Change Management and Maslows Hierarchy of Needs Case Study

Change Management and Maslows Hierarchy of Needs - Case Study Example As we see upon examination, something as small and as large as language or time expectations can lead to tremendous difficulties in motivation, and ultimately market demand and revenues. A fascinating insight into the world of work and human resource management, the GE Medical CGR case serves as a foundation for further inquiry into change management and equity incentive strategies. In consideration of organizational leadership and human resource management practices, the essay also infers the importance of a rather old, yet 'universal' paradigm from Psychology, Maslow's 'Hierarchy of Needs;' premise to fulfillment of the state of human nature as a means to consensus building and the inculcation of 'desire' in work. At the time that GE entered into the French market with its take-over acquisition of Companie Generale Radiology (CGR), an existing high level of specialization, low change professional environment was resilient to U.S. business protocol. The business practices at the Parisian based CGR reflected France's Scurit Sociale system. Like other medical suppliers, most of CGR's customer basis was drawn from a clientele state relationship that had held a low competition as an expectation of a 'civil service model.' Indeed from everyday aspects of employee motivation and performance on the job to standards of regulatory adherence, and attendant rules of conduct in response to those public partnerships, CGR was run on a model of a low participatory, low change management model that was experienced by most employees as stasis. No change meant that little challenge to normative modes of low productivity and national expectations of leave of absence, whether it be maternity, vacation, or merely a 'mental health break' all contributed to what GE found in a confrontation with U.S. models of high productivity, and low absence employee relations. CGR employees were nothing short of shocked by GE's protocols which reinforced high change, aggressive capitalist market practice. CGR employees also complained about communicative practices, arguing that the English introduction to GE's new management oversight meant that it was not they, who were being addressed. CGR employees were met characteristic literalism (i.e., plain talk 'means' what is said, not inferred) by North American managers, who were equally shocked at what they thought to be unmotivated and unproductive long-term workers who had been working under the former system at the Paris based firm. In short, globalization of the corporation really required localization of GE in the preliminary stage, in order for the corporation to assess its human resources accurately and adequately, and to foster good faith ground in order to effectively translate the company's corporate culture and standardized expectations in a fertile context that would be receptive towards company centered ideas such as capital growth.