Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Coercion as a method of implementing change can have the desired effects, but this practice can be accompanied by barriers and pitfalls. According to Senghaas et al. (2019), coercive instruments often serve a strategic function and are characterized by inflexibility. As a result, targeted individuals may not be able to adapt to dynamic work environments, which may result in distinctive outcomes from those anticipated. Another disadvantage of utilizing coercion is the inability to influence motivation. As Senghaas et al. (2019) note, the incentives and drivers used to engage and reward the members involved are often crucial factors in the success of changes. Coercion, in this case, excludes any form of encouragement, and therefore, participants motivation is not a determining criterion for effective interventions. As a result, the outcomes of this form of control may be significantly worse than those achieved through positive persuasion.
Another negative consequence of using a coercive strategy to implement change is a lack of trust. Senghaas et al. (2019) analyze various mechanisms of influence on initiative and argue that building a communication environment largely depends on how positive two-way communication is. In addition, given the nature of coercion, one can note that those targeted by relevant orders do not have a clear idea of the outcome of the intervention. In this case, the likelihood of a successful change is significantly lower because the limited knowledge of the planned results reduces productivity due to the inability to assess the significance of individual roles. Therefore, coercion can be described as a managerial practice characterized by inflexibility and an authoritarian principle of control, in which the level of interaction between participants is determined by a weak level of trust.
Reference
Senghaas, M., Freier, C., & Kupka, P. (2019). Practices of activation in frontline interactions: Coercion, persuasion, and the role of trust in activation policies in Germany. Social Policy & Administration, 53(5), 613-626. Web.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.