Respond to the following discussion post in ten sentences.

For any organization, change is hard. In order to implement such a drastic change, per our example, I would think that implementing facets of transformational, servant, and participant leadership styles would greatly benefit the acceptance of the organization's change by their stakeholders. An organization's stakeholders will resist change because of the perceived impact that this shift in ideology will have on them; both at work and at home (Borland, et al, 2020, pg. 124). This is why I believe, like a minefield, change must be navigated carefully via the implementation of the three leadership styles I mentioned above.

According to our text, transformational leaders "are trusted, admired, and respected by their followers because these leaders often demonstrate high levels of moral and ethical behavior" (Borland, et al, 2020, pg. 124). This quality is drastically important when instituting a change such as moving an entire organization from one city to another. If your stakeholders trust that you are executing this change in the best interest of the organization and for them, then the change will be more widely accepted. However, if your stakeholders believe that this change is in the interest of yourself, trust will be tarnished and adherence to change will be minimal.

In chapter 8, our text also describes the importance of a leader's vision and the organization's path to obtaining that vision. Transformative leaders are typically very good at communicating their vision clearly and with passion. This in turn helps to lead to employee buy in and acceptance of change. Also, transformative leaders have a tendency to be enthusiastic about their vision, goals, and employees. Thus, this affects the feelings of your employees and can help lead to a higher level of trust and acceptance towards their 'survival' involving change.

Servant leaders are those who tend to do everything they can for their employees. This type of leadership garners high trust within their stakeholders, which is important in such a drastic change as relocating cities. Going to your employees and letting them know that you're doing this for their best interest and laying out how the change is in their best interest is crucial for transparency purposes. Because stakeholders' response to change is typically 'survival', they must feel as if their leader has their best interest at heart. Leaders that exhibit a servant approach are typically seen within the organization, amongst their employees, by all stakeholders, thus gaining trust. Also, because they're amongst their stakeholders more than other types of leaders, servant leaders typically have a higher moral ethic code, which in turn establishes more buy-in from their employees. I also think using aspects of participant leadership can be good from the perspective of getting insight on the change from your employees and making them feel involved in the decision. However, in the end, the buck stops with you.

I don't believe that quelling all resistance is a good idea. Stakeholders need to feel that they're being heard from their leader. Some stakeholders may love working for your organization but just can't move their family. If their job is able to be performed remotely or partially remotely, do everything you can to make that accommodation for them. Obviously you can't accommodate everyone. However, making an accommodation like that shows a willingness to hear your employees, and do what you can for them, especially when you're making a change that affects them and their livelihood.