Dealing with Change

BUS 117 W5D2 NOTES

Overcoming Resistance to Change

Eight tactics can help change agents deal with resistance to change. 4  Let’s review them briefly.

EXHIBIT 16.1 Sources of Resistance to Change

Individual Sources

Habit—To cope with life’s complexities, we rely on habits or programmed responses. But when confronted with change, this tendency to respond in our accustomed ways becomes a source of resistance.

Security—People with a high need for security are likely to resist change because it threatens feelings of safety.

Economic factors—Changes in job tasks or established work routines can arouse economic fears if people are concerned that they won’t be able to perform the new tasks or routines to their previous standards, especially when pay is closely tied to productivity.

Fear of the unknown—Change substitutes ambiguity and uncertainty for the unknown.

Selective information processing—Individuals are guilty of selectively processing information in order to keep their perceptions intact. They hear what they want to hear and they ignore information that challenges the world they’ve created.

Organizational Sources

Structural inertia—Organizations have built-in mechanisms—like their selection processes and formalized regulations—to produce stability. When an organization is confronted with change, this structural inertia acts as a counterbalance to sustain stability.

Limited focus of change—Organizations are made up of a number of interdependent subsystems. One can’t be changed without affecting the others. So limited changes in subsystems tend to be nullified by the larger system.

Group inertia—Even if individuals want to change their behavior, group norms may act as a constraint.

Threat to expertise—Changes in organizational patterns may threaten the expertise of specialized groups.

Threat to established power relationships—Any redistribution of decision-making authority can threaten long-established power relationships within the organization.

Threat to established resource allocations—Groups in the organization that control sizable resources often see change as a threat. They tend to be content with the way things are.

EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION

Communicating the logic of a change can reduce employee resistance on two levels. First, it fights the effects of misinformation and poor communication: If employees receive the full facts and clear up misunderstandings, resistance should subside. Second, communication can help “sell” the need for change by packaging it properly. A study of German companies revealed changes are most effective when a company communicates a rationale that balances the interests of various stakeholders (shareholders, employees, community, customers) rather than those of shareholders only. 5

PARTICIPATION

It’s difficult to resist a change decision in which we’ve participated. Assuming participants have the expertise to make a meaningful contribution, their involvement can reduce resistance, obtain commitment, and increase the quality of the change decision. However, against these advantages are the negatives: potential for a poor solution and great consumption of time.

BUILDING SUPPORT AND COMMITMENT

When employees’ fear and anxiety are high, counseling and therapy, new-skills training, or a short paid leave of absence may facilitate adjustment. When managers or employees have low emotional commitment to change, they favor the status quo and resist it. 6  Thus, firing up employees can also help them emotionally commit to the change rather than embrace the status quo.

DEVELOP POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS

People are more willing to accept changes if they trust the managers implementing them. One study surveyed 235 employees from a large housing corporation in the Netherlands that was experiencing a merger. Those who had a more positive relationship with their supervisors, and who felt that the work environment supported development, were much more positive about the change process. 7

IMPLEMENTING CHANGES FAIRLY

One way organizations can minimize negative impact is to make sure change is implemented fairly. As we saw in  Chapter 6 , procedural fairness is especially important when employees perceive an outcome as negative, so it’s crucial that employees see the reason for the change and perceive its implementation as consistent and fair. 8

MANIPULATION AND COOPTATION

Manipulation refers to covert influence attempts. Twisting facts to make them more attractive, withholding information, and creating false rumors to get employees to accept change are all examples of manipulation. If management threatens to close a manufacturing plant whose employees are resisting an across-the-board pay cut, and if the threat is actually untrue, management is using manipulation. Cooptation, on the other hand, combines manipulation and participation. It seeks to “buy off” the leaders of a resistance group by giving them a key role, seeking their advice not to find a better solution but to get their endorsement. Both manipulation and cooptation are relatively inexpensive ways to gain the support of adversaries, but they can backfire if the targets become aware they are being tricked or used. Once that’s discovered, the change agent’s credibility may drop to zero.

SELECTING PEOPLE WHO ACCEPT CHANGE

Research suggests the ability to easily accept and adapt to change is related to personality—some people simply have more positive attitudes about change than others. Such individuals are open to experience, take a positive attitude toward change, are willing to take risks, and are flexible in theirbehavior. One study of managers in the United States, Europe, and Asia found those with a positive self-concept and high risk tolerance coped better with organizational change. A study of 258 police officers found those higher in growth-needs strength, internal locus of control, and internal work motivation had more positive attitudes about organizational change efforts. 9  Another study found that selecting people based on a resistance-to-change scale worked well in winnowing out those who tended to be rigid or react emotionally to change. 10  Individuals higher in general mental ability are also better able to learn and adapt to changes in the workplace. 11  In sum, an impressive body of evidence shows organizations can facilitate change by selecting people predisposed to accept it.

COERCION

Last on the list of tactics is coercion, the application of direct threats or force on the resisters. If management really is determined to close a manufacturing plant whose employees don’t acquiesce to a pay cut, the company is using coercion. Other examples are threats of transfer, loss of promotions, negative performance evaluations, and a poor letter of recommendation. The advantages and drawbacks of coercion are approximately the same as for manipulation and cooptation.

APPROACHES TO MANAGING ORGANIZA