Organisational relocation - the employee experience Peggie Rothe Ph.D. Student BES Research Group ERES 2011 June th, Eindhoven

Relocation? “a change of address of a firm from location A to location B” (Pellenbarg et al. 2002)

Background Relocation includes several risks financial risks functional risks corporate culture risks interest group risks future risks. (Rasila & Nenonen 2008) On the employee level: increased absenteeism substantial reductions in productivity low morale and a poor attitude toward the company that may persist for months and years an increase in work errors the loss of experienced, hardworking people even attempts to sabotage the move. (Attwood 1996)

Background How do we minimize and manage employee related risks?  Create an understanding of how employees experience relocation …but so far only little knowledge about employee experiences of relocation

Aim To increase the understanding of employee experience and perception of relocation

Methods Multiple case study 32 thematic interviews Comparison of the responses of the two groups case by case Interview themes: Case Interviewees InvolvedNot involved A34 B43 C24 D33 E33 Total1517 –the process –the organisation involved in the decision making and implementation –the employees and the process –thoughts concerning the outcome

Findings The relocation process the employees often had straight forward perceptions of why the organisation relocated: – cost savings – need for more/less space – “qualitative” motives were seldom mentioned by the employees employees rarely understand the complexity of the search for new premises employees identify what is different in the new premises (compared to the old ones) and draw conclusions that these differences were criteria based on which the organisation searched for new premises

Findings The organisation involved employees did not have a clear understanding of who – within or outside the organisation – were involved in decision making and implementation of the decisions Often mentioned issue: who decided upon the seating order? If they did know who were involved in the process, they often did not have a clear understanding of what kind of responsibility and role these people had – employees do not have a clear understanding of the tasks involved in a relocation project

Findings The employees and the process The two groups had different views on employee participation What is employee participation? – Task group / questionnaire / expressing your thoughts by the coffee machine? Some efforts (e.g. surveys) had gone by unnoted or were forgotten about by some employees The employees had a perception of less communication efforts than the group of involved The persons involved did not perceive the negative reactions to be as significant as what the employees reported

Findings Thoughts concerning the outcome Both groups agreed that better communication is needed Opinion concerning the outcome varied – The people involved in the process were usually more often satisfied with the location than the employees not involved

Conclusions There are differences in how employees and persons involved perceive the relocation process – The persons involved seemed to have a more positive picture of the process than the employees – Persons involved also did not always recognise the extent of negative reactions that the relocation caused for some employees Variations were also found in employees’ perception of the process, even within the same organisation More effort should still be put on making sure employees understand what and why things are happening

Further research The research gives an indication of how employees might experience relocation and what kind of misunderstandings can emerge A better understanding of how relocation affects employees would give an opportunity for organisations to – minimise the employee related risks in relocation – even more actively start using relocation as a strategic tool for change

Thank you! Questions? Comments? For more information: