Bachelor Thesis, 2008
66 Pages, Grade: 1,5
2. Definition of Terms
2.2 Organisational Change
2.3 Change Management and managing resistance
3. Examination of Organisational Change
3.1 Types and Characteristics of Organizational Change
3.2 Drivers of Organizational Change
3.3 Impacts of Change on Employees
4. Identification of Employee’s Needs
4.1 The Human Nature – Examination of Psychological Theories
4.2 Employee Needs and Motivation
4.3 The Psychological Contract
4.4 Cultural and Social Differences as Determinants for Employee Needs
5. Examination of Employee Resistance
5.1 Reasons for Resistance
5.2 Change vs. Transition
6. Managing Resistance in Theory
6.1 Models for Change
6.1.1 Sociologically Focused Models
188.8.131.52 Critical Research Model
184.108.40.206 The Traditional Action Research Model
220.127.116.11 Appreciative Inquiry
6.1.2 Rational Change Models
6.2 Change Management Tools
6.3 The Importance of Leadership
7. Examples of Resistance Management in Practice
7.1 Daimler-Chrysler Merger
7.2 Managing Change at United Parcel Service (UPS)
8. Recommendations for Managing Employee Resistance
8.1 A Clear Reason for Change
8.2 A Vision to Guide the Change
8.3 Strong Leadership
8.4 Efficient Communication
8.5 People Involvement
8.6 Progress Measurement
8.7 Change Institutionalizing
9. Discussion of Findings
IV.I Impacts of Change on Employees
IV.I.II Mergers and acquisitions
IV.I.III Corporate Culture
IV.I.IV Strategic Alliances
IV.II Employee Needs and Motivation
IV.II.I Content Theories
IV.II.I.I Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
IV.II.I.II David Mc Clelland’s theory of needs
IV.II.I.III Clayton Alderfer’s ERG Theory
IV.II.I.IV Herzberg’s two-factor theory
IV.II.II Process Theories
IV.II.II.I Equity Theory
IV.II.II.II Victor Vroom’s expectancy theory
IV.II.II.III Goal setting theory
IV.III Cultural and Social Differences as Determinants for Employee Needs
IV.IV Managing Resistance in Theory
IV.IV.I Models of Change
IV.IV.I.I Kurt Lewin’s three-step model
IV.IV.I.II Kotter’s 8-step model
IV.IV.I.III Jick’s 10-step model
IV.IV.I.IV G&E’s 7-step model
IV.V.I PESTLE analyses
IV.V.II SWOT analysis
IV.V.III Field Theory
IV.V.IV Technology Adoption Life Cycle (TALC)
V. Sources and Bibliography
Buddha once said “The only constant in life is change”. This is clearly a paradoxon since change is not static but never the less it is true considering the world that surrounds us today. Changes are present anywhere and at any time. We face them in nature, society and demographics, in science and technology as well as in business.
And change is not a new phenomenon either. Looking back at the past the world has always been subject to changes. Such as climate changes that caused ice ages and warm periods to alternate, changes in technology and science without which we would still be sitting in the dark without light bulbs, telephone or Internet.
Thus we can indeed say that the world is subject to a continuous evolution. A world as described above which underlies constant changes may appear rather unstable and frightening. It certainly requires a high flexibility, an open mind and the willingness to change. Human beings, however, are often described as inflexible, as creatures of habit that prefer things to stay just the way they are or at least change in a way that positively impacts their personal situation. This is clearly not a good precondition for change. It shows a discrepancy between the requirements change makes on human beings and the needs and wants these human beings have that could cause them to resist. And it is this resistance that needs to be managed to implement change successfully.
This especially accounts for today’s business world in which organisations are influenced by the increasing globalization that exposes them to continuous change and thus requires growing flexibility of them to stay competitive. Not adjusting to occurring changes in the market may lead to the company loosing substantial business or even going out of business entirely if competitors act faster and more appropriate. However, companies in general are highly dependent on their employees’ motivation to deliver a high performance and carry out the production of goods and services. Because, even though processes these days are highly automated, there is still a human standing behind every machine operating it - even if that only means to switch the machine on and off and service it if necessary. Therefore if the employee’s motivation vanishes as a response to change, a phenomenon called resistance, then the company’s production and success or even its entire existence will be at risk. It is thus necessary to identify ways to manage this resistance as it surfaces to successfully implement change within an organisation.
The work at hand aims at identifying recommendations on how to manage this resistance of employees to organisational change. It starts off with a definition of important terms in chapter two, followed by the chapters three and four which form the basis of the work. Here organisational change and human needs will be analysed individually and more closely to find out what characterises them, what are their causes and impacts. The outcomes of both chapters will than be compared in chapter five – examination of employee resistance. Here reasons for and results of resistance will be identified and discussed on the basis of the findings of the two forgone chapters. In chapter six existing tools, theories and approaches on managing change and resistance will be described followed by practical examples of how resistance has been managed by two companies – DaimlerChrysler and UPS – in chapter seven.
Finally, based on all the information that has been collected in the previous chapters, chapter eight will give recommendations on how resistance can be managed successfully. This will be followed by chapter nine, containing a critical discussion of the suggestions given, and a summary of the complete work and its findings in chapter ten.
The work at hand will be dealing with organizational change and employee resistance towards change within the organisations they work in. However, before starting to discuss these specific phenomenons in more detail it is necessary to define the underlying principles and general characteristics that describe any kind of change or resistance as well the scientific discipline called change management that deals with both of them.
In Summary the Oxford English Dictionary defines change as the alteration of an object’s conditions, circumstances or status to reach an envisioned future state different from the current one. Changing is the action refers to the transitional phase that an object goes through as it modifies these conditions and circumstances to reach its envisioned future state (Oxford English Dictionary, 2007).
The key changes that any company is likely to be faced with are changes in technology, increasing globalization, continuing cost containment, increasing speed in market change, the growing importance of knowledge capital and the increasing rate and magnitude of change (Rothwell & Sullivan, 2005, p. 12).
Organizational change, under consideration of the definition for change given above, thus refers to the transformational process an organization goes through to reach a desired state different from the current one. Such transformation can occur in the form of cultural changes, mergers, acquisitions, restructuring or reorganizations and tends to be a response to changes in the organizations environment or a preparation for expected future developments. Cawsey and Deszca (2007) describe organizational change as “a planned alteration of organizational components to improve the effectiveness of the organization”. Organizational components are the mission, vision, strategy, goals structure, processes and systems, technology and people of that particular organization (p. 2). Furthermore Burke (2008) suggests that organizational change may be unplanned or planned, revolutionary or evolutionary. Unplanned and continuous change is the most common occurrence whereas planned change is rather unusual. Revolutionary change refers to comprehensive interferences that drastically effect and change the organization as a whole while evolutionary change is incremental. The latter is the more common occurrence, relating to unplanned and continuous change as a reaction on an ever changing external environment (p. 1).
Resistance can be found in many different areas such as physics, politics and psychology. The main characteristic however tends to be the same - resistance hinders, impedes or disrupts an ongoing process.
In the given context the situation or process is a planned or ongoing change process within an organization. The definition that Folger and Skarlicki give suggests that resistance is an “employee behaviour that seeks to challenge, disrupt, or invert prevailing assumptions, discourses, and power relations” (Maurer, R.., 2006, p. 121). In addition to that Agyris and Schoen describe resistance as “a defensive mechanism to protect against frustration and anxiety” (Maurer, R., 2006, p. 123).
Resistance should however not only be viewed as an occurrence hindering the change process but as a source of feedback for the latter is often based on good reason (Gallant & Rios, 2006, p. 188).
Change Management, according to Rothwell and Sullivan (2005), is the planned, coordinated and controlled process of bringing about change affecting individuals, groups or whole organizations (p. 17). In addition to that Anderson and Anderson (Rothwell and Sullivan, 2005, p. 17) suggest that change management is “a set of principles, techniques, and prescriptions applied to the human aspects of executing major change initiatives in organizational settings. Its focus is not on ‘what’ is driving change [...], but on ‘how’ to orchestrate the human infrastructure that surrounds key projects so that people are better prepared to absorb the implications affecting them.” The latter definition suggests the consideration of human aspects when implementing changes in an organization. This includes engaging and motivating employees but also the necessity of dealing with employee resistance to change. Resistance Management thus combines all actions included in a change management process that are directed at obtaining the employees support for the planned change initiative. This, however, should not only be viewed as the attempt to overcome but also to utilise resistance for the latter can present valuable feedback (Maurer, P., 2006, p. 121ff).
Now that the underlying terms, which form the works foundation, have been defined we can move on to the more detailed examination of organisational change and human needs. Both examinations are necessary to find out where the requirements of organisational change and employees needs contradict each other and thus form the breeding ground for resistance.
The following chapter will concentrate on organisational change. It will inform about the different types of change, its drivers and the impacts it has on the organisation, the work itself as well as the individual employee. By the end of this chapter the reader should have a comprehensive overview of what is demanded of an organization and its employees.
A lot of information can be found on the different types of change and on the criteria used to distinguish between them. Most of the literature used for this work has been referring to Linda S. Ackerman’s three types of change – developmental change, transitional change and transformational change.
Such a division is necessary so an organization can distinguish between the challenges it is faced with and react appropriately. Each of the three types is having its own characteristics, affects the organization differently and thus has to be dealt with in a different manner.
Developmental change is an incremental process focused on the improvement of existing processes, skills or conditions rather than on the creation of something new. Common examples are team building activities or any kind of training or development activities. Methods or processes that get examined and at some point replaced tend to be outdated, unable to do justice to existing expectations and thus need adjustment according to current external developments. The aim is to enhance the organizations productivity, product quality or overall performance and keeps people growing. By continuously carrying out these adjustments the company can reach a constant level of performance thus strengthening its position among its competitors (Ackerman, 1986).
Transitional change reaches a bit further by replacing existing procedures and processes with new ones, for example by introducing new technologies. The transition thereby is not the change itself but describes the period between letting go of the old known state and achieving a new desired state. To do so current processes and procedures are to be assessed to identify what needs to be changed to achieve the aim of better serving future demand. The results of this assessment form the basis for the design of a new desired future state and this future state serves as a guide through the transition period. Transitional change tends to involve developmental change as employees for example need to acquire additional skills and know-how to carry out new tasks or handle new technology (Ackerman, 1986).
Transformational change is the last and most complex of the three types. It describes the “emergence of a new state of being out of the remains of the old state” (Ackerman, 1986). Often the existing organization has reached a status in which it faces unbearable challenges. In its current state it would be incapable to stay in business as its way of doing business is no longer appropriate or competitive. It is than that the organization either goes out of business or decides to completely reinvent itself and take on a new direction to regain or even improve its position in the market. A change in believes and a shift in faith are equally important to make this happen. Focusing on the employees is necessary as they tend to experience a transformation as well. It may be painful as they have to let go of known patterns but can also be inspiring. In any case the organization and its members should be prepared to face uncertainty and chaos until they regain stability and a state they feel is suitable to face the existent and future challenges. The implementation can be quite a lengthy, uncertain process with no exact future state in mind except for a vision of what its position in the market should be. The facilitation requires both transitional as well as developmental approaches (Ackerman, 1986).
Independent of the kind of change the organization goes through, there will be leaders and followers involved both with different ways of characterizing change. The leaders, for example the management of an organization, tend to think of change as anticipated, gradual, incremental and paced. For them it is a conscious decision providing new opportunities and is directed at solving existing problems. Followers, such as the employees, on the other hand think of change as unexpected, sudden, dramatic and rapid. For them it may seem imposed, disruptive and the cause of problems rather than a solution to them (Carnall, 2007, p. 73).
How especially the latter characteristics can impede with the implementation of any change should become clear once the needs and wants of human beings, and employees in particular, have been examined in the 4th chapter. For now however, we will continue to focus on change by examining the drivers that cause change in the upcoming chapter.
Identifying the three types of change would not have been necessary in the first place if a company would not be confronted with all these external as well as internal influences. There would be no need to change if the environment would stay the same. The evolution of any company would eventually come to an end as it reaches the state of complete harmony with its environment. In this state competition would vanish as all companies reach the same state of harmony and together produce just what is asked for – including right quality and price.
However, this utopia as described above does not exist. The environment changes constantly, asking for adjustments from the individuals and organizations living in it.
Here, the “Open-System Theory” comes into play which suggests that each system is dependent on and interacting with its environment. Such systems can rank from individuals over organisations to the natural environment itself and differ in the influential power they hold as well as the degree to which they themselves can be influenced. And since the environment surrounding us is not static this also influences the process of change. This makes it necessary but also, up to a certain degree, uncontrollable as, despite having to carry out the planned change, organisations also have to react and adjust along the way (Burke, 2008, pp. 49).
The drivers which require these “open systems” to change can be categorized into external as well as internal drivers. External drivers are globalization, the increasing importance of sustainability, the technological evolution, changing governmental regulations and industrial relations as well as changes in customer demands, demographics and the society itself. Globalization again comprises different triggers such as
- increasing competition on any level of the value chain,
- currency fluctuations,
- a reduction of trade barriers, opening of new markets and thus growing consumer, labour and capital markets and
- global instabilities, including wars, due to different value systems, interdependences of countries in terms of resources and thus power struggles among those countries.
The increasing importance of sustainability in business arises from the company’s realization that natural resources used for production and the environment itself are transitory. In addition to that stakeholders, consumers as well as independent organizations, grow more environmentally conscious thus increasing the pressure companies are under.
The technological evolution again causes increasing competition, innovation and efficiency as well as changing business models and value chains. It further affects the customer’s power and the employee’s work life. Through the internet the accessibility of all kinds of information increases, it travels faster and reaches further. The companies therefore are demanded to show accountability for all there actions as in the information age everything will eventually become public. Companies grow transparent but thus also become more vulnerable as negative information e.g. about corruption or environmental pollution tends to travel even faster than positive. The work life is on the one hand affected by an increasing demand for higher skills but on the other hand also by a higher connectivity through internet, laptop and mobile phone. The latter again can have positive as well as negative impacts.
Changes in customer’s demands are on the one hand connected to globalization, due to which consumers are offered a greater choice of products and services, and on the other hand to the technological evolution and information age that increases the amount and accessibility of information. Demographic issues that affect the companies are the aging of the current workforce, the shrinking of the workforce to come, diversity and discrimination as well as changes in education. Finally the society itself changes in terms of its values and behaviours. It is turns into a “throwaway society”, more interested in entertainment than in actual news and facts, less caring and trusting, unable to commit and with opinions being polarized and shaped by the media.
Internal drivers on the other hand are among others new visions, missions, the purchase of a new technology, mergers, acquisitions, low employee morale, changes in management, ownership changes or differences in perception and problem management (Holbeche, 2006, p. 26 – 42).
To stay in business the above mentioned drivers demand an adjustment of structures, processes, operations or a company’s strategy. Impacts on the overall company thus may be the decision to restructure processes, to merge with or acquire another company or to enter strategic alliances. In any case it affects the workforce, the nature of work, the work climate and the employee as an individual; either as a side effect of any of the above actions to achieve adjustment or as the main effect (Carnall, 2007, p. 47-65).
Impacts of restructuring on employees may involve new technologies, changes in the internal management structure, practices such as outsourcing, lean manufacturing and relocation or head count reductions.
In terms of Mergers and Acquisitions research, according to Kusstatscher and Cooper (2005), suggests that most fail due to overlooking the human, or soft, factors. Such impacts may be positive in form of personal progression, increasing personal influence, and organizational survival in difficult times (p. 13-14). Other impacts may relate to redundancies, power games between the two involved companies or its employees as well as changes in management and the clash of different organizational cultures. Such cultures differ widely from one company to the next which poses difficulties in Mergers & Acquisitions as two distinct ways of going about business and interacting with each other are expected to merge. Thus each workforce, being used to its own organizational culture, will have to make adjustments as well as sacrifices to create a joint culture (Kusstatscher & Cooper, 2005, p. 17-25).
Impact of strategic alliances has not yet been subject to extensive research. However suggestions are that they relate to identity and intergroup dynamics, culture clash, third culture emergence and interunit conflicts. Identity and intergroup issues refer to the extent of identification with the alliance, to trust between the involved parties on a professional as well as a social level, to in-group favouritism and divergent perceptions of employees as well as to blocked or incomplete information transfer. Cultural issues refer to unclear organizational cultures and a lack of familiarity with the partnering company’s culture. And finally interunit conflicts relate to limited delegation by the parent company. These factors suggest mistrust, conflicts over positions and responsibilities, a negative work climate, bad employee relationships and changes in each party’s common organizational culture (Schenkar & Reuer, 2006, p. 199-218).
Other, more specific, impacts are those related to the workforce, the nature of work or the work climate.
Impacts on the workforce are for example the changing requirements posed on employees as technology evolves, competition increases and work organization changes. Jobs become more complex, asking for higher skilled labour. This in turn complicates the recruitment process as the competition for highly skilled labour increases. Furthermore the company is faced with an aging and shrinking workforce leaving the companies struggling to pay the pensions once their employees retire and also exposes them to issues related to age discrimination.
The nature of work is affected in terms of changing roles and increasing responsibilities, a demand for greater skills and knowledge, an increasing flexibility in terms of working hours, performance related wage calculation and work location and an orientation on outcome rather than on input.
Finally the work climate is worsening due to stress, a lack of trust and social contacts and thus loyalty. Stress is caused by additional responsibilities that lead to an increasing number of working hours needed to cope with the work load. It can negatively affect a person’s physical and psychological condition as well as their personal life. Other aspects adding to the worsening work climate are an increase in political behaviour, a lack of managerial support, missing rewards, a lack of trust as well as a lack of time and resources to achieve required tasks. Low moral within and loyalty towards the company thus become common characteristics.
Finally the employee himself is affected by the changes as he or she faces impacts such as head count reductions, relocation, new responsibilities, an increasing workload, insecurity, a lack of control over work and private life or a change in status (Carnall, p. 66- 96).
Independent of the type of change or its impact Barrie Hopson and John Adams (Mayhew, 2006, p. 110) suggest that, when confronted with change, an employee is going through seven different stages until he or she comes to terms with it. In the first stage they do not understand the change’s meaning and its implication. In the second stage employees think that the change will not affect them. Their self-esteem rises due to this misguidance. In stage three people realize that the change may involve loss. Their self-esteem declines as loss is experienced until the employee reaches stage four. In stage four the employee comes to terms with loosing and letting go of known ways of going about business. In the fifth stage self-esteem begins to rise again as employees start trying new approaches and get used to the changes and in step six they reflect on the events to assessing, understand and learn present as well as past behaviour. Finally stage seven presents the end of the ‘journey’. The employee gets used to the new reality and the self-esteem increases.
Whether these impacts are viewed as a threat or a chance for personal growth highly depends on each person’s individual needs and wants as well as on their immediate environment and personal background. To understand how the above mentioned impacts can lead to employee resistance it is necessary to examine the human nature and identify what it is that motivates their actions.
The forgone chapter offered an insight on the phenomenon that is organizational change. We now have an insight of what the causes and effects are and how organizational change in general can be characterized.
This however is not enough to explain why people could possibly resist change. To do so we need to know what peoples and especially employees needs and expectations are and what it is that determines their actions and behaviour. Only when knowing that can we suggest reasons for peoples reactions toward change.
Psychology offers three main theories to explain how people’s actions and behaviours are being determined. These are psychoanalysis, behaviourism and humanism.
Psychoanalysis was first introduced by Sigmund Freud to explain an individual’s personality, behaviour, mistakes, dreams and motivation. The theory puts emphasis on the unconscious psychological processes and personal drives that are assumed to influence and direct our behaviour (Microsoft® Encarta® Online Enzyklopaedia, 2008).
The theory suggests that the former are determined by a person’s libido and unconsciously controlled by the conflict between libidinal urges and social training (Sutherland, S., 1996, p. 370). This suggests that an individual, rather than consciously deciding to behave or act in a certain way, is first and foremost steered by its personal drives.
Behaviourism on the contrary does not support the idea that human behaviour is influenced or determined by unconscious internal forces existent in a persons mind. It rather suggests that behaviour is determined and shaped by the interactions of a human being with its immediate environment. Explanations for any kind of behaviour should thus be looked for in the person’s environment. Furthermore behaviourists believe that behaviour is highly depended on its consequences and on whether these are positive or negative. Positive consequences tend to reinforce the behaviour from which the result whereas negative consequences will reduce the behaviour. According to behaviourists behaviour can thus be explained, predicted, determined and adapted. Behaviour can be explained through continuous observation of and experimentation with causes and affects. It can be predicted by falling back upon experiences as to which behaviour was shown when and for what reasons. It can be determined by using enforcement or punishment according to what worked in the past. And finally it can be adapted by changing the consequences following a certain behaviour thus steering it into an alternative direction (Magill, Frank N., 1996, p. 271)
Human psychology as the third scientific direction intends to understand an individuals experience just as it is lived. It offers an approach that is based on respect for the human existence. Humanists place a high emphasis on human existence itself and neglect the thought of their “object” of research being just an object determined in its ways by external influences.
The four main characteristics of human psychology thus are
- the persons appreciation as a whole for parts can not be fully understood when viewed isolated from the rest of the body,
- the notion of consciousness which suggests that a human being is conscious of its surroundings and its interactions with it however selective as to what it perceives,
- the recognition of individual experience as an internal influence on a persons viewpoint that needs to be considered to understand behaviour and
- the vision of human freedom as the ability to independently choose to be ones authentic self or not and thus take responsibility for ones path in life (Magill, Frank N., 1996, p. 824).
Combining all three psychological theories one can say that human behaviour is partly determined by unconscious internal forces such as instincts, partly a reaction towards an individual’s immediate environment and its influences and partly by emotions and experiences. Thus it is partly conscious and partly unconscious, can in some cases be explained and in others not. The author’s suggestion is that the most comprehensive picture can be obtained by combining all three theories when examining human personality and behaviour.
In the forgone paragraphs we have discussed how human behaviour in general originates, whether it is a conscious or unconscious process, internally or externally influenced, but independent of its occurrence. Now however, we want to focus on exactly this occurrence of behaviour in organizations and what its determinants are.
An employee’s behaviour is influenced by three different variables. The first two are knowledge and skills that describe a persons potential to perform. The third variable is motivation and describes the employee’s willingness to direct its knowledge and skills toward a desired outcome. And this willingness depends on the extent to which the behaviour will serve the employees needs. Employee motivation can thus be described “as a cognitive decision making process that influences the effort, persistence and direction of voluntary goal-directed behaviour” (Bratton et al., 2007, p. 250). Effort is the intensity with that a certain task is being pursued, persistence refers to the application of this effort over time and direction refers to the effort being utilized to benefit the organization. Furthermore motivation can be intrinsic as well as extrinsic. Intrinsic motivators are related to a person’s internal desires while extrinsic motivators stem from the persons external environment. However what employees perceive as intrinsic or extrinsic motivators is highly dependent on values, ways of thinking, behaviour and social factors (Bratton et al., 2007, p. 250).
Motivational theories can be divided into content and process theories as well as in behavioural and cognitive traditions. Content theories rely on a set of basic needs that all employees have in common while process theories refer to the cognitive process that determines their behaviour. Furthermore the behaviourist tradition considers behaviour to be a response on environmental influences while the cognitive tradition on the other hand incorporates a person’s internal state of mind and its personal awareness of the environment (Brooks, 2006, p. 48 -50).
Content theories are Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, McClelland’s ‘three learned needs’ theory, Alderfer’s ERG theory and Herzberg’s ‘two factor’ theory.
Maslow and Alderfer both point out the more general needs that all individuals, not just employees, carry in themselves. Both scientists suggest that humans have physiological needs such as hunger and thirst, a need for security, protection and stability and social needs such as the need for love, affection and a sense of belonging as well as for relationships with family, friends and colleagues. Furthermore they incorporate esteem needs for respect, prestige and recognition and growth needs that refer to a person’s growth and the fulfilment of his or her individual potential. Furthermore, while Alderfer adds material requirements to his existence needs, Maslow adds self-esteem as one of the human’s higher ranking needs. The main difference between both is the fact that Maslow ranks the needs according the importance while Alderfer does not (Bratton et al., 2007, p. 253-256). McClelland on the other hand differs in that he leaves physiological and security needs aside and suggest that humans are driven by the needs for achievement, affiliation and power. Employees with a high need for achievement are, according to research, driven by individual responsibility, challenging but achievable goals and feedback on performance. Employees with a high need for affiliation desire interpersonal relationships and opportunities to communicate and employees with a high need for power prefer work conditions that enable them to have power over others and receive attention and recognition (Schermerhorn JR et al., 2008, p. 163-165).
Herzberg’s two-factor theory is more specific, focusing on the work place and referring to more tangible aspects that either satisfy and thus motivate people or dissatisfy and therefore demotivate them. Motivators that can lead to satisfaction are the sense of achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, advancement and personal growth. Hygiene factors on the other hand encompass policies and administration, supervision and the relationship with supervisors, working conditions, remuneration, relationships, status, promotion and job security (Brooks, 2006, p. 60-62).
 IV.I.I Restructuring
 IV.I.II Mergers and acquisitions
 IV.I.III Corporate Culture
 IV.I.IV Strategic Alliances
 IV.II.I.I Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
 IV.II.I.II David Mc Clelland’s theory of needs
 IV.II.I.III Clayton Alderfer’s ERG Theory
 IV.II.I.IV Herzberg’s two-factor theory
Master's Thesis, 98 Pages
Master's Thesis, 111 Pages
Bachelor Thesis, 68 Pages
Doctoral Thesis / Dissertation, 92 Pages
Master's Thesis, 45 Pages
Bachelor Thesis, 62 Pages
Research Paper (undergraduate), 13 Pages
Term Paper (Advanced seminar), 31 Pages
Bachelor Thesis, 73 Pages
Research Paper (postgraduate), 29 Pages
Master's Thesis, 152 Pages
Research Paper (postgraduate), 8 Pages
GRIN Publishing, located in Munich, Germany, has specialized since its foundation in 1998 in the publication of academic ebooks and books. The publishing website GRIN.com offer students, graduates and university professors the ideal platform for the presentation of scientific papers, such as research projects, theses, dissertations, and academic essays to a wide audience.
Free Publication of your term paper, essay, interpretation, bachelor's thesis, master's thesis, dissertation or textbook - upload now!