automation of accounting systems at Harris County Protective Services

 automation of accounting systems at Harris County Protective Services

Any organization in the fast-moving modern environment that is seeking the space of change to slow is likely to be significantly disappointed (Tidd & Bessant, 2018). The business environment is changing every single day; technology is changing, and customer trends are changing in equal measure. Businesses failing to embrace change will quickly wind up as dinosaurs-unable to compete and out of touch (Tidd & Bessant, 2018). Business organizations that fail to embrace change are likely to lose their competitive edge and fail to meet the ever-increasing and changing needs of their clients. The speed of communication and knowledge sharing has increased, and therefore, companies must respond in the same dimension to adapt to the changes being introduced and affected across the board.

The issue under discussion in this paper is the automation of accounting systems at Harris County Protective Services. For a considerably long time, the organization has been using outdated computer and technology systems to support its accounting systems and processes. Today, most companies have embraced automated and cloud-based accounting practices where accounting processes are not only made leaner but also faster (Benn, Edwards & Williams, 2014). The organization is using outdated enterprise accounting systems and platforms, which not only slow down the department but also limits the amount of work that can be done by the staff working under it.

The weaknesses in outdated and old accounting systems compromise a buy-side organization’s ability to be competitive and create several human errors. Such outdated systems have also contributed to a significant amount of compliance breaches, incorrect valuation of organization portfolios, and failure to detect fraud. Most companies realize the significance of adopting modern and state of the art accounting systems which support cloud accounting and other newer technologies such as artificial intelligence.

For a long time, the organization has been to slow to modernize, automate, and upgrade its legacy accounting systems. It could be argued that they have been more interested in other facets of automation, such as front office managing and communication systems. The management has been slow in integrating different back-office systems that support leaner accounting systems and processes.

Diagnosis of the Problem

The organization is currently using outdated accounting enterprise systems, which not only slows down the rate of work done but also affects the productivity of the department. The accounting software systems form the financial foundation of any organization. Outdated accounting software systems do not have the capability required to meet the evolving financial needs of the business both today and in the future. The organization has changed and outpaced its accounting systems. Therefore, it would be safe to say that the current accounting software and systems are not meeting the financial needs of the company. A significant body of evidence supports this diagnosis.

Firstly, it is no longer feasible to integrate Excel spreadsheets with the company’s accounting software. Excel spreadsheets are not able to copy or mimic the functionality of a database concerning reporting on massive data volumes. Key examples include the number of customers growing and when the inventory becomes extremely large. The spreadsheets have also limited when it comes to version control and collaboration. For instance, staff from many different departments may have contributed information or data to the spreadsheet. However, the accounting team may be unable to track the changes in the spreadsheet using criteria they need to assess the validity of the data. Lack of version control, on the other hand, can come with difficulties when it comes to month-end closings or regulatory compliance.

Appropriate Methods for Change

Organizational change efforts most often run into different forms of resistance, most common being human resistance. While experienced business executives are generally all too away of such resistance, surprisingly, few take their time to assess and implement the most appropriate methods for organizational change that would come with fewer instances of resistance (Fragouli & Ibidapo, 2015; Van der Voet, 2014). Change can also fall on its head when they do not understand its implications. For some, such changes come with more losses than benefits, and hence resistance is likely to come up. Misunderstanding and lack of trust is the greatest enemy of organizational change and must be addressed before the process begins. Another commonly perceived poor method of implementing change is when people assess the situation differently from their employers or the business executives initiating the change (Jacobs, Van Witteloostuijn & Christe‐Zeyse, 2013). With such different assessments, the staff believes that there are more costs attached to the change than benefits, and hence they do not find it easier to accept it.

Owing to the issues raised above, managers and business executives must work towards implementing change using the most appropriate and feasible methods. Such change implementation starts with education and communication. When initiating a change, regardless of its size and magnitude, managers must educate and communicate with the people likely to be affected and involved beforehand (Jacobs, Van Witteloostuijn & Christe‐Zeyse, 2013). Communication of ideas helps the staff and the people responsible for implementing it see the need for and the logic for the new approach being introduced. In organizations where changes have been successfully initiated and implemented like Microsoft in 2016, the managers take a lot of time educating and communicating with the staff about the change. The education process, Jacobs, Van Witteloostuijn, and Christe‐Zeyse (2013) explain, can involve reports, presentations to teams, or one-on-one discussions with the staff. Such communication and education process is most ideal when resistance is based on inaccurate or inadequate information and analysis, especially if the managers need those resisting to help in the change implementation. However, some change initiators also forget that such education and communication programs require an excellent relationship between the resistors and initiators. Communication and education also need the change initiators to put in consistent effort and time.

Secondly, an appropriate method of implementing organizational change requires participation and involvement (Jansson, 2013). If the business managers initiating the change involve those potential resistors in some component of the design and implementation of the change, a lot of progress can be made, especially in instances where the staff showed some level of resistance. With a participative change effort, the initiators can listen to the people involved in the change and use their feedback or opinion to move ground (Benn, Edwards & Williams, 2014; Jacobs, Van Witteloostuijn & Christe‐Zeyse, 2013).

A good number of managers, it has been established, have strong feelings about participation and involvement, sometimes positive and sometimes in the negative sense. This is to imply that some managers feel that there should be some level of the participation during change initiatives. In contrast, others believe that involving people in such processes is a huge mistake. Both attitudes can create significant challenges for the manager. When managers initiating a change, find that they lack all the information they desire to design and implement a change successfully, or when they need the wholehearted commitment of some other staff to initiate and implement it, involving others makes the perfect sense. A considerable body of research has shown that, generally, participation creates a significant deal of commitment, not just compliance. In some cases, compromise is needed for the change to be successful.

Thirdly facilitation and support are an effective method of initiating and implementing change, especially in instances where resistance has been registered. Managers can begin and implement the change effectively by being supportive. The process may involve the provision of training in new skills on how to use the integrated accounting system or giving the staff time off after an exhaustive period. The managers can also support the staff in implementing the change by offering emotional support and listening to them. An excellent example of the provision of emotional support is to staff the human resource department with counselors who spend most of their time talking to people who feel they will be affected by the change or have difficulties adapting to the new system. Support and facilitation become the most useful and helpful when anxiety and fear are lying at the heart of the resistance. Experienced, touch executives often ignore or overlook such kind of strength and the efficacy of facultative ways of dealing with them.

Lastly, apart from communicating, educating, and facilitating participation amongst the implementors of the change, managers need to listen to what the people feel and say about the change. Good managers listen to what their staff is saying and make time to understand their concerns. Strategic change processes like automation of business plans and ideas can be extremely daunting. Apart from listening to the needs and interests of the staff, managers should provide chances for the people likely to be affected by the change to give feedback. They should feel like the management, and the initiators of the change are available to hear their concerns and thoughts. Such managers easily unpick what they heart and get to the root causes of the issues at hand.

Impediments and Limiting Conditions

Initiating and implementing the change process is likely to be affected by a series of barriers and obstacles. Only change resistance is a crucial impediment to change. Most employees often do not enjoy organizational change, even if the results are more than drawbacks (Nesterkin, 2013). Such resistance is usually because the status quo tends to be more comfortable and convenient. Part of the ordinary human nature is being highly sensitive to certain types or kinds of perceived threats in the social environment, which, by extension, includes the workplace.

A lack of consistent communication and strategic direction is another considerable impediment to change. At the very core, successful organizational change involves a strong and successful case of contact. Cameron and Green (2019) explain that the most significant reason for the failure of organizations to implement change successfully is a lack of frequent and clear communication. Lack of strategic direction impedes organizational change. Communication is crucial but is likely to be unsuccessful if it lacks a cohesive message or it lacks a sense of direction. From the moment change is initiated to the time of change implementation, the objectives must be clarified. The goals are designed to be the roadmap that guides the organization in implementing the change towards the intended destination.

Evaluation of Change

Evaluation of change is vital as it indicates the level of success or failure of the proposed initiative. The success of the change process depends on the procedures put in place to implement it. The first step is calculating the net present value of the organization to measure the financial impact of the change initiative. The net current value formula discounts cost savings or future revenues from a change to today’s dollars (Hussain et al., 2018). The management of the organization can compare the calculated figure against the initial expenditure to change operations and determine whether the change has added any value to the firm (Hussain et al., 2018). The second process is determining the return on investment from the change’s impact. A fundamental way of doing this is dividing the estimated dollar benefits by the change cost. Through the determination of return on investment, the company is capable of determining a percentage return for the money they have spent on the change.

The last strategy is comparing the new levels of productivity to the previous levels. The management can measure the change in terms of employee output, units produced, and the number of customer inquiries that have been responded to in a specific time frame for the process. This is an operational analysis, and it allows the company to compare the estimated levels of productivity to the actual levels.

Proposed Outcome and Benefit of the Change

The integration of technology and automating the accounting systems of the organization comes with several benefits. Th organization will have a better method of conducting enterprise accounting and improve its financial management by a significant margin. Technology has changed the way organizations do business. Such change is not only limited to communication but also other facets of the organization, such as accounting and financial management, and how operations are conducted. The accounting field is transforming rapidly in part due to productivity optimization that can be gotten through newer and better technologies. The modern accountant is no longer weighed down with task-oriented projects. Instead, thanks and kudos to the change in dynamic accounting technologies, accounting software programs have become more automated. As such, the role of the modern accountant is expected to transform into that of a business advisor.

The role shift of the advanced accounting systems and principles also requires new sets of skills, which include critical thinking, judgment, and skepticism (Nesterkin, 2013). These skills are particularly significant, especially when conducting recruitment for professionals in the field. Accounting technology has always played a vital role in making the job of an accountant just a little easier. As the knowledge of technology increases, so has the accountant’s ability to analyze statistical values. Technological advancements are enhancing the strength of the accountant to interpret data effectively and efficiently (Myers, Hulks & Wiggins. 2012). The professionals can understand the language of business with much ease such that their roles have transformed into that of business advisors.

Role of Management in Effecting the Change

The management of the organization is not only the sponsor but also the role model of the change process and the idealized outcomes. The managers are expected to act as advocates for the proposed change at their levels in the organization. They are expected to be the representatives of the shift (Myers, Hulks & Wiggins. 2012). The management is expected to be the role models of the change. Managers of change must be willing to show direction and go first (Nesterkin, 2013). They must demonstrate the attitudes and behaviors that are expected of other staff implementing the change. The junior team often watches their leaders for consistency between actions and words see if they should believe the change is likely to occur (Myers, Hulks & Wiggins. 2012). As such, the management must be deliberate and self-aware.

The management makes vital decisions that affect the direction of the change. Managers provide leadership in controlling resources like equipment, budgets, and human resources, and therefore have the authority to make the decisions that impact significantly on the change initiative (Holten & Brenner, 2015). They possess the ability to give the go-ahead or stop the project from moving forward within the span of their authority and control. As the change is implemented, leaders are also expected to leverage their authority and decision making and support options or initiatives that will support the implementation of the change (Holten & Brenner, 2015). The management is expected to be decisive and set the priority guidelines that support the implementation of the change.

Biblical Implications

A series of Bible verses support organizational change. In Romans 12:2, the Bible says, “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what the will of God is, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” Being conformed to the world is the status quo. God does not want His people to maintain the status quo. There is an excellent room for people to renew their minds with new knowledge, skills, and abilities. Such renewal can be understood from the perspective of change.

2 Corinthians 3:18 says, “And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.” The scripture talks about continuous transformation and being renewed in Spirit to become better in the things of God. Just as God is continually asking for transformation and renewal of mind from one glory to another, organizations must also adopt change and transform their processes to become competitive.