เมื่อมีการปรับเปลี่ยนองค์กร ทำให้เพ

เมื่อมีการปรับเปลี่ยนองค์กร ทำให้เพิ่มโอกาสในการฝึกอบรมและโอกาสในการพัฒนาสำหรับพนักงาน
On the other hand, some studies have unveiled positive organizational outcomes, including lower overhead costs, less bureaucracy, faster decisionmaking, smoother communication, greater entrepreneurship, and increased levels of employee productivity


Training & Development Opportunities
Organizational Structure is not complicated
Many of the assumed advantages to downsizing have not been empirically substantiated. The financial
stability that is expected when organizations have downsized has not been realized (Tsai & Yen, 2008;
Guthrie & Datta, 2008; Tsai, Yen, Huang & Huang, 2007; Gilson et al., 2004; Casio, 2002; Roth, 1993).
Employees who remain with the company, termed survivors, have not been provided with the needed
support to take on the additional work that comes from the reduced workforce. Several researchers found
that there was a series of physical and mental health conditions that are referred to as the “survivor’s
syndrome.” The condition includes anxiety, low morale, less productivity, high levels of distrust and
excessive cautiousness (Schiro & Baker, 2009). At a time when there needs to have more open
communication, employees move to “hoarding” information in the hopes that it will secure their position
(Gandolfi, 2008). Furthermore, survivors of organizational downsizing also concern themselves with issues
related to justice not to mention their own feelings of job insecurity (Chipunza & Samuel, 2013). In
summary, organizational downsizing has not been unequivocally shown to achieve its intended outcomes.
However, it has been argued that downsizing harms the organization (Guthrie & Datta, 2002).

lower overhead costs, less bureaucracy, faster decisionmaking, smoother communication, greater entrepreneurship, and increased levels of employee productivity (Burke & Cooper, 2000).

Downsizing generates negative performance outcomes, such as the failure to reduce costs, the lack of significant increase in return on assets and return on common stock (Cascio, 1991, 1993; Cascio, Young, & Morris, 1997), decreased levels of worker commitment (Cameron et al., 1993) and commitment (Zatzick & Iverson, 2006), and the emergence of the 'dirty dozen' - a list of negative attributes associated with organizational decline (Cameron, 1994). A number of downsizing studies address the 'survivor syndrome' as a cluster of negative workforce outcomes (Brockner, Davy, & Carter, 1985; Brockner et al., 1986a, 1986b; Brockner, Greenberg, & Grover, 1988a). Downsizing research reports decreased employee efforts and adaptability, increased propensity to leave, and increased resistance to change (Brockner, 1992; Brockner, Grover, & Blonder, 1988b; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984; Littler, Wiesner, & Dunford, 2003). Further, studies on the financial consequences of downsizing raise problematic costs associated with downsizing activities (Atwood, Coke, Cooper, & Loria, 1995). These include deteriorating shareholder value (Appelbaum, Everard, & Hung, 1999a), effects of severance payments (Barker & Duhaime, 1997; Barker & Mone, 1994; Downs, 1995; Robbins & Pearce, 1992), failure in reducing costs (Gandolfi& Hansson, 2010), and decreasing returns on assets and return on common stock (Cascio, 1991, 1993; Cascio et al., 1997).(Galdofi 2011)
How Challenge Consulting helps you successfully lead change initiatives
วิธธีการStep 1: Long-Term Strategy
ระยะยาวกลยุทธ์องค์กรที่มุ่งมั่นที่จะเป็นกลยุทธ์ในระยะยาวสำหรับการเปลี่ยนแปลงที่คาดว่าจะมีแนวโน้มที่จะบรรลุผลตอบแทนทางการเงินต่อไปนี้การลดขนาด เท่าที่เห็นในรูปที่ 2 เมื่อการลดขนาดไม่ได้มีการจัดการเชิงกลยุทธ์หรือซ้ายที่ไม่มีการจัดการผลกระทบเชิงลบของการเปลี่ยนแปลงที่เด่นชัดมากขึ้นและติดทนนาน. เตรียมผู้นำอาวุโสของคุณกับทักษะในการกำหนดกลยุทธ์ระยะยาวนี้มีความสำคัญต่อความสำเร็จของที่คาดว่าจะลดขนาด การให้คำปรึกษาท้าทายทำงานร่วมกับผู้นำอาวุโสของคุณในการตรวจสอบ: ความเสี่ยงและผลประโยชน์ของกลยุทธ์การเปลี่ยนแปลงที่แตกต่างกันในองค์กรของคุณผลตอบแทนการลงทุนและกรณีศึกษาทางธุรกิจสำหรับการลดขนาดเมื่อเทียบกับทางเลือกในการลดขนาดกลยุทธ์ในระยะยาวสำหรับการเจริญเติบโตในอนาคตสำหรับองค์กรที่ท้าทายให้คำปรึกษายังทำงานร่วมกับคุณผู้นำอาวุโสในการพัฒนาแผนการดำเนินงานที่จะใช้องค์กรของคุณไปข้างหน้าซึ่งจะรวมถึงการวางแผนการให้คำปรึกษา - การให้คำปรึกษาและการมีส่วนร่วมในระหว่างขั้นตอนการเปลี่ยนแปลง - มีที่เกี่ยวกับสิ่งที่เท่าไหร่ที่ควรจะมีส่วนร่วมของพนักงาน? แผนการสื่อสาร - ภายในภายนอก , เริ่มต้นและต่อเนื่องแผนหมั้น- ขั้นตอนเพื่อให้แน่ใจว่าความผูกพันของพนักงานที่มีวิสัยทัศน์ระยะยาวและกลยุทธ์สำหรับการเปลี่ยนแปลง

Results (English) 1:

When an organization has been modified. Make opportunities for training and development opportunities for employees.On the other hand, some studies have unveiled positive organizational outcomes, including lower overhead costs, less bureaucracy, faster decisionmaking, smoother communication, greater entrepreneurship, and increased levels of employee productivity Training & Development OpportunitiesOrganizational Structure is not complicatedMany of the assumed advantages to downsizing have not been empirically substantiated. The financialstability that is expected when organizations have downsized has not been realized (Tsai & Yen, 2008;Guthrie & Datta, 2008; Tsai, Yen, Huang & Huang, 2007; Gilson et al., 2004; Casio, 2002; Roth, 1993).Employees who remain with the company, termed survivors, have not been provided with the neededsupport to take on the additional work that comes from the reduced workforce. Several researchers foundthat there was a series of physical and mental health conditions that are referred to as the "survivor'ssyndrome." The condition includes anxiety, low morale, less productivity, high levels of distrust andexcessive cautiousness (Schiro & Baker, 2009). At a time when there needs to have more opencommunication, employees move to "hoarding" information in the hopes that it will secure their position(Gandolfi, 2008). Furthermore, survivors of organizational downsizing also concern themselves with issuesrelated to justice not to mention their own feelings of job insecurity (Chipunza & Samuel, 2013). Insummary, organizational downsizing has not been unequivocally shown to achieve its intended outcomes.However, it has been argued that downsizing harms the organization (Guthrie & Datta, 2002). lower overhead costs, less bureaucracy, faster decisionmaking, smoother communication, greater entrepreneurship, and increased levels of employee productivity (Burke & Cooper, 2000).Downsizing generates negative performance outcomes, such as the failure to reduce costs, the lack of significant increase in return on assets and return on common stock (Cascio, 1991, 1993; Cascio, Young, & Morris, 1997), decreased levels of worker commitment (Cameron et al., 1993) and commitment (Zatzick & Iverson, 2006), and the emergence of the 'dirty dozen' - a list of negative attributes associated with organizational decline (Cameron, 1994). A number of downsizing studies address the 'survivor syndrome' as a cluster of negative workforce outcomes (Brockner, Davy, & Carter, 1985; Brockner et al., 1986a, 1986b; Brockner, Greenberg, & Grover, 1988a). Downsizing research reports decreased employee efforts and adaptability, increased propensity to leave, and increased resistance to change (Brockner, 1992; Brockner, Grover, & Blonder, 1988b; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984; Littler, Wiesner, & Dunford, 2003). Further, studies on the financial consequences of downsizing raise problematic costs associated with downsizing activities (Atwood, Coke, Cooper, & Loria, 1995). These include deteriorating shareholder value (Appelbaum, Everard, & Hung, 1999a), effects of severance payments (Barker & Duhaime, 1997; Barker & Mone, 1994; Downs, 1995; Robbins & Pearce, 1992), failure in reducing costs (Gandolfi& Hansson, 2010), and decreasing returns on assets and return on common stock (Cascio, 1991, 1993; Cascio et al., 1997).(Galdofi 2011)How Challenge Consulting helps you successfully lead change initiatives With how to Step 1: Long-Term Strategyระยะยาวกลยุทธ์องค์กรที่มุ่งมั่นที่จะเป็นกลยุทธ์ในระยะยาวสำหรับการเปลี่ยนแปลงที่คาดว่าจะมีแนวโน้มที่จะบรรลุผลตอบแทนทางการเงินต่อไปนี้การลดขนาด เท่าที่เห็นในรูปที่ 2 เมื่อการลดขนาดไม่ได้มีการจัดการเชิงกลยุทธ์หรือซ้ายที่ไม่มีการจัดการผลกระทบเชิงลบของการเปลี่ยนแปลงที่เด่นชัดมากขึ้นและติดทนนาน. เตรียมผู้นำอาวุโสของคุณกับทักษะในการกำหนดกลยุทธ์ระยะยาวนี้มีความสำคัญต่อความสำเร็จของที่คาดว่าจะลดขนาด การให้คำปรึกษาท้าทายทำงานร่วมกับผู้นำอาวุโสของคุณในการตรวจสอบ: ความเสี่ยงและผลประโยชน์ของกลยุทธ์การเปลี่ยนแปลงที่แตกต่างกันในองค์กรของคุณผลตอบแทนการลงทุนและกรณีศึกษาทางธุรกิจสำหรับการลดขนาดเมื่อเทียบกับทางเลือกในการลดขนาดกลยุทธ์ในระยะยาวสำหรับการเจริญเติบโตในอนาคตสำหรับองค์กรที่ท้าทายให้คำปรึกษายังทำงานร่วมกับคุณผู้นำอาวุโสในการพัฒนาแผนการดำเนินงานที่จะใช้องค์กรของคุณไปข้างหน้าซึ่งจะรวมถึงการวางแผนการให้คำปรึกษา - การให้คำปรึกษาและการมีส่วนร่วมในระหว่างขั้นตอนการเปลี่ยนแปลง - มีที่เกี่ยวกับสิ่งที่เท่าไหร่ที่ควรจะมีส่วนร่วมของพนักงาน? แผนการสื่อสาร - ภายในภายนอก , เริ่มต้นและต่อเนื่องแผนหมั้น- ขั้นตอนเพื่อให้แน่ใจว่าความผูกพันของพนักงานที่มีวิสัยทัศน์ระยะยาวและกลยุทธ์สำหรับการเปลี่ยนแปลง

Results (English) 2:

When Realignment Increased opportunities for training and development opportunities for employees
On the other hand, some studies have unveiled positive organizational outcomes, including lower overhead costs, less bureaucracy, faster decisionmaking, smoother communication, greater entrepreneurship, and increased levels of employee productivity. Training & Development Opportunities Organizational Structure is not complicated Many of the assumed advantages to downsizing have not been empirically substantiated. The Financial stability that is expected when organizations have downsized has not been realized (Tsai & Yen, the 2,008th; Guthrie & Datta, two thousand and eight; Tsai. , Yen, Huang & Huang, in 2007; Gilson et al., two thousand and four; Casio, 2002; Roth, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-three). Employees Who remain with the Company, termed survivors, have not been provided with the needed Support to take on the additional Work that. comes from the reduced WorkForce. Several researchers Found that there was a Series of physical and Mental Health conditions that are referred to as the "Survivor's Syndrome. "The condition includes anxiety, low Morale, less Productivity, High levels of Distrust and excessive cautiousness (. Schiro & Baker, 2009). At a time when there Needs to have more open Communication, employees Move to "hoarding" information in the hopes that it Will Secure their position (Gandolfi, 2,008th). Furthermore, survivors of organizational downsizing also Concern themselves. with issues related to Justice not to mention their own Feelings of job insecurity (Chipunza & Samuel, the 2013th). In Summary, organizational downsizing has not been unequivocally shown to Achieve its intended outcomes. However, it has been argued that downsizing harms the Organization (. Guthrie & Datta, 2,002th). Lower overhead costs, less bureaucracy, Faster Decisionmaking, smoother Communication, Greater entrepreneurship, and Increased levels of employee Productivity (Burke & Cooper, two thousand). Downsizing generates negative Performance outcomes, such as the Failure to Reduce costs. , the lack of significant increase in return on assets and return on common stock (Cascio, 1991, 1993; Cascio, Young, & Morris, 1997), decreased levels of worker commitment (Cameron et al., 1993) and commitment (Zatzick &. Iverson, 2006), and the emergence of the 'dirty dozen' - a list of negative attributes associated with organizational decline (Cameron, 1994). A number of downsizing studies address the 'survivor syndrome' as a cluster of negative workforce outcomes (Brockner. , Davy, & Carter, 1985; Brockner et al., 1986a, 1986b; Brockner, Greenberg, & Grover, 1988a). Downsizing research reports decreased employee efforts and adaptability, increased propensity to leave, and increased resistance to change (Brockner, 1992. ; Brockner, Grover, & Blonder, 1988b; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984; Littler, Wiesner, & Dunford, 2003). Further, studies on the financial consequences of downsizing raise problematic costs associated with downsizing activities (Atwood, Coke, Cooper, &. Loria, 1995). These include deteriorating shareholder value (Appelbaum, Everard, & Hung, 1999a), effects of severance payments (Barker & Duhaime, 1997; Barker & Mone, 1994; Downs, 1995; Robbins & Pearce, 1992), failure. in reducing costs (Gandolfi & Hansson, 2 010), and decreasing Returns on Assets and Return on common Stock (Cascio, 1991, the 1993rd; Cascio et al., the 1,997th). (Galdofi in 2011) How Challenge Consulting helps You successfully Lead Change initiatives Wythe. How to Step 1: Long-Term Strategy long-term corporate strategy that is committed to a long-term strategy for the expected changes are likely to achieve financial returns to downsizing. As seen in Figure 2, when downsizing is not a strategic management or left unmanaged negative effect of the changes more pronounced and long-lasting. Prepare your senior leaders with the skills to set long-term strategy is vital to the success of which is expected to shrink. Counseling challenging work with senior leaders of your monitor:  the risks and benefits of change strategies different in your organization  ROI and the business case for reducing the size. Compared to the alternatives to downsizing  long term strategies for growth in the future for organizations challenged Consulting has worked with senior leaders to develop a plan that will take your organization forward to. including planning counseling  - consultation and participation in the process of change - that is what it should be part of the staff?  communication plan - inside, outside, start and continued engagement  plan - steps to ensure that employee engagement has a long-term vision and strategy for change.

Results (English) 3:

When modifying the organization. Increases the chances of training and development opportunities for staff
On the other hand some studies, have unveiled positive organizational. Outcomes including lower, overhead costs less bureaucracy faster decisionmaking,,,,, smoother communication greater EntrepreneurshipAnd increased levels of employee productivity


Training & Development Opportunities
Organizational Structure is not complicated
Many. Of the assumed advantages to downsizing have not been empirically substantiated. The financial
stability that is expected. When organizations have downsized has not been realized (Tsai, & Yen 2008;
Guthrie, & Datta 2008; Tsai Yen Huang Huang &,,,, 2007;Gilson et al, 2004;,;, Casio 2002 Roth 1993).
Employees who remain with the company termed survivors, have not, been provided. With the needed
support to take on the additional work that comes from the reduced workforce. Several researchers found
that. There was a series of physical and mental health conditions that are referred to as the "Survivor 's
syndrome." The condition. Includes, anxietyLow, productivity morale less, levels high of distrust and
excessive cautiousness (Schiro, & Baker 2009). At a time when. There needs to have more open
communication employees move, to "hoarding." information in the hopes that it will secure their. Position
(Gandolfi, the 2008). Furthermore survivors of, organizational downsizing also concern themselves with issues
.Related to justice not to mention their own feelings of job insecurity (Chipunza, & Samuel 2013). In
summary organizational,, Downsizing has not been unequivocally shown to achieve its intended outcomes.
However it has, been argued that downsizing. Harms the organization (Guthrie, & Datta 2002).

lower, overhead costs less bureaucracy faster decisionmaking smoother,,, Communication.Greater entrepreneurship and increased, levels of employee productivity (Burke, & Cooper 2000).

Downsizing generates negative. Performance outcomes such as, the failure to reduce costs the lack, of significant increase in return on assets and return. On common stock (Cascio 1991 1993; Cascio,,,,, Young & Morris 1997), decreased levels of worker commitment (Cameron et, al.1993) and commitment (Zatzick, & Iverson 2006), and the emergence of the 'Dirty Dozen' - a list of negative attributes. Associated with organizational, decline (Cameron 1994). A number of downsizing studies address the survivor syndrome as. '' A cluster of negative workforce outcomes (,,, Brockner Davy & Carter 1985; Brockner et al, 1986a 1986b; Brockner Greenberg,,,, &, Grover 1988a).Downsizing research reports decreased employee efforts, and adaptability increased propensity to leave and increased, resistance. To change (Brockner 1992; Brockner Grover,,,, & Blonder 1988B; Greenhalgh, & Rosenblatt 1984; Littler Wiesner & Dunford,,,, 2003). Further studies on, the financial consequences of downsizing raise problematic costs associated with downsizing activities. , (Atwood,,, Coke Cooper & Loria 1995). These include deteriorating shareholder value (,,, Appelbaum Everard & Hung 1999a), effects. Of severance payments (Barker, & Duhaime 1997; Barker, & Mone 1994; Downs 1995; Robbins, &, Pearce 1992), failure in reducing. Costs (Gandolfi, & Hansson 2010), and decreasing returns on assets and return on common stock (Cascio 1991 1993; Cascio,,, Et al, 1997).