exploring a specific topic, requires a semi-structured or unstructured interview. This research specifically aims for finding determinants that middle managers mark as critical for successfully implementing the New World of Work. Therefore a semi-structured interview will be used for this study. It gives the interviewer the opportunity to start with specific questions and give the interviewee the room to explore and explain the themes (Blumberg et al., 2008).
All participants of the quantitative research were invited for an interview, which was scheduled to take between 30 and 45 minutes. A topic interview has been used for all interviews. With a guide the topic interview has been structured. The semi-structured interviews started with some general introductory questions, that could be elaborated by follow-up questions. In case that a specific theme is covered sufficiently, the interviewer can continue with discussing another theme.
3.4 Data Analysis
The quantitative research will be analysed by calculating the mean of the answers per question and by providing the standard deviation of the mean. This will give a general point of view of the middle manager regarding the themes of readiness for change.
All qualitative interviews have been recorded and transcribed. According to Richards (2009), the best way to handle qualitative data is by coding. However, coding is used for categorising qualitative data. Since this research aims for finding factors that middle managers consider critical in implementing the New World of Work, categorising would not be the appropriate method of analysis. The analysis has been executed by linking each answer to one of the nine propositions. In analysing the qualitative data, some data were given a higher priority.
If specific answers showed consistency with other answers provided, it was given a high priority. This degree of commonness only supports in finding the critical factors that are widely shared. The amount of commonness of answers has not been calculated in determining the exact priority, nor has it been correlated. This would conflict with the second aspect of prioritising. Answers which showed a critical factor were highlighted. If it was named more often in the other interviews it got a high priority.
4. RESULTS
This chapter presents the results of both the quantitative and the qualitative research. Since the quantitative research does not reveal any critical factors, but only indicates the general viewpoint of the middle manager, it will be presented first. Secondly, the qualitative research will be presented.
4.1 Quantitative Research
As described earlier, the quantitative research focused solely on the determinants of readiness for change. On a five point Likert-scale the respondents indicated whether they strongly disagreed (1) or strongly agreed (5) with the statement. The results are shown in table 1.
Statement
µ
σ
1. I possess the skills and abilities that are necessary for the New World of Work.
3.86 0.73
2. I am unsure if I am suitable for some tasks and responsibilities that are related to the New World of Work.
1.86 0.91
3. Adopting the New World of Work is unnecessary. 2.52 0.98
4. There are enough valid reasons for us to adopt the concept of the New World of Work.
4.00 0.77
5. I will personally benefit from the implementation of the New World of Work. 2.95 1.12 6. The implementation of the New World of Work will require more effort than
it will deliver.
2.43 0.93
7. I do not think that PostNL will benefit from the implementation of the New World of Work.
2.90 0.99
8. The organisation will become more productive after implementing the concept of the New World of Work.
2.90 1.14
9. The senior and top management is visibly involved with the implementation of the New World of Work.
2.86 1.01
10. When I encountered troubles regarding the New World of Work, I know the senior and top managers are there for me.
3.00 0.77
The respondents were more or less confident that they have the skills and abilities to execute activities related to the change. The majority (61.9%) agreed with the statement that they possessed the skills and abilities that are needed for working in the New World of Work. Three respondents (14.3%) even answered ‘strongly agree’ on this statement. None of the respondents answered ‘strongly disagree’. Interesting enough did not all respondents who answered ‘agree’ on the first statement, thought that they are suitable for working in the New World of Work. Eleven respondents answered ‘disagree’ on the statement whether they are unsure if they are suitable for the tasks and the activities that are related to the New World of Work. The statement ‘adopting of the New World of Work is unnecessary’ resulted in eleven respondents answering ‘disagree’. Five respondents agreed. The validating statement ‘there are enough valid reasons to implement the New World of Work’ led to 17 respondents supporting this statement, of which 5 persons ‘strongly agreed’.
Regarding the personal valence of adopting this concept, the statement 'I will personally benefit of the New World of Work' was answered diversified (σ = 1.12). The answers varied from ‘strongly disagree’ (three respondents) to ‘strongly agree’ (one respondent). Eight respondents (38%) answered with ‘no opinion’. Even though none of the respondents strongly believes that the New World of Work will result in personal benefits, eleven respondents do not believe that the implementation of this concept will cost them more than they will benefit from it. Only one respondent strongly believes that his/her efforts will not pay out.
The statement ‘I do not think that PostNL will benefit from the implementation of the New World of Work’ also resulted in a variety of opinions. The same can be seen in relation to the statement ‘the organisation will become more productive’. Nine respondents disagreed, five agreed, and the remaining seven respondents did not have an opinion.
The two statements related to senior leader support shows that the respondents not strongly believe that the organisation’s senior leaders are committed to the change and act supportive towards the middle manager. The results do not indicate a strong preference for each side.
This is also the case for proposition 6. As far as the quantitative research indicated, the middle manager believes that the New World of Work is implemented for the right reasons. Regarding proposition 7 the respondents are less convinced. No conclusions could be drawn here yet. The same seems to be the case with proposition 8: ‘the middle manager believes that the New World of Work will benefit the organisation.’ Regarding the commitment of the organisation’s senior and top management, the general opinion did not yet show a preference yet.
4.2 The New World of Work
The first proposition claims that technology is perceived by the middle manager as the main enabler of the New World of Work. All twelve respondents argued that technology is essential in successfully implementing the New World of Work. Two important elements have been derived from their arguments: mobility and communication.
Technology enables the middle manager to work time and location independent. In the case of PostNL, the latest technology will be implemented to facilitate access to the virtual workplace on any location. The so called ‘cloud’ stores all the data and software. The middle manager will only need a computer with an internet connection to access the virtual work environment. In the office this will mean that the common computer will be replaced for a thin-client, which gives direct access to the cloud. This sounds good in theory, but this state-of-the-art technology makes the middle manager cautious to the change.
“My experience from the past makes me reserved. (…) I have to see for myself if the technology will work.”
The opinion of respondent 6 is typical for all the other eleven respondents. They all have had bad experiences from previous IT related changes. Now they are even more aloof towards this IT component of the organisational change. The respondents emphasize that ICT should support the work, by making it more efficient and easier to execute.
These issues are things like the speed of the network, the necessity of an internet connection, and the introduction of the ‘bring-your-own-device’ concept, a concept which forces employees to use their own laptop or computer for work.
The middle manager emphasises that ICT is conditional, but not the core business. As respondent 20 formulated: “you know, ICT should just work”. Simply pointing to the core of the problem: well-functioning ICT will not lead to satisfaction, but not functioning ICT systems will lead to dissatisfaction. It could therefore be argued that technology is not an enabler at all, but a dissatisfier.
The second element of ICT, derived from the interviews with the middle managers, is communication. The middle managers perceived the state-of-the-art ICT systems not only as a threat, but also as an opportunity. Seven out of five respondents argued that communication with anyone within the organisation would be faster and more efficient. The possibility to (video) chat with colleagues, or to exchange information, is seen as a solution in reducing the overload of e-mails. The tools that enables any organisational member to quickly communicate, is perceived as a feature that could reduce the social talk in the office. Less walking means less talking, as one of the respondents described this benefit. Organisational members do no longer need to walk to another person.
“Everything that will be communicated will be relevant. However, you will need additional tools to maintain the amicable relation with your co-workers.”
As respondent 1 noticed, attention is needed to the possible change in social cohesion in the workplace. The introduction of new technology and communication tools make some of the respondents fear that the chumminess in the office will disappear. This, however, is closely related to proposition two.
Proposition two predicted that the middle manager perceives the change of the physical
workspace as essential for the successful adoption of the New World of Work.
“I have seen at another company that they have reconstructed and refurnished the office when they adopted the New World of Work. Everybody loves it and now comes to the office 5 days a week. Clearly, that doesn’t work. (…) You will need an hour to find a desk.”
Respondent 2 highlights the main concern of all twelve respondents. The middle managers expect a shortage of workplaces. In the case of PostNL, more employees will be housed in the head office than before. Even though the possibility to work from any other location is offered, the respondents expect that there will be days on which all employees come to the office and some days when the office will be almost empty. Especially for those days when all employees would like to work in the office, a shortage of workspace is expected.
Additionally, the new workplace concept also involves some practical issues that need to be solved. Ten respondents acknowledge the added value of open workplaces. It is perceived as stimulating information sharing. Less time needs to be invested in meetings to share information. The new office concept allows all organisational members to keep each other up to date by simply working in the same area. However, this benefit is simultaneously perceived as a threat to the quality of work. Some like working with some background noise, others are unable to concentrate when others are talking. Respondent 20 has already introduced a solution to this problem. She has told her management team that the area where their department is located will be divided in three zones: a ‘silence zone’ in which any kind of noise is forbidden, the ‘normal work zone’ where talking in an undertone is allowed, and the ‘interaction zone’ where people can talk freely and even a radio can be turned on.
So, it can be concluded that the second proposition is supported and that the middle manager perceives the change of the physical workspace as essential for the successful adoption of the New World of Work.
The third proposition predicted that the middle manager perceives cultural change as essential for the successful adoption of the New World of Work.
All twelve respondents state with no doubt that a cultural change is necessary to get the most out of the New World of Work. They argued that the current organisational culture does not stimulate any organisational member to work from home or to work on different times. In the current organisational culture the line of thought of line manager is ‘trust is good, control is better’. Additionally, the organisational culture is typical for its ‘Post-way of thinking’. In which you tuck your sleeves up and work really hard until the work is done.
Even though they are aware of the fact that some line managers do stimulate working time and place independent, the respondents presume that employees do not yet feel free enough to act that way. Still, eight of the respondents are aware of the need to change the organisational culture. They think that their view is shared by many others within the organisation.
Proposition four states that the middle manager perceives that changing the style of leadership
is necessary to successfully adopt the New World of Work.
The theoretical framework has described that ‘trust’ is the key ingredient of a manager in the New World of Work. An element recognized by all twelve respondents. They perceived trust as essential in enabling the organisational member to work time and location independent. Additionally, the presence of subordinates at the office will be of less importance in managing their performance. However, ‘managing on output’ is not perceived as an easy switch. Some respondents can imagine that line managers simply like to see in real time what their people are doing. Interesting enough, the generation gap is mentioned again in relation to the manager’s ability of giving the employee the flexibility to work from another location than the company’s office. Three respondents expect that older people in a managerial position will experience more troubles with the change than younger colleagues.
A change in style of leadership does, according to nine respondents, also involve flexible working times and location independent working by the line manager him or herself. As a person in a leading position, setting a good example could be of vital importance in the acceptance of the change by the workforce. The middle managers think that they also need to change. The New World of Work, and especially the element of open workspace, would make their job more visible. Which, they argued to be a good thing. One respondent claimed that an increase of visibility will create more understanding for what they do within the organisation. It can be stated that people in managerial roles do need to change the way they behave as a manager. However, it has not been clearly identified whether this change in style of leadership contributes to the successful adoption of the New World of Work. The fourth proposition is therefore only partly supported.
4.3 Readiness for Change
Four respondents admit that they do not believe that they are able enough to adopt the New World of Work in its optimal shape. The main reason for their doubts is that they realise that the New World of Work will invade, and disturb, their comfort zone.
“If everybody starts working time and location independent I will lose the overview.”
Simply said, some of the middle managers like to have their entire department nearby. This enables them to see and ‘feel’ that their personnel work hard. Furthermore, they believe that direct communication is more personal than via telephone or e-mail.
It seems that this hesitation by some of the respondents is due to some uncertainties about specific elements of the change. They know what will happen but lots of questions on detail level are still unanswered. This makes them hesitant, or even resistant, to the change.
“I have a problem with employees who would like to work at night instead of the regular office hours. I don’t appreciate it when I am watching the 8 o’clock news and a colleague, who just started to work, calls me for a work related issue.”
Those who like the current way of managing their employees on the spot, came with similar examples as the quote from respondent 6. This opinion might only rise from uncertainty and things that are unclear. The quantitative research showed that even though the respondents claim to possess the skills and abilities to adopt the New World of Work, they do not think that they are suitable for this concept. It is clearly not only a personal issue but also an organisational one.
This specific quote from respondent 6 highlights for what respondent 12 has already a solution for: “support and train managers (…) in what they can expect from New World of
Work”. By preparing and involving those in managerial roles for the organisational change,
they will understand the entire situation. Some middle managers were under the impression that after the implementation of the New World, their tasks would also hold a lot of ICT and facility related activities.
One respondent argued that there are different types of workers. He claimed to be the type that likes the pressure of social control. In a loose environment like home, he would get distracted too easily. This seems to be in line with other respondents who stated that they prefer working individually. They are the type of worker that is disciplined enough to actually work at home.
To conclude, respondents either say that they do not have the skills and abilities to implement the New World of Work, or they argued that those who do have the skills and abilities fit a specific set of characteristics like discipline, trust and flexibility. Proposition five is therefore not supported.
Proposition six predicted that the middle manager believes that the New World of Work is
implemented for the right reasons. While the New World of Work could be implemented for many reasons, the importance of these reasons can differ. The quantitative research showed that the majority of the respondents argued that there are good reasons to adopt the New World of Work. In this case, all respondents argued that the reason why the New World of Work is implemented is to reduce organisational real estate costs. The next question then, is if reducing these costs is the right reason to implement this concept. The answer is no.
Ten respondents believed that the concept of the New World of Work holds so much more than the aim of reducing real estate costs. Reducing costs is perceived by the middle manager as a benefit, not as an initiator. It is seen as a valid reason for organisational change, just not as the reason for implementing the New World of Work. Nevertheless, the respondents do see many benefits of the implementation of this concept. These will be highlighted when proposition seven and eight are discussed. Proposition six is not supported since reducing real estate costs is not seen as a valid reason to implement the specific concept of the New World of Work.
Starting outside the regular office hours also reduce the probability of getting stuck in a traffic jam during rush hour. Working location independent enables the respondents to anticipate on unexpected situations at home, or being able to work on other offices or at the customer site. Again the term ‘flexibility’ is named by some respondents. They argued that the flexibility of working time and location independent enables them to create a better fit between work and their life.
Besides all the benefits, some downsides are mentioned as well. Some respondents claim that their work life balance is disturbed because of the New World of Work. The possibility to work from home invades their personal lives. They fear that they get triggered to work too much. With a mobile device, which enables you to check your e-mail, it is no effort to read through your mail before you go to bed. And if you have received mail, why do you not answer it right away?
From a practical perspective, the respondents see troubles coming with team meetings or their own productivity at the office. The benefits from working time and place independent seems to cause problems in matching everyone’s agenda for a meeting. Nevertheless is this seen as a practical issue, which will find a solution when the situation will occur. Additionally, respondents think that in the situation that they will work in the open work space, they will get disturbed more often. This is expected to have a negative effect on their productivity. On the other hand, the possibility to work at home enables them to work concentrated, which will have a positive effect on their productivity.
To conclude, the element of the concept of the New World of Work that enables the middle manager to work time and location independent is perceived as a major benefit. Some minor issues are mentioned as possible troubles but all respondents are confident that those issues, if they occur, will be solved quickly. Proposition seven is therefore supported.
Proposition eight states that the middle manager believes that the New World of Work will
benefit the organisation.
Seven respondents claimed that the New World of Work enables the organisation to increase its efficiency and productivity. Working at home allows the person to work fully concentrated, while working in the office increases information sharing. The way the new office has been designed fits these elements.
The new workspace is believed to increase the interaction between co-workers who otherwise would not have met. The respondents argued that in the current circumstances the organisation is in, the open workspace could contribute to innovative thinking.
The gap between the current (and perceived as ‘old’) organisational culture and the intended new organisational culture is big. But this change is seen as necessary in order for the organisation to survive. The New World of Work contributes in not only the short-term survival of the organisation, but also seen from a strategic perspective. The New World of Work changes the company to a course that is essential to survive.
The New World of Work does also have a positive effect on the organisation’s reputation. The respondents believe that this concept will improve the organisation’s reputation as a modern employer. The improved attractiveness of the company is expected to result in more people interested to work for the organisation. According to some of the respondents, salary and other financial benefits are less important than flexibility in work and life. These elements are now something that can be used to strengthen the position at for example the labour market. However, the ambition to be a modern employer has also potential downsides. The aim of PostNL is to implement state-of-the-art technology to facilitate the organisational members to work anywhere at any time. The implications of this latest technology is perceived as one step too far. One respondent claimed that implementing the state-of-the-art ICT, including the consequences for the employee, are just too much.
With no doubt will the New World of Work benefit the organisation. The implementation of this concept is seen as important for the company’s future. Obviously, there are some downsides mentioned but none of them really seem to harm the organisation. The eighth proposition is therefore supported.
The quantitative research indicated that the respondents did not showed a strong preference to believing that the organisation’s senior leaders either support and commit to the change or not. Interesting enough could from the interviews be derived that none of the respondents believed that the organisation’s senior and top managers support the change and are committed to it.
All twelve respondents felt that the only reason that the New World of Work is implemented, is to reduce organisational costs. This makes the respondents feel like the only element the senior and top management are interested in is the organisation’s financial position. This even demotivates some middle managers to support and get involved with implementing the New World of Work.
The feeling amongst six respondents is that they do not feel the urge to change when the senior and top managers do not bother to change. A many mentioned example is the reconstruction of the head office. All floors are rebuild and refurnished, except for the floor where the executive board is located. This gives the respondents the feeling that the senior and top managers do not support the change whatsoever, and furthermore misuse their position to avoid any inconvenience related to the change. As mentioned earlier, the middle manager feels that he or she is the one gets the hard questions from employees. Their position forces them to be easy accessible for the lower levels. It could be argued that the middle manager could suffer from the behaviour of the organisation’s senior leaders.
Four respondents recon that the only senior manager that could be linked to the change is the company’s ICT director. He is visibly involved with the change, but his involvement is purely practical and ICT minded. The respondents miss a visible change champion who is recognized by the entire organisation as leading in the implementation of the New World of Work. They have no idea where to go with a change related question.
They also feel that the fact that the CEO and CFO have not been visible or involved in any way is typical for the reason why this change has been initiated. Some respondents argued that the beautiful concept of the New World of Work has been abused to simply reduce the organisation’s real estate costs.
So, the middle managers suggested that a change champion should be appointed. Preferably, a member of the executive board. Obviously, they do not expect this person to execute all project related tasks him or herself.
5. CONCLUSIONS & DISCUSSION
This research aimed for finding factors that middle managers consider critical for the readiness or resistance of the middle management in implementing the New World of Work. The research results have indicated these critical factors. In this chapter these factors will be discussed in relation to the theory.
Further, recommendations are made to PostNL. Even though these recommendations are company specific, they could be interpreted as general suggestions in case of adopting the New World of Work. Obviously, these suggestions are derived from the perspective of the middle manager. Additionally, the research’s limitations will be discussed. Which will be followed by suggestions for future research.
With no doubt the concept of the New World of Work is perceived by the middle manager as a radical change. This research clearly showed that the middle management perceives changing their style of leadership as essential. Multiple critical factors were named. But what theory marks as an important element, the respondents did not mention: personal change. The quantitative research indicated that the majority of the respondents believes they have the skills and abilities needed for the New World of Work. However, the qualitative research showed that most of the respondents did not perceive the change as an easy switch. It seems that the middle managers are fully aware of their role of change agent and are focused on keeping the daily business going. At the same time they are not aware that they also need to change. So, if the middle manager argued that additional measures are needed to ensure that they feel they have the skills and abilities to handle this change, they actually need a mirror to be aware of their own need for change.
Besides the lack of senior leadership support, changing the organisational culture and implementing the New World of Work simultaneously, also contributed to the resistance to change of the middle manager. Middle managers got confused by the radical change. They claimed that working time and location independent would lead to employees working at night. Which would make it impossible for the line and middle manager impossible to control the organisational members. This research clearly pointed out that the adoption of the New World of Work is much more difficult for middle managers when the organisational culture has not yet been changed.
If the current organisational culture would already fit the New World of Work, more attention would have gone out to the personal and organisational benefits of this concept. Technology, which enables the organisational member to work location and time independent, was perceived as a dissatisfier instead of an enrichment to their managerial tools. It is even seen as a possible threat. It invades the middle manager’s personal space by enabling them to work when they lie in bed or having dinner at home.
Nevertheless, the adoption of the New World of Work is perceived as valid. Elements of the New World of Work like the physical workspace stimulate creativity and interaction between organisational members. The expectation of the middle management is that the New World of Work will eventually make the organisation more productive and more attractive to the outside world.
So, could be concluded that adopting the concept of the New World of Work will always be perceived as the right thing to do? No. An important element of this concept is the physical workspace. Theory indicated that changing the physical workspace leads to a reduction in real estate costs. Unfortunately, in this case the main driver of implementing the New World of Work was to achieve major cost reductions in real estate. And clearly, this reason for change was clearly not perceived by the middle management as the right reason to adopt this concept.
In the end it seems that the readiness for change of the middle management is determined by a successful change of the organisational culture before the concept of the New World of Work is adopted. Confusion amongst organisational members results in the middle management being blamed for change related problems. Additionally, the confusion amongst the middle managers results in resistance towards the concept and annoyance towards the organisation’s senior leaders. As a famous proverb layouts: well begun is half done. In this case, the organisational culture is a good point to start.
5.1 Recommendations
From this research the following recommendations are made to PostNL. Even though these recommendations are company specific, they can be interpreted as general suggestions in case of adopting the New World of Work. The suggestions are either for the middle manager’s benefit or formulated from the perspective of the middle manager. They are presented chronologically as a kind of action plan.
1. Middle managers must be made aware of the need of personal change. In order to be able to help others to go through change, keep the daily business going, and actually implement the strategic plans, the middle manager must first change personally.
So, prior to the actual implementation of the concept of the New World of Work, the middle manager must change. A good way to start is by involving the middle manager by changing the organisational culture.
2. The organisational culture is the foundation of the New World of Work. If the culture is not right, the New World of Work is unlikely to be adopted in its optimal shape. By giving the middle manager a key role in the process of cultural change, he or she will be urged to change personally. Which makes the middle manager immediately ready for adopting the New World of Work.
