Implications The United Kingdom And European Union

Introduction

Brexit is the greatest challenge in the United Kingdom as the results are quite incomprehensible. The UK joined the European Union in 1973 while it was still known as the European Economic Community. In the process of time, and through examination of various key factors, the country’s leadership guided the state into a referendum that took place in June 2016 and resulted into an overwhelming decision to leave the European Union (Booth, 2015). However, despite the decision to leave the EU, the nation has not succeeded to date. As such, the first notable challenge of Brexit is on the scale. Notable, while many may perceive the decision as quite simple, the procedures of leaving the European Union are quite extensive. This is appreciated by the fact that for years since 2016, the country is yet to fully implement the exit plan. Still concerning the scale of the project, it is also apparent that the Brexit is extremely huge, with great the consequences not only on the state, but even to the greater European nations (Donnelly and Paul, 2015). Notably, upon joining the European Union, citizens of various countries within the EU, had freedom to live in the UK. The same applied to the citizens of UK that opted to live in other countries within the union. Thus, the exit presented a gleam outlook for the people living in the entire European Union. It is therefore, notable that the scale of this change is monumental as it affects a greater population within the European Union (Doppelt, 2017).

Contextualization

The scope of Brexit is extremely huge, hence posing a great challenge in the implementation thereof. Firstly, it is noticeable that the Brexit requires that the UK’s contribution to the EU will automatically stop. This may appear to be an interesting deal for the citizens of UK. However, the deal equally has a fair share of burden or limitations. For instance, the economic impacts of the Brexit deal are quite incomprehensible. The government is still not certain about how it intends to maintain economic stability (Beech & MacIntosh, 2017). For instance, recently the major proponents of the debate, headed by Teresa May have sought to make it clear that the government has a contingency plan to ensure that the country’s economy remains stable. Despite the numerous assertions to cool or positively present these limitations on the public, one fact that is apparently certain is that the government and the public do not understand how the neighboring countries will move in the wake of Brexit. Thus, the scope of this change is quite incompressible, thereby causing a great challenge (Doppelt, 2017).

At the early stage of change management, the key players are often in denial of the need to effect change, hence the need for the leadership to act as the sponsor, in this case, Teresa may is the main sponsor. Being a sponsor implies that the leaders will act the advocates of change. They will often ensure that the country realizes the need for change (Booth 2011). This is often done at the expense of personal benefits. Notably, it is evident that May has prioritized the issues and stakeholders in the first upper quadrant. Being a sponsor also means that one will go the extra mile to ensure that the team is well vast in the country needs, particularly concerning stakeholders in the first quadrant which include UK citizens and business traders. May is more than willing to use her political power, and economic resources to ensure that the team is strategically positioned for change (Beech & MacIntosh, 2017).

Further, the leadership must equally play the part of a role model to the Brexit plan. Still, at the first stage of change management-denial stage, the country members are often afraid of the consequences of change (Donnelly and Paul, 2015). Thus, leadership must be willing to make the first step. As in the case move to separate Britain from the greater EU community. With this in mind, it is evident that leaders should match their words and actions Beech & MacIntosh, (2017) recognize the importance of the enquiry-action framework, which sets out the areas that the major stakeholders should take into consideration whilst managing change. This involves questioning, and also understanding the context in question, content, change process, and the development of a repertoire of the various ways of enacting change. The following figure presents the activities involved in managing change, based on this model. Each of the three areas incorporate various possibilities that aim at providing ways of enforcing change aspects.

According to the colour print thinking, it is evident that May exhibits the yellow print leadership style. An essential role of leaders in leading change is through making decided decisions of various issues in the country. Assuming a confident stance in areas of contention would help the team to adopt a single lead from the top management. It is common knowledge that leaders have greater control over various resources in the country (Hayes, 2018). A perfect model that aids in explaining this is the one provided by Bernard Burnes, where he noted that change managers are obligated to make significant changes, based on different forms of analysis. He notes that some change need a lot of time to complete, yet a bigger scale. He notes that changes that can be enacted within a short time are of a small scale, and this is not the case of Brexit. Burnes’ change framework is as provided below:

The first kind of change that change managers should emulate is the large-scale type, and various change programs exemplify it. This change affects everyone, as it involved values, beliefs, as well as fundamental assumptions. The second change is the large-scale, it is very disruptive in many countries, and as such, they can only apply in case there is a pressing need.

It is upon the leaders to approve or disprove various decisions made in the country, especially the top leaders. Individuals in the yellow category tend to believe that subjects will only make decision based on their socio political standpoints. Thus, the leaders need to channel all the resources towards activities that enhance the improvement of social issues (Beech & MacIntosh, 2017). For instance, May has made clear decisions in making sure that the citizens of UK are certain about the Brexit deal. Despite these concerted effort the Brexit continues to witness immense retaliation from the members of parliament. However, this can be rectified by deliberate attempts to move resources towards change management (Hornstein, 2015).

Effective communication is equally a tool that leaders in the yellow print can use in effecting change management. In this context, the leaders are required to frequently communicate in terms that support and promote change management. The leaders are expected to share information about the progress and position of the country as concerning change management. According to Lozano et al. (2015), the leaders are also required to keep the members aware of the next phase of action. Consistent reports from Theresa May coupled by encouragements in cases of remarkable performance have gone a long way in achieving clarity. With intentional and exact messages and information from the leaders, the members are likely to contextualize the need for change. In fact, this would has significantly helped in eradication of resistance from a good number of parliamentarians (Adams & McNicholas, 2007).

Culture web of the UK parliament

For the Brexit to succeed, the entire project must understand the cultural dimensions of the parliament. Engagement of members is yet another crucial role that depends on the organizational culture. As such, May must ascertain that she deals and effectively handles all the issues that may result from the members’ of parliament in regards to change management (Doppelt, 2017). While the members of parliament may have a blurry vision concerning the need for change, the leader is expected to eliminate all these uncertainties. This is only achievable when the entire country is directly involved in realizing the desired change. Thus, the leaders are expected to examine issues such as routines and rituals, myths and stories with regards to Brexit, power structures of the entire parliament, and the country structures. In this way, the participants are in a position of having a greater need for change when they directly participate in the change process (Beech & MacIntosh, 2017). Besides, they also own up the idea and help in supporting the leadership in coming up with more effective plans.

The overall mission, values, and vision play a critical role in accessing a country’s readiness for change. The mission and vision of the state often define what the most important goal of the country is (Ceulemans et al., 2015). For instance, if the country checks its activities in comparison and finds satisfaction in the achievements, then the team would be complacent, hence resisting change. However, when the mission of the country is still far within reach, then the country team members would often be ready to accept new changes that would lead to a better country (Beech & MacIntosh, 2017). The entire members of parliament need to invest their resources in the achievement of these goals. In this way, one can comfortably assert that the state is ready for any given change.

Further, the level of commitment among the leaders is equally of great importance in determining a state’s preparedness for change. The urge and the energy invested by the leaders on change management provide a glimpse into the level of preparedness of the company to effect change. When the leaders are lux, and luck the needed motivation, the entire country would follow in the same footsteps. Consequently, meetings regarding change management are taken lightly (Carraher et al., 2008). Further, it is also evident that the lack of motivation on the leaders would translate to discounter in the entire process of change. On the contrary, seriousness on the part of leaders would result in better outcomes. Serious leaders would enforce and seriously monitor the change process (Beech & MacIntosh, 2017).

The culture within the country leadership also determines the preparedness position of a given company concerning change management. A positive and optimistic cultural environment enhances change management. For instance, conflict resolution in a positive working environment is often amicably resolved and effectively handled. Every individual that engages in a confrontation is often ready to compromise for a decision to be realized. This is done for the betterment of the entire country. Further still, a positive culture rewards the achievers. This motivates the team members to put more effort into their work (Beech & MacIntosh, 2017). Moreover, appreciations and rewards also encourage individuals to take positive risks. In brief, the culture determines the level of preparedness for change in every state.

Experiences have often influenced the readiness of a company to accept change. In the first instance, when the company has had numerous negative past experiences, then the entire team would be cautious about making drastic changes in the state. In other words, the company with negative past experiences would not be ready to accept new changes owing to the negative effects witnessed in the past. On the other hand, a company with positive past experiences would be willing and prepared to accept new changes. Hayes (2018) asserts that a company with positive past experiences is comfortable in the transition periods. This is because they correlate the change to development and better things in the company.

The first and most notable reason for change resistance is fear for job losses. Changes often destabilize the country as it creates efficiency. Establishment of efficiency in the state sometimes invokes the reduction of human capital. This is done to reduce costs while enhancing the capability of the company. For instance, if the change requires the use of more advanced technology, then it is sure that a fraction of members will not be required in the state. Thus, owing to the possible losses of jobs, the company members may vehemently resist possible changes in the country (Beech & MacIntosh, 2017).

Communication is a vital element that drives change. Without effective communication, the country is likely to create an environment where presumption thrives. As such, more problems would arise even when there was none (Hayes, 2018). Effective communication eliminates doubts. Clear guidelines ensure that the country is well vast in the proposed changes, and how these changes would directly benefit each member. With good communication and engagement of the members of parliament, then the company would reduce; if not completely emanate resistance for change.

Take a deeper dive into Implications Support Policy Development with our additional resources.

References

• Adams, C. A., & McNicholas, P. (2007). Making a difference: Sustainability reporting, accountability and organisational change. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(3), 382-402.
• Beech, N., & MacIntosh, R. (2017). Managing change: Enquiry and action. Cambridge University Press.
• Booth, S. (2015). Crisis management strategy: Competition and change in modern enterprises. Routledge.
• Carraher, S. M., Buckley, M. R., & Carraher, C. E. (2008). Research challenges in sustainable strategic management: Change and sustainability. International Journal of Sustainable Strategic Management, 1(1), 2-15.
• Ceulemans, K., Lozano, R., & Alonso-Almeida, M. (2015). Sustainability reporting in higher education: Interconnecting the reporting process and organisational change management for sustainability. Sustainability, 7(7), 8881-8903.
• Donnelly, P., and Paul, K. (2015). Use the PDSA model for effective change management. Education for Primary Care, 279-281.
• Doppelt, B. (2017). Leading change toward sustainability: A change-management guide for business, government and civil society. Routledge.
• Doppelt, B. (2017). Leading change toward sustainability: A change-management guide for business, government and civil society. Routledge
• Hayes, J. (2018). The theory and practice of change management. Palgrave
• Hornstein, H. A. (2015). The integration of project management and country change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management 291-298.
• Lozano, R., Kim, C., and Carol, S.S. (2015). Teaching organisational change management for sustainability: designing and delivering a course at the University of Leeds to better prepare future sustainability change agents. Journal of Cleaner Production 106, 205-215.