Communicating and Implementing Change at Toyota Company

Communication and Resistance to Change Reasons for resistance to change It is challenging for Toyota Corporation to avoid change because new ideas promote growth for the organization and its members. There are various reasons for the suggested changes like the acquisition of new technology, decreases or increases in funding, new staff roles new goals, vision or missions and to reach new clients. Though changes could create new opportunities, they are often met with criticism from resistant employees within the organization.

Various factors are associated with resistance in an organization chief among them poor communication, the existing support systems, and low tolerance for others (Mattiske, 2012). Poor communication contributes a lot to employees' tendency to resist change. At Toyota, changes start with key decision makers. They must pass the details to other staff members and ensure all complaints and questions are dealt with before changes go into effect. Sadly, as news about a change spreads across the hierarchy, sometimes details are skewed, and workers end up getting inaccurate second-hand details.

Therefore, poor communication could trigger resistance to the change initiative (Letavec, 2014). Concern about support systems also influences employees' acceptance to change. Introducing the change could shake employees' confidence in the organization's support system. They could be concerned about working under a new manager, working on familiar projects or working with new employees because they might fear that if they try and fail, no one will be available to support them. Simply, employees could resist the change initiative because it is something that is unfamiliar to them.

Lack of knowledge about why the change is special, these employees might imagine the worst case scenarios that could be so scary. The workers would recognize that a problem exists and affirm that the change might improve the situation. On the contrary, they could be concerned that the proposed change might worsen things for them. Such fear reasons could make them place roadblocks in the shift towards the change (Anderson & Anderson, 2010). Low tolerance and inertia.

Some workers are likely to see the change as a threat rather than a potential advantage. This is expected to be the case when these employees feel that the change will make it harder for them to meet their needs and when they believe that are already fulfilled. Unless these employees see the need for a change, they will not support it.

In some cases, employees can resist change even if they recognize that it is a good thing because they worry that they may be unable to develop the new behaviors and skills required. Another rationale for employee resistance is that they could feel that accepting the change would mean that their previous beliefs and decisions were wrong (Mattiske, 2012). Resistance to Change vs. Communication When enacting a change, there must be a communication strategy because uncertainty is much stressful compared to the practical elements of the change initiative.

Feelings of uncertainty are common among people especially when their future is threatened. Hence, furnishing workers with appropriate information about the change help to minimize uncertainty and anxiety about expected results. The relationship has been well documented in existing literature. Scholars cite that when workers report receiving useful information regarding a change initiative in a timely fashion, they tend to be positive towards the change and are more open to cooperate.

Moreover, when change announcements are communicated, those communications that are useful, timely and address workers' concerns are more expected to help workers feel ready for a change. These arguments highlight the significance of communication in change. It is said that good communication alleys employees' fears, conveys a message that promotes employee self-efficacy for performing after the change is enacted. In fact, communication cannot only promote understanding but can also enhance the buy-in of workers to the strategic need for change (Letavec, 2014). Communication strategies Communicating the change is a vital approach.

It is obvious that Toyota has departmental colleagues, reporting staff and workers to whom the leaders must communicate the change. How the leaders communicate the change to these people has a vital effect on the level of resistance to change. If the leaders communicate the change in a wholehearted manner, then, the organization will have won the minds and hearts of the employees (Anderson & Anderson, 2010). It is important to create an organization-wide improvement and feedback loop.

Organizations like Toyota must maintain an open communication line across the hierarchy to ensure that feedback reaches the lowest level of the employee involved in the change. Continuous improvement, changing details or course and tweaking is a common occurrence and expected part of any organizational change. The change initiatives are not just released to people; it is important to ascertain the willingness to examine the improvement.

Implementing a change initiative in a climate that is employee-centered, with a high degree of trust and transparent communication, there will be a great advantage. Before enacting the change, it is advisable to help workers recognize what is in it for them to adopt the change. When workers are clear about the benefits of the change, it takes away a good percentage of the normal resistance to change. Benefits to the organization, to the group and the department must also be emphasized.

This is the most appropriate approach for Toyota as nothing is vital to the individual employee that to be aware of the positive effect on their job or career (Hellriegel & Slocum, 2008). A communication plan for the change initiative Toyota will adopt Kotter's eight step model of change. Under this model, the company must follow the eight steps for a successful change management. This model concentrates on enhancing communication during the change process sat Toyota. 1. The leaders must create a sense of urgency.

Toyota must analyze their competitive climate by forecasting future opportunities and threats. This will enable them to be aware of these factors and activate the forces for the urgency of the change initiative. 2. The second step is to form a strong coalition. Toyota must create a powerful managerial team to lead the change (Letavec, 2014).