- Trang Chủ
- Quản lý dự án
- A study on structural changes among bank employees-an empirical study with special reference to Salem district
Xem mẫu
- International Journal of Management (IJM)
Volume 11, Issue 5, May 2020, pp. 447-453, Article ID: IJM_11_05_042
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=11&IType=5
Journal Impact Factor (2020): 10.1471 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com
ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510
DOI: 10.34218/IJM.11.5.2020.042
© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
A STUDY ON STRUCTURAL CHANGES AMONG
BANK EMPLOYEES-AN EMPIRICAL STUDY
WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO SALEM
DISTRICT
Dr. P.K. Anjani
Associate Professor, Department of Management Studies,
Sona College of Technology, Salem, Tamilnadu, India
Corresponding Author Email: anjani@sonamgmt.org
ABSTRACT
Every organization requires employees who can readily accept changes to carry
out their day to day business transactions and to accommodate with those changes
emerging from the environment. The purpose of this paper is to study the views on
significant differences among employees of banking sector in Salem district with
regard to the structural changes. Primary data were collected from 350 employees
serving in the private and public sector banks through questionnaires. T-statistics was
performed to analyze the data. The findings of the study clearly show that the views
among the employees of the Public sector banks on the Structural Changes are
favorable. It is suggested that the banking sector must take measures to conduct lots of
training programs and deliberations to adapt the changes among the employees in the
banks and enjoy the benefits emerging out of those changes.
Key words: organizational change, private sector banks, public sector banks,
structural changes
Cite this Article: Dr. P.K. Anjani, A Study on Structural Changes among Bank
Employees - An Empirical Study with Special Reference to Salem District.
International Journal of Management, 11 (5), 2020, pp. 447-453.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=11&IType=5
1. INTRODUCTION
The banking system acts as a vital role in the country by channeling money from those who
have excess funds to those who have creative needs for those funds. The changes in the
banking sector have been very rapid, which is no parallel anywhere in the world. Commercial
banks are comprehensive across the country at the extent and size which caters to the short
term needs of the industry, agriculture and trade and commerce. Commercial banks have been
in endurance for a number of decades in the organized sector. Commercial bank is run to
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 447 editor@iaeme.com
- A Study on Structural Changes among Bank Employees-An Empirical Study with Special Reference
to Salem District
bring in profits on a commercial line. Indian Banking today is witnessing radical changes. The
new generation banks have brought the needed opposition into the manufacturing and
spearheaded changes towards advanced consumption of expertise, enhanced client service and
inventive products. In spite of their strapping and better network, public sector banks have
proved to be astoundingly fast and elastic to convene the rising needs of customers. Change is
the array of the day. Here is a word that shakes somebody, while others welcome it as a
vision to make things better. But there is no doubt that without change, organizations and
individuals will stagnate putting their future at risk. Banking sector is not an exception. In
fact, a change in this sector is increasing at a rapid speed.
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1. Change
In a universal sense, change can be defined as follows: to make or become different, give or
begin to have a different form. Here, it can be explained, with a classic example of, the
postwar recovery of Japan to its present state which is a significant change though
predisposed to a great extent by American sincerity, generosity and leadership. The reverse
seems to be happening today. Americans are learning from the Japanese to keep hold of
competitiveness in the global markets. This is what change is all about. Change also means
discontent with the old and trust in the new.
Change is ever-present in today‟s fast-paced organizations (Lewis, 2000). Change
management is the process of continually renewing an organization‟s direction, structure, and
capabilities to serve the ever-changing needs of external and internal customers. Change is the
continuous process by which future invades humans‟ lives. Change is inevitable and fast.
Change is part of life, almost defining Characteristics of life. Change is a magnificent and life
enhancing feature of human existence. Change is the relation between the history and the
opportunity. In recent years, within a business context, however, the term “Change” has also
become synonymous with upheaval and chaos (Pritchett, 1996).
Organizational Change is a multifaceted process. It is much more complex than human
behavior. Therefore, there cannot be one specific solution to managing change. A change
technique that works in one organization may not work and even some times might fail in
another organization within the same culture and country. The swiftness of change taking
place in the social, political and economic environments is creating a noticeable impact on
organizations as well as individuals.
Nowadays, change is not bound by any such barriers and its impact is felt at the
individual, organizational, national and transactional levels. In contrast to the past, when
changes have been based on conservative technologies, the present-day changes are based on
finer technologies with technological revolution taking place quickly and significantly: for
example, the role of the computer chips in bringing about a technological revolution.
Evidently, what is different now is the pace of change. Therefore, the question is not whether
what is current will become obsolete, but how soon. Armenakis, Harris, and Field (1999) and
Klein and Sorra (1996 state that change theorists have also acknowledged the importance of
commitment by featuring it prominently in models of the implementation process.
2.2. Organizational Change
The most powerful model of change is the Kurt Lewin‟s simple three-step change model.
According to Lewin (1958) the first step in the process of changing behavior is to unfreeze the
existing situation. Only then can change, or movement, occur. Finally, to make the new
behavior stick, a third, refreezing step is necessary. Bareil (2007) in their study, deals with
this popular belief by determining the level of discomfort experienced by 321 employees of
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 448 editor@iaeme.com
- Dr. P.K. Anjani
the same organization who have simultaneously confronted 3 Organizational Changes, i.e., a
structural reorganization, a relocation of the workplace, and a technological change. The
overall results reveal that each change creates a distinct level of discomfort.
David (2007) has explored the relationship between how union employees of a U.S.
county government have perceived implementation of a new electronic performance appraisal
process and how they have responded to the planned Organizational Change along cognitive,
emotional, and intentional dimensions. The findings recommend that a significant relationship
exists between the perceptions of planned Organizational Change leadership strategy and
response to change along cognitive, emotional, and intentional dimensions. The study offers
insights into the multifaceted nature of resistance and the relationship between change
leadership strategy and response to planned Organizational Change. Dennis R. Self, Achilles
A.Armenakis and Mike Schraeder (2007) have investigated the relationship between three
attributes of Organizational Change (that is Content, Process and context) in a Fortune 500
telecommunications firm which reveals that the Organizational Change is strongly related to
the impact of the change on employees and organizational communication media and it also
indicates that the extent to which employees perceive an Organizational Change as justified is
influenced by their perceived Organizational support.
Melissa L.Waite (2007) provides the theoretical support for relationships between
situational workplace constraints, employee‟s control over these constraints, Perceptions of
corporate goal attainment; management trust and proposes the procedural justice. Analysis
reveals no significant differences between employees in change-ready and change-advanced
groups on their perceptions of, or control over, workplace constraints. Significant
relationships have been found between constraints and trust in management and perceptions
of pay fairness. Vakola and Nikolaou (2005) explore the linkage between employees‟
attitudes towards Organizational Change and two of the most significant constructs in
Organizational Behavior; Organizational Stress and Organizational Commitment. The
analysis reveals the expected direction showing negative correlations between occupational
stressors and attitudes to change. It indicates that highly stressed individuals demonstrate
decreased commitment and increased reluctance to accept Organizational Change
interventions.
Worrall (2004) explains the impact of different forms of Organizational Change on
manager‟s perceptions of the organizations they work within and the comparison between
changes that involve redundancy or delayering. It also shows that there is a difference in the
way directors and non-directors perceive the changes.
2.3. Structural Changes
Fritz (1994) says that the fundamental and most powerful influencing factor in an
organization is the organizational structure. One cannot bring fundamental changes in the
organization unless there is a proper organizational design. With an understanding of
structural principles, an organization can be redesigned so that change will finally succeed. It
is a change that alters any of the basic components of an organization‟s structure or overall
design. Organizations formulate structural changes to cut costs and increase profitability.
Structural changes can take the form of downsizing, decentralization, job re-design etc.
3. METHODOLOGY
The nature of the present study is descriptive. The population of the present study is defined
as the employees of the entire public and the private sector Commercial banks of Salem
district have a representation in this study. The sampling method used in this study is the
purposive sampling. In the present study, employees have been selected from the three levels
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 449 editor@iaeme.com
- A Study on Structural Changes among Bank Employees-An Empirical Study with Special Reference
to Salem District
of management in each branch of the 37 banks. A manager, an executive and a clerk have
been selected from each branch of the private and public sector banks. The total number of
employees taken for the study is 537 i.e. (179x3). Out of the total 537 respondents, only 350
employees have responded to the questionnaire at the usable level.
The construct used in the present study deals with structural changes taking place in the
organization, which was taken from the instrument, “Organizational Change Questionnaire”
by Mishra (2007). The coefficient alphas of the variables in Structural Changes range from
0.7 to 0.8, which is greater than the minimum threshold of 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978).
4. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
To identify the significant differences among the employees of the private and public sector
banks and their views on the variables in Structural Changes.
5. VARIABLES IN STRUCTURAL CHANGES AND ITS RELIABILITY
The Structural Change is one of the important changes taking place in organizations in
making strategic decisions. Hence, it is included as one of the Type of Changes. The views on
the Structural Changes among the employees have been measured with the help of the
variables drawn from the previous literatures. The employees are asked to rate these variables
in Structural Changes at five point scale. The mean score of the variables among employees
of the private and public sector banks has been computed separately. The t-statistics has been
executed to analyze the significant difference among the employees of the private and public
sector banks and their views on the variables in Structural Changes. Further, it results in the
reliability of the variables. The related analysis is presented in Table 1
Table 1 Variables in Structural Changes and its Reliability
Mean score among
employees in
S.No Variables in Structural Changes Private Public t-statistics Reliability
Sector Sector
Banks Banks
1 Changes, in the top management
2.34 2.29 0.523
administration
2 Changes in the number of
members controlled by one 2.64 2.43 1.991*
superior
3 Changes occurring in the
2.52 2.37 1.645 0.729
delegation of work assignments
4 Concentration of power in the top
2.40 2.19 2.172*
management
5 Concentration of power dispersed
toward all the levels of 2.55 2.36 1.893*
management
*Significant at five per cent level
The table shows the mean score of the variables in Structural Changes among the
employees of the private and public sector banks. The favorably viewed variable among the
employees of the private sector banks is „Changes in the number of members controlled by
one superior, Concentration of power in the top management and Concentration of power
dispersed toward all the levels of management‟ since their respective mean scores are 2.64,
2.40 and 2.55. The reliability test of the variables in the Structural Changes is 0.729 which is
greater than the minimum threshold of 0.70.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 450 editor@iaeme.com
- Dr. P.K. Anjani
6. STRUCTURAL CHANGES AMONG EMPLOYEES IN PRIVATE AND
PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS
The score on the views on Structural Changes among the employees have been derived by the
mean score of the variables in Structural Changes. It is computed among the employees in
Private Sector Banks and Public Sector Banks. In the present study, the score for the
Structural Changes is confined to 2.00 and 3.00, 3.00 and 4.00 and greater than 4.00. The
employees who are in the 2.00 and 3.00 category have moderately favorable views on the
change and the employees who are in 3.00 and 4.00 and greater than 4.00 category have
favorable views on the change. The distribution of employees on the basis of the score of the
Structural Changes is presented in Table 2.
Table 2 Structural Changes among employees in private and public sector banks
Structural Number of employees in
S.No Changes Private Sector Public Sector Total
score Banks Banks
1 2.00 - 3.00 42 27 69
2 3.00 – 4.00 108 116 224
3 > 4.00 18 39 57
Total 168 182 350
In total, 12.14 per cent of the employees of private sector banks and 7.71 per cent of the
employees of public sector banks have moderately favorable views on the Structural Changes,
since they fall in the 2.00 and 3.00 level of Structural Changes scale. It is followed by 31.21
per cent of the employees of private sector banks and 33.53 per cent of the employees of
public sector banks have favorable views on the Structural Changes, since the scores are
ranging from 3.00 and 4.00 level of Structural Changes scale. Similarly, 5.20 per cent of the
employees of private sector banks and 11.14 per cent of the employees of public sector banks
have favorable views on the change, since they fall in greater than 4.00 level of Structural
Changes scale.
The analysis infers that the views among the employees of the Public sector banks on the
Structural Changes are favorable.
7. MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
A sequence of training and development programs needs to be scheduled for the employees to
develop better intentions toward participating in change. Flexible working hours should be
introduced so that the views among the employees are favorable. If necessary, special
counseling sessions should be conducted for employees to make them accept the changes. At
times, when drastic changes takes place due to economic downturn, certain Structural
Changes need to be carried out in organizations. The young employees quickly get used to the
values and the belief system of the organization rather than those who are nearing toward the
retirement age. So, there should be a continuous support and training for the employee who
are aged. Employees need to feel adequately trained and informed about change during
implementation because effective communication reduces fear and uncertainty and resistance
to change.
8. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The present study is confined to Salem district in Tamilnadu. The study has been conducted
only in the Commercial banks existing in Salem district, which cannot be generalized to the
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 451 editor@iaeme.com
- A Study on Structural Changes among Bank Employees-An Empirical Study with Special Reference
to Salem District
entire banking industry. As the bank employees have always been busy with their work, the
questionnaire has been administered only to three employees who belong to the managerial,
executive and clerk cadre in each branch of the bank. Some employees have not been in a
position to fill up the questionnaire due to their busy schedule throughout the day. This study
cannot be generalized to the other service sectors since it is restricted to only the Banking
Sector. Since the internal environmental changes are the first-line responses to changes in the
external environment, the present study is confined only to the five types of internal
organizational changes taking place in banking sector. No scientific sampling has been
adopted since the commercial banks are not disclosing the details of the employees working
in their bank branches.
9. SCOPE FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
An important opportunity for future research is to obtain data from all the employees from
different organization levels and groups as they progress through the stages of Organizational
Change in the commercial banks. This study can be extended to further research in the other
rural and cooperative banks under the banking system.
There is a wide scope for both quantitative and qualitative research, on each and every
variable included in this study. Future research studies can be carried out in several other
industries and geographic locations, in order to determine the similarities and differences
across various business sectors and localities. Similar studies can be conducted and compared
with other developing and developed nations.
REFERENCES
[1] Armenakis, A.A., Harris S. and Field, H. (1999). Paradigms of Organizational Change:
Change agent and change target perspectives. In R. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of
Organizational behavior, Newyork: Marcel Dekker.
[2] Bareil, C., Savoie, A., and Meunier, S. (2007). Patterns of discomfort with Organizational
Change. Journal of Change Management. 7(1), pp: 13-24.
[3] David B. Szabla. (2007). A multidimensional view of resistance to Organizational
Change: Exploring Cognitive, Emotional, and Intentional Responses to Planned Change
Leadership strategies. HRD Quarterly.18, pp: 525-558.
[4] Dennis R. Self. (2007). Organizational Change Content, Process, and Context: A
Simultaneous Analysis of employee Reactions. Journal of Change Management. 7(2), pp:
211-229.
[5] Fritz, R. (2009). Corporate Tides: Redesigning the Organization, Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing, 1994, in Nilanjan Sengupta, Mousumi S. Bhattacharya and R. N. Sengupta,
Managing Change in organizations. Prentice Hall of India Private Limited. New Delhi.
pp:20.
[6] Klein. K. J., and Sorra, J.S. (1996). The challenge of innovation implementation. Academy
of Management Review. 21, pp: 1055-1080.
[7] Lewin, K. (1958). Group decision and social change in Readings in Social Psychology,
eds. E.E. Maccoby, T.M. Newcomb, and E.L. Hartley, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New
York, pp: 197-211.
[8] Lewis, L. (2000). Blindsided by that one and I saw that one coming; the relative
anticipation and occurrence of communication problems and other problems in
implementers‟ hindsight. Journal of Applied Communication Research. 28(1), pp: 44-67.
[9] Melissa L. Waite. (2007). The Impact of Workplace Constraints on Organizational
Change. The Business Review Cambridge; Summer. 7(2). ABI/INFORM Global. pp: 49.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 452 editor@iaeme.com
- Dr. P.K. Anjani
[10] Mishra, B., Bhaskar, U. and Khurana, A. (2007). Development of Organizational Change
Questionnaire. Global Management Review. 8(1), pp: 87-97.
[11] Nunnally, J. L. (1978). Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[12] Prichett, P. (1996). Resistance: Moving Beyond the Barriers to Change. Pritchett and
Associates, Dallas, TX.
[13] Vakola, M., and Nikolaou, L. (2005). Attitudes towards Organizational Change: What is
the role of employees' stress and commitment? Employee Relations. 27(2), pp: 160-174.
[14] Worrall, L., Parkes, C. and Cooper, C. L. (2004). The impact of Organizational Change on
the perceptions of UK Managers. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology. 13(2), pp: 139-163.
[15] Ashutosh Kumar and Prabhat Kumar, (2015), Change Management in Marketing Setup,
International Journal of Marketing and Human Resource Management, 6(2), pp.21–30
[16] layaraja Muthalagu, (2017), Data Modeling for Engineering Change Management
Processes in Engineering Industries. International Journal of Computer Engineering and
Technology, 8(1), pp. 05–18
[17] Sandeep Gunjal, (2019), Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) as a Change Management
Tool, Journal of Management, 6(2), pp. 157–167
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 453 editor@iaeme.com
nguon tai.lieu . vn
