Hi everyone, Im working on a project on effects of merger on the employees. I need your help and inputs. Thank you, Regards Archana.
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Hello,
I wish you would spell out the problem a little more clearly.
Merger is, like the word indicates, coming together of two or more entities in such a manner that they become congruent in all possible ways. This does not generally or automatically happen hence we need to focus special attention on this issue.
If the two parts come together but maintain separate identities the efficacy of their collective performance will be unsatisfactory. The two part remain two parts artificially brought together. Unless they become one in spirit and soul, it is of little use.
Apart from technology, finance, markets and related functions, if members of each organization remain isolated their performance will suffer. The merging entities have to be harmonized for improved performance/results, which is one of the main reasons that justify a merger.
Human beings are central to organizational performance and unifying them in spirit and culture is essential to results. We must remember the following points that would be material to merger of human resource in the case of any merger.
The two independent entities have had independent existence, that is to say,
1. different management styles.
2. different compensation patterns and reward systems.
3. different work cultures.
4. different values systems.
5. different work systems and
6. different leadership styles, different communication freedom and different levels of permissiveness. and many other axis along which these two can be differentiated.
It is these and such areas that demand serious attention. Nothing could/should be taken for granted as these are never written down and the reality could be vastly different from what is written down in manuals and brochures. If smooth, seamless assimmilation of human resource does not take place the very purpose of merger could be defeated.
The more the areas distinguishing one organization from the other, the better could be the efforts at assimmilation. And in any case, the objective of the merger will automatically explain the line of action one may have to adopt!
With your one line query, I suppose this reply will show you enough pointers, but if you need more assistance, kindly elaborate your querries and receive a better response.
Regards
samvedan
August 22, 2008
---------------------
From India, Pune
315I wish you would spell out the problem a little more clearly.
Merger is, like the word indicates, coming together of two or more entities in such a manner that they become congruent in all possible ways. This does not generally or automatically happen hence we need to focus special attention on this issue.
If the two parts come together but maintain separate identities the efficacy of their collective performance will be unsatisfactory. The two part remain two parts artificially brought together. Unless they become one in spirit and soul, it is of little use.
Apart from technology, finance, markets and related functions, if members of each organization remain isolated their performance will suffer. The merging entities have to be harmonized for improved performance/results, which is one of the main reasons that justify a merger.
Human beings are central to organizational performance and unifying them in spirit and culture is essential to results. We must remember the following points that would be material to merger of human resource in the case of any merger.
The two independent entities have had independent existence, that is to say,
1. different management styles.
2. different compensation patterns and reward systems.
3. different work cultures.
4. different values systems.
5. different work systems and
6. different leadership styles, different communication freedom and different levels of permissiveness. and many other axis along which these two can be differentiated.
It is these and such areas that demand serious attention. Nothing could/should be taken for granted as these are never written down and the reality could be vastly different from what is written down in manuals and brochures. If smooth, seamless assimmilation of human resource does not take place the very purpose of merger could be defeated.
The more the areas distinguishing one organization from the other, the better could be the efforts at assimmilation. And in any case, the objective of the merger will automatically explain the line of action one may have to adopt!
With your one line query, I suppose this reply will show you enough pointers, but if you need more assistance, kindly elaborate your querries and receive a better response.
Regards
samvedan
August 22, 2008
---------------------
From India, Pune
hi everybody, can you give me some examples of mergers where the concerned employees are adversely affected because of the merger...its really urgent. thank you, Sourav
Hi Abalan & Sourav,
The main challenges would be:
1. Managing the cultural differences of the two companies
2. Addressing the fears and apprehensions of the employees(w.r.t job secuirty, positions, policies, etc) whose company has been acquired.
3. Retaining the key talent people.
4. Deciding Power Positions.
5. Deciding who should stay and who should go.
6. Managing the excess manpower (if applicable)
7. Managing the ego clashes betwee the employees of the two companies.
8. Integrating the skills sets of the two companies into one profitable orgn.
9. Timely communication of the changes to the employees.
I have worked on both sides of the table and these were the main challenges we had faced during the Transition Period.
All in all, managing the HR issues are the biggest challenge in a merger, which decide the success or failure of the merger in a long run.
And Sourav, when two companies merge, it is mainly to grow into an even more profitable company together. They would want to have all talented people onboard and take every step to make it profitable for the employees as well. So unless, the people are extremely useless, I dont think employees will be adversely affected by a merger.
From India, Hyderabad
The main challenges would be:
1. Managing the cultural differences of the two companies
2. Addressing the fears and apprehensions of the employees(w.r.t job secuirty, positions, policies, etc) whose company has been acquired.
3. Retaining the key talent people.
4. Deciding Power Positions.
5. Deciding who should stay and who should go.
6. Managing the excess manpower (if applicable)
7. Managing the ego clashes betwee the employees of the two companies.
8. Integrating the skills sets of the two companies into one profitable orgn.
9. Timely communication of the changes to the employees.
I have worked on both sides of the table and these were the main challenges we had faced during the Transition Period.
All in all, managing the HR issues are the biggest challenge in a merger, which decide the success or failure of the merger in a long run.
And Sourav, when two companies merge, it is mainly to grow into an even more profitable company together. They would want to have all talented people onboard and take every step to make it profitable for the employees as well. So unless, the people are extremely useless, I dont think employees will be adversely affected by a merger.
From India, Hyderabad
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Bottle Effects.zip
Drinking effects.jpg
Soft-drinks-the -effects-of-cok e-and-pepsi-120 1402368302980-5 .pps