Impact of Change Management Program on A-list Hair Salon

Introduction
The structured strategy to the implementation of knowledge, resources, and tools for
dealing with change is known as "change management." It entails developing and
implementing company policies, structures, processes, and technology to address changes
in the corporate world and the wider world. Handling the "people side" of significant change
within an organisation entails more than project management and technical duties carried
out to implement organisational changes. The main objective of change management is to
efficiently introduce novel procedures, items, and corporate strategies while minimising
adverse effects.
Organisations frequently require to adopt enterprise-wide changes impacting their
operations, products, and personnel in order to keep up in a corporate environment that is
continuously changing. Change is a constant in today's corporate world. It could be
challenging, and numerous individuals object to it. However, in order to foster an agile
workplace culture, businesses should manage significant change in a diligent way.
Professionals in organisational development have developed strategies for surviving change.
A-list which is a reputable up-market hair salon has largely been influenced by Covid-19
ranging from shift from salon shop to on-line marketing during the period of pandemic, and
to fall in the online service at the post-pandemic period, thereby laying a considerable effect
in the general performance of the business. After the exit of some personnel, the existing
25-man administrative staff are now confronted with paradigm shift in organizational
activities which necessitates a change program to manage the current situation.
Therefore, this report seeks to examine the impact of the proposed change program in
terms of potential staff reaction, effective communication plan in change management and
the necessary HR strategies neded to support the process.
Discussion
Evaluation of the Impact of Proposed Change and the Potential Staff Response
Among the the key topics addressed by research on change management is how personnel
will respond to organisational change. Personnel perceptions and attitudes towards change

might be either favourable or adverse. For management and change drivers to successfully
implement organisational change, employee attitudes and behaviours that embrace
organisational change are key. Organisational change looks at the skills of managers,
workers, and the workplace itself. Shifting a circumstance from the familiar to the unknown
has an impact on employee behaviours and reactions since it could induce stress, tension,
and anxiety in workers (Shah & Irani, 2010).
There are factors that can affect the affect the A-list 25-man administrative staff and induce
their reaction to the proposed organizational change that could make them support or resist
the change initiatives among these are perceived organizational support, perceived
procedural justice, fear of consequences of a change, self-confidence for learning and
development, trust in management and perceived need for change are the factors that
influence employee reaction to organizational change. All these indicators are necessary for
A-list hair salon to watch out for and see how well to tackle them because researchers who
specialise in organisational change typically concur that change initiatives frequently fail.
Kotter & Cohen (2012) reported that over 70% of all organisational change projects fail,
while Appelbaum et al. (2012) reported that failure rates for change initiatives ranged from
30% to 80%.
Factor 1: Perceived Organizational Support
According to Eisenberger et al. (1986), one of the internal situational factors which would
affect the outcome of a change initiative is perceived organisational support. According to
earlier research (Eisenberger, Fasolo, and Davis-LaMastro, 1990), perceived organisational
support is connected to a variety of workplace behaviours and results. The 25-man
administrative staff, on the other hand, is more inclined to have sceptical responses,
experience negative emotions, and eventually oppose the change because they now
perceive the atmosphere at work as typically hostile, particularly in terms of work burden
and consequent strain (Kiefer, 2005; Martin et al., 2005). Likewise, if they perceive the
business owner as being helpful, they are more inclined to reciprocate the owner's gesture
of a little wage rise. They seem compelled to assist those who aided them in given the
standard of correspondence, implying a good standard of correspondence (Gouldner, 1960).
As a result, if the 25-man administrative staff's perception of the organization's support is

linked to specific choices, we might anticipate that they will be more prone to consider that
perception when deciding whether to oppose or adhere to organisational change. However,
the 25-man administrative staff is more inclined to practise organisational citizenship
behaviour if perceived organisational support is high (Pernica, 2011).
Factor 2: Perceived Procedural Justice
The perception of procedural justice is one of the aspects affecting the change procedure
and it is more probable to affect how personnel respond to the change. For instance, certain
investigations connected responses to organisational change with interactional and
procedural justice (Wang & Kebeke, 2020). Procedural justice was linked to greater
acceptability, willingness, and dedication to organisational change, according to Spreitzer
(2002). The actions of staff members in the name of justice—whether distributive,
procedural, interpersonal, or informational—determine how people respond to change, in
the manner the 25-man administrative staff's would stick to sense of justice is a prerequisite
to how they respond to the change program (Greenberg, 1990). This is consistent with the
findings of Ince and Gül (2011), who noted that employees react to the actions which have
an impact on them and are impacted by the procedures which result in these decisions. In a
nutshell, the 25-member administrative staff is concerned with procedural justice and
strives to comprehend how decisions are reached regarding the proposed change program.
Factor 3: Fear of Change Outcome
The defence against change that employees exhibit is commonly attributed to fear (Agocs,
1997; Kotter & Cohen, 2012). Fear of the known consequences of a change becomes an
obstacle to the 25-man administrative staff's acceptance of the change in the case of A-list,
where change is being attempted to change the the context of tasks, as it has a pessimistic
effect on anyone's common logic. On the off chance that we accept the notion that fear
might affect our reasoning and thought processes, we might anticipate that fear could also
affect our general dynamic and our dynamic with regard to how we react to change in
particular. It is clear from the study that dread is associated with resistance to change. As an
example, Dubrin and Ireland (1993) found that resistance to change is caused by employees'
fear of hopeless outcomes, unknown, and their awareness of pitfalls associated with the
change. Kotter & Cohen (2012) established that fear or hysteria induces self-assurance or

immobility. Therefore, the 25-man administrative staff will be fearful of the process of
change due to anticipation of either negative or positive outcomes, particularly in terms of
work stress, incommensurate compensation, etc.
Factor 4: Self-Confidence for Learning and Development
Personnel' self-confidence in their ability to learn and improve, according to Vithessonthi &
Schwaninger (2008), is a significant element in determining whether they would embrace or
oppose change in the organisation. This indicates that a few of the 25 employees who have
a high level of self-confidence in their ability to learn and grow could use the move as a
chance to build up additional capabilities. Others, on the other hand, who lack confidence in
their ability to learn and grow, might view organisational change as a threat. This is due to
the fact that self-efficacy is another name for confidence in the literature (Maurer, 2001).
Effective Change Management: Advise on Best Communication Plan for Minimizing
Negative Business Outcome
The significance of guiding people through change has grown in relevance as change
programmes have proliferated and advanced. All tiers of organisations could be impacted by
significant changes. Several business executives have come to the conclusion that it is
potentially expensive to fail to handle personnel through change: Workers that are agitated
or displeased with change typically work less productively. A responsible boss, such as the
proprietor of an A-list hair salon, should accordingly create a communication strategy for
change management.
Communication and organisational change are closely related procedures, posits Lewis
(2000). In fact, a key tool for managing change is communication. It is essential to creating
and carrying out transformation projects. In an effort to keep people engaged, win support,
and produce the required results, communication strives to address their concerns and ease
their tension. It goes beyond merely conveying information to the recipient.
In the opinion of Hardy (1997), the following issues should be taken cognizance of, by A-list
to approach the 25-man administrative staff and consequently, reduce the propensity of
negative business outcome: