GROUP MOVES
In relation to relocation, lack of
information on where the organisation might move to, and when the move is due to take place, is especially unsettling. Media attention is unhelpful if the organisation cannot supply accurate information. For example, individuals may well be fearful if they think that the relocation will involve moving themselves and their families to a country with a different language, culture, education system, and so on. This fear may generate strong resistance to mobility. Dublin has been showcased in respect of
having a common language with the UK, making it attractive to relocating English- speaking personnel. Nonetheless, cities such as Paris and Frankfurt are featuring particularly prominently in news reports of potential and planned group moves. To address potential resistance linked to
language and cultural issues, skills training programmes and support with cultural adjustment can prove to be a particularly valuable intervention. Advice and assistance with respect to appropriate schooling will be necessary for assignees with families.
Addressing employee concerns Given the uncertainty surrounding the terms of the Brexit deal and the UK’s trade links with non-EU nations, it would be surprising if employees were not a little suspicious of early announcements of the rationale for moving groups to particular destinations, since the outcome of any trade negotiations is so unclear at present.
• Will the move go ahead as planned to the selected location(s)?
• What if economic conditions change? • Will individuals’ and families’ plans to relocate be altered?
of it, and/or misunderstand, or lack trust in, their management. Given these issues, as Kotter and
Schlesinger state in their seminal Harvard Business Review paper Choosing Strategies for Change, a one-size-fits-all approach can lead to the failure of change programmes. The authors therefore recommend tailoring strategies to context and the concerns of different employee groups. So how can successful change
management strategies be devised and applied to relocation and global mobility in a group-move situation? Kotter and Schlesinger suggest analysis of situational factors to assess the level and kind of resistance to change that might be expected and, from this, to consider the methods that might be employed to manage resistance.
• What employment security is there if the move is undertaken?
A strategy is needed to provide reassurances if the affected group of workers who will be asked to relocate are to be convinced of the business case. They will also need to know the likely effects on their own career prospects and on relocated partners and families. This might be a difficult call for global mobility professionals whose role is to effect moves. Good interpersonal skills and strong
links with the top executives and HR colleagues will be needed to present a clear, coherent strategy on education about – and communication of – the organisation’s plans and logic for change. In this way, trust can be built, helping to support change initiatives.
Although organisations make decisions
in the best interests of their stakeholders, the various stakeholders in a business have both shared and competing interests. Kotter and Schlesinger thus suggest that ‘parochial self-interest’ can be a cause of resistance to change. They note that, as people focus on their own best interests, so they engage in political behaviour to encourage others to side with them and so help to develop and spread wider resistance through group action.
Decision-making and policy Of course, organisational decision-making is taken at the most senior levels, and, in UK firms, decisions made with respect to business location are not typically subject to employee consultation and participation initiatives. That said, to reduce resistance to change, encouragement of employee involvement and participation in relevant aspects of the move can help bring about a positive climate. This will be time-consuming, and
any strategy devised must also take into account how sticking points will be dealt with. For example, what if employees make suggestions that cannot be implemented? Take care that any employee involvement initiatives that can increase grass- roots support are based upon sufficient expertise and understanding at the grass- roots level. A further aspect to consider in the
strategic review of the change process is how to deal with those who believe that they will lose out from the move. Kotter and Schlesinger suggest negotiation and offering incentives for change compliance, but they do recognise that this can be expensive. Global mobility professionals will
take a large share of the responsibility for advising on and designing an appropriate compensation and benef its policy. Here, it is advisable to consult appropriate stakeholders in the design stage – typically top management, relevant line management, HR professionals, and possibly employees and family members affected by the move. Relocate’s series of factsheets on policy
design can help here. An effective policy takes views into consideration, but the business need and affordability will drive policy. As such, discussion and input can be welcomed, but on the understanding that the policy has to ref lect the interests of all stakeholders and not be a licence to over-incentivise individuals. ➲
relocateglobal.com | 11
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
