Wall-e and 9 movie
-
Watch at least two of the following movies:
• Make a comprehensive reaction paper for the two movies in no less than
300 words each.
• Make a comparative ...
13 years ago
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Last December 7, 2009, our group in SAD1 visited the AMS Group of Companies located at F. Torres St., Davao City for an interview regarding our report on the said subject. During our interview, we have been given a chance to include the question on our MIS2 assignment in this forum which is “What are the two most frequently experienced causes of frustration of IS professionals and users while working on an IS plan?” To answer that question, we approached Mr. Gemrald R. Glibara, the M.I.S Department Head of AMS Group of Companies.
Frustration is defined as a common emotional response to opposition. Related to anger and disappointment, it arises from the perceived resistance to the fulfillment of individual will. It is an emotion that occurs in situations where a person is blocked from reaching a desired outcome. It is not necessarily bad since it can be a useful indicator of the problems in a person's life and, as a result, it can act as a motivator to change. However, when it results in anger, irritability, stress, resentment, depression, or a spiral downward where we have a feeling of resignation or giving up, frustration can be destructive.
According to him, the two most frequently experienced causes of frustration of IS professionals and users while working on an IS plan are:
First, Lack of Support / Resistant to changes which is defined as an action taken by individuals and groups when they perceive that a change that is occurring as a threat to them.
Mr. Gemrald is working on the automation of manual systems of the HR Department of the company and developing the enterprise systems for the company. Aside from being the Head of office, he is also working as the project manager and developer of the MIS. According to him, in any organization, you cannot expect that all would be adaptive enough to the changes which he considers as one of the frustrations of an IT professional. It is really hard to purse IS plans when the users themselves resist to changes, that’s the challenging part of being a project manager. You cannot please everyone, he added.
Resistance is the equivalent of objection in sales and disagreement in general discussions. Resistance may take many forms, including active or passive, overt or covert, individual or organized, aggressive or timid. Nearly two-thirds of all major changes in organizations fail. That's pretty sobering information.
Did you know that:
- only about 30 percent of reengineering projects succeed
- 23 percent of mergers make back their costs
- 43 percent of quality improvement efforts are worth the effort
- 9 percent of major software applications are worth what you pay for them
Fortune 500 executives said that resistance was the primary reason changes failed. And 80 percent of the chief information officers said that resistance - not a lack of technical skills or resources - was the main reason why technology projects failed. It's that soft, touchy-feely, human reaction of resistance that matters. But these statistics are only partly right. Resistance is not the primary reason why changes fail. The real problem is that leaders plan and roll out major changes in ways that create inertia, apathy, and opposition.
For example, an executive announces that the company will restructure starting next week. Employees and middle managers begin to resist. As the project unfolds, executives see resistance appear in many forms - malicious compliance, in-your-face arguments, even sabotage. The executives respond by pushing the change even harder. Then they make demands. Employees redouble their opposition and the change ends up either failing or going far over budget and way past deadlines.
Resistance to change is a reaction to the way a change is being led. There are no born "resistors" out there waiting to ruin otherwise perfect plans. People resist in response to something. Resistance protects people from harm.
Three identified three levels of resistance.
Level 1 - I Don't Get It
Level 1 involves information: facts, figures, ideas. It is the world of thinking and rational action. It is the world of presentations, diagrams, and logical arguments.
Level 1 may come from . . .
- Lack of information
- Disagreement with data
- Lack of exposure to critical information
- Confusion over what it means
Many make the mistake of treating all resistance as if it were Level 1. Well-meaning leaders give people more information - hold more meetings, and make more PowerPoint presentations - when, in fact, something completely different is called for. And that's where Levels 2 and 3 come in.
To address level 1:
- Make sure people know why a change is needed. Before you talk about how you want to do things, explain why something must be done.
- Present the change using language they understand. If your audience isn't made up of financial specialists, then detailed charts showing a lot of sophistical analysis of the numbers will be lost on them.
- Find multiple ways to make your case. People take in information in different ways. Some like to hear things. Others like to see things. Some like pictures. Others text. Some learn best in conversation. The more variety in the communication channels, the greater the chance that people will get what you have to say.
Level 2 - I Don't Like It
Level 2 is an emotional reaction to the change. Blood pressure rises, adrenaline flows, pulse increases. It is based on fear: People are afraid that this change will cause them to lose face, status, control - maybe even their jobs.
Level 2 is not soft stuff. You can't say, "Just get over it," and expect people to say, "Wow, thanks, I needed that."
Level 2 runs deep. When it kicks in, we can feel like our very survival is at stake.
When Level 2 is active, it makes communicating change very difficult. When adrenaline shoots through our system, we move into fight-or-flight mode (or we freeze, like a camel in the headlights). And we stop listening. So no matter how terrific your presentation is, once people hear "downsizing" their minds (and bodies) go elsewhere. And this is uncontrollable. They are not choosing to ignore you; it's just that they've got more important things on their minds - like their own survival.
Organizations usually don't encourage people to respond emotionally, so employees limit their questions and comments to Level 1 issues. They ask polite questions about budgets and timelines. So it may appear that they are with you, but they're not. They are asking Level 1 questions while hoping that you'll read between the lines and speak to their fears. And here is a really tricky part - they may not even be aware that they are operating on such a basic emotional level.
To address Level 2:
- Emphasize what's in it for them. People need to believe that the change will serve them in some way. For example, work will be easier, relationships will improve, career opportunities will open up, or job security will increase.
- Get them engaged in the process. People tend to support things they have a hand in building.
- Be honest. If a change will hurt them - downsizing, for instance - then tell the truth. It's the right thing to do, and it stops the rumor mill from inventing stories about what might happen. Also, honesty bolsters their trust in you (a Level 3 issue).
Level 3 - I Don't Like You
So maybe they like you, but they don't trust you - or don't have confidence in your leadership. That's a hard pill to swallow, I know. But lack of attention to Level 3 is a major reason why resistance flourishes and changes fail. And it is seldom talked about. Books on change talk about strategies and plans (all good stuff, to be sure) but most of this advice fails to recognize a major reason why change fails.
In Level 3 resistance, people are not resisting the idea - in fact, they may love the change you are presenting - they are resisting you. Maybe their history with you makes them wary. Perhaps they are afraid that this will be "a flavor of the month" likes the so many other changes, or that you won't have the courage to make the hard decisions to see this through.
But maybe its not you. People may resist those you represent. The statement, "Hi, I'm from HRD Corporate office, I'm here to help," often leaves people skeptical. If you happen to be that person from Corporate Head Office, you're going to have a hard time getting people to listen to you.
Whatever the reasons for this deeply entrenched resistance, you can't afford to ignore it. People may understand the idea you are suggesting (Level 1), and they may even have a good feeling about the possibilities of this change (Level 2) - but they won't go along if they don't trust you.
To address Level 3:
- Take responsibility for things that may have led to the current tense relations.
- Keep commitments. Demonstrate that you are trustworthy
- Find ways to spend time together so they get to know you (and your team). This is especially helpful if the resistance comes from "who you represent" and not just from your personal history together.
- Allow yourself to be influenced by the people who resist you. This doesn't mean that you give in to every demand, but that you can admit that you may have been wrong, and that they may ideas worth considering.
Furthermore, The main reason behind the employee’s resistance is the underlying fear and anxiety caused by uncertainties of change. In most situations resistance arises out of individual problems rather than technical problems. Resistance is often because of attitudinal factors and blind spots, which the functional specialists have as a result of their concern for and preoccupation with technical aspects of new ideas.
One of the common reasons for resisting change is the feeling of discomfort with the nature of change itself, which may violate their moral belief systems. Another reason forresistance may be the method in which change is introduced. This is observed when authoritarian approach is used and people are not informed. Other reasons forresistance may be inequity where the employees feel that someone is likely to get greater benefit than they are likely to get.
Second, Communication Gap which is defined as a state that occurs when what is being said is not been communicated to the addressee properly and completely. There can be many causes of communication gap depending on where it exists. Actually Communication gap is the biggest hurdle in achieving the organizational goal and does not help at all in achievement of organizational goal. Communication gap in an organization means that the goals and objectives that are set by the top management are either not communicated to the employees of the organization at all levels or if communicated they are not been understood properly by the employees. This can be because of improper communication channels, unrealistic goals, inappropriate language etc.
Mr. Gemrald considers this gap as a cause of frustration for it is apparent in their organization. In most cases, IS professionals do utilize project models as a tool for project management which could help the planner to initiate processes in a more specific manner. In this process, one should not communicate the planner in requirements gathering only but throughout the life cycle one should be constantly communicating the planner.
During the requirements gathering, both the office specified the functionalities to cater on the system that Mr. Gemrald would develop. After passing all the necessary documentations, they came up to the development of the system. As he deployed the system, all specified functionalities were made and it is functional. As time goes by, there were functionalities that the office wanted to add which supposed to be addressed during the requirements gathering. In this case, it is now cumbersome to the part of the IS professional to do some revisions and recoding when the system was actually delivered already. In this scenario, our group asked him if he were able to make some closures or agreements in their agreement. He said, he is not used to make some closure and agreements on making the systems since those are just in-source. And he is the one making the system, so every time that certain office would request some functionalities to be added in the system, it will be cater and it would become a part of the maintenance. For him, making some agreements and closures is only applicable to those who engaged in business process outsourcing.
References:
http://www.psychologistanywhereanytime.com/emotional_problems_psychologist/pyschologist_frustration.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frustration
http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/life/resistance-to-change-perceive-threat-475852/
http://management4you.blogspot.com/2009/11/resistance-to-change.html
Frustration is defined as a common emotional response to opposition. Related to anger and disappointment, it arises from the perceived resistance to the fulfillment of individual will. It is an emotion that occurs in situations where a person is blocked from reaching a desired outcome. It is not necessarily bad since it can be a useful indicator of the problems in a person's life and, as a result, it can act as a motivator to change. However, when it results in anger, irritability, stress, resentment, depression, or a spiral downward where we have a feeling of resignation or giving up, frustration can be destructive.
According to him, the two most frequently experienced causes of frustration of IS professionals and users while working on an IS plan are:
First, Lack of Support / Resistant to changes which is defined as an action taken by individuals and groups when they perceive that a change that is occurring as a threat to them.
Mr. Gemrald is working on the automation of manual systems of the HR Department of the company and developing the enterprise systems for the company. Aside from being the Head of office, he is also working as the project manager and developer of the MIS. According to him, in any organization, you cannot expect that all would be adaptive enough to the changes which he considers as one of the frustrations of an IT professional. It is really hard to purse IS plans when the users themselves resist to changes, that’s the challenging part of being a project manager. You cannot please everyone, he added.
Resistance is the equivalent of objection in sales and disagreement in general discussions. Resistance may take many forms, including active or passive, overt or covert, individual or organized, aggressive or timid. Nearly two-thirds of all major changes in organizations fail. That's pretty sobering information.
Did you know that:
- only about 30 percent of reengineering projects succeed
- 23 percent of mergers make back their costs
- 43 percent of quality improvement efforts are worth the effort
- 9 percent of major software applications are worth what you pay for them
Fortune 500 executives said that resistance was the primary reason changes failed. And 80 percent of the chief information officers said that resistance - not a lack of technical skills or resources - was the main reason why technology projects failed. It's that soft, touchy-feely, human reaction of resistance that matters. But these statistics are only partly right. Resistance is not the primary reason why changes fail. The real problem is that leaders plan and roll out major changes in ways that create inertia, apathy, and opposition.
For example, an executive announces that the company will restructure starting next week. Employees and middle managers begin to resist. As the project unfolds, executives see resistance appear in many forms - malicious compliance, in-your-face arguments, even sabotage. The executives respond by pushing the change even harder. Then they make demands. Employees redouble their opposition and the change ends up either failing or going far over budget and way past deadlines.
Resistance to change is a reaction to the way a change is being led. There are no born "resistors" out there waiting to ruin otherwise perfect plans. People resist in response to something. Resistance protects people from harm.
Three identified three levels of resistance.
Level 1 - I Don't Get It
Level 1 involves information: facts, figures, ideas. It is the world of thinking and rational action. It is the world of presentations, diagrams, and logical arguments.
Level 1 may come from . . .
- Lack of information
- Disagreement with data
- Lack of exposure to critical information
- Confusion over what it means
Many make the mistake of treating all resistance as if it were Level 1. Well-meaning leaders give people more information - hold more meetings, and make more PowerPoint presentations - when, in fact, something completely different is called for. And that's where Levels 2 and 3 come in.
To address level 1:
- Make sure people know why a change is needed. Before you talk about how you want to do things, explain why something must be done.
- Present the change using language they understand. If your audience isn't made up of financial specialists, then detailed charts showing a lot of sophistical analysis of the numbers will be lost on them.
- Find multiple ways to make your case. People take in information in different ways. Some like to hear things. Others like to see things. Some like pictures. Others text. Some learn best in conversation. The more variety in the communication channels, the greater the chance that people will get what you have to say.
Level 2 - I Don't Like It
Level 2 is an emotional reaction to the change. Blood pressure rises, adrenaline flows, pulse increases. It is based on fear: People are afraid that this change will cause them to lose face, status, control - maybe even their jobs.
Level 2 is not soft stuff. You can't say, "Just get over it," and expect people to say, "Wow, thanks, I needed that."
Level 2 runs deep. When it kicks in, we can feel like our very survival is at stake.
When Level 2 is active, it makes communicating change very difficult. When adrenaline shoots through our system, we move into fight-or-flight mode (or we freeze, like a camel in the headlights). And we stop listening. So no matter how terrific your presentation is, once people hear "downsizing" their minds (and bodies) go elsewhere. And this is uncontrollable. They are not choosing to ignore you; it's just that they've got more important things on their minds - like their own survival.
Organizations usually don't encourage people to respond emotionally, so employees limit their questions and comments to Level 1 issues. They ask polite questions about budgets and timelines. So it may appear that they are with you, but they're not. They are asking Level 1 questions while hoping that you'll read between the lines and speak to their fears. And here is a really tricky part - they may not even be aware that they are operating on such a basic emotional level.
To address Level 2:
- Emphasize what's in it for them. People need to believe that the change will serve them in some way. For example, work will be easier, relationships will improve, career opportunities will open up, or job security will increase.
- Get them engaged in the process. People tend to support things they have a hand in building.
- Be honest. If a change will hurt them - downsizing, for instance - then tell the truth. It's the right thing to do, and it stops the rumor mill from inventing stories about what might happen. Also, honesty bolsters their trust in you (a Level 3 issue).
Level 3 - I Don't Like You
So maybe they like you, but they don't trust you - or don't have confidence in your leadership. That's a hard pill to swallow, I know. But lack of attention to Level 3 is a major reason why resistance flourishes and changes fail. And it is seldom talked about. Books on change talk about strategies and plans (all good stuff, to be sure) but most of this advice fails to recognize a major reason why change fails.
In Level 3 resistance, people are not resisting the idea - in fact, they may love the change you are presenting - they are resisting you. Maybe their history with you makes them wary. Perhaps they are afraid that this will be "a flavor of the month" likes the so many other changes, or that you won't have the courage to make the hard decisions to see this through.
But maybe its not you. People may resist those you represent. The statement, "Hi, I'm from HRD Corporate office, I'm here to help," often leaves people skeptical. If you happen to be that person from Corporate Head Office, you're going to have a hard time getting people to listen to you.
Whatever the reasons for this deeply entrenched resistance, you can't afford to ignore it. People may understand the idea you are suggesting (Level 1), and they may even have a good feeling about the possibilities of this change (Level 2) - but they won't go along if they don't trust you.
To address Level 3:
- Take responsibility for things that may have led to the current tense relations.
- Keep commitments. Demonstrate that you are trustworthy
- Find ways to spend time together so they get to know you (and your team). This is especially helpful if the resistance comes from "who you represent" and not just from your personal history together.
- Allow yourself to be influenced by the people who resist you. This doesn't mean that you give in to every demand, but that you can admit that you may have been wrong, and that they may ideas worth considering.
Furthermore, The main reason behind the employee’s resistance is the underlying fear and anxiety caused by uncertainties of change. In most situations resistance arises out of individual problems rather than technical problems. Resistance is often because of attitudinal factors and blind spots, which the functional specialists have as a result of their concern for and preoccupation with technical aspects of new ideas.
One of the common reasons for resisting change is the feeling of discomfort with the nature of change itself, which may violate their moral belief systems. Another reason forresistance may be the method in which change is introduced. This is observed when authoritarian approach is used and people are not informed. Other reasons forresistance may be inequity where the employees feel that someone is likely to get greater benefit than they are likely to get.
Second, Communication Gap which is defined as a state that occurs when what is being said is not been communicated to the addressee properly and completely. There can be many causes of communication gap depending on where it exists. Actually Communication gap is the biggest hurdle in achieving the organizational goal and does not help at all in achievement of organizational goal. Communication gap in an organization means that the goals and objectives that are set by the top management are either not communicated to the employees of the organization at all levels or if communicated they are not been understood properly by the employees. This can be because of improper communication channels, unrealistic goals, inappropriate language etc.
Mr. Gemrald considers this gap as a cause of frustration for it is apparent in their organization. In most cases, IS professionals do utilize project models as a tool for project management which could help the planner to initiate processes in a more specific manner. In this process, one should not communicate the planner in requirements gathering only but throughout the life cycle one should be constantly communicating the planner.
During the requirements gathering, both the office specified the functionalities to cater on the system that Mr. Gemrald would develop. After passing all the necessary documentations, they came up to the development of the system. As he deployed the system, all specified functionalities were made and it is functional. As time goes by, there were functionalities that the office wanted to add which supposed to be addressed during the requirements gathering. In this case, it is now cumbersome to the part of the IS professional to do some revisions and recoding when the system was actually delivered already. In this scenario, our group asked him if he were able to make some closures or agreements in their agreement. He said, he is not used to make some closure and agreements on making the systems since those are just in-source. And he is the one making the system, so every time that certain office would request some functionalities to be added in the system, it will be cater and it would become a part of the maintenance. For him, making some agreements and closures is only applicable to those who engaged in business process outsourcing.
References:
http://www.psychologistanywhereanytime.com/emotional_problems_psychologist/pyschologist_frustration.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frustration
http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/life/resistance-to-change-perceive-threat-475852/
http://management4you.blogspot.com/2009/11/resistance-to-change.html
;;
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
