- Email: [email protected]
Dealing with resistance to change
Dealing with Resistance to Change Joseph Stanislao and Bettie C. Stanislao
74 J o s e p h Stanislao is Dean and Professor of the College of Engineering and Architecture of N o r t h D a k o t a State University. Bettie C. Stanislao is a Nutritionist and Registered Dietitian at the Fargo Diabetes E d u c a t i o n Center. B o t h publish chiefly in their respective fields.
A great frustration is having the answer to a problem in the form of a proposed change, and being unable to get anyone to accept or carry out that change. This article handily surveys the reasons supervisors and workers resist change. Also, it offers some prescriptions for dealing with c o m m o n resistances. hange is inevitable if an or- lectively determine whether the . . . . gamzat•Ùn is to survive m a change will be successfulJ world of developing techSince major technological nology and new consumer and changes are few relative to the employee demands. Maintaining number of day-to-day changes in the status quo is likely to stifle product, process, and procedures, success, so managers at all levels the following discussion devotes must develop skills in changing attention to these day-to-day people, procedures, methods, and changes. When considering the people to machinery. But even with adequate planning, the manager is likely to be affected, it is useful to distinencounter resistance to change in guish between the individual who employees. Such resistance stems has authority to accept or reject a from fear; this fear is easier to change and the individual who has prevent than it is to remove once it no voice in acceptance or rejection has developed. of the proposed change. If the According to Certo, the major latter is affected, he or she must factors when changing an organiza- cooperate in order for the change tion are determining what should to be successful; both groups debe changed, what type of change serve separate analysis. needs to be made, who will be 1. Samuel C. Certo, Principles of Modern affected by the change, and who Management Functions and Systems will be the change agent. These (Dubuque, Iowa: Win. C. Brown Company, factors and their interaction col- 1980): 265.
C
Business Horizons [ July-August 1983
Dealing with Resistance to Change
Resistance to Change b y a Person Having Veto Power
y person with the authority o accept or reject a proposal may reject it for any any one of the reasons outlined below. Inertia. An innate desire to retain the status quo exists, even when the current situation is inferior. Inertia is the tendency to want to do things in the accustomed manner. Thus, a supervisor will oppose the new m e t h o d merely because it is different from the accustomed one. This person will n o t "get around to doing" anything differently unless impressed with necessity. Uncertainty or fear of the unknown. Regardless of how bad the existing m e t h o d might be, at least how well it functions is known. Any deviation from the known procedure involves risk, and the proposed m e t h o d offers no guarantee of better results. In this case, supervisors are unwilling to trade inferiority of which they are certain, for superiority of which they are uncertain. This fear or uncertainty can be eliminated b y training programs in the new methods. Insecurity and fear of failure. The individual who is to accept the new idea may see no need for any change and m a y resist because of the fear of possible failure. In this case, implementing the change on a trial basis may reassure the supervisor that success is possible. Change on a trial basis should reduce the fear of personal loss and will give the people involved an o p p o r t u n i t y to get more facts about the change. Ignorance. Even when individuals are not directly involved, their failure to understand the new system will produce cautiousness and resentment. Properly prepare the employees for change b y providing as much information as possible about the change. Lack of knowledge may lead to imaginary problems in addition to the real
problems of change. Do not underestimate the grapevine as a source of information to employees, and do not underestimate the grapevine's capability of providing misinformation if given nothing better. Obsolescence. People are afraid of having a skill which is considered obsolete. One who has invested years of experience in building up a high level of skill, knowledge, and judgment for a specific activity may resist any new proposal. A fear of not being or not becoming proficient in the new system may cause apprehension and a resistance to change. Personality. Personality conflicts between the proposer and the proposee can produce resistance to change. Maintaining a friendly relationship with and showing respect for everyone helps in eliminating personality conflicts. Outside Consultants. Reliance on outside help can cause resentment. A change developed b y outsiders may not be accepted b y insiders. The implication, as the insiders see it, is that insiders cannot handle their own problems. Make limited use of outside consultants in dealing with employees.
to "influence" as the focal element in any successful change process. ~ Having some influence as the change is being proposed will strengthen the support of people affected b y the change. People are more likely to support what they help to create. Tact. Sometimes a few right words can make the difference between acceptance or resistance to change. The manner of presenting the proposal should be friendly, and words should be chosen to show personal regard for the persons affected. Encourage full participation of supervisors in helping employees accept change. Confidence. If the person who is to carry out the change doesn't perceive adequate experience and expertise in the person who proposed it, he or she will resist the change and think it is d o o m e d to fail. The person selected to be the change agent should be someone who inspires confidence. Timing. Timing of the proposal is essential. Many good ideas are reiected because people are emotionally or physically upset, or unusually busy, or because business is in a temporary slump or labor relations are strained. Select a time when the receiver is in a receptive mood.
Resentment of criticism. Criticism may erupt from the person who originated the present method, since changing the present Resistance to Change by a Person method may be a threat to that Having No Veto Power person's security. Noncritical stateesistance to change reacments are sometimes construed as tions may come from indicriticism, so beware of critical viduals who have no direct statements and of ones that might be taken as such. In reality, the voice in the acceptance or rejection resentment of criticism is probably of the proposal, but who are dimore responsible for failure of rectly affected by it, for any of the change programs than is resistance reasons given below. Surprise. Employees tend to to change itself. resist change, especially when the Participation. When a change is change is unexpected, sudden, or proposed, staff members may be radical in their view. People need embarrassed at not having contime to evaluate change before it ceived an idea which, with hindsight, appears obvious. The importance of participation by all staff 2. Kurt R. Student, "Managing Change: A members from the start should not Psychologist's Perspective," Business Horizons, be underestimated. Student refers December 1978: 28-33.
R
75
76
Dealing with Resistance to Change
"These measures should be supplemented by a long-term effort to prepare personnel for changes in general. Such a conditioning process will involve both technical and psychological preparation."
77 Loss of security. Fear of economic insecurity can cause an immediate resistance to new concepts, particularly if workers fear a reduction in earnings. Resistance to change may arise as a result of a reduction in j o b classification, a tightening of a time standard as a result of the change in question, or an inability to master the new method or to reach the level of proficiency that the worker had attained under the replaced method. Here again, reassuring the workers of their worth will be beneficial. Loss of known work group. Alteration of social relationships, coupled with the fear that a closely knit work group will be replaced or eliminated, may cause resistance. Workers need reassurance that they will not be expected to betray friends. Personality conflicts. Antagonism toward the person introducing the change may be a personal antagonism, or may be an emtagonism toward the person's function, or may be toward management in general. Such hostility causes individuals and groups to resist almost any change that comes from management, referred to as resistance on general principles. The change agent, or person who tries to effect change, should be able to use behavioral science tools to influence the employees before and during the change. To
be successful, the change agent Recommendations must determine how much change he following recommendathe employees can withstand and tions should be considered should limit change to that in planning the introducamount. Changes must be made in tion of an idea and in modifying such a way that employees who the idea to make it more saleable must change their behavior are and palatable. First, one should given the opportunity to become convincingly explain the need for ready to learn the new behavior, to change to receivers, particularly try the new behavior, to make the the workers. Use straightforward, new behavior useful, and to accept clear, well-organized language to the new behavior as part of them- assure that they understand the selves. Lewin refers to these stages method or policy. Do not take for in the change process as un- granted the importance of this freezing, changing, and refreezing. 3 understanding. Tailor the comThe change agent must give ideas munication format to suit the paror innovations time to become ticular receiver. Many change proacceptable. grams have failed because of the mutual understanding Timing. Poor timing may cause lack of maximum resistance to change. If about what the program is trying the business has slack periods, to accomplish. changes should be made during Facilitate participation, or at these periods to minimize con- least the feeling of participation, in fusion. The proposed change the formulation of the proposal. In should wait until all employees general, people are concerned who will be affected by it have about making their own ideas and received accurate information recommendations succeed. The about h o w the change will affect feeling of participation may be them and their jobs. If possible, imparted by consulting with the they should participate in change- workers, and b y seeking their inrelated decisons. formation, opinions, and suggestions. Above all, show real interest in what these people have to say. Seeking their advice will encourage their participation in the change. Whenever possible, include the worthwhile suggestions of 3. Kurt Lewin, "Frontiers in Group Dyothers in the final report and give namics: Concept, Method, and Reality of Social Sciences: Social Equilibria and Social credit to the appropriate indiChange," Human Relations, June 1947: 5-14. viduals.
T
78
Use a tactful approach in introducing the change proposal. Watch wording and mannerisms and avoid implying criticism. In attempting to gain adoption of an idea, avoid making the proposal when the recipient is upset or busy. Allow sufficient time for the recipient to think it over. Also, avoid introducing certain changes when labor relations are abnormally strained. In the case of major changes, try to design the proposal to introduce the change in stages. The mere magnitude of some proposals or ideas m a y frighten people and arouse objections. Capitalize on the features which provide the most personal benefits. A procedure of planting the idea in the recipient's mind is usually effective if it can be properly executed. The difficulty with this planting concept is that it
is not easily done, nor are people generally willing to allow others to get credit for their ideas. Management should show that it supports the proposed change. Publicize the benefits of completed changes which are of interest to employees. Share the benefits of changes with the employees. he foregoing measures, concerning the minimization of resistance to a specific change, are no substitute for a long-range plan for change. These measures should be supplemented by a long-term effort to prepare personnel for changes in general. Such a conditioning process will involve both technical and psychological preparation. Before the change is introduced and when considering long-term effort, plan for technical training, so that per-
T
sonnel will feel capable of mastering the new ideas and managerial techniques. Education on the importance of change, the consequences of change, the role of competition, and the need for change is emphasized through the psychological phase of minimizing resistance to change. Maintaining a policy of fair treatment of employees affected by change concerning job retention, job replacement and job content is also part of the psychological phase. In general, an effective longterm measure in minimizing resistance to change is the very awareness of the p h e n o m e n o n itself. Then if employees are aware of the causes, manifestations, and frequency of this reaction, the employee or supervisor will be less inclined to resist change. [Z]
74 J o s e p h Stanislao is Dean and Professor of the College of Engineering and Architecture of N o r t h D a k o t a State University. Bettie C. Stanislao is a Nutritionist and Registered Dietitian at the Fargo Diabetes E d u c a t i o n Center. B o t h publish chiefly in their respective fields.
A great frustration is having the answer to a problem in the form of a proposed change, and being unable to get anyone to accept or carry out that change. This article handily surveys the reasons supervisors and workers resist change. Also, it offers some prescriptions for dealing with c o m m o n resistances. hange is inevitable if an or- lectively determine whether the . . . . gamzat•Ùn is to survive m a change will be successfulJ world of developing techSince major technological nology and new consumer and changes are few relative to the employee demands. Maintaining number of day-to-day changes in the status quo is likely to stifle product, process, and procedures, success, so managers at all levels the following discussion devotes must develop skills in changing attention to these day-to-day people, procedures, methods, and changes. When considering the people to machinery. But even with adequate planning, the manager is likely to be affected, it is useful to distinencounter resistance to change in guish between the individual who employees. Such resistance stems has authority to accept or reject a from fear; this fear is easier to change and the individual who has prevent than it is to remove once it no voice in acceptance or rejection has developed. of the proposed change. If the According to Certo, the major latter is affected, he or she must factors when changing an organiza- cooperate in order for the change tion are determining what should to be successful; both groups debe changed, what type of change serve separate analysis. needs to be made, who will be 1. Samuel C. Certo, Principles of Modern affected by the change, and who Management Functions and Systems will be the change agent. These (Dubuque, Iowa: Win. C. Brown Company, factors and their interaction col- 1980): 265.
C
Business Horizons [ July-August 1983
Dealing with Resistance to Change
Resistance to Change b y a Person Having Veto Power
y person with the authority o accept or reject a proposal may reject it for any any one of the reasons outlined below. Inertia. An innate desire to retain the status quo exists, even when the current situation is inferior. Inertia is the tendency to want to do things in the accustomed manner. Thus, a supervisor will oppose the new m e t h o d merely because it is different from the accustomed one. This person will n o t "get around to doing" anything differently unless impressed with necessity. Uncertainty or fear of the unknown. Regardless of how bad the existing m e t h o d might be, at least how well it functions is known. Any deviation from the known procedure involves risk, and the proposed m e t h o d offers no guarantee of better results. In this case, supervisors are unwilling to trade inferiority of which they are certain, for superiority of which they are uncertain. This fear or uncertainty can be eliminated b y training programs in the new methods. Insecurity and fear of failure. The individual who is to accept the new idea may see no need for any change and m a y resist because of the fear of possible failure. In this case, implementing the change on a trial basis may reassure the supervisor that success is possible. Change on a trial basis should reduce the fear of personal loss and will give the people involved an o p p o r t u n i t y to get more facts about the change. Ignorance. Even when individuals are not directly involved, their failure to understand the new system will produce cautiousness and resentment. Properly prepare the employees for change b y providing as much information as possible about the change. Lack of knowledge may lead to imaginary problems in addition to the real
problems of change. Do not underestimate the grapevine as a source of information to employees, and do not underestimate the grapevine's capability of providing misinformation if given nothing better. Obsolescence. People are afraid of having a skill which is considered obsolete. One who has invested years of experience in building up a high level of skill, knowledge, and judgment for a specific activity may resist any new proposal. A fear of not being or not becoming proficient in the new system may cause apprehension and a resistance to change. Personality. Personality conflicts between the proposer and the proposee can produce resistance to change. Maintaining a friendly relationship with and showing respect for everyone helps in eliminating personality conflicts. Outside Consultants. Reliance on outside help can cause resentment. A change developed b y outsiders may not be accepted b y insiders. The implication, as the insiders see it, is that insiders cannot handle their own problems. Make limited use of outside consultants in dealing with employees.
to "influence" as the focal element in any successful change process. ~ Having some influence as the change is being proposed will strengthen the support of people affected b y the change. People are more likely to support what they help to create. Tact. Sometimes a few right words can make the difference between acceptance or resistance to change. The manner of presenting the proposal should be friendly, and words should be chosen to show personal regard for the persons affected. Encourage full participation of supervisors in helping employees accept change. Confidence. If the person who is to carry out the change doesn't perceive adequate experience and expertise in the person who proposed it, he or she will resist the change and think it is d o o m e d to fail. The person selected to be the change agent should be someone who inspires confidence. Timing. Timing of the proposal is essential. Many good ideas are reiected because people are emotionally or physically upset, or unusually busy, or because business is in a temporary slump or labor relations are strained. Select a time when the receiver is in a receptive mood.
Resentment of criticism. Criticism may erupt from the person who originated the present method, since changing the present Resistance to Change by a Person method may be a threat to that Having No Veto Power person's security. Noncritical stateesistance to change reacments are sometimes construed as tions may come from indicriticism, so beware of critical viduals who have no direct statements and of ones that might be taken as such. In reality, the voice in the acceptance or rejection resentment of criticism is probably of the proposal, but who are dimore responsible for failure of rectly affected by it, for any of the change programs than is resistance reasons given below. Surprise. Employees tend to to change itself. resist change, especially when the Participation. When a change is change is unexpected, sudden, or proposed, staff members may be radical in their view. People need embarrassed at not having contime to evaluate change before it ceived an idea which, with hindsight, appears obvious. The importance of participation by all staff 2. Kurt R. Student, "Managing Change: A members from the start should not Psychologist's Perspective," Business Horizons, be underestimated. Student refers December 1978: 28-33.
R
75
76
Dealing with Resistance to Change
"These measures should be supplemented by a long-term effort to prepare personnel for changes in general. Such a conditioning process will involve both technical and psychological preparation."
77 Loss of security. Fear of economic insecurity can cause an immediate resistance to new concepts, particularly if workers fear a reduction in earnings. Resistance to change may arise as a result of a reduction in j o b classification, a tightening of a time standard as a result of the change in question, or an inability to master the new method or to reach the level of proficiency that the worker had attained under the replaced method. Here again, reassuring the workers of their worth will be beneficial. Loss of known work group. Alteration of social relationships, coupled with the fear that a closely knit work group will be replaced or eliminated, may cause resistance. Workers need reassurance that they will not be expected to betray friends. Personality conflicts. Antagonism toward the person introducing the change may be a personal antagonism, or may be an emtagonism toward the person's function, or may be toward management in general. Such hostility causes individuals and groups to resist almost any change that comes from management, referred to as resistance on general principles. The change agent, or person who tries to effect change, should be able to use behavioral science tools to influence the employees before and during the change. To
be successful, the change agent Recommendations must determine how much change he following recommendathe employees can withstand and tions should be considered should limit change to that in planning the introducamount. Changes must be made in tion of an idea and in modifying such a way that employees who the idea to make it more saleable must change their behavior are and palatable. First, one should given the opportunity to become convincingly explain the need for ready to learn the new behavior, to change to receivers, particularly try the new behavior, to make the the workers. Use straightforward, new behavior useful, and to accept clear, well-organized language to the new behavior as part of them- assure that they understand the selves. Lewin refers to these stages method or policy. Do not take for in the change process as un- granted the importance of this freezing, changing, and refreezing. 3 understanding. Tailor the comThe change agent must give ideas munication format to suit the paror innovations time to become ticular receiver. Many change proacceptable. grams have failed because of the mutual understanding Timing. Poor timing may cause lack of maximum resistance to change. If about what the program is trying the business has slack periods, to accomplish. changes should be made during Facilitate participation, or at these periods to minimize con- least the feeling of participation, in fusion. The proposed change the formulation of the proposal. In should wait until all employees general, people are concerned who will be affected by it have about making their own ideas and received accurate information recommendations succeed. The about h o w the change will affect feeling of participation may be them and their jobs. If possible, imparted by consulting with the they should participate in change- workers, and b y seeking their inrelated decisons. formation, opinions, and suggestions. Above all, show real interest in what these people have to say. Seeking their advice will encourage their participation in the change. Whenever possible, include the worthwhile suggestions of 3. Kurt Lewin, "Frontiers in Group Dyothers in the final report and give namics: Concept, Method, and Reality of Social Sciences: Social Equilibria and Social credit to the appropriate indiChange," Human Relations, June 1947: 5-14. viduals.
T
78
Use a tactful approach in introducing the change proposal. Watch wording and mannerisms and avoid implying criticism. In attempting to gain adoption of an idea, avoid making the proposal when the recipient is upset or busy. Allow sufficient time for the recipient to think it over. Also, avoid introducing certain changes when labor relations are abnormally strained. In the case of major changes, try to design the proposal to introduce the change in stages. The mere magnitude of some proposals or ideas m a y frighten people and arouse objections. Capitalize on the features which provide the most personal benefits. A procedure of planting the idea in the recipient's mind is usually effective if it can be properly executed. The difficulty with this planting concept is that it
is not easily done, nor are people generally willing to allow others to get credit for their ideas. Management should show that it supports the proposed change. Publicize the benefits of completed changes which are of interest to employees. Share the benefits of changes with the employees. he foregoing measures, concerning the minimization of resistance to a specific change, are no substitute for a long-range plan for change. These measures should be supplemented by a long-term effort to prepare personnel for changes in general. Such a conditioning process will involve both technical and psychological preparation. Before the change is introduced and when considering long-term effort, plan for technical training, so that per-
T
sonnel will feel capable of mastering the new ideas and managerial techniques. Education on the importance of change, the consequences of change, the role of competition, and the need for change is emphasized through the psychological phase of minimizing resistance to change. Maintaining a policy of fair treatment of employees affected by change concerning job retention, job replacement and job content is also part of the psychological phase. In general, an effective longterm measure in minimizing resistance to change is the very awareness of the p h e n o m e n o n itself. Then if employees are aware of the causes, manifestations, and frequency of this reaction, the employee or supervisor will be less inclined to resist change. [Z]