 |
Kathmandu,Sunday January 16, 2000 Magh 2nd, 2056.
|
Managing human factor in
CAAN
-By Deependra Bickram Thapa
Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN) has
already come into effect from 31st Dec 1998. CAAN completed its first year of operation on
31st Dec 2000. The very important and long awaited personnel rules containing service
terms and conditions of CAAN have been approved by the cabinet on 4th Nov 1999. However,
other important CAAN rules pertaining to finance, fees and charges, and Nepal Civil
Aviation Regulations are still under government consideration were already approved by the
CAAN Board eleven months ago.
CAAN is expected to provide not only safer, more
economical, more efficient and more reliable services to clients but also become
commercially profitable. This is one of the most important rationales for creating the
autonomous entity like CAAN. This simply means that a great change has been introduced in
Civil Aviation sector whereby a typical governmental organisation is destined to produce
results as that of a more or less private entity. For a multidimensional and
multidisciplinary organisation like CAAN, it is experienced that change of this nature is
not a neutral word. It has produced some emotional reactions and resistance among some
employees which need proper addressal.
What is there as a resistance to change?
The foremost concern is to do with the working
style or habit. Normally people who are accustomed to work and behave in one particular
pattern always feel eased to work in that pattern. The very rationale of establishing CAAN
demands a change of work habit on the part of employees. The unproductive work habit
associated with the government’s bureaucracy is to be replaced by a business culture
with a strong drive for result orientation.
It is a fact that CAAN possesses a number of
dedicated, dynamic and positive employees yet there are also people who still hold
bureaucratic hangover, the change in work habit and mentality is really a challenge for
CAAN.
Apart from this, although bureaucracy is charged of
being non-responsive, rigid, unproductive and so on the prestige and job security
associated with a government job are also the prime sources of resistance to a change.
Obviously, former government employees i e employees in transition in CAAN, who are yet to
be converted to CAAN employees, are feeling a threat to their prestige as if they are
going to be socially degraded from a governmental employees to that of CAAN. For example,
a CAAN officer can not attest a photocopied certificate like a government employee.
“Privilege to attest” bears a significant social prestige in our Nepalese
society.
People also feel secured and stable when they do
not have to deviate from the earlier established and accepted norm. Introduction of a
business culture in place of a bureaucratic culture, as discussed, earlier is certainly a
deviation from our established norm. Thus, this can also be attributed as one of the
factors of resistance to change from the employees in transition. For example, CAAN
service conditions have introduced a revolutionary provision of six years’ tenure
system for 12th level senior executives. This provision although is commendable as it
gives an excellent opportunity for career advancement but for young middle managers and
executives, the provision threatens their job security. Obviously, for any person promoted
or, adjusted to the 12th level, the count down starts from the very day first of her/his
promotion.
It is natural that in every emerging organisation,
misunderstandings on the expected intentions and outcomes are becoming a major problem.
CAAN is not an exception to this. Employees in transition to some extent have
misunderstandings regarding CAAN. CAAN obviously is not a management dogma. It’s
rather with a pragmatic approach. Commitment, devotion and hard work on the part of
employees are fundamental to the success of CAAN. It is a fact that a majority of the
staff is committed for the successful performance of CAAN, while for some nothing is going
to happen in “this society, this system and this environment.” This is totally a
misunderstanding and negative perception which also prevails side by side with CAAN.
How to manage a change?
Keeping in view of the above scenario, management
of change particularly the human factor in CAAN, should be treated strategically at two
levels-one at the ministry level and the other at an enterprise level. Past experiences
have revelled that the employees working at the parent ministry normally possess a
superiority complex. They consider themselves superior to that of the employees of
autonomous and corporate bodies. Keeping in view of this point, the government employees
in the Ministry of Tourism and Civil Aviation, (MOTCA) should realise that CAAN is neither
their competitor nor inferior to them, it is just a delegated mode of governance. The fact
is that the inception of CAAN, in this context, has created an excellent opportunity to
work in a collaborative and integrated approach for better results. CAAN is just an
extended but independent hand of HMG/N in general and MOTCA in particular.
Strict adherence to designated work areas is
another point that both MOTCA and CAAN should consider. Air Service Agreement and Accident
Investigations are the two distinct areas of paramount importance that MOTCA has to
discharge. This is exactly in line with the contemporary concepts of limited government
and good governance which have provided theoretical basis of creating CAAN. Hence
functional line of actions to be performed by MOTCA and CAAN are crystal clear. However,
in a transitional situation like this, special caution should be taken whereby designated
responsibilities are ensured being discharged without any overlapping. This will certainly
encourage CAAN to achieve its predetermined goal while ensuring good governance on behalf
of MOTCA.
At the enterprise level, it is felt that a range of
development interventions need to be adopted so as to change CAAN towards a customer
friendly and client oriented organisation with strong drive for result. At this juncture,
conduction of regional seminars regarding CAAN, its objective, its vision, its state of
affairs and expected role of employees seem to be in a dire need of the hour. Besides,
training interventions at all levels are also required to be organised. This will
definitely help reduce the misunderstanding and wrong perceptions about CAAN as mentioned
in above paragraphs.
Participative/consultative style of management
could be another viable tool to reduce resistance to change. Those who feel that they are
being affected by change can feel that the change is not imposed, rather it is a joint
endeavour. After all management is a partnership.
Again, release of news letters, bulletin and other
publications could be also feasible tools which acts as a linch pin between the management
and the employees, resulting to an enhanced understanding between them.
What next?
Attitudinal change resulting in a change in the
work ethics and business culture are expected and an inseparable part of the corporate
culture of CAAN. The objective of this nature can not be obtained over night. There is
also a need to educate people about recent improvements, including any other future
improvements, in salaries and other facilities must be justified by a change in their work
ethics and better results. Employees must keep in mind that CAAN is required to generate
its own revenue in order to meet operational as well as investment costs.
As change is a human desire, it has actually
resulted in many creations and innovations. However as discussed above, it is also a fact
that there is always resistance whenever change is introduced. The discussion made so far
clearly indicates that attitudinal change is required both at the ministry and enterprise
levels. Change is for result and result can be attained only by a strong commitment
towards goal with a customer friendly and visionary management.
Other Stories
|
